A number of pro-gun rights Republicans pushed back on the administration’s argument that Alex Pretti was dangerous because he had a gun. Pretti was legally licensed to carry one.
A war of words over deeply held beliefs erupted on the political right in the hours after a federal agent shot and killed Alex Pretti on a Minneapolis street Saturday, pitting top officials in Donald Trump’s administration against Second Amendment defenders in his electoral base.
At the core of the debate is that Pretti — who was permitted to carry a gun in public in Minnesota — had a concealed firearm on his person that eyewitness videos show federal agents apparently discovering and removing during the altercation that led to his death. Videos do not appear to show Pretti holding the weapon during that confrontation.
Kristi Noem sought to justify the killing by asserting at a news conference that Pretti “attacked those officers, had a weapon on him, and multiple dozens of rounds of ammunition, wishing to inflict harm on these officers coming, brandishing like that and impeding their work that they were doing.” No evidence has been provided to back up this account.
Psst.
It’s because black people are open carrying.
Just like the last time Republicans started talking about gun control when black people started open carrying.
Psst.
The American conservative movement is a racist movement.
How many kids had to die in school shootings in order to protect these 2A rights? But a holstered weapon is suddenly a threat to 6 men armed to the teeth and wearing body armor.
But a holstered weapon is suddenly a threat
Couldn’t have been a threat. It was removed from his possession before he was executed.
I’m summoning the NRA to do some good for once
They already issued a milquetoast response on it and republicans are siding with Noem even tho it’s nonsense.
It doesn’t matter what these clowns do. That cult of MAGA can do no wrong in their eyes. Greg Bovino could arrest Jesus for coming to the US illegally during the Second Coming and the conservatives would applaud him for getting rid of another illegal.
Anyone who is even the slightest bit surprised by this wasn’t paying attention.
Everyone in the trump admin is acting like the 2A will get you killed by them. They’re not violating the right they’re just murdering in tangent
Treat her like she treats puppies.
What is it that you people don’t understand about “The right’s right to bear arms shall not be infringed”?
Maybe you should take a course to read good.
Spoiler Alert: It’s because American conservatives are racist and black people are open carrying.
plot twist, all the people in that photo are now ICE agents (except the black guy, he is deported).
It’s funny because it’s true, so that instantly shifted gears to sad.
2026: so far as bad as 2025, plus one.
We need more community defense classes now more than ever. Seriously!
Anyone else remember the wild accusations all these years about how tHe LiBrUlS wAnNa TaKe Ur gUnS!
But wait. Anyone noticing how it’s not the “libruls” shitting themselves right now, but the NRA and right-wing 2A groups who want no part of this new narrative?
For anyone paying attention, this was always the right wing plan. Always.
Gun rights were previously restricted during the Reagan administration too. These people are seriously the scum of the earth. They’re just too stupid to be convinced of that, and if it finally got through, it wouldn’t change anything.
Absolutely. I have an overarching theorem about US “Conservative” politicians and donors that I’ve been challenging for decades but remains unchanged.
Tr;dr: the top brass are all fucking grifters.
Their primary strategy is doing whatever is most effective and expedient for increasing their socioeconomic power, even if that directly contradicts their previous and current actions and alleged principles. They’re only ostensibly aligned with conservative values because they’re the best for meeting that goal, especially because true social conservative voters are overall both less educated and intelligent, and therefore less critical.
Since noticing that, their actions are all quite consistent and predictable and the hypocrisy rarely surprises me.
This is one of the main reasons people don’t vote blue. They care a lot about their firearms. If the red start going after them, grab some popcorn because things will go down. Maybe this is whats needed to get them to open their eyes.
Nah. There isnt some huge group of people who would give their vote to Dems if Dems were pro-gun. The Dems would lose more support than they would gain. The Dems’ gun control positions are mostly pretty moderate and have majority support in swing states.
I see this pro-gun hysteria on the Virginia sub on Reddit all the time. They’re so massively out of touch with real life. They actually think that hardcore pro-gun positions are popular when they’re not, polls consistently show that large majorities of the electorate support gun control measures.
Before the election they were all screaming about how Dems were losing votes because of gun control, and then Spanberger proceeded to win by 15 points and the legislature now has the largest Dem majority since the 1970s.
I think its dependent on their base. I firmly believe Beto O’Rourke would have unseated Fled Cruz if there wasn’t an emotional sound bite of him saying “Hell yeah we’re taking your guns!” After a WalMart in his hometown was shot up.
Ted Cruz (and Greg Abbott in the ensuing gubnatorial election) both played the FUCK out of that clip, and Beto lost both elections but only by a slim margin.
I’m not a 2A person, but I personally think if there was someone progressive like AOC or Bernie Sanders AND they touted gun ownership, they would be a winning candidate every single time.
Way too many people are “Anything but the D”. And then complain they’re incels.
It is, and it’s the dumbest thing. If they could read they’d find the last administration to hinder gun rights was the Reagan regime.
Actually the last admin to go after gun rights was Trumps first term where he said, “take the guns first, go through due process second”.
They did do that but they weren’t the last. Clinton passed the AWB, which was essentially a “scary looking guns” ban. Guns that were functionally the same could be legal or illegal based on meaningless cosmetic features. It was dumb ineffective pandering, the worst kind of 2A violation.
You know a country is deeply fucked when their guns are more important than literally everything else.
Healthcare? Nah.
Education? Nah.
Human rights? Nah.
Pew Pew Machines I can shoot cans with? Only thing that matters!
Disagree. They’re fine with it if the person doing it claims to be red.
Guarantee no die hard 2FA MAGAt changes their mind over any of this.
Trump voters have literally lost their business, their jobs, have had to relocate due to lifestyle collapse, and they still say voting for him is better than the alternative.
single issue gun voters are lost to trump now
“The dems want to take away your firearms!”
“That may or may not be true, but the GOP WILL just kill you and label you a terrorist if they find out you have a firearm.”
That’s been true for a long time in police interactions. Possessing a firearm in public alone has been justification for detainment, arrest and use of force including lethal force countless times.
Yes, but now it’s true for white male conservatives who just happen to be in the right place at the wrong time.
Not an equality they’re used to.
Yeah, I doubt very much this will matter to them. See: all the campaigning and crying they did over Epstein and now how they are good with covering that shit up, or making insane executes. The hypocrisy does not matter to them at all
I disagree. I really think you are underestimating how much Americans, especially American men, especial rural men who hunt and don’t like being bossed around by a government that’s far away, want to buy whatever weapons they want without extra regulation.
For many people, they vote just based on the NRA’s selection. If the Democrats became a more pro-gun party, they would gain a substantial amount of power in the US.
Maybe, or they will just make it political: registered dems can’t own guns or something else insane. I guess we will see, I would have thought oedophilia would be the line, but if they are ok with that and suddenly 2a is the breaking point …. I mean I’m disgusted but if we get there we get there.
They can now if they want to.
The left has always been pro firearm regulation. Not removing them.
Fox News did a marvelous job at convincing them that anyone to the left of them was a pacifist and wanted no weapons.
Like you talk to any hardline 2A supporter, and they will straight up agree with you that some people really shouldn’t have firearms.
The victim’s gun was in a waistband holster and an ICE agent took it before the other one shot him. The blatant lying is wild
Good ol’ No-Evidence Noem. “Just take my word for it, Cricket practically asked me to shoot him in the face with that shotgun. He was a Domestic
TerrierTerrorist. Anyone who pisses me off is a Domestic Terrorist.”Clearly the dog had a gun with an intent to kill
I have always held the moral belief that no citizen should be allowed to legally own a firearm. That doesn’t mean we should just ignore current law.
Why do you believe no citizen should be allowed to legally own a firearm?
I am against firearms in general.
Fair enough. The modern world would probably be an overall better place if firearms didn’t exist.
It is, just look at all the other countries in the so called civilized world.
But they do exist. And you don’t want the fascist to be the only ones who have them.
We have fascists here in Europe. They don’t have guns.
Well the fascists AND non-fascists have them in America. Not seeing how its making any difference.
2A was specifically written to help prevent a tyrannical government.
Hasn’t worked.
They’re not magic talismans, you need to actually use them on tyrants. Fire Extinguishers don’t ward off fires by just existing.
Yes, that’s the point.
It was never claimed that it would work overnight. You can’t just plead the 2nd as if it were the 5th and , flash, everything is all democracy again. Organized and individual actions, both, will likely be necessary.
All the Second does for us is ensure that we weren’t disarmed at this point. One thing I can guarantee is that nobody is going to be discussing any plans for retaliation on this forum or any like it.
Every day we get closer to the tipping point. Arm yourself with a firearm and the knowledge on how to use it safely.
If it’s safe for you to have a firearm.
I think a lot of people skip that step.
Thankfully I dont live in America.
I’m just watching in horror from a few thousand miles away
The anti-fascist having a gun doesn’t seem to have helped him in any way. Just giving the fascists a talking point for demonizing him after the fact.
They find talking points and demonize anyways.
They’ll make up any excuse. This one is bullshit like the rest but this excuse is one that has been the law since 1791. People seem to really care about it and previous SCOTUSs have made very clear that no laws can infringe on that even when it’s to prevent harm.
I feel so funny on this because I want to defend a right under attack by the rump admin but also it’s a right I want limited in many ways… Just not right now.
pretty effective in the US with the second amendment nuts going crazy… and joining ICE
Why should they?
Why should citizens be allowed to legally own firearms? Best reasons I can conjure up: to engage in subsistence hunting, if that’s their thing. Self defense, either from other humans with bad intentions or large wild/feral animals. Target shooting as recreation. Ensuring the collectively armed citizenry can defend itself against an unlawful tyrant threatening national values and founding principles.
I would personally prefer to live in a world where everyone respects everyone else’s rights to life, liberty, and property and there are no reasons at all for firearms to exist, so they don’t and absolutely no one has one.
But I don’t live in that world. I live in a world where people cheat, steal, maim, and kill. It would be nice to have an impenetrable forcefield protecting me from harm, but I don’t have that, either. So, the next best thing, is a way to level the playing field. To ensure the smallest, least physically-imposing person can be every bit as lethal as the largest bad motherfucker intent on causing harm. I think that’s the central idea as shared by The Cornered Cat.
Edit: I guess another reason would be to make an armed country harder to invade by another country. The would-be invader may think twice before laying feet upon the armed country’s soil, knowing the likelihood of a strong underground and guerrilla tactics.
So fear. Got it.
Did you just not read the first and second paragraph?
Well the hunting bullshit was an intentional attempt to legitimize owning a gun when in reality you don’t have to shoot a vegetable.
I guess you could take it as that but also I feel like it is a legitimate reason to own a gun. Especially because I personally know people that do actually hunt as a way to put food on the table. Being vegetarian is perfectly valid and a good choice and everything but also shouldn’t be forced on everyone. And honestly hunting is more ethical than buying meat from the grocery store or whatever, and much more of the animal gets used if you do it right.
But even if you completely disregard hunting, what about target shooting for sport?
That’s your reason for not owning or wanting others to own firearms isn’t it? Fear? Are we a hypocrite?
I’m afraid of all the people that own guns now because their fear puts others in danger. Other countries with strict gun laws or even bans out rank the US in safety. How odd…
Sounds irrational.
Fear seems like a legitimate reason to me. Plenty of things to be fearful of out there.
Farmers use them to protect livestock.
So farmers need them, but not everyone.
That kinda depends on where YOU personally draw the line.
And that line is going to be different.
Me personally I would include recreation. Clay pigeon, biathlon, etc.
The point being that there’s a wide range of opinions on guns that should all agree being armed under current laws shouldn’t be a death sentence.
That too. I don’t think anyone abiding by the law should be killed. I agree. Let me be clear.
I think the need for armed citizens to fight tyranny is real but it’s also true that guns are very dangerous and cause a lot of problems in society.
My best solution is autonomous community armories. What do you think of that idea?
Wouldn’t that create gatekeeping?
Everyone in the community can bear arms… except those individuals we don’t like.I think they’d be able to create their own armory if they want to. Just need to get a few people together.
Can’t wait until Krusty Gnome is hanging around at the Hauge. You think she will be asking for her right to Habeas Corpus then?
Doubt she will ever set foot in the ICC, unless the next president will hand her over personally. Like the US president has the power to use all means necessary to free US service members when they are detained on behalf of the ICC. Meaning the US president can invade the Netherlands without the need for Congressional approval.
Yes.
