> Using deadly force in self defense against law enforcement officer is only justified when that law enforcement officer is acting outside the bounds of the law.
I'd say I'm astonished but I'm not.
I'd say I'm astonished but I'm not.
Let's say someone robs a liquor store at gunpoint. The police chase him down, with their guns drawn - which is totally reasonable given that they're trying to arrest a criminal who is armed with a gun. The robber turns and sees a pair of police officers with their guns trained on him. The robber shots the two cops dead.
Is this a justified shooting? By your logic, yes it is. The robber saw two police officers with their guns drawn, that meets your criteria for the law enforcement officers presenting a deadly threat.
On my end, I absolutely am astonished by your attempts to justify shooting law enforcement officers.
Just give it 3 minutes.
And like it or not, countries have the freedom to define their own immigration policy. If I overstay my tourist visa in Canada I'll get deported. This isn't some grave violation of human rights.
If someone decided to open fire on Canadian immigration enforcement officers to try and block my deportation, they should get prosecuted and imprisoned.
Your persistence in trying to justify shooting law enforcement is disturbing. It mirrors the thinking that motivated January 6th rioters beating up the police. Like you, they believed their mission was righteous and justified violence against law enforcement.