ICE Finally Fires Back!

[paxamericana]

17 hours ago, eyeball said:

Before or after she was dead? It sure looks like she was turning into the traffic lane to get the fùck out of there ASAP...on reflex and from a sense of self-preservation.

Car made contact with the police officer before he fired. Gota pay attention to the detail before jumping to conclusions.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/08/us/video/minnesota-mn-ice-shooting-timeline-vrtc-digvid

Edited January 8 by paxamericana

[Hodad]

18 minutes ago, Venandi said:

I don't like second guessing split second decisions (with a beer in hand) and having the benefit of frame by frame still views of FMV to do it. And I especially don't like the way the analysis of this event has broken down along political lines, probably because I didn't expect it.

Otherwise though, I tend to agree with you.

The draw began in the first 20% of forward tire rotation as the front wheel was being turned, note the wheel deflection (to the right) and position of the shooter as the first round is fired through the side window. I don't believe she was trying to hit him.

I didn't look up the video until after I read about the encounter and saw the statement below... based on the description and statement, the video wasn't what I expected to see.

...rioters began blocking ICE officers and one of these violent rioters weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over our law enforcement officers in an attempt to kill them — an act of domestic terrorism,” DHS assistant secretary for public affairs Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.

Agreed... that's how I think it will play out too, and I would agree with the outcome should it come to pass. This was tragic, there are no winners here.

Indeed, no winners. 

I appreciate the fairness you've applied. As you point out, the video of the incident is WILDLY different than the story the government is telling. Anyone who heard that description first and then tried to find the video would have wondered if they are even looking at the right footage. Night and day difference. This is concerning for two reasons. The first is that that, though spin is a part of politics, we should all be alarmed when the government outright lies about events, particularly when they involved the killing of a citizen. The second reason is that it's clear that they have no concern about maintaining credibility. It's a non-issue for them. They know the video is available. They know we can all see what they are trying to do. They just don't care. The calculus is that facts simply don't matter anymore, in a very 1984 way. And, sadly, most of this thread bears that out. 

[WestCanMan]

2 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

But what you aaid happened didn’t happen. The vehicle didn’t move towards the agent, the agent wasn’t sttuck the agent fired the second shot well away from the vehicle and the third shot from BEHIND the vehicle as it drove away 

Here is an initial forensic analysis of the video (the analyst doesn’t comment on whether he thinks there is wrongdoing)  

First shot is fired at 7:19. Both feet are outside the perimeter of the car and the car’s tires are clearly in a right turn position moving away from the shooter.

 

 

Second shot is fired at 8:06 with the officer two feet to the left side of the vehicle, firing at a 90% angle laterally through the open passenger window.

 

 

The third shot is at 8:18 and is from the side and slightly behind the driver.

 

The aftermath shows the shooter standing, uninjured.

 

 

Additionally, here is a visual of the the front windshield showing only one shot entering the windshield, consistent with what is described above. The location and position of the shot are consistent with the shot coming from a position not directly in front of the vehicle. 

https://open.substack.com/pub/michaeldsellers/p/renee-good-shooting-three-shots-one?r=3adb8b&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay

 

If its determined that the first or maybe even the second shot killed her then IMO it’s not likely an American jury or prosecutor will care. The third shot from behind I wasn’t aware of, that could change things.

 

However, Trump’s FBI  is already reportedly obstructing state and local law enforcement from investigating. 

You're looking at the wrong angle, dummy.

The guy who got hit was obviously in front of the car, and can't be seen from the angle you're using.

There's a different camera angle that they showed on Fox News last night (somehow leftard sources always miss out on the M Brown videos, the G Floyd videos, etc 😉)

It's from further away, and you can see that he doesn't get hit very hard, but you can clearly see that he was bumped by the car.

In defence of both of them, she was turning the wheel as she was accelerating, and may have turned the wheel far enough to miss him if she didn't get shot, but at the very beginning of her forward acceleration the car was accelerating towards the officer at the peak of its ability in those weather conditions.

 

It was a legit shooting, and she was breaking the law all day up to that point, when she was legitimately being arrested. I don't expect a cop to take mercy on me if I accelerate my car towards them. 

[Hodad]

12 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You are such a sleazy little weasel it's sickening. 

Running over cops is illegal, self-defence is legal. FAFO

Nobody ran over a cop--nor tried to--and shooting a fleeing "suspect" is not self defense. Jeebus, we can all see the video. Like Noem and co, you don't have any hesitation or shame about lying, and aren't really concerned with credibility. 

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Why would any rational human being purposely put themselves in such a position...against armed federal officers that have used lethal and less lethal force many times while conducting ICE operations ?

Because they're hearing and seeing stories in the news about Americans being snatched and shipped off to shit hole prisons by federal officers without due le process.

What rational government does that to its people?

Your government is terrifying it's citizens and a lot of your allies are also getting concerned about the way your government is behaving similarly on the global stage.

But, you say this is all normal...a nothing burger...happens all the time...

You're nuts.

[WestCanMan]

16 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

I think this woman got in way over her head after watching too many YouTube videos, panicked, and drew deadly fire from an officer who had previously been injured under similar circumstances.  I don't think she intended to hit him or others, but the officer doesn't know that in that instant.

Unfortunately, leftist leaders are doubling down with hate, like the mayor there who told ICE agents to "Get the f out of his city", and with more incitement to rebel against authority, like Tampon Timmy's open call for resistance to ICE activity in Portland and other cities. 

To be quite honest, the dictionary definition of sedition is to implore citizens to resist lawful authority.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, eyeball said:

Because they're hearing and seeing stories in the news about Americans being snatched and shipped off to shit hole prisons by federal officers without due le process.

What rational government does that to its people?

 

Its people ?   WTF ?

Actual Americans are routinely detained, jailed, and imprisoned even with due process.  What's so special about illegals ?

 

Quote

Your government is terrifying it's citizens and a lot of your allies are also getting concerned about the way your government is behaving similarly on the global stage.

But, you say this is all normal...a nothing burger...happens all the time...

You're nuts.

 

Stop depending on the U.S. to be the benevolent superpower (you love to hate)...because it never was.

You should see what our "allies" do to their illegals.

[WestCanMan]

4 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Nobody ran over a cop--nor tried to-

The fact remains that, while the criminal was disregarding the lawful commands of the officers, she struck the officer with her vehicle while she was attempting to flee. 

In the moment when the vehicle was accelerating towards the officer, on its way to eventually hitting him, he had the absolute right to use lethal force to defend himself. 

It's an absolute fact that the vehicle was on a path to hit him, because it hit him. Even CNN acknowledges that the vehicle struck the officer.

The dead ho that was killed was the author of her own tragedy. 

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Because they're hearing and seeing stories in the news

See, there's your problem. You're admitting that they're stories, while pretending that what you're watching constitutes "news".

[bush_cheney2004]

3 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Unfortunately, leftist leaders are doubling down with hate, like the mayor there who told ICE agents to "Get the f out of his city", and with more incitement to rebel against authority, like Tampon Timmy's open call for resistance to ICE activity in Portland and other cities. 

To be quite honest, the dictionary definition of sedition is to implore citizens to resist lawful authority.

 

Agreed....this has gone far beyond a garden variety American use-of-force incident and has now firmly entered the usual political three-ring circus.   Tim Walz was already toast before this happened because of the epic fraud during his watch as governor.   This will not save his political behind.

[Nationalist]

58 minutes ago, Hodad said:

I don't know if there was obstruction at some point off film, but not on, and there was certainly no threatening. By all appearances, they were just annoyed by the civilian scrutiny, as power tripping LEOs often are. 

Sane people don't think that killing civilians is a valid way of discouraging scrutiny. Surely, knowing that these masked agents are clear to use lethal force for petty annoyances will have a chilling effect. But to see that as a positive? That's a pretty crazy take. 

Yes we'll...im afraid it's a tad more than "civilian scrutiny".

Lesson to be learned. Don't fck around with federal officers.

[CdnFox]

42 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

But what you aaid happened didn’t happen. The vehicle didn’t move towards the agent, the agent wasn’t sttuck the agent fired the second shot well away from the vehicle and the third shot from BEHIND the vehicle as it drove away 

Here is an initial forensic analysis of the video (the analyst doesn’t comment on whether he thinks there is wrongdoing)  

First shot is fired at 7:19. Both feet are outside the perimeter of the car and the car’s tires are clearly in a right turn position moving away from the shooter.

 

 

Second shot is fired at 8:06 with the officer two feet to the left side of the vehicle, firing at a 90% angle laterally through the open passenger window.

 

 

The third shot is at 8:18 and is from the side and slightly behind the driver.

 

The aftermath shows the shooter standing, uninjured.

 

 

Additionally, here is a visual of the the front windshield showing only one shot entering the windshield, consistent with what is described above. The location and position of the shot are consistent with the shot coming from a position not directly in front of the vehicle. 

https://open.substack.com/pub/michaeldsellers/p/renee-good-shooting-three-shots-one?r=3adb8b&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay

 

If its determined that the first or maybe even the second shot killed her then IMO it’s not likely an American jury or prosecutor will care. The third shot from behind I wasn’t aware of, that could change things.

 

However, Trump’s FBI  is already reportedly obstructing state and local law enforcement from investigating. 

I'm sorry but you're a 100% wrong. The shots were fired from the officer in front which we see in the last picture there. And the car did strike that officer. Two officers were hit or hurt by the vehicle and went to the hospital and were treated for minor injuries

All those photos are of the guy at the side and he's not the one who fired. the guy you see forward of that in the last picture is the one who shot.  You can see the shot hit the front window (the glass exploding off of it) in the video

And your shot placement tells me you've never shot much.  If the bullet placement was from where you said it was it couldn't possibly have hit the person. That Shot obviously came from in front of the vehicle Either from someone firing from the right of the vehicle facing head on and passing through the side window or from just in line with the left of the vehicle bumper and into the driver's seat area 

So everything you said was wrong. You are falling victim to the spin that the left is desperately trying to create on the subject but it's wrong. If you watch the video the shot comes from in front and that guy is actually struck by the vehicle.

[eyeball]

33 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

To be quite honest, the dictionary definition of sedition is to implore citizens to resist lawful authority.

They're imploring citizens to overthrow the tyranny that's subverting America's government.

That's called resistance. It borders on sedition not to resist but I think we can cut Americans a lot of slack for being relectant for being tasked with getting control of a super-rogue. It's a pretty tall order. I doubt they'll be able to vote their way out of this. I'll wish them luck for trying but...the right and left wings of America simply hate each other's guts too much.

[eyeball]

56 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Actual Americans are routinely detained, jailed, and imprisoned even with due process.  What's so special about illegals ?

You should see what our "allies" do to their illegals.

We're even aware of how Putin treats his legals. He often just kills them too.

 

 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Tim Walz was already toast before this happened because of the epic fraud during his watch as governor.   This will not save his political behind.

To think that he could be the VP right now, with Kamala as president... 😬

I wonder if we'd even know about that scandal if those two were running the show. It's not unlikely that the FBI would have been off on a witch hunt somewhere else while the Somali scammers and swindlers were still out partying.

I can guarantee you that AG Ellison - the guy who kept the G Floyd bodycam footage under wraps in order to keep the violent rioting going - wasn't gonna use his state's own law-enforcement officials to uncover evidence of his buddies' crimes.

[WestCanMan]

41 minutes ago, eyeball said:

They're imploring citizens to overthrow the tyranny that's subverting America's government.

That's called resistance. 

They can't win without you, eyeball. You're the difference-maker. 

You owe it to the world to go down there and help the anti-government forces win their battle against evil. 

YOOOOU CANNN DOOO IIIIIT!!!!!!!

[WestCanMan]

36 minutes ago, eyeball said:

We're even aware of how Putin treats his legals. He often just kills them too.

Are you aware of how the LPoC treats their citizens? They force them to take useless and harmful injections that they don't even need, sometimes killing them. 

But don't let that stop you from getting the jabs. By all means, please continue to juice up. 

[ironstone]

 Keith Olbermann's social media posts gives us a glimpse of how twisted the average leftist mind is.

[User]

5 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

POSSIBLY. That’s the most generous explanation for the officer. But that’s not really a “I had to kill this lady to save my life” situation. More like “things happened so suddenly I only had a split second to react”.   In this latter defence, whether he was ACTUALLY is in harm’s way is irrelevant. As Ive said American prosecutors and juries tend to be very lenient with law enforcement in far more egregious cases so I don’t think he’s going to get in any trouble here. 

For as much as either of us can know, it is more than possible; it is on the video, captured from multiple angles. 
 

5 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

She wasn’t going towards him. He was to the left of the vehicle while she was driving forward with a slight right hand turn even. He shot her through the driver window not the windshield.  

Yes, she was in fact going towards him. The fact that she cut her wheels and was further turning away is hindsight, but even then, he still had to get out of the way and was still hit. There is literally photographic evidence of a bullet hole in the windshield. 

5 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

But like I said this is all probably within the scope of what Americans consider acceptable, where police shooting someone over a traffic ticket or jaywalking encounter gone wrong is commonplace …. In other countries these things are not normalized and the population is not so desensitized to it. 

This happened because people like you think it is acceptable to interfere with federal law enforcement operations and then attempt to flee. None of this happens if she wasn't screwing around with ICE and then trying to flee. 

 

[TreeBeard]

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

 Keith Olbermann's social media posts gives us a glimpse of how twisted the average leftist mind is.

He’s bang on correct.  Shooting mothers of three for no reason is a bad thing.   You have to be a complete nut to think it’s ok.  

[User]

7 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

He’s bang on correct.  Shooting mothers of three for no reason is a bad thing.   You have to be a complete nut to think it’s ok.  

"For no reason"

That is your lie. She was shot because she was trying to flee after unlawfully interfering with ICE Operations and while doing so endangered the life of an Officer by accelerating towards him.

You people are such two-faced partisan hacks as you cheer on Ashli Babbitt's death but then sit here lying about this one to say it was bad. 

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

You're looking at the wrong angle, dummy.

The guy who got hit was obviously in front of the car, and can't be seen from the angle you're using.

There's a different camera angle that they showed on Fox News last night (somehow leftard sources always miss out on the M Brown videos, the G Floyd videos, etc 😉)

It's from further away, and you can see that he doesn't get hit very hard, but you can clearly see that he was bumped by the car.

In defence of both of them, she was turning the wheel as she was accelerating, and may have turned the wheel far enough to miss him if she didn't get shot, but at the very beginning of her forward acceleration the car was accelerating towards the officer at the peak of its ability in those weather conditions.

 

It was a legit shooting, and she was breaking the law all day up to that point, when she was legitimately being arrested. I don't expect a cop to take mercy on me if I accelerate my car towards them. 

You can see everything in the pics and the video on the site including slo-mo, dummy.
 

AT BEST the first shot is arguably defensible, especially by American standards , I openly conceded that point already. But the second and third shots which are from the side and rear of the car when he is clearly not in the car’s path are totally unjustified.   
 

That reminds me of rhe Sammy Yatim shooting here in Toronto about a little over a decade or so ago. In that case the police officer fired one bullet that instantly felled a teen with a knife and then, even though he was motionless on the ground, the cops approached, stood over him and fired several more bullets into his body.  
The court found that the first bullet, had mortally wounded the teen and was his ultimate cause of death, was defensible and the cop was not faulted for killing him. HOWEVER the subsequent bullets fired at him point blank while he was already dying and immobilized from the first shot were completely unjustified. Therefore the court  rightly ruled that though the cop was justified in actually killing the teen, he was still guilty of attempted murder for the subsequent shots and he went to jail. That might be what justice should look like here at the very least but in USA that ain’t gonna happen. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Are you aware of how the LPoC treats their citizens? They force them to take useless and harmful injections that they don't even need, sometimes killing them.

Well, maybe if we're lucky Trump will add that to his list of grievances/pretexts for liberating Canada.

2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Agreed....this has gone far beyond a garden variety American use-of-force incident and has now firmly entered the usual political three-ring circus.   Tim Walz was already toast before this happened because of the epic fraud during his watch as governor.   This will not save his political behind.

Why hasn't his guilty ass been shipped off to CECOT yet? Why the delay?

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

They're imploring citizens to overthrow the tyranny that's subverting America's government.

 

You mean the Julie elected lawful authority that at this point in time hasn't actually subverted anything.

Yeah, sedition

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

You can see everything in the pics and the video on the site including slo-mo, dummy.

AT BEST the first shot is arguably defensible, especially by American standards , I openly conceded that point already. But the second and third shots which are from the side and rear of the car when he is clearly not in the car’s path are totally unjustified.   

That's not how it works and there are several cases in the united states that have already explored this.

If the vehicle is moving and has already come in contact with him he has a split second and firing three shots of succession is perfectly normal and acceptable. It's not like you get the opportunity to say oh hold on a second, what she doing now, maybe she's not trying to kill me anymore I can't really tell I guess I'll wait and see.

What you're saying is akin to suggesting that if a bad guy shoots at you and misses you should assume that they're done and they're not going to try again or there's no additional threat. That's not how it works

She had already accelerated towards him, she had already hit him, and the car is still in motion. It's not like she was driving away and he was safe, he was still right there she could easily turn the wheel and risk getting him again, physically in contact with the vehicle, it's perfectly acceptable at that point to assume you're still at risk.

She brought her own death about the moment she accelerated towards a police officer, who doesn't even appear to have drawn his gun till she began to accelerate towards him and then struck him.

If she's driving down the street and he's looking at her in the rear view mirror then that's completely different but I'm sorry it is 100% justified to shoot someone in the circumstances he did

 

Quote

That reminds me of rhe Sammy Yatim shooting here in Toronto about a little over a decade or so ago. 

It's not even remotely similar.

In that case the bad guy was already on the floor and unable to move and the police officer shot him anyway.

In this case the vehicle was still in motion, still in contact with the police officer and the bad guy was still quite capable of committing harm.

Absolutely night and day.

End of the day if you don't want to get shot don't drive your vehicle out of police officer

[CdnFox]

19 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

You can see everything in the pics and the video on the site including slo-mo, dummy.
 

AT BEST the first shot is arguably defensible, especially by American standards , I openly conceded that point already. But the second and third shots which are from the side and rear of the car when he is clearly not in the car’s path are totally unjustified.   
 

That reminds me of rhe Sammy Yatim shooting here in Toronto about a little over a decade or so ago. In that case the police officer fired one bullet that instantly felled a teen with a knife and then, even though he was motionless on the ground, the cops approached, stood over him and fired several more bullets into his body.  
The court found that the first bullet, had mortally wounded the teen and was his ultimate cause of death, was defensible and the cop was not faulted for killing him. HOWEVER the subsequent bullets fired at him point blank while he was already dying and immobilized from the first shot were completely unjustified. Therefore the court  rightly ruled that though the cop was justified in actually killing the teen, he was still guilty of attempted murder for the subsequent shots and he went to jail. That might be what justice should look like here at the very least but in USA that ain’t gonna happen. 

Here's a video you may not have seen. 

You can see what happens exactly.  And you can see how fast it happens.  The car goes strait at the agent and hits him and he fires his shots in less than a second while the car is still moving and a threat. And it did hit him. 

BTW, they're saying that officer was struck by a car a few months earlier and snagged on the side of the car and was dragged with very serious injuries resulting. 

That car is 100 percent still a threat, he fires 3 quick shots and that's it.  

The vast majority of lawyers commenting are suggesting the law favours the cop, barring additional evidence.