ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis
-
You can psycho-analyze Pretti and his hypothetical motives to engage in obstruction, mischief and hooliganism against ICE until Hell freezes over. Likewise, the irrelevancy of his apparent religious zealotry in opposition to ICE’s mission and tactics. The fact remains that Pretti never used his firearm against ICE troopers in the two documented incidents.
@Renauda said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
The fact remains that Pretti never used his firearm against ICE troopers in the two documented incidents.
Either there is a right to bear arms that applies to all, or there isn't. We can't have one that just applies to the people we agree with or who don't look a bit shifty.
And the argument that 'Sure, you've got a right to carry, but don't complain or be surprised if it gets you killed' is intellectually bankrupt.
I was only joking
-
@Mik said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Speaks to his state of mind regarding ICE operations. Ax is being deliberately obtuse.
The video title says ‘guy who looks like’ pretti.
But let’s say it is - if the individual agents happen to know that, which is a big if, given they sent about 3000 to Minnesota, it might sorta justify why they used pepper spray on him for trying to help a woman shoved onto the ground by a CBP guy. But I’m not sure it gets you to 10 shots in the back.
The whole reason we call them illegal aliens is because they’re subject to our laws.
-
@Renauda said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
The fact remains that Pretti never used his firearm against ICE troopers in the two documented incidents.
Either there is a right to bear arms that applies to all, or there isn't. We can't have one that just applies to the people we agree with or who don't look a bit shifty.
And the argument that 'Sure, you've got a right to carry, but don't complain or be surprised if it gets you killed' is intellectually bankrupt.
And the argument that 'Sure, you've got a right to carry, but don't complain or be surprised if it gets you killed' is intellectually bankrupt.
As far as I’m concerned the continued adherence to and argument for a person’s “the right to bear arms” is intellectually bankrupt. It is a bygone from an era when the country was an infant union of individual states on a huge and sparsely populated frontier on a remote continent during the age of black powder muzzleloaders.
It really has no place or real purpose in a post industrial society that is defined by rule of law and established robust institutions of governance.
-
@Mik said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Speaks to his state of mind regarding ICE operations. Ax is being deliberately obtuse.
The video title says ‘guy who looks like’ pretti.
But let’s say it is - if the individual agents happen to know that, which is a big if, given they sent about 3000 to Minnesota, it might sorta justify why they used pepper spray on him for trying to help a woman shoved onto the ground by a CBP guy. But I’m not sure it gets you to 10 shots in the back.
@jon-nyc said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
@Mik said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Speaks to his state of mind regarding ICE operations. Ax is being deliberately obtuse.
The video title says ‘guy who looks like’ pretti.
But let’s say it is - if the individual agents happen to know that, which is a big if, given they sent about 3000 to Minnesota, it might sorta justify why they used pepper spray on him for trying to help a woman shoved onto the ground by a CBP guy. But I’m not sure it gets you to 10 shots in the back.
Someone yelling "gun", his ongoing resistance to physical restraint, an ambiguously sourced first shot, and potentially panicked reactions from CPB got him 10 shots in the back.
Education is extremely important.
-
@Renauda said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
The fact remains that Pretti never used his firearm against ICE troopers in the two documented incidents.
Either there is a right to bear arms that applies to all, or there isn't. We can't have one that just applies to the people we agree with or who don't look a bit shifty.
And the argument that 'Sure, you've got a right to carry, but don't complain or be surprised if it gets you killed' is intellectually bankrupt.
@Doctor-Phibes said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
@Renauda said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
The fact remains that Pretti never used his firearm against ICE troopers in the two documented incidents.
Either there is a right to bear arms that applies to all, or there isn't. We can't have one that just applies to the people we agree with or who don't look a bit shifty.
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
And the argument that 'Sure, you've got a right to carry, but don't complain or be surprised if it gets you killed' is intellectually bankrupt.
It's simply true that Alex bringing a loaded gun to those ICE agitation sessions has essentially zero positive outcomes. But some negative ones that might serve his purposes. It's an interesting choice.
Education is extremely important.
-
@jon-nyc said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
I don’t think there’s any ambiguity about the first shot except which CBP agent fired it.
There has been talk of spontaneously discharging firearm, which Alex had been carrying. i know that sounds ridiculous, but that model of gun apparently does have that issue.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
@Renauda said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
The fact remains that Pretti never used his firearm against ICE troopers in the two documented incidents.
Either there is a right to bear arms that applies to all, or there isn't. We can't have one that just applies to the people we agree with or who don't look a bit shifty.
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
And the argument that 'Sure, you've got a right to carry, but don't complain or be surprised if it gets you killed' is intellectually bankrupt.
It's simply true that Alex bringing a loaded gun to those ICE agitation sessions has essentially zero positive outcomes. But some negative ones that might serve his purposes. It's an interesting choice.
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
Trump, Bessent, a high level DoJ guy, at least one Congressman, the director of the FBI. That’s off the top of my head and I’m not paying that close attention.
-
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
Trump, Bessent, a high level DoJ guy, at least one Congressman, the director of the FBI. That’s off the top of my head and I’m not paying that close attention.
@jon-nyc said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
Trump, Bessent, a high level DoJ guy, at least one Congressman, the director of the FBI. That’s off the top of my head and I’m not paying that close attention.
Did they call it stupid or did they invoke the word "right"?
-
@jon-nyc said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
They indicated it was on him for having a gun. Sorta the opposite of the 2nd amendment.
The objectively false statement would be that the second amendment does not apply at ICE protests. "On him for having a gun" is just rhetorical blame shifting, which is ubiquitous.
-
McWhorter mentioned something that I'd noted and thought too banal to mention. But hey if he thinks it's worth saying, so will I. Note the skin color of the people getting killed at these ICE agitation sessions. Breaks the narrative that only black people get shot by the authorities.
Of course these ICE agitation sessions are overwhelmingly white, so maybe the bloodthirsty agents have to settle for their second choice of victims.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
@Renauda said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
The fact remains that Pretti never used his firearm against ICE troopers in the two documented incidents.
Either there is a right to bear arms that applies to all, or there isn't. We can't have one that just applies to the people we agree with or who don't look a bit shifty.
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
And the argument that 'Sure, you've got a right to carry, but don't complain or be surprised if it gets you killed' is intellectually bankrupt.
It's simply true that Alex bringing a loaded gun to those ICE agitation sessions has essentially zero positive outcomes. But some negative ones that might serve his purposes. It's an interesting choice.
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
Right, so you honestly believe that nobody feels this way other than the Director of the FBI. And that's supposed to make me feel better somehow?
-
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Other than Kash Patel, can you name someone who's said something like this? Of course you can't.
Right, so you honestly believe that nobody feels this way other than the Director of the FBI. And that's supposed to make me feel better somehow?
Yes, the dumbest thing anybody has said that I'm aware of, came from the director of the FBI. That sucks. But in terms of culture wars, I'm not aware that it's a tribal thing. An administration thing potentially, and definitely a Kash thing, at least in that moment.
-
Yes, the dumbest thing anybody has said that I'm aware of, came from the director of the FBI. That sucks. But in terms of culture wars, I'm not aware that it's a tribal thing. An administration thing potentially, and definitely a Kash thing, at least in that moment.
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
Yes, the dumbest thing anybody has said that I'm aware of, came from the director of the FBI. That sucks. But in terms of culture wars, I'm not aware that it's a tribal thing. An administration thing potentially, and definitely a Kash thing, at least in that moment.
Well, the Secretary of Homeland Security called the victim a domestic terrorist, which is essentially the same. That creepy bloke Stephen Miller said the same thing.
This isn't just one guy. When Donald Trump appears to be the calming voice of reason you've got to suspect you have a problem.
-
.Lotta dancing going on here, but I think we all agree that the shooting was unjustified. Also, I don't think anyone is arguing that his bringing a gun was foolish. I think we're also agreed that the rush to say stupid things didn't serve to add credibility to the government- but that is not unique to this administration.
We're arguing on his motivations and terminology, hypocrisy of one side or the other. Fun stuff as always. I think we're all agreed that his earlier behavior should have had consequences - but whether that was an indication he was a rabid agitator - or whether he learned from that and came to the party this time to be more responsible - we may never know.
-
I'm aware one can claim a certain verbal framing is the one, true verbal framing. I'm also aware that such claims are flimsy rhetoric.
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
I'm aware one can claim a certain verbal framing is the one, true verbal framing. I'm also aware that such claims are flimsy rhetoric.
I don’t think the right would find it flimsy if it came from a democratic president. The message is pretty clear. As it was from Bessent.
-
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
I'm aware one can claim a certain verbal framing is the one, true verbal framing. I'm also aware that such claims are flimsy rhetoric.
I don’t think the right would find it flimsy if it came from a democratic president. The message is pretty clear. As it was from Bessent.
@jon-nyc said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
I'm aware one can claim a certain verbal framing is the one, true verbal framing. I'm also aware that such claims are flimsy rhetoric.
I don’t think the right would find it flimsy if it came from a democratic president. The message is pretty clear. As it was from Bessent.
What, that they believe the second amendment should be revoked within ICE protests? Do you think they'd all avow to that, or do you rely on your true framing of their own rhetoric to infer it? If you don't think they'd all avow to that explicitly, then I can infer that you only have a flimsy framing. Whether or not other flimsy framings exist in other whataboutism thought experiments is irrelevant.
