Let's call a murder a murder

https://daringfireball.net/2026/01/lets_call_a_murder_a_murder

by hermitcrab • 7 months ago

400 175 7 months ago

Good post by Gruber on this, and kudos to him for emphasising the bravery of the citizens involved, I only hope that justice can be seen to be done, but I'm not holding my breath with Noem neck-deep in the lies already.

techblueberry2• 7 months ago

Just found:

"The agent who shot a woman in Minneapolis on Wednesday was pulled about 100 yards by a car last year while firing a stun gun at the driver."

So, this is a trend.

DustinEchoes• 7 months ago

Yeah, he broke open the rear window and tried to unlock the door.

duxup• 6 months ago

Considering the behavior of ICE, it seems like they hired some folks just desperate to find legal cover to shoot someone. There are numerous videos of them casually drawing their weapons on protesters.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ICE_Raids/comments/1q7u4kz/ice_agen...

https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesota/comments/1q7y43s/cbp_poin...

eps• 6 months ago

The whole MO of ICE is that of intimidation. That's really their raison de être in the agency's current format.

They are effectively a paramilitary enforcing the agenda. Parallels with the 1930s Germany are really explicitly uncanny.

Gibbon1• 6 months ago

My dad has a story from the late fifty's. He was at a party at his cousins house in Stockton. And the cousins brother in law had just been hired as a country sheriff and was boasting about how he was looking forward to killing his first nagger.

These kind of people exist.

tombert3• 6 months ago

I feel like this is a problem that is going to be inherent to any position of power that allows people to use weapons; you very heavily selection-bias towards people want power and to use weapons, especially if the people who do abuse their position of violence are consistently allowed to do it with impunity.

Not saying that every person in law enforcement is bad, obviously; there are plenty of cops and people in the military [1] that are responsible with their weapons and do genuinely want to help people, but if you create an institution where people don't have to pay the consequences for their actions, then of course you're going to attract people who want to commit those actions.

The Catholic Church with their abusive priests is one of the most obvious examples. They create a situation where an adult male can be surrounded by kids unsupervised, not be married, and when abuse does happen it is covered up and the priest is moved somewhere else. Combined with the fact that they're paid shit, there's going to be a very strong selection bias of pedophiles.

[1] and who knows, maybe even ICE!

_DeadFred_3• 6 months ago

His failure to do his job correctly multiple times isn't justification for the murder of a 37 year old mother and the orphaning of her child.

Most sane government agencies would make sure he knew and started following the required protocol so that he would be safe/competent the next time before putting him back on the street. Yet he again failed to do his job and follow protocol, and stood in front of a vehicle. Seems like repeat government/leadership/agent failure.

The quote is 'We live in a world where trained cops can panic and act on impulse, but untrained civilians must remain calm with a gun in their face.'. Random americans in unusual situations can't be expected to not stress/freak out, that is realistic human nature. That is why officers are trained and required as part of their job to never place themselves in front of vehicles.

It is on the trained officers, initiating the situation and experienced with it, to keep things under control. That is literally their job. The obligation shouldn't be on a mom that just dropped her kids at school that isn't the 'trained professional' in the scenario.

techblueberry2• 6 months ago

Agreed! Why wasn’t he removed from duty when he fucked up the first time! Like I said, it’s now a trend the the makes bad decisions when cars are present.

DerArzt• 6 months ago

If my buddies' ex (a hair dresser) is required to have more schooling and education than US law enforcement officers, I feel it's safe to say that none of these officers are "trained".

ndsipa_pomu4• 6 months ago

It doesn't make any sense to me why an agent would deliberately put themselves at the front of a car if they'd previously been in such an incident (presumably they weren't hurt by the previous incident). Anyone with a functioning brain would surely have much better awareness of their positioning and should be following the guidance to approach from the side.

Also, I thought there was very clear guidance about not discharging guns towards unarmed drivers as it doesn't tend to stop them and is likely to result in the vehicle being accelerated into someone/something.

mindslight11• 6 months ago

why an agent would deliberately put themselves at the front of a car if they'd previously been in such an incident

One reason would be that after the first time he fucked around and found out with a vehicle, he resolved to shoot the driver the next time. This would explain why he tried to box in the metal car with his squishy body while keeping an exit strategy - being positioned at the right place to claim he was worried about being hit without actually getting hit. It would also mean this incident was premeditated murder.

solid_fuel2• 7 months ago

The nature of our current political crisis is changing by the minute, and with every fascist act this administration emboldens the next wave of left wing opposition.

The moderate position for future liberal candidates is now the full dissolution of ICE.

The more radical position - which is rapidly gaining support - is the arrest and prosecution of everyone involved in this administration. Starting with the president but including his cabinet and the oligarchs who spent the last year fomenting corruption and enriching themselves.

jaybrendansmith• 6 months ago

I'm not sure that isn't the moderate position. Every one of them are certified criminals. They all need to stand trial. I pledge to do everything in my power to ensure that they do. So say we all.

culi3• 6 months ago

See also the mind-boggling sign-on bonuses they get. They know ICE being the 8th most funded army in the world can't last forever. The left wasn't allowed to do a wealth transfer from rich to poor so instead the right did a massive wealth transfer from all of us to the most racist of us.

soco2• 6 months ago

But is what you have now "right" wing? Or just oligarchy of no real wing? I'm not sure that ideology has a real role in what they actually do (looking beyond words), unless "I do what I please" is an ideology...

culi3• 6 months ago

ICE was only created in 2003. We had a time before ICE and we need to go back to it

lovich3• 7 months ago

I feel no shame in anything I felt about Charlie Kirk’s death after seeing their response to this, and that looks like it was a team kill from conservatives.

One side of the political aisle in this country is screaming about how violent the other side is, while they are committing murder and telling us that our eyes are lying to us.

Gonna be a fun decade ahead

cryptochamorro• 7 months ago

How is this situation even remotely similar to Charlie Kirk’s assassination other than a death occurred?

lovich3• 6 months ago

Same team committing the violence and using it as an excuse to enforce even more authoritarian efforts on people like me, before the bodies are even cold

renewiltord• 7 months ago

I’ll just say that I fully expect American police to shoot people in that situation. Not because it’s justified but because their whole deal is:

“Sir, stop resisting. I gave you a lawful order”

“Sir, sir, BANG BANG”

“I feared for my life”

It’s like a pitbull, right? It’s right there most of the time. Then one day it eats a baby. But you kind of knew it had baby eating ready to go. It’s sitting there ready to eat babies. Just a question of when. Then the baby gets eaten and you’re upset. But most people just stay away from the baby eater.

One day you’re walking down the street and your baby gets eaten. Justifiable? No. Your fault? Also no. But there’s baby eaters out there. Such is life.

rozap3• 6 months ago

"she was asking for it" but with murder. Cool argument.

Embarrassing what level of discourse this site has fallen to.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF• 6 months ago

Embarrassing what level of discourse this site has fallen to.

Indeed.

Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
"she was asking for it"

Another way to, er interpret their comment could be, "This tragic outcome was predictable." It does not blame the victim, it is an observation.

iJohnDoe• 6 months ago

You had me until, “Such as life.” The point here is there is no reason life should be this way and that is why people have a problem with it.

Sadly, agreed, most should expect to get shot to death by police in any given situation. Most become a police officer with the sole purpose of being able to shoot someone and they are continuously looking for any opportunity to do so. They are literally a junkie waiting to get their fix.

Sadly, agreed, pitbulls should not be kept as pets and certainly not when children are present. Most people can’t control their pets, let alone a pitbull. Also, pitbull owners know they are choosing a pitbull for the sole purpose of proving others wrong, or the opportunity to blame someone else if their pitbull attacks someone. Weirdly like police.

KittenInABox3• 7 months ago

Inquiry, since I know anti immigrant sentiment is on the rise in other countries. How are other countries increasing their enforcement of their immigration laws? Are there also chaotic situations where their immigration enforcers are shooting people in cars? Are there better ways for rising anti-immigrant sentiment to result in stricter enforcement with less violence?

soco2• 6 months ago

Now that you're mentioning, I'm surprised that, even though in some corners anti-immigrant parties rose to governing, they are only doing legislation and stricter enforcing immigration and border protection rules - not appreciated by everybody of course but somehow understandable where they're coming from. Might be somebody else knows more, or has seen more, but my one data point is: no nothing like that was ever hinted from what I can tell. And I'm appalled.

captn3m0• 6 months ago

India has been deporting immigrants to Bangladesh/Myanmar and this includes Indian Citizens, because there is no due process being followed and court orders are being regularly ignored.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/07/23/india-hundreds-of-muslim...

authorities forced another 40 Rohingya refugees into the sea near Myanmar, giving them life jackets and making them swim to shore
the police raided his home, seized his mobile phone, and tore up his identity documents, which were proof of his (Indian) citizenship. They then flew him in a BSF plane (…) Sheikh said he was forced to cross into Bangladesh with eight others.

square_usual• 6 months ago

I remember threads about this on HN back when the CAA Bill first dropped - you saw much of the same concern trolling back then, as if nobody could see what the real intent behind it was.

culebron21• 6 months ago

I'm from Russia. There's no such special department there, nor police shoots at anyone in a car. They do chase, then after some minutes, if nothing works, shoot at tires. There's no rule, nor drilling to shoot then think, nor to take a gun ASAP. There's no qualified immunity for police either. (Right-wing Russians, even die-hard Putin's supporters, in fact admire this side of the American police -- like "you don't stare at a policeman in America", they say.) The whole issue of detainees being shot -- that's not a problem there at all.

There is one department that's similar to ICE, the riot police called Rosgvardia (Russian Guard), which is anti-mass-protest force. When it was created, they hired all the normal police drop-outs, the worst. But they only carry batons.

The real issue with human rights in Russia is in courts and law application, and inside prisons, out of public eye.

machomaster• 6 months ago

Can confirm. Police will generally be quite gentle (even when they use weapons, they have to shoot a warning shot). Rosgvardia very likely will beat you up. Russian SWAT will for sure beat you up or shoot you.

Beating up and actual torturing may commence after you were apprehended.

But being shot during the ordinary police stoppage is not a wide-spread problem.

culi3• 6 months ago

Around the world, anti-immigrant sentiment is a minority viewpoint. At least it was in 2019

https://www.pewresearch.org/global-migration-and-demography/...

KittenInABox3• 6 months ago

Neat, this goes against my understanding that anti-immigrant is a rising sentiment. Thanks for informing me of this.

cbeach• 6 months ago

I’m in the UK. There is strong anti-ILLEGAL-immigrant sentiment, because hundreds of thousands of undocumented men originating in Africa and the Middle East have illegally crossed the English Channel from France and then made asylum claims, meaning the UK taxpayer is forced (by treaty) to house them and feed them. These are quite evidently opportunists. A large proportion are young fighting-age men, and most are fleeing countries where there is no current conflict.

As a taxpayer in a cost of living crisis I resent seeing hotels full of these chancers.

And I don’t think women and girls are safe with them around, given the staggering sexual crime statistics

https://www.migrationcentral.co.uk/p/up-to-third-of-sexual-a...

Call me “anti-immigrant” if you like. I don’t care. I’m voting for fairness and safety in the next election.

KittenInABox3• 6 months ago

I'm not really interested in your personal opinion about immigration. I don't really know why you decided to vent your personal grievance at me.

tombert3• 7 months ago

It's almost like giving a nearly-completely-unregulated quasi-military force unlimited funding, more weapons than God, and no clear goals other than "deport more people" is actually a really bad idea.

People voted for this.

Oh but hey, we at least made sure to pretend to save money by firing and then rapidly rehiring a lot of the workforce.

cmxch• 6 months ago

If we give money to groups that aid and support the protection of illegal aliens, no sense in not outspending them.

estimator7292• 6 months ago

You're suggesting a grassroots movement to outspend the US government, one of the wealthiest entities on the planet

metadope2• 6 months ago

Here you appear to be using "illegal aliens" as a synonym for "immigrants".

Groups that aid and support immigrants are doing a service that benefits America and all Americans; we should give them money so they can continue to help.

Immigration is of benefit to most nations; we are no different. But if and when you call immigrants illegal aliens, you're removing an important distinction and distorting reality.

Have you ever seen an immigration application? Ever examined the regulations that legal immigrants must navigate?

Legal immigration is a quagmire, but some would rather turn away from the swamp rather than drain it; some would like to pretend that immigration is the same thing as invasion, to justify the lazy approach that groups everyone together in an alien blur.

empath753• 6 months ago

illegal aliens

Do you mean "human beings"

lesuorac2• 6 months ago

How is this even relevant to the discussion at hand?

The issue from the article is that an "Immigration" agency used lethal violence against a _citizen of the US_.

This is not an illegal aliens issue.

bigyabai• 7 months ago

Let's call Google, Microsoft and Apple accessories to extrajudicial martial law. No? We still like those guys?

Gruber needs an identity that isn't conjoined at the hip with fascist enablers. His insecurity is palpable.

vdupras• 7 months ago

And it's flagged, of course.

Will somebody vouch for this? I know what you're thinking. This doesn't encourage curiosity! This is politics! Same old, same old.

HN! Come on, how myopic must you be to not see that a working democracy is a condition sine qua non of your dear curiosity. You see what's happening in Iran, right? Well, they don't!

Put your glasses on, HN, you're not seeing shit.

solid_fuel2• 7 months ago

So many people here want to bury their heads in the sand, like that will protect them. It's disgraceful to see people calling themselves "hackers" while they support the feds with no reservations or critical thought.

lovich3• 6 months ago

A good number of people on this site don’t mind the boot as long as they are wearing it. It’s not particularly rare for groups of software engineers to have American style libertarians amongst them

thefz2• 6 months ago

And it's flagged, of course.
Will somebody vouch for this?

It's a false dichotomy and this mode of black/white thinking is everywhere online. Unless you agree 100% with every single atom and detail of >THING X<, you are automatically the enemy and literally Adolf Hitler.

Had a similar discussion in the thread for the hacker doxxing conservative dating sites: while I disagree with white supremacists I still think doxxing people online is wrong (for both sides).

And for Gruber's article: I don't think HN is the place to discuss US local politics coverage, let alone through a poster that reviews Apple software and hardware most of his time.

I can still think this && what happened to that woman is horrible.

I can still think that doxxing political opponents is wrong && that white supremacists have no place in 2026.

metadope2• 6 months ago

Agreed; in general, doxxing people is wrong. In general, politics are polarizing and reactive, and are to be avoided on a mostly-technical discussion site. In general, Gruber is an Apple review guy. These rules-of-thumb are useful and proper, generally. But you know what comes next, right?

The exceptions.

I think we're seeing some extraordinary events irl that the HN community and moderators are dealing with organically. Exceptions are being made; eventually the rules of thumbs will return to prominence.

metaphysicalyes10• 6 months ago

The current administration has made clear that right or wrong is the question of which side has more power. And appeal to human morals has lost its power in dopamine addled society rife with mental issues. To assert their will people resort to alternative means.

praptak• 6 months ago

Yeah. The US government blatantly excusing a murder in broad daylight? Not intellectually interesting at all.

Better discuss another article about using AI for coding.

rozap3• 6 months ago

It's crazy to me that "no politics" arguments are still getting flung around. This is so far beyond political at this point. Citizens being murdered by masked men with total immunity? What the fuck has our country come to.

He already has talked about cancelling the election. What happens when he declares a state of emergency to cancel the 2026 midterms - is that political? Are we allowed to discuss it? The effective end of the United States, but whatever, get back to the code mines, the VCs need those returns.

Just an absolutely crazy situation we are in right now.

slumberlust• 6 months ago

Why does vouching require a certain threshold of accountability to perform but reporting can be done by anyone?

FpUser• 7 months ago

At one point Orange was talking about shithole countries.

esseph• 6 months ago

Site full of cowards.

The stance this site has taken while things like this happen outside the very doors is shameful.

zahlman15• 6 months ago

The stance this site has taken

What are you even referring to?

tastyface• 6 months ago

What I find even more horrifying than the murder is the response from people in power. Lying. Calling the victim a terrorist. Claiming she deserved it. Expressing unequivocal support for the killer. Threatening more of the same for the opposition. Posting fucking memes! Not even a hint of sympathy anywhere to be seen.

These people are animals. They should be in chains in front of a tribunal, not running the country. And they dare call themselves Christians?

tim333• 6 months ago

I'm not sure this will play well for them politically. A fair bit of what got Trump elected was saying they'd protect ordinary Americans from immigrant criminals. Now they have footage of a white middle class mum in an suv, pretty much their median voter, being shot dead by their thugs and saying don't believe you eyes and clear video evidence, she tried to run an officer over when she obviously didn't.

etothet• 6 months ago

You may be correct (and I hope you are), but speaking anecdotely, I have several friends & acquaintances on the right who justify pretty much any actions taken by the admnistration (including this one). Many of the supporters of this administration are religious zealots who see left wing thinking and people as just about the most evil thing out there. To them, the end (fewer “radical” left wing thinkers) justifies the means.

xtracto• 6 months ago

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command" - 1984

I've found the reaction from most people in the US horrifying since the "grab em by the pussy" days...

folbec• 6 months ago

I personally think that the more appropriate quote from 1984 is this one, because the cruelty is the whole point :

“The real power, the power we have to fight for night and day, is not power over things, but over men.” He paused, and for a moment assumed again his air of a schoolmaster questioning a promising pupil: “How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?”

Winston thought. “By making him suffer,” he said.

“Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing. Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating?[...]”"

1984.

y0eswddl2• 6 months ago

ALL humans are animals.

And most animals typically act much less indiscriminately violent than we do.

Integrape• 6 months ago

Man is the only animal to claim a God, and the only animal to behave as if there is no God.

mindslight11• 6 months ago

That relies on absolving other animals of responsibility for their behaviors because they don't have higher order thought, no? Animals can be pretty violent to even their own species.

edit: Chewing on this a little more, this viewpoint almost feels like the dual of a common justification that people drunk on religion use to justify the killing of other human beings - "animals kill each other so it's natural behavior, and God sorts us all out in the afterlife"

datsci_est_2015• 6 months ago

The whole “was it justified or not” is a huge distraction from the principles of the matter, which ironically is a huge benefit to those with fascist ambitions. Classic America getting caught up in reviewing the tapes like it’s Monday morning after a controversial NFL Sunday.

The principle of the matter is that the fascist apparatus of the US government has made it clear that should you have a grievance against them, you have no recourse, even if your grievance is legitimate. Their immediate response to deny wrongdoing and establish immunity is de facto fascism, which should be no surprise to those who have read Carl Schmitt and Decisionism, and paid attention when Miller slipped up about “plenary authority”.

Spade is a spade at this point.

directevolve2• 6 months ago

Yep. Bad use of force by police is tragic, but it’s happened before and will happen again. This is federal support for murdering liberals.

shitter• 6 months ago

JD Vance, man. What a mendacious piece of shit.

lma21• 6 months ago

Why is this flagged??

addandsubtract• 6 months ago

It'S PoLiTiCaL

Atreiden• 6 months ago

As self-proclaimed hackers who are part of a community whose core values include curiosity and critical thinking, we do ourselves, and the world, a massive disservice by closing our eyes and ears to important information just because it's political in nature.

Hacker culture and fascism are antithetical, and we should all be acutely aware when the current regime moves towards violence to squash dissent.

ZeroGravitas• 6 months ago

The women he is praising for filming is, according to the current government, committing illegal violence against the ICE agents.

https://reason.com/2026/01/08/you-have-the-right-to-record-i...

The Trump Administration Says It's Illegal To Record Videos of ICE. Here's What the Law Says.
Violence is anything that threatens them and their safety, so it is doxing them, it's videotaping them where they're at when they're out on operations," Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said.

So he is right to think she might have been shot for doing this.

edit: note that's a libertarian source. They've always had a strain of civil libertarians on that publication but the comments on the site reveal a lot of libertarians now think it's a good thing that white liberal women are being shot.

throwawayqqq114• 6 months ago

At that point, its not libertarian anymore, its identitarian. The victim was from an outgroup so anything goes, including your values around liberty out the window.

Identity politics is at the core of conservativism and what ever is good for, or part of your group or yourself is just by nature and good for society. This tribalistic bias skews your reasoning, because we apes have evolved to sustain our own group or ourself. As social animals, we have externalized our self-preservative drive onto the tribe we live in and this bias drives libertarians to these comments and why there is such a significant overlap between religion, racists (group oriented) but also libertarians (individual oriented), etc. The big political divide is between people who are more vulnerable to such identity based biases and people who are lesser so.

4gotunameagain• 6 months ago

And your point is ?

Because someone is filming, it is okay for a federal agent to execute their partner ?

I'm not sure I understand.

Tohsig• 6 months ago

No, they're supporting Gruber's statement that the woman filming was putting herself in very real danger by filming the shooting and then continuing to film for several minutes after.

metalman• 6 months ago

this is so hard for me, I have been in several situations where guns have been drawn, including by police(for no reason), and others where guns have been fired as intimidation, and "accidental" discharges and have always reacted instinctivly and yelled at and stood up to idiots and there guns, watching this video and the one where a civilian disarms one of the attackers on bondi beach, vividly shows the monsters and people who will stand up and fight or are just caught up in something they dont understand, but that the person in Miniapolis who filmed this, stood there and bore witness while this unfolded is something I could never have imagined, the ones at the top, orchestrating these public executions, should fear the implacable bravery of those who will stand firm far more than a reactionary like me. Also, another person has documented ICE blocking an MD from assisting the murder victim, who is 20' away dieing.

bananabiscuit19• 6 months ago

I don’t think this is as clear cut as anyone on either side is claiming.

Looking [1], it does appear that Renee attempted to run the car right into the ICE officer, the wheels were still pointing slightly left, and the officer was still in front of the car. Also in [2] you can see that she was looking directly at the officer during this initial acceleration attempt. The only thing that saved the officer in that initial attempt was the loss of traction due to the icy road.

After that, indeed the wheels were pointing away from the officer and arguably there was no more danger to him, but after the clear attempt to hit him, you cannot realistically expect the officer, in a split second, to re-evaluate if her intentions to hurt anybody changed or not. At this point his life was already threatened. He doesn’t know what she is doing and waiting to find out could mean that he is dead.

[1] https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/2008984798271094791

[2] https://x.com/nicksortor/status/2009683575298211979

throwawayqqq114• 6 months ago

It gets quite clear, when you change the setup a little bit.

1) Make the PO a regular human without a gun and you can imagine, that any normal person would have made just a quick sidestep to avoid collision, like most of us have experienced in person too. Use of force was totally unjustified, esp. when you combine it with:

2) Change the intetion of the driver to really want to harm the person ~2m in front of the car. Cop get trained, that you should not use your gun on close encounters with knives, bc the short distance <5m will give you not enogh time to stop a knive attacker reliably. If you stand that close infront of a car, a short but strong tab of the pedal would have been enough to get you, no matter how fast you draw your gun or how good your aim is. To me, it is clear that she never ment to hit anybody, the acceleration does not indicate it.

It is _very_ obvious. 2/3 shots hit the side of the car and the front wheel _never_ pointed at the PO.

bananabiscuit19• 6 months ago

the front wheel never pointed at the PO.

My whole point is that this isn’t true. Look at the first video I linked, in the first couple of seconds, the cop is in front of the bumper, the cars wheels are still pointing slightly to the left, on their way to center, as she guns the engine. The loss of traction on the icy road is the only reason the PO had a chance to jump out of the way (but apparently by the NYT analysis, he might have been still hit). And at this point he is correct to think the driver is dangerous and might harm somebody.

mindslight11• 6 months ago

Focusing on the minutiae of how the victim reacted when she was already well into fight-or-flight mode is a red herring.

Real police officers [0] are trained to deescalate situations. Because needlessly turning up the heat results in very bad outcomes for everyone involved.

Meanwhile, these ICE "officers" aggressively created and violently escalated a situation arising from a traffic infraction at best [1]. They didn't even follow their own procedures, crafted not out of any type of restraint with concern for the public, but merely pragmatism whereby shooting someone does not stop a moving vehicle.

Thus, responsibility for how the victim reacted in her moments of panicked terror rests completely on them - and it's perfectly understandable that when a bunch of masked armed thugs are trying to carjack you, the natural response is trying to get out of there as quick as possible regardless of if that means hitting any of the attackers.

[0] as much as they themselves are statistically quite trigger-happy and are often criticized by actual soldiers who are used to stricter rules of engagement,

[1] ignoring the equity of a citizen exercising her natural right to observe and document the activities of her government, and the fact that ICE has no mandate to police traffic infractions

zahlman15• 6 months ago

Use of force was totally unjustified, esp. when you combine it with: Change the intetion of the driver to really want to harm the person ~2m in front of the car.

Such intent is not legally relevant and the legal standard for use of force here is simply not what you appear to think it is. Please watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDda-L_ZOE8 .

Cop get trained, that you should not use your gun on close encounters with knives, bc the short distance <5m will give you not enogh time to stop a knive attacker reliably.

No, the point of the training is not "don't use the gun in close quarters".

They are trained to not fuck around, and to shoot while they have the chance at range; and to not approach the person who brandishes a knife.

But "not approaching the person who brandishes an SUV" is unreasonable. By this standard, pedestrian crossings would be impossible. And in fact he was not "standing" in front of the SUV. He was in the process of circling back around it, while reasonably expecting the car to remain put, while regrouping with his allies as they demanded Good exit the vehicle.

It is _very_ obvious. 2/3 shots hit the side of the car

This is also explained by the fact that the car is moving and turning such that the side of the car would face the gun. It does not in any way suggest malicious intent. The timing of the gunshots makes it clear that the officer fired three rounds continuously, most likely on instinct from training for that exact sort of firing pattern. There is enough time for the car to turn slightly (simply from the gun's mechanics), but not enough to allow for any kind of premeditation or even really conscious thought.

the front wheel _never_ pointed at the PO.

I do not understand how it's possible to watch the video and come to this conclusion in good faith.

Of course, this does not mean that the wheel orientation was deliberate. But if the wheel "never pointed" that way and then continued to turn further right, the officer could not plausibly have been struck. Multiple videos make it abundantly clear that he was struck, and required considerable time (I would say more than a full second) to regain his balance.

_DeadFred_3• 6 months ago

ICE has routinely done much worse driving, on video, to/at people protesting them. Are you saying ICE has REPEATEDLY, ON FILM, attempted murder? And that neither their leadership, nor the ICE protestors, cared about these video taped attempted murder attempts?

Are you calling for ICE to be prosecuted for attempted murder for such actions if they are on film? Up until now ICE administrators were just fine with their officers doing equal/worse than what this now dead woman did. Or is it this administration's policy that some animals are more equal than others. Reminder the day before this occurred the officials that called the murdered woman a terrorist said that Jan6 was peaceful.

bananabiscuit19• 6 months ago

Yeah, that would be good. ICE should be prosecuted for all their murder attempts. I just don’t think it’s beyond a doubt that this one in particular was a murder.

UncleMeat2• 6 months ago

Wait. Looking at the officer is a threat now?

bananabiscuit19• 6 months ago

This seems like an intentional misunderstanding to me, but I’ll clarify anyway:

What I said was that she was looking directly at the officer while having her wheels pointed in his direction and accelerating hard (to the point that she lost traction). The looking detail is important because then you can’t claim she didn’t see the officer was in her way because she was still looking back from her reversing maneuver. It makes it more clear that she was intentionally trying to hit the officer with her car.

metaphysicalyes10• 6 months ago

First shot is a red herring. It might be legal in the US to shoot the driver trying to hit you when are already out of the vehicle's way.

The more condemnatory are the 2nd and 3rd shot from the side window. This is pure cruelty and disregard of human life which in a parallel universe could be one of your family member. Anyone justifying this deserves no sympathy from rest of the human populace.

bananabiscuit19• 6 months ago

Once the officer sees that Renee attempted to hit him with her car, he (tragically indeed) has the right to use lethal force. When somebody tries to kill you, I don’t think it’s reasonable to (in that same split second) give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they won’t try to immediately kill you or one of your partners again.

zahlman15• 6 months ago

That is simply not supported by either facts or law. At this speed of firing, the decision must have been made in advance. The second and third shots are not "from" the side window; they hit there as a natural consequence of continuing to fire in a burst. I see nothing to support the claim that the officer was "already out of the vehicle's way" at the time of the first shot. In fact, he was struck by the vehicle; he did not succeed in getting "out of its way" at all.

A trained LEO in a self-defense situation is expected to fire multiple shots. Even civilians learn how this works in sufficiently advanced firearms training. See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozambique_drill . A failure to follow procedure here would be more consistent with "not actually self defense".

luke54415• 6 months ago

I'm getting really depressed here that people watch those videos and actually think this was not murder.

It's like they live in a different reality or something.

zahlman15• 6 months ago

Please explain what you think the word "murder" means, first.

Then please explain your understanding of the law, with regards to the circumstances under which LEO are permitted to use their weapons.

Then please watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDda-L_ZOE8 and cite at least one point of disagreement with the legal argument presented, on any objective grounds (factual or legal).

hairofadog2• 6 months ago

They have released a version of the masked agent's bodycam. Seems to be another Rorschach test: they released it because they think it's exculpatory, but to my eyes it's even worse. He's engaged in a petty argument with the driver, tries to block her car with his body as she drives away, shoots her, then says "fuckin' bitch!" after he's killed her.

https://bsky.app/profile/thetnholler.bsky.social/post/3mbz3v...

empath753• 6 months ago

Her last words to him are "I'm not mad at you"

metaphysicalyes10• 6 months ago

Very convenient because right around the moments of shooting the video goes blank and the viewer can confirm the below preconceived notions:

1. The masked gunman was in grave danger when in fact he had stepped aside.

2. The car accelerated rapidly before the shots instead of after the driver was in immeasurable agony.

3. All three shots by masked gunman were in self defense. Not that the next two shots were in the driver's face from side window while standing well clear of the vehicle.

zahlman15• 6 months ago

All of this happens in a split second. It's simply not possible, in the evidenced time frame, to fire one shot in self defense and then realign and fire two more with murderous intent. It is also not at all plausible that the position of the two individuals could have changed that much in between the shots. It's also very clear in other video that the officer has been struck and his balance severely disturbed; it takes considerable time for him to recover and he has very clearly fired all three shots before he has properly stood up.

In short, other video evidence clearly rules out any possibility that "he had stepped aside". And we can see the relative timing of when the SUV's wheels start to spin, too, even in the video from behind the SUV where Good is obscured from view by the other officer.

tstrimple• 6 months ago

I wish this video would put an end to the claims that she was blocking traffic. This video makes it clear that the very person who shot her was the one who blocked traffic. She was trying to get around that vehicle. Unfortunately I know it won't.

bananabiscuit19• 6 months ago

https://x.com/i/status/2010037103665787019

zahlman15• 6 months ago

The vehicle is perpendicular to the road and has remained in that position for a considerable period of time as Good circles around and then the other officer approaches the driver's side window. There is no "that vehicle" that she could plausibly have been "trying to get around". Every video makes this clear, including the officer's.

zahlman15• 6 months ago

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ice-agent-shooting-video-minne...

He's engaged in a petty argument with the driver

No; the argument occurs outside the vehicle, and is with the driver's partner. And it is not so much of an "argument" as him being repeatedly provoked with statements such as "You want to come at us? I say go get yourself some lunch, big boy. Go ahead."

tries to block her car with his body

No, he does not. He happened to move around the front of the car, which is consistent with circling the car to get video footage of it from all angles which would be part of expected evidence-gathering protocol. The car can be seen (including in other video) to move back and realign as he is walking in front.

then says "fuckin' bitch!" after he's killed her.

Even left-wing sources like the CBC concede that "It is unclear who said those words."

aussieguy1234• 6 months ago

ICE are the modern day equivalent of Nazi Brownshirts/storm troopers, who went around rounding up and harassing minorities in the early days of Nazi Germany.

They're now able to kill at will and call it "self defence".

tda• 6 months ago

The sharpest (and scariest) analysis I've encountered is this: the administration governs as though no government will ever follow. The blanket pardons for January 6th insurrectionists, the revocation of Secret Service protection for political enemies—these are not the actions of someone who expects to face accountability from a future administration. And that's precisely the point. Trump is not governing recklessly; he is governing with a specific end in mind: to be president for the rest of his life. That project requires dismantling the judiciary, hollowing out independent institutions, muzzling the press, and having his own goon squad. By all appearances, he is on schedule.

luke54415• 6 months ago

My baseline (as an outside observer) is still that they are too stupid and uncoordinated to do a facist take-over. But that a significant possibility even exists that there will be a facist take-over is awful.

(The main ingredient for a facist take-over is control over the military and media and he is not creating many loyalists in either)

rozap3• 6 months ago

Mussolini was not the brightest bulb in the tanning bed, but it worked for him.

defrost• 6 months ago

If you're a fan of sharp scary analysis, try

Maduro in Minneapolis (Murderous Lies) by Timothy Snyder - https://snyder.substack.com/p/maduro-in-minneapolis

  The abduction of Maduro was not about naming his crimes, but about ignoring them. The worst thing that Maduro did is just what Trump is beginning to do: killing civilians and blaming them for their own deaths. After Minneapolis, Maduro’s lies are being repeated: in American English, by American authorities.

  The thousands of extrajudicial killings in Maduro’s Venezuela were carried out by organized death squads. These actions were described as defensive. The Maduro regime claimed that the people they murdered were resisting government authority, and that the men who pulled the trigger had been provoked by those whom they murdered.

  Minneapolis has just witnessed an extrajudicial killing, at the hands of ICE, which looks more and more like a presidential paramilitary organization.

  The action was, horribly, excused by the president, the vice-president, and the director of homeland security, using the same lies as those told by Maduro’s Venezuelan regime.

  The victim was resisting government authority, they said.

  The man who pulled the trigger had been provoked, they said.

  It was not the killer who was a terrorist. It was the mom who had just dropped off one of her six-year-old at school.

ndsipa_pomu4• 6 months ago

Also, the proposed expansion of the White House doesn't align with the interests of Trump leaving at the end of his second term as it would have barely been finished by then. He does not seem like the type of person who would do something that only benefits someone else.

(My conspiracy-inspired theory is that they are working on the underground bunker there with the understanding that it may soon be in use when war breaks out)

spencerflem• 6 months ago

Even if the democrats win, they will face no consequences.

Chuck Schumer can’t even say ICE funding should go down

fzeroracer4• 6 months ago

I feel like posting this up top for context [1]. This is an example of someone actually getting hit by a car, from an ICE agent driving with clear intent to harm someone while laughing about it. I would assume that everyone who believes Renee was committing vehicular assault would agree that this is also a case of vehicular assault, and the agent in question should be charged with attempted murder.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/ICE_Watch/comments/1pjye82/ice_agen...

iugtmkbdfil8344• 6 months ago

The more I see of those videos, the more I am starting to understand previous generations' contempt for hippies. The difference is hippies actually believed in something.

fzeroracer4• 6 months ago

If you see these kind of things and immediately jump to a conclusion like this then I'm going to have to agree with SpicyLemonZest in their earlier discussions with you. I hope you stay as the 'right citizen' per your own argument lest the boot comes for you too.

ndsipa_pomu4• 6 months ago

Does the administration's interpretation of this incident (i.e. self-defense) mean that it is now okay to fire at drivers that may (or may not) be about to drive too close to you?

hairofadog2• 6 months ago

As you migth expect, their position is contradictory, working in their favor either way. They have passed bills making it legal to run over people as long as those people aren't members of the tribe:

G.O.P. Bills Target Protesters (and Absolve Motorists Who Hit Them) https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/us/politics/republican-an...

"Stand your ground" laws often work the same way: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/is-there-racial-b...

ndsipa_pomu4• 6 months ago

Something that isn't being addressed is why/how the ICE agents prevented medical treatment for the victim which may or may not have been life-saving. That seems like a level beyond war-crimes (e.g. sides usually agree to allow medical personnel access to wounded soldiers).

Let's call a murder a murder

Related Stories