With the number of times just today I've seen "kill ICE agents" or ICE agents deserve to be doxxed", I just don't think I can be on the protesters' side anymore. It's becoming a dangerous precedent.
This kind of stuff is why they lost the 2024 election in a total landslide. Reddit, legacy media, and political streamers had the left fooled that trump had no support and we saw it was the total opposite.
There are WAY more people supporting what Trump has been doing than reddit would have the average person to believe. I think this recent incident probably alienated a lot of people from the left because every talking point started getting shut down as more and more video evidence got released, and I doubt the ICE officer will spend any time behind bars.
If trump doesn't totally blow the Greenland deal then I think the ICE shooting solidified his support for the midterms. At the end of the day, ICE are just federal agents trying to do a job, and who knows maybe they would've been in and out of Minnesota in a week of they were allowed to do their job undisturbed. Instead they are stuck there for months.
I just want to understand the thought process of thinking it is a right to be in any country illegally. I guess when you have citizens blindly protecting you it makes you feel validated but I still don't understand.
From what I see from real people's posts, they don't care about the illegal part, they just think it's mean to be deporting them at all. The actions of tracking down and arresting, the "profiling" even it's legal, the near-sanctuary status of businesses and schools.
Because they are not here illegally. They are sending immigrants who are going through due process to CECOT, the harshest prison in the world reserved for the most violent criminals. Look up Andry Hernández Romero, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Daniel Lozano-Camargo, and Merwil Gutiérrez.
I don't give a fuck, the fact that that even happened ONCE makes me think this has gone too far and makes me not want to support. Have you watched CECOT documentaries? I feel like we have lost our humanity that a place like that even exists. Just put people in solitary and throw away the key, or kill the bastards. But in what world do we design a mega-prison torture chamber to put people, and without any fair trial... in AMERICA. Send them back to their countries for God's sakes. They had 0 evidence of gang membership except for tattoos... and the gayest fucking tattoos for that matter. Little roses that say "Mom and Dad." The kid was gay. That's why they put him there. Because they are homophobic and were drinking beers and laughing about it later.
No they fucking weren't Andry Hernández Romero was a gay twink makeup artist who literally couldn't hurt a fly. He's in Venezuela now so obviously they took him back.
Remember that girl that got arrested for “giving an interview”? They had cameras rolling and people there for her when she got out of holding and she says “free Maduro!”
So it’s unsurprising the group of people that support a murderous dictator would be ok with this.
I also read she was out protesting and they asked her 20+ times to move then she moved inside of the police cordon upon where she got interviewed so they detained her
The only reason I could see them wanting Maduro free is because they didn't want the US to interfere in the first place. That I can understand, but after seeing real reports from Venezuelans I think it was a good start, but it can't end there. A full revolution requires support and comradery. We need to be Venezuelans strongest allies right now.
The ironic part of the entire Maduro thing, putting if it was legal or not aside, is that in Europe they had to change No Kings to No Dictators so they wouldn't offend real kings in Europe.
Faster forward a few months and a real dictator was snatched out of power, the people under his former rule celebrated, and then the "No Kings/No Dictators" crowd completely flipped the script
I want so badly to both sides this. The agent probably didn’t need to fire his weapon. She should have stayed still.
But these people are calling for violent action against innocent people because someone was killed while doing what would be labeled as attempted vehicular manslaughter. Fuck them. I’m done. Her death is tragic but I want these people to be jailed for their incitement.
Same. She shouldn't have been impeding law enforcement. He didn't need to fire his weapon. Her wife didn't need to scream the incriminating 'drive,drive,drive!' This was a fucking tragedy. And I keep hearing shit about 'the officer has a foreign wife' or 'the victims wife had her children taken away' and I just don't care anymore. I don't care who they are outside of this incident I just want an impartial investigation and justice.
Right? They seem to dig up seemingly random inconsequential shit to weave into a narrative. I could give a fuck less who these people are in their personal life.
I did see something funny in a comment section regarding that, though. It went something like this:
Person 1: You're defending a mother being murdered!
Person 2: She was a mother? How many kids did she have?
Person 1: Two, dumbass. You could've just googled that.
Person 2: Correct! How many did she have in her custody?
The "Gestapo" accusation makes it really obvious what the intent of these protests is. They're all trying to incite their most mentally disturbed to "do something."
Don't agree here. If Kyle had a crystal ball and could go back to that night, I think he should have shot every shot he did, he was legitimately at risk of his life and every shot was not only justified but actually morally correct. With the ICE shooting, I think he was justified because in his eyes it looked like she was trying to run him over, but with hindsight she actually was not and was trying to flee. She was still a moron, he still shouldn't be convicted, but I think if that ICE agent could go back in time, he would jump out of the way of the car and not fire his weapon, and then they'd track down and arrest the woman who was killed.
I agree. And even if she didn't intend to hit him, she still did, and at minimum if she didn't its assault with a deadly weapon and he was justified in doing what he did
Slow it down to .25 speed and look at his legs. You can see his left leg going back and straight while also sliding back. He's very clearly being pushed by the car.
The video should be timestamped, but if anyone needs it, it's at 2:08.
Given that she was pressing the gas, you can’t know her intent, and it’s easy to get dragged under and crushed? Yes, I do. And don’t minimize the speed either. You can’t know someone’s intent in that moment and you can’t know if the driver isn’t going to something stupid and/or desperate
Given that she was pressing the gas, you can’t know her intent, and it’s easy to get dragged under and crushed?
If he was so concerned for is life, why record with a phone in one hand, draw a gun with the other, and shoot inaccurately because he was one handed shooting? And why do all that instead of just spending your effort jumping to the side?
…what? I have no idea why he was recording but I don’t see how that has any bearing on whether she hit him with a car. It’s certainly suboptimal to do one handed shooting but it’s probative of nothing.
What do you think that proves? I really have no idea what the point is.
I don’t know about you but even as someone who has fortunately never got ran over by a car, I don’t think being ran over by a 4000lb SUV even when it’s going 2 mph would be a pleasant experience.
So yes. I consider someone who is trying to run me over with malicious intent as a threat
She initiated conflict by blocking the road and dancing while doing so, she also refused to get out of the car when the officers instructed her to do so and started to floor it when one of the officers was merely inches in front of her even though if she wanted to drive past the officers, she had enough time to leave the scene when one of the officers wasn’t in front of her and she did those things while her wife egged her on.
Because due to the officer being hit and nearly ran over by a 4000lb vehicle, it gave the officer a reasonable belief that he was in physical danger regardless of intent.
Because he was already aiming and shooting. It's the training. They're not going to shoot once, stop reassess reaim fire, they lock onto a target and shoot it.
I dunno if you watch football at all, but it's like a roughing the passer penalty happening in the split-second between the QB releasing the ball but the defender has already launched for a tackle. It's an unfair penalty because it's not like the defender can stop his momentum mid-tackle, but the realty is the QB's status changes and you can't hit him anymore. The agent was already disccharging his weapon, you're asking him to make a split second decision if his life was in danger, and then make another split-second decision to stop firing counter to his muscle memory.
its weird how misinformed redditors with such strong opinions are on this subject. There were 3 shots, one through the front (far right side of windshield) and the other two through the side window, probably hitting her in the side of the head and killing her.
Did we watch the same video? She literally drives into him. He shot her because he was in fear for his life. He didn’t know what she might do next to potentially harm him
But northdingo, she drove past the officer! Don’t you know that it magically stops her from being a threat to the officer she hit and almost ran over!1!1!1!1!1
Your first sentence is correct, it's obvious she wasn't trying to run him over based on angles the agent didn't have access to in real time. But he didn't know that, and law enforcement training is once you've decided to use lethal force, you use it until the danger is neutralized. I don't know exactly if he should have shot, obviously knowing what we know now I wish he had just leapt out of the way and they could have just arrested her later. But when you're attempting to arrest someone, they reverse, then slam on the gas and you're right in front of the car, obviously you're going to assume they're attempting to run you over and react accordingly. And he shot 3 bullets, the first one went through the windshield, so he was obviously in front of the car when he made the decision to shoot, and the time it takes to fire 3 shots is not all that long. He didn't shoot once, realize he was beside the car, then shoot again. He simply fired 3 shots as her car was moving. As he was firing the shots, he likely assumed she was trying to run him over, and stopped after 3 when he realized she wasn't.
Your first sentence is correct, it's obvious she wasn't trying to run him over based on angles the agent didn't have access to in real time.
Umm, what? So the car was turning right in front of him but he couldn't tell, even when he got pushed to the SIDE?
And he shot 3 bullets, the first one went through the windshield, so he was obviously in front of the car when he made the decision to shoot
He was at the front quarter, not directly in front. You can tell because the bullet hole is in the bottom right side of the windshield
He simply fired 3 shots as her car was moving. As he was firing the shots, he likely assumed she was trying to run him over, and stopped after 3 when he realized she wasn't.
The killing shots were probably the ones through the side window. Good luck explaining to a jury that he feared for his life when the car was driving past him.
Watch the pov video that got posted, when he decided to shoot it almost definitely hadn't even started turning even if the wheels may have been turned (at his angle he couldn't see the tires). I'm not trying to be a dick, but have you actually fired a gun before? Again you don't shoot one, go into a deep intellectual pondering, and then shoot again, and the moment you choose to shoot isn't the exact same moment the bullet leaves the gun.
He clearly made the determination that she was trying to run him over, and shot several times. It doesn't matter that between his 1st and 3rd shot the car had turned slightly (and hit him btw even if it was just a glance) and he was on the side, that's completely irrelevant to any of this.
You do say good luck convincing a jury, would you actually be interested in betting on the outcome of a potential jury case? I'm willing to put up a sizeable amount that a jury will find him not guilty, dm me if actually interested.
It doesn't matter that between his 1st and 3rd shot the car had turned slightly (and hit him btw even if it was just a glance) and he was on the side, that's completely irrelevant to any of this.
It matters because if he can shoot into the side window there was no longer a threat to him. That's all the jury needs to know.
Its illegal for a cop to shoot anybody that isn't an imminent threat, and when he could fire into the side window, there was no longer an imminent threat, and if you are arguing there was still a threat, then you'd have to explain why he was the only cop there with is gun drawn and shooting. Good luck with that.
And yet you won't bet on it, which shows you don't actually believe what you're saying. I'm being serious we can bet as much as you want I'll literally find people to put up millions of dollars and we can get lawyers involved.
With the number of times just today I've seen "kill ICE agents" or ICE agents deserve to be doxxed", I just don't think I can be on the protesters' side anymore. It's becoming a dangerous precedent.
This kind of stuff is why they lost the 2024 election in a total landslide. Reddit, legacy media, and political streamers had the left fooled that trump had no support and we saw it was the total opposite.
There are WAY more people supporting what Trump has been doing than reddit would have the average person to believe. I think this recent incident probably alienated a lot of people from the left because every talking point started getting shut down as more and more video evidence got released, and I doubt the ICE officer will spend any time behind bars.
If trump doesn't totally blow the Greenland deal then I think the ICE shooting solidified his support for the midterms. At the end of the day, ICE are just federal agents trying to do a job, and who knows maybe they would've been in and out of Minnesota in a week of they were allowed to do their job undisturbed. Instead they are stuck there for months.
I just want to understand the thought process of thinking it is a right to be in any country illegally. I guess when you have citizens blindly protecting you it makes you feel validated but I still don't understand.
From what I see from real people's posts, they don't care about the illegal part, they just think it's mean to be deporting them at all. The actions of tracking down and arresting, the "profiling" even it's legal, the near-sanctuary status of businesses and schools.
Because they are not here illegally. They are sending immigrants who are going through due process to CECOT, the harshest prison in the world reserved for the most violent criminals. Look up Andry Hernández Romero, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Daniel Lozano-Camargo, and Merwil Gutiérrez.
You named a few people, whom I can understand, but I'm talking the vast majority that came in via coyote, overstayed, visa fraud, asylum fraud, etc.
Its unclear but it was like 250 people sent there one time but yall like to act like every one deported goes to CECOT
I don't give a fuck, the fact that that even happened ONCE makes me think this has gone too far and makes me not want to support. Have you watched CECOT documentaries? I feel like we have lost our humanity that a place like that even exists. Just put people in solitary and throw away the key, or kill the bastards. But in what world do we design a mega-prison torture chamber to put people, and without any fair trial... in AMERICA. Send them back to their countries for God's sakes. They had 0 evidence of gang membership except for tattoos... and the gayest fucking tattoos for that matter. Little roses that say "Mom and Dad." The kid was gay. That's why they put him there. Because they are homophobic and were drinking beers and laughing about it later.
They were largely Venezuelan whom Maduro refused to take back. And they were violent criminals who did receive due process
No they fucking weren't Andry Hernández Romero was a gay twink makeup artist who literally couldn't hurt a fly. He's in Venezuela now so obviously they took him back.
There's about a dozen countries in between Venezuela and the US. He could go claim asylum in any of those
This is how they’ve been for a while too.
Remember that girl that got arrested for “giving an interview”? They had cameras rolling and people there for her when she got out of holding and she says “free Maduro!”
So it’s unsurprising the group of people that support a murderous dictator would be ok with this.
I also read she was out protesting and they asked her 20+ times to move then she moved inside of the police cordon upon where she got interviewed so they detained her
The only reason I could see them wanting Maduro free is because they didn't want the US to interfere in the first place. That I can understand, but after seeing real reports from Venezuelans I think it was a good start, but it can't end there. A full revolution requires support and comradery. We need to be Venezuelans strongest allies right now.
The ironic part of the entire Maduro thing, putting if it was legal or not aside, is that in Europe they had to change No Kings to No Dictators so they wouldn't offend real kings in Europe.
Faster forward a few months and a real dictator was snatched out of power, the people under his former rule celebrated, and then the "No Kings/No Dictators" crowd completely flipped the script
Didn't they do that in Canada too due to them being under rule of King Charles III?
TIL
Because anything that gives good political points to Trump is bad in their eyes. Even if it makes America stronger
I want so badly to both sides this. The agent probably didn’t need to fire his weapon. She should have stayed still.
But these people are calling for violent action against innocent people because someone was killed while doing what would be labeled as attempted vehicular manslaughter. Fuck them. I’m done. Her death is tragic but I want these people to be jailed for their incitement.
Same. She shouldn't have been impeding law enforcement. He didn't need to fire his weapon. Her wife didn't need to scream the incriminating 'drive,drive,drive!' This was a fucking tragedy. And I keep hearing shit about 'the officer has a foreign wife' or 'the victims wife had her children taken away' and I just don't care anymore. I don't care who they are outside of this incident I just want an impartial investigation and justice.
Right? They seem to dig up seemingly random inconsequential shit to weave into a narrative. I could give a fuck less who these people are in their personal life.
I did see something funny in a comment section regarding that, though. It went something like this:
Person 1 never replied.
The "Gestapo" accusation makes it really obvious what the intent of these protests is. They're all trying to incite their most mentally disturbed to "do something."
It's Kyle Rittenhouse 2.0
Maybe not a clear cut case. But the levels of delusion are there.
The similarities are uncanny. The woman crossed state lines and all those black people that mattered that she ran over before being stopped by ice.
Don't agree here. If Kyle had a crystal ball and could go back to that night, I think he should have shot every shot he did, he was legitimately at risk of his life and every shot was not only justified but actually morally correct. With the ICE shooting, I think he was justified because in his eyes it looked like she was trying to run him over, but with hindsight she actually was not and was trying to flee. She was still a moron, he still shouldn't be convicted, but I think if that ICE agent could go back in time, he would jump out of the way of the car and not fire his weapon, and then they'd track down and arrest the woman who was killed.
I agree. And even if she didn't intend to hit him, she still did, and at minimum if she didn't its assault with a deadly weapon and he was justified in doing what he did
If you haven’t seen it, the body can footage is worth watching.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7yv4524gqo
Now there’s new footage of the “victim” dancing while blocking the road prior to the events.
I don’t know about you but that’s clearly someone who wanted to initiate conflict
The biggest problem this reveals is the lack of a shared reality.
If we can't agree on what's happening in the physical world, nothing is going to bridge the intellectual one.
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
It’s fascinating that people “know” 100% what is happening in those videos and it’s down party lines.
In this video you can see she was turning away from him and probably just misjudged her turning radius
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbq98aqF794&t=1s
You can also see he's barely shook and just standing there
There's also the unfortunate truth he shot her from the side, through the side window, after he was no longer in any danger (if he actually ever was)
I'm 100% for what ICE is doing, and this really hurt their cause, and the people defending his behavior aren't helping either.
Counterpoint.
Slow it down to .25 speed and look at his legs. You can see his left leg going back and straight while also sliding back. He's very clearly being pushed by the car.
The video should be timestamped, but if anyone needs it, it's at 2:08.
"pushed by the car". Does that mean he's in such imminent threat he needs to unload three rounds into somebody?
In the video I provided, if you watched it, he got pushed a little and stepped back and then stood there unharmed.
And why shoot her two more times after he was no longer being "pushed" and was out of the way of the car?
Actually yes being "pushed" by a car is an imminent threat.
pushed to the side by a car going about 2mps is something you consider a threat?
Given that she was pressing the gas, you can’t know her intent, and it’s easy to get dragged under and crushed? Yes, I do. And don’t minimize the speed either. You can’t know someone’s intent in that moment and you can’t know if the driver isn’t going to something stupid and/or desperate
He's also missing the point that the time between being hit and the shots was less than 2 seconds.
If he was so concerned for is life, why record with a phone in one hand, draw a gun with the other, and shoot inaccurately because he was one handed shooting? And why do all that instead of just spending your effort jumping to the side?
…what? I have no idea why he was recording but I don’t see how that has any bearing on whether she hit him with a car. It’s certainly suboptimal to do one handed shooting but it’s probative of nothing.
What do you think that proves? I really have no idea what the point is.
I don’t know about you but even as someone who has fortunately never got ran over by a car, I don’t think being ran over by a 4000lb SUV even when it’s going 2 mph would be a pleasant experience.
So yes. I consider someone who is trying to run me over with malicious intent as a threat
So when he shot her through the side window, as she drove past, she was still considered a malicious threat somehow?
She initiated conflict by blocking the road and dancing while doing so, she also refused to get out of the car when the officers instructed her to do so and started to floor it when one of the officers was merely inches in front of her even though if she wanted to drive past the officers, she had enough time to leave the scene when one of the officers wasn’t in front of her and she did those things while her wife egged her on.
So yes. I do think she had malicious intentions.
But she was still a threat to him as she drove past and shooting her in the side of the head was justified? How was she a threat at that point?
Because due to the officer being hit and nearly ran over by a 4000lb vehicle, it gave the officer a reasonable belief that he was in physical danger regardless of intent.
Because he was already aiming and shooting. It's the training. They're not going to shoot once, stop reassess reaim fire, they lock onto a target and shoot it.
I dunno if you watch football at all, but it's like a roughing the passer penalty happening in the split-second between the QB releasing the ball but the defender has already launched for a tackle. It's an unfair penalty because it's not like the defender can stop his momentum mid-tackle, but the realty is the QB's status changes and you can't hit him anymore. The agent was already disccharging his weapon, you're asking him to make a split second decision if his life was in danger, and then make another split-second decision to stop firing counter to his muscle memory.
Bullet went in through the front window
its weird how misinformed redditors with such strong opinions are on this subject. There were 3 shots, one through the front (far right side of windshield) and the other two through the side window, probably hitting her in the side of the head and killing her.
here’s a video showing the agents pov. it’s clean she intentionally tried to hit himwatching this makes it clear as day as to what happened. She hit the officer. It doesn’t appear like she’s turning away
I don't see anything like what you describe. In fact, right before and during you cant see anything because of the angle of the phone.
Even if that's true, why did he shoot her in the side window as she drove past, after there was no more threat?
Did we watch the same video? She literally drives into him. He shot her because he was in fear for his life. He didn’t know what she might do next to potentially harm him
It’s like he’s a Westworld bot. “It doesn’t look like anything to me”
Looks like the killing shots were from the side, as she was driving past, was he in danger then too?
He didn’t know what she was going to do, so yes he could have been. She already showed she had intentions to harm him
How is she going to harm him driving past him? Come back and run him over?
He did not know what her intent was other than the fact that she clearly wanted to harm him
But northdingo, she drove past the officer! Don’t you know that it magically stops her from being a threat to the officer she hit and almost ran over!1!1!1!1!1
So he reasonably thought that a lady driving past him was somehow going to harm him at some later date so he had to shoot her in the side of the head?
If I run over someone on their bike I don't think the judge is going to let me off with a "but my turning radius" defense
“But judge! The turning radius!”
“But judge! She drove past him!”
“But judge! The side window!”
I love how he uses these excuses as if that magically stops her from being a threat
I bet you he’s one of those people who thinks the cops shouldn’t be able to arrest him because he “reached home base”
except nobody got run over, or even got knocked down, or even dropped their phone
Your first sentence is correct, it's obvious she wasn't trying to run him over based on angles the agent didn't have access to in real time. But he didn't know that, and law enforcement training is once you've decided to use lethal force, you use it until the danger is neutralized. I don't know exactly if he should have shot, obviously knowing what we know now I wish he had just leapt out of the way and they could have just arrested her later. But when you're attempting to arrest someone, they reverse, then slam on the gas and you're right in front of the car, obviously you're going to assume they're attempting to run you over and react accordingly. And he shot 3 bullets, the first one went through the windshield, so he was obviously in front of the car when he made the decision to shoot, and the time it takes to fire 3 shots is not all that long. He didn't shoot once, realize he was beside the car, then shoot again. He simply fired 3 shots as her car was moving. As he was firing the shots, he likely assumed she was trying to run him over, and stopped after 3 when he realized she wasn't.
Umm, what? So the car was turning right in front of him but he couldn't tell, even when he got pushed to the SIDE?
He was at the front quarter, not directly in front. You can tell because the bullet hole is in the bottom right side of the windshield
The killing shots were probably the ones through the side window. Good luck explaining to a jury that he feared for his life when the car was driving past him.
Watch the pov video that got posted, when he decided to shoot it almost definitely hadn't even started turning even if the wheels may have been turned (at his angle he couldn't see the tires). I'm not trying to be a dick, but have you actually fired a gun before? Again you don't shoot one, go into a deep intellectual pondering, and then shoot again, and the moment you choose to shoot isn't the exact same moment the bullet leaves the gun.
He clearly made the determination that she was trying to run him over, and shot several times. It doesn't matter that between his 1st and 3rd shot the car had turned slightly (and hit him btw even if it was just a glance) and he was on the side, that's completely irrelevant to any of this.
You do say good luck convincing a jury, would you actually be interested in betting on the outcome of a potential jury case? I'm willing to put up a sizeable amount that a jury will find him not guilty, dm me if actually interested.
It matters because if he can shoot into the side window there was no longer a threat to him. That's all the jury needs to know.
I notice you didn't respond to my request about betting. The jury will almost definitely find him not guilty.
Its illegal for a cop to shoot anybody that isn't an imminent threat, and when he could fire into the side window, there was no longer an imminent threat, and if you are arguing there was still a threat, then you'd have to explain why he was the only cop there with is gun drawn and shooting. Good luck with that.
And yet you won't bet on it, which shows you don't actually believe what you're saying. I'm being serious we can bet as much as you want I'll literally find people to put up millions of dollars and we can get lawyers involved.
are you twelve years old?