The American discourse around these killings are actually insane. In any other developed country it wouldn't be possible to escalate these situations like this regardless of what you were doing.
> In any other developed country it wouldn't be possible to escalate these situations like this regardless of what you were doing.
Without in any way excusing the clear and obvious excess of the US DHS and ICE here, you should at least read various Coroner's findings in respect of Australian police interactions with indigenous Australians.
Various police forces around the globe, in Australia, Canada, the UK, and elsewhere have their subgroups with encrypted chat accounts detailing at length their contempt for various others .. women, particular minorities and ethnicities, etc.
They often exchange grooming notes on provoking "officer-induced jeopardy" .. how to escalate a situation into what passes for "justified homicide" or least a chance to put the boot in.
> The American discourse around these killings are actually insane.
The only insanity is in the defence of the killing(s).
On the most recent event, a reduced-speed video showing one agent (centre, bent over at beginning) removing the victim's firearm from his waistband, then a second agent (left) waiting for the first to get clear, and then pulling his pistol (video stops before any shooting):
I’m not sure how many people realize this, but ICE is the buildup for trump to hold power by deploying soldiers ahead of time. I expect we will see them deployed at the election sites of democratic cities in November.
The massive public outcry against ICE would likely cause that to backfire. Look at the extent of protesting in Minneapolis. People aren't afraid of ICE, putting them at polling stations would intensify the outrage against them, and fire up the opposition. They're
My two cents. Trump likes the idea that in the Ukraine they can't hold elections when they are at war as per their constitution. Even though the US doesn't have such a thing, it's not going to deter Trump from creating a "situation" where he can declare a marshall law event of some sort to "postpone" elections, indefinitely. If Americans think that there are going to be midterms, or even a next presidential election, better get ready!
They’re failing to control a single mid-sized city, I’m not sure how they would maintain control over half the country. They don’t have the numbers, and are widely hated.
They don't need to maintain control. Elections are close and voters are geographically polarized.
Reduce turnout in cities in four or five swing states and that can be enough to flip an election. If you've got ICE just detaining random non-white people near polling places based on the theory put forward in Noem v Vasquez Perdomo, how many nonwhite citizens who would be solid voters for the democrats just decide to stay at home rather than go to the polls?
It is possible that this approach sparks a reaction and backfires. But I'm not sure that's a guarantee.
If you want to hold on to the house and senate you don’t need to maintain control - you just need to disrupt the elections of 10 to 20 key cities, and they have the numbers for that.
They are disrupting lives, but elections? Imagine if the election was held today in Minneapolis, how do you think the vote would go? Would people be afraid to vote, or would it be the largest turnout the city has ever seen?
That's a blue state being targeted for revenge and for practice and so they can spin stories for their voters in other states. They'd probably target blue cities in swing states if they wanted to impact votes.
They have people who are experts in this. Before the latest wave of open fascism, many of the rising stars in the Republican party where people who were experts at removing people with Democrat sounding names off voter registration databases shortly before elections.
They have the data to target this effectively if they want to do it.
Their plan is failing because their popularity numbers are dropping constantly, and they are convincing people to get out and organize and protest. Like, do you actually see any successes here? They’ve managed to turn “Abolish ICE” from a fringe left wing opinion, to the mainstream centrist position.
Like, I get that they’re doing this big show of force. But they’re losing. They are not accomplishing any of their goals, and the longer this goes on, the more the population is turning against them, and the less and less they will be able to accomplish their goals anywhere. Minnesota is not afraid of them, and they’re teaching the rest of the country not to fear them either.
Well, from what I’ve seen, the most likely theory is that the agent who disarmed the man (after another agent had yelled “gun”) then accidentally discharged the weapon, which caused all the other ICE officers to freak out and discharge their weapons.
I don’t want to argue over the broader questions; ie should ICE even be there and doing this; are they adequately trained; are they overly aggressive to tackle this guy and pepper spray him in the first instance; is American law enforcement is way too trigger happy and protective of their own skin; and so on. There’s a lot of validity to all of that. But the narrow story of this particular incident changes a lot if there was an accidental discharge that made the other offices believe he was shooting.
You can quite clearly see the second shooter in the video standing over him, shooting him multiple times as he's laying motionless on the ground after being beaten and shot once.
> the most likely theory
According to whom? What's your source for this? Wild that you're trying to muddy the waters with "theories" that even ICE hasn't claimed (the only defense so far is that he was a violent domestic terrorist who wanted to murder ICE agents, which is demonstrably false).
> You can quite clearly see the second shooter in the video standing over him, shooting him multiple times as he's laying motionless on the ground after being beaten and shot once.
Yes, that's how cops/ICE react when they hear gunshots. They shoot and ask questions later. I'm not necessarily defending that (I think it would be a great thing if cops/ICE received more extensive training, cared more about de-escalation techniques, and perhaps even were more willing to risk their own lives than just always shoot recklessly), but putting all that aside, if someone yells "gun", and then a shot is fired, the second shooter then assuming it's the guy they are tackling that shot, and shooting him multiple times in response, is a typical cop reaction. So the main question is - who fired the first shot and why? The moral weight of the event, at least in my view, is very different if it was ICE deliberately shooting, or an accidental discharge that triggered everything.
> According to whom? What's your source for this? Wild that you're trying to muddy the waters with "theories" that even ICE hasn't claimed (the only defense so far is that he was a violent domestic terrorist who wanted to murder ICE agents, which is demonstrably false).
Most likely according to me, based on the videos I have seen (https://x.com/Landeur/status/2015191223900803407). I could be wrong. I was responding to someone who said there's clear video that it was a deliberate execution. The water of any breaking news reporting is already muddy; it's all speculation on all sides.
You're the only person speculating about their motives. Everyone else is watching the same incident, shot from multiple cameras/angles, which make it clear that an extreme escalation of violence from untrained ICE agents towards a man who was attempting to help a woman (who was also attacked in a show of excessive force) ended in his unnecessary death. The motives are irrelevant - these people are untrained, trigger-happy, and just killed another person.
> But the narrow story of this particular incident changes a lot if there was an accidental discharge that made the other offices believe he was shooting.
Does it? What you are describing is still a monstrous crime. The federal government is insisting that absolutely nothing went wrong and that Pretti was intending to massacre ICE agents. Even taking an enormously charitable reading of the killing I am still horrified by the actions of the government here.
You too. Tell me if you disagree that this seems to show the officer who removed the gun may have plausibly accidentally discharged the first shot: https://x.com/Landeur/status/2015191223900803407
The footage is too grainy to say anything for certain in my view.
> Well, from what I’ve seen, the most likely theory is that the agent who disarmed the man (after another agent had yelled “gun”) then accidentally discharged the weapon, which caused all the other ICE officers to freak out and discharge their weapons.
Then an investigation should clear up the situation and exonerate the ICE folks. But ICE/FBI are (a) not investigating any of the shootings, and (b) are blocking the local police from investigating.
In the Renee Good case, the FBI is actually 'investigating' the victim of the shooting.
If you don't see what's going on at this point then you are either wilfully ignorant or feigning ignorance. Anybody who cares just a little about "the others" can see the truth. Wake up!
Everybody already knows what to do in a civil unrest scenario if you don't want to risk your life (stay at home, don't let in anybody without a warrant). There are other people with different, more noble priorities.
Exactly what was said to the Venezuelian and Irani protesters.
On the other side, the last time in the US police were killing this indiscriminately, some people in Oakland started open carrying automatic rifles in groups and followed patrol cars to prevent those 'mistakes' to happen again.
The penalty for legal concealed carry is not death.
Victim blaming may be practical, but it's a measure of the depths the government agents have come to, that we are in fear of our lives from them and stepping out of line might be a death sentence.
reply