https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Gb_IkGVK7WvsTAXfMvQU...
I've watched them all repeatedly. It's clear she was blocked in at the front, trying to pull out, and yielded, waving the ICE vehicles to go around front.
They instead got out, needlessly attempted to drag her from her vehicle, and she freaked out and tried to GTFO by turning right to avoid hitting any of them. She was shot and killed for it.
Especially with the second video, it seems like there should be enough footage of the guy's face to figure it out. Ideally her relatives could then SUE, but qualified immunity is some powerful bullshit. At the very least, maybe we could track bad actors. Does the guy regularly use unnecessary force?
The counter argument is "if you DOX people, especially unpopular people, they'll be subject to death threats, possible violence, etc. and you'll be partially responsible", but man, it's obvious that the agency itself isn't holding its people accountable. I'd want to know if he was in my city, still performing ICE activities.
Ideally a lawsuit? The only sane outcome of this in a civilized society is that the perpetrator stands trial for murder.
If that does not happen the already slim distinction between US law enforcement and a paramilitary execution squad loyal to the president will have dissappeared entirely.
Even if there is a perceived slim chance of success I still think charges should be brought forward. At the very least it might make some of these psychopaths hesitate to do the same. Maybe. And while they are at it maybe an investigation that produces names on who ordered these guys to act so brazen.
If you cant nail the guy who did this go after those who are above in rank. Maybe there's a "paper trail" on giving orders to do such thing?
People have to fight back or this lady definitely wont be the last.
Edit: Context here because they are literally doing a pincer move on this lady's car all wearing masks and with at least 1 gun drawn. All issuing different commends backup, get out, this is way hiring amateurs off the street to play cop is a bad idea. Trained people don't esclate this way
Edit2: She definite hits the cop before he shots but where is that 5'th video of the lady right up in the pincer cop's face. She's video taping him
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Gb_IkGVK7WvsTAXfMvQU...
Watch the one titled "LEFT-full-duration". Watch it in slow motion. Everything in my GP is correct:
1.) The lady reversed to make room to drive away AFTER conflicting orders to "get out of there" and to "get out of the car";
2.) An ICE agent got in front of her car mid-reverse and hovered for his sidearm;
3.) The lady gets out of reverse and turns her wheels to face to the right, the ICE agent is now middle-left of her car, and commits to drawing his weapon;
4.) Lady commits to her right turn and didn't hit the cop, as evidenced by the fact that he was literally out of the way, he didn't lose footing, and most of all - he was able to shoot the driver at point-black from the driver's side window. If the car was aimed for him - let alone if he was hit, it would have been physically impossible for ANY of those to occur on their own AND ESPECIALLY in combination - most of all, the point-blank shot from the driver's side window.
The agent who fired NEEDS to be tried for murder, simple as.
So this clears up the misconceptions:
- That she didnt know who they were
- That she didnt hit him
- That he had time to react differently
- That she wasn't following them purposefully
- That they didnt tell her to get out of the car
- That she was in fear for her life (smiling and laughing about it 10 seconds beforehand, gleefully pulling away with excitement like it's a video game)
I'm glad we have this footage to see the truth now.
When he was prosecuted, the feds played jurisdiction games fucking with the case until the case was so cold it was difficult to prosecute.
The U.S. Attorney filed a notice of removal of the case to federal court, which automatically took effect under the statute for removal jurisdiction[11] where the case was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge on May 14, 1998, who cited the supremacy clause of the Constitution which grants immunity to federal officers acting in the scope of their employment.[6]
The decision to dismiss the charges was reversed by an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit, which held that enough uncertainty about the facts of the case existed for Horiuchi to stand trial on state manslaughter charges.[6] Ultimately, the then-sitting Boundary County prosecutor, Brett Benson, who had defeated Woodbury in the 2000 election, decided to drop the charges, because he felt it was unlikely the state could prove the case and too much time had passed.de jure legal but enforced is de facto illegal.
You might want to cite some case law here supporting that assertion. They may not be able to charge someone with a traffic infraction but can they detain someone? Absolutely.
Well, gosh. It's a little rusty, but I'm pretty sure I was taught in school that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
Something like that, anyway.
To be blunt: your assertion is batshit. NO, the cops can't just "detain" people on random "suspicion" of "interference". They need probable cause to suspect a crime in progress. Period. There are no exceptions. There never have been. If you want to argue that they clearly have the ability, you need to explain why that car in its perfectly legal travel lane was somehow a criminal violation. You seem extraordinarily inclined to split hairs on the other side of this argument, so it seems... odd that you're being so cavalier on this one.
No, ICE can't detain anyone on a "traffic infraction". No one can. That's not criminal, and you know it.
More to the point, obviously, sure: there are gray areas where cops stop teenagers to see if they run or smell like weed or whatever, and they can get away with it. They don't then proceed to shoot their suspects in the fucking face. Seriously? How are we possibly even having this discussion. There's no universe in which this is acceptable law enforcement practice.
(That last bit I italicized you might want to read again, because it’s pretty important and you left that part out and it is the cornerstone to everything in this incident and specifically what I articulated in the comment of mine you replied to).
The ability of people on the right to throw all their principles about limited government and checks and balances and constitutional restraint out the window the second the person who got shot in their face is a political enemy is just amazing to me. You people are the ones who think we all need guns all the time to PREVENT this kind of thing, I thought!
That’s up to the agents to articulate and the investigators, prosecutors, judges, and juries to evaluate.
The fact is that law enforcement are able to legally detain people under certain conditions and those conditions do not need to be adjudicated in the moment of detainment. It can come later, and the LEOs can be held responsible if they violated someone’s rights. People on here commenting otherwise either misunderstand the law, or are intentionally providing misinformation to manipulate people and create outrage.
Which will never happen, because the suspect is a faceless (literally) body in a morgue. You're just dodging. Because, and be honest with yourself: you want this to have happened. You want your enemies to be afraid of the (again, literal) secret police wandering the streets in pursuit of your personal political goals. And if the price for that is a few unconstitutional executions, you're willing to pay it and excuse it on the internet.
But you don't really believe this was legitimate law enforcement behavior. No one does. Real civil societies don't accept summary executions of probably-asshole probably-protesters who probably-obstruct visa check operations.
If you don’t like the way the law works, do something to change it, don’t just pontificate on the internet because you are upset.
I’ve explained elsewhere on this HN thread what I observed from the videos we have all seen by now and why I think it will be difficult to waive the qualified immunity of the officer to pursue criminal charges against him. This particular spur of the thread is about whether or not law enforcement can detain people. They have the force and capability to detain, and they have case law that allows it.
Operating manuals state that officers cannot use deadly force to stop a vehicle, even if the vehicle itself is used as a weapon, if they can get out of its way instead.
This is clearly a case of an untrained, unhinged, far-right militant, itching for an opportunity to fire and kill a “fucking bitch” (seems ICE is leaving the indefensible idiot out to dry, and prepared the ground by releasing the video from the murderer’s phone).
It’s a hate crime, pure and simple.
You want to live in a world where your enemies are afraid of gestapo-like goon squads who will shoot them in the face if they do the wrong thing. You think they deserve it, that the work of the goons is important and worth some violence to enable, and surely that such violence would never be used inappropriately.
Just be clear in your own mind what you're cheering for. It's not new. Historically this never ends at plausibly-justified-minutiae about law enforcement practice.
Did she panic? Was she given conflicting commands? That is unknown, but the actions of the vehicle itself are consistent with the driver pressing the accelerator to quickly move the vehicle forward when the LEO was directly in front of it.
The circumstances of the overall situation and the position of the vehicle before it was confronted and moved are consistent with someone attempting to block traffic on that street with their vehicle. The actions of the driver are consistent with someone attempting to evade.
Edit: bellingcat did a video sketching overhead reenactment of the event. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTPraD7DGZh/
There was absolutely no reason for the attempt to pull her out of her car, and even less for escalation to use deadly force and, IIUC, DOJ guidelines and DHS policies[1] back that up.
This was an execution, not a law enforcement officer "defending" himself. That the decision was made in the heat of the moment doesn't make it any less an execution.
What's more, shooting peaceful protestors (cf. First Amendment[0]) is illegal on its face:
"Congress shall make no law...prohibiting...the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.*"
[0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment
[1] https://apnews.com/article/ice-minneapolis-police-rules-shoo...
Clearly shows that, at the moment the officer fires, he is not in front of the vehicle at all. He actually moves FURTHER toward the vehicle and leans over the hood in order to get a better shot. The angle Trump tweeted of course makes it seem like she rammed him, but this is the better angle to see the timing. She reverses and cuts it hard right, and he has to lean TOWARD her vehicle.
https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/2008976092326203562
Here is what I see in this video…
- Officer at driver side window, reaches into vehicle while simultaneously trying to open the door (I cannot fathom why an officer would be reaching in the vehicle and attempting to open the door if he was giving the driver an order to move the vehicle, but perhaps there would be a reason for this). At this time the vehicle is moving backward, its tires turned to the left shifting the front of the vehicle to the right. The shooting officer comes into view but appears to be stationary. (This suggests that he was probably on the front right of the vehicle before the vehicle reversed). The reversing movement of the vehicle orients its front end to line up with him in front of the vehicle.
- Shooting officer is in front of the car just left of center of the hood when vehicle starts moving forward
- Vehicle tires spin before gaining traction and they are facing forward. The officer is directly in front of the vehicle at this moment
- Vehicle tires are straight towards the officer until after he unholsters his firearm, only at that point does the vehicle wheels start turning towards the right. Also at this point the vehicle begins moving towards the right and the officer begins moving towards his right (to avoid being hit).
- Officer is still at the front left corner of the vehicle when shooting but nearly clear. He is at an angle where it is possible for him to shoot through the windshield at the driver, his body dodges further to the right as he is firing his weapon. Additional shot appears to have been fired after he was cleared of the immediate danger.
The administration told several lies. First that an officer was in the hospital because they were run over and fired in self defense. Then they said ICE was stuck in the snow and the woman was an agitator who weaponized her vehicle to go after them. Neither of these are true. This has often been the case with ICE incidents.
The person in front of her vehicle moved himself there, as she was backing up, in violation of training/procedure. Qualified immunity doesn't protect you if you aren't actually doing your job, and your job is to follow training/procedure.
Edit because throttled: They are trained/procedure dictates that they do not stand in front of vehicles. He had plenty of time as she backed up to get into proper/safe/required position. The officer is the professional in this situation and it is them who are obligated to follow required procedure, not the random mom (with a glove box full of her kids stuffed animals) that turned down the wrong street when an ICE action was taking place who is being yelled at to both move her car and get out of her car by armed agents who approached her vehicle.
You will have also see how she was waving cars past, she was not obstructing/blocking, the officer that shot her is whose car was blocking traffic, including her.
In addition, ICE is on video driving much more aggressively into civilians in front of/next to them. Are you saying that the ICE officers should be charged with attempted murder for that driving? That civilians would be justified in firing rounds into ICE vehicles in self defense in those situations and should not face criminal consequences were they to start responding as ICE did here?
In the video they shout contradictory directions for her to move move move and also shout for her to get out of the vehicle.
> People demonize ICE
ya cos they murder people lol
So it's totally possible the murderer gets locked up for a few years while facing trial and then released. Which would be at least a couple years sentence since murder trials take 1-2 years to prepare and you get basically no compensation for time spent imprisoned awaiting trial.
I am not claiming that this officer did not cause the death of this woman. I am suggesting that because of LEOs having qualified immunity, this being a situation that happened very quickly, and that there are real questions about how this happened and why, that there is a high legal bar to overcome when analyzing it.
It’s going to be legally murky and that alone will make it very difficult to waive the immunity.
Your claim about murder is bad and wrong on the same level as "I did not have sexual relations with 'that woman'." Stop language policing people and actually think about what has happened. This was an extrajudicial killing of a US Citizen by the US Government. That should scare anyone, but instead you're in all of the comments trying to split hairs about "how things would play out in a court of law." No one cares how things would play out in court, because no one trusts the US legal system to carry out justice. So it doesn't matter.
What matters is that this is murder and the US Justice system is about to start doing cartwheels to try and defend a system that is so clearly backwards and corrupt because the current POTUS administration has given up on "law and order" in favor of a grab for absolute power.
And the emotion here most certainly matters - this is an American mother, being gunned down in broad daylight, by chickenshit masked gangs who don't have an ounce of respect for the citizens of this country they're claiming to serve. And then an administration and its state media mouthpieces, instead of taking a moment to step back and reevaluate and try to prevent this from happening again, doubles down on nonsense narratives about how this American mother deserved to be summarily executed - full-throated support for the murderer. Anybody with half a brain that isn't caught in an info bubble of reactionary propaganda should be fucking angry.
Yes, that is my point. What you consider a corrupt legal system, I call one that tries to protect people who are accused of a crime until they are proven guilty. It’s not “guilty until proven innocent”…its the other way around.
> This does not matter - in the eyes of We The People this is fucking Murder. And the emotion here most certainly matters
Well, I guess the mob has spoken then and that is what is important—not law, not civility, only anger and anarchy. Good luck with that world you want to create, one day that lawless mob will come for you. Maybe you were deserve their brand of justice, or maybe not.
But really, "lawless mob" and "anarchy" ? The larger push is that people's widespread outrage is needed to drive strong action by our institutions that still remain mostly intact (eg state governments) to get these masked terror squads out of our cities. These masked terror squads are precisely your "lawless mob" engaging in anarcho-tyranny, emboldened and legitimized by a con artist (now "president") who promised them contradictory-everything, but really just naked autocratic power red in tooth and claw.
We need to stop both-sidesing this, period. I get it - I'm a libertarian who was both-sidesing up through June of 2020. But really, stop. Pretending to somehow be above this just undermines support for taking action to defend our country.
Our political system worked exactly as designed, the person and party that America wanted is running the country. The checks and balances are still in place too. It’s just that those checks and balances are largely in agreement with Trump at this time. America wanted and deserves exactly what it has right now.
Our overall republic is also working as designed, our states via our elected representatives have made immigration a federal issue. If states want that control given back, then it needs to be taken back in the same way it was given—via Congress. That’s how this shit works. We know from history what happens when states decide to take a different approach. Frankly, that is uglier and more dangerous than what we have now.
The nice thing is, we also have a chance to upend congress a bit this year. If America decides to do that, good for it. If it doesn’t, then you know where its mood still is. The good thing is he is definitely gone in 2028. At that point America again will give us clues to where its mood is by who it chooses to elect into leadership.
Second, winning an election does not imply a mandate to ignore the Constitution and act as a dictator. Nor does Congress and the Supreme Court abdicating their Constitutional duties in favor of enabling an autocrat running roughshod over our Constitutional rights with impunity mean that the Constitution is being followed "as designed".
But lastly, and this is really the only point I am asking you to agree with - if you think the only way we can put a firm stop to this is wait to Congressionally check the fascists in November, then surely you can agree that labeling this regime as unrepentant murderers of American mothers is a good way of building broad opposition from people who might otherwise think it doesn't concern them, yes?
No. In fact I think jumping to conclusions, exaggerating, trying to use a tragedy to your advantage, obfuscation, and outright lying to try and manipulate public sentiment is perhaps the WORST way to try and move that needle.
Because what happens is what is happening now, more and more information trickles out and when that some of that info runs contrary to your narrative, people realize you have been trying to manipulate them and you lose your credibility. It creates reasonable doubt to all accounts about the situation and people simply reject it as evidence of anything.
We have seen first hand what the “don’t trust your lying eyes” approach has achieved…it’s achieved a second Trump administration.
As you're appealing to a general concept of restraint, I presume you have much harsher criticism for the administration, which immediately dropped into pushing bald faced lies [0] and rejecting responsibility for the situation rather than taking even a moment to assess? Would you care to share that criticism here?
The flip side of this refrain of "don't trust your lying eyes" is outright lying by this administration "supported" by narrow video clips that don't tell the whole story. Like a clip of "stop" and the victim trying to drive away is pretty convincing, if you're not shown the other clip where another violent attacker was yelling "move move move".
[0] The basic known facts here are that ICE electively confronted and escalated a situation with an American citizen, did not follow their own mandate or rules of engagement, the woman was shot repeatedly, and then a nearby doctor tried to render emergency aid and was prevented from doing so, correct?
Edit:
Also, the ICE agent who shot her POV video in realtime of the incident has just been released and it includes the interaction with the the driver and what appears to be the driver’s partner.
Would you care to point at anything specific in these actions that show either one of them physically impeding or otherwise violently aggressing on ICE?
> people coming out who knew her and are describing her connections to activism and affiliations
... because what I'm seeing is a lot of handwaving and innueno.
> the very words of the woman’s partner as to what they were doing
Once again, care to quote anything specific?
I've always been one to go to primary sources, but I haven't seen the need to give this regime the benefit of the doubt since I combed through all those fake legal claims that Trump filed to support his "stolen election" hoax. I guess I'm going to have to break down and just watch this woman be executed over and over to see for myself. But I'd also think if there were facts here that demonstrated she was the initial physical aggressor (as opposed to inconveniently engaging in Constitutionally-protected observation, filming, and heckling), they could be stated quite plainly!
Just like a jury will have to do should this come to trial. The act of judging someone for a crime often means you have to see all the evidence in detail even when it’s disturbing and difficult.
But I do have jury duty a few months from now, and if it requires me to do a similar thing then I will rise to the challenge for my civic duty. I have become quite conservative - supporting our remaining institutions of law and order is especially important in these days of rampant criminality by all three branches of the federal government.
If you want to make your case here, I have asked you two straightforward questions that you have so far thus avoided:
1. Would you care to describe anything specific shown by these videos where either Renee or her wife physically impede or otherwise violently aggress on ICE? (before their escalation into a high-stakes assault on her vehicle. also keep in mind this would be the beginning of forming a logical argument and that the principle of equity between those actions and the response still applies)
2. As you've been appealing to a general concept of restraining judgement, I presume you have much harsher criticism for the administration - as supposed leadership for the country, they immediately dropped into pushing bald faced lies and rejecting all responsibility rather than taking even a moment to examine, reflect, and work to prevent further tragedies regardless of fault. Would you care to share your own criticism here?
'The mob at the Boston Massacre were the ones in the wrong, good luck with your ungovernable new country'.
Fuck that un-American bullshit. The Redcoats that murdered those people in Boston way back when is what led to a free America because the MURDERERS were in the wrong. Learn some fucking American history/civics.
You want to abuse civility/civilization/rule of law into protection for the government extra-judicially murdering Americans in the street. Nah, fuck that. We got it right in Boston. Your deferring to authoritarianism because 'rule of law' is bullshit and anti a free people/nation/government of/for the people.
So is it perfectly normal for a civilian vehicle to just be blocking a street at a 90 degree angle during an active ICE operation where there are other protestors present?
“Deliberately antagonizing” might be an explanation, perhaps “unintentional but poorly timed three point turn” is another. Either way, it’s interfering with the operation.
> You just believe the law is a post-hoc rationalization for murder by the state
No, I believe that Pierson v. Ray allows law enforcement the ability to be shielded from certain laws if the legality of the action is unclear or if it’s a reasonable human response within the circumstances. I don’t agree with it (as I said and you of course ignored). However that’s the law and it was an 8-1 SCOTUS decision…so it’s unlikely to change.
The person who murdered her's unmarked vehicle was blocking the road so she stopped before going into the oncoming lane.
If you drive down a random street and there is a random truck in the middle, and lots of government officers, would you stop, or just drive through them without assessing the situation? Should you be killed if, in that situation, you stop instead of what, ramming through the truck blocking the road?
If a cop car is blocking the road, and there are cops standing around, should I just swerve around the cop car without slowing down, stopping to make sure it's safe to pass? If I stop to assess if I should pass in the oncoming lane, should I be murdered? Arresting for impeding the cop?
Instead, he chose to draw his weapon and kill her.
What the fuck is wrong with people defending this?
That is what 'If you want to avoid the tragedies, avoid the situations where they can arise' refers to. Driving down a street in America. Driving down a fucking street in America deserves death in your book. Check yourself bro. You are lost as fuck.
Bro, you aren't anti qualified immunity, you are totally cool with it. You are cool with this mother being murdered, and her daughter left an orphan tonight, because she did what she was shouted at by the officers to do, which was 'move move move'.
You are OK with it today, because it is in alignment with your politics. Yesterday the right said J6 was a peaceful march, today a mom following basic traffic safety and the 'move move move' command yelled by government employees at her deserves being murdered because she 'move move move'd.'
This is what murder looks like: https://ibb.co/7J2NK4Dn
> You are cool with this mother being murdered, and her daughter left an orphan tonight,
Nope, quite the opposite, I’m just not caught up in the heat of the moment they way you are.
When this is evaluated legally your emotion will not be taken into account. I specifically left emotion out of my observation and kept my observation as coldly specific as possible because that is how this will play out legally. Unless something changes drastically, no criminal legal ramifications will come of this.
> You are OK with it today, because it is in alignment with your politics
Nope again. My politics run across a spectrum and don’t directly align with any party. Recently I think the democrats have descended into utter lunacy, but GOP candidates almost never get my vote. In fact, in the last 15 years only a single GOP politician has gotten my vote and only because I knew his opponent personally and specifically voted against him.
Lol. And there we have it :)
So easy to not be emotional when your enemies are the ones being killed I guess ;)
You should probably not have stopped reading after “my vote”. You could have read further to the point where I described only voting GOP candidate once in the last 15 years…and only then because I was voting against his opponent who I knew personally, and because of that I knew they were corrupt. Perhaps I should have voted for the crook so I passed your acid test of democratic purity?
Bro you shit posted FAFO to a 37 year old mom being murdered because she turned down a street that ice randomly had an unmarked car parked in the middle of. You aren't rational. You aren't middle of the road. You literally smuggly posted FAFO as your response to a mom with her call full of her childs stuffies, because she drove down the wrong street and ended up blocked by an unmarked car. That isn't normal, that isn't American. Like I said, check yourself, because you are lost. I left California for a red red state because I was middle. I know what 'middle' means. Middle means default being against arbitrary federal government use of force, especially when lethal. You can lie to yourself that you are middle. Don't lie to me, thanks.
Your totally rational position: If ICE blocks the road with an unmarked car like in this case, if you stop, you are interfering with their activities. If you don't stop, you are a threat to their life and they can kill you.
Normal people get emotional when that becomes the new normal from their government. Not post FAFO. And you never address anything contradictory to your position. You are purely posting talking points. You aren't middle of the road. You are all in on this. You own it as much as any MAGA bro.
ARMED GOVERNMENT AGENTS YELLED AT HER TO MOVE MOVE MOVE. THE AGENT IN QUESTION VIOLATED HIS TRAINING AND PROCEDURE. THE AGENT IN QUESTION STEPPED UP IN NO FEAR FOR HIS LIFE WHEN SHE WAS BACKING UP, HE DID NOT MOVE AWAY LIKE SOMEONE IN FEAR WOULD. SHE WAS A RANDOM MOM THAT DROVE DOWN THE WRONG STREET. You are a crappy American trying to justify/normalize this. You are a crappy American saying FAFO is valid procedure for law enforcement in the USA. You are allowing our country to devolve into something awful. You are cool with that. You are NOT middle of the road.
The government/cops can defend their actions without you. The middle position, and our job as Americans, is to hold our government accountable. Not justify a government where a mom can be murdered because she drove down the wrong street. You are lost. I was a libertarian dumb ass once, but I checked myself and realized I wasn't being honest. I wasn't being a good person nor American, I was being a political animal for shallow, unevenly applied weak/shallow political theory.
You and others are essentially demanding that I believe a crafted narrative here and get all pissed off about it. It’s not a narrative that appears to supported by all of the confirmed information right now (and newsflash, I am not buying every detail the government is peddling either). I have seen a few comments on here purporting some “facts” that now appear to be in contradiction to some witness statements (non-ice/government and are protestors) on video that have even come out today.
That is the problem with crafting a narrative…sometimes information comes out and gets in the way of the story you want to tell. Lots of things being claimed in this crafted narrative (both yours and the governments) are easily proven or disproven and I am sure will be before this issue reaches a conclusion.
Bear in mind what I initially did here was posted was an assessment of what I observed in a video and how what was present within that video will likely make it difficult to get that agent’s qualified immunity waived and explained why. I have also responded to others who are suggesting violence as a response, countering that using your vote to change is the better way to go. You have probably seen me comment that when valid laws are being enforced, that interference with that enforcement can create problems for those doing the interference. You have seen me comment that we are where we are because America voted how it voted.
I stand by all of that no matter what the eventual conclusion of this event turns out to be.
This is just false information. He was off to the left of her hood, and her wheels were hard to the right. He wasn't in front of her vehicle, she wasn't driving towards him, and she wasn't trying to murder anyone.
You're moving the goalposts. You said she tried to murder him, she clearly did not. What the officer perceived is another matter.
That kind of neutral bias is selectively employed to protect right wing takes from getting attacked by more liberal ones.
Although, here's pg with a brief moment of insight:
https://xcancel.com/paulg/status/2009219891933630925
> hardcore Trump supporters are indistinguishable from bots.
That'd get him spanked on this forum if he didn't own it.
Maybe pg should come back to this board, and make HN his primary venue. Does he really like getting backscatter from all the bots and botlike humans on xitter? He could still syndicate there.
Meanwhile, HN certainly could stand to use an opinionated benevolent dictator (or at least tone-setter), not mere "both sides" moderation (as heroic as it has been). With such an anchor we might be able to constructively discuss these problems without getting derailed by the handful of reactionary flamebaiters.
---
The moral of the story is: if you’re against witch-hunts, and you promise to found your own little utopian community where witch-hunts will never happen, your new society will end up consisting of approximately three principled civil libertarians and seven zillion witches. It will be a terrible place to live even if witch-hunts are genuinely wrong.
---
https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/neutral-vs-conservativ...
Dan & Tom are so incredibly restrained, I'd be much more of a shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later type because the longer such behavior goes on the more people will believe it is acceptable.
You should be.
> I would like to see all the far left cranks who have taken over what was once an entrepreneur / hacker / libertarian's forum banned.
Right...
For anybody that wants to see what I was getting at: check parents comment history. Showdead 'on'.
https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/minneapolis-ice-shootin...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/minnesota-ice...
Keep justifying the murder of a 37 year old mom of a now orphaned child because it threatens your political position.
I am an American, and I generally find his political judgements to be spot on, or if I disagree then at the very least enlightening. Frankly given the abjectly moronic siren song narratives too many of my "fellow countrymen" have fallen for, we could use more outside context from allied countries of the western world to steer us through these dark times. Remember when our friends the French tried to stop us from making that horrible Iraq War mistake and the thanks they got was "freedom fries" ?
Meanwhile, you seem to be some kind of fascist-cheerleader who relishes in trolling. All over this thread, you've spared no opportunity to rally support for agents of the state executing an American citizen and mother. I would tell you to get the fuck out of my country, whose values of individual liberty and limited government you clearly have no understanding or appreciation of, before Lady Liberty sticks her torch up your ass. But really you're just sick with social media psychosis, and you need help.
(if you want a breadcrumb you might be able to follow to start to get out, you've said you can see the "media manipulation" by "the left". perhaps you could look for the same type of manipulation by "the right", and then ask yourself who has the power right now)
Trying to shut up people who disagree with you is literally the fascism you claim to abhor. Not to mention that fascists themselves were socialists (Nazis is a nickname for National Socialists, who had a 25 point platform half of which matches the Democratic Socialists nearly exactly - https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-party...).
Engage on the actual merits of the discussion rather than saying anyone who disagrees with you is supposedly a shill and a bad person.
Am I wrong here? I am trying to share my view, which while unpopular, is valid and backed by the full video and witness accounts. I am getting called a "fascist-cheerleader who relishes in trolling" and that I somehow support "agents of the state executing an American citizen" (which is ridiculous as I am a libertarian).
I am guessing you have spent too much time in the far left echo chamber that is Reddit, where dissenting opinions are purged. Try X.com where everyone from the far left leaders of Minnesota who are glorying in the attention being moved off of their multi billion dollar fraud and forced resignation can share their opinion to anyone else with an idea can share it.
BTW - I come to hacker news to learn about entrepreneurs, programming, etc... not to argue politics. Let's go back to what this forum is for.
Since you're asking for it: yes. But I can see how from your perspective it looks that way.
Most of your recent submissions and comments are political. I invite you to go back to posting about entrepreneurs, programming, and etc. if that’s what you’d rather be doing.
From what I (and apparently many others) have seen is that there is no merit to your assertions about what factually happened. It seems as if you're simply repeating what you've heard from the regime, government news sources (eg Fox), or some other bald-faced liars. I'm not saying you yourself are deliberately lying, rather you're caught in a filter bubble so strong it's causing you to rally around the killers of a fellow American citizen.
Sorry, but you're simply not a libertarian. An actual libertarian believes in individual liberty front and center - in this case the freedom for a non-violent woman to not be assaulted and then ultimately killed by government agents, for what amounts to Constitutionally-protected filming, criticism, and heckling. But there is certainly a strain of fake libertarianism whereby people will overindulge in the deductive parts of its framing, attracted to the idea that the violation of a precondition serves as a justification for a draconian response. But this is not libertarianism! Rather it is more appropriately described as cryptofascism.
On this specific topic, I am most certainly open to evidence that Renee physically impeded or assaulted ICE agents before they chose to create an an escalated high-stakes situation. So far I have yet to see any beyond vague allusions and innuendos.
For reference here no, I haven't spent much time on reddit since 2009 or so. When I do, it's mostly to find answers to technical questions. Some of the subs on the top banner of my current throwaways - /r/kubota, /r/woodstoving, /r/vorondesign, /r/buildapcsales. I haven't seem much political commentary in them.
But as far as HN? I'd say HN owns this problem. The way I see it, this topic isn't really politics per se but rather a societal sickness that is the direct result of the consumer surveillance industry that HN helped build.
Also perhaps maybe part of your frustration here comes from having characterized everyone who doesn't support summarily executing American citizens in the street as "far left wackos" ?
HuffPost has obtained a video of a physician trying to give medical care to the woman shot and killed by ICE agents today, and not being allowed to go near her. The ICE agents claim there are medics on site, but witnesses scream that there are no medics presentExtensively reported
> "“I’m a physician,” the man protested."
> "“I don’t care,” the officer replied,"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2026/01/07/ice-sh... ( https://archive.is/hP0qR )
As a US citizen you DO NOT have to obey them in the same manner as a police officer and their rights to detain you are limited. Unless they were placing her under arrest she was free to leave and drive on. Most ICE agents lack the same training that your average state police officer would be forced to go through and thus are far more likely to do something stupid.
A federal court agreed, ruling that agents can't rely on factors such as race, speaking Spanish, wearing workman-like clothes, and location [...] to meet the standard of "individualized suspicion."
But in September, the Supreme Court paused that previous ruling, saying immigration agents can use those factors as reasonable suspicion to stop someone. (Legal proceedings continue on this case, however.)
Like, even under this awful terrible and completely unimaginable ruling (Which should not be the legal standard in the US), there is no way that ICE could be considered to have the power to detain this person.
I'd imagine that in a civilized democratic country it would be something along the lines of "Let's make sure there's a fair investigation". That's not what I'm hearing from US.
The mother's 6-year-old child's stuffed animals overflowing the glovebox.
The child has lost both parents and is now an orphan.
https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/01/07/ice-officer-fatally... ("Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer")
https://web.archive.org/web/20260108053100/https://minnesota...
I've confirmed, with search engine caches, that this is the photo Reddit Trust & Safety intervened to remove from Reddit's front page, at the permalink here,
https://old.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1q6tclo/removed_by_re... ("[ Removed by Reddit ]" (1147 comments))
Thankfully, Silicon Valley does not (yet) exert editorial control over newspapers who self-host.
> ICE officers are trained to never approach a vehicle from the front and instead to approach in a “tactical L” 90-degree angle to prevent injury or cross-fire, a senior Department of Homeland Security official told NBC News.
> Officers are also instructed not to shoot at a moving vehicle and only to use force if there is an immediate risk of serious injury or death, the official said.
> ICE officers are also instructed that firing at a vehicle will not make it stop moving in the direction of the officer.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/minnesota-ice...
[1] https://copalmn.org/the-handbook-for-constitutional-observer...
> “To Minnesotans, on the National Guard, they’re there to protect you and protect your constitutional rights,” Walz said. “These are our neighbors. They don’t wear masks. They don’t bust in from somewhere else. They’re not here to cause hassles to you or what we saw today, the tragedy.”
It sounds like he is calling on the National Guard to protect against ICE? Is this the first time a state has done this? I personally think it’s the right move but this is a serious matter to have one law enforcement agency called out to protect against another law enforcement agency. If true, this is a very big deal.
edit: More about Walz’s statement:
> In addition to readying the state’s National Guard, the governor said the State Bureau of Criminal Apprehension is investigating the incident, where masked agents were recorded approaching a vehicle in the middle of a Minneapolis street and an agent then fired shots into the car after it accelerated. Walz also said he activated the State Emergency Operation Center and members of the State Patrol’s Mobile Response Team.
> “From here on, I have a very simple message: We do not need any further help from the federal government,” Walz said. “To Donald Trump and [Homeland Security Secretary] Kristi Noem, you’ve done enough.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5677541-walz-minnes...
It's just better politically to say "to stop ICE" rather than say "shit's looking like it could pop off and I need to be prepared either way."
Also let's be clear here, most of these "ICE" jackboots are chickenshit gravy seals whose training amounts to weekend cosplay sessions while whining about Joebiden, which is why they're murdering women in cars. They won't be raising their weapons when soldiers who signed up to defend this country show up.
That is an extraordinary claim. You must have extraordinary evidence. Good work uncovering that! I'm sure the FBI would love to hear about it and arrest him alongside the 80 other convicted fraudsters.
It’s to motivate peace and riot control due to the situation.
If he had some “knucklehead” notion to pit The NG against ICE, the federal government would simply federalize the NG and remove it from state control. I think he’s a goof, but he’s smarter than that, plus as a former NG, he knows how the NG command structure works.
For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_State_Defense_Fo...
A State Guard is the obvious counter to a rogue executive branch when checks and balances have failed. Alternatively, at some point, people are going to start organizing actual defensive militias out of sheer necessity.
No shit the rules of the game have changed.
It's not just "politicians speech" either, these are leaders in the executive who will bring any charges and are the ones investigating themselves. If they're not professional, and completely lie about the circumstances, how can we expect justice? States can bring charges, I guess, but I'm not going along with "nothing they say matters" idea.
If he did not follow procedure that will be accounted for in the investigation. I am sure that question will hinge on whether or not from all the angles and prior to the vehicle moving if the officer was in a position that was against procedure.
They state can certainly try and bring charges if it wants to, but that doesn’t automatically mean that prosecution will be successful or that the officer is guilty, the officer right now and until tried, is innocent. Any prosecutor still will need to prove their case and from my perspective, overcoming the qualified immunity in this case will be difficult.
The horror! That was more scary than imagining a woman with three bullet holes in her head.
But those of us with functioning eyes cannot call a spade a spade?
And now video made by the person firing the weapon has been released.
Make up your own mind.
"Pull up everyones id that watched the video in the last 24 hours"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39796550 ("Google ordered to identify who watched certain YouTube videos" (380 comments))
(That article does say this kind of "dragnet" search warrant is, in theory, precluded by the US Constitution. One can ask a certain 6-year old child in Minnesota who just their mother to masked constitution-men what that constitution means).
ICE has a blank check on power overreach and qualified immunity for a domestic, dominating police state that WE DON'T NEED - and this is how they use it. Their actions are grotesque, and their words are worthless. They don't even honor what the judicial documents say that they claim to "enforce" - they flat-out ignore active asylum statuses, wait outdoors of immigration court hearings and check-ins, deport people to countries that they have a court order not to be deported to, and sometimes just go for citizens anyway - why not?
Speaking of "blank check", remember that ICE has an approved budget that's 3x the US Marine Corp, folks. This isn't a game anymore, this isn't playtime.
What are you gonna do about it? The same thing is happening in Ukraine, and nobody is doing anything. There are no protests.
Spare me. I have my non-negotiables for when action is needed. Do you?
I surely wouldn't have been braver, we all saw the consequences of even the meakest assertiveness. Those people are the bravest we have to offer, we are fucked.
They don't really believe in anything, and it's due to an inability in their own self to bring about real change in themselves and others.
Look at the comment section. Are they all bots? Maybe they are, but if they aren't, trying anything would be a suicide. You would just be labelled a terrorist, and no one would support you.
>"I would never take "action" personally though."
That's that for you, then. Like I said, spare me.
He got roasted in court because he had given conflicting commands, and also because you can't put yourself in jeopardy just so you can shoot someone that's running away (police can but only fleeing felons). Life sentence.
This appears to me what happened here. She was committing a misdemeanor, and running away from the misdemeanor. Police explicitly asked her to move her vehicle. After she finally did so they stood in front of her to intentionally put themselves in jeopardy so they would have a reason to "defend themselves."
I have a feeling it will be a very long and dicey trial that ends up in a hung jury. Hopefully Minneapolis doesn't experience riots due to this; but it would prove the exception.
[] https://www.kptv.com/2023/05/24/private-security-guard-who-s...
* The woman shot and killed was a bystander, an American citizen
* The video shows the ICE agent just straight up killing her unprovoked, against the narrative they're currently trying to setup that she was a terrorist
Don't try to bend the facts while there's literal video of the confrontation, as you yourself noted. She was being commanded to step out of the vehicle (My speculation: to be arrested) and refused to do so while accelerating the vehicle quickly with an officer standing in front of her vehicle. If the drivers intent was to commit vehicular homicide or not is obviously unknown (and at this point unknowable), it was not unprovoked in any way.
Intentionally or not she was accelerating her vehicle toward someone. Regardless of if the reaction of the agent was justified, it was 100% provoked by the driver.
After the women got shot, the agent who shot lost the scene taking the weapon with him, which is against all regulations. Other ICE agents prevented medical help from a doctor who identified himself as such and the blocked an ambulance, making them complicit with the murder as she might have been saved if she had gotten medical treatment immediately.
If a masked federal law enforcement officer can shoot someone with impunity in a situation that could have easily been avoided, then we are in a very dangerous place.
This is false. He started drawing his gun while she was still in reverse (to turn and drive away) and was not 'in front of the vehicle' but approaching the front left of the vehicle. Nor was she 'accelerating the vehicle quickly.' You are simply being untruthful.
Frankly, with multiple masked goons pulling weapons approaching, any evasive/defensive maneuvers would have been fully justified.
She was given conflicting order by different officers. One order to drive on, one order to step out of her vehicle.
Which is standard cop practice to just yell conflicting orders out and then wind up killing someone for not complying with one of them.
> and refused to do so while accelerating the vehicle quickly with an officer standing in front of her vehicle.
Cop was off to the left of her hood, and she had her wheels hard to the right and drove around him. She wasn't aimed at him. He wasn't in danger.
Well it's ICE, they haven't gotten the real cop training.
by ICE? they have no authority to detain or arrest US citizens.
[1] https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2020/05/when-stand-your-ground-...
Even if she had floored it at that point, and overal she was driving pretty slowly like a panicked mom might do, his arm would have just been struck by the windshield as she passed.
But you keep living in that delusion you’re so attached to.
This is the type of thing that I sort of rely on HN to inform me about. Then other articles are seemingly killed as dupe which I guess would make sense if the original was visible.
However, we're not living in normal times. US is speed running the book to become a dictatorship, or probably worse. And it's in no small part thanks to the tech community, which HN is all about.
Recent story about how Grok is used to produce naked pictures of any women or girl, including young kids, was killed very quickly on HN. I feel like a lot of people working in tech should take a good look in the mirror.
Edited for clarity
2) For contacting dang, email hn@ycombinator.com. “@dang” doesn’t do anything.
Looking at /active I can also see articles listed high with very small number of upvotes but with high number of comments.
At this point, it is getting increasingly harder to argue that HN isn't completely biased.
To dang and the SV/VC world, everything should work like it does in Mr Rogers ... they can stare at their computer and live in the land of the make believe it affords them.
GenX and Millennials are just as ignorant and self-absorbed as Boomers. America is a shit hole country of adults with the emotions of middle schoolers.
I’d liken it to going to a hacker conference and wanting to talk to like minded people about 3D printing something controversial, like a gun barrel or a knife. It’s interesting as a topic and worthy of technical and moral exploration but putting it on stage as a keynote talk would risk attracting all the wrong attention.
Umm... flagging issue aside, this story is currently at the top of CNN, NBC, ABC, BBC, and Google News, as I just checked. What part of information do we rely on HN regarding this story?
The "real" homepage of HN is now /active. The rest is effectively censored to support the techbro worldview. This will not be fixed.
i.e Can states override federal authority?
Seems like states should have the right to allow ICE. Police departments are already by state.
The woman was occupying just one lane, which means there is no merit to the claim that she was obstructing them. And then no matter what she did next, the masked agents just walk up to her vehicle and try to pry open her door and pull her out. That is not what the police do. That's what the mafia does. Anybody facing such a harrowing situation is likely to panic and try to get away. A real officer would know that and won't shoot a panicked and unarmed person who has her hands on the wheel. Nothing about the circumstances suggest a regular confrontation with a law and order agency. It's a terror campaign. The people arguing the self-defense claim based on some flaky technicalities are psychopaths who lack any respect for human lives.
Whenever I mention Nazism in here to make a serious point, I get downvoted based on some unexplained moral outrage. It's either because 'it's so disturbing' or because people don't like the comparison with the worst that humanity has produced, or because I'm 'cheapening' (trivializing) the Holocaust and insulting its victims! Lame in my opinion, because there is no worse insult to its victims than to just let the horrors repeat!
Well, these outraged people can just stay outraged all they want, because I'm going say this in no uncertain terms. The US and HN has a real Nazi problem - at least in ideology, if not outright in spirit. And another Holocaust is not entirely out of the question either, because back in the past too, it wasn't that well known in public even among the German citizens until the allied forces overran the concentration camps. Who knows what is going on in the shadows right now, when so many people are comfortable with justifying murder, racism, invasions and imperialism?
You're too pretentious if you think that the horrors of the past can't repeat, because history sets precedents and shifts the Overton window. I know that HN is primarily a technical forum. But I seriously don't care if I lose my entire HN score for this, because what is the point of having any technology if it is to live like slaves under tyranny? This is one matter that well worth saying out loud, no matter how unpopular it is or how disturbing a suggestion it is.
Now let's look at the atrocities that ICE has committed so far. Intimidation/terrorizing, destruction of property, attacks on local law enforcement, kidnappings, child abuse, racial discrimination, denial of justice/due process, illegal warrantless arrests and detention, inciting riots, armed attacks on unarmed civilian protestors, attack on media personnel, attack on elected representatives (the last three constituting attack on democracy), human trafficking, torture and murder. It pretty much ticks all the agenda that the Gestapo used to have. Does Nazism sound all that improbable now? Governments around the world should be classifying ICE as a state-funded terrorist organization right now and sanctioning its leaders and members. They should be arrested and tried at Hague or Nuremberg if they step outside the US.
I'm deeply disturbed by how fast we forget the fragility and preciousness of human lives. And the worst is that we have historical examples showing us what will happen. And yet, we relentlessly justify their replay unconcerned?
It doesn't matter what she did, the punishment for no crime in the US is public execution. We have courts, law and order. Everyone is missing the forest for the trees.
Yes, this is how it happened: good people standing by, doing nothing.
Also remember the rights reaction to Babbit (an insurrectionist) being shot at the J6 riot. She was a patriot hero for delaying election certification but people resisting ICE goons are domestic terrorists.
That's official government policy now. It's worth taking a few minutes to look at that whole page, it's straight 1984 type revisionism.
I agree, probably not in the way she intended though.
You may forget that the US drone strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats are still an open question and an ongoing story. The video evidence is scant, the scandal is real, but we still don't know the details. Who were those fishermen, who will tell their stories? How we learn more about what was real?
The kidnapping of the Maduro couple is another act that is related and still developing. In both of these cases, the events are distant and nebulous, uncertain as to where they land on a spectrum of good and evil.
But this murder of an American citizen in a senseless act of violence by its government is felt deeply because it is immediate and well-documented, highly visible and tragic, with hardly any of the uncertainties that distance from those other events bring.
I'm pointing out - for the umpteenth time - the sheer hypocrisy of the West, and especially the US.
What your regime has been practising since 1945 outside of your borders has finally reached your own towns and cities, and frankly the only question I have is, what took so long?
You left umpteenth behind a long time ago; you find hypocrisy everywhere, no?
https://open.substack.com/pub/grumpychineseguy/p/americans-d...
"American Samoa is the only U.S. state or territory where people are born without automatic citizenship, and without the right to vote in state, federal, and most local elections anywhere outside of American Samoa."
Hypocrisy, institutionalised.
https://boltsmag.org/prosecuted-for-voting-american-samoans-...
I believe this to be the issue causing most issues discussed here. "My people" is fluid, and anyone redefined as "other" no longer requires empathy, and that's how we get here.
This unaccountable Gestapo analogue have, for example, been shown - in Congress - to be raping a whole lot of people. 'Losing' kids. Performing life-altering medical procedures without consent.
It's also worth pointing out that 'both' parties have raised ICE's budget every single year since their creation, including after the above reports were delivered.
Every US regime behaves this way: gunboat diplomacy goes back to the days of the banana republics, it was the United Fruit Company then, and oil today.
Fact is the US is run by oligarchs.
Peace presidents from Nixon onwards are just fronts for corporate interests. JFK was probably the only sane president since Roosevelt.
Edit: replaced correct term with "peace presidents."
Yeah, I've criticized those too. What's your point? Do you think I really saw this event and just now decided that Nuremburg-style trials would be in order?
Also saying they are trained to shoot first and ask questions later is very hyperbolic. Police conduct over 30 million vehicle stops per year without incident.
> Police conduct over 30 million vehicle stops per year without incident.
Read the room.
If a policeman asks you to get out of your car without justification you can bet they're the sort that are more likely to not be disciplined with their use of force either. Police are always quick to cite this case but generally they're ignorant of what it says, they just mindlessly say "pennsylvania v Mimms" everytime they want to be a dick to someone by inconveniencing them or to incite an arrest of someone they think won't want to leave their car. Look up "Civil Rights Lawyer" online and he even uses PA v Mimms against one officer ordering someone out in a case because their order was unlawful.
The administration early on made the decision to allow/require ICE agents to wear whatever tactical gear they had, along with masks, and authorized/required an intentional lack of insignia.
The lack of a uniform and insignia is a real problem for ordinary Americans.
We're used to subjecting ourselves to authority. We're willing to obey commands, to cooperate, to assist, even, the officers in uniform. We are law-abiding and respectful, even to the lowly rent-a-cops in the mall.
That respect and cooperation and obedience absolutely depends on the recognition of the uniform, the badge, the symbol of authority displayed without doubt.
Someone in the administration got the bright idea to remove the symbol, the uniform, and decided that everyone should now bow down in respect to ununiformed masked militia roaming our towns in plain pickups and SUVs.
Someone thought it would be 'cool' or 'bad-ass'; they still do, I'll bet.
But the lack of uniform changes the psychology of enforcement, imho. It places less demand on the discipline of the anonymous tactical-fatigue wearer. Add the mask and you're almost there. Just need jack-boots, and you complete the transformation of officer (blessing) into thug (curse). There is no accountability, no real standard to live up to, when the uniform is gone, the mask is on, and you, as an ostensible agent of federal authority, you are Anonymous. [Yes, I would like to see ICE issue all field agents the Guy Fawkes mask. There's a uniform for you./s]
The lack of a uniform creates moments of doubt and uncertainty in a US citizen as well. We are comfortable complying with commands from an officer in uniform. But we're just not used to unpredictible swarms of masked and often angry militia pouring out of dark windowed F150s and barking out conflicting orders, surrounding us, yanking on our door handles, pulling a sidearm and pressing it against the glass of our windshield.
This tragic confrontation has to become the last. We cannot continue to tolerate roaming anonymous militia wearing disguises, conducting unpredictable federal enforcement raids on our otherwise peaceful streets, under the cover of anonymity. We need these officers to be a part of our community, to come out from behind their masks, to put on a uniform we can identify and associate with the real positive authority of a well-intentioned federal government. [Yes, prerequisite, I know, we first need a federal government that is well-intentioned.]
https://lataco.com/federal-immigration-agents-halloween-mask...
Soon Americans being shot in the face by ICE and framed as terrorists will be as common and accepted as the President talking about invading Canada and Greenland, or launching billion dollar shitcoins, talking about his love letters to dictators, insulting soldiers who died in combat, violent riots overturning elections or openly mocking disabled people etc. etc. etc.
You'll see people in these comments who worked to normalise all those doing the same again.
Maybe 50 years from now "everyone will always have been against this", but even that's a stretch.
What exactly makes you think that this time is different? I just saw a clip from Fox, justifying the killing of this woman because she had pronouns on her profile.
At this very moment the MAGA types are explaining why it was the right move to execute this woman. Weren't they also relentlessly explaining why it was OK for a police to step on the neck of this black dude that end up dying some years ago? Weren't they relentlessly explaining why it was OK to shoot and kill looters?
Maybe in a year or two shooting people who destroying America will be the norm. Maybe soon someone will ask why just shoot looters and women with pronouns who run away from the law enforcement? why not kill everyone who destroys America? Are fat kids destroying America less than women with pronouns? Then wouldn't be patriotic to exterminate people with bad genes and improve nations genes?
BTW this is happening everywhere with persecuted people. Assailants feel trigger happy, they trust the system that will protect them from actual consequences. Most of the time there's some benefit of doubt that can be attached to the action and even when everything is clear and well documented they end up getting special treatment, they become heroes and they are looked after in prison or after the prison.
We've had plenty of those without meaningful consequences in most cases.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Daniel_Shaver is a good example if you can stomach the video. It's way worse than the text summary implies.
If someone wants to believe that ICE is the good guys and people protesting ICE are bad, they'll be pretty quick to adopt any narrative that will justify the actions of ICE. You can see that in this very thread.
This might sway a few people, but I really think the Trump "I could shoot someone on 5th avenue" is simply a truth.
Trying to? Trump already posted that she DID run him over and he was hospitalized for it.
Hah, many of them have been hired by ICE since.
> The president himself is also a convict.
Funnily enough, Florida made an exemption for him that allowed him to vote, despite their laws against convicted felons voting. They decided that since he had only been found guilty, and not sentenced, that he was not, yet, a convicted felon.
I wonder how many other people in Florida in the same situation could vote, or whether they'd be laughed at.
Isn't this a delightful Catch-22.
If you forewarn about a developing Fascist movement, you're simply taking away the meaning from the word until it's too late and the Fascists take power.
You cannot call anything Fascist, for there may be something more Fascist that may need the power of the word.
But ah! We couldn't call out their fledgling movement full of dog whistles and double speak so no one was aware enough to stop them as a fledgling movement!
I disagree. This is the action of a competent propagandist. Getting a narrative out as fast as possible before facts are known very often works.
This isn't the only shooting by ICE and if you look at the press releases for all those shootings it's exactly the same thing, "the protestor was violently trying to ram the ICE agents who bravely used self defense to shoot at the vehicle".
It has worked up until this shooting, and I imagine the reason it's not working as well here is there's too much video evidence to the contrary.
Approaching someone in a car with a mask on and a gun out is not a good reason to shoot at them. That would terrify just about any citizen, and their reaction to flee would be expected.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/minnesota-ice...
EDIT: And [dead] removed now. Fascinating. I checked the unofficial guide on GitHub again to confirm my understanding:
https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented#flaggi...
> A [dead] submission (that does not also show [flagged]) is killed by a moderator or by the software. They will only be shown to users who have showdead enabled in their profile. A submission can simultaneously be [flagged] and [dead].
No, it doesn't mean that. [flagged] is by users, not mods. [flagged][dead] means enough users have flagged it to kill it. [dead] alone is the result of moderator action (manual or automatic).
Time will tell how this all shakes out but I’m mentally preparing myself for the worst case scenario.
Media were largely acting like our current media, woefully ineffective and passive reporting on right wing violence. Hitler called then lugenpresse, now its fake news.
Resistance continued after that but not in the open, can be seen in the large number of assassination attempts.
Speaking of which: https://www.lemkininstitute.com/single-post/experts-warn-u-s...
No. Melissa Hortman. Also egregious to state this without mentioning how many of the assassins were also Republicans.
They definitely did.
> I don’t know German history very well
It's worth revisiting. _The Nazi Seizure of Power_ by William Sherman Allen is available in a variety of formats and may be an accessible starting point for this. It does directly contain examples of resistance and opposition to Nazis, before, during, and after their seizure of power (albeit in just one town that the book focuses on).
There sure was opposition to them (while it was still possible), that sure changed after they had enough power to get you locked up and killed for trying.
That is a horrible and dangerous reaction that does not solve the problem whatsoever. You are typing this comment with your heart, not with your brain.
If all cars were mandated by law to not accelerate when a person is in front of them, doesn't that give carjackers pretty much guaranteed success to confront and forcibly stop their victim before stealing their car, their belongings, or taking their life?
Why would I even bother buying a nice car if I know someone can just walk up in front of its front grill and hold me at gunpoint, and my car can't help but force me to stay there?
That woman would be raped and murdered in the middle of nowhere if her car disallowed her from making an executive decision for her safety.
Your idea is bad.
> Criminals would never get in front of a car. Especially after you legally mandate that by doing it their victim cannot escape by any means anymore.
Like, can you even hear yourself?
> Or women in?
You must be rolling in women. Lucky them. Maybe you can take them out to dinner and run over some car jackers on the way home.
Remote start/stop of motor vehicles is dangerous. You should not be wondering at any point in your life why automotive manufacturers are ignoring your armchair design specifications.