OlDawg

Don’t use @DCT gingko biloba to try to help. It just makes you talk to yourself. 😂 😉 Now, I need to go to Walmart Vision Center and get my progressives adjusted before my teeth fall out…

I believe I’ve read where 4 agents still had their body cams on.

Haven’t seen anything on that yet. It was merely a question based on other reporting. If a big deal was made about him being on medication for a rib injury, they probably weren’t talking about Tylenol.

According to the preliminary investigative report, he was in the street, impeding LEO’s, and refused to move. In other words, committing a felony. Does that in itself justify shooting? I’d say a definite ‘No.’ As far as my comment on possible medication for a purported rib injury, that’s all the more reason to not be carrying at the time. Another failure in judgement. Wouldn’t you agree? Carrying a loaded firearm if he was on opioids? If he was on opioids, (not saying he was) he shouldn’t even have been driving. So, how did he get to the scene to interfere?

As an ICU nurse who supposedly was given medication for his ribs, I wonder if he was on oxycodone? Hadn’t thought of that… That would definitely impair his judgement.

That’s an excellent breakdown—to me. If I understand what you’re saying, the two go hand-in-hand as a means to a decision. I’m not an attorney. But, it always seemed to say—in layman’s terms—to not just focus on the instant, but to look at ALL things without a definite time limit. Even those events that may not directly be involved in the specific circumstance. (i.e. recent threats, other stops that may have had an effect on the officer’s judgment, community events, etc.) That’s why I believe the agent/agents in the Pretti issue will have a strong argument that—while not pleasant to watch, and maybe not the best—they didn’t act with bad intent. They made a split decision under duress. Do I think they may be better suited for some type of ‘off the street duty?’ Yes. For their own psychological needs if nothing else.

Marxism is making another attempt. How's about we just follow the laws on the books, passed by the People's Representatives in Congress? I believe they're as simple as illegal immigration is just that...ILLEGAL. Deport those here illegally with their limited due process rights, and quit making carve-outs. Either that, or change the law.

The actual majority opinion in Barnes v Felix 23-1239 (05/15/2025) is linked. Please read the majority opinion reasoning on Page 7. The moment-of-threat rule applied in the courts below prevents that sort of attention to context, and thus conflicts with this Court’s instruction to analyze the totality of the circumstances. [Hidden Content]

Yep. Whitmire knows. Houston City Council is another matter. I’m just glad I live in La Porte, and not Houston. I thought Texas just passed a law outlawing ‘sanctuary policies’ anyway?

Even Gov. Abbott is saying there needs to be a reset. If the Texas Governor says that, it’s fairly obvious there’s an issue—in perception and communication at the least. Houston City Council meeting last night was overrun with people demanding the city stop working with ICE. Right now, Houston holds those with ICE warrants—just like they hold anyone for any other agency. But, they don’t assist in any other way that’s not a normal part of their duties. The madness is spreading.

See above post.

Actually, the majority SCOTUS opinion explicitly states “the totality of the circumstances” in Barnes v Felix 2025 as the reasoning that should be used to determine use of force. Also, this paper was developed by the Congressional Research Office, which is a part of the Federal Government that advises Congress on SCOTUS for legislative needs. It doesn’t advocate for any position. It merely advises of decisions.

I don’t think so. This mentioned ‘preliminary.’

I said earlier they would turn on themselves. The organizers have no real interest in the people. Only in the chaos. Walz deserves what he gets. He coddled it. [Hidden Content]

Report of the encounter with Mr. Pretti that was provided to Congress: [Hidden Content]

[Hidden Content] Certain Minnesota officials after their names have been uncovered in the Signal chat logs with the organized anti ICE agitators. (Permission granted for @DCT to use in his daily Epstein rant. But, only in that thread!) 😂

I’m still waiting on the purported body cam footage. I don’t think it will paint the incident with Mr. Pretti in any better light. But, in light of new information posted, I think the ‘totality’ argument established by SCOTUS in LEO use of deadly force has been satisfied if the new evidence is proven out.

Latest Development on Alex Pretti Shooting Tears Up Another Lib Narrative [Hidden Content] Don't usually view this source. But, this is interesting, and follows along with other recent reporting. IMHO, Katie Pavlich is correct in her assessment. Anyone with experience will try to avoid.

Neighbor is a retired policeman then detective for a local police department. He used to work with the HPD Gang/Drug Task Force on special assignments occasionally. He would tell me he felt 'naked' without carrying his firearm--even on vacation. I asked him once if he'd ever had to use it. He said 'No.' He knows some of my background. He asked if I'd ever had to use my training. I told him 'Yes, and that's why I don't carry.'

I think people would be surprised to find that most veterans don’t own firearms. While I’m one of the 47% minority, I don’t carry. My home is a different matter entirely.

Excessive Force and the Fourth Amendment: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Legal Test [Hidden Content]

Please post a single video that shows an immigration agent jumping out at someone from behind anything. Sure you’re not confusing them with ambulance chasing lawyers?

I have seen multiple videos in both cases. Have you read the link I posted? I stand by my statement that—in both cases—the deceased and others were performing illegal actions according to the courts. Just the acts of whistling, yelling, distracting LEO’s, or encroaching on an area is illegal according to the courts. Does that mean Good and/or Pretti should have been shot? IMHO…I’d think there could have been a lesser alternative chosen. But, I’m not into second-guessing someone in a conflict situation. I’ve been there in slightly different situations. Although, I will say my situation was me or them. Different.

As my background is military/‘foreign affairs’ oriented and engineering—not law enforcement—I was interested in any SCOTUS rulings on distance requirements during an active law enforcement activity. I wasn’t sure of it myself. I just always tried to stay back. Clearly, Good wasn’t following these guidelines, and Pretti is still not clear as—in the Good incident—the first videos only pick up at the confrontation, and don’t show the full interaction. Pretti was obviously on scene before the widely circulated videos begin. What was he doing? Was he interacting with anyone? In the rush for each ‘side’ to claim the narrative, videos are being presented that only show what the videographer wants to show. A layman’s breakdown of distance rulings and rights: [Hidden Content]

Ha! May want to try Qunol Turmeric cause that ginkgo biloba ain’t cutting it. 😉