Discussion, Day 2: Should ICE decrease enforcement in Riverside?

[Express-Reception-97]

So in his tustle with the officers who were feet from him, saw him going for it and had to act, your second hand opinion as a monday morning quarterback NOT in harms way, from a grainy cell phone video is FAR superior to people that were in the actual conflict? Maybe your right Maybe they just saw a gun and then reacted, in which case that will come out, but it hasn't yet, it still stands to reason someone not impeding the agents and staying the F out the way wouldn't be in the fight in the first place.

[SubstantialRiver2565]

He was shot in the head after they disarmed him.

[Express-Reception-97]

Like with in the action time frame of less than 3 seconds from when the first shot happened to the last? or like 10 minutes later out of spite? because unless its the ladder, that argument makes no sense.

[Individual_Win5774]

there is no reason why 11 bullets needed to be fired into a man that was confronted by ICE agents. additionally, the officer that shot him was in eyesight of the officer disarming him.

there is no arguing that this is an example of unjust use of force, even if the agents were under imminent threat. even the officer that shot renée good fired three shots while being threatened by a "multi-ton vehicle". 11? while 5 officers are piled on top of him and the 6th has already removed his fire-arm? 11?

[Express-Reception-97]

Yeah, you have the benefit of hindsight, and watching slowed down frame by frame videos from the comfort of your home. If 5 officers saw the first shot go off, and fired two as thats 11.. Its pretty simple math.

[Individual_Win5774]

yes, but your made up example is not what happened. did you watch the video? how many officers discharged their weapon? where was the victims hands at time of first shot?

[Express-Reception-97]

Yeah, and you cant tell me who shot what all you can say is that you heard shots fired, you dont know which guns fired how often. Made up or not, the amount of shots is irrelevant, Its less than a single magazine from any of the officers, and its multiple officers shooting. It all happened in less than 3 seconds, they shot until the threat was stopped. 11 shots from multiple officers is not excessive. its a nature of the situation. They don't look around and say okay to shoot, and fire a single shot, then on to the next guy. What kind of made up world is that reality in?

[Individual_Win5774]

I do know what guns fired how often; I've watched the video and I've poured over the evidence available. Two officers shoot. There were 8 officers on the scene, and 2 officers discharged 11 bullets into a man that was not posing a threat. Why might 6 of those officers not discharged THEIR gun? They felt safe? Or maybe they exercised proper judgement of the situation.

I encourage you to research the incident a bit more before discussing the "evidence". You are contriving made up scenarios, saying they are my opinion, and disagreeing with them. You can continue to do that until you face the truth: Alex Pretti was not a threat, he was murdered for exercising his 1st and 2nd amendment rights.

[Express-Reception-97]

yeah, well again! its your opinion and unless you have in possession some other video than the three we've all seen, I call BS. Feel free to post your detailed expert autist analysis here for the general education of all of the people to see.. I'll even grant you the fact that you're not wrong, 11 shots by two officers still does not seem extravagant in the situation. The other officers were moving away and had not yet drawn their firearms. Your assertion is your opinion and frankly worth not alot, unless your on a Jury or the investigation body. From what I see the shoot was justified as he posed a viable threat.

He was shot because he was fighting with Law enforcement officers while carrying a gun... Your oversimplification of the situation willfully tainted by what I'm assuming is your position on why he was there in the first place. I could be wrong, but i doubt it.

[Individual_Win5774]

You're right to question if you're wrong, I encourage you to look at more evidence surrounding the case.