# The ICE shootings in Minneapolis (1/7/2026) **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 8, 2026, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461 "2026-01-08T05:32:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2026, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/243 "2026-01-09T23:44:48Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Yes, as a general principle, but in this case all three shots were taken by one shooter So if any of the shots are murder, then he’s a murderer. Regardless of whether the first shot was ultimately the one that proved fatal. That’s irrelevant to his guilt ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2026, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/244 "2026-01-09T23:53:02Z")
Yeah, and what I haven’t seen mentioned much yet is that the placement of that first shot through the windshield could be damning. The first shot is extremely close to the A pillar and we know where he was standing when the shot was taken. [![](https://www.cpr.org/cdn-cgi/image/width=3840,quality=75,format=auto/https://wp-cpr.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2026/01/20260107-ice-shooting-01.jpeg) ](https://www.cpr.org/cdn-cgi/image/width=3840,quality=75,format=auto/https://wp-cpr.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2026/01/20260107-ice-shooting-01.jpeg) I’ll leave it for others to conclude where you obviously have to be standing to shoot through the windshield in that spot and get a head shot. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/245 "2026-01-10T00:01:32Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Yeah, and what I haven’t seen mentioned much yet is that the placement of that first shot through the windshield could be damning Yeah it’s still absolutely murder. It’s just the last two are a flat out execution committed live on camera, no defense lawyer is talking their way out of them, thin blue line or no. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/246 "2026-01-10T00:12:57Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > > [@griffin1977](#): > > > > It’s an open and shut case for the state to prosecute. > > Seems like the local DA has same thought…. > > [https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5680312-fbi-rescinds-cooperation-minnesota/](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5680312-fbi-rescinds-cooperation-minnesota/) I’d like to toot my own horn here - I was right, state investigators can indeed conduct their own investigation, and I’m very glad they’re doing so. ---
**Author:** ![3AxisCtrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/3/ecd19e/32.png) [@3AxisCtrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/3AxisCtrl)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/247 "2026-01-10T01:11:22Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > … it’s still absolutely murder. I’ve seen the video recorded by the shooter, and I’m now not so sure. (This gets called “bodycam” video, but it seems it may have been from a smartphone held in his left hand.) It looks like the car came close to him - probably delivered a glancing blow. It’s not a wild reach to believe he - accurately or not - perceived a serious threat. And the driver’s wife about to open the passenger door, then shouting “Drive, baby, drive!” as the car starts forward is not a good look. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/248 "2026-01-10T01:23:14Z")
Never mind, already addressed. Back to catching up with the thread. And yes, it was murder. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/249 "2026-01-10T01:29:49Z")
> [@3AxisCtrl](#): > > . It’s not a wild reach to believe he - accurately or not - perceived a serious threat Just possibly (with a good defense lawyer and a pro-cop jury) but that doesn’t get around the fact that shooting her doesn’t prevent the threat, and that is required for a self defense case. But it doesn’t matter as the other two shots cannot conceivably be explained away like that. They were flat out murder, so whether the first shot was or not is academic. It’s murder. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/250 "2026-01-10T01:32:27Z")
> [@3AxisCtrl](#): > > I’ve seen the video recorded by the shooter, and I’m now not so sure. (This gets called “bodycam” video, but it seems it may have been from a smartphone held in his left hand.) This is the problem - we’re used to seeing actual bodycam footage, so when the camera suddenly jumps, our brains assume the body was hit. But that’s not the case here. It was a hand-held phone, and the camera jumps because he suddenly drops his hand while drawing his gun. It doesn’t tell you anything about if the car actually hit him, or where the camera was in relation to his body. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/251 "2026-01-10T01:34:33Z")
> [@3AxisCtrl](#): > > (This gets called “bodycam” video, but it seems it may have been from a smartphone held in his left hand. Which I’m sure is not proper DHS procedure. Which speaks, again to how this was not a federal agent conducting his duties in necessary and proper manner, so he has no immunity from state prosecution ---
**Author:** ![3AxisCtrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/3/ecd19e/32.png) [@3AxisCtrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/3AxisCtrl)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/252 "2026-01-10T01:42:38Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > …but that doesn’t get around the fact that shooting her doesn’t prevent the threat, and that is required for a self defense case. I may be wrong - I’d understood that the requirement is for an officer to have had a valid reason to believe there was a serious threat to his safety. ---
**Author:** ![Jihi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jihi/32/17768_2.png) [@Jihi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jihi)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/253 "2026-01-10T01:43:16Z")
Somehow, a fascist piece of shit cosplaying as a brownshirt and murdering an innocent woman who didn’t “respect his authoritay” with proper deference while wielding the gun in one hand and a cell phone camera in the other seems to just be about the perfect summation of America in the year 2026. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/254 "2026-01-10T01:46:33Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’d like to toot my own horn here - I was right, state investigators can indeed conduct their own investigation, and I’m very glad they’re doing so. I agree that a state investigation is needed due to the federal government having rushed to a highly implausible judgment (“domestic terrorism”) before investigating. If the state charges the shooter, he will try to get the case into the federal system on grounds of it being part of official duties. The federal judiciary then has to rule. If it gets to the Supreme Court while Trump is still in office, I expect the case will be federalized and Trump will pardon. But maybe I am making too many assumptions. The important thing, which will not happen during this administration, is to train ICE agents in how to safely do car stops. Teaching police how to deescalate would violate Trump’s guidance against police being “too nice.” ---
**Author:** ![3AxisCtrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/3/ecd19e/32.png) [@3AxisCtrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/3AxisCtrl)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/255 "2026-01-10T01:47:39Z")
Here’s what came up via Googling: The legal requirement for a law enforcement officer to shoot in self-defense is that the officer must have an **objectively reasonable belief** that the suspect poses an **imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm** to the officer or others. This standard is based on the Supreme Court ruling in _Graham v. Connor_ (1989), which requires that the use of force be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with 20/20 hindsight. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/256 "2026-01-10T01:50:43Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > shooting her doesn’t prevent the threat, and that is required for a self defense case. It is? I don’t think that’s the standard, and I doubt you have a cite for this. > [@griffin1977](#): > > the other two shots cannot conceivably be explained away like that. They were flat out murder, so whether the first shot was or not is academic. It’s murder. Is this really how juries decide cases? They rule on individual shots? In my experience, a defendant’s _decision to shoot_, and not the number of shots or where they hit, is what is up for consideration. > [@griffin1977](#): > > this was not a federal agent conducting his duties in necessary and proper manner, so he has no immunity from state prosecution From where are you deriving your “necessary and proper” standard? Are you citing a law of some kind? I believe that you are citing the law as you wish it was. Alas, I sympathize, but that’s just not the standard at play. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/257 "2026-01-10T02:07:24Z")
> [@3AxisCtrl](#): > > I’d understood that the requirement is for an officer to have had a valid reason to believe there was a serious threat to his safety. As I understand it (IANAL) the law says he must have a valid reason to think it will _prevent_ a serious threat to his safety (in most cases, e.g. someone carrying a weapon, that’s implied but not when someone is driving a car) ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/258 "2026-01-10T02:10:43Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > From where are you deriving your “necessary and proper” standard? Are you citing a law of some kind? Yup see the link I posted above > Although federal officers do have immunity in some circumstances, that protection applies only if their actions were authorized under federal law and “necessary and proper” in fulfilling federal duties. When federal officers violate federal law or act unreasonably when carrying out their duties, they can face state charges. > **[Minnesota Could Prosecute the ICE Shooter. Trump Can’t Pardon Him.](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2026/01/is-minneapolis-ice-shooter-immune-state-prosecution-supreme-court.html)** > > Shortly after an ICE officer shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis, city leaders began looking into whether the officer had violated state criminal law. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/259 "2026-01-10T02:19:12Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > don’t think that’s the standard, and I doubt you have a cite for this Let me [Google](https://www.justia.com/criminal/defenses/self-defense/) that for you…. > courts have recognized that all individuals have the right to **protect themselves from harm** and may use reasonable force in order to do so. In this case shooting the driver does nothing to protect the cop, or anyone else, from harm. ---
**Author:** ![3AxisCtrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/3/ecd19e/32.png) [@3AxisCtrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/3AxisCtrl)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/260 "2026-01-10T02:22:45Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > As I understand it (IANAL) the law says he must have a valid reason to think it will _prevent_ a serious threat to his safety That doesn’t appear to align with the quote I posted, which requires simply a belief there’s an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. ---
**Author:** ![3AxisCtrl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/3/ecd19e/32.png) [@3AxisCtrl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/3AxisCtrl)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/261 "2026-01-10T02:32:11Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Let me [Google](https://www.justia.com/criminal/defenses/self-defense/) that for you…. > > > courts have recognized that all individuals have the right to **protect themselves from harm** and may use reasonable force in order to do so. Note that this link pertains to the general legal issue of self defense, not the narrower one of use of force by a law enforcement officer. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2026, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461/262 "2026-01-10T02:36:31Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Let me [Google](https://www.justia.com/criminal/defenses/self-defense/) that for you…. > > > courts have recognized that all individuals have the right to **protect themselves from harm** and may use reasonable force in order to do so. > > In this case shooting the driver does nothing to protect the cop, or anyone else, from harm. If the question is whether a person has a right to use deadly force in response to a person driving a car at them, the answer is “yes”. A vehicle when aimed at somebody is a deadly weapon. Unfortunately, the law is going to protect this guy, most likely. What? You thought America didn’t have a hidden undercurrent of fascism this whole time, did you? But that doesn’t mean that I am not outraged. What bothers me most is the very fact that this shooter drew his gun in the first place. I don’t see him pulling his gun because she is driving towards him. I see him pulling his gun because she is not complying with the other guy pulling on the door handle (I, personally, never hear any officer telling the driver to leave; I hear them telling her to “get the fuck out of the car”) and he then shoots when she starts forward. He had no basis to initially pull the gun. He was intending to draw on a woman who had, to that point, interfered with traffic, and wasn’t getting out of her car. (Yes, I think her lunging forward startled him. And in reaction he fired the shots. But he had no reason to draw his weapon - nobody else had done so. And I don’t think he can claim that he pulled his weapon _because she drove towards him_ - he wouldn’t have had enough time to do so). So, were I in charge, absolutely fired and then criminally prosecuted. But the reality of legal immunity for this kind of stuff is usually infuriatingly broad. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ice-shootings-in-minneapolis-1-7-2026/1026461.md?page=14)