A woman is dead following a “tragic chain of events” that began with a bomb threat against Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene at her Rome home, police said.
A woman is dead following a “tragic chain of events” that began with a bomb threat against Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene at her Rome home, police said.
2)…wanna bet the cop was driving at a high rate of speed, in a vehicle without lights and sirens?
I’d argue it isnt clickbait and is a fairly accurate title. Motorist killed as police respond. The motorist was hit while the police were responding. The title never claimed the motorist had anything to do with the bomb threat, that was the context for the police response. Typically when the headline is refering to someone involved with the crime, they use the term suspect. The fact they used motorist actually gave me a hint it was an unassociated party that was hit.
The only way it’s misleading is in the usual refusal to acknowledge that the police killed this innocent person. It’s always the same passive voice, as if people keep magically dropping dead when the police happen to be around.
It including that it was to a bomb threat towards green implies an untrue association.
Was the title technically accurate? Yes. Is it still click bait? I’d say yes. Cops kill people responding to (and no where near,) calls with a startling regularity.
Some cop got up and yehawwed through traffic without the usual aids to make it safe. It happens. It’s almost never reported.
A headline trying to get you to read an article!? The scandal of the century.
It doesn’t imply that the motorist had any association with the crime. It barely implies that the two events are related and doesn’t even suggest that the police were involved in the killing.
I wouldn’t concede the technically accurate part myself. That second paragraph really throws that into doubt.
Where do you get they were responding? This says they were heading to headquarters in a personal vehicle. They’re not rushing to the scene of anything here.
They were called in for a bomb threat (as bombsquads usually are,) but had to report to the station first.
so they were “responding” to the bomb threat, but had to go gear up before actually heading out. So it’s fair to say they were “responding”, particularly since highly specialized cops like bomb techs only catch certain kinds of calls, and other cops stay the hell away from them.
Exactly, so not rushing to the scene of the crime , but going to change clothes. If their expertise was needed immediately they would have headed right to the scene, and if equipment was needed it would have met them there. Of course it’s all moot because if you actually read the article, you’d see that the bomb threat was made on Friday, and this happened on the following Monday. So tell me again what they’re responding to? Tell me again why he had to kill this woman? Did this even have anything to do with the bomb threat or are they just using it as an excuse when they really just killed a woman?
Ahhh… Okay. But wait, the equipment can’t teleport or drive itself there, right? So maybe this person was doing that, getting the equipment there, so other people could drive straight there?
They never said that, lol
What do you mean maybe this person was doing that? Where are on Earth you getting that from? They’re absolutely implying the death of this woman was justifiable due to an emergency. An emergency that didn’t exist. Which I note that you didn’t address at all.
Where? They only said it wasn’t click bait and that the accident happened while the officer was responding. “They’re absolutely implying the death of this woman was justifiable due to an emergency.” They never ever say it was justifiable. Show me where.
I said implying genius you just quoted me saying that. By saying that the motors was hit while the police were responding. That part. That’s called justification.
I noticed yet again you ignored the pertinent part of my comment though. Almost like you don’t want to bring it up.
Personal vehicle: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/12/10/marjorie-taylor-greene-bomb-threat-car-crash/76884681007/
I’m sure it’ll come out later that he was speeding.
Sometimes, cops that are frequently on call are allowed to install lights or sirens on personal cars so they can get into their station quickly.
Bombsquad calls are less frequent but generally urgent.
In any case, I would suggest he was driving like he had lights and sirens, despite not having them. Which makes it incredibly unsafe to do, and places blame squarely on the cop. (Though the article made sure to mention she pulled into his way.)
I mean, like it or not, that’s the way the law reads and is applied. We run into it with motorcycles all the time. Barring extreme cases, the car that pulls in front of the speeding vehicle is ‘at fault.’
I wouldn’t bet against it but I’ve had the same thing happen. Buddy was driving and it was a bright sunny summer afternoon. We were doing all of 30MPH and an old lady pulled out onto the road maybe 20’ in front of us. The Samurai we were in was totaled and so was her Buick. She didn’t die but she did spend a couple of days in hospital. I bounced my head off the windshield so hard I was knocked out and I bent the passenger door out a good 4" with my right arm / elbow. My buddy was also knocked out from banging his head off the windshield even with his seatbelt on. That can happen when your vehicle is suddenly gets 18" shorter.
I’m not defending the cop but sometimes drivers just do dumb shit, especially older ones.
Sure. Stuff happens.
But given the urgency in the cop… I have to assume he was rather more than somewhat at fault.
Also a good reason why driving a giant vehicle like a GMC Sierra that smashes anything it touches shouldn’t be free. A higher vehicle tax on something like that would be appropriate, instead they get higher tax write-offs and lower emissions and safety standards.
Only if you’re giving like +1500, then I might bet like $10
lol, my usual go-to internet wager is pet photos. Doesn’t even need to be your pet :)
When cat photos are exchanged we all win.
I don’t have a cat, so take this instead… shamelessly ripped off c/cats (rocket may have been good for a few shared chuckles on my end. Compliments of PugJesus)
And probably distracted using his laptop.
Of course they applied their brakes, just like they “fear for their life” or “told the citizen to comply” while beating their brains out - they just make up whatever fanciful lies they can to escape the justice they purport to represent.