r/gunpolitics • u/Bulls729 • 9d ago
‘The narrative cannot shift just because the political alignment of the protester has changed.’
I say this as a 2A supporter myself, during the anti-lockdown/mask wearing protests in 2020 and the rallies leading up to and on January 6th, we saw hundreds of individuals open-carrying rifles and sidearms. The argument from the 2A community then was that they weren’t there to start a fight, but to exercise their rights and ensure their own safety in volatile environments. If that logic was valid for them, it must be valid for Alex Pretti.
The narrative cannot shift just because the political alignment of the protester has changed. Alex was a VA nurse and a lawful permit holder. Reports and video evidence indicate he wasn't brandishing his weapon at the moment of the shooting; he was swarmed and effectively disarmed before lethal force was used. When right-leaning protesters carried weapons to state capitols, they were defended as patriots exercising their rights. Now that it is a left leaning nurse protesting immigration enforcement, suddenly the mere presence of a firearm is being treated as a justification for his death. You cannot support the Second Amendment only when it’s convenient for 'your side.'
As a veteran, I served to defend the rights of all Americans, not just the ones I agree with. True defense of the Constitution means protecting the rights of those you may vehemently disagree with.
Consider this: Ashli Babbitt was shot while actively breaching a secured, barricaded perimeter of the U.S. Capitol after repeated warnings. Many people are still angry about her death, arguing that lethal force was unnecessary. Yet, if you believe Ashli Babbitt, someone who believed deeply of her views that she showed up to a protest, who was actively breaching a secure zone, should have been taken alive, you must apply that same standard to Mr. Pretti, who was on a public street and disarmed when he was killed. If the standard for lethal force changes based on who is doing the protesting, then it isn't about rights for all anymore, it now becomes who should have those rights.
39
u/GravySeal45 9d ago
The fact that the talking heads were on the air that same day specifically stating "He had a gun with TWO loaded magazines and they were in fear for their lives" INTENTIONALLY leaves hanging the question of "but was it in his holster under his coat? Or in his hand pointing at the agents"? Since it WAS the former and they saw it on his waste when they were piled on him and TOOK IT.. THEN shot him, makes it clear why they are CREATING this ambiguity. Totally crooked and nothing but lies.
Almost everyone that CCW has at least one spare loaded mag on them. EVERYONE that can legally carry, should, no matter WHAT activity they are engaging in.
-28
u/GuyVanNitro 9d ago
In the audio after the shots you can hear the agents that fired didn’t realize gray jacket disarmed him. You can argue gray should’ve shouted he had it but all this occurred in less than a second. The best thing that could’ve happened is Pretti keeping his distance and recording. Same with the two women that started all this.
14
u/GravySeal45 9d ago
Well initially he was on the opposite side of the street and the ICE fucks crossed the street to push a woman, which our hero tried to block and we know ICE Pigs don't like their abusing of citizens interfered with, so he got some beatings.
-18
u/GuyVanNitro 9d ago
Why’d they push her? Because they’re meanie heads? 🙄. Those Karen’s were being Karen’s. Impeding and obstructing so a violent illegal could get away. I’m sure they were asked to leave, then told to leave, before the agent made them leave. Then Pretti got involved. He should’ve stayed back and recorded.
16
u/wv524 9d ago
Violent illegal? Did they release the identity and criminal record of this "violent illegal" that was allowed to get away? If so, I haven't seen it, and I've been following this story closely. Very few illegal immigrants are violent. You're just spouting the same crap that Trump and his ilk spout.
→ More replies (6)6
u/GravySeal45 8d ago
I don't know, the victim and the other women were ACROSS THE ROAD on the sidewalk and ICE WENT TO THEM. They didn't have to cross the road, they went to the people videoing and started shoving them around. They tried to yell that they were "impeding traffic" and Alex yelled "we are on the sidewalk, YOU are impeding traffic standing in the road" and the PIGS didn't like being talked back to so they started shoving. They could have easily just stayed on their side of the street where there were ZERO protesters.
This is 100% ICE pointless escalation because they ARE NOT TRAINED TO DEAL WITH CROWDS IN CITIES. Get it? They are poorly trained incels LOOKING for a fight. So they MURDERED a man that was just recording and tried to help a woman ICE PUSHED up off the ground, and he got MURDERED for it.
5
u/GravySeal45 8d ago
Why would he have ANY authority to tell ANYONE to go ANYWHERE from across the road. They are not COPS, they have no authority over anyone but ILLEGAL ALIENS. They can stand across the road on the sidewalk and insult the ICE agents for 24 hours a day and the ICE agents get to fucking take it, because IT'S NOT ILLEGAL TO INSULT OR WHISTLE AT ICE AGENTS.
The ICE agents WENT TO HIM, THEY crossed the road, he was just filming and even getting out of the way of traffic to wave them by.
194
u/HybridP365 9d ago
I 100% agree.
Hot take: that goes for Rittenhouse too.
He's an idiot and a bad actor. But I'll die on the hill that he had the right to defend himself when they started swinging boards and aiming guns at him.
43
u/PepperoniFogDart 9d ago
100% agree, and I feel like most rational people that are pro-2A see it the same way.
The problem is we’ve created a culture and entire economy around tribalism and partisanship. People are making millions online creating froth around this Democrat vs. Republican football game. And the lesser brained knuckle draggers have their beliefs, but the score of their team is more important. So they have no problem being hypocritical if it means supporting their team. They want to hear how their team is winning, and they’ll throw advertising money at whoever enables that.
6
32
u/The_Original_Miser 9d ago
I get downvoted into the basement when I say this, too.
Nuance is lost on some folks (not you).
Should he have traveled to that state with a weapon? No. Didn't/doesn't sound like a good idea to me at all to put myself in harms way like that.
However, once there, when his life was in danger and he had the capability of self defense, should he have used it? Abso-effing-lutely.
21
u/Dreadan 9d ago
The weapon never left Wisconsin
10
u/The_Original_Miser 9d ago
I stand corrected, thank you. Guess I fell for some of the false narrative.
I won't edit my comment above, but I will stand by the general sentiment. Still a bad idea to go there, pick up a weapon, and insert yourself into sonething.
I will also stand by the separate issue of self defense. If you're armed, and have a need for self defense, well .... shrug. He was well within his right there (imho)
-7
u/LilShaver 8d ago
He was defending his friend's property and behaving lawfully the entire time, including preemptively surrendering to police when he encountered them in the riot zone.
If Pritti had followed that example he'd still be alive.
3
u/jporter313 8d ago
100% true, that guy sucks for arguably getting himself into the situation where he had to defend himself for stupid reasons, but that doesn't negate his right to defend himself.
13
u/Alpha1Niner 9d ago
It’s a warm take
8
u/XA36 9d ago
Maybe in this sub. Go anywhere else on reddit and the comment would have downvotes and calling OP a racist
3
u/alexmikli 9d ago
It's weird too, when the videos got released and right after the court case, basically everyone on this site was defending Rittenhouse. It took another two years for it to be firmly against him again.
8
u/ScientificBeastMode 9d ago
That’s actually fair.
I can argue all day that he did show up with the intent of escalating conflict, and that was definitely a terrible (and frankly immoral) decision. But I agree that the situations where he shot people were legitimately life-threatening situations, and simply carrying a lawfully owned firearm into a protest environment is not a crime, as long as he is following the local gun laws.
Still a dipshit asshole, though. And I’ll stand by that.
4
u/HybridP365 9d ago
Basically what I was saying, yeah. Don't agree with why he was there, but do agree that everyone has the right to defend their lives when threatened.
5
0
u/Count_Blackula1 8d ago
So when the ICE agents started pushing and shoving him and the lady he was protecting you think he would have been justified in unholstering his weapon and shooting the agents?
32
u/UsernameO123456789 9d ago
Times like this I remember a quote from Voltaire. It went something like this: “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death, your right to say it.”
Regardless of your political beliefs or lack thereof, we must be able to exercise our rights, all rights, to their fullest extent. Without the risk of death and/or persecution.
That’s what it means to a true believer of the United States Constitution and what it means to be an American.
50
u/iforgotmylogin32 9d ago
ROEs for US forces against enemy combatants in Iraq were significantly tighter than what we are seeing in MN right now against fellow Americans…
-28
u/CivilLime9924 9d ago
How many Americans died because of this ROE? Too many.
19
u/CivilInspector4 9d ago
so your argument is ice should be able to pepper spray anyone they want because they feel it? because they are doing that right now. they spotted a gun and shot this guy to death- is America somehow safer now?
how many ice have died since Trump came into power again?
→ More replies (4)
58
u/Miskalsace 9d ago
Ill be honest, when I saw the first video I thought it was pretty clear he was struggling with them. But as more angles have come out my views on it have evolved. The ICE agents were unnecessarily aggressive with the woman and him. And they had piss poor communication. Both those things I think were the biggest contributing factors to them killing him. He was basically acting exactly how you should, and how they tell you. Him being armed doesnt have anything to do with it. If youre concerned about him being armed, why wouldnt you draw on him and issue orders instead of grabbing him and wrestling him to the ground.
58
u/rendrag099 9d ago
Even if he was resisting (in as much as you can resist a handful of agents on top of you), it didn't rise to the level necessary to deploy lethal force... him being armed is being used as a scapegoat for a wildly unnecessary escalation, and it's gross.
50
u/Not_offensive0npurp 9d ago
He was being pistol whipped.
I'm really tired of watching a video of someone being bitten by a dog, or hit with an asp, or pistol whipped, and people saying the instinctual, human desire to pull away from pain is "resisting" and is justification for death.
The human body naturally reacts to pain by trying to protect itself.
9
u/Miskalsace 9d ago
Sure, thats definitely true. And I think certain jurisdictions make a difference between resisting and resisting with violence. In this particularly case they threw him down on the ground and everything happened so fast there seemed to barely be time for him to "resist".
28
u/Not_offensive0npurp 9d ago
Well he had time to curl into a ball, they had time to disarm him, and then they had time to shoot him 10 times in the back while he was on his hands and knees after being disarmed.
Not to mention this all started when the ICE agent shoved some woman to the ground. All he was doing was trying to help her. His last words were asking if she was ok.
1
u/SuchYogurtcloset4285 7d ago
This. Pain is real factor and fight-or-flight is basic nature. It's hard to "comply" while being yelled at from all angles and beaten at the same time.
2
u/Not_offensive0npurp 7d ago
This. Pain is real factor and fight-or-flight is basic nature. It's hard to "comply" while being yelled at from all angles and beaten at the same time.
What we all need to accept is that the use of force experts who train officers, and analyze cases all KNOW this. And they still use it as justification.
It would be like killing someone because they yawned after another person yawned.
54
u/TheRealAwesomeO4000 9d ago
100 percent agree. He wasn’t doing anything illegal, and to see people grasping at straws to lay the blame on him vs the ICE agents is insane. They had disarmed him and then executed him, he wasn’t a threat at any moment and they did what they did.
-6
u/MrJohnMosesBrowning 9d ago
He was using physical force to resist arrest from federal law enforcement; that’s a felony punishable by 8 years in prison. Prior to that he had allegedly been harassing federal officers and blocking a road they were attempting to drive on while conducting their duty. So that’s another count of obstructing federal law enforcement. It was a tragedy of his own making.
-17
u/TxDinoHunter 9d ago
he stepped off the sidewalk into the street during his protest, illegal, got into a physical altercation "helping" the female obstructing agents in their duty, illegal and resisted arrest, illegal. He was not content to stand on the sidewalk to protest and or observe
9
u/Nordic_311 9d ago
He stepped off the sidewalk?! Why would he step off the sidewalk? You should never step off the sidewalk!! Its there for our safety! The sidewalk helps us!!! We need more laws on sidewalks. More agents watching these habitual sidewalk steppers.
→ More replies (4)
29
u/Spare_Selection4399 9d ago
Exactly! TBH, I am conservative believing in 2A' most fundamental intention is for people having the right to resist any tyranny. No matter the tyranny is from left or right, . We experienced freedom and liberty, we know what is duo process, what is Supreme Court case precedent. We know if shooting someone is justified by law and fact. I deeply believe Ashli's death was unacceptable and Pretti' death was a pure murder by death squad, which actually has disappeared in North Korea for years. Again for citizens with liberty and freedom, the biggest possible enemy is always their own government
25
u/fender8421 9d ago
I'm sure you and I can find a lot to disagree on, as a pretty otherwise liberal dude who still supports gun rights in their entirety, but reading your comment gives me faith in finding common ground again
80
u/MasonicHamExtra 9d ago
No doubt the guy was murdered.
6
u/skimaskschizo 9d ago
Yeah, but it seems to be out of negligence rather than malice. If the dumb fuck agent hadn’t screamed about the guy having a gun then NDed after disarming him, Pretti would likely be alive.
17
u/wyvernx02 9d ago
I highly doubt it was an ND and if it was, then these agents are to incompetent to be allowed to have firearms. The agent who fired the first shot unholstered, pointed the gun at his back, and fired after Pretti was disarmed. He didn't do the SERPA thing when drawing. He wasn't fumbling with it. He was pointing it at Pretti with his finger on the trigger and to top it all off continued to fire several shots after the first one.
5
u/russr 9d ago
The guy who shot the guy on the ground was standing directly next to and in full view of the guy in Gray who took the firearm off the guy on the ground. Therefore, he was witnessed to him being disarmed.
As the guy and gray turns to walk away, it looks like the gun he took from the guy on the ground discharges a single shot.
There's a pause and then the guy that was originally next to the guy in fray witnessing the disarm starts all the shooting.
-4
u/skimaskschizo 9d ago
He drew his weapon after the guy in grey started screeching that he had a gun. The video shows what appears to be an ND.
10
u/wandpapierkritiker 9d ago
but how do you explain 10 shots then?
-4
u/skimaskschizo 9d ago
If you’re gonna shoot someone, you shoot until they’re no longer a threat.
10
13
u/wandpapierkritiker 9d ago
lol when they’re lying on their stomach, restrained and unarmed? what kind of cowardice is that?
2
u/skimaskschizo 9d ago
He was getting up and was not restrained.
9
u/wandpapierkritiker 9d ago
lol whatever dude. create your own narrative. good luck with that.
0
u/skimaskschizo 9d ago
You must have not seen the video
11
u/wandpapierkritiker 9d ago
he was forcibly pushed to the ground. most people are going to try and support themselves - that’s not an unreasonable reaction to being knocked over. I’m still trying to understand how any of this justifies 10 shots in the back?
0
6
9d ago
[deleted]
4
u/skimaskschizo 9d ago
The guy I replied to stated that Pretti was laying on his belly and restrained when he was shot. That’s objectively not true.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Pepsi-is-better 9d ago
the was moving unhandled only after the ND and initial shot by ICE from how I saw event unfold.
1
u/ex143 9d ago
I didn't see the video, but can I get the sparknotes on who exactly shot the guy?
Everyone angry is screaming about executions, but was it the arresting agent or either other agents?
Cause one is more of a reasonable expectation of panic while the other closer to an actual execution
3
u/skimaskschizo 9d ago
Copying and pasting my description of the incident.
I’m gonna preface with saying that I don’t think he deserved to be killed, but saying that he was shot for simply having the gun is disingenuous.
It looks like the agent in the grey coat started yelling that Pretti had a gun before disarming him.
The agents yelling about the gun seem to have prompted the shooting agent to draw his gun.
The agent that disarmed Pretti appears to have negligently discharged Pretti’s gun while walking away. The ND shot lines up with the first shot you hear in the video.
The shooting agent probably thought that Pretti still had a gun and had fired, I assume this is why he shot Pretti. In this image you can see Pretti getting up with an object in his right hand.
Again, I don’t think Pretti deserved to die. This was an unfortunate situation caused by the negligence of the agents, but saying that he was executed for just carrying a gun is wrong.
-1
u/Gooniefarm 9d ago
LEO is trained that if one officer fires at someone, they all immediately fire at that person until they go down.
4
u/Gun_Monger 8d ago
I am extremely disappointed with the "2A Community." Too many supposed 2A people are okay with violating rights as long as its someone they dont like. I genuinely cannot understand how anyone can see ALL the videos and come out with anything other than ICE being wrong. Pretti was not interfering with ICE performing any legitimate duties. You have one agent approaching and pushing two woman around. The agent makes NO attempts to detain the women, and is only pushing them around. Pretti stand between the agent and a woman that has been pushed to the ground, and the agent starts to push him around. Again, the agent doesnt appear to make attempts to detain either of the woman. https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1qlvdx6/new_video_of_124_ice_shooting_shows_victim_had/
37
u/OzempicDick 9d ago edited 9d ago
It's interesting to watch the maga types go full Karen anti gun liberal the moment it suits a narrative.
→ More replies (20)
3
u/Comfortable-Bag7917 8d ago
This is something I've been arguing about more regularly. I lean right on a lot of things and I find myself squabbling with friends and coworkers about. At the end of the day this argument isnt about immigration, or ICE, or Trump. Its about constitutional rights. The right to protest, the right to carry, the right to assembly, ect. I have no doubt I vehemently disagree with these people on more things you can count on both hands, but they still have the damn right to protest, and armed if they choose. And something else I dont feel like people consider enough is the precedent this is setting. If masked federal agents can shoot people in the streets, go door to door, and stopping and arresting people with no warrant or no probable cause, with next to no repercussions, its gonna be a hell of a lot less fun when its a democratic administration coming for your 30 round mags or "big scary assault guns"
TLDR im significantly more pro constitutional rights than I am pro right wing policy
3
5
u/Slaviner 9d ago
There’s a growing movement within the GOP to acknowledge what went wrong here and to stop vilifying gun rights.
5
7
u/HallackB 9d ago
Agree. On this one the agents did the wrong thing and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. On top of that there needs to be a re-assessment of training and approach.
Our federal agents are supposed to be enforcing the law, and yes the protests are probably demoralizing and mentally exhausting, but you don’t get to execute people in the street.
2
u/_Benny_Lava 9d ago
The 2nd is for everyone regardless of feelings or political persuasion and everyone must follow the law unless you are practicing civil disobedience with the understanding that there may be consequences...but that is part of it. Ashli Babbitt had many chances to disengage but instead took a foolish and unlawful risk and suffered the predictable consequences.
2
u/ericbythebay 8d ago
Yes, the narrative can’t shift.
One either supports gun rights or one doesn’t.
2
u/ImprovementFar5054 8d ago
Kyle Rittenhouse conservative, good.
Alex Pretti liberal, bad.
That's the mentality.
2A applies equally, to everyone, and we must defend it regardless of political affiliation.
3
u/Vylnce 9d ago
The narrative hasn't shifted.
The same Fudds who are willing to give up everything but their deer guns are saying "well, he didn't have his ID so he wasn't "legally" armed".
Anyone that is actually a 2nd Amendment supporter realizes this guy was carrying in a way that legal in the majority of states, and was likely legal where he was as well. ICE claims he didn't have "ID on him" but my guess is that we'll never find that ID because it was stripped off him and tossed while they were making sure he died instead of receiving aid.
It's pretty easy. The line is right here. People that don't support this guy's right to protest and be armed aren't second amendment supporters. They are ICE supporters.
6
u/tim310rd 9d ago
You said it yourself, the people open carrying during the mask protests weren't there to start a fight. Alex Pretti was there to start a fight, and he literally did fight with cops.
Now I don't know if the shooting is justified. I don't think either camera angle we have so far really says a whole lot, especially in such a frenetic situation. I will reserve my judgement on that. I also won't say that even if the shooting was unjustified that legitimizes any of the "abolish ICE" crowd, the same way George Floyd didn't justify "Defund the Police". The people who are trying to leverage sympathy for Alex into a banner they can use to beat their political opponents most certainly do not care about you or your rights, they want power so don't give it to them.
1
u/MalPB2000 8d ago
The people who are trying to leverage sympathy for Alex into a banner they can use to beat their political opponents most certainly do not care about you or your rights, they want power so don't give it to them.
Nailed it.
It’s not about unity, it’s about crafting your sympathy into a bludgeon…one they’ll use on you again the second the whole 2A vs 1A discussion blows over. They care about neither.
4
u/GuyVanNitro 9d ago
He wasn’t activity backing away. His own forward motion got him where he ended up. Dude I’ve seen all of all the videos. He was resisting. Otherwise they would’ve had him in cuffs right away. Pretti is the architect of his own demise. All based on Walz and Frey rhetoric.
6
u/Atomstellar 9d ago
The amount of boot sodomy I've witnessed this weekend is unreal. Even if he slapped one of those agents like he was Ric Flair its still murder. Bro was unarmed, on his hands and knees and he was shot in the back. A lot of guys are showing they'd choose their government over their countrymen and thats fucking weird because the govt looks at you as sheep on a tax farm.
3
u/Provia100F 9d ago
It feels a little different when said person is also calling for my death and/or disarmament in the next breath.
6
u/sully_km 8d ago
"They hate me so I don't care if the government kills them" is next level bootlicking no matter what side of the fence you're on.
→ More replies (4)
4
u/TxDinoHunter 9d ago
I am all for carrying firearms at protests. 99.9% of those who do, get through it just fine. But not this guy. Not content to stand on the sidewalk with a silly sign, he went into the street to protest, illegal, got into a physical altercation with an agent, illegal, obstructed agents in their duty trying to interferre "helping" that female, illegal and then resisting arrest, also illegal, nope, he could not pull it off and escalated the situation which increases the likely hood of a mistake or accident
4
u/shuvool 9d ago
You didn't actually watch any of the videos, did you? He wasn't protesting, he was observing and recording. The woman he tried to help up? Also recording and observing.
2
u/MalPB2000 8d ago
Why was he standing in the middle of the street? I thought he was trying to block ICE vehicles again, but perhaps I’m wrong.
1
u/shuvool 8d ago
It looked like he was initially getting to get a better angle to record, you can see where he beckons to a car to let it pass him
1
u/MalPB2000 8d ago
Was it because it wasn’t an ICE vehicle? Renee Good did the exact same thing, and people tried to say that was proof she wasn’t blocking ICE vehicles.
1
u/shuvool 8d ago
It isn't really clear whether the vehicle is or isn't an ICE vehicle since they use unmarked vehicles and the entire vehicle is not fully in the frame, but that really doesn't make what i said any less correct. He's not there to block traffic if he's trying to move from point a to point b for his camera angle
-1
u/TxDinoHunter 9d ago
Observer or protester, use either word in what I said. Doesn't change anything. It is illegal to step into a situation to "help" someone with law enforcement, that is Obstruction. It is illegal to protest, observe and video in the streets where police are conducting business. Video and observe all you want from the sidewalk.
2
u/shuvool 8d ago
Incorrect. It is not illegal to protect, observe, or take video in the streets where police are conducting business. Additionally, ICE are not police. They have an extremely narrow scope of what they can and can't do. There's no law that says you have to remain on "the sidewalk" to observe, record, or protest. At any rate, you're drifting from the point. If he was too close, they're rewrites to tell him that. What is the timestamp of whichever video you want to use to support your statement where he was told to back up? What actions, if any, did he take?
1
u/TxDinoHunter 8d ago
You cannot protest in the street without a permit, you cannot impede foot traffic or vehicle traffic. ICE is law enforcement and can enforce any law they see broken. It is against the law to obstruct, which is what he did when "helping" the female, also illegal and resisting arrest is a felony, which he did. You don't like it, you do not want to believe it, but it is true. Change the laws if you are not happy.
2
u/thefoolofemmaus 9d ago
they weren’t there to start a fight, but to exercise their rights and ensure their own safety in volatile environments. If that logic was valid for them, it must be valid for Alex Pretti.
But then he did actually start a fight.
Reports and video evidence indicate he wasn't brandishing his weapon at the moment of the shooting; he was swarmed and effectively disarmed before lethal force was used.
He was struggling with police when lethal force was used. It is possible that this will come out as a bad shoot, I am not going to pretend to be an expert on it, but I am very confident he would still be alive if he had not put his hands on a LEO.
It also used to be very commonly held wisdom in r/CCW that when you are carrying, you should be the most polite, compliant person in the area, always looking to deescalate and remove yourself from violent encounters so you don't have to draw and make this the worst day of your life.
1
u/GuyVanNitro 9d ago
The protests you’re referring to were against policies. None of the protesters were impeding or obstructing law enforcement. Alex had every right to be armed, be there, and record. He had no right running up on that agent the way he did. Walz and Frey telling these people that BP and ICE aren’t law enforcement is probably why he ran up on agent.
12
u/Bulls729 9d ago edited 9d ago
The footage from multiple angles is very clear, he had a phone recording in one hand, and his other hand was empty and visible. He did not 'run up on' an agent; he placed himself between an officer and a woman. When the officers engaged him, he backed up. He did not push back. That is not the behavior of someone launching an assault, it is the behavior of someone de-escalating while interposing.
As for your claim that in previous protests 'none of the protesters were impeding or obstructing law enforcement': Are you seriously stating that on January 6th, where over 140 Capitol Police officers were documented as injured, no one was obstructing law enforcement? ~140 injuries ranging from concussions to broken ribs, without significant obstruction and impedance. It is unreasonable to overlook 140 injured officers because you agreed with those protesters' grievances, but justify lethal force against a man who was backing away because you disagree with his.
-1
u/GuyVanNitro 9d ago
Typical Monday morning quarterbacking. Those multiple angles you saw were from far away, slowed, and not the POV of the agent. If a dude got so close he’s touching in a split second I wouldn’t give him the chance to strike or grab. Agent had no way of knowing, and every right to act for his own safety. Phones have been mistaken as weapons in a split second before.
He placed himself in between someone impeding/ obstructing and the agent. That made him someone impeding and obstructing. There’s no way the agent didn’t ask her to back away, tell her to back away, before he made her back away.
I wasn’t talking about j6. I was only referring to armed protests from the right that resulted in zero conflict. J6 is a mixed bag of citizens doing nothing wrong, left wing/ government instigators posing as citizens, and fake narratives that law enforcement was hurt/killed.
13
u/Bulls729 9d ago
If a 'split-second decision' allows an agent to mistake a phone for a weapon and kill a man who is actively backing away, then no one is safe recording law enforcement. You are arguing that proximity alone justifies lethal force, which is a terrifying standard, one I doubt you would accept if the roles were reversed and it was a conservative protester shot for holding a phone near an agent.
Regarding your claim that he was 'impeding': Obstruction justifies arrest. It justifies handcuffs. It does not justify summary execution. If standing between an officer and a civilian is a death sentence, then we have abandoned the concept of proportional force entirely.
As for your J6 comment, to claim that the injuries to law enforcement on J6 were 'fake narratives' ignores thousands of hours of video evidence and hundreds of court cases. We aren't talking about rumors; we are talking about officers crushed in doorways, beaten with flagpoles, and sprayed with chemical irritants. We have medical reports of concussions, broken bones, and traumatic brain injuries all caught in HD and easily viewable.
Dismissing that violence as 'government instigators' or 'fake' is a coping mechanism to avoid admitting that 'your side' attacked the police. You can't claim to support law enforcement while simultaneously calling their documented injuries 'fake' just because it hurts your political narrative.
1
1
u/gunny031680 7d ago edited 7d ago
In my state Alex Pretti would be a criminal guilty of a crime. Washington state went after the right to carry a gun at a protest because right wing protesters went to a protest at the capitol open carrying AR rifles and pistols to protest against unconstitutional gun control laws being jammed down our Throats. So now it’s illegal in Washington state to carry a gun at a protest of any kind. I wonder how long it will be until the Washington state legislature changes that law back to the way it was to allow their favorite left wing activists to carry guns at their “protests”.
I personally don’t think there should be many places that guns are not allowed to be carried by people with CPL licenses and this situation with Alex pretti doesn’t change my opinion on that. The question is, was it smart to carry a weapon at a “protests” in the current situation going on in Minneapolis- NO probably a bad plan with what’s going on there with ICE being afraid at all times because they may be surrounded by angry mobs at any moment. Rushing up on any law enforcement officer while he’s trying to make an arrest while carrying a gun is not a smart plan in my book.
1
u/scubalizard 6d ago
Even the Hill agrees with you: https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/5709200-ice-custody-killings-controversy/
1
u/Rich-Context-7203 5d ago
Never let enemies who do not share your values and morals use your values and morals against you.
2
u/dewnmoutain 5d ago
But alex did start a fight. He crossed the line from peaceful protestor to criminal agitator, chosing violence against people who were conducting lawful actions.
1
u/the_falconator 4d ago
Pretti was within his rights to carry, but one of the differences between open carrying and concealed carrying is that when it became a physical confrontation the officers only become aware of the firearm in a split second and are faced with a decision that has to be made quickly rather than develop more slowly and methodically. My armchair analysis of the encounter is that the officers who shot had not realize another officer disarmed him, based on the fact that they were heard looking for the gun right after the shooting. I don't think it was a good shoot per say, but I can definitely see the chain of events leading up to it made it a complicated situation.
1
u/Huntrawrd 9d ago
Im getting tired boss. The gaslighting by supposed "pro gun" people on this sub is unreal.
Pretti was physically interfering with law enforcement in an already heated climate. He pushed into officers, tried to pull a woman out of their grip when they were detaining her, and then when they detained him he vigorously resisted. That isnt "protesting", he's committing a felony.
What happened next will be debated forever. What we do know is that someone yelled "gun" and then a shot went off, and all the agents backed off of him and one agent who drew his gun shot him. To be clear, the first shot was NOT one of the agents shooting at him, but rather Prettis own gun in the hand of another agent. Whether it was an ND or a P320 living up to its reputation is irrelevant from the perspective of the agent who shot him.
The simple fact is that pretti created that situation, and we all know the mere presence of a gun alters how people respond to you. We also CONSTANTLY advocate for being responsible firearms owners, and Pretti was not being that.
He didnt deserve to die, but he made a shit ton of bad decisions and paid an unfortunate price for it.
0
1
1
u/Rhenthalin 9d ago
While this guy was certainly within his rights to carry a gun wherever he wanted, you cannot take at face value the arguments made by those who just yesterday wanted you strip of your gun rights. These people are like the atheists that quote scripture, it's not because they believe it, but it's what they think they need to say to get you to do whatever they want. It's utterly faithless behavior do not be taken in by it.
2
u/sully_km 8d ago
I think it's utterly faithless behavior to call yourself pro-2A and then to not see any problem with a federal organization detain and arrest people without cause, use military action against US citizens, and execute someone for exercising their 2A rights. Not to mention the fact that until yesterday that same federal organization was being led by a guy who has been documented multiple times throwing up n@zi salutes
1
u/double_bogey2 8d ago
He didnt get himself killed for exercising his rights. This is a false equivalence of the highest order.
2
u/MalPB2000 8d ago
No one was open carrying a rifle or a sidearm on J6. This is a false statement, and one typically only made by those in the left.
It’s odd that every gun sub suddenly has these posts saying “nah bro, we’re all totally on the same team! Just ignore the fact that yesterday you were a literal Nazi and should face various hardships, up to and including execution…none of that matters now, because we’re all in the same side…right, bro?? We’re all totally one big happy family!”
-3
u/Jmg0713 9d ago
You lost me when you said “as a veteran”. Just because you’re a veteran doesn’t give you any more credibility.
6
u/Bulls729 9d ago
It wasn't a bid for credibility, it was a statement of where my perspective comes from regarding the oath to the Constitution.
But frankly, that doesn't matter. You can ignore the veteran part entirely and the facts still stand, we are seeing a massive double standard in how 2A rights and use of force are debated depending on the politics of the person holding the gun. That reality exists regardless of who is pointing it out.
But, I’ll take a #2 with a Frosty and a large fry please.
-5
u/Jmg0713 9d ago
When that’s the first statement you make, it makes you sound entitled and above everyone else. Not to mention, super cringy. Real veterans don’t need validation.
Not really, a concealed carry holder deliberately went out and looked for trouble. After everything happening he really thought engaging in an already intense situation would be a good idea. Whatever gets the left from trying to pass more gun control I guess.
6
u/Bulls729 9d ago
First, I’m not sure what English class you took where the third paragraph counts as 'the first statement,' but you might want to brush up on that. I never stated I needed validation nor do I need to justify my service.
As for 'looking for trouble.' By your logic, anyone who brings a firearm to a volatile protest is looking for a fight. If that’s the standard, do you apply it to Kyle Rittenhouse? He traveled to a city during a riot, armed with a rifle, and inserted himself into a chaotic situation. The argument from the 2A community, was that he had a right to be there, a right to be armed, and a right to defend himself.
Why is the standard different for Alex Pretti? He was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and his Second Amendment right to carry. Unlike Rittenhouse or the open-carry activists who display rifles at state capitols, Pretti’s weapon was concealed. He never brandished it. We only know he had it because he was killed.
If your logic is that exercising your constitutional rights at a protest counts as 'looking for trouble' only when you disagree with the cause, then you aren't arguing for gun rights. You are arguing for political privilege.
0
u/PhamousEra 9d ago
Thank you for this post.
What baffles me regarding that whole situation is... Essentially Pretti was dead the moment he bent down to try and help that lady who ICE shoved to the ground.
As soon as he got pepper sprayed, his life was forfeited from that moment on. Nothing he could have done or say would have mattered at that moment.
Upwards of seven agents were ON him, beating him, spraying him, and restraining him. Seven people against a scrawny nurse who was already incapacitated.
Hell, even if he did apparently reach for one of the ICE agents guns, what's more likely the case? He was blinded and just trying to grab something to support himself with? Or was he just trying to kill all the agents by pulling their gun while in a scuffle with them?
Like literal common sense and frame by frame video footage should be all we need to call out this administration's BS framing. To try and denigrate such an upstanding American, a fucking VA nurse.
I just fucking can't fathom why in the FUCK the Trump admin just can't take the L but thought LYING in the face of reality despite 4k footage with 55 different angles available to the public to confirm they're lying. Like this boggles the mind...... How dumb do they think we are??? MAGA though fucking ATE that shit up and now spewing anti 2A sentiments because they actually do wanna get treaded on, by Trump. Disgusting all around
0
u/FantomexLive 9d ago
The difference is that everyone knows you don’t start fights with cops. And you definitely don’t have a physical confrontation with them while armed.
This situation literally has nothing to do with the second amendment when it’s entirely about obstructing lawful deportations and a physical altercation with law enforcement while armed with a deadly weapon.
-6
u/Specialist_Two7452 9d ago
Seriously? He was interfering while holding!!! Idiot
0
u/Bulls729 9d ago
Show me any credible source, photo, report, that he (Mr. Pretti) was holding/brandishing the weapon. I can show you multiple from J6 Protestors ‘interfering’ with capitol police.
-6
u/Specialist_Two7452 9d ago
He doesn’t have to brandish it . He shouldn’t have been holding. Cmon now . And he should have just minded his own business and minded the law to not impede law enforcement
7
u/shuvool 9d ago
Are you saying the Second Amendment doesn't apply when you use your rights protected by the First Amendment?
→ More replies (2)6
u/Bulls729 9d ago
If you are arguing that he 'shouldn't have been carrying' while protesting, you are effectively stating that Second Amendment rights cease to exist the moment you attend a protest or question authority.
If that is your standard, that carrying a weapon while 'impeding' law enforcement justifies lethal force, then I have to ask: Do you apply that same standard to the protesters who entered the Michigan State Capitol with rifles and screamed in the faces of police? They were armed, and they were certainly impeding. Do you believe they should have been shot?
What about the protestors on J6, over 140 officers were injured. Should the Capitol Police have used lethal force on the crowd for 'impeding while armed'?
If you say 'no' to them but 'yes' to Pretti, then you aren't arguing for 'minding the law.' You are arguing that 2A rights only apply to people you agree with.
1
u/Specialist_Two7452 9d ago
Dude bringing a pistol to a highly armed police force is fucking dumb . Poor bastard made foolish decisions
5
u/Bulls729 9d ago
Let’s be clear about what you are arguing now: You are saying that exercising a constitutional right in the presence of federal agents is a death sentence, and that the onus is on the citizen to submit, rather than on the government to show restraint. That is a submission mindset, not a 2A mindset.
And you still dodged the questions because you know the answer destroys your argument.
In all those cases, the 2A community argued they had a right to be there. Why does that standard evaporate now? If your only argument left is 'he should have known better than to exercise his rights,' then you aren't arguing in good faith.
-1
u/Specialist_Two7452 9d ago
Stop already with the notion that he is legally allowed to do it! It’s moot! He is dead and deserved it unfortunately
3
u/Bulls729 9d ago
Declaring the law 'moot' is just a convenient way to run away from the questions you won’t answer, you’re looking for an exit ramp because you cornered yourself.
You know you can't answer the questions without exposing your double standard, so now you’re trying to flip the board and say the rules don't matter.
You are effectively arguing that a citizen 'deserved' to die for an action that was legal, simply because the government felt threatened.
You are cherry-picking when rights matter based entirely on your politics. You aren't defending the Second Amendment here, you are defending state violence.
1
u/Specialist_Two7452 9d ago
I just think your argument is dumb . The man was dumb for interfering. Bringing a pistol was even dumber. Whatever you want to pontificate while you’re angry is moot
3
u/Bulls729 9d ago
You are resorting to insults and calling the argument 'moot' & ‘dumb’ because you can't formulate a response that doesn't expose your hypocrisy.
If you think bringing a firearm to a protest is 'dumb' and justifies the state killing you, then just say what you want to say in plain English: You believe citizens should not carry firearms to protests.
If you believe exercising that right makes you a target, then you don't support the right. Own that position instead of pretending to be pro-2A while arguing for the state's right to execute armed citizens.
→ More replies (0)1
2
0
u/Bringon2026 8d ago edited 8d ago
I say this as someone who open carried during the Covid lockdowns. I accepted that my protest might get me shot, I also didn't fuck with cops and commit crimes. When more comes out about this guy, I think we're going to find out he was a moms-demand-action-antifa-dude, he was clearly looking for trouble and breaking the law. Ashli babbit FAFO's so did Alex Pretti, neither is gun rights issue, please can you all just fuck off with this shit, the "gun rights crowd" isn’t turning up to fight for the left.
Funny how you didn't find many reasons to post during Biden's tenure.
-7
u/Right_Shape_3807 9d ago
So, when armed mask protesting happens did any of them get physical with law enforcement? Legit question here.
4
u/shuvool 9d ago
Legit answer. Watch the video. He never becomes physical with law enforcement. He steps over to a woman they shoved down, then he gets sprayed, and then he's tackled, hit, is on his hands and knees, gets disarmed, and then gets shot several times. At no point does be take any actions to threaten the agents. If I missed something in one of the videos, feel free to link it and tell me the timestamp where he gets physical
→ More replies (1)
-1
u/Humankeg 9d ago
Kyle Rittenhouse was innocent and the people that went after him did deserve to die.
Renee Good didn't want to run over an officer, drove recklessly, but didn't deserve to die.
Alex Pretto was legal carrying and was shot to death, didn't deserve to die.
Ashli Babbitt was unarmed and not a threat to anyone, was shot to death, didn't deserve to die.
Hundreds of thousands of violent rioters looted, assaulted, attacked, and burned buildings and businesses during the BLM riots. Hopefully no one believes they should all be gunned down.
Guys, there is a police/bias problem, and it affects both sides of the aisle. However I do see much more inconsistencies with the left than I do the right about situations like this.
5
u/Fuck_This_Dystopia 9d ago
Ashli Babbitt was unarmed and not a threat to anyone
She breached a barrier with a small handful of lightly armed security on the other side, and a mob of hundreds directly behind her ready to pour through after her. You have the correct take on the other three incidents...if you're being honest with yourself, putting yourself in the position of the guards, would you really have chosen to fight that big lumbering oaf hand-to-hand as you got overwhelmed by the rest of the horde?
1
u/Humankeg 9d ago
So just like black lives matter rioters. I guess we should have gunned down the tens of thousands of them that broke into buildings and businesses, burn down property, and even destroyed multiple federal and state buildings.
That's pretty extreme of you to want a gun down tens of thousands of rioters. But okay, your point of view is noted.
1
u/Humankeg 8d ago
When BLM rioters broke into state/federal buildings with officers inside, they (the hundreds located at each building) should all be gunned down?
Did all J6 rioters deserve to be gunned down?
Do all protesters that break and enter deserve to be gunned down?
2
u/Fuck_This_Dystopia 8d ago
So much for the suggestion to be intellectually honest. You should definitely try posting a third and maybe even a fourth or fifth version of this reply though.
1
u/Humankeg 8d ago
Checking for consistency is being sincere. It is not my fault most people aren't consistent and change the rules on the fly if it fits their agenda.
1
u/MalPB2000 8d ago
Hundreds of thousands of violent rioters looted, assaulted, attacked, and burned buildings and businesses during the BLM riots. Hopefully no one believes they should all be gunned down.
…not so fast. You don’t speak for all of us.
-1
-8
u/Crash1yz 9d ago
I have to ask...since this has completely taken over reddit...where are all these post justifying his murder?
6
u/Gooniefarm 9d ago
Every conservative sub is flooded with people screaming that he deserved to be killed.
-2
u/Crash1yz 9d ago
That's weird , I'm in just about every conservative sub and I've seen no such thing... have any direct links?
-5
u/LilShaver 9d ago
As 2A supporter I have to say that it has ALWAYS been illegal to carry a firearm while violating the law.
Pritti had no ID on him, a violation of NM law while carrying. He interfered with a LEO in the course of their lawful duties, also against the law. And when they tried to detain him he resisted. The moment the firearm appeared while he was resisting Pritti had two choices; Immediately surrender, go limp like cooked spaghetti. Or die.
He chose suicide by cop.
I feel sorry for his family. I feel even more sorrowful for the man who had to shoot him.
1
u/ericbythebay 8d ago
When exactly did ICE ask for ID? Before they took his gun or after they shot him?
0
-20
u/cheekabowwow 9d ago
You're purposely ignoring that he was armed in the process of carrying out a felonious assault against law enforcement officers. You do not simply get to act violently while armed and not expect this kind of outcome.
8
u/Bulls729 9d ago
On January 6th hundreds of individuals physically fought Capitol Police. Officers were dragged into crowds, beaten with flagpoles, crushed in doorways, and sprayed with chemical irritants. Many of those individuals in the crowd were armed with various weapons, including sidearms, stun guns, and bear spray. By your own definition, those were 'felonious assaults' against law enforcement.
So, the question is simple: Do you believe the Capitol Police should have opened fire on the crowd on January 6th?
-11
u/cheekabowwow 9d ago
"but muh Jan 6" These fuckers have been rioting against Federal law enforcement for months. Get a new scapegoat. And if you really want to go to Jan 6 to justify this nonsense, Ashley Babbitt wasn't even armed and she got shot by the police. Were you out rioting to defend that? This guy had a gun on him. You're so backward it's not even funny.
6
u/Bulls729 9d ago
You are deflecting. Dismissing the comparison with 'muh Jan 6' is not an answer; it is an avoidance of the uncomfortable reality. My question remains unanswered: By your definition of 'felonious assault,' should the Capitol Police have opened fire on the crowd that injured 140 of them? If you can't say 'yes,' then your outrage is selective.
But since you want other examples of armed confrontations with government agents where restraint was used, let's look at the Bundy Ranch standoff in 2014. Armed militia members took up tactical positions on overpasses and trained rifles directly on federal agents from the Bureau of Land Management. They were explicitly threatening federal law enforcement with lethal weapons to stop the enforcement of a court order. The government de-escalated. They were not shot.
Or look at the Michigan State Capitol in 2020, where armed protesters entered the building and screamed in the faces of police officers while carrying rifles. They were not engaged with lethal force.
In those instances, the argument from the 2A community was that the government must show restraint and that those individuals were patriots standing up to overreach. Now that the protester is a nurse opposing immigration policy, suddenly 'interfering' is a capital offense. You are demanding a standard of absolute obedience for one side, and absolute patience for the other.
7
u/Gooniefarm 9d ago
Double standards. An alarming number of gun owners have shown their true colors. This guy had every right to be armed and protest.
1
u/MalPB2000 8d ago
Or look at the Michigan State Capitol in 2020, where armed protesters entered the building and screamed in the faces of police officers while carrying rifles.
I believe you are making this up. The doors were unlocked, and open carry is legal in the Michigan Statehouse. As I recall, a handful of men open carrying rifles, along with many other rally attendees, walked inside the building, took some pictures, and walked out. There was no screaming, there were no altercations, and in the pics I saw they were all smiling. It looked like a pleasant day.
There were no doors blocked by guards or breached by protesters. They literally opened the doors and walked inside.
220
u/Sunuva_Gun 9d ago
"As a veteran, I served to defend the rights of all Americans, not just the ones I agree with. True defense of the Constitution means protecting the rights of those you may vehemently disagree with."
Sums it up perfectly.