The Threat to our Liberty

Legal & Second Amendment
21
6 Likes
22

The supporters of anarchy continue to conveniently ignore these facts. Good video Todd.

5 Likes
23

It’s been heartening to hear all the voices, both individual and organizational, speak out in defense of the rights of others, Ir-regardless of ideology or cause. Hopefully this sends a message to this and future governments that the violation of peoples rights will not be tolerated.

3 Likes
24

I rest my case.

2 Likes
25

There is probably much discussion that has happened since this was posted two days ago, but, an example:

It being decreed that you cannot carry a gun at a protest.

That’s definition and erosion

There is also the president of the United States making someone out to be a bad guy because he carried two magazines, lawfully. That’s an erosion.

4 Likes
26

Where was it decreed ?

It stopped being a protest when he interfered with a lawful operation.

Is it stupid to insert yourself illegally into an ICE operation while carrying? Yes. Illegal, NO.

6 Likes
27

Pretti stopped being a law abiding citizen exercising his rights protected by the 1st and 2nd Amendments when he engaged with law enforcement officers conducting a law enforcement action.

There is no right, protected by any Amendment, to intervene, impede, hinder, fight, etc law enforcement.

Based on my extremely limited knowledge of Pretti, do I think he went to the protest intending to get into a situation like the one he ended up in? Probably not, but I could be wrong.

Regardless, his rights remained fully intact and, indeed, protected, up to the point he began acting unlawfully.

When he made the decision, with or without foresight, to engage, he became an armed threat. As he continued to resist and act in noncompliance, he continued to escalate the situation. A threat of bodily injury or death was perceived by the officers involved. They acted in a manner that eliminated the threat.

6 Likes
28

This was stated by the FBI recently.

Question: Why do you phrase this as “insert yourself illegally into an ICE operation”.

When and where did the deceased in question illegally insert himself into a situation? I’m not saying he didn’t, but, I have yet to see a video of him doing that…I have seen plenty of people (who weren’t there) claim he was interfering…what interference was it, exactly? Do you have a video you can share with a brief description of the interference seen within the video, or some other hard evidence?

29

I have not yet seen the video of him doing this.

I have only seen him on a public sidewalk being approached (and piled on) by LE while he was filming. Is filming from a public sidewalk interfering and not legally allowed? Or is there video I haven’t seen that you could share?

1 Like
30

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/2015134638914609336/mediaViewer?currentTweet=2015134638914609336&currentTweetUser=EricLDaugh

He wasn’t on the sidewalk, he was in the street.

He approached the LEOs. He involved himself. He continued to resist, fight, and act in noncompliance.

7 Likes
31

I see you haven’t watched Todds video above. If you spend 10 minutes watching this video, you might become enlightened. This guy has engaged in hindering an ICE operation, by causing agents to move him away from the scene of a legal operation. That takes them away from their primary mission. They had to use resources to restrain him. That takes them away from their primary mission. They were there for a specific purpose. They weren’t there just to rough people up. They had a mission. Do yourself a favor, watch the video.

5 Likes
32

I’m still not seeing it.

Per the video it would be if he reached for or otherwise indicated possible use of the firearm, which I don’t see whatsoever, or he physically interfered, which I also don’t see.

Is the claim still that by approaching on a public street and filming, he was breaking the law and opening himself up to being shot?

What did he do that interfered, besides filming? I’m noticing that no matter where I have asked this question the last few days, nobody has an answer other than he was filming.

2 Likes
33

Wrong video. My bad.

3 Likes
34

lol, it happens.

I’ll watch that one later before posting more in the issue

1 Like
35

And the bad guy got away…not an insignificant point. What if he was a kiddie molester adn went to molest a dozen kids after…and Pretti didn’t die. Isn’t it then Pretti’s fault?

4 Likes
36
3 Likes
37

I guess my opinion, and we know what opinions are, is, He went into the area where there was an ICE Operation, he could have stayed on the other side of the street. From the video clips I have seen he engaged the cops. There is a video that looks like at one point he does have a gun in his hand. I guess it come down to “Go looking for trouble, with the cops, with a gun in your hand, you’ll find trouble.”

4 Likes
38

I’d say their operation was impeded.

6 Likes
39

He drew resources away from the operation. There are thousands of people there videoing. WHY did they choose this one person? They’ve put up with a LOT of $hit for several weeks. We may never hear why, but the fact remains, he drew resources away from the operation. That’s hindering.

6 Likes
40

“We may never hear why” bothers me. I don’t want us to assume that just because LE chose to single someone out, it must have been justified and legal whether they ever tell us why or show us why or not.

And drawing resources away is hindering? Even if we don’t know why they chose to single them out, even if they don’t tell us what the person did that caused them to choose to pull resources away, it…whatever it is… is illegal just because they said so?

That’s not how laws are supposed to work

2 Likes