Stepping back and trying to look at the bigger picture, it’s amazing that we, as a society have lost the concept of nuance or that even two things can be right at the same time.
Rarely is anything 100% right. Rarely is anything 100% certain.
But we do a lot of things that are not 100% certain everyday. We drive a car knowing well there is a chance of an accident. Even death. We fly in planes knowing the same thing. We eat food knowing there is a chance it’s not good for us.
We make decisions everyday that we know will never mean 100% success or safety.
What we try to do is minimize the danger as much as possible and maximize the chance of success.
So when we drive, there are things we do to minimize the chance on an incident. Drive the speed limit, obey traffic laws, avoid driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
But still, even if abiding by all laws and precautions, bad incidents can, and will happen.
And I try to look at incidents like we are seeing in Minnesota the same way.
Bad things are going to happen. But what is increasing the odds of them taking place?
Most Americans believe ICE is necessary. We have immigration laws, and Ice is part of that enforcement. Without enforcement, laws mean nothing. Yes, there are those who want to abolish ICE, but it’s the same as the Defund the Police idea: its not smart.
So lets accept that ICE exists and has a job to do.
We can also accept the politics at work. Is Trump pushing more people to Minnesota as he’s mad about actions by the Governor/Sanctuary Cities/Political opponents?
Yes. It’s a dick move.
But is a state passing laws prohibiting local law enforcement from working with Ice the same way they had for years prior to Trump? Yes. Its political, and it’s a dick move too.
Both actions increase the likelihood of an incident. A shooting, death, car crash, etc. If Trump didn’t increase the number of ICE agents, the chance of an incident are lower. Also, if the state let ICE and local law enforcement and prisons work together, the chances of an incident are lower.
For years, and still in most states, when someone who is undocumented/illegal is arrested, ICE was notified. ICE would let the police know if they wanted them held to be picked up. No issues.
When you remove that system, now ICE has to go into neighborhoods to get these people, and they don’t want to be gotten. ICE doesn’t know if they have a weapon, or what other issues will exist.
This wasn’t a concern when they were picking up them up already in police custody, as was done under Obama.
It can also be true that there are going to be bad actors in ICE, just like there are bad actors in police or any law enforcement.
So that clearly increases the chance of an incident.
But, we also know that residents are taking additional steps to further increase the chance of an incident.
Deliberately protesting outside the hotel where ICE agents are trying to sleep, deliberately blaring loud music, smashing windows, banging drums.
Does this decrease or increase the chances on an incident the next day?
Clearly, it increases it.
Does an organized group of residents creating a system to map out where ICE is and call on people to show up, blowing whistles to let those ICE is trying to apprehend escape while calling in other protesters increase or decrease the chance of an incident?
Clearly, increase. Does the nonstop whistles in the ears of ICE, something that can easily disorient someone, help increase or decrease the chance of an incident?
Clearly, it increases it.
So as I have left leaning readers yelling at me saying “how can you not see this as a murder?” as if how they see it is the only way, my reply is simple: I don’t see it as anything but a tragedy until I look at all the mitigating factors, all the areas that increased the chances of an incident like this taking place.
And I will take issue with those encouraging actions that increase the likelihood of an incident then playing the victim when one does take place.
All of these things can be true at the same time. Trump can be an ass increasing ICE presence. Waltz can be an ass stopping local police from working with ICE. Democratic leaders can be an ass for not actively stopping their followers from interfering in ICE. So-called protesters can be an ass for trying to make a stressful job much harder, for deliberately trying to deprive law enforcement of sleep, and for aggressively trying to interfere.
I’d like to assume that no one wants to see a tragedy. But its not so clear that is true. In politics, tragedy can mean opportunity, and some are complicit in trying to increase the tension and stress to the point that a tragedy takes place.
Contrary to what some have convinced themselves, being against ICE does not make you morally superior to those who support it. Wanting to Defund the Police didn’t make you more caring or empathetic than those who support law enforcement.
So I’m sorry if I don’t immediately see something the way you do. But I’ve covered the game too long to not know well the roles each party plays in these incidents taking place. Supporting the actions that deliberately increase the odds of a tragedy happening makes one complicit in the actual incident.
