In a Richfield Target, video shows federal agents detaining Target employees, including one being tackled/handcuffed while saying “I’m literally a U.S. citizen,” and they were later released:
Okay, go for the first one where ICE shoots a pastor directly in the head from a rooftop with a pepper ball (their claimed reason was they were blocking a vehicle, but in the video the pastor is on the sidewalk and there is no vehicle in sight anywhere. Also, that is not the way that sort of weapon is supposed to be used for crowd control as it could seriously injure someone).
Thanks for that. Here’s what I’ve found for the governments response:
- Demonstrators were throwing rocks and bottles, and shooting fireworks at ICE agents.
- Demonstrators were blocking vehicles, impeding ICE operations.
- The demonstrators were trespassing on federal property and were repeatedly warned before force was used.
I have been unable to find anything claiming those are false. Let me know if you have a source that contradicts these.
If it turns out all of those are true, does that justify the use of pepper spray to you? It does for me. I’ve shot paintballs ( not pepper spray balls ) many times and do not believe they can be reasonably aimed for a headshot. I’ll consider that a ‘lucky shot’.
Let me know it you have proof against the government claims, or if you feel unnecessary force was used if they are all true.
I hear you on the “maybe they threw rocks/blocked vehicles/got warned” list (but that’s basically DHS’s standard script in every crowd-control incident.)
Two things:
The video of the pastor getting hit doesn’t match that story in that moment. I don’t see an imminent threat that would justify rooftop agents firing pepper balls into a crowd and someone getting tagged in the head, do you?
More importantly:
A federal judge also wasn’t just like “sounds fine to me.” This went to court, and the judge issued a TRO/preliminary injunction restricting exactly this kind of conduct (indiscriminate force and targeting peaceful protesters/press/clergy who aren’t posing an immediate threat). That is strong evidence that the court thought the pastor had a serious case and that ongoing harm was likely.
So even if we grant (for the sake of argument) “some people were doing dumb/illegal stuff somewhere,” that still doesn’t justify shooting projectiles into a crowd in a way that predictably risks serious injury (especially head/face hits). “We can’t aim these well” is not a defense, it’s literally the reason you shouldn’t be firing them like that, right?
Also worth saying: a TRO/PI isn’t a final “verdict,” but it’s still a judge basically telling the government “you can’t keep doing this while the case plays out.” That should tell you something about how convincing the government’s version looked when it mattered.
If you’ve got a source showing rocks/fireworks/clear warnings right before that rooftop volley in the same spot, please link it. I’d be happy to look. But between the video and the fact a judge stepped in, I’m siding with the pastor’s account here.
> I find it hard to believe that any law enforcement agents anywhere would tolerate these actions without similar response.
It’s interesting that that’s your perception. In a lot to countries it’s very rare for the police to kill anyone in the sorts of circumstances you’re describing.
Interesting. How do they deal with things like people driving cars towards them?
That’s the only fatality situation in the current unrest.
Another protester was shot yesterday, the agent was being attacked with a snow shovel and a large stick. The protester was shot in the leg ( not fatal ), which is sometimes suggested as a less permanent way of stopping such an attack.
Renee Nicole wasn’t driving a car at anyone, but regardless, it is stupid to shoot someone who’s driving a car at you as it won’t stop the car. What you need to do in that situation is get out of the way.
The truth of that can be seen in the recordings where the car is driving away from the ICE person, till it crashes violently into a mast or something after the driver (Renee Nicole) was shot by the ICE person.
You are conceding the point that it is not in fact normal in other parts of the world for the police to shoot the driver as a means of avoiding being hit by the car. Doing so does not even make sense from a practical point of view. The car will most likely keep coming towards you anyway.
The incident you linked where the police officer sustained life threatening injuries (they didn’t die, as far as I can tell) seems to have been a collision between two cars caused by dangerous driving, so it’s not really a relevant example.
The point is not to stop the car. The point is to stop the driver, because that person is obviously willing to kill someone using the car as a weapon. That person should be stopped ASAP.
The cited articles include charges of murder, highlighting that point.
Err, your claim is that Renee Good was about to go on a Carmageddon-style killing spree and the ICE agent was concerned not for his own safety but for the safety of the general public? There are three key problems with this analysis:
1) It is utterly ludicrous considered in itself, going beyond even what MAGA’s lunatic fringe has dared to suggest.
2) It undermines the only possible legal defense the officer might theoretically have had (self defense).
3) Even waiving the outrageous absurdity of what you’re saying and your various insults to the reader’s intelligence, shooting the driver just means that the car is almost certain to crash into something (as indeed happened here), which creates more danger to the general public, not less.
That was an aside because I think inaccurate summaries of what happened in the videos should always be corrected, however bad MAGA want to post truth this.
But the question we were discussing was whether or not it was normal in other countries for police to shoot the drivers of cars as a means of stopping them. So no agreement on the facts of the Renee Nicole case is required.
