Time will tell how this all shakes out but I’m mentally preparing myself for the worst case scenario.
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.
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...
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).
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).
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.
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...
"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).
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.
I agree, probably not in the way she intended though.
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.
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."
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?
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?
> 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...
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.
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.
Can federal law enforcement detain? Yes.
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.
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.
If she had simply complied with police officers command to stop and exit the vehicle, she probably would have just received a warning and gone home. So dumb to try to murder a cop with your car.
You're moving the goalposts. You said she tried to murder him, she clearly did not. What the officer perceived is another matter.
No, poor "officer" training and conflicting orders ("move move move") from different gang members does not make for mens rea.
On a meta note, can HN just start banning these troll accounts that shotgun blast reactionary propaganda to abuse our assumption of good faith? This commenter is all over this thread posting support for the murder of an American mother. Most of them have been flagged but I guess some are not over "the line" enough.
The goal is obviously to derail the conversation and suck the energy out, and we really need discussion to be moving past these autocracy-cheerleading flame-bombs so we can constructively discuss how to save our country.
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.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/minnesota-ice...
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.
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.
Edit: bellingcat did a video sketching overhead reenactment of the event. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTPraD7DGZh/
https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/minneapolis-ice-shootin...
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.
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.
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.
The "real" homepage of HN is now /active. The rest is effectively censored to support the techbro worldview. This will not be fixed.
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.
2) For contacting dang, email hn@ycombinator.com. “@dang” doesn’t do anything.
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?
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
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.
[1] https://copalmn.org/the-handbook-for-constitutional-observer...
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 )
> “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."
It’s more likely to keep neighborhoods peaceful as this hot point processes.
Sending the guard after ICE would probably quickly draw federal backup from the Marines. Guard units want no part of that. Walz would not do such a thing, he’s not stupid.
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...
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.
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.
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.
> Police conduct over 30 million vehicle stops per year without incident.
Read the room.
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 would never take "action" personally though."
That's that for you, then. Like I said, spare me.
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.
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.]
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.
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.
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.
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.
[1] https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2020/05/when-stand-your-ground-...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
i.e Can states override federal authority?
Seems like states should have the right to allow ICE. Police departments are already by state.
fzeroracer•1d ago
* 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
MC995•23h ago
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.
fzeroracer•23h ago
apical_dendrite•23h ago
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.
JayNitram•23h ago
GuinansEyebrows•22h ago
by ICE? they have no authority to detain or arrest US citizens.
ryandrake•3h ago
anigbrowl•22h ago
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.
lamontcg•19h ago
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.
fjfaase•17h ago
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.