ANOTHER ICE SHOOTING IN Minneapolis

[OlDawg]

1 hour ago, baddog said:

Is the investigation concluded?

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

[Reagan]

I did hear that Trump has deported so many illegals that Minnesota has lost a congressional seat.  They need to redo the census now!  

[Reagan]

On 1/25/2026 at 8:47 PM, Porter said:

Deport all illegals.

Report anyone suspected of being an illegal in your neighborhood or job to 1-866-DHS-2-ICE (1-866-347-2423), the official 24/7 U.S.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Tip Line - it is now active.

I’m glad you posted this.  I wonder how many illegals are in Port Arthur?   🤔 

[tvc184]

14 hours ago, OlDawg said:

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

Without a comment I am not sure of the context of those sites.

 The legal comment on the way it is portrayed in the Excessive Force and the Fourth Amendment article is incorrect in the point that I think it is trying to make, in my opinion.  On the other hand, it kind of makes no point except to say that Congress might want to change some laws. 

[tvc184]

9 hours ago, OlDawg said:

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.

The Supreme Court does not use the totality of circumstances in determining whether a use of force was justified.

In Graham v. Connor, reaffirmed recently in Barnes v. Felix, the Supreme Court rejected the totality of circumstances in the determination of the use of force and use “objectively reasonable” as the standard. The totality of circumstances can give false decisions on the uses of force. 

[tvc184]

8 hours ago, baddog said:

Have you ever conceal carried on your person? If so, did you tuck it in the backside of your pants? That doesn’t seem like a logical place to carry. I’m going out on a limb and say Pretti had another gun in front. People resisting keep their hands in front to make it difficult to cuff them behind. With hands tucked in front and possibly another gun, I can see how he was shot very easily.

That is actually a well known way to carry, often called the SOB carry or Small of Back. They make holsters for specifically that purpose.

It has probably lost some favor in recent years with the trend being more toward appendix carry.

I used to carry a revolver in the SOB position years ago and only on some occasions. I still do on rare occasions for a situation and not as a preferred option. 

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, baddog said:

Is the investigation concluded?

No.