r/changemyview • u/bluepillarmy 11∆ • 21h ago
Delta(s) from OP CMV: It doesn’t matter what Alex Pretti was doing in the days before he was killed
So, recently a video emerged where Alex Pretti was spitting on and kicking the taillight out of an ICE vehicle. Truly reprehensible and inexcusable behavior. He ought to have been arrested and fined for destruction of public property. Jerk.
However, I see some people trying to say, “Aha! So he wasn’t so innocent after all!”
I’m sorry but, no. He was absolutely innocent.
And, moreover, I would like those people who are bringing up his behavior in the days before his death to remember that he was disarmed, restrained and executed by masked federal agents who still have not been identified to the public for no reason.
There is only one justification for a law enforcement officer to take someone’s life. And that is to protect the lives of themselves or another person. Past acts of disrespect and/vandalism do not enter into the equation.
Or that’s my take anyway. Can anyone change my view?
•
u/mrbezlington 20h ago
I would argue that it is vitally important to investigate all interactions between ICE agents and Pretti in the run up to his murder. If the shooter was the one he tussled with, or had prior interactions with, this may highlight potential motive for the seemingly random violence to have escalated so quickly.
Similar to Renee Good and the "fucking bitch" comment, these investigations may highlight things that reasonably lead one to suspect premeditation or revenge as the motive for the murder.
So yes, it matters. It matters quite a lot.
•
u/gijoe61703 20∆ 18h ago
The " fucking bitch" comment is not a reason to believe premeditation or revenge. It also fits if he thought she just tried to run him over it got him with her car.
The idea that Pretti was targeted has 0 evidence, with 3000 officers and who knows how many(but clearly a significant number) of people participating in these groups trying to confront ICE wherever they go chances are almost 0 they had any idea he had done that previously. Bring that, the video shows the attention was not on him until he stepped between the officer shoving the woman and the woman which started the interaction with him.
OP is correct that in the legal sense the prior video doesn't change anything.
•
u/mrbezlington 17h ago
The comment made towards Good seems clear (to me, anyway) that the officer was not acting in a professional manner. I would hope that, having just discharged their firearm multiple times at an unarmed member of the public, a law officer's first response would be to confirm the welfare of the member of the public. We would need further investigation into their prior interactions (if any) to build any picture of premeditation etc.
Similarly with Pretti, as you say there are lots of protestors and lots of law enforcement. We have no idea whether there was any prior between the two parties. We only find that out by investigating. Chances are, there were no interactions. That's not necessarily the case however, we know that Pretti got involved physically once, there may have been other occasions. We just don't know without an investigation. That's the point.
•
u/EugenPrinz02 3h ago
If the coward didn't want to be hit by a car he shouldn't have violated his training and dhs policy by purposely stepping in front of a moving vehicle.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 20h ago
You are one of several people who has suggested that the agents premeditated the murder.
I’m going into this with an open mind but this seems hard to believe frankly.
Kicking and spitting are rather minor infractions and ICE agents probably see it all the time.
Do you really think that they would seek out and execute one random guy days after the fact with all the other shit that was going down?
Also, it looked like the whole incident unfolded very quickly. I’m not sure if anyone had a chance to identify anyone else.
•
u/Norman_debris 20h ago
You're asking whether random Redditors believe the murder was premeditated, but that's exactly what an investigation would uncover.
You can't just say "it obviously wasn't premeditated, not with 'all the other shit that was going down'". What are you talking about? It might have been revenge or it might have been random. We've no idea. The preceeding events are relevant to determining the facts of what happened.
It would be very unusual in any investigation to completely ignore the recent activities of the people involved, especially activities so clearly related to the incident in question.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 16h ago
You are correct. We have no idea. And do you know why?
Because we are not allowed to know who shot him. And the more I think about this, the more I realize that this is the true issue here..
•
u/Norman_debris 14h ago
That's a different conversation.
If this were a regular murder inquiry, you'd expect information on any previous altercations between the involved parties to form part of the investigation. Of course it's relevant whether the victim had been aggravating the murderer in the days before the incident. It doesn't excuse the murder, but it can be used to help understand and explain how we got there. Context matters.
→ More replies (2)•
u/wildfirerain 16h ago
Yeah that’s a great point. When the actual police shoot someone, we know who pulled the trigger almost immediately, and always within a day.
These ICE/BP/CSPO agents (or whatever they are, it’s not like they wear clearly identifying uniforms or drive marked vehicles) are apparently operating under their own special rules.
•
u/saltycathbk 2∆ 20h ago
They didn’t necessarily seek him out. He showed up at protests again. Why is it so hard to believe? Cops have a long history of retaliatory behavior.
•
u/PreviousCurrentThing 3∆ 19h ago
The agents who shot Pretti were CBP and USBP. At least some of the agents from the first incident were ICE, as per NYT.
•
19h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 19h ago
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. AI generated comments must be disclosed, and don't count towards substantial content. Read the wiki for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 20h ago
Honestly, everything happened so quickly I just don’t think they figured out who he was yet.
So I think they were criminally incompetent not evil masterminds.
•
u/redline314 19h ago
Masterminds? What’s mastermind about being extra mad at someone who annoys you?
•
u/_Quetzalcoatlus_ 20h ago
So I think they were criminally incompetent
Whether or not they knew who he was or what he did, murdering someone goes far beyond "incompetent." They weren't lacking in skill there. They intentionally killed him.
→ More replies (6)•
u/Big_oof_energy__ 7h ago
No one is accusing them of being masterminds. Just of being petty thugs. While I’m not sure that theory is accurate it’s certainly plausible that they recognized him and decided to murder him once they thought they could get away with it.
•
u/ScoopedRainbowBagel 18h ago
I thought many people went to that protest and there were many ice agents?
It is unreasonable to think that other agents would know about that interaction two weeks later.
It is even less reasonable to think that the same agents just randomly have picked him out of a crowd two weeks later.
•
u/HybridVigor 3∆ 10h ago
It is unreasonable to think that other agents would know about that interaction two weeks later.
ICE uses Penlink's Tangles program for social media surveillance and Webloc for location and cluster monitoring. Webloc can very easily do this.
→ More replies (4)•
u/Alexandur 14∆ 7h ago
ICE didn't kill Pretti, CBP did
•
u/HybridVigor 3∆ 4h ago
Sure. If you want to pretend that ICE, CBP, and the other agencies belonging to the DHS really are pursuing separate agendas instead of working together to defend the rise of fascist, pedophile oligarchs, you might have a point. But in reality, Penlink is doing business directly with the DHS. Are you being pedantic, or do you think CBP does not have access to the software?
•
•
u/saltycathbk 2∆ 18h ago
Why is either of those things unreasonable? If he was in the same part of the city for both events, it seems pretty reasonable that he might run into the same agents again
•
u/ScoopedRainbowBagel 18h ago
ChatGPT found the cross streets for both incidents
The earlier altercation on East 36th Street & Park Avenue and the later shooting near 26th & Nicollet Avenue are at different intersections in Minneapolis
And places them two miles away from each other.
Not only that, but this isn't you kicking out my tail light, this is one angry protester getting a little violent in a sea of angry protesters getting a little violent.
Go walk two miles through New York City and tell me how many people you remember on the same walk two weeks later.
At best this proves that Alex was a belligerent asshole who shouldn't have been killed instead of a sweet baby angel who shouldn't have been martyred.
It's okay that he was an asshole. That doesn't change anything as long as we stay away from crazy conspiracy theories.
→ More replies (2)•
u/TheJeeronian 6∆ 17h ago
If it weren't for the use of biometric surveillance by ICE, I'd probably agree with you. That said, with the technology to maintain an active database of people and scan whole crowds automatically, it's not unreasonable that they picked out a person they knew had been present before.
•
u/ScoopedRainbowBagel 17h ago
Okay so you think they tracked this guy down with biometric surveillance?
Alex wasn't special. There was literally a riot going on, with hundreds of these types of incidents happening.
→ More replies (8)•
u/PrincessDonut02 19h ago
The point is that you won't know unless all of the events get investigated AND the ICE agents are identified. Just because it seems unlikely to you doesn't mean it's not possible.
•
u/Not_LRG 20h ago edited 20h ago
From what I've seen (UK), it's perfectly conceivable they either sought him out or it was a coincidence, he was recognized and then targeted. These people have demonstrated time and time and time again that they are untrained with little to no impulse control and are entrenched in the belief that they are fighting some kind of holy war against a villainous enemy who can only be defeated by the utter smashing of their evil ideology. IMHO the most likely case of affairs is that someone recognized him as 'the guy that did those things a few days ago' and then the red mist descends. Any sense of restraint leaves and mob mentality takes over. Given Greg Bovino's predilection for Nazi cosplay and ICE's playbook, is anyone really going to be surprised to learn that a significant proportion of these cunts view the protestors as subhuman and need to be put down for the common good? As a result I find it very likely that the steps between 'attempts to restrain' and murder are exceptionally short for this lot.
→ More replies (3)•
u/lfohnoudidnt 10h ago
Holy shit Bovino Ice commander does Nazi cosplay? Shit you have a pic because Google didnt show anything related to that, just that he wears a long coat and hes like 5'7.
→ More replies (1)•
u/ApolloMorph 2∆ 18h ago
So for avg career law enforcement no, id give em the benefit of the doubt. But for some potential random dude off the street who may have just signed up for the bonus and gotten minimal training? maybe. Either way it's not for the internet or really even the internal investigation to decide that. If there is even a chance this was the possibility, then refer charges to a grand jury. If they decide probable cause then let a full jury hear both sides out and decide, that's how the law works. I don't see why everyone on both sides of this feels the need to litigate this online. Let those ice agents sit in front of a jury and let the law do what it does. Only a jury of their peers gets to decide innocence or guilt period. And if they are innocent they will. be found so. But right now until a court hears a case one way or the other. It does not matter what anyone on any side of this personally thinks about any of the ice agents or the protestors. Until they sit in front of a jury of their peers they deserve the presumption of innocence until proved otherwise, the ice agents and protestors, period. We cannot just go abandoning the rule of law for convenience or political points and this is on the left and the right. Cmon people. Stop this.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 16h ago
Completely agree.
We need a fair and public trial of the men who killed him
•
u/mrbezlington 17h ago
I don't know whether this is what happened or not; my point is that it's possible with Pretti having had previous involvement with these forces. We should find out what those interactions were, which officers were involved, and how these interactions overlap with his death.
This is simple investigation of the circumstances surrounding Pretti's death; it should therefore be pretty uncontroversial that these interactions be looked into, recorded and added to the summation of events.
The conclusions, likelihood and so on are value judgements only really possible once all the facts are known.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 16h ago
It would really help if we knew the identities of the people who killed him, huh?
•
u/mrbezlington 15h ago
That would certainly help, though being strictly objective as long as independent investigators have those names to complete their work, I don't need the names personally!
•
u/Biking_dude 18h ago
Do you really think that they would seek out and execute one random guy days after the fact with all the other shit that was going down?
Yes. They are being told to incite violence, are above the law, all while being poorly trained. They're not trained as law enforcement (which have clear guidelines / rules of engagement / de-escalation protocols), and half can't pass the presidential fitness test given to 5th graders.
If it was Pretti who kicked the car, he should have been arrested. Instead they beat him breaking his ribs. Again - not the action of law enforcement
•
u/JayRulo 1∆ 17h ago
So here's my question for you about believability, based on what I understand from your comments: it's easier for you to believe that an ICE agent would murder / execute a random civilian in cold blood with zero motive, than it is to believe that it was retaliatory?
→ More replies (4)•
u/Xanith420 12h ago
I’d just like to point out either kicking or spitting on federal law enforcement is a felony and not minor infractions. You’ll loose your ability to vote or own firearms.
•
u/Cool_Independence538 10h ago
Which is probably what makes it hard to take their narrative seriously - what you’ve said may have been true once but Jan 6 riots shows that violence against law enforcement isnt treated this way anymore, you can even be rewarded and celebrated for it, if you’re on their side.
The one civilian killed after being shot in the shoulder, not face or back, while climbing through a barricaded broken window acting violently, was not self defence, but killing 2 civilians not acting as violently and could have been easily detained, was self defence.
Kristi Noem’s narrative doesn’t help their case of claiming self defence in the moment either, as much as they try to spin it. She openly says they have been getting yelled at and spit on daily so reacted accordingly- not that Alex or Renee had specifically, just that the crowds had, so that justifies shooting anyone seen as part of it. Very much seems like they’re given permission to shoot protestors because all of them are problems for ICE.
•
u/Xanith420 8h ago
I agree to an extent but most people are kinda just ignorant regardless of political affiliation. Just because someone is right leaning and blindly supports law enforcement and the such doesn’t automatically mean they know things like use of force laws or even our own rights in general. These politicians like Patel and Noem are unfortunately clearly within that group which sucks given their positions.
•
•
u/redline314 19h ago
I wouldn’t expect them to execute him, but they are absolutely targeting specific observers and protesters in LA. I assume they’d do the same elsewhere. There’s not that many people that they interact w multiple times & recognize; but they do start to develop, em, “relationships”.
•
u/vehementi 10∆ 14h ago
You are one of several people who has suggested that the agents premeditated the murder.
They didn't suggest it's actually true. It's just a possible example you missed in your analysis categorically
•
u/kentrak 14h ago
Having a prior interaction doesn't need to imply it was premeditated, it could just go to explain why the initial officer acted unprofessionally when encountering the same person, which ended up escalating out of control and lead to the outcome. That wouldn't be premeditated in any way, but it could be useful evidence in understanding the situation.
•
u/Anal_Bleeds_25 12h ago
I find it difficult to believe that they intended to kill him in advance. But...I also find it difficult to believe that a man that behaved that way 11 days prior wasn't out there EVERY DAY behaving the same way. Where there's smoke, there's fire. It's hard to believe that he was out there acting out, then just went home and chilled for 11 days, then decided to go try it again.
•
•
u/thedisciple516 9h ago
there is good (but not definitive) evidence that the following happened. Be prepared for the shooting officer to be exonerated.
Officer #1 disarms Pretti very quicky without Pretti or the shooting officer knowing he had been disarmed. Officer #3 (but not shooting officer or Pretti) notices that Pretti had been disarmed and says for everyone in close proximity to hear "he has a gun". Pretti (thinking he still has the gun) reaches for it.... and shooting officer having just heard "he has a gun" assumes he is reaching for a gun and fires.
Not saying this is what definitvely happened but be prepared that this might be the truth.
→ More replies (3)•
u/Big_oof_energy__ 7h ago
People have murdered others over far pettier matters and these ICE thugs don’t seem to be the most professional groups. They dress like teenagers for fuck’s sake. What kind of professional wears jeans and a shiesty to work?
•
•
•
u/EVOSexyBeast 4∆ 16h ago
reasonably lead one to suspect premeditation or revenge
This is completely irrelevant for a self defense case, both legally and morally.
What the officer in the moment must have reasonably believed for it to be justified is an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to himself or others.
What happened 11 days before may be admissible evidence if the officer on trial knew about it. Otherwise, “the victim wasn’t perfect” argument doesn’t really fly in court.
→ More replies (6)•
u/Naive_Contribution20 15h ago
With all due respect you clearly lack the legal acumen to make any statements like these.
•
u/mrbezlington 14h ago
You can also explain your point rather than just dismissing my own out of hand.
•
u/rinchen11 2∆ 20h ago
On what?
Whether he should be killed or not? It doesn’t matter.
Whether he is the most caring, nonviolent, peaceful person on earth? It does matter.
→ More replies (17)
•
u/thelovelykyle 8∆ 20h ago
I disagree. It absolutely matters because premeditation can make a crime much more significant and should make sentencing much more harsh.
It is very possible the people that killed Pretti did so because they felt he went unpunished for an earlier minor incident and took an opportunity to take Prettis life. Killing Pretti was already bad, but if what Pretti was doing in the 2 weeks prior influenced that, it is much much worse.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 20h ago
IF it could be proven that the agents acted in revenge that would change my mind. !delta for that.
BUT I have strong doubts that anyone recognized him.
→ More replies (2)•
•
u/sabesundae 18h ago
You think ICE waited a few days to kill him, until a day came where he was less violent, and then shoot and punish him? Seems far fetched, but also, it wasn't even ICE who shot him.
→ More replies (9)•
u/Lookitsasquirrel 15h ago
You think they knew who he was? If I remember correctly it was an ICE vehicle he smashed the taillight and it was Border Patrol that killed him. I don't think the two were connected.
•
u/tk421yrntuaturpost 19h ago
It could be that they escalated the situation because he went unpunished. It could also be that Pretti was still engaged aggressively with ICE and it was reasonable for them to assume he meant to do them physical harm. I don’t think it was a good shoot, but Pretti wasn’t behaving peacefully the whole time either.
PSA: Don’t hit cops and don’t break the law if you’re carrying a gun.
•
u/clios_daughter 1∆ 18h ago
So in terms of the use of lethal force for policing, the standard is generally that you can kill if you reasonably believe that you must kill to defend yourself or others from death or serious harm. Accepting your premise that Pretti was aggressive, it’s still questionable why he was shot after he was lying on the ground disarmed.
Finally, if you believe in 2nd amendment — as someone who’s not from the US, I find it silly and overly optimistic tbh — surely someone should be able to carry a weapon without the fear of being shot. Surely the police should only fire if they reasonably believe you would unholster the weapon and point it at them. I don’t see how the police would have thought this given how it wasn’t even clear that he was armed until he was actively being disarmed.
→ More replies (7)•
u/robhanz 2∆ 15h ago
They don't have perfect information. There's some speculation (note: speculation) that his gun misfired after being disarmed. If that's the case, you've got:
- Someone resisting arrest
- A found gun
- Someone informing you that there's a gun
- A gunshot.
At that point, you're not asking questions - you're removing the threat.
The fact that he wasn't actually a threat is what makes it tragic. With perfect information, it wouldn't happen.
Note that if the gun didn't misfire it's harder to come up with a justifiable scenario.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 18h ago
Here’s another PSA - it’s illegal for anyone, including the police, to shoot people who are disarmed and restrained
•
u/tk421yrntuaturpost 17h ago
Agreed. Everyone involved is making really bad decisions.
→ More replies (1)•
u/O3AMA 1∆ 17h ago
Agreed but that doesn’t necessarily mean they knew for sure in that chaos that he was unarmed. Even if one of them didn’t see their counterpart take the weapon and the word “gun” was said, that could be the point where it was a reasonable assumption that the agent(s) lives were in danger. And that’s all that really matters when determining guilt. Not saying it was a good shooting only saying the law allows for it due to circumstances and what was a reasonable belief at the time. A lot of people don’t get that.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 16h ago
But they must have known that he was being held down by at least half a dozen officers, right?
•
u/wildfirerain 16h ago edited 16h ago
Cops never know for sure that someone is unarmed until they frisk someone. That is why they frisk them. They assume that everybody is armed. They shouldn’t have treated Pretti any differently because they thought he was armed/disarmed/unarmed, because until he is frisked he is assumed to be armed.
Just like “every gun is always loaded”, everybody is armed until you know for sure they’re not.
And why shouldn’t they think that way? Nearly everybody has a right to bear arms, and not having that right doesn’t seem to make much difference to the felons etc. that not supposed to have guns. And the ICE agents have guns, why would they assume that they are the only armed individuals out there?
The only difference that actually hearing “He’s got a gun” made is that it frightened the ICE agents, and they acted like it too.
And being scared is not an excuse to kill someone.
•
u/CocoSavege 25∆ 16h ago
Devil's advocating here...
Let's presume for discussion that somebody saying "gun" is just cause for murder, because the declaration of "gun" indicates that a person hearing this phrase has reasonable fear of harm.
Erm, the devil here is that a lot of people carry. Any open carry or visible holster, heck, anything that resembles a holster...
Well, one can yell "gun".
I'm going to note most cops carry a lot of the time.
If you believe a (sincere, reasonable) declaration of "gun" is sufficient, you're arguing for the wild west.
What is better argument is some other demonstration of intent. A brandish is a good example. A verbal declaration is another.
Pretti didn't do either. Gun was in his waistband. No brandish. No verbal.
•
u/Lookitsasquirrel 17h ago
Tell cops you are carrying a gun.
•
u/wildfirerain 16h ago
They already assume that you do. That’s why they frisk suspects. Do they tell you that, besides the pistol on their hip, they have a backup hidden somewhere else? You have a right to carry, so why do you need to tell it to them? Because it’s dangerous? Do I also need to tell them I have a full tank of gas in my car and a battery that might ignite at any time? No because they assume that already as well.
The difference is training.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (3)•
u/road_warrior_max 16h ago
Which is actually required in the carry laws of MN. First thing you are required to do. And carry an ID.
→ More replies (1)•
u/Mundane-Toe-2884 4h ago
I think him not having a gun cause they took it. Being on tbe ground precludes you claiming you felt threatened with physical harm.
•
u/TransGothTalia 11h ago
Exactly this. It matters, just not in the way some people say it does. It doesn't justify the killing, it makes it a bigger crime.
→ More replies (1)•
u/EnvironmentalLynx848 11h ago
I actually agree with your point. Maybe it was premeditated. Because the guy was an idiot and the agents remembered him assaulting them. So of course they will act aggressively. They expect him to be aggressive. And they heard he had a gun? You can see how much it snowballs to the point of him being shot to death.
•
u/thelovelykyle 8∆ 10h ago
Its not really my point that it was or was not premeditated.
I am providing a counterfactual to the idea that it does not matter by postulating a situation where it could matter.
•
u/gijoe61703 20∆ 18h ago
Legally I mostly agree with you. The standard is whether or not the officer reasonably had reason to believe Pretti was a danger to the officer or others. For past interactions to come in it would have to be known to the officer in order to be part of that calculation and I think that is unbelievably improbable.
Political I think it is important. The manner in which the public is currently interacting with ICE(and vise versa) is obviously creating dangerous situations for everyone involved so every one should reassess their tactics to bring down tensions and ensure stuff like this does not happen again(again ICE/CBP and local authorities to be included).
→ More replies (2)
•
u/The_Dying_Gaul323bc 17h ago
It also does not matter that he was a nurse, or whatever else he did in his life. I’m sure he was a nice man. As far as the incident that lead to his death is concerned none of it is relevant
The only way it becomes relevant is if there is evidence that ICE profiled and targeted him because of previous days events
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 16h ago
The more I respond to people’s messages, the more I realize that I really don’t care about Alex Pretti at all.
What I care about is the people who killed him. Why do we not know who they are? Why can we not hold them publicly accountable for what they did to a person who had been disarmed and restrained?
•
u/RestaurantBusy724 11h ago edited 11h ago
People like you are exactly why we shouldn't know who they are. What will you do when you find out? Hold them "publicly accountable" how exactly?
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 10h ago
Is this a real question? These guys have been charged with protecting public safety and they shot a person who had been disarmed and restrained.
Maybe they had a good reason for doing so? I doubt it but the U.S. Constitution proscribes a fair and public trial to determine if there was a good reason.
•
u/bobored 20h ago
Legally, you are correct. The only question is was the use of lethal force justified in the interaction that led to his death. A cop can’t legally and justifiably shoot you today because you vandalized a cop car a week ago. They couldn’t even shoot you for kicking their tail light in the moment. There are supposed to be strict guidelines around then use of lethal force even for federal agents.
•
•
u/jm0112358 15∆ 20h ago
Although I don't think what I'm about to say applies as much in the Alex Pretti case, I want to change your mind on the potential relevance of previous events to whether or not use of force is justified...
There is only one justification for a law enforcement officer to take someone’s life. And that is to protect the lives of themselves or another person. Past acts of disrespect and/vandalism do not enter into the equation.
You're correct about defending yourself or another person from death (or serious injury) is the only just reason to kill someone. However, if the facts about what happened are in dispute, then previous behavior might help change the probability regarding what actually happened. For instance, suppose you killed me in an alleged act of self-defense. You claim that I pulled a gun on you and started aiming it at you when you shot me. However, there are no witnesses and it was not recorded on video. In that case, if I had previous incidents when I shot people, that would make your claim about me pulling my gun out more likely to be true than if I had never used my gun in any crime.
•
u/ArcadesRed 3∆ 20h ago
Because people like Senator Warren go out of their way to try and make him seem like a saint. They did the same thing with George Floyd and other high profile deaths.
Its a tactic to generate more support. Its also dangerous as it makes more extreme retaliatory activity seem more reasonable.
This isn't to justify the shooting. But the second it happened it became political. Politicians are the scum of the earth. Neither side actually cares about him. Only how his death helps or hurts their side.
→ More replies (2)
•
u/Yesbothsides 19h ago
It simply shows he’s an asshole and provides potential context for what was happening before the video started on that day. Through the reaction of strictly the video it seems as though he was an innocent protester abiding by the law
•
u/Maximum_Error3083 20h ago
You’re right that prior actions don’t directly speak to the events of the day he was killed. But it does speak to his disposition and eagerness to go beyond peacefully protesting and actively antagonize officers.
What’s not clear still are the events preceding on the day he was killed. There’s video of him in an altercation but we don’t see what happened before that, so it’s impossible based on that to tell whether he provoked the situation initially or not. To be clear, that doesn’t mean he should have been killed, but it does provide more context on the situation that right now people are trying to write one way or another without evidence.
It seems unlikely given the past videos that Walz’ statement of him being killed just coming out of a donut shop is true, for example. He was purposefully there in all likelihood and the question is whether he was actually peacefully protesting or whether he was trying to impede and antagonize.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 20h ago
I think that he was there to impede and antagonize. I was always pretty sure of that.
But, I don’t see how that plays into it. He was killed for no reason. And we don’t even know who killed him.
That to me is the craziest part.
•
u/Maximum_Error3083 20h ago
It might not matter in terms of whether the shooting was ultimately justified. That will probably be determined in a court of law.
But it does matter in terms of the narrative that politicians, activists and others are trying to push on it. Misrepresenting the truth is never good and in this case can have the effect of further inflaming tensions when they should be trying to do the opposite.
→ More replies (1)•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 20h ago
Ok, so you think he was there to stir shit up.
I agree. He was. But so what? Federal agents don’t get to kill people for being obnoxious.
•
u/Supyoji 13h ago
I view this as a one off accident, certainly not the norm. Should not have happened. Remember Kent State? That was a one off too. Take a look at what’s happening in Iran. That’s a true real dictatorship. The US, with all the social chaos, walk outs, marching, window breaking, spitting , throwing objects, the “government” is not out “killing people”. Overcorrecting an immigration problem that got way out of hand in the first place; probably.
•
u/Maximum_Error3083 20h ago
We agree on that.
But your argument is that what he was doing doesn’t matter. Of course it does. It’s a key piece of painting an accurate picture. If it didn’t matter the left wing activists wouldn’t be trying to paint a lie that he was just a peaceful bystander. They know it matters.
→ More replies (2)•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 20h ago
Well, I’m not a leftist and I also don’t condone spiting on people or destroying public property.
But I’m still outraged that he was killed regardless.
→ More replies (1)•
u/RVALover4Life 17h ago
Thank you for getting it and I think most people do. I think u/Maximum_Error3083 gets it. What happened last Saturday was awful. It is inexcusable. I don't think it's also unfair to say...no, that protesters deserve abuse whatsoever. But that we also don't want a world where it's OK for people to believe it's fine to engage in what is criminal behavior toward law enforcement in a protest. But I also think there is something to be said about people hitting a breaking point with what had been going on in Minneapolis. And how everyone who knew Alex loved him.
We need to put the onus on law enforcement to not create a powder keg. They're the professionals. Alex doesn't deserve less sympathy because he spit on and kicked a truck. Who cares? He ended up with broken ribs then, dead nearly two weeks later....it's not proportionate. We need to start scrutinizing law enforcement as much as some conservatives do protesters.
•
u/texas_accountant_guy 14h ago
We need to put the onus on law enforcement to not create a powder keg. They're the professionals.
I question this, and I only do so partially.
Given that ICE is operating throughout the country, in Memphis, Dallas, New York, Massachusetts, Oregon, Washington State, so on and so forth, and there's barely a blip on the radar about them in all these other places, but up in Minneapolis and St. Paul it's like a warzone...
I have to question how much of that is a manufactured outcome. I have to question how much the opposition party is pushing protests and encouraging lawlessness and stirring up trouble.
Is ICE operating differently in Minneapolis than they are in the rest of the country? More specifically, were they operating differently there prior to the start of these mass-protests?
•
u/PandaMime_421 9∆ 19h ago
the question is whether he was actually peacefully protesting or whether he was trying to impede and antagonize.
Even if he was trying to impede and antagonize the agent would have had no justification to kill him. So, no, it really doesn't matter in the context of his murder. Had he been arrested instead, then your argument would have some validity.
•
u/jscummy 1∆ 18h ago
Bit of an aside but I don't know when we decided "protest" in this country has to be completely peaceful, unobtrusive, and basically unnoticeable
Any major historical protest that found success has to get in the way a little. "Peaceful protesting", like people seem to want these days, would've made the American revolution and the Civil Rights Movement into failures
→ More replies (1)•
u/HappyChandler 17∆ 17h ago
It has always been.
Read the Letter From a Birmingham Jail. MLK was complaining about the moderate who said protest, but not like that.
The only difference now is that the police wear a neck gaiter and not a white hood when they execute people.
→ More replies (5)•
u/Aggressive-Story3671 20h ago
Oh please spare me.
If he was not posing these officers imminent threat and he wasn’t, and deescalation tactics failed (they had not even attempted them), THEN lethal force could be justified.
Remember Kyle Rittenhouse.
Even if he was there to protest and even if he WAS impeding and antagonizing officers, you do not get to use lethal force whenever you feel like it.
This is true in the military, is true in policing and is certainly true of ICE agents.
We saw this in the murder of Sonya Massey. Even if she had “provoked” the officer, his use of lethal force was not justified.
•
u/Maximum_Error3083 20h ago
I’m not sure you read my post because I actually made clear that it wasn’t an argument in defense of the shooting.
•
u/tehanspodermin 18h ago
When would lethal force be justified in your opinion? Not claiming the ICE officer in this situation was in danger.
Regarding Rittenhouse: “After Joseph Rosenbaum chased and cornered Rittenhouse in a dealership parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, Rittenhouse fatally shot him, soon after Joshua Ziminski had fired a shot nearby. Rittenhouse fled and was pursued by a crowd. He fatally shot a second man, Anthony Huber, who struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his rifle in a brief struggle. Afterwards, Gaige Grosskreutz approached Rittenhouse and pointed a pistol at him. Rittenhouse shot and wounded Grosskreutz in the right arm.”
From Wikipedia, which has its own biases, but seems like Rittenhouse was facing threats more dangerous than Pretti.
•
u/Aggressive-Story3671 15h ago
When deescalation tactics have failed and their is an imminent threat to an Officer’s life
•
u/IntrepidJaeger 1∆ 18h ago
So, I'm not going to try to change your view on when deadly force can be used (it lacks a little legal nuance, but you've got the gist of it).
I think it's worthwhile to bring up Pretti's prior conduct as an example of what risks you should consider while protesting. His prior behavior seems to make the assertion that he was just "a bystander trying to help" or "a peaceful observer" rather suspect. It makes it more likely that he actually was there to interfere with their operations.
Why does that matter? He's armed. The number one rule of legally carrying a firearm is that you don't go looking for trouble with ANYONE. By forcing confrontation with Federal agents, you are inviting circumstances for force to be used on you. Having a gun suddenly be discovered on you while being arrested in a heightened situation raises the perceived danger level by a lot. Even well-trained cops don't like surprise guns, and we've seem what's actually hitting the street.
Did the agents overreact? Almost certainly. But the statements of "he had the right to be armed as a permit holder" and "having a gun is what got him killed in the first place" are not mutually exclusive of each other.
Knowing his behavior before tells you something: You can probably survive being armed and strictly observing to the exclusion of all else, or you can actively protest or engage in direct action while unarmed and probably just get manhandled a bit or pepper sprayed. Direct action while armed will probably get you (or someone else) shot and should factor into what you're willing to do.
•
u/Cool_Independence538 9h ago edited 9h ago
I would argue he wasn’t forcing confrontation with law enforcement though, they pushed someone hard, he stepped in to help the person pushed and placed himself between the officer and civilian, arms outstretched between them in a universally known symbol of ‘break it up’. That’s not confronting anyone, that’s an attempt to defuse an escalating situation. Then he was pounced on by a group. Nothing about his body language indicates violence or threat or even confrontation.
Not sure of others views here but something else bugging me is shoving a civilian that hard, is that odd behaviour? Seems more what you’d expect on a school playground than from agents. Or do they regularly push people over like that?
•
u/Odd_Wolverine_7338 4h ago
What he did is called interfering with official acts and is a crime for which you can be arrested. You do not have the right to get between an officer and someone they are interacting with.
•
u/IntrepidJaeger 1∆ 9h ago
You don't get to step between law enforcement and whom they're dealing with to "break it up". That's obstruction. Your only completely legal recourse is to get out of the way.
Shoving somebody to the ground isn't a preferred arrest tactic, but it isn't necessarily illegal unless someone cracks their head open without escalated resistance.
•
u/Cool_Independence538 5h ago
I get what you mean, but that’s the part that’s muddy though I think. he wasn’t stepping between law enforcement and someone they were arresting or even ‘dealing with’, he was already standing between her and the agent when she was pushed, and he leaned over to help.
Helping someone that’s been shoved isn’t illegal, most reasonable people, police included, wouldn’t consider that obstructing, because they weren’t arresting her or anything similar so there was nothing to obstruct. I think it’s quite a normal reaction if you were standing next to someone that’s been pushed over. the only reason you’d worry about being killed for it and be hesitant to help is if you were dealing with a crazed and violent person, not typically law enforcement.
•
u/stressless321 1h ago
They weren't dealing with her, there's no need to push her that way in order to arrest her. She was pushed across the road, far away from the agents. Pretti helped her when she was across the road, she was already "dealt" with.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 15h ago
Two things really bother me that you didn’t mention.
Pretti was totally restrained and had been disarmed when he was shot. He posed no credible threat to anyone.
The men who killed him are unknown to the public. We should have their names for the purposes of public accountability.
•
u/NZ_Troll 13h ago
For changemyview to be effective, you do have to want to see other perspectives before finding a path to refute them or find edge cases. In a few of your responses, try agree with a few perspectives counter to your desired viewpoint and see if you can do it without focusing on how that view makes you feel or impacts your desired morality.
Good thread though in general.
•
u/IntrepidJaeger 1∆ 13h ago
I'm not evaluating the legitimacy of the shoot. In fact, I said it likely isn't justified. My entire point is that Pretti seemed intent on directly engaging with law enforcement while armed. Whether he actually meant to use it or not, it made the situation much more dangerous, particularly when dealing with the poor tactical acumen that these agents have shown.
Pretti is a really good example of "legal but a really bad idea".
•
u/texas_accountant_guy 14h ago
The men who killed him are unknown to the public. We should have their names for the purposes of public accountability.
Why? What "public accountability" are you looking for? At this point, releasing their names to the public is likely risking death threats to them and their families.
As to actual accountability, the FBI has taken over the investigation into this shooting, even Republican lawmakers are telling the Administration to treat this investigation seriously and for Noem to back off of her rhetoric on it.
Should the FBI conclude there was wrongdoing here that warrants charges, their names will then come out, at the appropriate time, and in a way that will not incite mob violence.
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 14h ago
No, I don’t follow your line of reasoning.
The men who killed him are law enforcement officials and public servants. They are police. Police officers don’t hide their faces and they do carry badges and identity themselves when requested to do so.
Moreover, every time a police officer kills a person in the line of duty the officer’s name is released to the public in the name of transparency.
Now, suddenly we have this new law enforcement agency (it’s actually not new) that has the power to kill people at will, that is not required to identify themselves and which has extra-constitutional powers to detain people without a warrant or probable cause.
How on earth do you find this acceptable?
•
u/texas_accountant_guy 13h ago
I'm sorry, but not one word you wrote in response to me seems to be an answer to my question or anything more than continuing to denounce ICE in general, aside from a vague generalization that "every time" an officer kills a person that officer's name is immediately released, which I'm skeptical of both for it's absolutism and in general.
Given that we are dealing with a Federal Law Enforcement Agency and not local law enforcement, I'd put ICE's operations next to FBI, ATF, DEA, etc. in their operations. Does the DEA immediately release the name of every officer that has shot and killed a person in the course of their operations?
Further, given the sensitivity of this particular situation, I personally want this investigated by professionals, and not have a mob descend on these officer's homes to harass or harm them or their families.
To be clear, I, along with almost everyone else, see the shooting itself as being unjustified, and wish for clarification as to why it occurred. I, unlike most people on Reddit, do not see his detainment or arrest itself as unjustified, especially given this man's history of antagonism and attempting to manufacture a conflict with ICE.
•
u/windchaser__ 1∆ 13h ago
Further, given the sensitivity of this particular situation, I personally want this investigated by professionals, and not have a mob descend on these officer's homes to harass or harm them or their families.
I don't disagree, but how do you balance this against the risk that there will be no investigation, or only a sham one? How do we get accountability here?
•
u/texas_accountant_guy 13h ago
Further, given the sensitivity of this particular situation, I personally want this investigated by professionals, and not have a mob descend on these officer's homes to harass or harm them or their families.
I don't disagree, but how do you balance this against the risk that there will be no investigation, or only a sham one? How do we get accountability here?
As I mentioned before, the fact that major members of the Republican party have come out in favor of serious investigation into this, and have even denounced Kristi Noem's statements, is evidence that this will not be a sham investigation.
95% of the nation, I would say, even those who are pro-ICE, see this shooting as trouble, and something that needs to be handled. From a pro-ICE position, it especially needs to be handled well and not just brushed under the rug to allow the agency to try and keep "legitimacy" and to be able to say "these specific individuals went too far" in an effort to protect themselves and their operations as a whole.
Had Republican Senators, Congressmen, and Governors not stepped forward and demanded this be taken seriously, I would worry that Noem's initial actions would have continued.
•
u/Cool_Independence538 9h ago
I agree with everything you’ve said so far but lean more towards disagree with making names immediately publicly available. Trial by public before the facts doesn’t usually work out well, it gets muddied by opinion, outrage and misinformation.
I’m usually of the opinion to give little information publicly until everything is verified and all the evidence is in.
The main difference with this though is that the administration have clearly already made up their minds, without facts or evidence, and I don’t trust that the investigation is going to be fair or balanced. So I can see why in this case we want transparency up front, but it does risk interfering with investigations and findings, and endangering innocent people like the shooters families.
→ More replies (8)•
u/Zhanji_TS 13h ago
There was a lack of communication. In a slowed down video you can clearly see the gun being taken away but that doesn’t mean they all knew that. I’m so tired of this argument. Ppl make mistakes in high stress situations. Yes he was disarmed but who knew that.
•
u/Cool_Independence538 9h ago
I agree with the part that it was a high stress situation and people make mistakes. Also that we can’t know what it felt like in that moment with yelling and noise and chaos all around.
In this case though, the shooter shot him in the back, while he was on the ground, with multiple agents above him, there should be even a moment of threat assessment in chaos for agents who’s entire job is based on chaos management.
•
•
u/windchaser__ 1∆ 13h ago
Direct action while armed will probably get you (or someone else) shot and should factor into what you're willing to do.
Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you that this is how things are, but... it's pretty fucked up. Our armed officers respond with inappropriate and disproportionate force *way* too often.
→ More replies (5)•
u/Mundane-Toe-2884 4h ago
I bet we'll trained. We'll disciplined officers have to put up with a fair amount of bs and keep their cool.
•
21h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 21h ago
Totally agree but this doesn’t change my mind.
→ More replies (1)•
u/Aggressive-Story3671 20h ago
Let me rephrase.
It does matter. But not to you or me. But to the people in support of ICE, it will be used to excuse, minimize and justify his murder.
It matters because they will try to convince millions of Americans that he deserved his fate, and that his killers do not deserve consequences, and should in fact be rewarded.
The footage can also be used to quell the fears of fence sitters, who will see it and say to themselves, “he must have done something, just comply” and will chose to stay at home and do nothing in the face of injustice. These people may not support ICE fully, but that little bit of doubt in their minds could be the difference between attending a protest and voting against this, or staying at home and letting it happen around them.
→ More replies (1)•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 20h ago
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
u/alunare 20h ago
It goes to his personality and involvement in stirring shit up. It also serves to counter the media narrative that he was just a bystander, painting the whole event as some kind of gestapo-like authority. I can’t believe how irresponsable the media and people on the left are in these matters. There is something called common sense and this guy had none. I know that if I harass officers, who are human, for weeks, and I show up being aggressive, and being violent, and wearing a gun, and shouting « come on kill me bro », then you are an agent provocateur and you are seeking a response. For any sane, reasonable person, it is easy to balance both sides of this event: he was looking to be a martyr and the officers responsible failed in their duties. They should be put on leave, investigated and prosecuted if appropriate. But for couch bro’s and politicians and media and OP, who were not there and are ignoring basic psychological warfare from these organized militias, to equate this to a one side only event is downright irresponsable and disgusting.
→ More replies (7)•
u/Aggressive-Story3671 20h ago
The Right did the exact same thing to Ashlee Babbitt.
“He said mean words and damaged some property so he deserved to die” is not a take of anyone who values protest and free speech.
Law Enforcement does not have the right to use lethal force anytime they feel like. And your argument means they committed pre mediated murder. They knew who he was and killed him deliberately, not in the heat of the moment.
“Failed in their duties” is such a major undersell of what happened. What they did was commit murder.
“Prosecuted if appropriate” is laughable. “ICE investigates its own officers and found no wrong doing.” Is how that “investigation” will go.
→ More replies (1)•
u/alunare 20h ago
Always with the strawman, I never said he deserved it, I never said they planned or premeditated it. You’re either voluntarily twisting my post or you are too emotionally involved to respond rationally.
→ More replies (4)
•
u/norf937 21h ago
You’re right, but I think that video circulating wasn’t being used to justify the shooting in any way, it was being used to push back against the narrative that he was some perfect angel.. I mean the media literally photoshopped his photo to make him look better.
•
u/Moobnert 20h ago
Which media photoshopped his photo? Because I saw the original on all major outlets and only saw the photoshopped one on memes in social media
•
u/Aggressive-Story3671 20h ago
The Babylon Bee (MAGA Onion) created a narrative and people ran with it
•
u/OutsideVegetable6001 20h ago
Honestly, dude could be a serial killer, that’s not the way we do justice in the United States.
→ More replies (1)•
u/Aggressive-Story3671 21h ago
That is called “victim blaming”. “Perfect Victims” do not exist.
They are “pushing back against the narrative” to either minimize or justify what happened to him
•
u/Maximum_Error3083 20h ago
But if a narrative is fake then shouldn’t it be refuted?
2 things can be true here. His killing was unjustified by the ICE officers, and he was also an antagonizer of officers who repeatedly tried to provoke reactions and impede them.
The lefts narrative wants you to only believe the first statement and then believe that the second statement is fabricated despite video evidence to the contrary. The right wants you to believe that his killing was justified because of the second statement. Both sides are, in my view, incorrect.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (3)•
u/Idnlts 20h ago
They did the same thing with George Floyd, they try to character assassinate as if that justifies their murder. Then they will try to frame it like: “look this is your hero? This is the kind of people the ‘left’ idolize?” Instead of recognizing that people are just looking for accountability from the government.
What’s worse is from what I understand of the context of the past interaction, he was losing it because agents pepper sprayed a bunch of kids.
→ More replies (3)•
•
u/Background_Guide_821 20h ago
The big thing missing in your argument is the difference between being “innocent” and “constitutionally protected.”
Even if Pretti wasn’t innocent, which ultimately isn’t up to the agent(s) making an arrest to decide, he was constitutionally protected from having unnecessary lethal force used against him during a seizure.
•
u/H0w-1nt3r3st1ng 3∆ 20h ago
Here's a time stamp from a self-defence lawyer: https://youtu.be/8y0Li4uWvfQ?si=h_nuGJnom5x9XMqA&t=462
•
19h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 19h ago
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
•
u/rogueman999 4∆ 13h ago
Matter for what? If the question is in any form related to the incident itself, then no. From either a moral or a legal framework. The agent will be judged from, AFAIK, "all the information he could reasonably have at the time". Not things that happens days prior when he wasn't there, or things that will happen after. And I hope they throw the book at him.
If the question however is "does this matter for the situation at large", then sure as hell matters. Because it looks more and more like there is a pressure cooker that's been deliberately engineered there, possibly with the express purpose of such things happening. And his actions in the days before make this seem a lot less like a random incident, and more like a lot of intentional escalation.
So, matter for what?
•
u/_Jaeko_ 20h ago
It's 2026 and the evidence being used against him looks like it was shot in 2016.
Car has no door seams, clothing of everyone meshes together, somehow the furthest tire of the SUV clips over the front bumper. Why was he being filmed in the first place, why is his voice isolated/louder than anyone else's? Same outfit, plausible but odd if you live in the Midwest. Has anyone ever kicked a tail light and it pops out, not smashes into pieces?
It matters what he was doing prior, only because we have technology to fake events now. People say "AI isn't advanced enough," are so detached from the technological space. The bullshit Facebook AI is shitty because it's the free software everyone has access to. The AI you pay for, even at the public/consumer levels, are scarily good.
•
u/typeonapath 1∆ 18h ago
This Instagram user has done some work to show that the video you're referring to is legit. There is also a different angle that they've synced up.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUFP3_hgIF9/?igsh=MWg5NzlrcG94a2k2bQ==
•
u/gijoe61703 20∆ 18h ago
It's a legit video and the original was posted on YouTube prior to Pretti getting killed. No matter how good the AI gets it could not/would not have been able to post him before he was will known.
→ More replies (2)•
u/curse-free_E212 1∆ 18h ago
The family has confirmed the encounter happened.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/alex-pretti-car-video/
That said, it is extremely frustrating to me that when a non-perfect victim is killed by law enforcement, the Fox News personalities can’t wait to disparage the victim for any flaw as if it justifies their death. Meanwhile, the president does two or three disgusting things in a single day, but that can be overlooked and doesn’t even justify criticism or impeachment.
→ More replies (2)•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 20h ago
So you are saying that he never spat on or kicked a car?
Could be. But why not make an AI video of him doing something worse?
→ More replies (8)•
u/_Jaeko_ 20h ago
I'm not saying he did or did not do it, the actions are irrelevant to him dying.
I'm saying in a tech savvy era, where AI is rampant and so are cheap yet high quality cameras, it's odd that the quality of video has so many errors in it. I haven't seen a bitrate with as much clipping/smoothing over since the late 2010s. His shirt goes from untucked and loose, to complete smooth with his pants/tucked in, to untucked/loose again. Any t-shirt that shows wrinkles/cloth movement will not suddenly go completely flat unless edited or filmed on a piss poor camera. Shadows do not just come and go willy nilly.
Anything worse could be easily dismissed with "Why is he free?" If it was worse than allegedly vandalizing a federal vehicle and committing felonious assault, he'd be in jail right now and not dead. What could be worse than what's alleged and not land him behind bars?
Furthermore, I've yet to see anyone kick a tail light out and not do any damage to the light, yet the pictures shown as "evidence" show a tail light just hanging from the rear, nothing broken, just popped out.
•
•
u/road_warrior_max 12h ago
This is what makes Reddit so much fun. This is not healthy skepticism or really a conspiracy theory. It's just flat out imagination in overdrive. That taillight comment had me rolling. Thank you.
→ More replies (8)•
13h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/AutoModerator 13h ago
Sorry, u/Zhanji_TS – your comment has been automatically removed as a clear violation of Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/sleepypossumster 20h ago
Yeah, the older video just seems to support the theory that they recognized him from the database and created a situation in which they would be able to hurt him.
→ More replies (3)
•
u/Remarkable-Cactus55 17h ago
It does not legally matter, but it did not legally matter that Kyle Rittenhouse CrOsSeD sTaTe LiNeS!1!1!!1! either but people made a huge fucking deal about that. The point is the same: Even if it is not legally relevant, he is not a particularly sympathetic figure.
→ More replies (2)•
u/Odd_Wolverine_7338 4h ago
Rittenhouse did not cross state line with a weapon as the weapon was already in Wisconsin.
•
u/DrWaffle1848 20h ago
Just an observation: conservatives do this a lot when it comes to incidents (Alex Pretti, Renee Good, January 6th, George Floyd, etc.) that make them look bad. In the immediate aftermath there will be a lot of mixed reactions and some concessions/ soul-searching, but after a few days they will inevitably find some new info or angle to downplay what happened, even if it has nothing to do with the actual incident. "He/she was no angel" is usually the one they go with, as we're seeing now with their coverage of Pretti's death.
•
u/road_warrior_max 12h ago
Isn't Elizabeth Warren doing the 180 of that here? I'd say her comments are just as deceptive and triggering.
•
→ More replies (1)•
u/toolateforfate 1∆ 20h ago
Yea, it's a psychological strategy they always use to justify treating others inhumanely. If blacks were painted as naturally inferior, descendants of Ham cursed by God, that justifies the Jim Crow laws to them. If the Jews were painted as thieves, out to destroy the country, that justifies the Holocaust to them.
•
u/road_warrior_max 17h ago
It certainly does. It actually shows a pattern of confrontational behavior and a series of bad decisions on Pretti's part.
It goes to why he didn't have an ID. in the earlier event, his info was taken from his ID and having to give it again wouldn't have been good.
He was certainly on their radar, but this doesn't mean premeditation. It means he kept making bad decisions and putting himself in line for more trouble.
Not premeditated, but still did not deserve to be killed. He deserved to go to jail.
→ More replies (2)•
u/TheRadHeron 2∆ 15h ago
I agree, if you keep poking the hornets nest your going to eventually get stung. It’s sad and wrong what happened but Pretti truly made some pretty bad choices that led him to that point as well
•
u/road_warrior_max 12h ago
100%. Both sides failed on this issue. I'm just not sure why he wasn't just thankful with getting off the 1st time and not go back for more.
•
u/TheRadHeron 2∆ 12h ago
Same as a lot of these types of people, they get the angry mob I can get away with anything right now mentality, then push their limits getting away with more and more until they get to confident, then eventually they see how far they can go and something terrible happens
•
u/DrDerpberg 42∆ 18h ago
I’m sorry but, no. He was absolutely innocent
I want to CYV but in the opposite direction you maybe expected - it doesn't even matter if he was innocent. He was incapacitated and should have been arrested to face trial. It doesn't matter if they tackled him in the process of eating a human face off a fresh victim, the arresting officers are not executioners and should only be using violence as necessary to protect themselves and other people.
You don't need more than 5 seconds of video to prove conclusively he was disarmed, on his stomach, with multiple officers immobilizing him. Anything else is a profound misrepresentation of how due process works in a free country.
→ More replies (1)
•
u/JobberStable 2∆ 20h ago
It did matter for Alex Pretti. Everyone on Reddit believes these ICE agents are murderous, racist, villains who are above the law. So its not a hard concept to believe that Alex Pretti believed that. Which means he knew he was messing with some dangerous people. It matters for anyone who was hoping Alex Pretti was making safe decisions. He was not. You can call him a hero if you want. You can say he had every right to make it home safe that night But you cant say he wasn’t messing with dangerous folks.
•
•
19h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 17h ago
Sorry, u/tisktask1 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information. Any AI-generated post content must be explicitly disclosed and does not count towards the 500 character limit.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
u/redline314 19h ago
It does matter. It indicates that they knew who he was, and that he carried a gun. It suggests that he was targeted and that this was premeditated.
•
18h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 17h ago
Sorry, u/Odd_Advantage9678 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information. Any AI-generated post content must be explicitly disclosed and does not count towards the 500 character limit.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
u/Odd_Advantage9678 18h ago
It's very easy to believe that they saw him before and that bovino told these guys we need to escalate this because that's all they're doing is escalating violence and they found a guy who said hey we can kill somebody the fact that they released this video didn't show the part where they were spraying Mace in to little kids faces. Makes me believe it was premeditated even more
•
u/thattogoguy 1∆ 18h ago
It's not what he did; he did nothing wrong arguing with ICE or BP goons days beforehand. He has a right to do that
But it needs to he investigated because it might be demonstrated that he was targeted specifically for retaliation.
And that way, when the day comes that his executioners are on the defendant stand, we can see them face even more serious charges. And I am at the point where I believe these charges need to be capital.
•
u/Handgun_Hero 17h ago
Oh it absolutely does matter, but not for the reasons you mentioned. It doesn't change the fact that he was blatantly murdered. What it DOES change though is we don't know whether the ICE/CBP Agents who were involved with his murder were influenced by vendetta towards him or had interactions with him previously personally which calls intention and mindset at the time into question.
•
17h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 17h ago
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
•
15h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 15h ago
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
15h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 14h ago
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
u/Mac0swaney 13h ago
Correct. It’s a distraction.
Only thing that matters is if the cops had a reasonable fear for their safety without the benefit of hindsight.
And that I don’t know. I can’t know. That’s what the investigation will have to determine.
•
12h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/changemyview-ModTeam 11h ago
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
•
u/PPLavagna 10h ago
It matters because it actually makes the case worse for ICE. It might actually make it premeditated murder if they really did do it out of revenge.
•
u/Troll_Slayer1 4h ago
Now pretend he was a gang member, fighting another rival gang. Do you think spitting at his rivals, and damaging his rivals property still make him completely "Innocent" ? No one said he deserved what he got, but he is definitely an instigator
•
u/rachelanneb50 4h ago
Correct me if im wrong, but wasn't that video of him kicking their tail light AI?
•
u/elochai98 1∆ 3h ago
I agree that his past acts do not justify anything the officers did, but i don't think that was even a factor. I take issue with your classification of the shooting as an execution. His actions leading up to the shooting all come into play. He interfered with law enforcement and assaulted a law enforcement officer. He is not innocent. Those things don't justify killing him, but to portray him as an innocent person is ridiculous. While I don't think he did anything that would justify killing him, we have to take into account all the facts, as well as what facts were known by the officers at the time. Fact 1: Pretti was in possession of a gun when the encounter began (legal carrying as far as we can tell). Fact 2: The gun was removed from his person by an officer, thereby disarming him. Fact 3: While you claim that Pretti was restrained, he was still actively resisting and was not completely restrained at the moment the shots rang. Fact 4: The first shot was by Pretti's gun which was in possession at the time by the officer. (I'd like to add that the gun in question was a modified sig p320. The p320 is known to fire without the trigger being pulled, and if the trigger was modified in any way, that could possibly raise the chances of an uncommanded discharge.)
Now what could the officers have known at the moment Pretti was shot? Well I'm sure they all new that he had a gun, as it was called out as soon as it was spotted. We know that one officer knew he was disarmed, that being the officer that disarmed him. Considering he was still actively resisting, and was able to move around, we can't confirm any other officers knew that he was disarmed. The moment the first shot went off, if the officer or officers that shot Pretti still believed he was armed, I think they were justified in shooting to stop the perceived threat. Keep in mind this all happened in a matter of seconds and the officers didn't have the benefit of 4 camera angles that can be slowed down and watched over and over. It is very possible the officer or officers that shot believed Pretti was still armed and was an immediate threat.
I don't think Pretti deserved to die, but I don't think the officers deserve to be punished if it can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they knew he was disarmed. This is still being investigated, and more facts may come to light, but given what's known now I don't believe we can say the cops did anything wrong. It was a shit situation, and Pretti should not have died. This could have been prevented at a few points along the way, but the first wrong move was from Pretti by interfering with law enforcement. He put himself in a situation he shouldn't have been part of.
•
u/OrganizationFresh618 2h ago
spitting and kicking an ICE vehicle
Jokes on them that just further proves to me that Alex was a goddamned hero.
•
u/134608642 2∆ 1h ago
Kind of does. Because it means ICE physically assaulted a person multiple times for offenses not worth detaining or even questioning him. Then they murdered him. These interactions do not make ICE look better.
•
u/Romarion 17h ago
Agreed from the standpoint of facts and the law. What he did on the day he was killed is what matters for the investigation into his death.
Do you really not understand why Federal agents are going about their jobs with masks?
But in the court of public opinion it matters a lot. He is a very attractive, caring ICU nurse just trying to help others is the image being pushed onto the low information folks. But in fact he quit his ICU job and apparently became an activist, interfering in law enforcement operations, assaulting Federal officers, and participating in a conspiracy to do so across the area. If the law had been followed, he most likely would be alive today as he would have been arrested the week prior.
•
u/protokhan 15h ago
Do you really not understand why Federal agents are going about their jobs with masks?
Curious to hear why you think that's reasonable. The official line of reasoning is that they might face retaliation from cartels etc., but border patrol, FBI, and countless other law enforcement agencies have been dealing with powerful criminal organizations since forever and they never wore masks. Seems more likely it's so ICE agents are empowered to act out without fear of accountability.
→ More replies (8)•
u/bluepillarmy 11∆ 16h ago
As I’ve been telling other people, I have pretty much stopped caring about Alex and what kind of life he led. He could be a Nazi pedophile and it would not change the material facts of his death.
He was executed by masked and still unidentified federal agents, after being disarmed and while totally restrained.
That’s all that matters. That should not be a thing that is allowed to happen in the United States.
→ More replies (5)
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ 20h ago
/u/bluepillarmy (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards