Quote of the Day
The Renee Good case was clear-cut self-defense. Objectively, she hit the accelerator when her tires were pointed directly at the officer. If the officer had complete omnipotence he would still have been justified in using deadly force.
The Pretti case is different. It still looks like lawful self-defense, but in this case, if the officers were omnipotent, they would NOT have fired. But from the perception of the individual officer in the moment, all they know is that they are dealing with an agitator who has 1) aggressively confronted a federal law enforcement officer 2) unlawfully interfered in an arrest of a third party and 3) violently resisted arrest. And then the officer hears “gun gun gun.” We don’t know exactly what that officer was seeing at the time; maybe the body cam video will be probative, maybe not. But the officer is allowed to rely on the perceptions of his colleagues combined with his own, so if he heard “gun gun gun” and saw Pretti reach for his waist that’s a lawful shoot even if the officer was mistaken.
Will Chamberlain @willchamberlain
Posted on X, January 26, 2026
He meant “omniscient”, not “omnipotent”.
There is at least one video I have seen that appears to show the officer who took Petti’s gun had an AD with it as he was walking away. This, as you might expect, appears to have initiated the shooting of Petti.
If true, it will almost certainly result in it being a lawful, tragic shooting.
“There is at least one video I have seen that appears to show the officer who took Petti’s gun had an AD with it as he was walking away. This, as you might expect, appears to have initiated the shooting of Petti.
If true, it will almost certainly result in it being a lawful, tragic shooting.”
This opens a door to ***horrible*** abuses, even if all the officers involved in *this specific case* acted in good faith.
Of course, the problem is that I can’t think of any way to close it without opening another door for ***horrible*** abuses, just in the other direction.
Ugh. At least the officer who had the AD should be prosecuted for it. That would be *SOMETHING* to make it less “get to shoot people for free”.
Horrible abuses in the other direction is exactly what the Left wants.
Excellent point. But it does require two or more conspirators to be reliable. Which makes it less likely to be kept a secret.
Prosecuted for what?
He was in a violent confrontation with an armed person. He disarmed that person by taking from him a weapon. The agent is not expected to be an expert on the use of every weapon in existence. But we have no evidence that he attempted to manipulate that weapon in any manner.
What we see is him leaving the immediate vicinity of the suspect and the struggle. Smart – get the weapon out of play. And then it *maybe* discharges. Again – what are you going to prosecute him for? Grabbing the weapon incorrectly? That would immediately end any police officer attempting to keep a weapon away from a suspect – they will just have to shoot them instead. Hello law of unintended consequences…..
“Prosecuted for what?”
In most jurisdictions in the country, an accidental discharge in city limits is a crime. Literally, prosecute him for the AD.
That is what would happen to any citizen who had an AD for essentially any reason in most “blue” jurisdictions, after all.
Yes, if it is truly all in good faith, that sucks. But the other option (the guy is dead through no direct fault of his own, and NO ONE pays any penalty for it) is worse.
” That would immediately end any police officer attempting to keep a weapon away from a suspect – they will just have to shoot them instead.”
The penalty for AD is much, much lower than for shooting someone.
In most jurisdictions there is a penalty for running red lights and speeding – but law officers get to do those things in the course of their duties……
The ‘penalty’ you propose would result in more people being shot because the police would not even touch the guns the people have – and then the people make the slightest move with their hand towards the gun – boom. Justified shooting.You aren’t thinking that through very well.
“the guy is dead through no direct fault of his own”
The guy is dead because he was flipping stupid, went to fight with the cops while carrying a gun and got into a situation where once the cops knew he had a gun, there was an extremely limited set of movements he could make that would not result in him getting shot. Hint – flailing around on the ground fighting a bunch of cops almost always results in your hands moving in such a way that a reasonable person would think you were reaching for that gun that that reasonable person just saw on your hip.
This shooting is awful – but I disagree with the quote in the post – there is even less question of whether this shooting was justified. There is very little doubt, legally. that a reasonable officer in that pile could have had a legitimate fear that justified the use of deadly force. There are multiple supreme court cases elucidating almost that exact scenario.
“The guy is dead because he was flipping stupid”
Oh, absolutely. He definitely did the FA, then he FO.
But *IF* the facts are ordered as we currently believe (the cops *took possession* of his gun), then this shoot looks a LOT worse.
And *IF* there was an AD that lead to his shooting, *HE* didn’t do the thing that caused his own shooting. I would like perps getting shot to be their own reason they were shot just absolutely as often as possible. Anything else opens up abuses.
An AD the perp *didn’t do* should not justify him getting shot, and that goes about quintuple if the one who did the AD is one of the police officers – “One of my teammates fired a gun, so I am justified in killing you” is bad. That’s a ***VERY VERY VERY *** bad way to run things.
Might be the least bad (certainly, there are actors in this tragedy actively trying to make it worse than that), but I hope not. I hope we can find something that sucks less than that.
The video of the AD is an AI fake.
https://www.patreon.com/posts/age-of-ai-when-149474980
It’s tragic that only two traitors were killed.
If the officer who handled Petti’s pistol during the process of detaining / arresting him had a negligent discharge with it, they bear some responsibility. At least a letter of reprimand in their file for mishandling a pistol in an unsafe manner so that the negligent discharge occurred. Petti bears the vast majority of responsibility for his multiple poor decisions. If you’re going to protest, do it peacefully. If you think you may have hands put on you by an officer during civil unrest leave your firearms at home or secured in your vehicle unless things are so dire that you PLAN to use them in a conflict against officers. In which case you’re a moron because you brought a handgun to a rifle fight
“leave your firearms at home”
I assume you agree, then, that all these conservatives bringing guns to protests were in the wrong too, correct?
https://zeteo.com/p/conservatives-ice-guns-trump-minneapolis-list-second-ammendment
They were peaceful protests, as far as the armed protesters participating went, so being armed was fine
Yah, those J6 protests were super peaceful.
https://nypost.com/2021/01/07/who-are-the-four-who-died-in-the-dc-protest-at-the-capitol/
“Yah, those J6 protests were super peaceful.”
Far more than the “mostly peaceful protests” by the left all the previous year.
But that’s irrelevant to the point, as the J6 people did indeed NOT HAVE GUNS.
Despite what the FBI itself has called “the largest operation in their history”, they managed to charge 2 people with *having* firearms that day, one from someone noticing the shape of it beneath the clothes and one from stuff that was said to a family member.
No interactions with the police, no brandishing, no threatening, NOTHING. They looked HARD, and that’s all they could find.
I get that J6 is your magic words comeback on anything related to “protesting”, no matter how ridiculous, but in this case, it fits *even worse than usual*.
Also, that link you left is from January 7th and, to put it charitably, has several factual errors. It is not a good reference, from a purely factual standpoint.
For only the most egregious error, Rosanne Boyland didn’t die from being trampled, she was beaten to death by a police officer. The video of her being beaten unconscious *and then beaten some more* is public. The officer in question committed murder, no question, but hey, it was a MAGA person, so no complaints from the likes of you, eh?
How many have to be killed before the left does not gain an advantage from each death by celebrating them as martyrs?
Ask the Muslim jihadis…. Seems like it’s a pretty high number.
I’m guessing you were fishing for this reply. I will oblige although I strongly disagree with the conclusion; “One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic.” Joseph Stalin, Communist mass murderer.
Mi General Augusto Pinochet says it should only require helicopter rides for less than 100,000 totalitarian scumbags to clean up the current mess if the proper selections are made
“Lawful but Tragic”.
Not really.
He was a communist enemy combat that went out looking for a fight. Armed.
Against law enforcement that were executing lawful orders.
I’m glad they got him before he got around to doing something really stupid. And the more I think on it. The more this whole kerfuffle seems “Pretti stupid”.
As he’s a good commie now.
People desirous of removing illegal immigrants would be better served if Petti had been humiliated. Perhaps given three seconds of attention and left whimpering on the ground and covered head to toe with a marking dye and pepper spray. Or perhaps prosecuted, convicted, paid a heavy fine, and spent many months in jail. Losing his job and suffering lifetime economic harm. As a dead martyr, he is a motivator to others to increase the violence and makes the agents targets for suffering economic harm and increasing danger.
“Perhaps given three seconds of attention and left whimpering on the ground and covered head to toe with a marking dye and pepper spray. Or perhaps prosecuted, convicted, paid a heavy fine, and spent many months in jail. Losing his job and suffering lifetime economic harm”
The first would be just as good as martyrdom, as far as the left is concerned, and the other two options are off the table, in terms of actual things that might happen in Minnesota today.
The prosecution would be by the feds.
The first option would be considered just by far more people. Also, it does not impair the effectiveness of the feds. It probably would even improve their morale.
“The prosecution would be by the feds.”
That helps with the “charging” part, but the track record of the federal judicial system, especially in the “blue” areas (where this would have to happen) is not much better, if at all.
Agreed, 100%.
But that didn’t happen. Better or worse. What happened, happened.
We know communists don’t stop. And if he isn’t dead, he will be plotting your/our deaths.
There is no living with these people. They won’t leave you alone. They won’t stop till they’re stopped.
Martyrs or no.
If he wasn’t put down by the police, he would have been put down by some patriot later.
To me it’s all about timing.
And as for dead communists, the sooner the better.
Assuming being “put down” is the morally justified “solution,” then it should be done by someone who does not get caught. The conspiracy theories and doubt about false flag versus “Gestopo” responsibility would mute the advantage given to the left over his death.