Not sure why the Minnesota Ice and Run thread got locked by the originator but.....

El_Rayo
Posts
428
Joined
6/21/2025
Location
Valparaiso , IN US
Fantasy
1/27/2026 9:22am
OldTech wrote:
Kenneth Moreno Guzman was just arrested for breaking into a house in Georgia in the middle of the night. He raped an 11 year old girl...

Kenneth Moreno Guzman was just arrested for breaking into a house in Georgia in the middle of the night. He raped an 11 year old girl at knifepoint and made her little sister watch. This is who YOU are protecting.

T-MAC wrote:
This is a subhuman POS that deserves to be removed from society. It looks like Guzman was taken in by local LEO's, not ICE though.No one...

This is a subhuman POS that deserves to be removed from society. It looks like Guzman was taken in by local LEO's, not ICE though.

No one wants to protect these types of people, not sure why you think folks are protecting these people by protesting how ICE is currently operating.

If you voted for Trump, you also voted for a rapist (in the generally accepted meaning of the word). Several articles out now regarding ICE agents caught raping people in custody as well. Why do you think he's so hellbent on not releasing the unredacted files?

Is this what you voted for? Or who/what you want to protect?

OldTech wrote:

It was a child rapist that Pretty sacrificed himself to let get away. 

?? It was a woman protestor. What are you talking about. 

5
2
Timo
Posts
1404
Joined
1/9/2021
Location
Wichita, KS US
1/27/2026 9:47am
Yzf916 wrote:
Step 1. Act right. Step 2. COMPLY. Step 3. COMPLY…..in case you didn’t understand me the first time. When ANY officer tells me to get on...

Step 1. Act right. Step 2. COMPLY. Step 3. COMPLY…..in case you didn’t understand me the first time. When ANY officer tells me to get on the ground with my hands behind my back. I GET ON THE GROUND WITH MY HANDS BEHIND MY BACK. And the crazy part??? I DON’T get shot. YES. it’s THAT simple. 

Timo wrote:

Good to know you'd give up your guns and hop on the train to the special government sleep away camp...

Yzf916 wrote:

Not in the least. But it’s called self preservation or common sence. Comply and there is no issue. 

Get on the train and there won't be an issue...

3
2
1/27/2026 9:51am
T-MAC wrote:
This is a subhuman POS that deserves to be removed from society. It looks like Guzman was taken in by local LEO's, not ICE though.No one...

This is a subhuman POS that deserves to be removed from society. It looks like Guzman was taken in by local LEO's, not ICE though.

No one wants to protect these types of people, not sure why you think folks are protecting these people by protesting how ICE is currently operating.

If you voted for Trump, you also voted for a rapist (in the generally accepted meaning of the word). Several articles out now regarding ICE agents caught raping people in custody as well. Why do you think he's so hellbent on not releasing the unredacted files?

Is this what you voted for? Or who/what you want to protect?

OldTech wrote:

It was a child rapist that Pretty sacrificed himself to let get away. 

El_Rayo wrote:

?? It was a woman protestor. What are you talking about. 

Open your eyes, they were not there for that woman. All the agitators were there to interfere with apprehending a criminal illegal alien. This all plays out so tragic. That guy didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I wish I get killed today. That ICE officer didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I want to kill someone today. This was all a culmination of some very bad events that led up to a very tragic ending. How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering? And how disingenuous it is to use the term "murder". Nobody wanted this. But over half the country voted for removing criminal illegal aliens and a large portion voted for removing illegal aliens. They are doing what the majority of people voted for. And a small segment does not want what the majority voted for, so they try to stop it by using chaos.

And before you go and say they were just protesting which we all know they were not. Hypothetically, if there was a couple down in Alabama (could be any state) and a young black man was on a date with a young white lady. And they were at a restaurant enjoying dinner. This exact same crowd shows up gets in their faces with their whistles, yelling, what nots.. Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date? Or that's just legally protesting something they don't like/agree with?

TM

7
12
truck
Posts
3549
Joined
6/10/2015
Location
Louisville, KY US
Fantasy
1/27/2026 9:57am

Bovino out 

borg wrote:

Noem should be next.  Patel thinks it's it's illegal to carry at a protest. Where do these morons come from?

Lawful carry becomes unlawful carry the second you commit certain crimes or don't follow the rules as outlined by your state for carrying. From what's being reported, sounds like he was likely not carrying lawfully according to the laws of the state which say he must have his permit on him at all times. It would also become unlawful the second you interfere with law enforcement or resist arrest.

Now if you want to talk about loosening up all those rules and just say 2A and forget the rest I'll happily listen, but I don't think liberals are going to be very happy about that. 

Went down rabbit hole listening to a few self defense and use of force experts go through this case and am starting to think that there's very little chance it ends up resulting in a conviction. 

Horrific, tragic, avoidable, stupid..... it's all of those things and more, but likely not criminal based on the standards that get applied in these situations. No doubt he'll be charged, but I doubt he'll get convicted. The second a democrat is back in the white house they'll charge him with federal civil rights violations. I've seen this movie before. No winners. Only losers. 

4
11

The Shop

truck
Posts
3549
Joined
6/10/2015
Location
Louisville, KY US
Fantasy
1/27/2026 10:06am

I think most will find this infuriating and certainly others will disagree with his interpretation of everything, but not sure he's wrong about the standards that get applied and suspect these arguments will at least be enough to hang a jury. 

 

1
8
Freddy99
Posts
334
Joined
1/31/2014
Location
Wilder, KY US
1/27/2026 10:07am
Freddy99 wrote:
i wonder why they are targeting what they are targeting

i wonder why they are targeting what they are targeting

image 2531
R66 wrote:

Because there is suspected voter fraud in MN. 

and to maga the proper response to trump continuing his big lie of unsubstantiated voter fraud in states he doesn't like is to send in DHS to murder citizens? 

1
7
El_Rayo
Posts
428
Joined
6/21/2025
Location
Valparaiso , IN US
Fantasy
1/27/2026 10:10am Edited Date/Time 1/27/2026 10:11am
OldTech wrote:

It was a child rapist that Pretty sacrificed himself to let get away. 

El_Rayo wrote:

?? It was a woman protestor. What are you talking about. 

ToolMaker wrote:
Open your eyes, they were not there for that woman. All the agitators were there to interfere with apprehending a criminal illegal alien. This all plays...

Open your eyes, they were not there for that woman. All the agitators were there to interfere with apprehending a criminal illegal alien. This all plays out so tragic. That guy didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I wish I get killed today. That ICE officer didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I want to kill someone today. This was all a culmination of some very bad events that led up to a very tragic ending. How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering? And how disingenuous it is to use the term "murder". Nobody wanted this. But over half the country voted for removing criminal illegal aliens and a large portion voted for removing illegal aliens. They are doing what the majority of people voted for. And a small segment does not want what the majority voted for, so they try to stop it by using chaos.

And before you go and say they were just protesting which we all know they were not. Hypothetically, if there was a couple down in Alabama (could be any state) and a young black man was on a date with a young white lady. And they were at a restaurant enjoying dinner. This exact same crowd shows up gets in their faces with their whistles, yelling, what nots.. Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date? Or that's just legally protesting something they don't like/agree with?

TM

You asked me, “How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering?” - I never argued that he was not interfering

you asked me about your hypothetical situation “Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date?” - my answer would be yes.

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back….

Would you consider that murder? Do you think the youn man on the date should be charged? Would you question the ma on the date? 

Also keep in mind the difference is the man in your hypothetical date, never signed up to represent a government organization, swearing an oath to protect the people. He’s just a guy on a date. The real life example we have is someone who is expected to uphold and enforce the law, higher than any other US citizen, he should be held to a much higher standard. After all, he signed up for it.
 

 

1
5
R66
Posts
1227
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
1/27/2026 10:30am
Freddy99 wrote:
i wonder why they are targeting what they are targeting

i wonder why they are targeting what they are targeting

image 2531
R66 wrote:

Because there is suspected voter fraud in MN. 

Freddy99 wrote:
and to maga the proper response to trump continuing his big lie of unsubstantiated voter fraud in states he doesn't like is to send in DHS...

and to maga the proper response to trump continuing his big lie of unsubstantiated voter fraud in states he doesn't like is to send in DHS to murder citizens? 

You asked and I answered. If there is no voter fraud, there is nothing to worry about. If there is voter fraud, you can deny it, change the subject, call me a nazi, and a white supremest for supporting President Trump. Have a great day 

9
R66
Posts
1227
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
1/27/2026 10:36am

You can also burn your city to the ground, throw rocks, shoot fireworks at people, scream like a bitch at anyone who will listen and say you are peacefully protesting

10
OldTech
Posts
1220
Joined
1/13/2024
Location
Decatur , AL US
1/27/2026 10:40am
El_Rayo wrote:

?? It was a woman protestor. What are you talking about. 

The guy The whole operation was after was Jose Huerta Chuma, A domestic abuser and violent assault alien. The guy with the gun and the woman in the pink coat tipped him off and interfered to let him escape. They are part of the ICE watch organization who are communicating through the signal encrypted apps with advanced information on who the agents are looking for. 

2
10
1/27/2026 10:46am
El_Rayo wrote:

?? It was a woman protestor. What are you talking about. 

ToolMaker wrote:
Open your eyes, they were not there for that woman. All the agitators were there to interfere with apprehending a criminal illegal alien. This all plays...

Open your eyes, they were not there for that woman. All the agitators were there to interfere with apprehending a criminal illegal alien. This all plays out so tragic. That guy didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I wish I get killed today. That ICE officer didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I want to kill someone today. This was all a culmination of some very bad events that led up to a very tragic ending. How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering? And how disingenuous it is to use the term "murder". Nobody wanted this. But over half the country voted for removing criminal illegal aliens and a large portion voted for removing illegal aliens. They are doing what the majority of people voted for. And a small segment does not want what the majority voted for, so they try to stop it by using chaos.

And before you go and say they were just protesting which we all know they were not. Hypothetically, if there was a couple down in Alabama (could be any state) and a young black man was on a date with a young white lady. And they were at a restaurant enjoying dinner. This exact same crowd shows up gets in their faces with their whistles, yelling, what nots.. Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date? Or that's just legally protesting something they don't like/agree with?

TM

El_Rayo wrote:
You asked me, “How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering?” - I never argued that...

You asked me, “How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering?” - I never argued that he was not interfering

you asked me about your hypothetical situation “Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date?” - my answer would be yes.

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back….

Would you consider that murder? Do you think the youn man on the date should be charged? Would you question the ma on the date? 

Also keep in mind the difference is the man in your hypothetical date, never signed up to represent a government organization, swearing an oath to protect the people. He’s just a guy on a date. The real life example we have is someone who is expected to uphold and enforce the law, higher than any other US citizen, he should be held to a much higher standard. After all, he signed up for it.
 

 

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back.

The problem you have to overcome is that they are there to disrupt and interfere with a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) trying to do the job they are hired to do. Which is apprehend criminal illegal aliens. These people are breaking the law, and every time they don't have consequences, they get bolder. To the point where someone got/gets killed. Not because someone wanted to kill them, but because the events lead up to tragedy. Remember when the guy got off for throwing a sandwich at the officer? So that emboldens them to throw water bottles, but then you have people freezing water bottles. You have liberal activist judges that will not set a line which makes for more people testing "the line". So, while these activist judges like to rule "free speech and right to protest" they perpetuate the problem that anyone with common sense sees.

TM

7
8
Spurdo
Posts
401
Joined
12/26/2016
Location
FI
1/27/2026 10:57am
R66 wrote:
You asked and I answered. If there is no voter fraud, there is nothing to worry about. If there is voter fraud, you can deny it...

You asked and I answered. If there is no voter fraud, there is nothing to worry about. If there is voter fraud, you can deny it, change the subject, call me a nazi, and a white supremest for supporting President Trump. Have a great day 

Your dealing with an individual so spineless that they couldnt spell out "Nazi" a few pages back. And as a whole, the very same groups that wanted personal freedoms (gun control) suppressed in the past, are now crying about "muh Constitution". 

3
11
Peddy
Posts
136
Joined
9/27/2016
Location
Upland, CA US
1/27/2026 11:02am
El_Rayo wrote:

?? It was a woman protestor. What are you talking about. 

OldTech wrote:
The guy The whole operation was after was Jose Huerta Chuma, A domestic abuser and violent assault alien. The guy with the gun and the woman...

The guy The whole operation was after was Jose Huerta Chuma, A domestic abuser and violent assault alien. The guy with the gun and the woman in the pink coat tipped him off and interfered to let him escape. They are part of the ICE watch organization who are communicating through the signal encrypted apps with advanced information on who the agents are looking for. 

5
1
El_Rayo
Posts
428
Joined
6/21/2025
Location
Valparaiso , IN US
Fantasy
1/27/2026 11:27am Edited Date/Time 1/27/2026 11:27am
ToolMaker wrote:
Open your eyes, they were not there for that woman. All the agitators were there to interfere with apprehending a criminal illegal alien. This all plays...

Open your eyes, they were not there for that woman. All the agitators were there to interfere with apprehending a criminal illegal alien. This all plays out so tragic. That guy didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I wish I get killed today. That ICE officer didn't wake up that morning and say, you know what, I want to kill someone today. This was all a culmination of some very bad events that led up to a very tragic ending. How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering? And how disingenuous it is to use the term "murder". Nobody wanted this. But over half the country voted for removing criminal illegal aliens and a large portion voted for removing illegal aliens. They are doing what the majority of people voted for. And a small segment does not want what the majority voted for, so they try to stop it by using chaos.

And before you go and say they were just protesting which we all know they were not. Hypothetically, if there was a couple down in Alabama (could be any state) and a young black man was on a date with a young white lady. And they were at a restaurant enjoying dinner. This exact same crowd shows up gets in their faces with their whistles, yelling, what nots.. Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date? Or that's just legally protesting something they don't like/agree with?

TM

El_Rayo wrote:
You asked me, “How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering?” - I never argued that...

You asked me, “How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering?” - I never argued that he was not interfering

you asked me about your hypothetical situation “Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date?” - my answer would be yes.

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back….

Would you consider that murder? Do you think the youn man on the date should be charged? Would you question the ma on the date? 

Also keep in mind the difference is the man in your hypothetical date, never signed up to represent a government organization, swearing an oath to protect the people. He’s just a guy on a date. The real life example we have is someone who is expected to uphold and enforce the law, higher than any other US citizen, he should be held to a much higher standard. After all, he signed up for it.
 

 

ToolMaker wrote:
But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or...

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back.

The problem you have to overcome is that they are there to disrupt and interfere with a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) trying to do the job they are hired to do. Which is apprehend criminal illegal aliens. These people are breaking the law, and every time they don't have consequences, they get bolder. To the point where someone got/gets killed. Not because someone wanted to kill them, but because the events lead up to tragedy. Remember when the guy got off for throwing a sandwich at the officer? So that emboldens them to throw water bottles, but then you have people freezing water bottles. You have liberal activist judges that will not set a line which makes for more people testing "the line". So, while these activist judges like to rule "free speech and right to protest" they perpetuate the problem that anyone with common sense sees.

TM

idk, you guys just got fact checked there pretty quick…

( see @Peddy comment)


Anyways, I answered the 2 questions you asked me, could you do me a favor and answer the questions I asked you? 

For the scenario you and I referenced:

 “Would you consider that murder? Do you think the young man on the date should be charged?”

You keep going back to the point of Pretti interfering with a  LEO. To which I agreed, on multiple instances. You never mention the LEO himself or what he is at fault for? Why is that? Why can’t you say “the ice agent should not have shot him 9 times?” I feel as if this is not a very hard concept to grasp. 

If you and others cannot admit that. It would be a logical conclusion to draw, that you DO believe the Ice agent acted correctly in shooting the man. Which now means any time a citizen is interfering with a LEO, you believe they should be executed. Which based on who you talk to, could vary on definition with the term “interfering”. 

6
1
Freddy99
Posts
334
Joined
1/31/2014
Location
Wilder, KY US
1/27/2026 11:28am

Bovino out 

borg wrote:

Noem should be next.  Patel thinks it's it's illegal to carry at a protest. Where do these morons come from?

truck wrote:
Lawful carry becomes unlawful carry the second you commit certain crimes or don't follow the rules as outlined by your state for carrying. From what's being...

Lawful carry becomes unlawful carry the second you commit certain crimes or don't follow the rules as outlined by your state for carrying. From what's being reported, sounds like he was likely not carrying lawfully according to the laws of the state which say he must have his permit on him at all times. It would also become unlawful the second you interfere with law enforcement or resist arrest.

Now if you want to talk about loosening up all those rules and just say 2A and forget the rest I'll happily listen, but I don't think liberals are going to be very happy about that. 

Went down rabbit hole listening to a few self defense and use of force experts go through this case and am starting to think that there's very little chance it ends up resulting in a conviction. 

Horrific, tragic, avoidable, stupid..... it's all of those things and more, but likely not criminal based on the standards that get applied in these situations. No doubt he'll be charged, but I doubt he'll get convicted. The second a democrat is back in the white house they'll charge him with federal civil rights violations. I've seen this movie before. No winners. Only losers. 

ah right

image 2541
8
7
Freddy99
Posts
334
Joined
1/31/2014
Location
Wilder, KY US
1/27/2026 11:31am
R66 wrote:
You asked and I answered. If there is no voter fraud, there is nothing to worry about. If there is voter fraud, you can deny it...

You asked and I answered. If there is no voter fraud, there is nothing to worry about. If there is voter fraud, you can deny it, change the subject, call me a nazi, and a white supremest for supporting President Trump. Have a great day 

Spurdo wrote:
Your dealing with an individual so spineless that they couldnt spell out "Nazi" a few pages back. And as a whole, the very same groups that...

Your dealing with an individual so spineless that they couldnt spell out "Nazi" a few pages back. And as a whole, the very same groups that wanted personal freedoms (gun control) suppressed in the past, are now crying about "muh Constitution". 

the fact that offends you is very telling 

6
2
Freddy99
Posts
334
Joined
1/31/2014
Location
Wilder, KY US
1/27/2026 11:40am
R66 wrote:
You can also burn your city to the ground, throw rocks, shoot fireworks at people, scream like a bitch at anyone who will listen and say...

You can also burn your city to the ground, throw rocks, shoot fireworks at people, scream like a bitch at anyone who will listen and say you are peacefully protesting

nice of you to bring up j6 again.  

4
3
1/27/2026 11:54am
El_Rayo wrote:
You asked me, “How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering?” - I never argued that...

You asked me, “How in the world can you argue that preventing them from efficiently doing their job was not interfering?” - I never argued that he was not interfering

you asked me about your hypothetical situation “Would you agree that they were agitating/interfering with that date?” - my answer would be yes.

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back….

Would you consider that murder? Do you think the youn man on the date should be charged? Would you question the ma on the date? 

Also keep in mind the difference is the man in your hypothetical date, never signed up to represent a government organization, swearing an oath to protect the people. He’s just a guy on a date. The real life example we have is someone who is expected to uphold and enforce the law, higher than any other US citizen, he should be held to a much higher standard. After all, he signed up for it.
 

 

ToolMaker wrote:
But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or...

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back.

The problem you have to overcome is that they are there to disrupt and interfere with a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) trying to do the job they are hired to do. Which is apprehend criminal illegal aliens. These people are breaking the law, and every time they don't have consequences, they get bolder. To the point where someone got/gets killed. Not because someone wanted to kill them, but because the events lead up to tragedy. Remember when the guy got off for throwing a sandwich at the officer? So that emboldens them to throw water bottles, but then you have people freezing water bottles. You have liberal activist judges that will not set a line which makes for more people testing "the line". So, while these activist judges like to rule "free speech and right to protest" they perpetuate the problem that anyone with common sense sees.

TM

El_Rayo wrote:
idk, you guys just got fact checked there pretty quick…( see @Peddy comment)Anyways, I answered the 2 questions you asked me, could you do me a...

idk, you guys just got fact checked there pretty quick…

( see @Peddy comment)


Anyways, I answered the 2 questions you asked me, could you do me a favor and answer the questions I asked you? 

For the scenario you and I referenced:

 “Would you consider that murder? Do you think the young man on the date should be charged?”

You keep going back to the point of Pretti interfering with a  LEO. To which I agreed, on multiple instances. You never mention the LEO himself or what he is at fault for? Why is that? Why can’t you say “the ice agent should not have shot him 9 times?” I feel as if this is not a very hard concept to grasp. 

If you and others cannot admit that. It would be a logical conclusion to draw, that you DO believe the Ice agent acted correctly in shooting the man. Which now means any time a citizen is interfering with a LEO, you believe they should be executed. Which based on who you talk to, could vary on definition with the term “interfering”. 

"Why can’t you say “the ice agent should not have shot him 9 times?” I feel as if this is not a very hard concept to grasp. "

No, he should not have been shot 9 times. If you believe your life is in danger, your brain reacts differently. So do you know what was going on in his head? Maybe if he had 15 rounds, he'd have shot 15 times, I don't know, you don't know. In an ideal situation he should not have, would not have, been shot at all. However, this was not an ideal situation, and the circumstances created an environment that he did get shot 9 times. Can you not see that events led up this that were created by agitators? But at the end of the day, I'd like to see nobody shot. Is it not common sense that if you put yourself in harm's way, harm might happen? It's pretty fucking easy to Monday Quarterback.

TM

 

2
9
1/27/2026 12:01pm

The amount of you in here not on ICE's side after all the facts, is sad.

1
16
truck
Posts
3549
Joined
6/10/2015
Location
Louisville, KY US
Fantasy
1/27/2026 12:26pm

The number of shots isn't a great way to quantify the shooting. It gets headlines but it's mostly irrelevant and won't come up in trial other than in emotional appeals. How much time elapsed from the moment of identifying threat until the last shot? That gives a much better representation of whether or not the shooting was excessive. 15 rounds in 2 seconds after identifying a threat is showing more restraint than 2 rounds in 15 seconds when the threat was stopped after the first one. In this case if the first shot was accidental discharge that prompted the agents to shoot then the remaining shots all take place in about 3 seconds. Very reasonable amount of time to engage a threat before stopping to reassess. 

1
3
R66
Posts
1227
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
1/27/2026 12:29pm
R66 wrote:
You can also burn your city to the ground, throw rocks, shoot fireworks at people, scream like a bitch at anyone who will listen and say...

You can also burn your city to the ground, throw rocks, shoot fireworks at people, scream like a bitch at anyone who will listen and say you are peacefully protesting

Freddy99 wrote:

nice of you to bring up j6 again.  

Thanks for perfectly making my point. Good job! Have a great day!

1
5
R66
Posts
1227
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
1/27/2026 12:34pm

He’s not resigning.

2
4
Peddy
Posts
136
Joined
9/27/2016
Location
Upland, CA US
1/27/2026 12:39pm
Peddy wrote:
OldTech wrote:

I got the name from the spiffy dresser Bovino at the press conference 

Ya, that's because all Bovino and Noem have done is lie about the circumstances of the past two deaths connected to ICE. We can see the footage from both of these and yet they come out and say easily false stuff.

5
4
R66
Posts
1227
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
1/27/2026 12:50pm

I just heard that on the intercepted Signal chat the resistance organizers are using they stated that deaths are ok. When will the resistance realize they are pawns in this whole mess?

5
12
1/27/2026 1:00pm
truck wrote:
The number of shots isn't a great way to quantify the shooting. It gets headlines but it's mostly irrelevant and won't come up in trial other...

The number of shots isn't a great way to quantify the shooting. It gets headlines but it's mostly irrelevant and won't come up in trial other than in emotional appeals. How much time elapsed from the moment of identifying threat until the last shot? That gives a much better representation of whether or not the shooting was excessive. 15 rounds in 2 seconds after identifying a threat is showing more restraint than 2 rounds in 15 seconds when the threat was stopped after the first one. In this case if the first shot was accidental discharge that prompted the agents to shoot then the remaining shots all take place in about 3 seconds. Very reasonable amount of time to engage a threat before stopping to reassess. 

Has it been reported yet if all the shots came from one gun or several?

1
R66
Posts
1227
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
1/27/2026 1:02pm
R66 wrote:
You asked and I answered. If there is no voter fraud, there is nothing to worry about. If there is voter fraud, you can deny it...

You asked and I answered. If there is no voter fraud, there is nothing to worry about. If there is voter fraud, you can deny it, change the subject, call me a nazi, and a white supremest for supporting President Trump. Have a great day 

Spurdo wrote:
Your dealing with an individual so spineless that they couldnt spell out "Nazi" a few pages back. And as a whole, the very same groups that...

Your dealing with an individual so spineless that they couldnt spell out "Nazi" a few pages back. And as a whole, the very same groups that wanted personal freedoms (gun control) suppressed in the past, are now crying about "muh Constitution". 

Freddy99 wrote:

the fact that offends you is very telling 

I don’t think anyone was offended but maybe you for sounding like a hypocrite.  Have a nice day!

1
4
T-MAC
Posts
640
Joined
8/15/2011
Location
Trabuco Canyon, CA US
1/27/2026 1:13pm
Peddy wrote:
OldTech wrote:

I got the name from the spiffy dresser Bovino at the press conference 

Peddy wrote:
Ya, that's because all Bovino and Noem have done is lie about the circumstances of the past two deaths connected to ICE. We can see the...

Ya, that's because all Bovino and Noem have done is lie about the circumstances of the past two deaths connected to ICE. We can see the footage from both of these and yet they come out and say easily false stuff.

Pulling an R66 here and recycling content but it's relevant.

They are taking a page out of the ol' commander in chiefs book (literally).

“If you say it enough and keep saying it, they’ll start to believe you.”  -DJT

1000005377 2.png?VersionId=hZ51cd47uyQv8TPkR0ERmKsT3Tmmf
5
2
1/27/2026 1:14pm Edited Date/Time 1/27/2026 2:53pm
ToolMaker wrote:
But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or...

But using your same scenario, if this same crowd showed up. One of which has a firearm mounted on him (not pulled out or waving,taunting, or pointing) the young man on the date tackles him, his 9 friends help him beat the guy while he’s on the ground, they pin him down, then take his gun off him, and then shoot him 9 times in the back.

The problem you have to overcome is that they are there to disrupt and interfere with a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) trying to do the job they are hired to do. Which is apprehend criminal illegal aliens. These people are breaking the law, and every time they don't have consequences, they get bolder. To the point where someone got/gets killed. Not because someone wanted to kill them, but because the events lead up to tragedy. Remember when the guy got off for throwing a sandwich at the officer? So that emboldens them to throw water bottles, but then you have people freezing water bottles. You have liberal activist judges that will not set a line which makes for more people testing "the line". So, while these activist judges like to rule "free speech and right to protest" they perpetuate the problem that anyone with common sense sees.

TM

El_Rayo wrote:
idk, you guys just got fact checked there pretty quick…( see @Peddy comment)Anyways, I answered the 2 questions you asked me, could you do me a...

idk, you guys just got fact checked there pretty quick…

( see @Peddy comment)


Anyways, I answered the 2 questions you asked me, could you do me a favor and answer the questions I asked you? 

For the scenario you and I referenced:

 “Would you consider that murder? Do you think the young man on the date should be charged?”

You keep going back to the point of Pretti interfering with a  LEO. To which I agreed, on multiple instances. You never mention the LEO himself or what he is at fault for? Why is that? Why can’t you say “the ice agent should not have shot him 9 times?” I feel as if this is not a very hard concept to grasp. 

If you and others cannot admit that. It would be a logical conclusion to draw, that you DO believe the Ice agent acted correctly in shooting the man. Which now means any time a citizen is interfering with a LEO, you believe they should be executed. Which based on who you talk to, could vary on definition with the term “interfering”. 

ToolMaker wrote:
"Why can’t you say “the ice agent should not have shot him 9 times?” I feel as if this is not a very hard concept to...

"Why can’t you say “the ice agent should not have shot him 9 times?” I feel as if this is not a very hard concept to grasp. "

No, he should not have been shot 9 times. If you believe your life is in danger, your brain reacts differently. So do you know what was going on in his head? Maybe if he had 15 rounds, he'd have shot 15 times, I don't know, you don't know. In an ideal situation he should not have, would not have, been shot at all. However, this was not an ideal situation, and the circumstances created an environment that he did get shot 9 times. Can you not see that events led up this that were created by agitators? But at the end of the day, I'd like to see nobody shot. Is it not common sense that if you put yourself in harm's way, harm might happen? It's pretty fucking easy to Monday Quarterback.

TM

 

 

 You could also argue that if ICE agents had better training they  may not have disarmed him and THEN shot him in a panic. There should be some sort of training given for dealing with protesters.  As it is they are setting ICE up to fail, or setting them up to purposely have these types of things happen. Just think, in just 8 weeks any of US that do not have ANY background in law enforcement and 0 experience with guns could be out there .     

 

The bigger problem I have is how Christy Nome has  described the situation and how so much of what she says can be proven false   by watching the videos.  That makes me not trust ANYTHING she's saying.  If they want any sort of credibility they could at least tell lies that are not so easy to prove false. Its like they either know their supporters will support whatever they say. Or they think they are  not smart enough to see the lies. You might be able to justify the way she described the situation with the women that was shot. 

  With this most recent shooting other than blocking some pepper spray and that being the extent of obstruction. Unless they are talking about him taking video of ICE agents  pushing that women and spraying her with pepper spray as obstruction too.  Up until he stepped In front of the stream of pepper spray, point out the obstruction.  He never had a chance to resist, he was attacked by a group of agents and should have been cuffed when he was on the ground. Unless the resisting was when he was standing up. He "walked towards the agents with his gun" . True in that he walked towards agent while taking video at some point and had a gun.  But the gun might as well have been a wallet or dildo at the time. He never did anything with the gun.  

 Would ICE also be justified for shooting the people who were driving by as the scuffle was taking place, if a driver yelled out " F YOU ICE"   while recording video of them?  After All they too were behind the wheel of a deadly weapon.   

Don't you find  the way she described the shooting concerning?  I have a problem with people trusting that lie ,even seemingly small lies.  So I have a major lack of trusting the word of most politicians regardless of party . 

     

10
1
oldman59
Posts
248
Joined
3/25/2019
Location
Kingwood, TX US
1/27/2026 1:27pm

A lot of the well funded protest groups are socialist, Marxist. They are funded by Neville Singham. Imagine giving up your life for him and illegal rapists, murderers, and sex traffickers that hate you.

 

5
11

Post a reply to: Not sure why the Minnesota Ice and Run thread got locked by the originator but.....

The Latest