Quote of the Day
The people who scream the loudest about government tyranny have nothing to say. The same people who fantasize about standing up to federal overreach have vanished at the precise moment federal power killed a citizen exercising a constitutional right.
This is the tell.
We have seen this movement erupt before. When Kyle Rittenhouse crossed state lines with an AR-15 and killed two people, he was transformed into a cause. He was fundraised for, defended relentlessly, and held up as proof that armed citizens are the last line of order in a chaotic world. The weapon was the point, and the violence was excused. The narrative was protected at all costs.
But when a man lawfully carrying a firearm is tackled, disarmed, and shot anyway, there is no mobilization from the same crowd. The difference is not the gun. It is who the gun is allowed to protect.
Because the gun-rights movement has never actually been about freedom. It is about hierarchy and about who gets to feel powerful and in charge. It is about whose fear counts, and whose death does not.
Dead children are acceptable collateral. Dead immigrants are invisible. Dead Black and brown men are routine. And now, apparently, dead armed citizens are still not enough to stir outrage unless they fit the right political story.
Cassie McClure
January 31, 2026
Thoughts and prayers for the Second Amendment
The tell is that McClure left out the part where Alex Petti, who is never named in the article, committed a crime and was in the process of being arrested when he was disarmed and erroneously shot during the scuffle. A criminal getting shot by law enforcement during an arrest is much different than Rittenhouse who successfully defended himself against multiple criminals’ intent on killing or seriously injuring him.
The two situations are not analogous. It has nothing to do with the political affiliation, skin color, or immigration status. It has to do with whether the people involved were law-abiding or not.
The only thing clear in the article is McClure does not have a good grasp of reality and/or is being deliberately deceptive.
They are incapable of discerning the nuance of the situation.
Somebody who starts a fight vs somebody who finishes one.
He was actually committing a minimum of two (2) crimes at the time he died.
First, MN carry law states unequivocally that you MUST carry both your permit card AND your driver’s license when you are carrying a concealed firearm. He had NEITHER of these on his person, thus committing a misdemeanor crime.
Second, he was physically interfering with federal officers in the performance of their duty. Whether he personally likes the outcome of that duty or not is irrelevant; what IS relevant is that he was committing a felony crime.
Then she continues her nonsense spewing garbage about “dead children”, and “dead immigrants”. Who? Where? Under what circumstances? I’m actually a little surprised she didn’t try to continue the new left-wing myth that La Migra is targeting 5-year-old girls when what actually happened is that;
– The girl’s father dumped her and abandoned her in the middle of the street in a MN winter, and
– The girl’s mother wants absolutely nothing to do with her, also abandoning her, and
– Officers from ICE took the girl under their wing and did their best to keep her warm, safe, fed, and amused. Evil bastards, making those parents look like orcs.
I have read where several people mentioned he was not carrying his concealed carry license. But see that as, essentially, irrelevant in the case. At the time of the shooting, law enforcement was totally unaware of this, right? So, it could not be used as justification to detain or arrest him.
And that would be a violation of state law, which ICE and other federal agents are not tasked with knowing, let alone enforcing.
Totally separate jurisdictions.
I was attempting to contradict her statement about “…a man LAWFULLY carryiing…” when in fact he was NOT.
I regret that I was not clear.
I listened to an interesting podcast with Jim Bovard, who likened this incident to Ruby Ridge. I think that’s a bit much, but after listening to his understanding of the events, if he is correct, this was a faure of training and policy as well as stupidity on the part of the mob and governments. Gun restrictions should be opposed no matter who is involved and LEOs should be trained not to panic at the sight of one. I’m extremely skeptical of the excercise of government power even if it seems to be or is obviously directionally correct. I have no idea what really happened, it’s a tragedy all around, caused by the mess The Biden administration purposely left us with.
The cases for Alex Pretti and Kyle Rittenhouse are not at all the same. That’s one thing McClure isn’t seeing (or more probably, is well aware of but also knows her readers aren’t).
Both were armed, and both attended a protest that turned violent. That’s where the similarities end.
Rittenhouse shot three men who were trying to either seize his gun or assault him with weapons of their own — no law enforcement was involved — after he made multiple attempts to retreat and gave multiple verbal and non-verbal warnings, and was ultimately found to be acting in self-defense.
Pretti attempted to physically intervene in law enforcement officers performing their duties, got into a physical altercation with those officers as they tried to (legally) arrest him for it, and got shot after they discovered he was armed. (Is he entirely to blame? I’d say no, there’s a solid case to be made that at least one of the ICE agents “jumped the gun” in shooting, but the agents probably aren’t entirely to blame, either.)
Rittenhouse made every attempt to avoid conflict and shot criminal assailants. Pretti intentionally escalated conflict and scuffled with law enforcement officers.
The two are not the same and cannot be reasonably compared. Not that that stops disingenuous (if I’m being polite) people like McClure.