One problem is only giving them 6 weeks training…
A Deeply Fractured US
- Thread starter BeyondTheNow
- Start date
FSTO
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,103
- Points
- 1,210
And turning them into aggressive thugs who seem to have only one gear when interacting with the public.
- Reaction score
- 1,509
- Points
- 1,160
True, but they are dealing with criminals on a daily basis. On the other hand, the majority of people being detained by DHS/ICE agents are not criminals. Depending on the reports about a third of people of people arrested by ICE don't even have a criminal record! And of the other two-thirds, only about 5% have a violent criminal record.
In reality, no ICE agent has every been killed by an immigrant and the last ICE agent killed by criminals was on February 15, 2011, when Special Agent Jaime Jorge Zapata and Special Agent Victor Avila were driving between Monterrey and Mexico City when gunmen stopped their car and opened fire on both agents. Zapata was fatally shot; Avila was seriously wounded in the attack but recovered from his injuries.
5% of People Detained By ICE Have Violent Convictions
About a third of people arrested by ICE had no criminal record, new data shows
The allegation that cartels are placing bounties comes from DHS and I take anything coming out of DHS/ Kristi Noem with a grain of salt. There is no solid evidence that cartels have put bounties on ICE/DHS agents. Below is a Guardian article that interviews a former Cartel member and former DEA agents and they all say its unlikely that Cartels would target law enforcement officers because the resulting backlash.Examples please!
None specific. It's pretty common knowledge the viciousness and determination these cartel gangs use in reprisals. ICE and DHS have already been victims of contracts.
"The federal agency alleges cartels are offering $2,000 for intelligence gathering and doxing of agents, $5,000–$10,000 for kidnapping or non-lethal assaults on standard ICE/CBP officers and up to $50,000 for the assassination of high-ranking officials.
Cartels issuing bounties up to $50,000 for hits on ICE, CBP agents: DHS
Drug cartels have "disseminated a structured bounty program to incentivize violence against federal personnel," according to a press release from DHS.abcnews.go.com
Gangs like the Latin Kings have also deployed "spotters" armed with firearms and radio communications to provide the real-time movements of CBP and ICE agents, according to DHS."
"These criminal networks have issued explicit instructions to U.S.-based sympathetics, including street gangs in Chicago, to monitor, harass, and assassinate federal agents. Specific details from ongoing investigations include:
Bounties Originating From Mexico Offered to Shoot ICE and CBP Officers in Chicago | Homeland Security
DHS obtained credible intelligence indicating that Mexican criminals, in coordination with domestic extremist groups have placed targeted bounties on ICE and CBP personnel.www.dhs.gov
Spotter Networks: In neighborhoods like Chicago's Pilsen and Little Village, gang members affiliated with groups such as the Latin Kings have deployed "spotters" on rooftops equipped with firearms and radio communications. These individuals track ICE and CBP movements in real-time, relaying coordinates. This surveillance has enabled ambushes and disruptions during routine enforcement actions, including recent raids under Operation Midway Blitz.
Tiered Bounty System: Cartels have disseminated a structured bounty program to incentivize violence against federal personnel, with payouts escalating based on rank and action taken:
$2,000 for gathering intelligence or doxxing agents (including photos and family details).
$5,000–$10,000 for kidnapping or non-lethal assaults on standard ICE/CBP officers.
Up to $50,000 for the assassination of high-ranking officials."
Now, I might be wrong, but I've never heard of beat cops being exposed to this level of threat. Given an agent's identity is given a specific bounty, I have zero problem with them being masked. Especially when it is not against the law.
Local street gangs are another matter. In fact, last October, a member of the Latin Kings was arrested on allegations of placing a bounty on a senior DHS official.
Sheinbaum denies allegation of Cartel Bounties
Latin Kings gang member arrested
True, while there is no Federal law, some states like California have enacted laws preventing LEO from covering there faces. However, there is starting to be pushback for the reasons below (AI generated):"Can officers wear masks and hide their face?
Is it Legal for Law Enforcement to Hide their Identity in the U.S.?
Guide to Rules About Police and Law Enforcement Wearing Masks & Using Unmarked Vehicles in the United States Federal and local police, including ICE and DHS, have increasingly worn masks and driven unmarked vehicles during immigration raids and tactical operations. Agencies justify this based on...lawsoup.org
There is currently no federal law that requires law enforcement to wear uniforms or show their faces during arrests."
Why It's Controversial:
- Erosion of Trust: Masked officers create an "us vs. them" feeling, harming community relations, according to critics.
- Accountability: It becomes difficult to identify officers for public oversight and to hold them accountable for misconduct.
- Public Fear: Unidentified officers using force can be frightening and intimidating, notes The Guardian.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 17,472
- Points
- 1,260
Does your post mean 2/3s or people taken by ice have a criminal record, violent or not ?
If the are illegal aliens would they all technically be criminals?
Just speaking for Canada I have no issue with the deportation of people who are wrongly here, and I doubly have no issue if they have committed other crimes, violent or not.
- Reaction score
- 6,098
- Points
- 1,160
'Barefoot and pregnant' used to be standard. Oh wait . . . she's gay, which social media is all over. Fruits of living in sin.
Which is a fine mantra, but it also starts with not treating every human interaction during your shift like an army of occupation. People have rights, whether you (an ICE agent) like it or not.
What I find interesting, particularly in a land of 'stand your ground' that, when a bunch of unidentifiable dudes pointing weapons and yelling 'get out of your car' under one set of circumstances are celebrated for resisting but under others are expected to acquiesce.
I honestly don't know the authority of US federal agents to do traffic stops, their powers of arrest and detention, etc. In most if not all US jurisdictions, regular law enforcement need probably cause for vehicle stops (similar police authority up here is broader). I suspect they cannot simply do round-ups and sift out who they really want after the fact.
They (he) might try to argue his life was endanger, and he might or might not be successful. It can't be ignored that the whole set of circumstances might have been predicated by an illegal act, and I suspect it wasn't on the part of the victim.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 1,509
- Points
- 1,160
From what I gleaned is that 1/3 have no criminal record; 2/3 have a minor criminal records (e.g. traffic violations), and of that 2/3, only 5% have violent criminal records. And yes, technically being in a country illegally would make you a criminal.
- Reaction score
- 8,693
- Points
- 1,160
You reject an official government document, out of hand, but accept the word of a former cartel member as proof? It sounds like your opposition is based, not on proof, but on your distaste for the current administration. Your assertion that there is no such thing as a bounty list, based on dubious sources, is not fact, it's opinion.
I posted some stats awhile back, generated by AI and was roundly pillored for it. It appears AI is not a respected source for use here.
Federal law trumps state law. Newsom, et al, can pass all the laws they want. Feds can effectively ignore them.
Bottom line, at the moment, no law exists stopping LEO from wearing face coverings. So, they can continue to wear them. People might not like it, can pick their favorite windmill to tilt at, and raise unholy hell. Doesn’t make a lick of difference.
And before I get too involved, that's where I stand. Take it for what it's worth. I'm out.
- Reaction score
- 3,395
- Points
- 1,040
Keep in mind the US for many decades encouraged illegal immigration and workers because it was a cheap source of labour.
Many of these people were literally paying taxes for a system they couldn’t be part of, working jobs most Americans wanted nothing to do with for less money than what is legal to pay a American.
Trump has decided to end that system in the most unfair and violent manner possible. Realistically they should have offered citizenship to those who had been there a while with no criminal record and contributed well slowly working out others.
Instead we have armed masked thugs arresting American citizens and disappearing them to other states with no due process. If you need to always wear a mask to do your job because of the risk of being identified maybe your not working a particularly honourable job and should reconsider your life decisions.
- Reaction score
- 2,795
- Points
- 1,090
seen this. Accurate?
Yes, ICE Is Law Enforcement—But Their Authority Has Limits You Need To Know
ICE is federal law enforcement with arrest authority—but ICE agents can't enter your home without a judge's warrant. Learn what ICE can and cannot do.
allaboutlawyer.com
also this
and this
again accurate?
- Reaction score
- 11,137
- Points
- 1,040
People imitating agents is a legitimate worry, but subject to common sense. When there are a lot of them, and they are hanging around, and particularly if some activists are convinced enough to be blowing whistles and horns and putting out messages on social media reporting the presence of ICE agents, they are probably ICE agents.
Every interference with law enforcement is a set of circumstances. Bear in mind that some of these people aren't just making it up on the fly - there are suggested TTPs activists circulate for how to "de-arrest" people in custody. All the attention is going to be focused on the ones that end badly to the discredit of the administration, so it'll be difficult to judge how much risk is being created by activists and mouthpieces - particularly those who have plenty of advice to offer to others, and not so much intent to risk themselves.
- Reaction score
- 11,137
- Points
- 1,040
"the US" lumps all the people who objected all along and wanted the laws as written enforced, in with all the people who for ideological or economic reasons wanted the immigration. That's not an accurate description of the situation.
All true, and all beside the point. That people break laws or allow laws to be broken is usually because its to some benefit.
In 1986 the US (Reagan and Congress) did an amnesty deal (IRCA) which was supposed to be followed by increased enforcement (eg. crackdown on employers of illegal immigrants). The people who wanted only the amnesty part got what they wanted, and the enforcement was allowed to just go away. There's dispute about whether or in what way Reagan regretted the latter - he was definitely pro-amnesty - but any remarks he made were essentially to only a few people. (Obviously anyone who claims he never said anything could not be physically present for everything Reagan ever subsequently said.) Others, however, accurately characterize the bones of the deal as amnesty today for enforcement tomorrow, and they rightly note the deal was essentially broken. In 2012 Obama did DACA after earlier stating he didn't believe he had constitutional authority to do such a thing. So the situation for people who object to immigration law not being enforced is that they want to see enforcement well established before talking about amnesty. There is no good faith on which they can rely.
Tolerance of illegal immigration has become such an embedded part of some people's ideology that they vilify every aspect of enforcement and actively work to thwart enforcement of US federal law. That influences others, some of whom act.
At least some of the reported incidents of attacks on ICE agents by third parties, with or without vehicles, are likely to be true. Suppose the government orders de-masking. Suppose one is identified, and someone shows up at his house, and does something violent or even merely threatening. What then? Acceptable risk? But families are involved; it isn't just the officer facing the risk. Maybe they push through, prosecute the offender(s), and the risk drops off. Fine.
But one thing activists want is for agents to apprehend personal risk sufficiently to refuse - in effect, to nullify enforcement of federal law. It's a bad idea to allow that on legal principle, and an even worse one politically. The people who favour enforcement will be elevated to new levels of anger and thus even less interested in compromise on anything.
FSTO
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,103
- Points
- 1,210
I cannot believe we are actually debating the merits of ICE’s actions of shooting that woman who was no danger to the agent. Or the idea of ICE swarming a place with the attitude, “arrest them all and let God sort them out!”. Would we be fine with the RCMP striking at a high school in Brampton to arrest the parents of a couple of students who may or may not have come to the country illegally. Are we really all that stupid?
- Reaction score
- 8,693
- Points
- 1,160
So you're OK with 10-20 million illegal aliens invading the US?
Just for shiggles, Trump isn't the record holder. His current score, for this term, is about 600,000 forceful deportations and 1.6 million self deportees.
| President | Returns | Removals |
|—————-|————-|————|
| Reagan | 7,992,746 | 100,000 |
| H.W. Bush | 4,728,471 | 200,000 |
| Clinton | 10,000,905 | 870,000 |
| W. Bush | 10,039,724 | 2,000,000 |
| Obama | 2,000,000 | 3,000,000 |
| Trump | 500,000 | 2,000,000 |
| Biden | 100,000 | 500,000 |
Deportations Under US Presidents: Surprising Statistics - Infographic Website
Explore deportation statistics under U.S. presidents, highlighting policy shifts and their impact on numbers and community effects.
infographicsite.com
I'm assuming these numbers mean that none of these administrations were very keen on the cheap labour either. Much more so than Trump is.
The link provides some clarity to your cursory allegations.
- Reaction score
- 3,395
- Points
- 1,040
Hiding one’s face well doing standard government work is wrong. It is like drafting laws and not having any politician sign their name to it or giving who voted where. Or having a judge sentence someone but not attaching their name or the names of who is charged and convicted. Accountability is critical in a free and democratic society, unaccountable masked agents is a feature of Soviet society not ours.
There is slight risk to being identified (certainly not much in the grand scheme of things), but that comes with the territory. Just like there is risk in the road rager behind me identifying where I live, it is all part of life.
The US has a huge issue with extremists on both sides doing wrong. Between mailing pizzas to judges and families to show they know where they live, to actively killing politicians who they disagree with (both democratic and republican).
As to people not agreeing with Federal law, that is part of democracy, you don’t get to just rule from above and expect the plebs to fall in line. It isn’t a dictatorship and if there is enough pushback against what ever it is you’re doing, maybe it should be changed.
- Reaction score
- 11,137
- Points
- 1,040
There's more to it than that.
Also debatable are the risks of interfering with law enforcement. The reasonable expectations of restraint. Whether it's acceptable to nullify law enforcement. Whether it's politically wise or unwise to nullify law enforcement. What effect overwrought emotions or mere political ideology are having on the conduct of people on both sides. Etc.
The shooting might be wrongful, or it might be tragic. Most people have already decided, but there is not uniform agreement.
I'm almost always in the position of arguing for more police restraint and that authorities ought to cut dissidents more slack; it's unusual for me to be providing support for blunt force law enforcement and what has me over that fence is the peculiarity that what has set it all in motion is attempts to nullify federal law on a massive scale. I've (long ago) argued that the tragedies at Waco and Ruby Ridge were avoidable and ought to have been avoided. There are, conversely, people who believe everything the government did in those two cases was reasonable and necessary, and that everything the government is doing now is unreasonable and unnecessary. My point isn't to litigate all these and more; my point is that it's often easy to argue authorities ought to have conducted themselves differently and also that people on the wrong side of the law are responsible for outcomes.
- Reaction score
- 26,708
- Points
- 1,360
So you're OK with 10-20 million illegal aliens invading the US?
Just for shiggles, Trump isn't the record holder. His current score, for this term, is about 600,000 forceful deportations and 1.6 million self deportees.
| President | Returns | Removals |
|—————-|————-|————|
| Reagan | 7,992,746 | 100,000 |
| H.W. Bush | 4,728,471 | 200,000 |
| Clinton | 10,000,905 | 870,000 |
| W. Bush | 10,039,724 | 2,000,000 |
| Obama | 2,000,000 | 3,000,000 |
| Trump | 500,000 | 2,000,000 |
| Biden | 100,000 | 500,000 |
Deportations Under US Presidents: Surprising Statistics - Infographic Website
Explore deportation statistics under U.S. presidents, highlighting policy shifts and their impact on numbers and community effects.
I'm assuming these numbers mean that none of these administrations were very keen on the cheap labour either. Much more so than Trump is.
The link provides some clarity to your cursory allegations.
What data would full a fourth column, “deaths under deportation custody?”
- Reaction score
- 11,137
- Points
- 1,040
Right, and legitimate civil disobedience means accepting consequences. If you carry disobedience to the point they say, "Fine, you're under arrest", you hold out your wrists. If you don't, you should expect to be responsible for most of what follows if it escalates. If you do something provocative before that point, you're also at least partly responsible depending on how your actions could be interpreted. So it has to be done responsibly, and by that I mean that as much as police have responsibilities they're expected to fulfill, so do ordinary people.
There are people who are at fault for specific things, and people who could reasonably have prevented something.
As for the notion that authorities and their delegates don't get to just rule from above (pass laws and enforce them), amen. I could wish it were so. But that's not the standard position of politicians, police, lawyers, and judges, except for those few whose political priors take precedence.
- Reaction score
- 11,137
- Points
- 1,040
Search "deaths in US custody". Lots of recent ICE-focused articles.
For general comparison: here for recent years up to 2023.
- Reaction score
- 26,708
- Points
- 1,360
Not deportation specific.
- Reaction score
- 11,137
- Points
- 1,040
"deaths in US custody" (no mention of ICE or deportation or any other such thing in my search terms) gave me an AI-assisted result and four other results specifically mentioning or about ICE before the general link I provided.
The information is there for those who actually want it.
Similar threads
