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

[Smelly Squirrel]

NY Times video analysis.

 

[Inthedetails]

Let that sink in. ICE
FAILED TO COMPLY WITH 96 COURT ORDERS.
NINETY SIX.

The law-and-order people.

jmo

 

[Amonet]

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.

If I thought they feared for their lives I would feel totally differently.

He's reaching to help a woman up from the sidewalk. Are they threatened by that to the point where they need to use pepper spray?

Then he's struggling on the ground being beaten up. They seem very much in control of AP at this point.

If one of those officers surrounding AP had shouted "gun" none of them had time to assess where the gun was or who it was pointed at prior to the start of the ten shots. I think that assessment is crucial. There could have been someone behind them with an AK 47 pointed at them and they wouldn't know as they were too busy pumping bullets into the man on the ground in front of them who was being beaten up because he tried to help up an innocent bystander from the sidewalk.

 

[Inthedetails]

CNN hosted a town hall in Minnesota tonight. A recap of the event is here:

https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/minneapolis-ice-trump-01-28-26?post-id=cmkypbi6300003b6p4xswulnl&t=1769656275869

 

[K9Enzo]

IMO Would Mr. Pretti have had continued employment with his current employer if this video was brought to their attention? Employers are permitted to take action on off duty conduct when it calls into question someone’s fitness for duty, particularly in roles involving vulnerable patients. Kicking , spitting at a LE vehicle and engaging in a physical confrontation with agents demonstrates a serious lapse in judgement and impulse control. We would see this again, amped up, a week later. IMO

Video shows Alex Pretti in scuffle with federal agents 11 days before his death

A newly released video shows Alex Pretti confronting federal officers on a Minneapolis street 11 days before he was fatally shot in another encounter with CBP agents, a Pretti family representative confirmed to CBS News.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[iamshadow21]

Alex Pretti’s colleagues hold moment of silence for him at Minneapolis VA hospital

Photos show health care workers lined up along the hallways where he worked as they honored the intensive care unit nurse.

www.mysuncoast.com

 

[Amonet]

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

The possibility of second, unidentified, weapon makes me think that this logic would be the same as assuming, without evidence, that any person had an unseen weapon, and that the weapon was an immediate threat, and that therefore deadly force would be necessary to save lives.

I think this is the same logic being beheld by those who are saying that AP should not have had a gun on his person at that place and time. But LE should be aware that some citizens might be carrying legally in jurisdictions where it is legal to do so. They can't just assume anyone they drag off the street and beat up has a hidden weapon and use that as a reason to shoot them dead.

 

[Snoopster]

IMO Would Mr. Pretti have had continued employment with his current employer if this video was brought to their attention? Employers are permitted to take action on off duty conduct when it calls into question someone’s fitness for duty, particularly in roles involving vulnerable patients. Kicking , spitting at a LE vehicle and engaging in a physical confrontation with agents demonstrates a serious lapse in judgement and impulse control. We would see this again, amped up, a week later. IMO

Video shows Alex Pretti in scuffle with federal agents 11 days before his death

A newly released video shows Alex Pretti confronting federal officers on a Minneapolis street 11 days before he was fatally shot in another encounter with CBP agents, a Pretti family representative confirmed to CBS News.

www.cbsnews.com

How is this relevant to the events of this past weekend? CPB took him down, beat him and shot him in the back when he was not a threat. <modsnip>

 

[Amonet]

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.

And AP was not the "instigator" of what happened at any point.

He did not push anyone. He did not unholster his weapon. He did not point a weapon. He did not shoot a weapon.

 

[Andreee]

IMO Would Mr. Pretti have had continued employment with his current employer if this video was brought to their attention? Employers are permitted to take action on off duty conduct when it calls into question someone’s fitness for duty, particularly in roles involving vulnerable patients. Kicking , spitting at a LE vehicle and engaging in a physical confrontation with agents demonstrates a serious lapse in judgement and impulse control. We would see this again, amped up, a week later. IMO

Video shows Alex Pretti in scuffle with federal agents 11 days before his death

A newly released video shows Alex Pretti confronting federal officers on a Minneapolis street 11 days before he was fatally shot in another encounter with CBP agents, a Pretti family representative confirmed to CBS News.

www.cbsnews.com

No way to answer that. And a mute point also, since he was shot dead in the back! If anything, Americans should demand a full review of how that fatal shooting of an American citizen went down, again.

 

[Amonet]

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

For how long will "Good Samaritans" exist in the US when they see what happens to people who go to the assistance of another person?

The lesson here appears to be that if, in the presence of ICE or Border Patrol, do not go to the assistance of anyone who is pushed or falls to the ground. If you do, you maybe pepper sprayed, pushed to the ground, beaten up, and shot dead. Some might say this is hyperbole. The gun makes a difference? So don't reach to help anyone while you're legally carrying a small holstered gun. And then you'll be safe?

I know some perceive this to be a lesson in not interfering with LE. And I'd agree with them if LE had been trying to apprehend some violent criminal and AP had stepped between. But it was a woman fallen to the snowy, icy, sidewalk that AP went toward, not a criminal trying to evade apprehension by LE. That makes a huge difference in my mind.

 

[Amonet]

Tricia, thank you for this question. I will try not to take it on a hay ride : )

IMO ONLY From LE perspective, these encounters are becoming more dangerous because many misunderstand where the legal lines are. There's widespread belief that as long as no physical contact happens, nothing unlawful is happening. This is getting people injured and killed.

Assault does not require physical contact. What matters is whether someone’s actions create a reasonable fear of imminent harm. When people deliberately close distance, step into an agents path, or force a moment where the agent must stop, or push through, that behavior is no longer passive protest. It is perceived as obstruction and a safety risk to the agent.

Agents aren’t evaluating these moments in slow motion or with the benefit of replay. They are assessing intent, proximity, movement, and threat in real time, often with shouting, bizarre whistles blowing non stop, frozen water bottles being thrown at them, car horns honking nonstop, crowd pressure, and limited visibility. When someone engineers a confrontation through movement, the agent must make a split-second decision based on safety, not speculation about motives.

There is no right to physically obstruct a federal agent performing official duties. To me Mr. Pretti was obstructing. From the agent’s standpoint, being blocked, crowded, or forced into unavoidable contact is a legitimate safety concern, not a political disagreement.

A struggle was clearly underway, someone yelled “gun,” and at least one firearm was involved, which would reasonably heighten fear in a fast-moving, chaotic encounter. From the agents POV it’s possible they did not know whether a weapon had already been secured or whether the person had another weapon. What did the agent(s) reasonably perceive at the time? I suspect we are going to hear this was not one (singular) agent that fired reportedly 10 times, but more than one. I believe this all went down in four seconds. IMO

I think this is really well said.

I also think armed LE need to be trained for such scenarios so that they do not overreact in the way they did here. If they're going to be armed, if they're going to be sent into chaotic environments, they need training so that they don't immediately shoot multiple bullets into someone on the ground in front of them at the sound of a whistle or a gunshot, or even the word "gun". As I said in another post, "gun" could have been anywhere, it might not have been under their nose, it could be behind them being brandished by someone in the street who was upset seeing them beat up a 'protester'.

They also need training that just because bystanders A, B, C, and D, are blowing whistles and calling them nasty things, that they don't shoot person E because of their anger and frustration at the others.

 

[Amonet]

now now I am sure they were just investigating the crime scene. the crime being homicide JMO

Perhaps they should stand back from the deceased individual, once it's ascertained that they are beyond assistance, and call local police to deal with the body and do forensics and let them collect evidence from the body? This kind of separation from the person who one of their officers has shot would be best for them to avoid the kind of accusations that are being made, and it might be a bit easier for the families of individuals killed in these circumstances?

 

[iamshadow21]

Memorial outside Minneapolis VA hospital honors Alex Pretti

The Minneapolis VA hospital, where Alex Pretti worked, is a place where people go to heal and, today, a place to honor one of those healers.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Charlot123]

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.

JMO

We may ask lawyers to chip in, but isn't there a certain measure of "professionally appropriate" or "professionally expected" decision-making and actions for most specialties?

I guess, 75-80%? So if 80% of (doctors, lawyers, pilots, bus drivers, insert whatever you want) would have acted in a similar way given the circumstances, then the act is "professionally appropriate".

So if 80% of border patrol agents would have acted in the same way, then I guess it would be OK.

Given what I saw on the video, it doesn't look like it, though. The border patrol overuses pepper spray, is physically aggressive, pushes people off their feet, the actions of the agent who took the gun and wandered off somewhere are exceptionally poorly explained. Did he say, "i took away his gun?". Did he just wander away?

Clapping hands after a person is killed is not the act of a person who's scared for his life. Again, is this what 80% of border patrol agents do?

There may be some mitigating circumstances (the whole situation in Minnesota) and also, sad reality (perhaps, poorly trained people who are unused to work in a group?), but I do hope that 80% of our border patrol might do a better job under the circumstances.

In general, "I was scared for my life" might be a limited defense. The border patrol agents clearly escalated the situation. By the time of the shooting, they had Alex Pretty incapacitated, disarmed and blinded by pepper.

 

[SouthAussie]

Let that sink in. ICE
FAILED TO COMPLY WITH 96 COURT ORDERS.
NINETY SIX.

Not sure why people haven't been thrown in jail for contempt of court yet.

Maybe there is appeal after appeal after appeal going on. That seems to be the usual strategy - appeal and continue the errant behaviour.

imo

 

[SouthAussie]

As far as we know, the agents were conducting an active operation even if we don't know who and where their targets for that day were. And I haven't seen it reported anywhere that they were waiting for a warrant. But even if they were, that's evidence that they were still conducting their operation.

It seems that their stated procedure was to form their own perimeter for their operation. It is what the additional ICE people were sent to Minneapolis for (apparently).

And Bovino was removed from his commander position and sent back to his previous position at El Centro. Probably for not following stated procedures. imo


Stephen Miller said the White House had “provided clear guidance to DHS that the extra personnel that had been sent to Minnesota for force protection should be used for conducting fugitive operations to create a physical barrier between the arrest teams and the disruptors.”

“We are evaluating why the CBP team may not have been following that protocol,” he said.

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/27/politics/stephen-miller-alex-pretti-trump

 

[Herat]

JMO

We may ask lawyers to chip in, but isn't there a certain measure of "professionally appropriate" or "professionally expected" decision-making and actions for most specialties?

I guess, 75-80%? So if 80% of (doctors, lawyers, pilots, bus drivers, insert whatever you want) would have acted in a similar way given the circumstances, then the act is "professionally appropriate".

So if 80% of border patrol agents would have acted in the same way, then I guess it would be OK.

Given what I saw on the video, it doesn't look like it, though. The border patrol overuses pepper spray, is physically aggressive, pushes people off their feet, the actions of the agent who took the gun and wandered off somewhere are exceptionally poorly explained. Did he say, "i took away his gun?". Did he just wander away?

Clapping hands after a person is killed is not the act of a person who's scared for his life. Again, is this what 80% of border patrol agents do?

There may be some mitigating circumstances (the whole situation in Minnesota) and also, sad reality (perhaps, poorly trained people who are unused to work in a group?), but I do hope that 80% of our border patrol might do a better job under the circumstances.

In general, "I was scared for my life" might be a limited defense. The border patrol agents clearly escalated the situation. By the time of the shooting, they had Alex Pretty incapacitated, disarmed and blinded by pepper.

What I see is that the CBP agents at no time seem to defuse the situation with calm and non-threatening behaviour

1. They have a very aggressive military appearance (likely why they are getting wanna-be's to hire)

2. They openly have lethal weapons in their hands at the ready

3. They have a crouched defensive appearance, not a full stand calm appearance.

4. They do not appear to use low calm voices.

5. They START the physical contact and continue the combative PUSHING.

How difficult it is for Stephen Miller to see the obvious problem: They act like they are in military combat instead of peaceful crowd control and descalation of the interactions.

Dun

PRIVATE CONVERSATION

 

[Amonet]

ICE not only looks and acts like a paramilitary force – it is one, and that makes it harder to curb

ICE, created in response to 9/11, meets most definitions of paramilitary forces. Critics worry it’s gone beyond its writ of immigration enforcement.

theconversation.com

I found that a very helpful read. I think it explains some of the anxious feelings and distaste some are feeling when seeing these organisations in action and the choices they make.

I also think the article does offer helpful assessment of differences that could be applied to ICE to make it more in line with regular LE so that they'd be more likely to retain the support of more of the public, suffer less antagonism from the public, and be a safer force both for themselves, the public, and those they apprehend. Add in things like triple checking of targets to ensure they really are violent and illegal, and I think the public would be so much more accepting and eventually supportive.

 

[TristanP]

A person has a right in a crosswalk, but a poor judgement call could lead to being hit by a truck.

That poor judgement call would have to involve the truck seeing the person in the crosswalk and speeding up on purpose.

A person has every right to freedom of speech, however, in the wrong place at the wrong time that too could cost them their life.

It's my opinion this man chose to be there that day with a confrontational attitude, and when he involved himself in the situation the presence of the firearm came to light, the threat to the Federal agents arose, and the rest is history.

There is no evidence that he had a confrontational manner. (I realize you stated that it was your opinion.)

The 2nd Amendment doesn't say one has the right to bear arms only with the right attitude.

He was shot AFTER his gun had been taken by those Federal "agents".

Attempting to justify this by saying he shouldn't have been carrying his gun is no better than saying it's a woman's fault for being raped because she wore provocative clothing. Your last sentence could read "It's my opinion that this woman chose to be there that night with a flirtatious demeanor, and when she entered the nightclub the temptation for that man arose, and the rest is history."