[billy99k]

"But after an ICE agent shot and killed an unarmed US citizen, Renee Nicole Good"

She was antagonizing the agents all day and almost ran one over. The picture this is trying to paint is that she was completely innocent and was shot for no reason.

The only reason ICE had to get this involved in the first place is because cities decided to stop cooperating with them and allowing illegal immigrants to stay.

[JohnFen]

> The picture this is trying to paint is that she was completely innocent and was shot for no reason.

No, the picture is that the shooting was unjustified, not that she was some uninvolved bystander.

> The only reason ICE had to get this involved in the first place is because cities decided to stop cooperating with them

This reverses the truth. Cities decided to stop doing more than is legally required to assist ICE because they became too heavy-handed.

The feds have certainly become even more egregious in order to punish those cities, but that just underscores the point. The violence being used against cities who, remember, are acting within the bounds of the law, shows the truth of how dangerous these agencies have become.

[akagusu]

> The picture this is trying to paint is that she was completely innocent and was shot for no reason.

She was completely innocent because everyone is innocent until proven guilt in the court.

[SilverElfin]

ICE still has to follow laws. This ICE agent didn’t even follow his own agency’s guidance to not stand in front of cars.

Here is an annotated analysis of each significant frame of the video, showing Jonathan Ross was standing to the SIDE of the car when he fired the first shot, and that the car was steering away from him:

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-TRUMP/MINNESOTA-RECONST...

Murder is murder, and Ross murdered Renee Good. And let’s not forget, ICE is detaining citizens daily, kidnapping children off the streets, and unconstitutionally entering homes without warrants. It’s a Gestapo army, no different from what we saw in Nazi Germany. If you think that’s an exaggeration, read this:

“Terrible things are happening outside ... poor helpless people are being dragged out of their homes. Families are torn apart, men, women and children are separated. Children come home from school to find that their parents have disappeared." - Anne Frank

[mothballed]

Police are allowed to summarily execute fleeing violent felons. It does look like she barely nicked him with the car, which technically is felony battery on a a police officer. I will say I don't have all the facts, nor do I agree with the morality of the shooting, just to note the police are allowed to execute people even not in self defense.

If we judge him by, say, civilian standards in Minnesota though there was no excuse as it is a "duty to retreat" state and he had a clear path of retreat.

[JohnFen]

> just to note the police are allowed to execute people even not in self defense.

Only if they reasonably believe that the suspect represents an immediate danger to the public. And even then, they're expected to use the minimum amount of force necessary to defuse that danger.

[mothballed]

I honestly have no idea how that officer could have stopped a car that was just used in his own eyes as a deadly weapon, other than shooting the driver, which enabled him to crash her car immediately into another car rather than let it get away. Shooting the tires or something is the closest second readily available but you can drive a long time with a blown out tire.

I am certainly not defending what he did. I find his actions unreasonable. However I do think they were legitimately seen reasonable through the eyes of someone with PTSD from being dragged 7 months before and who never should have been put back in the field because he was now mentally unfit from said PTSD of his last idiotic episode of man v car. Which is something he seems to constantly find himself in despite most officers never having that happen in their life.