.jpg)
Can we all agree on one thing?
Seeing Americans shot and killed on American streets by fellow Americans is not at all good.
I’ve purposely waited to write about the killing of two people on the streets of Minneapolis by agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Border Patrol to allow more information to come out.
There was quite a rush to judgment in both cases. Renee Good, who was shot and killed a month ago, was immediately labeled a “domestic terrorist” who “ran over” a federal agent.
Just after Alex Pretti was gunned down on Jan. 24, federal leaders said he had approached Border Patrol agents with a 9mm semi-automatic handgun and had “violently resisted” when agents sought to disarm him.
Video of both incidents tended to dispel those accounts. (There was also video of a previous incident in which Pretti had kicked out a taillight of a federal vehicle and spit at officers. Why wasn’t he arrested then?)
Were both shootings justified? Did officers act in self defense?
Guidelines for the Department of Homeland Security state that lethal force should be used only if there is a “reasonable belief” of an imminent threat of death or serious injury to officers.
Those guidelines also say an officer should not shoot into a moving vehicle (probably better to get a license plate number and track that person down later) and that standing in front of a vehicle is a bad idea.
We all have our opinions (and this column isn’t going to change any). But these are questions best decided by a jury. Federal officers are protected against lawsuits in most cases and these questions likely won’t get to court.
A buddy, who was equally horrified by the killings, said that Good would likely still be alive if she had gotten out of her car. Pretti, he speculated, would not have been slain if he hadn’t intervened when an agent pushed a fellow anti-ICE protester to the ground.
Ok, sure. But does blocking a street with your car, or trying to help up a woman from a snowy sidewalk justify the death penalty?
Let’s hope not. We’ve heard now that ICE will withdraw most of its forces in Minneapolis, and will take a less aggressive and less confrontational approach in the future, sending out pairs of officers to apprehend specifically identified targets. If true, that’s a much better approach than swarming dozens of agents down public streets – not the best way to promote peace and safety in neighborhoods. I’ve covered law enforcement agencies over the years, and the officers and troopers I knew were professionals who wanted things done right, and were in the profession for the right reasons. They were also trained to avoid using deadly force, and deploy de-escalation techniques first.
When there was a fatal shooting by an officer, an outside agency, with a perception of independence, would review the incident and issue a report.
Any legitimate agency that had two officer-involved fatal shootings in the space of a few days as in Minneapolis, would take a pause, review its procedures and ask “can’t we do our job without killing people?”
Federal immigration officials eventually did that, but it took way too long for common sense to prevail.
Now there’s calls for ICE agents to stop wearing bandannas over their faces (like some terrorist group), to wear body cameras, and clearly identify themselves with a name tag. All good ideas in a country where there are constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure.
When the Minneapolis occurred, I wondered “are agents properly trained in crowd control?” How about de-escalation?
Right now, ICE is rushing to hire 10,000 new agents, doubling its ranks -- a rush that has led to lowering fitness, education and age requirements, and cutting training time in half. Not wise.
Like a lot of people, I’m OK with deporting the “worst of the worst” – serious criminals. But what federal authorities have been doing, in too many instances, has gone way beyond that. And the consequences have been deadly.
