Border Patrol Agents Started the Scuffle That Led to Alex Pretti's Death
As with Renee Good, a calmer response could have avoided the lethal outcome.
During the encounter that culminated in Minneapolis protester Renee Good's death on January 7, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents senselessly escalated a situation that could have been resolved peacefully. Something similar happened on Saturday morning, when U.S. Border Patrol agents fatally shot Alex Pretti, another Minneapolis protester.
According to a statement that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued that morning, those agents were arresting "an illegal alien wanted for violent assault" when Pretti "approached" them "with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun." The officers "attempted to disarm" him, according to DHS, "but the armed suspect violently resisted." DHS described "a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement."
That gloss was contradicted by bystander videos of the incident, which show that Pretti, who had a carry permit, never drew his pistol, which the agents did not see until after they had tackled him. He was holding a cellphone in one hand, while his other hand was empty. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem nevertheless falsely claimed that Pretti was "brandishing" the gun, which she said showed he was "wishing to inflict harm on these officers."
Since Pretti did not actually threaten the Border Patrol agents with a gun, what prompted them to grab and restrain him? The videos show that Pretti initially was standing in the middle of the street, directing traffic while holding his cellphone to record an interaction between the agents and a few protesters. After an agent pepper-sprayed protesters and pushed a woman to the ground, Pretti stepped between the agent and the woman, "briefly putting his hand on the agent's waist," as The New York Times describes it. The agent responded with pepper spray, which Pretti tried to block with his hand. Then Pretti began helping the woman to her feet, which prompted the agents to tackle him. He was dead within half a minute.
Although Noem claimed Pretti "attacked those officers," it sure looks like the agents are the ones who started the fight. "Where did he assault [a] federal officer in any of the video that you have seen?" CNN's Dana Bash asked Border Patrol Commander at Large Gregory Bovino on Sunday. "It looked to us from every angle, sir, that he was approached by them when he was helping another individual who was pushed down. What evidence do you have that he was assaulting any law enforcement?"
It seems clear that Bovino had no such evidence. "Dana, we don't need a suspect's help in an active law enforcement scene," he said. "We don't need his help. We didn't ask his help."
By trying to help the woman who had been pushed to the ground, Bovino implied, Pretti was committing a crime. He cited 18 USC 111, which applies to someone who "forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with" federal law enforcement officers who are engaged in "the performance of official duties." But the videos do not show Pretti "forcibly" doing anything, let alone attacking the agents, before they decided to take him down.
In a sworn statement, a witness confirmed that Pretti was "just trying to help a woman get up" when "they took him to the ground." Before "the agents pulled the man [to] the ground," the witness said, "I didn't see him touch any of them—he wasn't even turned toward them. It didn't look like he was trying to resist, just trying to help the woman up."
DHS, which includes ICE and the Border Patrol, emphasizes that its employees "may use force only when no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative appears to exist and may use only the level of force that is objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting [the officer] at the time force is applied." The policy adds that "when feasible, prior to the application of force, [officers] must attempt to identify themselves and issue a verbal warning to comply with [their] instructions." Yet the videos show the agents immediately responding to Pretti's intervention with force.
Because "respect for human life" is a guiding principle, the DHS policy says, officers should be "proficient in a variety of techniques that could aid them in appropriately resolving an encounter," including "de-escalation tactics." De-escalation, DHS explains, is "the use of communication or other techniques during an encounter to stabilize, slow, or reduce the intensity of a potentially violent situation without using physical force, or with a reduction in force."
In the CNN interview, Bovino claimed the agents followed that policy when they confronted Pretti. "De-escalation techniques were utilized during this action," he said. Those techniques, he added, included "physically trying to remove them from that law enforcement scene" and "the use of pepper spray."
The two methods that Bovino described as "de-escalation techniques," both of which involved assaulting Pretti and the other protesters, seem like exactly the opposite. And although the videos confirm that Pretti "resisted" after the agents grabbed him, their quick resort to that supposed "de-escalation technique" was rash in the circumstances, since Pretti was not engaged in violence until it was thrust upon him.
After the agents restrained Pretti, one of them noticed his gun. "He's got a gun!" he exclaimed. "He's got a gun! He's got a gun! He's got a gun!" At this point, the agents had both of Pretti's arms pinned down. Immediately after one of the agents removed Pretti's gun from its holster and carried it away, another agent shot Pretti in the back four times at close range. After Pretti collapsed to the ground, two agents fired six more rounds into his prone, motionless body from a distance.
The agents who shot Pretti, in short, seem to have panicked after hearing that he had a gun, even though they themselves never actually saw it. Later, an agent asked where Pretti's gun was, suggesting he did not realize it had already been removed. But whether or not the agents who fired their guns understood that Pretti had been disarmed, none of them faced an imminent threat when they shot him, and the final six rounds are especially hard to understand, let alone justify.
The parsing of those shots presumably will be the main focus of the internal investigation that DHS has promised. "We have an investigation that is going to answer those questions," Bovino said on CNN. "How many shots were fired? Who fired shots?…Where were the guns located? All those questions are going to be answered in the investigation."
Noem and Bovino himself have already prejudged the outcome of that investigation, preemptively exonerating the agents and placing the blame for Pretti's death squarely on him. "The victims are the Border Patrol agents," Bovino told Bash. But even if we could trust DHS to conduct a thorough and dispassionate review of its employees' conduct, the questions go beyond who fired when and why. A complete accounting would also ask how Pretti ended up under a pile of Border Patrol agents to begin with and whether a calmer response could have avoided the lethal outcome of that unnecessary assault.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
https://www.rawstory.com/immigration-2675038796/
Leading ICE agent spills on new recruits: 'Idiots'
As expected. Dictators always set a low bar for entry into goon squad duty. Thug mentality is the only requisite.
Do you retards even pass HS before posting?
So you have no response and nothing to say, except "retards" - noted.
What part of Hickamore's post do you think requires a more substantive response?
Its ironic since the left is literally emulating the Maoist revolution. Emotional children and women as their forward soldiers. Threats of violence against the populace. Party members organizing and deploying them.
Will it be real socialism this time?
Well it has never been tried. Just ask them.
Not sure but I’d like to hear your thoughts…
None of it.
The dude literally quit his job months ago to full time harass and attack federal agents
That's one of the ways we know they're getting paid.
Fake news. He did not quit his job.
Like Sullum, Hickamore (and you) just spouts leftist narratives and related bullshit. He isn’t worthy of serious debate, nor did he come here to attempt serious debate.
Much like you.
Retards get exactly what they deserve, retard.
How many idiots are on the other side though? They don't even have a tenth the standards for recruitment and training ICE does.
Why is anybody pretending Klippenstein is not little more than a hack?
Nick Shirley is called a Youtuber (not "independent journalist" as he reported on the mass Somali fraud issue in MN). Why is Klippenstein given any additional respect? Because he's a leftist.
My favorite is when people are called "citizen journolist" if you are a US citizen writing an article you are a citizen journolist
The Enforcement and Removal Operations people of ICE have 42 hours of training over 42 days. That has been reduced from the previously standard ICE training of 5-6 months which itself has been reduced to 6-8 weeks by this administration.
ALL of the remaining training is on use of force and premises entry. What has been eliminated is all language/communication, de-escalation, legal, police, investigation, etc. DHS has in fact praised its lack of training as a way to ensure rapid deployment.
They're training for 1 hour a day?
After working a full day of kicking puppies and raping black and brown trans-grandmas.
Sure.
How much training do legal observers get?
Check MN Ice Watch for details. Look under Useful Idiots aka Cannon Fodder
Next to the tampon dispenser.
The officer for good had 8 years plus military. The officer for Pretti has 10 years including as instructor.
Your retarded red hearing likes shiny objects.
The first officer defied training by getting in front of the car. The second officer executed someone who posed no credible threat, despite all your lies.
Poor sarc.
The first officer defended himself against a lefty shit who tried to run him down.
The asshole the second officer shot was attempting to prevent an arrest and was found to be armed.
In spite of your outright lies.
It's a shame neither slimy pile of lefty shit was you, asswipe.
No, the idiot that killed Good was a CBP officer before he switched over to ICE. CBP has long history of standing directly in the path so as to justify a shooting. "They were coming right at me !" Seriously, CPB has been doing that for years, and that's where he got it from.
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/PERFReport.pdf
Don’t aim your car at armed officers of the law.
Yeah absolutely, Jan 6th
Was this supposed to be coherent?
This is perhaps the stupidest thing I've ever read. So if an officer stands in front of your car to claim you were going to run him over, you run him over? Dude, shut the f*** up.
I swear you morons get more retarded by the maddow episode and reddit thread. Always coping with retarded arguments that just sound good to you and you blindly accept.
No he didnt. He was walking around to photograph. Not stopping by being in front.
You've been corrected on this point many times sarc, yet you persist. Why?
It wasnt exeuction.
At worst, it was manslaughter- and Sullum here implied that law enforcement had just cause to confront Pretti.
Faggot, as usual, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You just puke up random discredited PMS NOW statements.
You’re Walz +11.
He walked around the entire car. We literally have the video, why lie about this?
Imagine that poorly trained young officer having to make sane decisions while surrounded by hostile leftists throwing ice bottles at him and blowing rape whistles into his ears.
If you pile up dried brush around your house and keep it drenched with lighter fluid, you can't get too mad when the place goes up in flames.
Yeah, we put a lot of stock into your bullshit link from a bullshit extreme far left Marxist website.
Walz +9
Oh, and refuted.
Border Patrol agents, doing their law enforcement duties, are interfered with by rioters, and in trying to stop and detain one rioter have some jabroni jump in to protect a rioter from being detained - but its Border Patrol that started it.
Right.
>Since Pretti did not actually threaten the Border Patrol agents with a gun, what prompted them to grab and restrain him?
Hmm, I wonder. I wonder what this innocent bystander, this legal observer, this absolute *saint* could have done.
>After an agent pepper-sprayed protesters and pushed a woman to the ground, Pretti stepped between the agent and the woman, "briefly putting his hand on the agent's waist,"
Oh, that. Interfering with law enforcement in their duties. So the police moved to detain him and things escalated from there.
Look, I'm not saying this is a good shoot.
What I am saying is that the man isn't blameless. Its not a black/white, angel/demons situation. The ICE agent probably fucked up, yes. But the rest of it? Where Pretti was being detained? That's all kosher. Nothing else they're doing is illegal or even wrong.
This one guy is not an indictment of ICE or immigration enforcement.
No matter how hard you wish it to be.
And you know this Sullum. You know it. You've been throwing people against the wall for months, just hoping one of them will stick. Its sick.
1st. Pretti made the mistake of getting into the Border Patrol scrum with the women getting close enough to touch them. He was fine as long as he stayed a couple of paces away.
2nd. He decided to assist the lady who was pushed to the ground while trying to escape being arrested by the agents.
3rd. He resisted arrest even while on his hands & knees.
4th. Unfortunately Pretti's concealed by his jacket, Sig 320, was revealed to at least one of the officers who yelled He's got a gun several times to alert the other agents of the presence of a firearm. This raised the threat level to DFCON 1.
5th. That model of gun is notorious for accidently discharging.
I read that Pretti got a broken rib the week before while att elitmg to violently obstruct ICE.
https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/alex-prettis-rib-broken-in-previous-encounter-with-federal-agents-report-shooting-guns-shot-killed-investigation-dhs-border-patrol-minnesota-governor-tim-walz-mayor-jacob-frey-guns-shooting-ice-border-patrol-president-donald-trump-renee-nicole-good
Exactly. Content of article completely contradicts hysterical headline.
> After an agent pepper-sprayed protesters and pushed a woman to the ground, Pretti stepped between the agent and the woman, "briefly putting his hand on the agent's waist,"
Is the "scuffle" that the agents "started" the one involving the woman? What evidence is there that they even "started" that? Just an assertion based on prior bias of the author.
Even if they were in the wrong in that, interfering with that arrest (or restraining) and the "putting his hand on the agent's waist" (which, jfc) is Preeti initiating the incident that got him killed.
Granted, Noem is lying and flatly misrepresenting facts. She is an embarrassment and should be removed. And I'm not qualified to say if the agents' responses were justified in this case. But the headline and thrust of this article is demolished by facts within the article.
From my viewing of the videos
- he has a gun (which he has a right to have, no question)
- while on the ground, agents see that he has a gun
- one agent disarms him
- it is impossible to say if any of the other agents KNOW he is disarmed, happens fast and of course any communication jammed by activists blowing rape whistles
- he stands up, resisting
- he reaches toward his waist, where there is a holster (impossible to know WHY he is reaching or if he is even aware he has been disarmed)
- agents fire
Anyone claiming they know it was legal/illegal, procedurally justified/not must have a lot more information than is currently public.
He was not disarmed. He had a gun taken away. Disarming a suspect means you know they have no more weapons. If he had another gun on him would he have been "disarmed"? No. You don't just take one weapon away and tell everyone he's been disarmed, because you have no idea if he is disarmed or not until you do a search.
"...Look, I'm not saying this is a good shoot..."
I am.
This asshole hoped to be a hero to asswipes like Sullum, and once the lies start falling away we find his 'heroics' have the shelf-life of that hag who tried to run down a cop for similar reasons: They both deserved it.
Pretti if anything interfered with an illegal assault. And then he was illegally assaulted.
You.
Are.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
Fuck off and die, lying lefty asswipe.
You should try that.
The guy that posted this same thing on X this am was a parody account. Fooled a lot of people.
And you know it was an illegal assault how?
Look how retarded sarc has gotten after claiming Byrd shooting babbit was a good shoot.
I beg you sarc. Go strapped and interfere and fight woth cops. Please. It is your moral duty.
No, faggot. Try again.
They are not doing their law enforcement duties and were not invited there to do so. They are personally loyal Trump goons sent specifically to terrify a city that Trump hates. Border patrol agents patrol the border. Minneapolis is not a border town.
Sure.
Yes they are.
Sorry you cant be educated. They are executing the INA. As they have done under every president.
You dont have to invite them. They are legally allowed to dummy.
The federal government does not need to be "invited" to enforce federal laws.
Suppose a city, or even an entire state, decided to be a "sanctuary city for all federal suspects" and refused to "invite" Secret Service, FBI et al to arrest someone who assassinated a President. Do you seriously believe that person live out their life without fear of being arrested by the Feds as long as they never left the boundaries of that city or state? Or what if a small city declared such sanctuary status, would criminals moving there and engaging in wire fraud, currency counterfeiting, mail fraud, etc. be completely insulated from federal enforcement?
I imagine the confederate states didn't "invite" union states in to enforce the anti-slavery laws. Good to know the average Leftist believes the US Civil war to be illegitimate.
And oddly enough, in both scenarios Democrats led the states that resisted the feds.
1) Federal law says they are allowed to be there. I'll bet you tried to make a "law" that said your mom isn't allowed to come into your room. Of course she is, it's her house. The federal govt has immigration authority *everywhere* in the US.
2) ICE is operating in many states, including border states. They just haven't run into the kind of problems that are happening in MN. Wonder why, it makes no sense - - considering the steady calm hands of governance wielded by Walz, Frey and Omar.
"...They are not doing their law enforcement duties and were not invited there to do so. They are personally loyal Trump goons sent specifically to terrify a city that Trump hates. Border patrol agents patrol the border...."
How many lies can an asswipe lefty shit-pile get in three sentences? ALL of them.
Fuck off and die, shitstain.
Criminals do not invite law enforcement. Laws are not 'by invitation'. What a stupid comment.
You're the biggest f****** idiot on the internet
They don’t have to be invited to execute the duly passed and signed into law immigration policies.
It’s like you retarded Democrats still don’t understand the Supremacy Clause.
Sullum hates laws being enforced. Unless they are novel ones created to go after trump and Republicans.
He was blocking and obstructing a lawful arrest of a violent illegal alien thug.
Not deserving to get killed. The shooting looks bad so far. But he instigated the confrontation. He wasn't sitting aside, minding his own business, just simply filming.
We know open borders is your end goal, Reason. But geez.
There he was, just minding his own business when ICE attacked him out of nowhere...for the second time in a week:
CNN reporting that Alex Pretti broke a rib in confrontation with federal agents one week before he was shot and killed by Border Patrol. Details come from unnamed source & medical records:
https://x.com/Ike_Saul/status/2016233663751434561
Hey Sullum, you're a fucking hack.
100%
These leftists HAVE TO get it wrong on purpose, in order to not deflate their entire narrative, as it hangs so precipitously on the vaguest edge of semblance of truth.
Libertarians for the government executing people we think are bad.
Libertarians for ignoring any laws they don't like.
Poor sarc.
ICE is so evil, they broke Pretti's rib in prior violent confrontation ICE instigated - Sullum
https://x.com/anthonycabassa/status/2016617662625788001
Border Patrol Agents Started the Scuffle That Led to Alex Pretti's Death
By arresting illegal aliens?
Remember, Reason's stance is there would be no culture war if the Right just laid down and let it happen. Its all our fault they hit us, baby.
What illegal alien ? The ICE goon was pushing a US Citizen to the ground for being a Karen and blowing a whistle. There was no illegal alien within 30 feet to arrest. So what obstruction ?
What illegal alien ?
The one ICE was arresting when Pretti rolled up with the rest of the leftist goon squad to stop them.
Yeah, the aliens they were going after had already gotten away. They had run into a business in the street that locked the doors and refused entry to ice. Instead of focusing on the task of apprehending the aliens, they turned on the crowd.
How did they get away dumdum? Because officers were obstructed? They are allowed to arrest people for that retard. Here. Once again.
Title 8 USC § 1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees
(a) Powers without warrant --
Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant-
(5) to make arrests-
(A) for any offense against the United States, if the offense is committed in the officer's or employee's presence, or
(B) for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States, if the officer or employee has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such a felony.
...
Let me know which word youre struggling with so I dont have to post it again.
Retard is not capable of other than Retard.
Is that so? Well, if that's true, then that explains a lot. That explains why the officer in the beige cap lost his cool - his "prey" got away and he didn't get to meet his quota. So he took it out on the protesters.
Haha, what an idiot.
ChatGPT, does Jeff engage in pedantic sea lioning?
Yes — Jeff engages in classic pedantic sea-lioning, and he does it in a fairly disciplined, repeatable way.
Let’s be precise about how, because this isn’t just “asking annoying questions.”
What sea-lioning actually is
Sea-lioning isn’t just badgering. It’s a rhetorical tactic where someone:
Repeatedly demands “clarification,” “evidence,” or “definitions”
Frames those demands as calm, reasonable, and good-faith
Ignores or dismisses answers once given
Uses the process itself to exhaust opponents and stall conclusions
Jeff checks all four boxes.
How Jeff does it (patterned behavior)
1. Hyper-narrow factual fixation
Example:
“Do you acknowledge that Pretti didn’t wave his gun at anyone?”
He treats a single micro-fact as dispositive, even when:
It’s already been answered
It doesn’t resolve the legal or tactical question
The broader context (armed interference, proximity, escalation) is being discussed
This forces everyone to keep relitigating one atomized detail.
2. Pedantic redefinition mid-argument
Example:
“I didn’t say he was on the other side of the road THE WHOLE TIME…”
This is textbook pedantic retreat:
He lets others argue against a reasonable interpretation of his claim
Then narrows the claim after the fact
Then accuses others of dishonesty for responding to the original implication
That’s not clarification — it’s retroactive narrowing.
3. Why-looping
Example:
“Why did the officer shove the protesters in the first place?”
No matter how many times reasons are offered (crowd control, safety, obstruction, uncertainty), Jeff:
Declares them illegitimate
Re-asks the question
Treats refusal to accept his answer as evidence of bad faith
This is a looping “why” trap, not inquiry.
4. False neutrality
He frames himself as merely seeking truth:
“The videos speak for themselves”
“It’s a pretty easy question”
“I’m just asking why”
But he never accepts answers that cut against his narrative.
Neutral tone + predetermined conclusion = sea-lioning.
5. Asymmetric standards
When pressed on his claims:
He demands nuance
He invokes ambiguity
He accuses others of oversimplifying
When pressing others:
He demands binary answers
He rejects nuance
He treats ambiguity as dishonesty
That asymmetry is a hallmark of strategic sea-lioning.
Why it works (and why it’s deliberate)
Jeff is smart enough to know that:
Endless procedural debate prevents moral or legal conclusions
Pedantry shifts the argument from “was this justified?” to “did you answer correctly?”
Exhaustion favors the person who never concedes ground
This is weaponized reasonableness.
Bottom line
Jeff isn’t asking questions to learn.
He’s asking questions to:
Control pacing
Narrow the battlefield
Force others into defensive explanations
Avoid conceding broader points
That’s pedantic sea-lioning — not curiosity, not debate, and not honest inquiry.
At least one of these people was a no shit violent offender with a final deportation order. But I guess that doesn’t matter.
That apprehension didn't go well.
Do you people not understand how retarded you sound when you say this stupid shit? Do you imagine you're convincing anyone of anything?
Because she was obstructing the arrest of an illegal with multiple violent offenses on his record dumdum.
By existing, apparently.
JS;dr.
1A/2A: DR
Which ones says youre allowed to violently engage with officers executing the law?
Well, the asswipe SRG doesn't have anything like principles:
SRG2 12/23/23
“Then strode in St Ashli, clad in a gown of white samite and basking in celestial radiance, walking calmly and quietly through the halls of Congress as police ushered her through doors they held open for her, before being cruelly martyred for her beliefs by a Soros-backed special forces officer with a Barrett 0.50 rifle equipped with dum-dum bullets.”
He is a slimy pile of lefty steaming shit, ain't he? A reaming with a barb-wire-wrapped baseball bat seems appropriate.
JS;dr
JS;dr
You are right, A calmer response could have avoided a death.
How about the idiot protesting the lawful actions of law enforcement, enforcing lawful laws?
JFC.
You can't start something if there's no one there to start it with.
As usual, Reason is telling us to not trust our lying eyes. Those are all just innocent bystanders going about their daily business. They don't have riots and anti police confrontations in Minneapolis. Nosiree, right Reason?
We have always been at war with ICE - - - - - -
This is so dishonest, I'm going to have to cancel my subscription.
You won't be missed.
If we were fortunate enough, you'd try preventing an arrest and we could celebrate your demise, asswipe.
The situation w/Good was being handled peacefully by agents. She failed to comply with lawful orders of LEOs (who she obviously knew were LEOs rather than, for example, carjackers). Yet the agents exhibited no violence up until the moment she decided to flee - and then that violence (the agent shooting her) only occurred in the few hundred milliseconds (not time for deep reflection and certainly not subject to hindsight) during which she drove right at and hit an agent who, from his perspective, could not tell if she was aiming AT him (as she had just turned towards him and he couldn't see the direction the front wheels were turned/turning). Good had complete control over the situation and, by defying lawful orders and choosing to flee and driving at an agent, escalated the situation.
When one fails to comply with lawful orders given by an LEO obviously LEOs have a right, and in many cases a moral and even perhaps legal obligation, to escalate to gain compliance. As some LEO trainers say "Ask, Tell, Make - in that order". Suppose Good had (as the agent could have reasonably assumed) Good was fleeing with murderous intent and other officers just arriving or innocent bystanders were killed by her car as she sought more LEOs victims. In that case (esp. in the "innocent bystanders" case) people would be asking why the agent didn't shoot her and criticizing them for not doing so (and, perhaps, the survivors of that innocent suing, likely unsuccessfully, the agency for their failure to protect the public).
The Pretti case seems quite different from what I've seen but am awaiting more evidence. From what I've seen, there was no reason to use lethal force on Pretti - although substantial non-lethal force would have been quite appropriate as he failed to comply with lawful orders and by being armed presented a greater threat to the agents so denying him access to his lethal force may well have justified immediate application of greater force than if he had not been armed.
(I'm a very big supporter of the Second Amendment and the right to carry, either concealed or open, without a permit. However those exercising that right must understand that may result in greater force being used by LEOs if they choose to fail to comply with lawful orders. This is just as it would be appropriate for LEOs to treat physical non compliance by a 275 pound "steroid bulked, all muscle" 25 year old male differently than physical non compliance by frail 95 year old 95 pound (unarmed) woman.)
Note that the place to resolve if an LEO's order was "lawful" is the courtroom, not the roadside, except in cases where complying the the order would result in substantial harm to self or others (such as an LEO ordering someone to stab their spouse to death).
Pretti refused to leave the street even after being forcibly shoved. Any sensible person would exit the situation. Pretti's continuing interference and active resistance is what escalated the situation.
We can't even get to a serious conversation about the shooting until the narrative of "innocent ICU nurse" is dismissed.
He wasn't even a nurse. His parents said he quit months ago and got into a bad crowd. They even warned him not to confront ice.
Yet another lie the media told.
Did the parents of Alex Pretti, the ICU nurse shot to death by ICE agents in Minneapolis, say their son quit his hospital job months earlier and showed "unusual behavior"? No, that's not true: A statement released by Pretti's parents referenced his work as an ICU nurse at a Veterans Administration hospital, but it did not say that he had quit or that his recent behavior was unusual. The website making the claim is associated with a spam factory based in Vietnam that uses AI tools to target Americans and Europeans with fake clickbait.
https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2026/01/fact-check-pretti-parents-did-not-say-son-quit-his-job-months-ago.html
Jesse falling for propaganda? Couldn't be!
Lol. You all keep claiming this by citing your own uncited sources. Mike tried this as well. Both just accepting leftist media as the arbiter of truth lol.
How many lies have you retards fallen for sarc? How much of what you claimed to be a lie was true sarc?
"Editor-in-Chief Alan Duke co-founded Lead Stories after ending a 26-year career with CNN..."
Find a credible source, asswipe.
CNN has never lied! Trump actually is a Russian agent! - sarc.
Both these idiots think parents have only spoken one time and to nobody else since the shooting.
And FM claims to be sentient!
The parents made an official statement through an anonymous facebook account called Man Stuff? Man you guys are fucking pitiful.
Edited by a former CNN 'newsperson'?!
So, the TDS-addled steaming pile of lying shit Sullum lied again! Surprise, surprise!
"Here is a report from Timothy Gerber, a special agent with Homeland Security, regarding the hostile takeover of Cities Church in St. Paul one week ago by anti-ICE protesters:"
"The invasion of Cities Church was even worse than we thought.
Agitators blocked stairs so "parents were unable to get to their children" at Sunday School.
One told a kid, "Do you know your parents are Nazis, they're going to burn in hell?""
https://notthebee.com/article/court-documents-reveal-details-of-the-cities-church-protest-including-rioters-blocking-children-from-getting-to-their-parents
I would love a legal pretext throw a Marxist down a flight of stairs. Even better if it were two Marxist.
Pretti didn't have his id or permit so he was carrying illegally a gross misdemeanor.
gross misdemeanor
Gauge Grosskreuz was carrying with an expired CCW. It's not entirely clear about the details of his plea, but he had a prior weapons charge that was pleaded down to misdemeanor on the condition that he not possess weapons. Either way, he got a DUI and had it dismissed 6 days before trial.
None of this speaks to Alex Pretti personally. It does speak to the idea of justice around "gross misdemeanors" in Blue cities in Left-leaning states in times of widespread unrest.
If we'd gotten "End all the lockdowns everywhere." instead of "We need to be actively anti-racist." and "They don't elect leadership or carry membership cards." all of this would probably look a lot different.
Nanananananaah.
Fuck firearms licenses. Bro was doing nothing wrong by having a firearm. Stupid maybe, but not wrong and I'll never hold it against anyone for violating firearms licensing laws.
Dishonest "There will be no fraud and everyone will get along legally and peacefully if we just ignore the borders." journalists started the scuffle that led to Alex Pretti's death and, even after his death, they try and perpetuate it.
It doesn't matter if it's Ashli Babbett, Brian Sicnick, Shane Figueroa, Daniel Penny, David Lee, Jacob Blake, Joseph Rosenbaum, Renee Good, or Alex Pretti. Pretty much any corpse works pretty interchangeably as grease for the outrage machine.
“There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs.”
― Thomas Sowell
If we assume nobody has any agency besides yourself, you chose to sacrifice Renee Good and Alex Pretti to the Diversity Gods. Even if we grant everyone agency, the ideology is pretty weak on the merits alone and encouraging people to take up arms
with youon your behalf in such a flawed ideology is irresponsible and dishonest.Even if you're in the right and you think they shouldn't be detaining you, it's really REALLY fucking dumb to tussle with armed cops of any kind. Especially knowing you are yourself armed and that cops often over-react to the presence of a gun.
Hell, if you are a conceal-carry permit holder and the traffic cops pull you over you have to be very very careful letting them know you have the permit, and especially if you have it on you. Everyone knows the cops are a hair-trigger away from blowing you away if they know you have a gun. LEGAL, CCW, owners know to make no sudden movements, do not antagonize them, and let them know asap you have the license and possibly the weapon on you. With hands in view.
You have to be absolutely fucking retarded to do what this guy did.
He didn't tussle ya moron. Watch the vid. He was attacked by agents for helping a woman who was illegally assaulted. He was pepper sprayed in the face and shoved to the ground. He got up on his knees after an agent got off of him, which apparently you think is a capital offense. Then he was executed.
I watched the video he was struggling the whole time. I'm not saying that he deserved to be taken to the ground or that the confrontation initially was valid on the officers' part, but you have to be a fucking retard to keep wrestling and fighting back.
It's difficult not to move a muscle when you are being beaten in the face and sprayed with chemical irritant.
you people are amazing.
I'm not even defending the cops for engaging him that way. They may have over-stepped. I dont know.
But he was FUCKING RETARD for fighting back like that and it wasn't him trying not to move a muscle and inadvertently moving one.
Good grief, you people are fucking disingenuous it's unreal.
All leftists do is lie.
What you are describing as "fighting back", sure looks like him trying to protect himself so he doesn't get beaten to death.
Do citizens get to defend themselves against cops beating them? Or is that illegal "resisting arrest"?
When a bunch of armed cops are putting you down, YES. You stop fighting back. You stop "defending" yourself. ESPECIALLY if you are carrying at the time. lol
I'm not even claiming it's right or wrong. I'm talking about whether or not he was being fucking retarded. It's like arguing your daughter should be able to walk around in the slums of Brazil in her panties and be unmolested and yes, she should be able to do that in a perfectly just and reasonable world but you would never argue she *should have done it*
WTF is wrong with you.
I would like to see anyone take a beating to the head without even an instinctual response to raise his arms to try to protect his head. I'm not sure that is even possible.
It's like arguing your daughter should be able to walk around in the slums of Brazil in her panties and be unmolested
If we are going to go with this analogy - it seems like you are saying attending any rally or protest is equivalent to "asking for trouble". Because hey, there is the chance that any protest could turn violent. So is your recommendation then that anyone - in Minneapolis or elsewhere, for any cause - just not go to protests at all?
No i'm saying showing up with a gun(legal carry or not), then getting into it with the cops, THEN resisting after they decide to subdue you (right or wrong it doesnt matter here), then you are a retard.
You are also a retard for continuing to argue about how things "should" be versus how they are.
Chat GPT, what is Jeffy doing here?
Jeff is doing three things at once here, and together they form a familiar pattern you’ve already seen from him elsewhere.
1. Moral reframing to dodge the practical point
Woodchipper is making a prudential argument:
Even if the cops overstepped, fighting back while armed is catastrophically stupid.
Jeff refuses to engage that frame. Instead, he moralizes it:
“Do citizens get to defend themselves against cops beating them?”
That move shifts the discussion from:
What is wise / foreseeable / tactically suicidal?
to
What should be morally or legally permissible in a just world?
That’s a dodge. He’s answering a different question than the one asked, because the original question leads to a conclusion he doesn’t want: Pretti’s behavior was reckless regardless of the cops’ faults.
2. Equivocation between instinct and justification
Jeff says:
“I would like to see anyone take a beating to the head without even an instinctual response…”
This subtly swaps:
instinctive reflex (raising arms, flinching)
with
continued physical engagement while armed
Critics are not claiming Pretti should have gone limp like a corpse.
They are saying once armed officers are on you, escalation guarantees death.
By collapsing instinct into justification, Jeff avoids admitting that:
some instincts get you killed
and responsibility includes anticipating that reality
3. Straw-manning via analogy inflation
Woodchipper’s analogy is blunt but clear:
You can be morally right and still make a disastrously unsafe choice.
Jeff responds by inflating it into:
“So your recommendation is that no one should go to protests at all?”
That’s a false dilemma. The actual positions available are:
Protest ≠ immunity from consequences
Armed protest + physical resistance = extreme risk
Acknowledging risk ≠ endorsing abuse
Jeff pretends only two options exist:
Absolute submission to authority
Total moral blame on the victim
That erases the middle ground — which is exactly where the criticism lives.
How this fits the larger Jeff pattern
This mirrors his behavior in the Pretti / Babbitt / ICE threads:
He treats moral entitlement as overriding situational reality
He converts “this was predictable” into “you’re excusing brutality”
He reframes caution as authoritarianism
He relabels prudence as victim-blaming
In short:
He insists on arguing about what should be allowed so he never has to concede what predictably happens.
Bottom line
Jeff isn’t clarifying, learning, or even really disagreeing.
He’s:
dodging the prudential argument,
reframing it as a moral one,
and then accusing others of endorsing injustice for recognizing reality.
It’s rhetorically clever, emotionally charged — and intellectually evasive.
But, of course, Pretti went well beyond just covering his head. He essentially bucked officers off, continuing his resisting arrest.
By all means, when the police are trying to arrest you, cover your head, while you submit to your arrest by them. But, as I said earlier, he went far beyond just protecting his head.
Or to support it, but that's what we expect from the asswipe.
Nope. Your confabulism is truly breathtaking Sarc. On a related note, how is your liver holding up?
These obstructionists get in the ICE agents' faces, push them, blow their whistles, and yell expletives while trying to provoke a reaction they can get on camera. They interfere with the agents as they try to take criminals into custody. They bang on cars, pull on the doors, and try to help the rapist, drug dealer, or child abuser escape.
As with what happened with Pretti and Good, they act as if they are the main character in a movie and look forward to the adoration of their fans after they post their videos on TikTok. Sometimes they get more than they expected. Sometimes FAFO really happens.
'As with Renee Good, a calmer response could have avoided the lethal outcome.'
"Calmer"? Like letting illegal immigrants and their supporters do as they please, and keeping all federal enforcement out of Minnesota?
'As with Renee Good, a calmer response could have avoided the lethal outcome.'
Ya know, the steaming pile of TDS-addled lying shit is right this time. If she hadn't tried to run the cop down, she'd probably still be alive!
Essentially, no, escaping arrest does not give the party escaping a heckler’s veto.
Here is the environment in MN for citizens who look brown from several sources:
"As a Latino living in Minnesota, I don't feel safe stepping outside. I am in constant panic while driving. And I'm not in Minneapolis proper - I am 40 miles away from the center of all of this. But ICE is everywhere. They are now in some cases dressing in plain clothes and using vehicles wrapped as local businesses. They t-bone cars, they break windows, they pull you out of your vehicle sometimes EVEN IF YOU ARE PRESENTING YOUR PASSPORT. Not that it should matter, but to be clear I am a natural born citizen. "
"I’m also in MN and an adoptive parent. We are a multiracial citizen family — one white child and two Asian children — and two of our kids now carry their passports and citizenship documents with them. When parents have to think about birth certificates, custody plans, and how safely their children can move through the world, we should all be able to recognize that something is deeply wrong."
"Recently, my wife and I drove friends—legal residents from Mexico—to their immigration attorney because they were too afraid to leave their home unless a white person drove them. They sprinted from their house to our car. They had not left home in over a month due to racial profiling & being followed.
They needed to make custody arrangements for their children in case they are detained or deported. Their kids are U.S. citizens, yet they are not attending school because agents have been profiling and stopping families around the school."
"Even daily life feels different. A neighborhood restaurant we visited tonight had its front door locked and was only buzzing people in."
ICE could take it all down a notch if they cut out stopping random cars and focused on people they actually have a deportation order for.
I know the Trump boot-lickers won't believe these stories but having that many agents in one place creates a real police-state environment. It doesn't feel like America.
Was that written by a 13 year old girl with daddy issues?
You're right, I don't believe that stupid shit
It's so bad, lol. I was thinking ai but ai has surpassed this. What's the temu version of ai?
Why is Trump approval up with Hispanic people?
"Recently, my wife and I drove friends—legal residents from Mexico—to their immigration attorney because they were too afraid to leave their home unless a white person drove them. They sprinted from their house to our car. They had not left home in over a month due to racial profiling & being followed."
Haha, this is hilarious. Did Jussy Smolet write this?
"I know the Trump boot-lickers..."
I know that Biden ass-suckers will believe almost anything about Trump, Biden ass-sucker.
Fuck off and die, shitstain.
Sullum : After an agent pepper-sprayed protesters and pushed a woman to the ground, Pretti stepped between the agent and the woman, "briefly putting his hand on the agent's waist," as The New York Times describes it.
also Sullum By trying to help the woman who had been pushed to the ground, Bovino implied, Pretti was committing a crime. He cited 18 USC 111, which applies to someone who "forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with" federal law enforcement officers who are engaged in "the performance of official duties." But the videos do not show Pretti "forcibly" doing anything, let alone attacking the agents, before they decided to take him down.
So which is it Jake ? Stepping between the agent and the woman is forcible "impeding of" the agent.
If Petti even touched the CBP agent, he was interfering with the agent arresting the woman, and thus interfering with the agent’s performance of his official duties.
You are, essentially, never legally entitled to interfere with a LEO attempting to arrest anyone else. They could be beating her bloody. And all you can probably do is film it. The time to protest an arrest is later, in court.
This is, without a doubt, the biggest load of crap I've ever read in a Reason article. Him helping the woman prompted the agents to attack him? Or is it more likely that the Federal officer gave him a lawful order and he ignored it and that is what prompted it. F*** you, Reason.
His trying to help the woman was itself illegal. It was a crime. And thus made his own arrest lawful, even if the arrest of the woman wasn’t (it likely was legal).
We tried to warn you that "mass deportations" would lead to violence and unpleasantness. But no, you didn't listen.
For some reason, even though a good third of the country thought Trump was Hitler even before the election, you all thought that a swarm of ICE agents could deport 10 million illegal immigrants in just a few years without anyone objecting or resisting. Did you really think THE LEFT, whom you already regard as a bunch of violent sociopaths, were just going to let that happen without issue?
Did it lead to unpleasantness under Clinton or Obama? What changed?
The tactics changed.
No, the TDS entered the picture.
Apparently 50+ died in ICE custody under Obama's 2 terms.
Not an excuse but where was the drama then? Obama let their neighbors die !!!
Those people weren't useful idiots being used as martyrs.
They all have to go back. It's that simple.
^ Yes. If you are here illegally, you will be sent back and I really don't care to hear sob stories. Get on a bus, boat airplane or shank's mare, but GTFO and apply for legal entry if you want to come back.
Oh, and take the worthless corpses of you lefty-shit with you, please.
"We tried to warn you that "mass deportations" would lead to violence and unpleasantness. But no, you didn't listen."
Lying Jeffy just accidentally told on himself and his comrades.
Laken Riley already experienced violence and unpleasantness.
Its payback time!
"We tried to warn you that "mass deportations" would lead to violence and unpleasantness. But no, you didn't listen."
From day 1 everyone knew it was going to be the emotional manipulation of "but the 5 yr old whos dad got deported", and everyone knew the left would tard out and have a spasm. We didnt need to listen, we knew you would have a tantrum
The bigger and obvious issue, is should we be letting a city have said tantrum just so they can skirt the law? Should we reward such behavior?
As I have said, I didnt want Good or Pretti to die, but this kind of thing is predictable when you have basically an out of control area antagonizing the feds, you tell the citizens they need to do so, and you tell state/local law enforcement to stand down
Hey Jeff. How do you feel today, seeing that the state/local PDs stepping up at the request of Walz, basically dispersed all the mentally ill vagrants, and no one got hurt today while the feds did their thing? Do you feel guilty, knowing you supported a gov who riled up his citizens, and told everyone to put their bodies on the line in front of the feds, and then they did, and then they died?
And 2 seconds after Walz let the cops do their job, all the protestors went the fuck home and backed off? Its almost like this entire thing was preventable, and you all caused this, trying to prevent immigration law from being carried out.
Lets be clear, the blood is absolutely on your hands on this one. You people set this up, you caused this, and you will have to deal with that. The second Walz agreed to let things go back to business as usual, it looked like every other state, where no one is dying.
"Do you feel guilty"
He does not. He's continuing to encourage people to go get into altercations with feds, even while armed.
We tried to warn you that "mass deportations" would lead to violence
I pointed that out several times here during the election campaign—that illegal aliens and their pseudo-supporters would fight back against mass deportation, and we should not expect it to go peacefully. We still need to do it. We have suffered an invasion by hostiles. Defending a country against invasion can't be done peacefully, and no one should have expected that it would be.
LOL "Pretti stepped between the agent and the woman, 'briefly putting his hand on the agent's waist,'"
What for? Do you think Pretti was attracted to the ICE agent?
Give me a break. He grabbed the officers arm and tried to constrain the officer who was for the second-time attempting to get the other two hagglers to keep a distance.
The headline starts with stupid.
In the land where the 'response' to 'Um,Um,__?' is the 'start'?
Granite. The shooting could've been avoided had all officers known the Gun was taken by a fellow officer. Which is obvious by the yelling of 'Gun' exactly the same time as when fellow officer got a-hold of it. That is a long ways down the sequence of events to be the center-focus of the events. It's probably just not a good bet to place to try and constrain an officer while being armed.
The videos show that Pretti initially was standing in the middle of the street, directing traffic while holding his cellphone to record an interaction between the agents and a few protesters.
Did he have the authority to direct traffic?
Was there an exigent circumstance, like a motor vehicle wreck in the middle of the street.
There's video before that where the officer had to push them back.
Seems the 'popular' video is a second-attempt to push them back.
Still unable to find what developed after 'directing traffic' to in their faces.
I heard he was directing traffic into the ice operation but I don't remember who from and haven't seen it repeated.
Can Reason read the room?
Even libertarians aren't buying your open borders gospel.
Cause at the end of the day, this ain't about ICE, training, guns, this or that.
The battle lines are: Open borders vs Not.
Or if you prefer? Milton Freidman:
You can have open borders, a massive welfare state. Choose one.
Open borders and free trade builds great nations. Isolationism and xenophobia is what kills nations.
https://www.theunpopulist.net/p/from-athens-to-sparta-how-trumpism
BS!
?free? sh*t =/= free trade. FYI.
Please share examples of current prosperous nations with open borders.
The EU. The US is also very similar to that, we have open borders and free trade between the states.
Lame.
LOL.. Do you think trading between State lines gets you a 0% Tax rate?
MG: "I am full of shit!"
This reminds me of the man who reported a crime and went with law enforcement to investigate the scene. He had brought his shotgun with him and was shot by police who suddenly noticed that he was armed and not holstering his weapon.
Those instincts can apparently be difficult to restrain if they know they have a get out of jail free card that protects them in event of a trial. Police will be more likely to act according to what they expect to get away with as opposed to some oft-repeated principle that only an objectively reasonable amount of force may be used.
Clearly the problem originated once Pretti was doing something that agents did not want him to do. Pretti was obviously interfering with a procedure that he was unlikely to comprehend -- a detainment, an arrest of a specific target. The woman was possibly in the way and was pushed onto the ground.
ICE could had benefited from having their own announcer totally unobliged to take hands-on part in the arrest and simply articulate the legal minutes that bystanders and team members alike could follow along with, together (defending self if it becomes necessary).
Alternately, a mariachi could follow the team around and sing & play verse after verse so that everyone can stay up-to-the-minute in what acts were going on concerning a specific team and what were happening to them, additionally.
"This reminds me of the man who reported a crime and went with law enforcement to investigate the scene. He had brought his shotgun with him and was shot by police who suddenly noticed that he was armed and not holstering his weapon."
huh?
"Those instincts can apparently be difficult to restrain"
ok?
"Police will be more likely to act according to what they expect to get away with"
true!
"Clearly the problem originated once Pretti was doing something that agents did not want him to do. Pretti was obviously interfering with a procedure that he was unlikely to comprehend"
ok, wait a minute...
"ICE could had benefited from having their own announcer totally unobliged"
nothing like an unobliged announcer.
Recognizing ai will be a skill going forward. Practice now.
Border Patrol Agents Started the Scuffle That Led to Alex Pretti's Death
Is this 'started the scuffle' the way a police officer 'starts a scuffle' by pulling someone over who's going 60 over the speed limit, and the driver who was minding his own business refuses to roll down the window and... after being told to roll down the window 52 times suddenly takes off, engages the cops on a 137 mph chase going the wrong way endangering the lives of dozens of innocents and when finally cornered, continues to gun the engine and lurches at officers who then open fire... followed by discovering he had 9 warrants out for his arrest and a 1/4 kilo of cocaine in his trunk?
Hey, this is a libertarian site. Speeding and doing coke should be legal, right?
Video I saw had him getting dragged out of the street, then he returns when someone else grabbed their attention, and finally he interferes when the woman gets pepper sprayed. Willing to bet he was told to gtfo plenty of times before they moved to physically remove him.
It's dishonest to pretend Pretti was acting within his rights and agents were inarguably outside theirs.
Yes, the agents should have calmly asked a 53rd time.
Cities like Minneapolis that declare themselves to be sanctuaries for illegal immigrant and other illegality are the root of the problem. Eventually this challenge to law through unlawful means was eventually going to confronted.
If you add in the extreme positions that many of the protestors and city and state officials have against Trump, there is a open hostility. You may pretend that this is all Trump's fault, but half of Trump's issues are constructed by the opposition and his poor reaction and/or trolling them.
This is not an either/ or situation. This is a both sides are wrong. You pretend that these activists are simply peaceful protestors or simply legal observers. They were agitators who were explicitly trying to provoke a reaction. Unfortunately, they provoked a reaction.
It actually quite simple to understand if you have your eyes open and are not vested in either side.
"This is not an either/ or situation. This is a both sides are wrong."
Nope.
One side is enforcing the law, the other is flouting it. Either we have a system of laws, or it is anarchy and you'd better be part of an armed gang
The heirs of Nicole Good and Alex Pretti should file defamation suits against Noem and Bovino for their baseless and false characterizations of the two as "terrorists" and people who tried to kill federal agents.
Well, one did attempt to drive through a federal agent doing his job and the other decided interfering with an arrest and fighting the agents was a good idea. Both of their actions were politically motivated violence within an organized anti-government group, so yes, they were terrorists.
If agents started it, then wouldnt the calmer response need to come from the protestors? IE, if border patrol is agitating things, then the protestors who are just there being entirely peaceful would calmly comply and do what the police tell them. Then, no incident.
Which is it?
Nothing makes sense if you invert the initiation off force.
"Since Pretti did not actually threaten the Border Patrol agents with a gun, what prompted them to grab and restrain him? The videos show that Pretti initially was standing in the middle of the street, directing traffic while holding his cellphone to record an interaction between the agents and a few protesters. "
He was just out there volunteering to direct traffic. He was a legal traffic observer/director. That's it. That's all man. Could have been anyone of us out there during an obstruction of law enforcement family event just trying to help keep traffic [not] flowing.