+- Rogue-Nation Discussion Board (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb)
+-- Forum: Rogue Politics (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=47)
+--- Forum: Political news and more (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=50)
+--- Thread: The US Second Amendment and Protesting (/showthread.php?tid=3309)
The US Second Amendment and Protesting - Ninurta - 01-25-2026
By now, I presume most of us have seen the various angles in the latest ICE related shooting in Minneapolis. A male emergency room nurse was shot by ICE agents while apparently unarmed, although he was armed when entering the protest zone.
From all the video I've seen so far, it appears that the deceased was disarmed by an ICE agent a split second before the shots rang out which ended his life. This is, of course a tragedy, but one that was supremely avoidable, which makes it all the worse.
The US government higher-ups are scrambling now to cover their asses by making statements that seem to me to be ludicrous - they should have at least the same information I have, and probably more, to base their statements upon, yet they insist on going off on tangents in the mad scramble to CYA. The latest such statement is to paint an assumption of guilt because the deceased "had two loaded magazines". None of them have specified if those two magazines were in addition to the one in the firearm, or if the two magazines included the one in the firearm (i.e. a single additional magazine), but that really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
Two additional magazines are pretty much standard. My current every day carry shoulder rig came with two spare magazine pouches as standard. They ride under my right arm, and balance out the weight of the firearm riding under my left arm pretty well, whether they are ever needed or not... and in a gunfight, too many bullets are always preferable to too few bullets.
When I carried a gun for a living, two spare magazines were also the standard. Nearly all of the magazine pouches sold for my duty belt held two spares as standard. Some guys carried two of those pouches for a total of 4 spares, but I only ever carried one two magazine pouch, leaving space on the duty belt for other things I felt necessary. It was rare to find anyone with just one spare magazine. So, two is the standard.
Therefore, there is nothing unusual about carrying two spares plus the one in the gun. The government should know better than to insinuate otherwise. I would be willing to bet that every single one of those ICE agents had, at the very least, two spare magazines. Using the government's logic, that would mean they are going in there with the intent to massacre people rather than just do their jobs and go home... which is a conclusion that is ridiculous on the face of it. So, if it's ridiculous the make that assumption on the part of the ICE agents, it's equally ridiculous to apply that assumption to a civilian. Foolish assumptions are foolish assumptions, regardless of the direction they are flying in.
Another argument the government is putting forth is the ludicrous notion that one is not allowed to be armed at protests. That is a ridiculous notion - both are rights guaranteed by the US Constitution. In no other cases are the assertion made that any Right in the Bill of Rights cancels out any other right enshrined therein. For example, you do not give up your 4th Amendment right against unlawful search and seizure when you exercise your 1st Amendment Right to speak out. You do not give up your 5th Amendment Right against self incrimination when you exercise your 1st Amendment Right to attend a church service. So, the government, of all people, should be extremely aware that exercising one Right does not cancel any other right.
What appears to me to have happened in this case was at the very least a lapse in judgement that tragically cost a man his life. Probably several lapses in judgement on both sides.
To me, it makes no sense to interfere with law enforcement engaged in their sworn lawful duties, which is what these Minnesota "protests" have devolved into on a mass scale. And that makes no sense to me regardless of whether one is armed or unarmed. That was the first lapse in judgement. It's smarter to avoid these protests altogether, knowing that they are all devolving into violent action, but if you simply must go, then you should go armed, also because they always devolve into violence. Better to stay away from insurrections unless your purpose is to engage in insurrection.
Now in the Renee Good case, I believe that was a clearly righteous shooting. From the video evidence, they were certainly interfering in ICE operations they had no business interfering in, and Ms. Good's actions of trying to mow down an ICE officer - while her "wife" cheered her on chanting "drive, baby, drive!" was pretty clearly an act of insurrection. In this recent case, the waters are quite a bit murkier.
All of the video I've seen so far starts with the action of an ICE officer knocking the deceased on his ass. There has been no footage presented so far that shows what preceded that - nothing that shows WHY the ICE officer knocked him on his ass, or even if there was any justification for that action at all. That may be by design - propaganda of omission is every bit as powerful as propaganda of commission. What really started this ball rolling downhill? Anything?
Then, after the deceased is knocked on his ass, Feds dogpile on him, and the actions become murky. We can see what appears to be an ICE agent reaching into the dogp[ile and drawing his hand back out with a pistol from the area of the deceased's waist band... which, if that is the case, would tend to indicate that the deceased had not drawn his weapon at all, and that it was still holstered, meaning there was no imminent threat.
A split second after the deceased appears to have been disarmed, the fatal shots ring out, and it sounds like they came from at least two different guns. If we are to give the benefit of doubt, as in "innocent until proven guilty", we would have to presume that the first officer to shoot saw an empty holster without knowing that another agent was in control of the gun due to the dogpiling, and assumed the deceased had drawn his weapon himself, and in a split second decision fired to protect himself and other officers from what he perceived to be an imminent threat. The second officer shooting probably then would have engaged in what is known as "sympathetic fire" - that is where one person hears the shots ring out, immediately assumes that the shooter saw a threat to fire upon, and starts shooting in a support role thinking the first shooter must have been justified.
That would, at the very least,be a case of manslaughter vs. murder. You have to be sure that your target is an actual threat, rather than assuming so... but Monday morning quarterbacking is easy when you're not having to make a split second decision in the middle of the deep shit.
But we don't really know what the initial interaction was that led up to the shooting. That will unfold n the course of the investigation, and government officials should not be trying to cover their own asses with hearsay and made-up bullshit. That makes them look like they are grasping at straws, and nonexistent straws to boot. That's a bad look.
The bottom line, really, is that it was poor judgement to engage in a protest that a reasonable person would know is going to turn violent, as these Minneapolis [protests almost always do... and poor judgement has killed many a person. Reality does not care what your intent was, it only cares whether there are consequences for your actions or not. It is often impartial in levying those consequences.
It's also poor judgement to interfere with armed men doing their jobs.. but we do not yet know if any such interference on the part of the deceased actually occurred, or if he was simply knocked on his ass and dogpiled for being in the wrong place at the wrong time... which again argues for not being there and continuing to breathe freely after you were not there.
If it happened, it's also poor judgement to randomly knock onlookers on their ass, and it's poor judgement to dogpile that onlooker simply for observing. It is poor judgement to shoot a target that you don't absolutely know is a threat.
So the entire thing MAY have been a series of faulty judgements that led to a man losing his life. Poor judgements on both side of the equation...
BUT, what government officials are claiming in spite of the evidence to the contrary is a poor judgement compounding all of the other poor judgements possibly made. we'll have to wait to see what the incident investigation reveals.
And the government should have waited, too, before yapping out bullshit.
This gent is a former law enforcement officer giving his opinion on the government ass-covering claims:
.
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - 727Sky - 01-26-2026
The government will do all they can for the CYA no doubt; standby the troops and all that sort of stuff. Could have been some pent up anger by the agents who in their minds wasted another useless eater .... Some of the acts by protestors I have seen, would make most people (where I grew up) want to lash out in anger if not self defense IMO..
If this stuff continues and even gets worse then maybe something really big will happen ?
Still not nearly as bad as what was going on in the late 60s early 70s as we have a way to go to reach that level of hate and B.S. but I supposed it could happen. Kinda surprised the Somali's haven't got an Al sha bob ali armpit movement started since their fraudulent games have been exposed.
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - Bally002 - 01-26-2026
(01-26-2026, 01:32 AM)727Sky Wrote: The government will do all they can for the CYA no doubt; standby the troops and all that sort of stuff. Could have been some pent up anger by the agents who in their minds wasted another useless eater .... Some of the acts by protestors I have seen, would make most people (where I grew up) want to lash out in anger if not self defense IMO..
If this stuff continues and even gets worse then maybe something really big will happen ?
Still not nearly as bad as what was going on in the late 60s early 70s as we have a way to go to reach that level of hate and B.S. but I supposed it could happen. Kinda surprised the Somali's haven't got an Al sha bob ali armpit movement started since their fraudulent games have been exposed.
Hi mate. I read and also listen to this. The problems in USA and Aust for that matter will not go away..ever. There is nothing you can do to stop it, albeit ICE, law enforcement or even military. It will always be there to fester.
Kinda like the Herpes virus. You can treat it all you want but once your immune system lowers it erupts causing grief.
Thanks lefties for our dose.
Kind regards,
Bally(
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - 727Sky - 01-26-2026
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - Ninurta - 01-26-2026
(01-26-2026, 01:32 AM)727Sky Wrote: ...
If this stuff continues and even gets worse then maybe something really big will happen ?
...
It may not have to go much further for something really big to happen. I think that, in this case, the ICE agents may have given the insurgents the very martyr they were craving. That's actually a part of Marxist insurgency and destabilization doctrine - push until someone does something stupid, get a martyr, and use that martyr as a rally point to destabilize. These ICE officers may have given the insurgents the very martyr they've been trying to generate, on a silver platter.
I think it's past due time for Trump to invoke the Insurgency Act and get some troops in there to take the load off of ICE. ICE is trained in fugitive apprehension, not crowd control... and, in my opinion, they are making a mess of their crowd control efforts. I give 'em a star for the attempt, but lower marks for the execution of it. But, it's not really their fault, as they are not trained for it. The government needs to get some troops in there that ARE trained for it, and they need to get them there last week. That would free the ICE agents up to do what they were hired to do instead of babysitting insurgents.
They wouldn't really need all that many troops. ICE raids are generally point raids on specific locations. All they need is enough troops to cordon off a block or so in each direction from the raid point, and let NO ONE in or out until the raid is over. So, usually about 9 square blocks, 3 on a side. In addition, they would need a roving contingent to deal with any eruptions within the cordoned area, to avoid weakening the cordon by being forced to pull personnel from it and possibly suffering a breakthrough at a point thus weakened. MP's and some other units are trained in crowd control / riot control, so that would be the obvious direction to take.
Just shuffling in more and more ICE agents isn't going to cut it, unless and until they are trained for crowd control and dedicated to ONLY crowd control.
But now, with the martyr the insurgents have been praying for, it's going to get a lot tougher, since the purpose of creating martyrs is to sway public opinion against the government. In the next few days, we'll probably see just how well that has worked for the insurgents. If they decide to bring in crowd control / riot control troops to protect ICE, then they should, at the same time, make it clear and loud that the troops are there to prevent any such repetitions, and that they are there to safeguard the insurgents from ICE as much as they are there to safeguard ICE from the insurgents. It's often all in the messaging.
And they have to be very, VERY firm in not allowing anyone in or out of the cordon until the operation is finished. I mean that people have to do jail time, and the hardest jail; time the government can muster, for people breaching or attempting to breach the cordon. Don't house them in local jails who are just going to cut them loose... instead, ship them out of area to Federal facilities where they will get the time they deserve.
The catch is, the Federal government doesn't really have much in the way of jail facilities, only prisons. I know from my work with the US Marshal's Service that most Federal inmates are usually housed temporarily in local jails. So they may have to build a few Federal detention centers that are not prisons, just detention centers to house the insurgents until trial and then ship them off to Federal prisons if they are found guilty in Federal courts. Ideally, they could use already existent, but now emptied, illegal alien detention centers. That would be a kind of poetic justice, I think.
==========================================================
Here's another angle and non-law enforcement analysis of the important points of the shooting:
From that angle, it's not looking pretty for the shooter. He should have been able to see the subject being disarmed, and should have known the threat was over, and that he was shooting an unarmed man in the back. However, I'm not qualified to comment on the emotional state of his mind at that point, which of course would factor in to the shooting.
In conditions like that, every man is going to psychologically react somewhat differently, and if he was in a panic state, or a rage state, that would factor in to his next actions as to whether he was in subjective "fear for his life" from panic or perhaps in "retribution mode" from rage. Either way, that may not be the right job for him..
And, in either of those cases, it cost a man his life, and handed a "Martyr for the Cause" to the insurgents on a silver platter.
He should NOT be back on the job right now, neither in Minneapolis or anywhere else, until a through investigation has concluded. Not only is his culpability not determined, but he's probably in a mental state right now, so soon after the action, and most likely unable to act effectively in an ICE capacity until he has had time to decompress and process the events. Judging from his actions/reactions, I would guess he's not a combat veteran, ad so this was probably his first kill, and he likely has not fully processed the implications yet. That shit can come back on you at the damndest times, and render you inop if you've not processed it fully.
.
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - 727Sky - 01-27-2026
Decent breakdown and possible discharge of Perps gun
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - Minstrel - 01-27-2026
What I have seen, among other things, is the following:
With Pretti on the ground, and smothered by officers, an officer in a grayish coat is messing around on Pretti's belt (back right side), where he discovers the gun.
Immediately, he yells "Gun Gun Gun", while pulling the gun from Pretti's belt/holster...and turning away, to clear the weapon.
As he is turning away, the firearm discharges (accidentally/incidentally), as evidenced by the sudden change of angle of the right arm (and the immediate 'jump' of an officer nearest where the firearm discharged)...(other angle/s show the impact of the bullet in the street, as well).
As soon as the grey-coated officer yelled "Gun...", other officers began reaching for their sidearms... When Pretti's gun discharged, the other officers responded...most (maybe all) of them Not seeing that the "Gun" had already been removed.
And, they responded, I presume, out of fear, desperation, and then, rage.
He was a victim of his own calamity...
If you bring a gun - you should realize that you're walking into a life-or-death situation.
He walked away, with Death.
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - Ninurta - 01-27-2026
(01-27-2026, 04:59 AM)Minstrel Wrote: ...
As he is turning away, the firearm discharges (accidentally/incidentally), as evidenced by the sudden change of angle of the right arm (and the immediate 'jump' of an officer nearest where the firearm discharged)...(other angle/s show the impact of the bullet in the street, as well).
As soon as the grey-coated officer yelled "Gun...", other officers began reaching for their sidearms... When Pretti's gun discharged, the other officers responded...most (maybe all) of them Not seeing that the "Gun" had already been removed.
And, they responded, I presume, out of fear, desperation, and then, rage.
...
You may be right. As I noted above, it sounded to me like shots from two different guns. I had not considered a negligent discharge from the shooter's own gun, and presumed it to be two different Federal agents shooting, which may be an error on my part.
Grace told me yesterday that the guy's gun was a Sig, but even then I didn't make the connection. After reading your post, I asked her if it was a Sig P320 by any chance, and she said yes it was, how did I know the model?
Folks who try to keep current on firearms already know that the Sig P320 is currently the most dangerous pistol on Earth... to it's own users, and any innocent bystanders. There is an engineering flaw in them that causes negligent discharges pretty regularly. Lots of folks, trying to protect Sig Sauer I reckon, are calling them "unintentional" or "uncommanded" (the latter of which I think is a whole new word coined just to cover Sig's ass) discharges, but I'm calling it like I see it - negligence, on the part of the manufacturer. Those guns go off apparently at random, with no finger anywhere near their trigger.
Of course, the US military has chosen that piece of crap as their next sidearm, and Sig is desperately trying to defend their dangerous chunk of metal so as not to lose that contract. One airman has already been killed by his own pistol, doing pretty much nothing with it at all but carrying it, holstered, and having the audacity to sit down while wearing it..
Personally, I stay away from all striker fired pistols. If it's a semi-auto pistol, and it ain't got both an external hammer and a manual safety, then i don't need it, because there are not enough controls there to make it a safe gun. But, that's just me. Your mileage may vary..
So, that would wrap it up nicely. The guy shouldn't have been there to begin with, and if he just had to be there he should not have interfered with law enforcement, and if he just had to do both of those, he shouldn't have been carrying a known knee-capper of a pistol. Making all three of those mistakes on the same day may have cost him dearly.
.
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - F2d5thCav - 01-27-2026
Minstrel--
Situation reminds me of this quote from a 1973 novel.
Quote:"This life's hard, man, but it's harder if you're stupid"
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - MalevolentTwitch - 01-27-2026
The more I look at this incident, the more I worry about it. It's too perfect. I hate saying "perfect" because a man has died, but here we are. So first, let me get my surface thoughts out of the way...
He showed up to a protest armed. Cool. So do I... Any event, protest, whatever in which I'm allowed to carry my handgun, exercise my 2A rights, AND utilize my CCW permit? I'm doing so. Hell, to risk being overly honest, I'll still carry to some events that I'm “technically” not allowed to... And the reason? Protection, and not just personal either... All it ever takes is a single spark or lone gunman or agent provocateur for that event to get completely out of hand and turn into either a riot or a tragedy. Am I looking for a fight? Absolutely not. Am I making sure that if one does occur, I'm prepared? Absolutely.
He showed up to a protest armed with multiple magazines. Cool. So do I... When I carry, I carry 3 spares. Why? Because I carry a single stack handgun. I'm relatively thin and I prefer to wear properly fitting clothes. This means that most double stack handguns “print” very easily on me. Is it ideal? Fuck no, but when each magazine only holds 7 rounds? Work arounds are required....
He tried to put himself between a female protestor and an agent that had already put his hands on her, shoving her to the ground. This didn't occur during an escalating conflict in the middle of a riot, the agent actively closed the distance between himself and a woman holding a cup of coffee, and shoved on her. Pretti immediately gets hit in the face that oh-so-tasty orange spray while trying to help defend the woman from the agent while other agents walk up. Pretti's hands were up in a defensive posture until he tried to put his cellphone away... Cool. I like to think I would have done the exact same thing. Look, just being a federal agent does not give someone cart-blanche to act in the manner that agent did. He overstepped, Pretti got in the way, and honestly? It really does look like Pretti was executed for it.
This man was exercising his 2A rights in a perfectly legal, peaceful, and safe manner. A couple of years back, I was temporarily detained (arrested but no charges went any further than the magistrate) for “brandishing,” i.e., I had pulled my Kimber in an attempt to de-escalate a situation in which I believed my safety and the safety of others to be at risk. I got arrested just for pulling my sidearm. It happens. No big deal. This man died and he never pulled his own...
Now...
Here's the greater problem I see with all of this. Liberals been on a warpath for the last few weeks about this idea they created in which the “2A Right” is only okay with the 2A when it's the Right that is armed... I've not actually seen that rhetoric from anyone other government talking heads and politicians, and yet it is all over my social media. What I have seen, is a lot of my more Right leaning friends and family defending these agents' actions. I can't, with good conscience, agree with them, and so we've been arguing about it, sometimes quite loudly.
Alex Pretti will be raised up as a martyr. Either by Liberals to prop up their stance that ICE is just jackbooted thugs for a tyrannical government, or by those that are actually paying attention and willing to call out their own for fucking up. I may not have agreed with his stance on immigration or possibly anything other than his 2A rights... But I do not believe Pretti was in the wrong at all for what transpired.
P.S. The only fault I can really find with Pretti at all is in his choice of carry gun... When ranges are banning P320's because they're not safe, is that really the one you should be carrying? Which does beg the question... Was that actually the firearm he *was* carrying?
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - Minstrel - 01-27-2026
It appears that Mr. Pretti was no newbie, encountering ICE operations, as, he'd been in another altercation with them, a week prior to his death...that is reported to have broken a rib (when tackled, and shackled).
Unrelated to previous statement, but...
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - Michigan Swamp Buck - 02-02-2026
I know, I'll be repeating what so many have already, but "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes", and the one I like better, "Fuck around and find out".
I have FAFO at least 3 or 4 times, where things could have gone really bad. The one time it nearly cost me my life and had me doing physical therapy for a long while.
It is mostly an attitude that comes from frustration and anger. It could be that your life has taken a downturn, and you feel trapped in the situation. Maybe you have reached your limit where you are close to snapping, and it causes you engage in stupid, risky behavior.
Like when you get so angry with someone you know will kick your ass, but you take a swing anyway. Blind rage, in this case, but it can be like that for anyone, cop or perp. When a group of people is angry, frustrated, and enraged, a gun won't be necessary when you want to tear people apart with your bare hands.
I guess I'm trying to factor in the state of mind of those involved basically. That is something we would have a hard time determining even with detailed investigations.
RE: The US Second Amendment and Protesting - sailorsam - 02-02-2026
I wonder if they saw the clips and had a brain glitch (not surprising considering the situation) and thought it was another gun and fired.
I have to give the agents the benefit of the doubt.