Leaderboard

Mostly this activist action against ICE is to distract the conversation from the electoral kryptonite of the MN welfare fraud scandal (and other states) They know the attention span of the public is short and they need a narrative they can spin against the Republicans in the mid terms This is a calculated planned funded political operation, a theater level action.

ICE has a legitimate function. They are not operating like this in red states because red states cooperate with the feds. If MN went back to cooperating, this type of activity wouldn't be necessary. Just because some radical Soros funded organizations are purposefully causing riots (or insurrections?) that are getting people killed, that doesn't mean law enforcement should cease. My kids throw temper tantrums occasionally. If my kids organize and throw a temper tantrum together, that doesn't mean I'm going to suddenly stop enforcing the rules as a parent. Give into that behavior as a parent or as a country and the only thing you can expect is that same tactic anytime they want something.

The left has been against deporting illegal aliens for some time now. Using the media, “protests”, and one off tragic events to try to turn the public to their side is just the standard left trying to gain political points. You can be against LEO being too aggressive (and definitely be against them harming the innocent), be pro-2A, and also be for deporting illegal aliens…but let’s not pretend this is what the left is doing.

Aggressive ICE ops wouldn't be necessary if the Republicans in Congress would get off their asses and pass some laws that a) dramatically increased the penalties for employing illegals (i.e. seizure of business, heavy jail time, etc.), b) 50% tax on remittances, ban on illegals receiving any taxpayer funded assistance, c) bill their home countries for their education and medical care costs incurred in the US (and trade embargoes on those who don't pay up), and d) remove counting illegals in the Census for Congressional apportionment (which is why the Dems are fighting so hard to keep them here, plus the kickbacks and grift). Most would self-deport were these policies enacted and aggressive ICE ops wouldn't be necessary. But the Republicans in Congress are only pretending to oppose the Dems.

TL/DR: It depends entirely on the situation, but regardless I'm ready to be disarmed by a LEO. I'll fight it in court, not in the moment. It's about managing my own expectations and it all boils down to the officer and his/her assessment of the situation. If I talk to the sheriff in church as I walk by, I'm fine. She knows I'm armed. If I am the first responder who engages an active shooter in that same church, I fully expect that same sheriff to disarm me afterwards. A: the situation is over and shootings result in frayed nerves and shaking hands. B: evidence. The reason doesn't matter, I've decided before it all happens that I'm submitting to the proper authority. If the officer deems according policy/judgment that disarming me is advisable, I'm not resisting in the slightest. It might be a complete BS reason. There also might be a factor I don't know about. If I feel like my rights are getting trampled, that specific moment is NOT the time to take a stand. I must give the officer the benefit of the doubt. The officer is not required to reciprocate. In fact, the officer literally stays alive by NOT automatically giving people the benefit of the doubt. If it was wrong and/or illegal, we can figure that out in court...later...when loaded weapons aren't in play. I'm also of the opinion and experience that simply acting as described above will relieve any tension and most likely the officer will not escalate to disarming me. It's about expectations. If I act like I am superior with better legal knowledge than this officer, they can smell it, it's a red flag for them, and it does nothing to help the situation, regardless of how right I am. To use an analogy: I treat every police officer the same way I treat the range safety officer I've never met: With absolute deference to the authority they hold in that moment. Yes, some that suck. Most don't. But every single one should be treated with respect. If they prove undeserving, I bring it up with management later, not on the range.

@Lord Ratner and @brabus already nailed it earlier. What we are seeing is useful idiots being useful. Yes, people have a right to protest and to have their voices heard, but in active law enforcement operations, law enforcement has the authority - which is something that people on the left just do not accept or comprehend. I'm not sure which. People have chat-grouped, reddited, or otherwise brained themselves into thinking that they can do whatever the hell they want and label it protesting and hence somehow legally insert themselves into some sort of "referee?" position that gets to be there calling balls and strikes, but then who also get to lightly skirmish at will when the play isn't going according to their own rule set? People have mistaken rights with license, which is a distinction that you're supposed to learn while writing civics essays in junior high school. Both Renee Good and Pretti appear to be people who never matured past their teenage rebellion years. Should either be dead? No. Do they deserve to have been killed? No. Did they engage in actions that led directly to their tragic, but justified deaths? Unfortunately, yes. I understand and accept that law enforcement is made up of people. People are imperfect. I see frat all the time in the sim. Thus, if I were to engage in such a protest, if things started to go sideways, I would immediately be completely compliant and non-threatening. You wouldn't see me struggling on the ground with 4 other officers while I was armed with a handgun. But this is also instructive as to the actual tactic and strategy being employed by the Left. Push things just far enough into the grey zone, that you provoke a violent or emotional response. Thus, Good and Pretti have done well, and served their purpose for the Left. Unfortunately, just like in 2020, this is part of a larger, coordinated operation meant to destabilize and delegitimize the government. The Federal government is helping somewhat, but then again, so is the Minnesota government. @Negat0ry is not worth responding to directly. The false equivalence between what Kyle Rittenhouse did along with whatever happened in Charlottesville is null and void right out the gate. No such struggles with law-enforcement took place. Even the terrorist MFer who ran over people at that protest in VA (useful idiot) surrendered peacefully. The difference is stark and could not be more clear. On the right, you have a true, grassroots, non-violent, response to the state abdicating its law-enforcement responsibility; the other is communist agitation which is apparently being sanctioned and coordinated by members within our government.