I originally posted an abridged version of this article on Facebook earlier this week, but took it down a couple days later after further analysis and investigation. Below is an edited version of that original post with more information and detail that I feel is important to shed light on.
After reviewing video footage from several different sources showing the altercation between Alex Pretti and ICE agents in Minnesota, I feel compelled to respond.
As a proponent of the second amendment, I am also a proponent of the first amendment. Below is an AI Overview of the first amendment:
“The First Amendment simplifies to protecting five core freedoms from government interference: Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, and the right to Petition the government. It ensures you can believe what you want (or not believe), speak your mind (even unpopular ideas), publish news, gather peacefully, and ask the government to fix problems, but it doesn’t apply to private entities like employers or social media companies, and some speech (like threats or incitement) isn’t protected. First Amendment: Protects the right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This enables legal, non-violent organization against government actions, distinguishing it from insurrection”
With that said, once you cross the line of gathering peacefully at a protest and engaging with federal, state or local law enforcement, you are now opening yourself up to serious legal issues, or worse. If you threaten a law enforcement officer(s) (LEO), verbally or physically, and/or impede an active investigation, and those LEOs feel their lives are at risk, they have every legal right to neutralize the threat you pose either by non-lethal, or lethal use of force.
Eleven days before Pretti was shot and killed by ICE agents in Minnesota last week, Pretti was seen, by several sources at another protest against ICE. Based upon video footage and photos captured by nearby spectators, Pretti was not “peacefully protesting”. He was aggressive, confrontational and at one point, seen kicking the brake light on an SUV occupied by federal agents. Reports indicate that he sustained a broken rib from a scuffle with agents on that day, however, I’m not sure how much truth there is to that claim. Is it possible? Yes. However, as of this writing, I haven’t seen any substantiated proof of that.
Alex Pretti appears to spit at ICE, kick out tail light in previous Minneapolis confrontation before he was shot by ICE agents
Now lets fast forward to this past weekend where Pretti is present at another demonstration against ICE before he was fatally shot.
Saturday, January 24th – Alex Pretti is Shot and Killed by Federal Agents
Initially, Pretti started out by directing traffic in the middle of the road while holding his cell phone up with one hand as ICE agents approached. He did not appear to be threatening the lives of those agents.
A woman was pushed to the curb. Pretti attempted to pull her up and that’s when the chaos began. One ICE agent uses pepper spray to subdue both Pretti and the woman, however that agent continues to advance toward Pretti even as Pretti is retreating to the curb/ground. At that point, in my opinion, the agent should have backed off unless Pretti gave him a legitimate reason to continue his advancement, and eventual assault.
This is the point where some confusion begins to set in.
Pretti possessed a concealed carry permit and was legally armed with a Sig Sauer P320 semi-automatic pistol, chambered in 9mm. Reports indicate, he had two fully loaded magazines on him. Now it’s not clear if one of those magazines includes the one loaded in the pistol, or if he had one in the pistol and two others thus actually having three loaded magazines on his person. The pistol was securely holstered under his t-shirt in his waistband on his back.
With that said, he was perfectly within his right to be carrying a firearm at a “peaceful protest”, contrary to what FBI Director Kash Patel publicly stated after the incident:
“you cannot bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple,”
To FBI Director Kash Patel: You are wrong. It’s not that simple. You are correct in that, certain states: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut , District of Columbia , Florida: Open carry prohibited, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Washington: Open carry prohibited, prohibit firearms at protests and public assemblies, however Minnesota isn’t one of them. Pretti was lawfully carrying a firearm at that protest and he did not remove that firearm and threaten federal agents with it. Spin it however you want, but I find it deplorable when you, an elected official, comes out with a blanket-statement that is incorrect in order to justify a situation that could have and should have, been handled much differently.
Pretti never once removed his pistol from its holster. It’s unclear how agents discovered that he was armed. It wasn’t until several agents descended upon him – one agent dressed in gray, pulled Pretti’s pistol out of its holster, and retreated with it in-hand – which was the right thing to do. As the agent in gray wass removing Pretti’s pistol, the other agent wearing blue jeans, is seen removing his pistol from its holster and aiming it at Pretti’s back – AFTER he had been disarmed, face down toward the pavement.
At this point – at least 5 agents are holding Pretti down – one agent has a foot on Pretti’s lower back – as it appears Pretti is trying to resist them.
Alex Pretti was not Without Fault
Upon further research, reports indicate that Pretti was a member of a local neighborhood chat group called SignalICE. Members of that chat group were apparently told NOT to bring any form of identification to an ICE protest. That is an issue.
In the State of New Hampshire, I am not required by law, to hold a Concealed Carry Permit (CCP). I can openly carry, or carry concealed in the state without any kind of permit. However, years ago, I voluntarily applied for a CCP from my local police department which along with my ID, remains on me at all times – especially if I’m carrying a firearm. If I’m engaged in an altercation where my life is at risk, and I have no other choice but to use lethal force, I need to be able to clearly identify myself to law enforcement, when they arrive. The CCP has the potential to provide a degree of aid in my defense should I be in a legal situation after having to use lethal force.
Along with carrying identification and CCP at all times, I’m also trained in situational awareness, making sound judgement and rational decisions under stressful situations.
Practicing Situational Awareness: Its Benefits and How to Train Yourself
I do not walk with my nose in my cell phone with ear-buds in my ears while crossing the street or walking down the sidewalk. Instead, my head is on a swivel. I am observing everyone and everything from all directions. I’m watching people enter and exit doorways. I’m listening to voices, traffic, etc. In that moment, I am aware of my surroundings and everything that’s occurring around me. That is a huge part of being a responsible owner of a firearm.
If I’m walking on a busy sidewalk and see a group of questionable people further-down taunting passersby – I have a choice to make. Continue on my path and risk entering a potential confrontation with that group, or cross the street and walk on the opposite side – avoiding any confrontation? The correct answer is to cross the street and avoid any confrontation. If I continue approaching that group of people, they confront me, and I’m forced to defend my life by use of lethal force, that decision can be used against me in a court of law by any savvy District Attorney. If a DA can prove to a jury that I had alternatives, but still chose not to pursue one of them, I could be legally screwed. To own a firearm requires that you avoid any confrontational situation by any means necessary – if at all possible.
That includes showing up at a “peaceful protest” armed with a concealed firearm. While you may not have any intent on using that firearm, you cannot predict how that protest is going to evolve. This was Pretti’s second fatal mistake.
Now, as per the United States Constitution, I have a right to peacefully protest, and a right to be armed (depending on what state I’m living in). However, once I engage with law enforcement physically (such as grabbing one of them by the shoulder) or if I try to stop their investigation or I refuse to follow their commands, or resist arrest, I have now crossed a line with little chance of coming back from. I am now, no longer a “peaceful” protester. I’ve become an antagonist – an armed antagonist which is what Pretti became. At that point, I have made the conscious decision to physically impede an investigation – or mission, and a LEO has every right to remove me as a threat by any means necessary to achieve that investigation or mission.
Alex Pretti confronts an ICE agent in Minnesota
Is ICE to Blame or the Intel They’re Fed?
The success of any law enforcement investigation, or a military mission is dependent upon several factors. One factor that plays a major role – is the quality of the intel given to the individuals tasked with carrying out that mission.
In at least a couple recent incidences, the wrong person was detained by ICE and deported from the country. While you may not agree with what ICE agents are doing – they are charged with carrying out a mission. That mission is dependent upon the intel given to the agents to carry out. Do I blame ICE for detaining and deporting the wrong people? No. I blame whoever the person or organization is for compiling that intel and giving it to ICE. They are the ones who should be held responsible.
So, feel free to exercise your first amendment rights. If you feel the need to peacefully protest against what ICE is doing – have at it – just realize, they’re only charged with carrying out the mission that was assigned to them. They’re not responsible for determining who is or isn’t, an illegal alien. If you make it a point to get in their way, antagonize them, or resist their efforts to detain you – you are now legally at fault.
This was Pretti’s third mistake.
In the video footage obtained, it shows that he’s fighting to remain on his knees, and quite possibly get back up on his feet. The ICE agents are preventing that from happening.  He crossed the line from peaceful protestor, to an antagonist who brought a loaded firearm into a combative situation with law enforcement, and then once detained, continued to resist them until they shot him.
So I have to ask – what further threat did Pretti pose in order to justify several agents firing approximately 10 rounds into/toward Pretti – 3 of which entered his back? What exactly are the rules of engagement that federal law enforcement officers are trained in and expected to follow? Because either those ROEs need to be reviewed, or the training process of federal law enforcement officers needs to be examined.
After the shooting occurred, President Trump made the following public statement:
“I don’t like any shooting. I don’t like it…but I don’t like it when somebody goes into a protest and he’s got a very powerful, fully loaded gun with two magazines loaded up with bullets also. That doesn’t play good either.”
To President Trump:Â Let’s be clear about something – Pretti had a 9mm pistol loaded with 9mm rounds. He didn’t have an AR-15 chambered in 5.56 or .308 (Kyle Rittenhouse). He didn’t have a long range bolt-action rifle chambered in .338 Lapua. He had a full-size 9mm pistol which MILLIONS of Americans own and legally carry everyday. A “slight” exaggeration on your part?
As for the shock of him carrying two fully loaded magazines – when you actually take several firearms training classes as well as active shooter classes over several years, you learn that not carrying a second magazine on your person, can be a very serious detriment if you find yourself in the middle of an active shooter situation. Again, Pretti – was no different than any other lawfully armed citizen in the street. His firearm was holstered, he never unholstered it, nor did he “brandish” it as Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, wrongfully stated. Federal agents disarmed him – which they have every right to do, and then shot him in the back. How those federal agents handled the situation after disarming Pretti – is extremely suspect, and that is on your watch…
What should Pretti have done differently?
Well, the easiest answer is – not to have put himself in that situation in the first place and certainly not with a loaded firearm. However, let’s assume he was unarmed – he didn’t have any type of weapon on him at all. He just became confrontational with law enforcement and they reacted. At that point – he should have laid flat on the ground – face first, hands behind his back – and a much different outcome would probably have been achieved. Instead, he paid for his poor decisions with his life.
In my unprofessional opinion, ICE is not without fault here. Even though, I wasn’t there amidst the chaos, and I wasn’t in the shoes of those agents, I have to believe that with better training under stress and greater use of non-lethal action such as hand-cuffs or zip ties – a less fatal outcome could have been achieved without the loss of life.
