Grinning anti-ICE agitator arrested after allegedly punching Florida trooper as DeSantis warns: ‘This is not Minneapolis’

LeafByNiggle · Tuesday at 8:43 AM

rjs330 said:
Can they? When they show up people run around like lunatics, screaming and yelling, blowing whistles, impeding traffic, chasing them in vehicles, blocking roads etc. If people left them alone to do their job it would be far less confrontational and disruptive.

The blowing of whistles has a purpose - to alert members of our community that ICE is in the area so that they can be prepared. That is a constitutionally protected action.

rjs330 said:
Masks could be ditched if people would stop doxing and threatening them and their families.

Police never wear masks because they are accountable to the people they serve. Not only do they not wear masks, but they do wear name tags identifying them for accountability. That is standard with all local and state law enforcement officers in every state in the union. These ICE officers are something different. They are shielded from accountability by masks and the lack of any visible ID. They came to town wearing masks. So it is not a response to doxxing. It was because they knew these agents would not be welcome and they wanted to shield them from accountability.

rjs330 said:
They haven't gone buck wild. That is a leftist talking point that is entirely untrue.

Yesterday a ICE officers broke down the door of a man's home with guns drawn, handcuffed him and dragged him into the snow wearing shorts and Crocs. (The temperature yesterday was well below freezing and it was windy.) ChongLy Thao, 56, a naturalized U.S. citizen who goes by the name Scott, was returned home later on Sunday without explanation or apology. If this isn't buck wild I don't know what is.

Postvieww · Tuesday at 9:26 AM

LeafByNiggle said:
The blowing of whistles has a purpose - to alert members of our community that ICE is in the area so that they can be prepared. That is a constitutionally protected action.

If your claim was 100% true, which it is not, it still is interfering with and impeding law enforcement, which is illegal.

LeafByNiggle said:
Police never wear masks because they are accountable to the people they serve. Not only do they not wear masks, but they do wear name tags identifying them for accountability. That is standard with all local and state law enforcement officers in every state in the union. These ICE officers are something different. They are shielded from accountability by masks and the lack of any visible ID. They came to town wearing masks. So it is not a response to doxxing. It was because they knew these agents would not be welcome and they wanted to shield them from accountability.

Your claim that they came wearing masks is irrelevant because doxxing has been a major problem in multiple locations. To think it would be of no concern in Minnesota is ridiculous. Why do you have no concern with the lunatics rioting in the streets wearing masks? Why are they wearing them?

LeafByNiggle said:
Yesterday a ICE officers broke down the door of a man's home with guns drawn, handcuffed him and dragged him into the snow wearing shorts and Crocs. (The temperature yesterday was well below freezing and it was windy.) ChongLy Thao, 56, a naturalized U.S. citizen who goes by the name Scott, was returned home later on Sunday without explanation or apology. If this isn't buck wild I don't know what is.

Have you considered that the incidents of mistakes by ICE would be far less if they didn’t have to deal with riotous lunatics in the streets and lack of cooperation from local law enforcement and liberal politicians? The numbers and tactics of ICE are directly impacted by the policies of liberal politicians and local law enforcement.

LeafByNiggle · Tuesday at 4:13 PM

Postvieww said:
Have you considered that the incidents of mistakes by ICE would be far less if they didn’t have to deal with riotous lunatics in the streets and lack of cooperation from local law enforcement and liberal politicians?

That is no excuse for this and other such "mistakes". Today the chiefs of police of Twin Cities communities, including Brooklyn Park and St. Paul, as well as the Hennepin County Sheriff and others held a news conference today in which they describe numerous incidents where off-duty police officers were stopped. These were all persons of color. Here is the address by the Chief of Police Mark Bruley of Brooklyn Park, a northern suburb of Minneapolis (as reported by local TV station, KARE-11) In this clip, Bruley describes one incident he says involved ICE agents boxing in an off-duty officer, drawing guns, and knocking her phone out of her hand when she tried to record. He says the agents left after she identified herself as a Brooklyn Park police officer. Bruley stresses he is not calling to abolish ICE and says immigration enforcement can be necessary — but argues how it’s done matters, and he’s calling for more supervision over the “surge” and for alleged civil rights violations to stop.

MarkSB · Tuesday at 5:25 PM

Postvieww said:
Have you considered that the incidents of mistakes by ICE would be far less if they didn’t have to deal with riotous lunatics in the streets and lack of cooperation from local law enforcement and liberal politicians?

How do any of those things cause ICE to break into the wrong house? A few days ago, they went into another family’s house without a warrant. Was that because of rioting in the streets as well? The “rioting” made them forget that the law requires them to have a warrant?

NxNW · Tuesday at 7:10 PM

Postvieww said:
If your claim was 100% true, which it is not, it still is interfering with and impeding law enforcement, which is illegal.

Blowing a whistle is not impeding.

Postvieww said:
Why do you have no concern with the lunatics rioting in the streets wearing masks?

ICE seems to be the lunatics wearing masks, not citizens assembling peacefully.

Postvieww said:
Have you considered that the incidents of mistakes by ICE would be far less if they didn’t have to deal with riotous lunatics in the streets

They don't.

Postvieww said:
and lack of cooperation from local law enforcement and liberal politicians?

Why should local law enforcement cooperate with ICE when they are being needlessly arrested?

Postvieww · Wednesday at 7:04 AM

NxNW said:
Blowing a whistle is not impeding.

Wrong! AI Overview

“Yes, warning a potential arrestee that law enforcement is on the way can be considered
obstruction of justice or hindering apprehension if the intent is to help the person evade arrest, destroy evidence, or hide. While warning someone is generally considered protected free speech, it crosses into criminal conduct when it actively interferes with law enforcement operations. “

NxNW said:
ICE seems to be the lunatics wearing masks, not citizens assembling peacefully.

Wrong! Throwing objects , raming cars, painting cars, shooting fireworks, storming a church service, assaulting law enforcement is no “ peaceful “ assembly.

NxNW said:
They don't

Wrong! Yes they do! ICE deals with lunatic rioters in the streets everyday. Only a diluted brainwashed person or a paid agitator thinks what is happening in the streets against ICE is peaceful constitutionally protected speech.

NxNW said:
Why should local law enforcement cooperate with ICE when they are being needlessly arrested?

Wrong again! The vast majority of arrests are absolutely warranted and legal. If a person is wrongfully detained they are released. Mistakes do happen but the overall operation is lawful and much needed to clean up the immigration mess exacerbated by the last administration. The arrests ICE carry out would be far safer and more accurate if local law enforcement and politicians did their sworn duties. One reported event showed an ICE agent informing a protester they were at that location to arrest a child molester. The agent told the protester “that is who you are protecting “. Just as the rioters in the streets are protecting and supporting criminals, all of those who argue against Immigration enforcement are also supporting vial criminals under the banner of compassion. Shameful!

LeafByNiggle · Wednesday at 9:05 AM

Postvieww said:
Wrong again! The vast majority of arrests are absolutely warranted and legal.

The question is over the meaning of the word "needlessly" in NXNW's post. ("Why should local law enforcement cooperate with ICE when they are being needlessly arrested?") You have reworded it to "warranted and legal". An action can be legal and still be needless. And whether or not it is "warranted" is essentially the same issue of "legal". So you have totally side stepped the claim of "needlessly arrested" by replacing it with "legally arrested". To address the "needlessly" part, we must ask what fundamental need do those arrests serve the community (beyond the mere fact of their lacking authorization)? It is at this point where we need to recognize that not all deportations of unauthorized immigrants are equal.

On one end of the spectrum there are those that have committed and are still committing serious violent crime against the community. Their arrests would certainly be needed. At the other end of the spectrum there are those who have lived as an undocumented immigrant, raised a family, assimilated into the culture, established friendships with neighbors, and aside from not having papers, is indistinguishable from other members of the community. We should not equate these two ends of the spectrum of undocumented immigrants solely on the basis of their not having authorization, in terms of what need is served by their deportation. While the deportation of those on the violent criminal side of the spectrum can be termed a gain for the society, the wholesale deportation of thousands of those on the other end of the spectrum is actually a loss for the society. We have come to rely on those long-term undocumented immigrants in certain sectors of the workforce, and the economy would suffer the shock, not to mention the social shock of the US citizens who had come to know these people as friends and family. Deporting all of those undocumented immigrants at once would be a needless self-inflicted wound to our own society. Immigration enforcement is an important function of the government for both national and local security, but the manner in which it is done can make it a success or a disaster. We currently seem to leaning toward the latter.

Postvieww · Wednesday at 9:36 AM

LeafByNiggle said:
The question is over the meaning of the word "needlessly" in NXNW's post. ("Why should local law enforcement cooperate with ICE when they are being needlessly arrested?") You have reworded it to "warranted and legal". An action can be legal and still be needless. And whether or not it is "warranted" is essentially the same issue of "legal". So you have totally side stepped the claim of "needlessly arrested" by replacing it with "legally arrested". To address the "needlessly" part, we must ask what fundamental need do those arrests serve the community (beyond the mere fact of their lacking authorization)? It is at this point where we need to recognize that not all deportations of unauthorized immigrants are equal.

On one end of the spectrum there are those that have committed and are still committing serious violent crime against the community. Their arrests would certainly be needed. At the other end of the spectrum there are those who have lived as an undocumented immigrant, raised a family, assimilated into the culture, established friendships with neighbors, and aside from not having papers, is indistinguishable from other members of the community. We should not equate these two ends of the spectrum of undocumented immigrants solely on the basis of their not having authorization, in terms of what need is served by their deportation. While the deportation of those on the violent criminal side of the spectrum can be termed a gain for the society, the wholesale deportation of thousands of those on the other end of the spectrum is actually a loss for the society. We have come to rely on those long-term undocumented immigrants in certain sectors of the workforce, and the economy would suffer the shock, not to mention the social shock of the US citizens who had come to know these people as friends and family. Deporting all of those undocumented immigrants at once would be a needless self-inflicted wound to our own society. Immigration enforcement is an important function of the government for both national and local security, but the manner in which it is done can make it a success or a disaster. We currently seem to leaning toward the latter.

You have waxed long to side step the fact that illegal entry into the country is still a crime. While it is true the hardened violent criminals are and should be the immediate priority for ICE, and they are. There no legal , or moral reason for ICE to ignore or overlook any illegal entrant into this country. It is their job to enforce immigration law on the books , not ignore or selectively enforce it. Feel good arguments clothed in sometimes fake compassion are not sufficient to justify ignoring law on the books. Write your congressman and advocate for changes in the law if you don’t like existing law.

LeafByNiggle · Wednesday at 1:13 PM

Postvieww said:
While it is true the hardened violent criminals are and should be the immediate priority for ICE, and they are.

They not the first priority. You can tell by the manner of their operations.

rjs330 · Wednesday at 2:12 PM

LeafByNiggle said:
The blowing of whistles has a purpose -

We all know what the purpose is. Its to obstruct and interfere with legitimate LE operations. Which of course would include rhe removal of the "worst of the worst."

LeafByNiggle said:
Police never wear masks because they are accountable to the people they serve.

Police would start wearing masks if the community they were serving started acting like these scummy people and started treating them like they treat ICE and their families.

LeafByNiggle said:
If this isn't buck wild I don't know what is.

So what's the rest of the story? Sorry, but I don't believe this version. They go to some random guys house and do all this? Yeah, no.

Here is the rest.

The Department of Homeland Security said officers were investigating two convicted sex offenders at the address. DHS claimed a US citizen at the home refused fingerprinting and matched the description of the suspects.

"The US citizen lives with these two convicted sex offenders at the site of the operation. The individual refused to be fingerprinted or facially ID'd. He matched the description of the targets," DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said.

DHS later released wanted posters, but relatives said one of the suspects no longer lived at the apartment."

It doesn't sound buck wild to me. Sounds like they were going after the worst of the worst and this guy matched the description and then refused to cooperate, which of course would make them very suspicious that he was indeed one of them.

LeafByNiggle · Wednesday at 2:20 PM

rjs330 said:
So what's the rest of the story? Sorry, but I don't believe this version. They go to some random guys house and do all this? Yeah, no.

The rest of the story is told by the combined news conference of the chiefs of police of the cities around Minneapolis. (Targeting of random persons of color, including off-duty police officers.)

ThatRobGuy · Wednesday at 2:25 PM

LeafByNiggle said:
The blowing of whistles has a purpose - to alert members of our community that ICE is in the area so that they can be prepared. That is a constitutionally protected action.

That's not the only purpose...

In some of the private organizing pages on FB (that I've hopped into with sock accounts on FB just to peruse and see what they're up to), the other purpose the loud whistles & megaphones & horns honking serve is to create plausible deniability as a legal defense tactic.

To the effect of:

Because of all the whistles and loud noises...
"I never heard that officer give any orders"
"I didn't understand my rights as read to me"

From what I've seen a few of the people in those groups suggest, if a person is being arrested, all of their friends standing around in the vicinity sounding off whistles and megaphones, they're hoping will (in their words) "Compromise the reading of the Miranda rights"

LeafByNiggle · Wednesday at 2:32 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
That's not the only purpose...

In some of the private organizing pages on FB (that I've hopped into with sock accounts on FB just to peruse and see what they're up to), the other purpose the loud whistles & megaphones & horns honking serve is to create plausible deniability as a legal defense tactic.

To the effect of:

Because of all the whistles and loud noises...
"I never heard that officer give any orders"
"I didn't understand my rights as read to me"

From what I've seen a few of the people in those groups suggest, if a person is being arrested, all of their friends standing around in the vicinity sounding off whistles and megaphones, they're hoping will (in their words) "Compromise the reading of the Miranda rights"

No, in that case the purpose of the noise is to impress upon the agents the fact that the community does not approve of their action. Normally people go into law enforcement from a desire to serve and protect the community. When faced with all this disapproval, some ICE agents have backed off from an operation.

As to your hypothesis, in most cases the agents are not even bothering with the reading of Miranda rights.

ThatRobGuy · Wednesday at 3:05 PM

LeafByNiggle said:
No, in that case the purpose of the noise is to impress upon the agents the fact that the community does not approve of their action. Normally people go into law enforcement from a desire to serve and protect the community. When faced with all this disapproval, some ICE agents have backed off from an operation.

As to your hypothesis, in most cases the agents are not even bothering with the reading of Miranda rights.

So even though the people in those organizing groups are specifically using the phrase "compromise the reading of the Miranda rights" to describe one facet of the utility for it, that's not what they really mean by it?

BPPLEE · Wednesday at 3:29 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
So even though the people in those organizing groups are specifically using the phrase "compromise the reading of the Miranda rights" to describe one facet of the utility for it, that's not what they really mean by it?

You only have to read someone their Miranda rights if you are going to question them and get a statement.

Postvieww · Wednesday at 3:33 PM

LeafByNiggle said:
They not the first priority. You can tell by the manner of their operations.

False!

Tropical Wilds · Wednesday at 3:33 PM

BPPLEE said:
You only have to read someone their Miranda rights if you are going to question them and get a statement.

Only if they’re in custody and not free to go. Otherwise, you don’t need to.

BPPLEE · Wednesday at 3:38 PM

Tropical Wilds said:
Only if they’re in custody and not free to go. Otherwise, you don’t need to.

When I was an investigator I read everyone their rights because I was going to get a statement.
Back when I was in patrol the detectives asked us not to read people their rights because they were going to do it when they interviewed them and they didn't want them to be able to say that they had asked for a lawyer earlier which would make their statements inadmissible in court,
police are not required to inform someone of their
Miranda rights if they aren't going to question them, as Miranda warnings are only necessary for a "custodial interrogation"—meaning the person must be in custody andbeing questioned. If police arrest someone but don't intend to ask questions, no Miranda warning is needed, though any statements made voluntarily might still be used in court.

Tropical Wilds · Wednesday at 3:44 PM

BPPLEE said:
When I was an investigator I read everyone their rights because I was going to get a statement.
Back when I was in patrol the detectives asked us not to read people their rights because they were going to do it when they interviewed them and they didn't want them to be able to say that they had asked for a lawyer earlier which would make their statements inadmissible in court,
police are not required to inform someone of their
Miranda rights if they aren't going to question them, as Miranda warnings are only necessary for a "custodial interrogation"—meaning the person must be in custody andbeing questioned. If police arrest someone but don't intend to ask questions, no Miranda warning is needed, though any statements made voluntarily might still be used in court.

But you don’t mirandize witnesses or the general public who are giving statements…? We only ever did it if the person was to be detained/not allowed to leave the scene.

BPPLEE · Wednesday at 3:48 PM

Tropical Wilds said:
But you don’t mirandize witnesses or the general public who are giving statements…? We only ever did it if the person was to be detained/not allowed to leave the scene.

It's only required if they are in custody and being questioned.
If the police are not going to question them they don't have to read them their rights.
And if they are not in custody Miranda does not apply

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Grinning anti-ICE agitator arrested after allegedly punching Florida trooper as DeSantis warns: ‘This is not Minneapolis’

Well-Known Member

Believer

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Believer

Well-Known Member

Believer

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Believer

Little Lebowski Urban Achiever

Well-Known Member

Little Lebowski Urban Achiever

Well-Known Member

Similar threads