If You Don’t Want to Be in Harm’s Way, Don’t Get in the Way [WATCH]

Sen. Markwayne Mullin responded to questions from CNN anchor Jake Tapper during a televised exchange about a disputed incident involving an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent and a woman who struck the officer with her vehicle, resulting in his death.

Mullin argued that even under the most charitable interpretation of events, the woman’s actions still met the legal standard for serious criminal charges and justified the officer’s right to defend himself.

Tapper framed the incident as unclear and contested, challenging Mullin’s characterization of the woman’s actions.

“The ICE agent, you just asserted that the woman clearly tried to run over the guy, and then you said, at the very least, she was going forward while he was in front. I think that does illustrate the fact that this is, at the very least, a widely disputed incident full of ambiguities and interpretations. How can anyone be confident that she was trying to attack the officer instead of she was trying to flee the scene?” Tapper asked.

Mullin responded by saying the distinction Tapper raised was legally irrelevant and that reckless operation of a vehicle resulting in death carries criminal consequences regardless of intent.

“Fleeing the scene. It doesn’t make any difference,” Mullin said.

“If you accidentally run over a police officer, you’re still are getting charged with involuntary manslaughter.”

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

Mullin continued by comparing the incident to other cases involving reckless driving.

“If you are accelerating at a fast rate of speed, driving your vehicle down the road and you cause the death of a civilian, you’re charged with invalid involuntary manslaughter because you’re driving your vehicle in a reckless manner,” he said.

Mullin then laid out what he described as undisputed facts surrounding the encounter between the woman and ICE agents.

“In this particular case, she purposely blocked the ICE agents. Is that disputed? No, we know she purposely blocked the ICE agents,” Mullin said.

He said the woman ignored commands from law enforcement.

“Is it disputed that she accelerated after the ICE agents gave her a verbal command to get out of the vehicle? No,” Mullin said.

Mullin acknowledged that some details remain unknown but said they do not change the legal or practical reality of the situation.

“Now did she know the ICE agent was in front of her? We don’t know,” he said.

“But we do know that she accelerated and she hit the ICE agent.”

Mullin emphasized that a vehicle can constitute deadly force and that officers are entitled to defend themselves when confronted with such a threat.

“At that point, that vehicle is a lethal weapon, and that police officer has the right to defend themselves,” he said.

He expressed frustration at what he described as public and media efforts to excuse the woman’s actions.

“It is, it is mind blowing to me, why we are defending someone that was acting this in this manner, when she it was clearly that she hit an ice agent and hits law enforcement that’s enforcing our nation laws,” Mullin said.

Mullin also addressed the broader issue of resistance to immigration enforcement, stating that officers do not get to selectively enforce laws.

“We don’t get a choice on which laws we enforce and which laws we don’t enforce. Police officers are doing their job, and she was interfering in their job,” he said.

He concluded with a warning about the risks of obstructing law enforcement operations.

“If you don’t want to be in harm’s way, don’t get in the way of police officers from doing their job,” Mullin said.