Posted on 02/03/2026 3:17:43 AM PST by RandFan
@60Minutes
“I saw a man that was retreating,” GOP Sen. Rand Paul says of the video he saw of Alex Pretti, shot and killed by federal immigration officers. He has scheduled a Congressional hearing on the matter.
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
Just sayin'.
Why did he have all the extra cartridges?
I think this guy may have been planning to take out as many agents as possible.
Probably chickened out.
These same RINOs couldn’t bring themselves to criticize old Joe Biden and his administration.
The guy was stalking Federal Agebts using an Antifa App.
Kentucky contingent is paid off by China.
China Rand doesn’t realize Antifa is an Anarchist organization.
100%
He was stalking Federal Agents. He went to locations of a Federal Law Enforcement Ops repeatedly.
You and your hero are Open Border Democrats Loons .
Both paid by the open borders billionaires .
Lets Audit The Loony Paulie Cult Books and shut down you a paid poster here.
Primary this Democrat in his next primary .
We need a Gop person not a Dem Trump hating operative .
RAND WAS real Happy during the Biden nightmare open border years when 10 million thieves strolled into the US .
You need to be zapped Dem operative .
There is no federal law banning guns at protests, the legality depends entirely on state statutes. Minnesota does not have statutes that specifically list "protests" as prohibited areas for carrying a gun.
Let the facts of this case come out. Protesting while possessing a gun is not a crime in Minnesota. For me the Pretti incident comes down to this: Did Pretti do something or break a law that justified, according to the law, him being shot and killed?
Only a fool or a Don Quixote would ignore what the courts have said since it represents the rule of law until reversed or changed by another court. Fools and madmen suffer the consequences as did Pretti.
Many words are said, many books are written but in the end if you choose to ignore the law there is no remedy for a death that results from your actions. You can’t hug your self righteousness after death.
This man was moving inexorably to this death, courting it having been inflamed and emboldened by political game players including Rand Paul.
“On most issues I’m as big a libertarian as Rand Paul.”
You believe that it’s OK for every critter in the world to invade the USA, steal from us, rape/murder citizens, and intentionally destroy our culture and Christian foundation?
It’s a bigger offense to “impede traffic on a public street”, I guess.
It’s pitiful that so many have zero respect for those who gave their “lives, fortunes and sacred honor” over the last 300 years.
Just because some virtue signaling, wankers with their eyes on a weather cock posture and virtue signal, the facts will not change. These congress critters are self serving hypocrites, most likely on the take, obstructing and delaying interfering the very serious business of rescuing Americans by removing illegal aliens.
👍
Federal law enforcement rallied round their officers. This is understandable. BUT, federal law enforcement should have also said that this incident would be investigated, not appear to jump to a conclusion. ALSO, federal law enforcement should have said that the decision of local authorities to not cooperate with immigration enforcement was a contributing factor to the violence that has occurred, including both deaths. These deaths are on the head of the Gov. of Minnesota.
As to the video, the other side (the federal law enforcement officers) has to be allowed to present its evidence as to what went down. Neither side should rush to judgment.
First, the interposition of a civilian into law enforcement isn’t heroic or even innocent. It’s a crime. You’ve got to consider the gravity of the situation. Rough handling of members of an unruly crowd is no where near justifying civilian intervention.
Second, carrying a gun when interfering with law enforcement is a bad idea. Regardless of your intention, the observation of a gun by law enforcement during an incident can be considered to put law enforcement into mortal danger and justify lethal force.
Third, we cannot be naive about the role of left-wing agitators in fomenting violence. We have seen this for decades going back to the anti-draft and anti-Vietnam War riots of 1968.
Yes. He resisted arrest while carrying a weapon. That made him a danger. When a shot was heard he was eliminated because the calculus of the threat assessment crossed the line.
Just like he was “retreating” when he kicked the tail light out of an ICE vehicle?
1, It is illegal to infer with LEOs engaged in law enforcement activities both at the state and federal level
2. It is illegal to carry while committing such crimes, every concealed permit license makes it very clear carrying while committing any crime is against the law, including things like just trespassing or shoplifting.
My statement stands, it was illegal for him at the state and now I add the federal level to go to the protest armed given his intent and ultimately his actions were to interfere with law enforcement.
So yes, it was illegal for him to go to that protest, he fully intended to cause an illegal confrontation, basically he intended to commit a crime while armed.
If a person hires a hitman to commit murder, that person can still be found guilty of intent to commit murder, if one goes to a protest to interfere with police AND they are armed, they are no less guilty of illegally carrying a weapon.
I think the law varies from state to state on a general level.
When Federal personnel are involved, it probably jumps to Federal law
At this point I would donate to the guy’s defense fund. For Paul to take the side of the insurrectionists against the agents, without a completed investigation, and with clear intent to attack Trump is despicable.
Does not matter. If your intention is to physically engage and disrupt law enforcement you don’t carry a gun. In a physical confrontation with law enforcement carrying a gun makes you a suspect that must be subdued.
Not probably, always, that is hard coded in the constitution’s supremacy clause.
Article VI, Clause 2
More specifically, if your intention is to interfere with legal law enforcement activates AND you are concealed carrying, it must be presumed you intend to use deadly force.
It forces the LEO to respond accordingly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.