MEDICAL EXAMINER RULES ALEX PRETTI DEATH A HOMICIDE -1 - dead after Minneapolis shooting involving immigration agents, US Jan 24, 2026

[BayouBelle_LA]

TEN times? Into a man on the ground? With the gun in possession of an agent? With people in the near vicinity who could've been hit?

It's ineptitude, imo.

jmopinion

It’s reasonable to believe that the agents didn’t know that a firearm was in possession. I think Tricia’s friend makes a good point about the possibility of a second weapon, something I hadn’t thought about. I’m sure they’re trained for that.

That’s far more plausible than believing multiple agents deliberately set out to kill a protester for helping a woman. imo

 

[southgoldengirl]

Can you explain what you mean? The 2nd Amendment is part of the Constitution. It is a right of the People, not the government as has been argued by so many.

Yes the 2nd Amendment is part of the Constitution and is the right of the People as you say. However you don't have to agree with the 2nd Amendment to support that whatever is in the Constitution is for ALL the People not just a select few.

So if the 2nd Amendment was trotted out for Kyle Rittenhouse who drove to another state and inserted himself into a protest and actually killed people with a firearm not licensed to him and was then acquitted, invited to the Whitehouse and held up as a hero, then surely Pretti under the same Amendment with a conceal carry license, who didn't brandish the weapon is entitled to the same rights, without the President et al coming out and saying he shouldn't have been there with a gun.

Apologies for the long sentence I have some things to attend to.

 

[Fika]

No, no, a thousand times NO! Ban me if you want to (IDK) or put me on TO. I CANNOT agree with this!

100%!

 

[PrairieWind]

It's an amendment to the Contitution, not part of the Constitition. It's true the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were ratified at the same time, thanks to the Anti-Federalists who thought the Constitution gave too much power to the Federal government and wanted protection against that.

Might sound nit-picky, but if we're going to tout support for the amendments, it's best to get it right. If the amendments were part of the Constitution, they wouldn't have needed to have been added. The Bill of Rights is 10 amendments added to the Constitution.

jmopinion

Amendments ARE part of the Constitution. It is important to understand that.

Any amendment BECOMES part of the constitution. Madison initially argued against the Bill of Rights since they shouldn't be necessary since the body of the Constitution set for the limits of the Federal government anyway. There were concerns that the addition of the Bill would be seen as defining and thus limiting other rights. (How wise the forefathers were). But the Bill was agreed to. And thus ARE part of the Constitution.

 

[moonglow123]

I, like many others here, said this after Renee's death. We need to stop justifying and allowing them to shoot people at any imagined slight. They desperately need to be taught de-escalation and be asked to stick with it. DHS's own handbook recommends de-escalation. Normal law enforcement are taught de-escalation.

There were, what, eight agents tackling Alex? Why is the answer to shoot him instead of arrest him?

He did not have his gun out. Saying he deserved to be shot for possessing a gun that was holstered and not out is completely contrary to the Second Amendment, and a very dangerous precedent.

I don't understand why anyone would want to normalize the regular use of lethal force. It doesn't just happen to "the other side" or "bad people", normalizing the flippant use of lethal force puts everyone at risk. We need de-escalation and greater training. Lethal force should be last resort only, instead of first instinct like it was here.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

Hey Everyone,

A friend of mine shared his thoughts with me and gave me permission to post them here. His perspective is different from what most people in this thread believe

I’m posting this because I think it’s important to understand how people think who strongly disagree with each other. I’d like to hear your responses to his views and how you would address his arguments.

As always, please respond respectfully and thoughtfully. This is a good opportunity to show that people can disagree passionately and still have a productive, civil conversation.

From my friend
I think that any LE officer in this situation could have felt threatened by this guy's movements. He is clearly resisting the officers and reaching for something. Did someone shout "gun" at some point? If so it would heighten the fear among the officers. Did the officers who fired at him know that another officer had taken a weapon from him? I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't from watching that confusing struggle. Does taking a single weapon during the struggle mean he doesn't have another weapon that could be used to kill? Of course not

So it's boils down to did the actions of the armed instigator cause these officers to fear for their lives or the safety of others. If it did then the shooting is legally justified

I wonder if you think it's possible the officers in this case really did fear for their safety during this encounter with the armed protester.

Tricia again. I would love to see your replies to my friend's message.

When he "boils it down" to
actions of the armed instigator....
We are unfortunately, right back at the beginning.

There are reams and reams of accounts of how aggressive, painful and heartless ICe agents have been in all States,
so trying to believe they are "in fear" is very very hard. Before taking on Alex, these officers pushed two women down to the street and sprayed them with pepperspray. Nope. They were not in fear.

 

[Friday Fan]

Hey Everyone,

A friend of mine shared his thoughts with me and gave me permission to post them here. His perspective is different from what most people in this thread believe

I’m posting this because I think it’s important to understand how people think who strongly disagree with each other. I’d like to hear your responses to his views and how you would address his arguments.

As always, please respond respectfully and thoughtfully. This is a good opportunity to show that people can disagree passionately and still have a productive, civil conversation.

From my friend
I think that any LE officer in this situation could have felt threatened by this guy's movements. He is clearly resisting the officers and reaching for something. Did someone shout "gun" at some point? If so it would heighten the fear among the officers. Did the officers who fired at him know that another officer had taken a weapon from him? I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't from watching that confusing struggle. Does taking a single weapon during the struggle mean he doesn't have another weapon that could be used to kill? Of course not

So it's boils down to did the actions of the armed instigator cause these officers to fear for their lives or the safety of others. If it did then the shooting is legally justified

I wonder if you think it's possible the officers in this case really did fear for their safety during this encounter with the armed protester.

Tricia again. I would love to see your replies to my friend's message.

I don't think they feared for their lives.

I know LE often frisk people and remove weapons, but how often do they shoot them just because they have a holstered firearm? Many times people resist arrest in the same manner that Alex was resisting. Physically moving and squirming. Many times this resistance is due to substances (However, not in Alex's case) If they shot every armed person who squirmed in this manner, there would many more deaths from police. I believe he was targetted because he was a "pain in the ass". Many arrested people are "pains in the ass" and many are armed. They aren't killed however.

I think in this case it was how they classified this "pain in the ass" versus any other type of "pita". So he was targetted for his specific actions: Filming, standing in the wrong place, assisting others who had been in the way etc etc...

Alex was restrained with both pepper spray and their bodies.

It was pretty obvious that even if he had another firearm on his body, that he would not be able to use it.

It's extremely difficult to tell if Alex ever reached for his backside to possibly grab his firearm. However, I don't think he did. He knew he was overpowered.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

I am certainly happy to see the massive increase in support of the Second Amendment.

Well, I can understand how you would see this.
I would suggest that this massive support is, in part, due to the absolute hypocricy.

 

[JennieM]

4m ago
A new letter from the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Trump administration’s deployment of federal troops to six cities cost taxpayers $496 million between June and December 2025.

Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, requested the estimate of costs to activate, deploy and compensate national guard and Marine Corps troops sent to Los Angeles, Washington DC, Memphis, Portland, Chicago and New Orleans. Continuing those deployments would cost roughly $93 million per month.

In a press release, Merkely’s office said “Following Trump’s directive that national guard troops will stay in Washington D.C. for the remainder of 2026, CBO estimates this deployment alone will cost taxpayers upwards of $660 million. If the administration continues the Guard deployment to Memphis and the 200 Texas National Guard troops remain active for all of 2026, as expected, and keeps personnel deployed to New Orleans for two additional months, that figure balloons to $1.1 billion.”

Federal agents involved in fatal shooting of Alex Pretti placed on administrative leave – live

Two officers involved have been placed on administrative leave in standard protocol, says CBP spokesperson

www.theguardian.com

 

[nhmemorymaker]

How would that explain TEN shots?

jmo

And shoving two women to the ground........
oh, and how nice we still have "Good Samaritans"

 

[Summerliz03]

That’s far more plausible than believing multiple agents deliberately set out to kill a protester for helping a woman. imo

For me, I think if this incident happened exactly as is, but with regular law enforcement/police officers instead of ICE/border control, I would agree with you.

But the fact that most of those officers have been hired very quickly, could be unqualified to be in LE, received much shorter training than other law enforcement, have had many, many incidents documented of using excessive force in multiple situations, were told by the VP that they had absolute immunity from any of their actions and were probably mad about protestors yelling and blowing whistles at them, I'm more likely to think this is a case where a group of officers took out their aggression and frustration on an innocent man. And maybe it was just the 1 who fired first, but all the officers contributed to it by lack of communication between them and and lack of de-escalation. All MOO.

 

[bestill]

Moo..BBC had best vid I have seen. Second by second from multiple vids. But I am also seeing AI altered videos. Ai scares me.....moo

Do you have a link to the BBC video?

 

[Fika]

As an European this is beyond understandable for me . You can’t have police to execute people on the streets. He was clearly on the ground at that time surrounded by what few ICE . They could have tackled him down instead of executing him for what? It is just so wrong.

 

[Inthedetails]

Amendments ARE part of the Constitution. It is important to understand that.

Any amendment BECOMES part of the constitution. Madison initially argued against the Bill of Rights since they shouldn't be necessary since the body of the Constitution set for the limits of the Federal government anyway. There were concerns that the addition of the Bill would be seen as defining and thus limiting other rights. (How wise the forefathers were). But the Bill was agreed to. And thus ARE part of the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights is a second document that had to be fought for and the fight was not easy. To say they are one document is not only false, it denies the important history of both documents.

But, yes, the Constititution and all the amendments together form the law of the land.

jmopinion

 

[Summerliz03]

Do you have a link to the BBC video?

I believe this is the one that was referenced. They break down the whole incident. Unpicking the second Minneapolis shooting frame by frame

 

[Inthedetails]

It’s reasonable to believe that the agents didn’t know that a firearm was in possession. I think Tricia’s friend makes a good point about the possibility of a second weapon, something I hadn’t thought about. I’m sure they’re trained for that.

That’s far more plausible than believing multiple agents deliberately set out to kill a protester for helping a woman. imo

Then why not 20 shots? Why did they stop at 10?

jmo

 

[waldojabba]

Senator Rand Paul, R-Ky., called for an independent investigation into Pretti's death, saying the Department of Homeland Security should appoint a commission.

"We can’t just say oh, nothing to see here, and he was obviously an assassin and a domestic terrorist. When we say things like that, it leads to no confidence," he said, referring to DHS's initial statements about Pretti.

"I don’t think it’s honest to say he brandished a weapon. I don’t think it’s honest to say he assaulted officers," he told reporters. "I’m not saying he might not have been obnoxious. I’m not saying he might have said obnoxious things, but he films; he doesn’t even obstruct the traffic. He waves a car through in the middle of this as they approach him. He retreats as they approach him again, he retreats when a woman is shoved to the ground, he goes to help her up, and that’s when he is grabbed from behind."
Minneapolis live updates: Two Border Patrol agents who fired their guns in Alex Pretti’s fatal shooting have been put on leave

thank you Senator Paul.

Omg even Rand Paul gets it right….baby steps !
Jmo

 

[JennieM]

Do you have a link to the BBC video?

I posted it upthread, I’ll find it for you.

ETA:

Post in thread 'MN - Alex Pretti dead after Minneapolis shooting involving immigration agents, US media report, January 24, 2026'
MN - Alex Pretti dead after Minneapolis shooting involving immigration agents, US media report, January 24, 2026

 

[Greenestdays]

Hey Everyone,

A friend of mine shared his thoughts with me and gave me permission to post them here. His perspective is different from what most people in this thread believe

I’m posting this because I think it’s important to understand how people think who strongly disagree with each other. I’d like to hear your responses to his views and how you would address his arguments.

As always, please respond respectfully and thoughtfully. This is a good opportunity to show that people can disagree passionately and still have a productive, civil conversation.

From my friend
I think that any LE officer in this situation could have felt threatened by this guy's movements. He is clearly resisting the officers and reaching for something. Did someone shout "gun" at some point? If so it would heighten the fear among the officers. Did the officers who fired at him know that another officer had taken a weapon from him? I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't from watching that confusing struggle. Does taking a single weapon during the struggle mean he doesn't have another weapon that could be used to kill? Of course not

So it's boils down to did the actions of the armed instigator cause these officers to fear for their lives or the safety of others. If it did then the shooting is legally justified

I wonder if you think it's possible the officers in this case really did fear for their safety during this encounter with the armed protester.

Tricia again. I would love to see your replies to my friend's message.

I would kindly ask your friend to actually watch the videos and then come back to me when they can point out where Alex was “clearly resisting”, “reaching for something” (sure, he was reaching to help up the lady the ICE agent had just shoved to the ground). Nothing in the officers’ behaviour or actions was showing fear, they were being confrontational, pushy, and eventually two of them killed a person, some scattered, one clapped, a few started going through the victim’s pockets. That is not fear, that is evil.

 

[PrairieWind]

Well, I can understand how you would see this.
I would suggest that this massive support is, in part, due to the absolute hypocricy.

Many today supporting the amendment, a few years ago were calling it obsolete and needing to be done away with. This is why we have a Constitution, to stand up to the changes in feelings and political winds of change.