Woman shot and killed by ICE officers in Minneapolis, Minnesota

Starfire57

MayBee70

How far do you want to go back to? Perhaps to the time when the settlers stole America from the Native Americans and treated them like dirt?

Idk, you tell me. Like , no settlers were killed by Native Americans either? My point is, all across the world, people went to war over land. This is the history of the world and nobody alive today played a part in it.

It's how our civilizations were born, through hostile takeovers. Everywhere, literally every place on the globe.

Stop blaming people now. It is what it is, nobody is going to change that basic fact.

Governments are powerful, established and laws are there, and if you are lucky to live in democratic countries, at least you have a vote on it.

If the vote doesn't go your way, that doesn't mean others votes don't count.

All the talk of the "loss of democracy" in the US is literally trying to undo that very vote of the majority, the vote in a free democratic election. It's a desperate attempt by the losing side. It might work, might not.

Trump will leave office after 2 more years. He's not coming back. But, if his policies end up making the country better, he may have a successor who will continue them. Or not, and then someone with a different vision will be elected.

I can't predict the future.

We will see, because again, it's up to the democracy, the vote we have established and what will always be in the US.

The hysteria over the perceived threat of fascism in the US is astounding, like some weird mental illness taking over.

Our constitution, our system of checks and balances have stood the test of time since 1776.

I really, really think the entitlement attitudes of today are leading to people who want hand picking of the laws they choose to obey or not obey.

Or no laws might be a wish of some. I really don't know, but I do know people should be careful what they wish for.

Your constitution, system of checks and balances has thrown up a president like Trump. Someone that can pardon murderers ( how do you feel about convicted criminals being pardoned by the way?) and does so, can veto anything that congress passes and is talking about changing the rules so he can stand for a third term. And, believe me he will try to do that unless his health prevents it.

Junglebub

Well put, Starfire57!

Thank you!

Well put, Starfire57!

MayBee70

How far do you want to go back to? Perhaps to the time when the settlers stole America from the Native Americans and treated them like dirt?

Idk, you tell me. Like , no settlers were killed by Native Americans either? My point is, all across the world, people went to war over land. This is the history of the world and nobody alive today played a part in it.

It's how our civilizations were born, through hostile takeovers. Everywhere, literally every place on the globe.

Stop blaming people now. It is what it is, nobody is going to change that basic fact.

Governments are powerful, established and laws are there, and if you are lucky to live in democratic countries, at least you have a vote on it.

If the vote doesn't go your way, that doesn't mean others votes don't count.

All the talk of the "loss of democracy" in the US is literally trying to undo that very vote of the majority, the vote in a free democratic election. It's a desperate attempt by the losing side. It might work, might not.

Trump will leave office after 2 more years. He's not coming back. But, if his policies end up making the country better, he may have a successor who will continue them. Or not, and then someone with a different vision will be elected.

I can't predict the future.

We will see, because again, it's up to the democracy, the vote we have established and what will always be in the US.

The hysteria over the perceived threat of fascism in the US is astounding, like some weird mental illness taking over.

Our constitution, our system of checks and balances have stood the test of time since 1776.

I really, really think the entitlement attitudes of today are leading to people who want hand picking of the laws they choose to obey or not obey.

Or no laws might be a wish of some. I really don't know, but I do know people should be careful what they wish for.

How far do you want to go back to? Perhaps to the time when the settlers stole America from the Native Americans and treated them like dirt?

Also, the thing about Greenland. I don't know if you are aware but many, many mexican groups think they should take back the western states because they were "stolen"

You know, the states that the United States government legally purchased from Mexico in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo

Bought and paid for. Not stolen. And, graciously allowed any Mexican citizen to stay and get instant citizenship, if they so choose.

Not a bad deal for the losing side in the Mexican-American War.

StoneofDestiny

Starfire57

I'm sure you can read - but can you understand? I was pointing out Native Law was not written down, but was their law nonetheless. Immigrants to the US conveniently ignored these rights and settled on Native lands, staking their claims at gunpoint. Laws passed in the US in the 19th Century by white immigrants conveniently ignored these Native rights and laws.
A technique played out across the world - and one Trump is considering in Greenland now. He wants Greenland and thinks the US are entitled to take it. Mind blowing stuff.

My point stands that those white settlers were not illegally settling because there were no immigration laws.

As I recall, Native Americans do not believe that anyone owns land. The land is sentient. One can live with the land.

They established their own territories, yes.

But no one is saying there wasn't a gradual takeover in the US of the settlers. But that was not illegal, at the time, as there were no laws concerning immigration.

For Native Americans, It was about treaties and living off that land, not owning it.

Soon of course, all that changed.

But so what? Pick up any World History book and show me where there was any civilized nation of today that didn't have their share of land being taken in various wars and killing of millions of people. In early times all over the world, people fought serious, injurious long wars and it was all for power and land.

History is full of this. But that is the past, and it cannot and will not be changed; not one person alive today is responsible for it or owes anyone else anything because of it.

Yet, according to some, the white person is to feel guilty about a time and place long before they were born.

Well, all that pointing fingers is why we are here today, why there is so much division among people.

And politics uses this for their own benefit. Each side has their own tactics, but using white guilt/straight white male/colonists/etc. is clearly left tactic that was working, still is to a point but wearing thinner everyday....and that's a big reason why alot of this is happening right now.

Oh it was definitely aggression from the wife of the driver to the ICE operative when stood next to the car.She clearly said ‘Do you want to come at us, do you want to come at us?’ While taking an aggressive step towards him, then said ‘ go get some lunch big boy’ ( said sneeringly) then opened the passenger door and said ‘drive baby drive!’ When seconds earlier the other ICE operative can be heard saying repeatedly’get out of the car’.
This wasn’t AI.
The car then lurched right by the other ICE operative either brushing or just missing him and he raised his gun and shot into the car.
I don’t think any of that merited being shot, of course not but they do things differently and it’s at the best unwise to taunt and then drive forward at the time the driver did.
We can replay this over and over on this thread, but that’s what happened.
The only things we can’t know is if the operative really did think he was going to be targeted by the car and what was in the drivers mind. (Oreo Sun 11-Jan-26 19:58:33)

That assessment depends on observable facts, not post-hoc interpretations. The central factual dispute here is whether the vehicle was being used as a deadly weapon, i.e., whether it was intentionally driven at an officer in a manner that posed an immediate threat, or whether it was moving in an attempt to leave a tense and confusing situation. That question is not settled and is actively contested by video evidence and by statements from local officials.

The officer’s subjective fear, while relevant, is not dispositive. The legal standard is whether that fear was objectively reasonable, particularly given established training that discourages officers from positioning themselves in front of vehicles precisely because doing so escalates risk.

Until the full body-camera footage, forensic analysis, and independent investigation are completed, it is premature to frame this as a justified or understandable shooting based on the victim’s conduct rather than as a use of deadly force that requires rigorous legal scrutiny.

I know this sounds legalistic, but legal standards exist precisely to protect everyone. Once we start setting them aside, we can’t assume they’ll still protect us when it matters.

Starfire57

I'm sure you can read - but can you understand? I was pointing out Native Law was not written down, but was their law nonetheless. Immigrants to the US conveniently ignored these rights and settled on Native lands, staking their claims at gunpoint. Laws passed in the US in the 19th Century by white immigrants conveniently ignored these Native rights and laws.
A technique played out across the world - and one Trump is considering in Greenland now. He wants Greenland and thinks the US are entitled to take it. Mind blowing stuff.

"A documentary about a Glasgow protest that successfully stopped two Sikh men being taken away by immigration officers will open the city's film festival next month.
Everybody To Kenmure Street is centred on the events of 13 May 2021, when a Home Office raid in Pollokshields prompted hundreds of locals to take to the area's Kenmure Street.
The two men were released from a van after protesters surrounded the vehicle for several hours.
The new film is directed by Bafta-winning Glasgow filmmaker Felipe Bustos Sierra and uses crowd-sourced footage from the day, along with archive film and set-designed scenes featuring actors relaying the testimonies of people who wanted to remain anonymous.
More stories from Glasgow & West Scotland
More stories from Scotland
It will receive its gala UK premiere on 25 February at the Glasgow Film Theatre, launching the 22nd edition of the film festival.
Bustos Sierra, who previously directed the documentary Nae Pasaran, about how a boycott by East Kilbride Rolls Royce factory workers helped end General Pinochet's regime in 1970s Chile, said he could not wait for his new film to be shown to a hometown crowd in Glasgow.
He added: "This film is a snapshot of a day, of a neighbourhood, and of gestures repeated through time, for the right to have a voice and to live in peace.
"Glasgow's long history of civil disobedience and meaningful change has been a barometer throughout the making of this film. I cannot wait to watch it at the GFT with its hometown audience, for whom we can only hope it'll be a joyful reminder of what a beacon they can be in uncertain times."
Paul Gallagher, the head of programme for the film festival, said the new film was hugely inspiring and tells a story "pertinent for the whole world right now".
The film is executive produced by two-time Oscar winner Emma Thompson and is slated for a full cinema release in March"

As I recall, 1882 was a time long after the "illegal white settlers".....LOL

StoneofDestiny

Starfire57
Thank you / but I’m fairly well read on history, including US history.
The US white settlers were illegal settlers. Because something wasn’t written down in US Statutes doesn’t mean there was no law! US Law was made for the US! The Native Nations of North America had customary laws and sovereignty over their lands. The white settlers ignored that and laid claim to the land. They were trespassers and unwelcome as they trampled on Native culture and sensitivities. You still hear echoes of Manifest Destiny out off the mouths of some right wing Americans to this day.

Um, the first immigration law was established in 1882, with the Chinese Exclusion Act. But I guess now History.com website is "right wing". LOL...

www.history.com/articles/the-birth-of-illegal-immigration

Lathyrus3. Actually Cossy as a (somewhat distant) relative of Edith Cavell, I want to object to you using her life as a comparison with the protest methods evidenced here

I mentioned Cavell - not as a comparison to the US protests, but as a person disobeying the law to do what was right. She treated all soldiers as equal not as 'friend or foe' but she was executed for treason ie not obeying the law that required allegiance to the state.

She died trying to ensure others lived. Several hundred lives were saved by her disobeying the law.

Very clever Willow.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAGr6J3ID3Q&list=RD8saU0WeocP0&index=2

The Raging Grannies singing group give their view on Trump. (Santa Fe)

enjoy.

Syracute

ronib

LemonJam video footage shown here suggests there were 2 women. The woman not in the car was to my view baiting the ICE officers. She was clearly not going to comply with any requests and suggested that she would be hearing from them later as she and her partner weren’t going to change their number plates. There was a strong impression of non compliance.
I hope demonstrators and law enforcement officers can understand that change is needed to avoid a repetition of this appalling situation.

The woman was taunting the officer with banter. Telling him to go get some lunch is hardly aggression. She was on her way to get in the car. So clearly she was presenting no danger and was going to leave. The officer you can hear on the recording calling them fxxxhing bxxtches. You don’t think he had hate in his heart ?
He not only shot Renee once but 3 times. At times endangering officers nearby and anybody that could of been in the path of the car after he killed her and her car kept going until it crashed.
Ronib did you even look at what I posted above regarding officer conduct ? No, clearly not .

Oh it was definitely aggression from the wife of the driver to the ICE operative when stood next to the car.She clearly said ‘Do you want to come at us, do you want to come at us?’ While taking an aggressive step towards him, then said ‘ go get some lunch big boy’ ( said sneeringly) then opened the passenger door and said ‘drive baby drive!’ When seconds earlier the other ICE operative can be heard saying repeatedly’get out of the car’.
This wasn’t AI.
The car then lurched right by the other ICE operative either brushing or just missing him and he raised his gun and shot into the car.
I don’t think any of that merited being shot, of course not but they do things differently and it’s at the best unwise to taunt and then drive forward at the time the driver did.
We can replay this over and over on this thread, but that’s what happened.
The only things we can’t know is if the operative really did think he was going to be targeted by the car and what was in the drivers mind.

DaisyAnne So very well put

ronib Sun 11-Jan-26 18:22:31

It’s understandable that you’re concerned about ensuring demonstrators and law enforcement are safe, but a large cloud hangs over the “non-compliance caused a shooting” argument. In this Minneapolis incident, there is significant dispute over what the videos actually show and whether the woman’s behaviour posed a real, imminent threat. Local officials and human-rights observers have said the footage contradicts the federal claim that she tried to weaponise her vehicle, and the city’s mayor has publicly rejected the self-defence narrative.

Non-compliance, even verbal defiance or refusing to exit a car, does not equate to a deadly threat even in the USA, as I understand it. UK policing, of course emphasises de-escalation far more than shooting someone over refusal to comply with orders. They are, of course, less likely to be armed. Framing her actions as simply “not complying” doesn’t justify lethal force, and at this incident highlights that it's vital for authorities to be transparent and restrained and TRAINED before resorting to deadly measures.

At the very least, this is a reminder to be cautious about accepting early “information” uncritically. The Brexit experience in the UK showed how effectively narratives can be shaped to influence public opinion - it's worth bearing in mind.

ronib

LemonJam video footage shown here suggests there were 2 women. The woman not in the car was to my view baiting the ICE officers. She was clearly not going to comply with any requests and suggested that she would be hearing from them later as she and her partner weren’t going to change their number plates. There was a strong impression of non compliance.
I hope demonstrators and law enforcement officers can understand that change is needed to avoid a repetition of this appalling situation.

The woman was taunting the officer with banter. Telling him to go get some lunch is hardly aggression. She was on her way to get in the car. So clearly she was presenting no danger and was going to leave. The officer you can hear on the recording calling them fxxxhing bxxtches. You don’t think he had hate in his heart ?
He not only shot Renee once but 3 times. At times endangering officers nearby and anybody that could of been in the path of the car after he killed her and her car kept going until it crashed.
Ronib did you even look at what I posted above regarding officer conduct ? No, clearly not .

Ronib 18.22 "I hope demonstrators and law enforcement officers can understand that change is needed to avoid a repetition of this appalling situation"

I agree but the onus evidently falls greater on the armed officers to ensure they operate within the law and jurisdiction of their role and that their use of firearm force is used only after efforts to deescalate have been tried and only when objectively reasonable.

LemonJam

Ronib 18.22- deflection and inappropriate conflation in my view. The officer who opened fire was not dealing or communicating with 2 women. He had 2 other ICE officers in his close range focussed on the car and the woman inside.

There were multiple ICE officers in the vicinity to deal with any other members of the public not in the car being driven by Renee Nicole Good that in your view were displaying a "strong impression of none compliance" on the public pathway.

I agree

ronib

LemonJam video footage shown here suggests there were 2 women. The woman not in the car was to my view baiting the ICE officers. She was clearly not going to comply with any requests and suggested that she would be hearing from them later as she and her partner weren’t going to change their number plates. There was a strong impression of non compliance.
I hope demonstrators and law enforcement officers can understand that change is needed to avoid a repetition of this appalling situation.

Just out of interest, how do feel about rubber bullets or even real bullets being used to disperse protests, you know like they do/did in China?

Do you genuinely believe that one unarmed woman “taunting” ICE officials justifies her wife being shot dead?

As I keep stating, it’s completely unclear, unless you personally witnessed this event to know exactly what took place, except a wife and mother was shot dead.

Ronib 18.22- deflection and inappropriate conflation in my view. The officer who opened fire was not dealing or communicating with 2 women. He had 2 other ICE officers in his close range focussed on the car and the woman inside.

There were multiple ICE officers in the vicinity to deal with any other members of the public not in the car being driven by Renee Nicole Good that in your view were displaying a "strong impression of none compliance" on the public pathway.

Syracute 18.17. A tragedy the officer, (who did in fact move out of the path of the moving vehicle) chose additionally to shoot at close range from the front of vehicle and then through left side window thereby killing Renee Nicole, when she had in fact complied with 2 other ICE officers directions.

The Investigation on this officer's use of force is yet to be demonstrate transparency, rigour, objectivity, impartiality and that decision making is evidence based.

LemonJam video footage shown here suggests there were 2 women. The woman not in the car was to my view baiting the ICE officers. She was clearly not going to comply with any requests and suggested that she would be hearing from them later as she and her partner weren’t going to change their number plates. There was a strong impression of non compliance.
I hope demonstrators and law enforcement officers can understand that change is needed to avoid a repetition of this appalling situation.