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.
