Ice agent shoots a woman in the face part 3

[Moontan]

Donald Trump has now said its okay to murder a woman. Because they are doing it for people's 'safety'

It is interesting how far humans will let themselves be abused by bad people.

I was watching a documentary about jonestown the cult.

Some people left the cult

They said that the leader beat people, raped people, starved people. He made them do physical labour for many hours a day. He demanded that they give him all of their money.

And yet still hundreds of people followed him.

People seem to keep supporting a person and staying there. Rather than saying "maybe i was wrong and this guy is actually a bad person"

I’m curious. If you’re one of the people who think protest is stupid and you’re asking for violence, how do you feel when you see things like the man vs tank in Tiananmen, the singing revolution in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, anti-Apartheid marches and protests, the fall of the Berlin Wall?

Do you sit and think, “well that’s just asking for trouble”? Or do you admire and respect the people fighting for freedom and democracy?

Because ICE are hauling people off the streets of America and some are bound for torture prisons in El Salvador, with documented brutality and murder. That warrants protest.

Ignore this. I’m an idiot.

Shit sorry I think you might have been being sarcastic.

In which case my utter and complete apology!!!

He calls her a ‘fcking bith’ after he has shot her in the face. I think that adds context that this was a spiteful, vindictive murder - he didn’t like being goaded and reacted with violence - and not a lawful killing done rationally under genuine fear for safety. I am reading that the ICE officer has a conviction for sexually abusing his stepchild so…you know…as usual
with violent gun nuts, he was an abuser of women. Someone like that should never be given a gun. If you cannot act rationally in the face of provocation, you shouldn’t be an officer, full stop.

Seeing Trump supporters and the online right who love to talk about ‘small government’ and ‘freedom’ celebrate and defend the cold blooded murder of a civilian is quite something though. The cognitive dissonance is real.

Rapists cause rape. Not flirting, short skirts or anything else.

sbaproject.org/what-were-you-wearing/

I think the poster was trying to show how ridiculous the argument from PP was that Renee made the wrong decision by not staying at home.

That's how I took it, apologies if I'm wrong.

Ah!!

Sorry, @Frequency

And murderers cause murder, not protestors.

I was pointing out how easily the victim-blaming can be spotted if you swap murder for rape and protesting for flirting. It's exactly the same sentence as the "not victim blaming but..." used to defend the murder of Renee.

She didn’t expect to get shot in the face, because she lives in a country where she has the freedom to protest - she should no more have been shot in the face for protesting than for doing her shopping. I can’t believe posters on here somehow fine with the idea that we should all lay down and give up our rights because now there are men who will shoot us in the face for exercising them! If you accept this it may well get to the point you are not permitted to leave home to shop freely down the line.

Sorry! I reported the post before I saw you were making a point. Deepest apologies. Let me know if you want me to email MNHQ and tell them!

The poster was saying that this is victim blaming in the same way as the posters on this thread stating that she shouldn't have been there, or that she hould have got out of the car and not doing so is why she was killed.

She was killed because a man was violent, or she was raped because the mn was a rapist. Anything else is just noise.

It's all good, I understood that you misread/misinterpeted and to be completely fair, it is an utterly abhorrent sentence to read. It is also utterly abhorrent when the same argument is used to defend the unlawful killing of a woman engaging in her right to protest.

Yes, she should have stayed home. What was her end goal here? What was she hoping to achieve? She wasn’t marching. She just chose to drive up to the situation, shouting stuff. It was just pointless antagonisation with no real end result, yet at the same time putting herself amongst other antagonists about whom she knew nothing. I’m saying that, imo, you don’t insert yourself into volatile situations, especially when what you’re doing is not going to make any difference whatsoever, but may end up endangering your life from the threat of others around you, whether that was going to be the ICE agents, or the other protestors.. I repeat she shouldn’t have been shot, but the majority of rational people would not have even been there.

Well let's say I walked into an airport carrying a pipe or an umbrella wrapped in a blanket and found myself quickly surrounded by armed police shouting at me to put down the weapon then the right decision is to do as they say. Would you agree that the wrong decision would be to raise the umbrella to my shoulder point it at the armed police whilst shouting "ney copper's going to get me alive".

You see it is possible to make the right or wrong decisions without it being "victim blaming ".

Thing is, you can’t even say it was the “wrong” decision.

lets say she did get out the car. And those rage filled, angry men dragged her to the floor, and sat on her neck for 10 minutes until she died while waiting for “back up”.

because that happened not too far away, not too long ago.

or she got out the car, shouted at them, or refused to get on the floor, and they shot her anyway.

we’ll never know whether her decision was right or wrong.

the ICE officer is the one who made the wrong choice.

Yeah, that's the same.

I would imagine the odds of getting injured whilst at a shopping mall is far less than going to a a situation where there are authorities vs hyped up protestors. It’s facetious to imply otherwise.

No! Just no! The ONLY way this stops is by people standing up to them. The only way countless people do not just disappear and be deported regardless of citizenship is if people stand united against ice.
You say vote them out at the ballot box. That’s not for years. If indeed free and fair elections take place agin in the US. 4 years is too long to wait to do anything. The game is rigged in the regime’s favour. The only way this stops is by protest and not being intimidated.

This is my take. She and her wife were clearly there with intent to protest. In the newer footage, she and her wife are shown engaging with the ICE agent in a verbally provocative manner – she's smiling, her wife is grinning, and they're both being sarky. They seem to be trying to piss him off. They succeeded, sadly.

I cannot understand why someone living in the US, with three children she's responsible for, would freely choose to engage with trigger-happy, badly trained, armed law enforcement officers, especially while in control of a vehicle – technically a deadly weapon, giving them an excuse to shoot her.

I don't live in the US and even I know to stay out of the way of law enforcement, and to comply, immediately and deferentially unless you want to risk being beaten or shot. Should it be that way? No. Obviously not. But is that the reality? Yes. She voluntarily put herself in the middle of a dangerous situation and assumed she wouldn't be at risk. She taunted an armed ICE agent and drove her car towards him for some reason (panic?), either genuinely panicking him or just giving him a veneer of credibility.

He didn't follow protocol, and was either badly trained, trigger-happy and dangerous, or both, and shooting her was a murder that shouldn't have happened, and for which he should be held accountable...but 'shoulds' didn't save her from being shot dead when she chose to put herself in the middle of a volatile situation, even though she had to know it was going to achieve nothing.

If I were her kids, I'd be angry at the ICE agent, but I'd also be pretty pissed off at her for being so irresponsible with her life.

I don't think you are understanding my point: if you can be shot in the face for doing something legal (protesting), then where is the line? The Trump regime is actively showing that there is no line — their officers have the mandate to shoot and kill because they feel offended by people exercising their rights (to free speech, to observe law enforcement). This is an erosion of rights is my point. It should not be a dangerous situation that escalates to someone getting killed.

The ICE officer Jonathan Ross wasn't the one convicted of sexual abuse, it was the man he was apprehending at the time: Roberto Carlos Muñoz, an undocumented Mexican immigrant with an open immigration detainer and a criminal conviction for sexually assaulting his 16-year-old stepdaughter in 2022.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/08/ice-agent-minneapolis-shooting

If I were her kids, I'd be angry at the ICE agent, but I'd also be pretty pissed off at her for being so irresponsible with her life.

More victim blaming.

In a democracy, people have a right to protest without being murdered by the authorities.

If we have a built-in assumption that they don't, we're living in a dictatorship.

You do realise we are talking about the US where shootings occur daily - including in shopping malls and schools don’t you?

Ah ok, I read that wrong in a different source.

There is no line anymore. Trump was on record telling ice agents deployed to Minneapolis to “get rough with them” shortly before they deployed to the city.