Did Pretti act lawfully?

[dudmuck]

Absolute fabricated bull shit.

‘Why Is This Happening to Us?’ Daily Number of Kids in ICE Detention Jumps 6x Under Trump ​

 

[Fang]

He never pulled the gun out he was disarmed when agents spotted it. At that point he was not an imminent threat and should not have been shot. Violent emotionally disturbed bad judgement yes. He should have been arrested

That's an incredibly easy take sitting from behind a keyboard. Pretti was a known agitator. He had already assaulted and spit on ICE prior to this incident. Pretti had destroyed their property. Pretti was NOT a peaceful protestor by any stretch of the imagination. He and many others were doing everything they could to intimate and scare ICE agents. Pretti made the decision to bring a gun to an already volatile situation that he created. You have no idea how these agents who Pretti has been abusing are gong to react when someone yells "GUN!".

 

[Seymour Flops]

‘Why Is This Happening to Us?’ Daily Number of Kids in ICE Detention Jumps 6x Under Trump ​

Sure, because the number of kids illegally being brought across the border skyrocketted under the Biden administration.

 

[Hafar1014]

That's an incredibly easy take sitting from behind a keyboard. Pretti was a known agitator. He had already assaulted and spit on ICE prior to this incident. Pretti had destroyed their property. Pretti was NOT a peaceful protestor by any stretch of the imagination. He and many others were doing everything they could to intimate and scare ICE agents. Pretti made the decision to bring a gun to an already volatile situation that he created. You have no idea how these agents who Pretti has been abusing are gong to react when someone yells "GUN!".

Pretti did not meet the standard for deadly force. He must be an imminent ( going to happen this moment) threat for serious bodily injury or death. He was disarmed and restrained by 4 agents when shot.
Watch a professional analysis.
In contrast the Goode shooting was lawful

 

[YoursTruly]

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, you didn't really respond to my question, you just deflected from it. What did he hope to accomplish by him being one person with a gun defending himself against several armed ICE agents? How could that possibly end well?

He didn't defend himself against BP officers.

 

[Seymour Flops]

OK, here is a video analysis that breaks down the events. Take a time hack and lets discuss.

WW

(BTW - heading out so will be back later.)

Sure.

The clip that starts at 6:13 with a camera panning upward (tilting up technically). Pretti is holding a woman or a man in a dress around the neck as if she is in a headlock, but I think he was pushing her out of the way. 6:18, the ICE officer reaches to push another woman who went toward him. Pretti sees and raises his hand - not toward the woman about to be pushed, but toward the officer. He then takes a step toward the officer - not toward the woman. I've seen more to that clip that shows him getting in the officers face.

No worries, though. The next clip edited on to that clip even more clearly shows Pretti getting in the officers face - not helping the woman who was pushed. 6:22 starts at about where 6:13 is in the previous clip. Pretti gets in the officers face and gets pepper sprayed by the officer.

Likely the officer was about to pepper spray the woman. Maybe Pretti thought he should step in an protect her. That's waht the host of the video said also. The hosts points out that trying to protect someone from a law enforcement officer by interfering introduces risk.

Regardless of whether he thought he was being noble,* that is interference with a federal officer under USC 18

and Minnesoata Statute 602.50.

When he resisted arrest, that also violated 609.50.

If you disagree with what officers are doing, video them and make your complaint through proper channels. Or you can decide that way is too slow, the system is rigged, etc. But then if you go the violence route there should be no complaints when it turns out badly for you. The law was there to instruct you as well as common sense. No complaints from the person who interfered and no complaints from the public.

Unless . . . the complaining person can agree that Pretti broke the law and set in motion the fast moving chain of events that ended in his death. If you can agree with that pretty obvious fact (no pun intended) but you still have a bone to pick with the way the officers responded to Pretti or what they were doing in the first place, we can have a rational discussion.

*He likely also thought that he was being noble a week or so before when he spat at and kicked a tail light off of an ICE vehicle.

 

[Independent thinker]

He didn't defend himself against BP officers.

You are not understanding my posts. I am questioning his thought process, not the actual events. What was he thinking beforehand? Why did he think he needed a gun? What did he think he was going to do with the gun? How did he expect to come out of a situation with his gun alive? Or, was he just thinking that if he got into a confrontation with ICE with his gun that when he dies at least he is going to take an ICE agent with him?

 

[candycorn]

Did Pretti act lawfully?​

yes

 

[YoursTruly]

You are not understanding my posts. I am questioning his thought process, not the actual events. What was he thinking beforehand? Why did he think he needed a gun? What did he think he was going to do with the gun? How did he expect to come out of a situation with his gun alive? Or, was he just thinking that if he got into a confrontation with ICE with his gun that when he dies at least he is going to take an ICE agent with him?

It doesn't matter what he was thinking hours before this happened. Or even minutes, really. He, like a lot of CC people, know that leaving the house and venturing out into public, it might be necessary to have a side arm.

 

[Independent thinker]

It doesn't matter what he was thinking hours before this happened. Or even minutes, really. He, like a lot of CC people, know that leaving the house and venturing out into public, it might be necessary to have a side arm.

Sure it matters what his thought process was. How does a guy who has reacted violently to ICE agents several times already think he can do that and bring a gun and expect to come out alive? What were his plans on using the gun and coming out alive? Under what circumstances did he feel he needed to use a gun and, if so, did he actually expect to come out alive? My wife tried claiming that he naturally carries a gun for protection but on that day it slipped his mind that he was carrying the gun and forgot he had it. Yeah, sure.

But, at least she gave me a reason while you refuse to.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Sure.

The clip that starts at 6:13 with a camera panning upward (tilting up technically). Pretti is holding a woman or a man in a dress around the neck as if she is in a headlock, but I think he was pushing her out of the way.

FIrst image is just seconds prior to your time stamp where DHS Agents crossed the the street. Then pushed the woman.

Second image is Pretti with his phone in his right hand attempting to help the woman.

Third image shows Pretti continuting to assist the woman and his arm is clearly in her mid back not in some type of headlock.

Please attempt to describe accurately what is clearly in the video.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Sure.
6:18, the ICE officer reaches to push another woman who went toward him. Pretti sees and raises his hand - not toward the woman about to be pushed, but toward the officer. He then takes a step toward the officer - not toward the woman. I've seen more to that clip that shows him getting in the officers face.

And the same scene is clearly visible from 6:23 with a clearer pickture.

The DHS Agent crossed the steet and initiated violence.

Pushed the woman to the ground and yes Pretti stepped between the woman on the ground and the officer that had just attacked her.

Then got OC sprayed in the face for stepping between the officer and the woman on the ground.

The woman was not obstructing law enforcement because she was on the other side of the street, the DHS Agents crossed the street to engage and initiated violence.

WW

 

[j-mac]

yes

Good, you should try that then…

 

[Seymour Flops]

And the same scene is clearly visible from 6:23 with a clearer pickture.

The DHS Agent crossed the steet and initiated violence.

Pushed the woman to the ground and yes Pretti stepped between the woman on the ground and the officer that had just attacked her.

He stepped into the face of the officer. As I said, maybe he thought he had a noble reason to interfere, but interfere he did.

Then got OC sprayed in the face for stepping between the officer and the woman on the ground.

The woman was not obstructing law enforcement because she was on the other side of the street, the DHS Agents crossed the street to engage and initiated violence.

WW

I was speaking about Pretti, not that woman. I haven't studied her role, so I won't offer an opinion at this time. I did see her approach the officer on that video you provided.

View attachment 1221592

View attachment 1221595

As I've said several times, I am very willing to discuss the appropriateness and also the lawfulness of the actions of the ICE officers. I would enjoy such a conversation.

But only with a person who is honest enough to admit that Pretti acted unlawfully by interfering with federal agents/law enforcement officers, which violated by federal law and Minnesota law. And that Pretti was reckless to do so while armed with a gun.

Absent willingness to agree to that simple truth, I cannot assume that the person I discuss the agents' with will be intellectually honest.

 

[Seymour Flops]

FIrst image is just seconds prior to your time stamp where DHS Agents crossed the the street. Then pushed the woman.

Second image is Pretti with his phone in his right hand attempting to help the woman.

Third image shows Pretti continuting to assist the woman and his arm is clearly in her mid back not in some type of headlock.

Please attempt to describe accurately what is clearly in the video.

I did describe it accurately. I did not say Pretti had her in a headlock. I said that Pretti is holding a woman or a man in a dress around the neck as if she is in a headlock, but I think he was pushing her out of the way.

I was not accusing Pretti of attacking that woman. Not wanting to waste time on strawmen like that is exactly why I am insisting on an honesty test before I discuss the actions of the ICE agents.

I wouldn't bother if it were some of the other Democrats on here. But you seem to be one of the more honest ones.

So yes or no please: Did Pretti unlawfully interfere with law enforcement/federal agents in violation of federal law and Minnesota law?

 

[WorldWatcher]

He stepped into the face of the officer. As I said, maybe he thought he had a noble reason to interfere, but interfere he did.


I was speaking about Pretti, not that woman. I haven't studies her role, so I won't offer an opinion at this time. I did see her approach the officer on that video you provided.

As I've said several times, I am very willing to discuss the appropriateness and also the lawfulness of the actions of the ICE officers. I would enjoy such a conversation.

But only with a person who is honest enough to admit that Pretti acted unlawfully by interfering with federal agents/law enforcement officers, which violated by federal law and Minnesota law. And that Pretti was reckless to do so while armed with a gun.

Absent willingness to agree to that simple truth, I cannot assume that the person I discuss the agents' with will be intellectually honest.

Petti didn't interfer, Petti was filming from the street and DHS Agent approched him and initiated violence.

Honest person? You made claims about the video with time stamps, I went back to the time stamps and grabbed the screen shots showing your statements describing the events were false.

You don't want an "honest discussion", you want a discussion where Petti is the bad guy, DHS Agents were justified in shooting an unarmed man, being pinned to the ground, and shot in the back.

Absent willingness to agree to that simple truth as shown in the videos, I cannot assume that the person I discuss the agents' with will be intellectually honest.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

Petti didn't interfer, Petti was filming from the street and DHS Agent approched him and initiated violence.

Honest person? You made claims about the video with time stamps, I went back to the time stamps and grabbed the screen shots showing your statements describing the events were false.

You don't want an "honest discussion", you want a discussion where Petti is the bad guy, DHS Agents were justified in shooting an unarmed man, being pinned to the ground, and shot in the back.

Absent willingness to agree to that simple truth as shown in the videos, I cannot assume that the person I discuss the agents' with will be intellectually honest.

WW

So sad.

One of the few relatively honest Democrats feels he has to be dishonest to go along with one of the most incredibly dishonest Democrat narratives in my lifetime.

Ring up one more soul sold for partisanship.

 

[Seymour Flops]

You don't want an "honest discussion", you want a discussion where Petti is the bad guy, DHS Agents were justified in shooting an unarmed man, being pinned to the ground, and shot in the back.

Wrong.

I have talked for years about police being too quick to shoot people:

Post in thread 'a virginia furious after special grand jury indicts white officer'

Oct 15, 2023

Call me a "Librull" if you like. But I have had it up to here with unarmed people being killed by police because the police officer claims they "reached for something."

Give me a break. No shooting until you see a gun. Shooting people for "reaching for something," and calling that justified, could be a death sentence for people with any kind of disability that affects behavior. I'm surprised we don't see more people with autism shot by cops. They act strangely sometimes, but I've never heard of one carrying or wanting to carry a gun. But I could easily picture one of my students...

• Seymour Flops

• 

I was willing to talk at length about ICE actions in this case.

But not with a dishonest with whom I'd be wasting my time.

 

[WorldWatcher]

So sad.

One of the few relatively honest Democrats feels he has to be dishonest to go along with one of the most incredibly dishonest Democrat narratives in my lifetime.

Ring up one more soul sold for partisanship.

So sad.

We're at the point where you have to devolve to personal insults when your claims about the video were shown to be false.

Ring up one more soul sold for partisanship.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

This is the gunman Pretti (red arrow) at least five feet from the nearest ICE officer (green Arrow) who is apparently ordering a woman (pink arrow) to stop chasing him:

Here the officer forces the woman to stop acosting him, as Gunman Pretti steps toward the officer, whose face is turned away from Pretti:

Get that?

The ICE officer paid attention to the woman who was harassing him, not to Pretti.

Until . . .

Here is Pretti, having closed in from five feet, getting in the face of the officer, who can barely be seen due to Pretti being inches away at most.

Here is the officer trying to subdue the gunman with non-lethal force:

This was no nurse seeking to help a patient. He was a man eager to fight police, possibly with a broken rib from having fought them days before. Still, police had no interest in shooting him, until they saw his gun. They have been incredibly patient in taking abuse no one should have to and without shooting people. Not until they saw that he had brought a gun with which to shoot them and was still fighting.

How could he have avoided dying that day?

-He doesn't go to a violent protest: he lives.
-He goes, but tends to injured without interfering with police: he lives.
-He goes, participates in the violence, but backs off when police use nonlethal force: he lives. Police did not shoot him when he spat on and kicked a tail light off of their vehicle. Unsanitary little jerk, but not in need of shooting.
-He doesn't carry a gun to a location with a plan to fight police: he lives.
-He gives up when multiple police tackle him: he lives.

In all of those scenarios, Nurse Pretti becomes the hero of the left media, he gets to sue the federal government in a Minnesota court, and he is nearly immune from firing because it would look like retaliation.

He walks into any Minneapolis bar and takes his pick of whatever his particular preference for f***buddy is.

If he had chosen to live.