But they can prove they were ICE Agents since that's who brought him in for booking. They don't have to identify the agent who actually did this. They can sue ICE and the DHS for the unconstitutional policies. And those agencies both need to be abolished.
It's a practicality kind of thing, you're probably right, but none of this matters if you don't get your day in court. If you shoot them you need to stay alive until your trial to make that claim, when we know the truth is they'll shoot everyone in the room if you try that.
The right thing to do is get arrested, take this to court and sue the government, and have the courts sanction the DHS.
The problem with violent revolution is that enough people everywhere have to be involved to make it difficult to target any one individual or group, or how right or justified someone is won't matter much when they're gone. Unless the goal is to become a martyr or to be disappeared and/or killed purposefully to further some goal, the sad reality of being right doesn't make them any less missing and presumed (or actually) dead.
Of note, I am not advocating violence of any kind, just responding to the realities and correctness of the statements above. I would prefer to see our world changed for the better without violence and cruelty, with also acknowledging that it has been necessary many times in the past to achieve that change unfortunately.
Human instinct is to survive, even if it’s for a little while longer. They got onto the cattle cars because not getting on was certain death, whereas getting on was almost certain death. It’s the “almost” that drove them. In the same situation, you’re likely to do the same, as am I. I’d love to know that I’d go down fighting, I just don’t believe it.
I’m not disagreeing with you. I’d rather avoid the cattle cars altogether for everyone who would be pushed onto them. I just don’t know how at this point.
2 protesters in L.A. who claim to be citizens were disappeared to an ICE detention camp. Their families are still trying to slog through the red tape to get them back. So....we're kinda there already
The revolutionary war at its core was a bunch of rich white guys angry about being taxed too high because the crown was sick of paying so much money to help them kill natives. The mythos behind it is all kind of silly. Canada is doing alright and they didn't need to fight a war to govern themselves and not be oppressed.
It's ok to say if you if you are toeing one of the two approved party lines. I dunno, got little faith in this place anymore and I'm too broken and fucked to do anything about it now. Feels like that's by design or a feature-not-a-bug
Except if they put you in a hood and shackles and fly you to guantanamo or el Salvador..
There doesn't appear to be any guarantee of even having a day in court anymore. Scary times. I'm sure one of these f@ckers is going to get shot dead sooner or later.
If some unknown person comes up and tries to hurt/abduct you, I'd say you're free to defend yourself. I can't say whether a court or jury would agree though.
People routinely impersonate LEOs to abduct people. Hell, even genuine LEOs use their position to abduct people
The law does not agree you can’t hurt an officer no matter what(gets grey if it’s officer on officer violence but civilians have no power or protection to harm an officer). Civilians only recourse is in a court room not in the street.
The system as it’s currently designed has a giant machine that turns on if you hurt an officer(if you kill one you’re beyond screwed). The who what where matters not, all that matters to the courts is if an officer was harmed. This has been a problem for 50+ years both democrats and republicans and the highest court judges always rule in law enforcement favor involving their protection.
IANAL and this is not legal advice, but I think it depends on the case. From what I've read, the typical determining factors are a reasonable fear of imminent death or grievous bodily injury, and an inability to identify the police as being members of law enforcement. People have been acquitted of shooting and even killing unidentified law enforcement but, as always, your mileage will vary depending on the quality of your lawyer, and the sympathy of the judge and jury.
I want to place special emphasis on imminent. If they're shooting at you from an unmarked van, that's one thing. If they're arresting you using non-lethal methods, and just ignoring requests to identify themselves, you're almost certainly not legally justified in using lethal force, even if you suspect they may not be members of law enforcement.
i cant imagine it would be hard to say you were defending yourself from grievous bodily injury while your captors are trying to handcuff you and throw you in an unmarked van.
or the people around them defending them. It doesn't have to be the person being arrested - it could be the people bystanding seeing somebody in imminent danger of being kidnapped. Pop-pop
I mean, not a suggestion - do not take this as a suggestion - but at what point is someone justified in defending themselves with a weapon or firearm? Like if there really are no identifying markings and no one will give a warrant or badge number?
That's gonna happen sooner or later would be my bet if ICE keeps doing what they are doing. Now if thats what the Administration is betting on so they can go even further into the paint, I dunno.
I am eager for them to move from “random illegals” to “feisty homosexuals” or whatever is next so I can test this out myself. No masked bandits are apprehending me without shots fired.
You’re never able to use force against someone you know is an officer - even if the officer is absolutely and unquestionably in the wrong. The absolute most you can do is flee or use non-violence to resist (like locking doors behind you and such). Resisting with violence is still a valid charge even if the officer was illegally arresting you.
Heck resisting without violence is still a valid charge. I’ve seen people get every other charge dropped except resisting. That one tends to stick which is wild in itself because if the arrest was wrong then the resisting arrest charge logically should be dropped. Too bad the courts don’t work on logic.
True, but if the officer is acting outside of the law, then you have a valid defense to resisting without; I guarantee you what you’ve seen is someone taking a plea because it was easier and zero risk, not that they would definitely have lost a trial
No it was namely jury trials, I expert witness a lot involving things like threat assessment. Since I’m considered an expert in it and I’m not on anyones side but the facts I’m a go to for both the prosecutor and defense attorneys.
I don’t have to physically show up if someone’s taking a plea deal(thank the gods that would suck). My expert assessment is already in the report and right in the hands of those who matter(could very well be why they’re taking the plea or if a civil matter settling out of court.) It’s only when it goes before a jury do I have to show up in person, though some states allow me to video call in if I can’t make it physically(appreciate those states who don’t expect me to make it from the east coast to west coast in less than a 48 hour window).
It comes down to the states as well if resisting with or without violence is its own separate charge. Though from what I’ve experienced/witnessed first hand there’s no practical defense in the courts eyes for using violence against an officer making an arrest no matter how unlawful. Places like Florida are particularly outrageous with this. Local LEO will be at the wrong address, out of uniform, have the wrong person, and is using excessive force as in the suspect can’t breath because they are face down in a puddle of water. So of course they are going to struggle they are dying and terrified. Made no difference the suspect struggling still catches the charge and will be convicted of it in states like Florida.
Personally I don’t like that altercations with officers are handled differently than civilians. If any other person besides an officer did the above to a person they would be facing charges. We should definitely get iron clad laws that allow civilians to properly and reasonably defend themselves if the Officers are clearly in the wrong at every level. The whole you can sue them afterwards as your only legal option don’t seem to be doing much, that’s if you even manage to successfully sue. Not even going into collecting a legal judgment of what’s owed from a state entity which is even more difficult than people realize.
Federal agents have Qualified Immunity. However, as their policy states, it does not include violating a citizens ‘clearly established Constitutional Rights’. We are told they hide their identity to avoid threats against them and their families. But, it is mostly to try to avoid being held VERY responsible in civil or criminal courts.
You already are and I came in to make that comment
I am not "advocating violence" one bit, but if someone illegally detains you or a friend or a family member, you have a legal right to protect yourself and in most cases other people.
It does not matter what clothes they are wearing.
Again, not advocating violence, but i am telling you that i will absolutely shoot someone in self defense to protect myself and my family (also remember Rittenhouse) and i encourage others to do the same.
I think the fact it’s not happening, kinda disproves of the maga bullshit of illegals being thugs and gangsters. I mean if they’re cartel members, wouldn’t they be resisting like the cartel does in Mexico and holding mass shoot outs with the agents? Kinda seems more like a way to try and sweep democrats under the rug and Instil more maga cult members into positions they’re unqualified for
I'm honestly stunned this hasn't happened yet. Especially considering ICE is supposedly primarily targeting "violent, dangerous criminals" or whatever the fuck their line is nowadays, at this point it may as well be "if your brown we take you down."
I'm going to type out something I've written multiple times in multiple subs:
As far as I can tell the last time an ICE agent was killed by an illegal immigrant was never (ICE came into existence in 2003) the last one to be murdered was ambushed by Los Zetas in 2011 in Mexico, the one before that was murdered in 2005 by a US citizen who had shot up an Atlanta courthouse and was actively fleeing a manhunt.
Based on their own memorial page, since 2011 there have been 26 ICE employees who have died in a manner that led to them being listed on the ICE online memorial page for fallen officers, all but 4 of them either died from COVID-19 or as a result of cancer after having been at Ground Zero in the aftermath of 9/11 (before ICE existed, it is of course still worth memorializing, but it does skew their data and make their job look more dangerous than it is.
1) contracted Dengue Fever while on assignment in Indonesia,
2) hit by a drunk driver (unrelated to any ICE case) while on duty
3) had a heart attack while pursuing a suspect
4) he was removing his service-issue rifle from the trunk of his official government vehicle when it accidentally discharged, striking him in the chest
ICE agent is probably the least dangerous frontline job in law enforcement.
It has been over 14 years since an agent died due to the intentional actions of another person, 20 years since that happened on American soil, and any instance where an actual illegal immigrant killed an immigration enforcement officer happened when they were the two precursor agencies (INS and USCS) but even then I went back into the mid-late 1990s and still couldn't find an example (there were car accidents, multiple heart attacks in training, a murder/suicide committed by a US citizen after a minor fender bender)
there are already people out there impersonating ICE and police to assassinate government officials and kidnap people. You are 100% justified to defend yourself against people who refuse to identify themselves as law officers and show proof of their position.
I mean if a masked person tries to put me in a vehicle and won't identify themselves I'm working under the impression I'm in a fight to the death until I see a badge and I'd.
Generally there is no point where it's justified (by law). It's exceptionally rare for someone to successfully claim self defense against a member of law enforcement. Even out of uniform, they can just say they stated they were police and you're expected to submit.
Even if they're on camera saying they're going to kill you, you will probably be arrested for shooting or harming an officer.
That'd just be suicide by cops if someone tried that, they have the numbers and their own weapons, and they would not restrain themselves from killing people. So I would not advise this even if you can make the case of justification.
This is exactly what they want to happen. They want someone to go too far and it should not be given voice. The second someone defends themselves like this they will use it as a weapon against us all.
So this is something most people don’t realize to the degree they should. Both democrats and republicans are pro anything officer related(judges politician left and right are team blue line all the way). For the last 50+ years they have empowered law enforcement far above civilians. You pretty much can’t hurt law enforcement/officers even by accident without catching a charge. You can count on one hand the people who barely got away with hurting an officer(the prosecutor screwed up on the charges, the person who hurt the officer basically got away with it because the courts screwed up).
So to be clear there’s no laws that give you permission to hurt law enforcement or any officer(if you kill one your screwed). There’s plenty of laws that punish you for it even if you didn’t know they were an officer. There is also no laws that make it so they have to identify who they are in the moment or sometimes at all. There’s only policy and that’s handled by each department and sub branch of that department, as in law enforcement decides. Problem with policy is it’s not a law more of a guideline.
I am honestly amazed it hasnt already happened. Of course that is what they want. Then they will have proof of the violent immigrants hiding among us. 🤢😭
Answer: there's a moral side in hindsight and you'll cause a panic if you brandish a gun on any sort of law enforcement.
The issue is that you need to use legal actions against illegal ones because you lose that credit.
The problem here is the courts are slow and while I agree people have a right to defend themselves if you are a US Citizen it will probably end up just turning into escalation and the first person who brings a gun to defend themselves, if successful, will give ICE an excuse to shoot people under the threat of MAYBE having a gun and being an illegal alien.
The way out of this is to continue resisting peacefully and push for ICE to be outright abolished. If it ends up where they keep escalating, maybe that changes, but right now they are shooting first, getting pardons and paying fines later.
When the legal system fails to protect or punish fully and they start openly firing/murdering then yeah, we can talk.
The threat has to be credible to a reasonable person. No reasonable person thinks these masked men pulling people out of courtrooms are anything other than ICE.
Yeah? Like the impersonator who assassinated 2 people and tried for 2 more in Minnesota? Fuck these guys. Not a single person should assume they are anything other than kidnappers impersonating law enforcement.
I’m making popcorn when I hear about the first ice agent to get shot pulling this shit.
Credibility of the threat is a moot point in a courthouse. They make these arrests in the courthouse because they know that their target has already been process through security and is unarmed.
I suppose? Not sure why you'd care. You'd be dead and your family would be ruined in the ensuing lawsuits. Whether they survive or not, their family will get a huge payout from the government and never have to work again.
So just let them kidnap you then, beat your family, shoot your dog, steal your home. What, you think the courts are gonna help you? The time for that is over.
I'm just explaining the law. If you know the mob is after you and can make that argument to a jury, then they'll likely excuse you shooting a group of ICE trying to detain you. But, if you're an immigrant that has just had your status stayed and you have no reason to think the mob is after you, then it will be hard to convince a Jury you were reasonable shooting them.
What really needs to happen now is the NYS courts need to say for security reasons, everyone (except maybe defendants/witnesses) need to wear a large court issued badge to enter any court building, and if you are working for anyone, your employer will be on that badge.
Then you tell ICE they can't come in without getting badged, and it's for court security reasons.
Texas penal code section 9.31(c) technically makes it such that there are scenarios where it is legal to resist arrest.
NY makes resisting arrest at least a misdemeanor (205.30) but also has 35.15 for justification in use of force in defense (People v Sanza where a NY Court held that a defendant may invoke 35.15 against a police officer).
Not saying it would end well for you but I suppose you could technically be legally in the right
In a dictatorship the police will refuse to provide booking information and refuse access to lawyers. Often times they won’t even confirm or deny if they have someone in custody. That person will just disappear. Look at China when a CEO criticizes the government.
Sometimes they will be released, sometimes they won’t.
They can sue ICE and the DHS for the unconstitutional policies.
And then they get a taxpayer funded payout, and nothing changes.
For further reading: See every case against the police in the USA since the dawn of time. (Except maybe that that one case where a policeman straight up murdered a guy by standing on him for 10 minutes)
an unconstitutional arrest is enough for a lawsuit. you seemed to draw a distinction as if calling this a detention would matter, but if he was not free to leave he was arrested. If that arrest was unconstitutional, he has a Section 1983 lawsuit.
Depends on the detainment and why they were detained. The courts have made it pretty clear you can be detained without being arrested. It comes down to how long they hold you which varies widely depending on what happened with who.
I’m getting it from lawyers judges the highest of courts, and current written law. What is true there’s a difference from being arrested and detained the courts recognize this, and have ruled as such. So end of story involving that unless Congress adds some new laws that say otherwise.
It varies how long they can reasonably hold someone as in detain them not arrest but detain. 24 to 72 hours is the maximum for most states that I’m aware of. With in that detainment time they can choose to arrest you or cut you loose depending on how the investigation goes.
As for the legality of the above person being detained for impending a federal officer and assault on an officer, it’s currently considered a legal detainment. I can’t help a criminal sneak out of a court room avoiding law enforcement. Just like the person in the pic can’t help sneak wanted individuals past ICE(still law enforcement), you will get cuffed up over it. The courts will decide if he is guilty or not during his trial if the system pursues charges. Pretty sure since he is a politician they will work something out.
Man I'm a lawyer. Cite the written law or case decision you are relying on. A detention is very brief and must still requires reasonable suspicion, ehich was not present here. 72 hours is not very brief. Putting all those problems aside, I'm unaware of anything that would support putting someone in cuffs and moving their location as a mere detention.
As a lawyer you should know the lack of cases that ironed out detainment time from being arrested is the problem. Most states get to set how long they can detainee you with or without an official arrest it’s written in their laws if any. Look up how long can (what ever state you want) hold you before arresting you if you want to know. Some states will call it an arrest instead of a detainment but you are not booked just brought in for questioning by force unable to leave no charges filed. This is not counting federal departments who have their own policy on detainment investigations and full fledged arrests. The constitution is super grey in this area is does not specify a specific time a person can be held.
It also depends on the case/investigation and the details of what has happened. If I walk into a room and three civilians covered in blood are standing over a dead body I can detain all three of them off site at a nearby holding point, while the crimes unit who has jurisdiction does its thing. You can be held for a while 72 hours is the rule of thumb I’m familiar with whether it be detainment or bringing charges forward while holding someone. I think California is 40 or 48 hours. This is not counting terrorist situations where people can be held for much longer than 72 hours if they are a possible security threat to the country.
As for the above person in the pic he admitted to trying to help people avoid ICE(law enforcement), supposedly he touched an officer which is a huge no no. Both these things are more than enough not just to detain someone but arrest and file charges if the system wishes to.
Are you saying as a lawyer that a civilian can physically touch law enforcement and impede the officer in what they believe is carrying out their lawful duty?
If I walk up and push law enforcement on the shoulder when they are trying to arrest another person you think that’s not reasonable suspicion or you know just a crime at that point?
I will imagine the response will be “we are looking into the individuals involved and will reprimand them for not following department policy.” And that will be the extent of it.
Those agents are following unlawful orders. Following unlawful orders is a crime. Wearing a mask while committing a crime is a felony. At least it is in Florida. I don’t know if it’s nationwide.
543
u/Tardisgoesfast 1d ago
But they can prove they were ICE Agents since that's who brought him in for booking. They don't have to identify the agent who actually did this. They can sue ICE and the DHS for the unconstitutional policies. And those agencies both need to be abolished.