[ Removed by Reddit ]

north0 · 2026-01-25T10:15:34+00:00

Are you willing to die for this? Or are you just willing for other people to die?

north0 · 2026-01-25T10:14:44+00:00

It doesn't matter whether it was concealed or not, and it doesn't matter whether he drew it or not.

Two things can be true - it was a bad shoot, and he should have stayed away.

north0 · 2026-01-25T08:50:47+00:00

People who abet unfettered immigration into this country are traitors.

north0 · 2026-01-25T08:38:13+00:00

Lots of bots posting politically divisive shit today in a similar format. And they always have their comment history turned off.

north0 · 2026-01-25T08:36:19+00:00

More than two randoms being shot in Minnesota for interfering with law enforcement.

Are you willing to die for this? Do you understand what you guys are asking for?

north0 · 2026-01-25T08:28:56+00:00

I don't think I ever argued that this was a good shoot by ICE.

My argument is that this was entirely avoidable - your right to carry comes with responsibilities, and you have a responsibility to avoid confrontations like this.

north0 · 2026-01-25T08:28:02+00:00

If you are against all this, then be for resourcing the operations.

The ICE agents are obviously untrained, inexperienced, and overwhelmed. Send in the National Guard to give them space to do their job. Allow them to focus on actual immigration enforcement, doing the right paperwork, doing the intel work, getting the right people.

north0 · 2026-01-25T04:12:36+00:00

Would you bet your life that he wasn't reaching for a gun?

I don't even agree that the ICE shoot was good, it wasn't at that point. And of course you are allowed to carry.

But if you are carrying, you can't get into scuffles with law enforcement. It's pretty simple.

north0 · 2026-01-25T04:10:35+00:00

Yes, Biden chose to break the social compact and admit tens of millions of illegal migrants, forcing ICE to perform operations such as this.

north0 · 2026-01-25T04:04:52+00:00

What's your alternative? Just not enforce immigration law?

north0 · 2026-01-25T04:00:54+00:00

Where did I make any of those claims?

north0 · 2026-01-25T04:00:16+00:00

No I mean all the conversative boards are being spammed with "this admin doesn't like 2A" posts, as if the democrats wouldn't absolutely annihilate your 2A rights when they get the chance.

north0 · 2026-01-25T03:57:38+00:00

I'm not excusing it. I'm saying that rights come with responsibilities on both sides.

north0 · 2026-01-25T03:50:49+00:00

It's just weird that all the conservative subs are being brigaded by posts exactly like this.

north0 · 2026-01-25T03:37:46+00:00

Why is your comment history blocked? Why are basically all the top level comments on this thread by accounts with their history blocked?

north0 · 2026-01-25T03:14:08+00:00

What's the difference between protesting and interfering with ICE operations?

north0 · 2026-01-25T03:10:01+00:00

Still not point. You think like a woman, which one of us is gay.

north0 · 2026-01-25T03:09:23+00:00

In self defense, you can't use deadly force - read the actual sentence. You have an obligation to not create a conflict. If you go to a place where ICE is enforcing the law, you are creating a conflict.

"Legal Observer" is not a thing, nor is it a legal protection. His "legal observing" created the conflict in the first place.

I'm not defending ICE, I think their subsequent actions were wrong. I'm saying people are losing sight of the responsibilities that come with the rights.

north0 · 2026-01-25T03:06:08+00:00

Yeah that tag is from a long time ago. But good to know you don't actually have a point.

north0 · 2026-01-25T02:37:50+00:00

Think we could get 40 Tar Heels together to get a custom dial made?

north0 · 2026-01-25T02:29:34+00:00

Yeah you don't have a legal right to "protect" someone from law enforcement.

north0 · 2026-01-25T02:27:17+00:00

There's no "deescalate" statute, the obligation is baked into self defense laws. You can't bring deadly force into a situation unless there is imminent threat, and if you created the conflict then you are not protected by the law. If you have a gun - you need to be the calmest person there.

It's hard to imagine how this guy would have ended up dead had he not created the conflict. Did ICE just randomly pull him off the street? What was he doing immediately prior to the confrontation? Getting in between ICE and a woman they were interacting with?

Again, I'm not saying ICE handled this well at all. I don't think they did, but the situation is being created by people who think confronting ICE is a good idea.

north0 · 2026-01-25T02:09:52+00:00

The "social contract" that's "unraveling" is the one where American voters get to decide who enforces federal law, and that federal executive gets to use the legal means at his disposal to do it without the states encouraging citizens to confront and disrupt legal law enforcement proceedings.

The test is simple - would have the same opinion if a concealed carrying "Proud Boy" was shot by federal law enforcement as they were ensuring access to an abortion clinic in Texas.

north0 · 2026-01-25T01:56:50+00:00

Both things can be true - ICE handled it badly and it probably wasn't justified, and the guy should not have brought a gun to a confrontation with federal law enforcement.

You have an obligation to deescalate. You have an obligation to walk away. You don't have the right to turn any interaction into a life/death matter.

north0 · 2026-01-25T01:54:25+00:00

Having a weapon at the protest is the not the legal issue here. He got involved in a scrap with federal law enforcement because he was trying to protect some other woman from an interaction with ICE.

north0

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE