Ice agent shoots woman in the face (pt 2)

[Eyesopenwideawake]

Renee Good. Proof the you can shoot someone and get away with it in Trump’s America.

Actually it is illegal to obstruct a highway in Minnesota; so nobody has any such ‘right’

You still have the right to be treated lawfully and the right to a fair process if it went to court. Illegally obstructing a highway should not result in state sanctioned murder.

They don't have the right to be free from excessive force?

No right to expect that they won't be shot dead in response to a non-violent protest? (If indeed it was a protest at all.)

They have the right to peaceful protest, as I said. I did not say anything about obstructing a highway. (They do have the right to block traffic if they have a permit.) However, I would argue that she is clearly not obstructing a highway as, before her murder, cars can be seen passing in front of her vehicle, and she can be seen waving them past.

In any event, she was asked to move her vehicle, which she began doing. Had her alleged 'obstruction' been a true issue, they simply would have allowed her to move her car. Legally, police officers (and ICE aren't police, but it's my understanding they do have some similar powers in certain situations) can't detain, search, arrest, or use force against peaceful protesters. Nor can they use excessive force, which this quite obviously was.

Of course you do. But posters on here seems to think ‘a right to protest’ means a ‘right to protest however you see fit’. It doesn’t

They were treating her like someone from Isis about to set off a bomb.

The officer is ex soldier who did a year’s tour in Afghanistan. As someone who was anppointed to ICE Special Response Team the shooter (only) got 30hrs training for this job and that included expert marksmanship - so imo more likely to be how to kill, not how to de-escalate.
www.cnn.com/2026/01/08/us/ice-agent-minneapolis-shooting-car-dragged-invs

That's a good observation that I don't think anyone has really discussed in any detail.

It is a realistic suggestion that the driver was focused on the officer trying to open her car door and was completely unaware that the other officer had moved from the side to be in front of the car. Sadly as she is dead this will never be known.

Equally it is a realistic suggestion that the officer in front of the vehicle genuinely believed that she was going to collide with him. The secondary question then is shooting her to prevent this happening a reasonable or unreasonable course of action.

Both statements can be true.

You're right. Some forms of protest are unlawful, and it is perfectly reasonable that people should be prosecuted for any breaches of the law, and indeed sentenced accordingly if found guilty.

However, some posters seem to think engaging in "an unlawful protest" (whether real or perceived) means that you are ultimately responsible if you happen to be summarily executed in response to that protest, regardless of whether or not you actually presented a credible risk to anyone. It doesn't.

No one has said that.

If Renee was breaking the law, and it is a big if, she had the right to fair and due process in a court of law. She had the right not be subjected to excessive force, and she had the right not to be murdered.

If she did break the law, the officers at the scene (not ICE, who are not police) had every right to detain her and investigate her actions accordingly.

The state had every right to prosecute her if she was found to have committed a crime.

And had that happened, I doubt very much that anyone would be protesting it.

No one had the right to murder her. No one ever has the right to shoot an unarmed woman in the face 3 times, no matter what she was or was not doing.

How does this funding work ?

How much money are we talking, and who is doing the paying ?

I'm not sure it is clear she was protesting anything rather than going about daily bussiness.

Plus many on here actually do have massive problems with protests tactics - with the just stop oil protests being widely condemened and frustration expressed police weren't firmer with protestors - but no one was advocating shooting people in the head.

No-one should be shot dead because their poltical view point is different - it's
disburbing as fuck that I've seen this sentiment expressed on right and left of US poltics.

Many in US who are legal experts think thsi ICE agent acted unlawfully - I don't know and hopefully some legal process without poltcial bias will look into that (though poltcial bias sadly looks unlikely) - but there were clearly better ways for this government employee to have handled this situation without leaving a woman dead and we can all see that because it was filmed and the world has seen and all the lies in the world aren't changing that outside the US- inside well it's so extreme politisation of everything including truth is sadly looking like a bleak future will play out.

The 8th United States Secretary of Homeland Security, whom we have seen speaking about this incident on the news, fully endorsing the ICE officer’s actions, took a young dog, which she wanted to be a gun dog, out with a shooting party on her ranch. The young dog had no experience of being a gun dog, but the Secretary for Homeland Security thought it would copy the other trained dogs. Not surprisingly, instead, it ran excitedly about chasing birds during the shoot.

So she shot it. That was her solution.

Exactly this. It shouldn't need spelling out.

Why was her wife filming from before the incident began then? Can anyone actually answer that?

Maybe she thinks that is how ICE officers will learn discipline and restraint. No need to bother training them properly.

The poor dog.

Why does it matter?

He put himself in the way of the vehicle but to one side, drew his weapon before the car came towards him and then fired 2 more shots as the car was going past...
He is a skilled soldier but totally unsuitable for the role he was placed into.

Your statement that he thought he would be struck by the vehicle is not backed up at all by what actually happened.

About as credible as Trump saying Nato/EU provoked Russia and it was therefore reasonable to invade.

You re constantly bring up stuff thats irrelevant, why?

Why does it matter? Public service officers in a public place, why can't they be filmed? Don't you want evidence to inform any dispute?

The screaming person who was filming in the footage I saw was screaming at the ICE officer 'You shot my neighbour'.

He seemed to intentionally step near the left corner of the car ( which was turning away to the right, away). Then he shot. The bullet hole on the left ( our right) of the windscreen. Not the middle of the windscreen as a result of the car being driven at him front on, trying to ram him. And if it had been, why shoot and guarantee the car will be even more dangerous?

Then when the car had moved ahead, and further away to the right, he shot again through the open window. Then again.

Then he pocketed his gun, not in the least harmed, and walked away.

Who here had had their life in danger?

If I went to the US now, I would film any interaction with authority. I don"t want them claiming I was an armed, dangerous agitator.

Maybe that’s how she thinks you can treat humans who are running around not toeing the line. The marksmen trained ICE officers, with poor de-escalation training and no webcams, are her guns.

Long history of US employee police etc acting outside the law and only being taken seriously when there is filmed proof and eye witnesses?

I seriouly doubt she was expecting her wife to be shot in the head - she may have had general concerns about masked men in cars turning up in her neigbourhood and wanted to film to document what was happening in case she or her neigbours needed proof later or to deter law breaking.

I've seen many video where law enforment people break the law - there entire channels out with cases on - qualified immunity often means indidual who commite these crimes get off and tax payers get to fund any payout in compensation.

So I'd suggest - though not being her and seeing nothing about her reasoning in press can'ts ay for sure - lack of trust in authorities.

Her vehicle was blocking the road. Ahead of her vehicle was an ICE vehicle that appeared to have been stuck in the snow.

Another ICE vehicle then pulls up, my guess is her wife is filming in order to film and upload the reaction of the ICE officers for example her being forcefully removed from her vehicle .

As the second ICE vehicle arrived it appeared that she then decided to get out of there. When the armed officers asked her to get out of the vehicle she then made the fateful decision to drive off rather than get out of the vehicle as directed.