Another ICE shooting in MN.

[Bigfoot]

Swing and a miss.

Urban Dictionary: Cape

Cape: When someone is protecting, covering for or being a “hero” for another person.

cape.urbanup.com

I've never heard that term before, so I looked it up and came up with capping. IDK.

 

[spat]

Please do identify the ad hominem.
The law and UoF procedure are matters of fact. If I've misrepresented or misstated them, as Rocpo has claimed, then the invitation stands for him to set the record straight. Your running interference is a convenient distraction.

If you intended this to be a private discussion with Rocpo, then you should have done it in a DM and not a public forum.

By posting it here the invitation for anyone with an opinion to join is implicit.

I have pointed out your error about use of force multiple times, but I will re-iterate:

It's irrelevant that he had been disarmed if the agents who fired didn't know he'd been disarmed.

And I am not coming to his aid, he is clearly done with the conversation and doesn't need any help either way.

I am just here to make it clear why this shoot was legally justified. That seems to be the opinion of most of us involved in this thread, I'm not sure why you have singled out Rocpo as the only champion the cause you are concerned with.

 

[Rap]

If you intended this to be a private discussion with Rocpo, then you should have done it in a DM and not a public forum.

By posting it here the invitation for anyone with an opinion to join is implicit.

I have pointed out you're error about use of force multiple times, but I will re-iterate:

It's irrelevant that he had been disarmed if the agents who fired didn't know he'd been disarmed.

And I am not coming to his aid, he is clearly done with the conversation and doesn't need any help either way.

I am just here to make it clear why this shoot was legally justified. That seems to be the opinion of most of us involved in this thread, I'm not sure why you have singled out Rocpo as the only champion the cause you are concerned with.

My reason for addressing Rocpo specifically is because he claims knowledge that great exceeds mine, which is "less than elementary."

This represents a learning opportunity in a way that you repeating your poorly substantiated *opinion* as a layman does not. Since this discussion centers the actions of law enforcement, there is value in hearing straight from the horse's mouth.

Also, @Rocpo making such a bold claim only to disappear is...weak. Back up your bluster!

The invitation stands.

Finally, it should be obvious to anyone reading this thread and others that I participate in, that I am a counter puncher. Don't start none, won't be none. For you to suggest that my conduct is the problem, is silly. Stop clutching your pearls and trying to get me DQ'd on a nonsensical ad hominems accusation. You may not like my views, but as you mentioned, this is a public forum. You're going to have to cope.

 

[holdover]

Suggesting that Pretti’s presence as a civilian legal observer is “the problem” is both legally and morally misguided.

His presence as a civilian legal observer does not hold water. He was, and had been interfering with Law enforcement operations , he was not there to observe . He was obstructing Federal agents from doing thier jobs


Although He had every right to be armed . He should have recognized the extreme danger he was placing himself in . Lets say for the sake of arguing, that the agent made a mistake, it was a bad shoot. What does he gain now? A tombstone with the epitah, Heres lies Alex Pretti , He was right.

 

[holdover]

It's irrelevant that he had been disarmed if the agents who fired didn't know he'd been disarmed.

As a former federal law enforcement agent myself , I have to agree with this . At the moment of the shooting I heard GUN GUN GUN then the shots . At this point, it is reasonable to believe there is a threat,

 

[spat]

My reason for addressing Rocpo specifically is because he claims knowledge that great exceeds mine, which is "less than elementary."

This represents a learning opportunity in a way that you repeating your poorly substantiated *opinion* as a layman does not. Since this discussion centers the actions of law enforcement, there is value in hearing straight from the horse's mouth.

Also, @Rocpo making such a bold claim only to disappear is...weak. Back up your bluster!

The invitation stands.

Finally, it should be obvious to anyone reading this thread and others that I participate in, that I am a counter puncher. Don't start none, won't be none. For you to suggest that my conduct is the problem, is silly. Stop clutching your pearls and trying to get me DQ'd on a nonsensical ad hominems accusation. You may not like my views, but as you mentioned, this is a public forum. You're going to have to cope.

While I do not have law enforcement experience, I do have formal education on use of force law.

The differences between law enforcement and ordinary citizen's justification are very limited and specific. Basically law enforcement doesn't have a duty to retreat in a few cases where ordinary citizens do, and obviously law enforcement has certain powers they can exercise that would be criminal for the rest of us in a way that would render our use of force unjustified.

But, the only relevance that has here is that the officers were legally empowered to arrest Pretti.

Otherwise the justification is the same.

You claimed earlier that I was making irrelevant statements. What did I say that wasn't relevant ?

I layed out a few statements that people claimed were the "reason" he was shot, and pointed out what they were wrong, but they're not irrelevant, they're specifically refuting erroneous claims made by others.

Then I layed out the *only* things that are actually relevant to the justification, and that is what the officers who fired reasonably believed at the time.

You are claiming I was ascribing thoughts and intentions to third parties as if those aren't the *only* relevant facts to the whole discussion. If you aren't going to do that, then you have nothing relevant to bring to the discussion.

I think the thoughts and intentions I was ascribing are quite reasonable inferences to draw based on what we know.

And the main aspect of "elementary use of force" that you seem to be woefully uninformed about is that justification is based on what the people using the force reasonably believed, not on what the reality of the situation was.

That's why it's justified to shoot someone threatening you with a realistic looking toy gun, and that's why it's reasonable here to have shot someone you reasonably believed was still armed, whether or not they were, in fact, still armed.

That concept is one of the cornerstones of use of force law, and is covered extensively in any class on it's use.

 

[Celt]

As a participant and an observer in this discussion I see a lot of talking past each other. There are several different aspects to the situation that people are debating about and even I was myself.

One, was the shooting justified based on the information we have currently? While the outcome is unfortunate, it appears so based on the laws of using deadly physical force.

Two was Pretti justified to carry a firearm while protesting. Technically no, because he wasn't carrying his identification and from my understanding it's required in that state. However personally I disagree with permitting laws and schemes and I believe it was his constitutional right to carry regardless. However the law is the law.


Three did he need to be killed and could the ice officers and border patrol have done something different to avoid having to kill this guy. Absolutely something could have been done differently. With so many of these guys on him they should have been able to subdue him without the use of deadly physical force, in my opinion.

Fourth, the media and leftist politicians are intentionally stoking the Flames of tension to create these types of situations that they can use for political points. Local law enforcement absolutely should be assisting federal agents in all of these situations and I think this would help prevent situations like this from happening.

Fifth, the messaging from Trump, Noem, Miller and Bovino is abhorrent to me. This was one of my biggest points of debate in this whole discussion. The fact that they are demonizing him for carrying a gun rather than the circumstances and actions that created the situation undermines the Second Amendment and will be used against the rest of us down the road.


Sixth, I think the way ice is going after people needs to be revisited. Without a doubt the violent and sex criminals need to be eradicated from our country asap. But there should be a different process for how they are dealing with people that have overstayed visas or that are simply not criminals other than coming here illegally. I get coming here illegally is a crime in itself, but it's definitely not the same as pedophiles, rapists and murderers. We don't treat people the same for petty larceny that we do for murder so we should come up with a different system in dealing with people that are here illegally. This would take a lot of the ammunition away from the leftists that they're using against the right.

I think there are many points that most of us can agree on here based on facts.

 

[tirwin1]

Sixth, I think the way ice is going after people needs to be revisited. Without a doubt the violent and sex criminals need to be eradicated from our country asap. But there should be a different process for how they are dealing with people that have overstayed visas or that are simply not criminals other than coming here illegally. I get coming here illegally is a crime in itself, but it's definitely not the same as pedophiles, rapists and murderers. We don't treat people the same for petty larceny that we do for murder so we should come up with a different system in dealing with people that are here illegally. This would take a lot of the ammunition away from the leftists that they're using against the right.

I think there are many points that most of us can agree on here based on facts.

If local authorities cooperated with ICE they would be the ones picking up most of these people and then ICE would simply get them from local jails or prisons. But these asshole sanctuary cities refuse to cooperate which forces ICE out into the streets. The dems know this, they want this, they profit politically every time someone is killed so they will continue to resist.

 

[Celt]

If local authorities cooperated with ICE they would be the ones picking up most of these people and then ICE would simply get them from local jails or prisons. But these asshole sanctuary cities refuse to cooperate which forces ICE out into the streets. The dems know this, they want this, they profit politically every time someone is killed so they will continue to resist.

This is a point I can't imagine anybody would disagree with.

Also just saw this clip. And regardless of anything I respect and appreciate what this guy is saying in regards to the second amendment.

Minneapolis police chief on Alex Pretti being a lawful gun owner with permit to carry #shorts

#news #minneapolis #minnesota "Face the Nation" is America's premier Sunday morning public affairs program. The broadcast is one of the longest-running news ...

youtube.com

 

[GOPerfect]

Pretti was there to obstruct federal law enforcement, but that's not why he was killed.

He was being arrested for that obstruction when he decided to resist that arrest, but that's not why he was killed either.

He brought a gun with him to commit that felony obstruction, but even *that* wasn't why he was killed.

He was killed because multiple law enforcement officers who were trying to arrest him believed he presented a danger of serious injury or death.

Whether he was disarmed or not is irrelevant. What *is* relevant is whether the officers who fired knew he had been disarmed. It seems unlikely that they did.

So, when determining whether their shots were justified the only question that matters is "would a reasonable officer who knew what they knew believe there was a significant danger of serious injury or death ?"


So, lets list what those officers likely knew:

This guy was there to antagonize and obstruct them. He'd been doing it for weeks. This seems pretty clear.

He was violently resisting their arrest. Also doesn't seem to be disputable.

He was armed. They knew this because one of the officers he was fighting yelled "gun".

Then they heard a gun shot.

Seems to me like a reasonable officer would conclude the danger was pretty real given those facts.

As usual... Perfectly said.

He is dead, 100% due to his choices and bad decisions.

Period.

 

[stokes]

Sixth, I think the way ice is going after people needs to be revisited. Without a doubt the violent and sex criminals need to be eradicated from our country asap. But there should be a different process for how they are dealing with people that have overstayed visas or that are simply not criminals other than coming here illegally. I get coming here illegally is a crime in itself, but it's definitely not the same as pedophiles, rapists and murderers.

Heres whats happening with regard to this issue. They go into Home Depot to find Jose the pedophile. In the process they come across Pedro and his friends who are not violent criminals but are here illegally. If they only take Jose and let the rest go, that is selective enforcement and will result in Jose being cut loose by some judge. Kinda makes the whole operation pointless, dont it?

 

[Celt]

Heres whats happening with regard to this issue. They go into Home Depot to find Jose the pedophile. In the process they come across Pedro and his friends who are not violent criminals but are here illegally. If they only take Jose and let the rest go, that is selective enforcement and will result in Jose being cut loose by some judge. Kinda makes the whole operation pointless, dont it?

I fully understand that, and the left created this mess and forced the right to come up with a solution. But I do think there needs to be a better way to deal with the varying levels of criminality.

 

[holdover]

NEW Video Emerges Showing Alex Pretti ATTACKING CBP Agents, He Was Violent

SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/ Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwNTXWEjVd2qIHLcXxQWxA/join Hosts: Tim @Timcast (everywhere) Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) Libby

rumble.com

 

[Rocpo]

I fully understand that, and the left created this mess and forced the right to come up with a solution. But I do think there needs to be a better way to deal with the varying levels of criminality.

You mean like... I dunno... maybe not having "sanctuary" bullshit and letting Agents arrest people detained on a request at thr jail?

 

[holdover]

You can smell the ground work for a civil war being laid

 

[stokes]

I fully understand that, and the left created this mess and forced the right to come up with a solution. But I do think there needs to be a better way to deal with the varying levels of criminality.

What solutions was "the right forced to come up with"? And how is it that the right has to come up with them? Varying levels of criminality? We have varying levels of criminality, violation, misdemeanor and felony. Everybody that comes into this country illegally falls into one of those categories. Too bad for them but they are not entitled to any due process by law.

 

[tirwin1]

 

[Bigfoot]

You can smell the ground work for a civil war being laid

I agree. Earlier today, me and the guys in the shop were talking about exactly that.

 

[spat]

I fully understand that, and the left created this mess and forced the right to come up with a solution. But I do think there needs to be a better way to deal with the varying levels of criminality.

You prioritize the worst, with the understanding that the goal is to deport every single illegal.

So, when you arrest Juan pedo, you're likely to find a half dozen of his associates during the process, some of whom might only be guilty of illegal immigration. But, you deport them too, because the goal has always been 100%.

 

[spat]

What solutions was "the right forced to come up with"? And how is it that the right has to come up with them? Varying levels of criminality? We have varying levels of criminality, violation, misdemeanor and felony. Everybody that comes into this country illegally falls into one of those categories. Too bad for them but they are not entitled to any due process by law.

They are 100% entitled to due process. Everyone is entitled to due process.

But due process for deportation doesn't look like due process for incarceration. Just like the rules for a civil trial for a lawsuit don't look like the rules for a criminal trial.

The current standard for deportation was set under Clinton, and we are still following it.

 

[stokes]

They are 100% entitled to due process.

The current standard for deportation was set under Clinton, and we are still following it.

The illegal immigration act of 96 signed by Clinton removed any due process for illegal immigrants being deported.

 

[subsonic]

His presence as a civilian legal observer

“Civilian legal observer” is a fake commie term and another tell from commie infiltrator rap. It’s a completely meaningless term. A meaningful term would just be “bystander” which Pretti clearly was not.

One of the biggest complaints that I had against Trump was the blanket pardon that he gave to many of them.

If he didn’t pardon them all it wasn’t a blanket pardon was it? Fourteen of those convicted, Oathkeepers and Proud Boys, got commutations that left their convictions and loss of rights intact after serving years in prison and months in jail before trial without bail in solitary confinement and deplorable conditions.

 

[GOPerfect]

“Civilian legal observer” is a fake commie term and another tell from commie infiltrator rap. It’s a completely meaningless term. A meaningful term would just be “bystander” which Pretti clearly was not.

If he didn’t pardon them all it wasn’t a blanket pardon was it? Fourteen of those convicted, Oathkeepers and Proud Boys, got commutations that left their convictions and loss of rights intact after serving years in prison and months in jail before trial without bail in solitary confinement and deplorable conditions.

Yes, it is absolutely considered a blanket pardon. Approximately 1500 out of 1600ish were part of the blanket pardon.