The bar for ending the threat of someone attempting to maim or kill a law enforcement officer should never be set so high as to allow these leftists to wipe out LEOs with impunity to advance political aims that should be settled at the ballot box.

You accelerate your vehicle in the direction of a cop, you are asking for an immediate and final judgement. You hit a cop with a vehicle as they are performing duties they are obliged to do by oath and by law, you are actively engaging in your own last rites.

No sympathy at all for this Bolshevik thug and those who encouraged her to attack law enforcement. Were it up to them, it would be open season on the rest of us by gun, bomb or vehicle.

whatthehey78 said:

---

Concerned Moderate Ag said:

---

If that's truly and legally the case, the bar is way too low.

---

You can always go test it.

---

Worked pretty well for the lunatic in the car.

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

Concerned Moderate Ag said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

Concerned Moderate Ag said:

---

The Unforgiven said:

---

Would you like to test your hypothesis? I am sure anyone on here would volunteer to be the driver if you are willing to be in the same position of the Leo but you cannot have a gun. Let's see how fast you can move and see how much damage you take. Willing to back up your position? If you survive with no injuries, I'll give you $100k

---

Did the shooter get injured here? If not, seems like your hypothesis is already off. Maybe he did, I haven't heard. Looked fine at the end when he holstered his pew pew .

---

Why does that matter?

---

Because this hypothetical experiment was literally tested in this very case and the cop was fine. So his hypothesis is already shot. Shooting the broad didn't save his life, he got out of the way and then shot her.

---

His first shot was not after her car rammed him out of the way.

---

I'm going based off this first video here. If you look at it frame by frame, she puts it in forward, he draws, she bumps with what appears to be the front driver's side quarter panel, he shoots through the windshield.

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000010631041/minneapolis-ice-shooting-video.html

I probably would have shot her too. That's why I shouldn't be a LEO. I'm sure it's hard to make that judgement call.

Only thing that's clear is she's a dumbass and she won the stupid prize.

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

The officer clearly saw the lady turning the steering wheel.

---

Why didn't dhe just listen to his commands?

aginlakeway said:

---

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

The officer clearly saw the lady turning the steering wheel.

---

Why didn't dhe just listen to his commands?

---

Too busy listening to the commands of her lunatic wife/girlfriend.

She chose poorly, again, for the last time.

deddog said:

---

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

The officer clearly saw the lady turning the steering wheel.

---

The lady clearly heard the cop telling her to get out of the car.

Next time a cop stops you, be sure to not obey his commands.

Win Win for everyone

---

And it's impossible in that short moment of time to determine how far she's turned the car. The front of the vehicle is aimed at him, the road is icey, and the women have been threatening him. It makes complete sense for the officer to fear for his safety.

Her intent is irrelevant.

chase128 said:

---

deddog said:

---

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

The officer clearly saw the lady turning the steering wheel.

---

The lady clearly heard the cop telling her to get out of the car.

Next time a cop stops you, be sure to not obey his commands.

Win Win for everyone

---

And it's impossible in that short moment of time to determine how far she's turned the car. The front of the vehicle is aimed at him, the road is icey, and the women have been threatening him. It makes complete sense for the officer to fear for his safety.

Her intent is irrelevant.

---

At least the Monday morning QBs aren't complaining that he should have shot her in the legs. So there's that. I'll take small improvements.

aginlakeway said:

---

Concerned Moderate Ag said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

Concerned Moderate Ag said:

---

The Unforgiven said:

---

Would you like to test your hypothesis? I am sure anyone on here would volunteer to be the driver if you are willing to be in the same position of the Leo but you cannot have a gun. Let's see how fast you can move and see how much damage you take. Willing to back up your position? If you survive with no injuries, I'll give you $100k

---

Did the shooter get injured here? If not, seems like your hypothesis is already off. Maybe he did, I haven't heard. Looked fine at the end when he holstered his pew pew .

---

Why does that matter?

---

Because this hypothetical experiment was literally tested in this very case and the cop was fine. So his hypothesis is already shot. Shooting the broad didn't save his life, he got out of the way and then shot her.

---

The law seems to indicate a very good shot here.

Well would you look at that 🤔. pic.twitter.com/TRrr7Fb6av

— Cloud (@cloud1a7) January 9, 2026

---

Sadly, that's the internet doing internet things.

https://law.justia.com/codes/minnesota/chapters-609-624/chapter-609/section-609-066/

I see no such thing here.

Wow.. two f ing idiots and sheeples under control of some protest employment company. Kind of wish the other butch lady was the one driving…. The butch lady can live the rest of her life regretting she told her partner to drive off and thus was responsible for her death. Butch lady is exactly the kind of person you would think would be harassing federal police officers.. she looks like a dam idiot … probably an IQ of 40-51

flown-the-coop said:

---

Hawg, what law gets applied here? He would be judged by whatever laws apply to federal officers, correct?

I imagine the standard for use of force at the federal level is friendlier to the officer vs whatever dumb **** a blue state can cook up.

What jurisdiction does the city or state have over a federal officer doing federal business? I would think not much.

I have only heard it mentioned briefly, but this guy must be judged by the correct standard and law.

---

Those are two different questions. But here as it turns out the state statute uses the exact same wording as SCOTUS in Graham v. Connor. So that standard is the same.

OTOH, there is the federal statute that establishes federal supremacy when it is a federal agent and federal operation involved. Most local cops know when the Feds come in to take over their investigation, they step aside and wait for the Feds to ask for their input. They really cannot force the Feds to give them crap. Not on an active investigation. Talk-to-the-hand type of brush off. And the law gives the Feds that right and ability.

Don't like it? Change the law. (Good luck though, likely would be struck down.)

USA*** said:

---

A 3200lbs Ford Escape at 5mph generates @2674 ft lbs of kinetic energy. That exceeds the kinetic energy of a high powered rifle. So, yeah, getting just getting squarely hit by such a vehicle at that speed is exceptionally dangerous to humans, not withstanding getting potentially run over.

---

interesting comparison.

for further reference Grok

Not a good shoot at all. A GREAT shoot!

Filming and shooting at the same time and taking out the trash.

Is CNN back tracking?

CNN chief law enforcement and intel analyst John Miller’s first reaction to the ICE officer’s cellphone video....

“Well, what stands out is a, it’s another angle that makes it helpful to start with. B, it’s the closest thing that we are going to have in all likelihood, to the… pic.twitter.com/G0sz5W4fEg

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 9, 2026

He also saw her soul leave her body.

Concerned Moderate Ag said:

---

I'm not a licensed attorney. You don't have to be an attorney to recognize that the bar for taking a life should be higher than "I was scared" without there being some level of repercussion.

---

Maybe the bar for lawbreakers to simply follow the law, not obstructing law enforcement, obeying law enforcement and not creating chaos should be higher with people valuing their lives and a civil society more than they currently do.

As it stands, they absurdly believe they are in a life and death struggle against fascists, Nazis, and literally Hitler of all things, encouraging and celebrating murder, supporting terrorists and calling the barbaric murder of Israelis justified, promulgating antisemitism, threatening Jewish students and preventing them from studying/attending class, assaulting and ambushing law enforcement, attempting to assassinate the President and posting vile messages after two failed attempts. Praising the murder of two Israeli diplomats. Applauding the assassination of a CEO. Mocking white children murdered while praying. Mocking the murder of a Ukrainian woman. Celebrating and mocking the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

The "bar" has been set. Vile threats originated from the highest office: "Put Trump in a bullseye," and a Senator threatening a Supreme Court Justice "You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."

They called for "blood in the streets."

And here we are.

And while this woman's death is tragic, yes, why are people are crying about it?

You're creating the world you live in. Don't you like it?

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Not a good shoot at all. A GREAT shoot!

Filming and shooting at the same time and taking out the trash.

---

This is an American left incapable of explaining its domestic and foreign policy approaches in the political realm.

They are turning to violence instead, hoping the chaos will be placed on the President rather than the thugs they deploy.

All the Democrat Party has to offer and promise is blood, a level of violent activity and abuse they hope to ride into legislative control.

They are thugs. They're thieves and murderers. They're bullies and control freaks.

Horn_in_Aggieland said:

---

Is CNN back tracking?

CNN chief law enforcement and intel analyst John Miller’s first reaction to the ICE officer’s cellphone video....

“Well, what stands out is a, it’s another angle that makes it helpful to start with. B, it’s the closest thing that we are going to have in all likelihood, to the… pic.twitter.com/G0sz5W4fEg

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 9, 2026

---

LOL. What an idiot. NOW they have a 48 hour rule?

aginlakeway said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

After seeing the video, I don't think my stance has changed. Cops are too quick to shoot in general.

---

Why not just follow the instructions and don't interfere? That's what most people do.

Thus why most people don't get shot.

---

You know, she didn't have to follow instructions. She just needed to put her stinking car in Park and quit moving.

Not following instructions might get her roughed up.

Driving a 3000 pound weapon at officers will get you killed.

Half of the left is asking human cops with families at home to be all knowing AI robots who can analyze every single variable imaginable. "He should have seen the angle of her tires/her turn the wheel in a highly charged, rapidly unfolding scenario!". The other half is saying he should have waited before she plowed straight through him and sent him flying over the car before he made any type of decision.

The irony, is that it is the biggest waste of flesh losers who usually armchair cop decisions the hardest..."Why did he do that? Here's what I would have done!" with their chubby frustrated androgynous faces and they/them boobs flopping about.

Henriques said:

---

The bar for ending the threat of someone attempting to maim or kill a law enforcement officer should never be set so high as to allow these leftists to wipe out LEOs with impunity to advance political aims that should be settled at the ballot box.

You accelerate your vehicle in the direction of a cop, you are asking for an immediate and final judgement. You hit a cop with a vehicle as they are performing duties they are obliged to do by oath and by law, you are actively engaging in your own last rites.

No sympathy at all for this Bolshevik thug and those who encouraged her to attack law enforcement. Were it up to them, it would be open season on the rest of us by gun, bomb or vehicle.

---

The bar is to stop the threat. One shot? Two or more? STOP THE THREAT. Rule # 1.

Or step out of the way. Which he did while he was shooting.

Philip J Fry said:

---

Or step out of the way. Which he did while he was shooting.

---

Then why is the bullet straight thru the windshield.

This is very simple. Don't disobey law enforcement. Don't drive your car towards law enforcement. You don't get shot. Agree?

Lots of people on this thread who clearly have never gone through a federal escalation of force class. I have and that shot was not only justified but pretty much in line with what is taught.

The most telling thing about all of this is that after hours of reviewing the footage from different angles and even watching at slo-mo, and all the talking heads adding their own twists and inferences from their comfortable chairs, none of them dare to admit the officer had a split second to make a decision.

Of course, that's because they aren't really upset about the shooting. They are salivating at the opportunity to turn more of the public against Trump and sensible immigration enforcement.

W said:

---

these ICE protestors are terrible people

---

Democrats and liberals are horrible people.

sam callahan said:

---

The most telling thing about all of this is that after hours of reviewing the footage from different angles and even watching at slo-mo, and all the talking heads adding their own twists and inferences from their comfortable chairs, none of them dare to admit the officer had a split second to make a decision.

Of course, that's because they aren't really upset about the shooting. They are salivating at the opportunity to turn more of the public against Trump and sensible immigration enforcement.

---

Yup. This.

Philip J Fry said:

---

Or step out of the way. Which he did while he was shooting.

---

NO requirement under the law. So, WRONG!!!!!

aginlakeway said:

---

Concerned Moderate Ag said:

---

The Unforgiven said:

---

Would you like to test your hypothesis? I am sure anyone on here would volunteer to be the driver if you are willing to be in the same position of the Leo but you cannot have a gun. Let's see how fast you can move and see how much damage you take. Willing to back up your position? If you survive with no injuries, I'll give you $100k

---

Did the shooter get injured here? If not, seems like your hypothesis is already off. Maybe he did, I haven't heard. Looked fine at the end when he holstered his pew pew .

---

Why does that matter?

---

It's some jacked up logic isn't it? The Cop's supposed to wait to get injured first before shooting at the person who is threatening him with a 2,000 plus pound weapon. He's supposed to look at the tires to see which way they are turning calculate the speed, make sure nobody else is around to get hurt, etc before making the decision to shoot when he only has a split second to deduce all these things...Some people just don't get how difficult Law Enforcement's jobs are.

He has a moron outside the car acting in a threatening manner and a moron inside the car acting in a threatening manner (that he can't fully see) not knowing if either of them is armed with a weapon of any kind. I'm sure he had all kinds of threatening thoughts in his head. Then the dumb lady revs the engine and sends the car toward him while he is already in an escalated and defensive posture because of the situation "they" put him in.. They got what they asked for, in my opinion..

Not surprised. Mental illness.

I found the Venmo of the woman shot dead in Minneapolis by ICE after accelerating into an agent. Rachel Good's mother was paying her bills, her image features a BLM logo, and in 2020, she paid someone for "terrorism." https://t.co/5FFcb9WcEr pic.twitter.com/UR5Ge0QTMl

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) January 10, 2026

Lol. Paid someone for "terrorism" on venmo. That's not great. Every purchase I've ever made on venmo was for "hookers and blow"

1981 Monte Carlo said:

---

Half of the left is asking human cops with families at home to be all knowing AI robots who can analyze every single variable imaginable. "He should have seen the angle of her tires/her turn the wheel in a highly charged, rapidly unfolding scenario!". The other half is saying he should have waited before she plowed straight through him and sent him flying over the car before he made any type of decision.

The irony, is that it is the biggest waste of flesh losers who usually armchair cop decisions the hardest..."Why did he do that? Here's what I would have done!" with their chubby frustrated androgynous faces and they/them boobs flopping about.

---

They've had two whole days to think about what the "appropriate" response would have been.

The officer had about a second.

W said:

---

these ICE protestors are terrible people

---

They're being paid to create the exact situation that happened. Protester shot, time goal met.

deddog said:

---

chase128 said:

---

deddog said:

---

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

The officer clearly saw the lady turning the steering wheel.

---

The lady clearly heard the cop telling her to get out of the car.

Next time a cop stops you, be sure to not obey his commands.

Win Win for everyone

---

And it's impossible in that short moment of time to determine how far she's turned the car. The front of the vehicle is aimed at him, the road is icey, and the women have been threatening him. It makes complete sense for the officer to fear for his safety.

Her intent is irrelevant.

---

At least the Monday morning QBs aren't complaining that he should have shot her in the legs. So there's that. I'll take small improvements.

---

Eh I've seen libs say he should have shot her tires.

The more videos come out the worse it looks for her. My favorite goal post move is the left is mad he called her a ****ing ***** after she hit him with her car.

If you get hit by a vehicle, yes that is deadly force. But by the time he shoots the car has to be past him, right? If the car is driving away isn't the danger gone? Or does the officer have to assume that she she's going to throw it in reverse and make another run at him?

Regardless, this woman went looking for trouble and she found it. FAFO. The real criminals are the government officials that have allowed their populace to feel emboldened enough act like this.