The paramilitaries that executed Pretti are all wearing street clothing, and all wearing different clothing. They look like a mob.
> Dangerous people that could identify their faces and kill their families in retaliation.
Well that's convenient, because it also allows them to kill protestors or their families without any consequence.
> Why are the protesters assaulting them covering their faces
Pretti didn't assault them, and wasn't covering his face. He got executed anyway.
On top of which they have matching ICE issued vest with inscriptions.
>He got executed anyway.
Yes, accidents like this will happen when you shove law enforcement officers with a gun on you. Similarly, a lot of people also got "executed" by police without even having a gun, but just by simply by being uncooperative and pulling out their wallets from their back pocket with a sudden motion towards them as if they were pulling a gun. That will get you killed.
There's etiquette when dealing with police that people seem to have forgotten.
It's a fascist theme to have paramilitaries not wearing uniforms. See for example the mukhabarat in Syria. It makes them more intimidating, because they look undisciplined, and adds confusion to protestors as to whether they are dealing with someone who is part of the legal system. Why on earth would they not be issued with uniforms?
> Yes, accidents like this will happen when you shove law enforcement officers with a gun on you.
Pretti did not shove any "law enforcement officers". The first physical contact is a shove on Pretti by one of them.
BBC did a frame by frame analysis: the first shove happens at approx 1:00 in this video. https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/l0057wmt/bbc-verify-an...
If you disagree, please provide a source.
The first time they seem to be aware that he has a firearm is when they disarm him, and the execution happens after that, so I don't see how that is relevant.
You're leaving the part out where a gunshot is heard right before they "execute" him. The officers with their fingers on the trigger pointed at him during detainment, got scared of that gunshot and jumped on the trigger by accident. It's an unfortunate accident but not an execution. Read up the legal definition of execution. This is not it.
Please stop making up stuff.
Feel free to look at the timeline here.
https://news.sky.com/story/10-shots-in-5-seconds-how-did-the...
It just leaves me wondering - how do you look yourself in the mirror each day? I guess it must be super easy if you just look at what happened there and think shooting a guy 11 times from close distance is an "accident".
Pot calling the kettle black.
>the only hope I have is that you are an actual russian troll
Yes, you are not the minority opinion, you are 100% correct and everyone disagreeing with you is a russian troll.
And I think - if I lived in 1930s Germany, I would also want to believe that my country isn't turning into a place where the rule of law isn't respected and where citizens are executed on the street without due process. After all, people are posting criticism of the government in the papers still, so it can't be that bad. That family next door that disappeared - they probably did something wrong. And the dude that got shot by the Gestapo on the street - he probably did something wrong too. Or maybe the officer made a mistake - it's just an accident after all. Nothing to worry about.
I think it's in our nature to gaslight ourselves, because otherwise we have to confront the horror of the world and also who we have become. You have become a person who goes on the internet and tells people that the shooting of Alex Pretti was an unfortunate accident. I hope that there is a day - maybe in 10 maybe in 20 maybe in 30 years - where you look back at yourself and think "damn why didn't I see what was going on".
>> everyone disagreeing with you is a russian troll.
You have your coping mechanism which is clearly just lying to yourself and others on the internet - every single comment asking you for evidence, proof, or in return - giving you those when you asked - you have ignored, because clearly you aren't actually interested in what is happening, you just want to stick to your point of view, something which you accuse others of doing.
For me, the only method of not going insane reading internet forums nowadays is assuming that either people like you are bots, or are doing this on purpose to elicit a reaction(kids call it ragebaiting nowadays?). If you really hold these views....then what I said above applies.
You are literally insane if you think this is a matter of "etiquette" or that it was an accident.
Essex police haven't fired a single bullet in the last 10 years, and they are able to provide effective policing anyway. But in US a bunch of gestapo officers have a man pinned to the ground, with his gun taken away, and then they shoot him?
At least the real gestapo had the decency to ask you to stand against the wall looking away before they executed you.
As I asked you in another comment - do you want to live in a Judge Dredd universe where officers can just execute someone like this? And I repeat, it's not an accident. If it was, they would have shot him once.
Only if you misreport crime, ignore grooming gangs and arrest people for Tweets as "effective policing" in the UK.
>And I repeat, it's not an accident. If it was, they would have shot him once.
Police are trained to always fire multiple shots, as learned from firefight reports, people are left in capacity to fire back even when they have several rounds in them.
And when there are 8 people on top of them, they're facedown on the ground, their hands are stuck in front of their face with no way to get at the waistband in which they had a legally concealed firearm, which one ICE officer removes while another waits for him to be out of the way before another executes them?
People got shot from police mistakes like these all the time. It's an accident, a bad one, but not an execution, as everyone on the left calls it.
Citizens have no duty to cooperate with police in their investigations. Citizens have first, fourth, and fifth amendment rights. I suspect that your idea of "being uncooperative" includes "following unlawful orders."
Thanks, good to see great mental clarity and debate skills.
> includes "following unlawful orders."
Except the judge decides if the order was unlawful, not you.
You don't get to decide on the spot that the order you received was unlawful and can just resist arrest if you feel like it.
You cooperate with the orders, and then your lawyer will seek justice and compensation on your behalf is the way the officer handled himself was unlawful. That's the way it works.
Really? Is that why they have vests with labels that say "POLICE FEDERAL AGENT" front and back? Maybe literacy is an issue.
> covering their faces to avoid identification
Same reason SWAT and special forces covering their faces. Because just like them, ICE arrests and deports violent criminals, cartel members, human traffickers, etc. Dangerous people that could identify their faces and then track down and kill their families in retaliation, exactly what lib-dem ANTIFA & co anarchists would love to do to them if they could see their faces.
And also then, why are the "protesters" assaulting them covering their faces as well if the good guys are supposed to show their faces and only bad guys cover their faces according to your logic?
>In any Western democracy (and I'm not sure if the US is currently part of that category) there would be a public investigation
Public investigations are meaningless now in this specific partisan case since the people have already made up their mind on who's guilty. So if the officer would be publicly investigated and then cleared, them dems would just say it was all rigged anyway.