ICE cold

The Dirty Job of Immigration Enforcement

Unlike Dr. Caplan, I like to talk aboot current events and I find it useful.

There’s a recent event that captured my attention and there’s a good chance that it captured your attention too: The shooting of Renée Good.

“I’m not mad at you.”

I don’t know aboot y’all, but I watched several videos of this incident, from different angles and watched more videos and read articles analyzing the incident and giving different perspectives.

Let me start by saying: This shooting was absolutely tragic. A relatively young woman died a painful, violent and avoidable death, leaving her wife a widow and her child an orphan.

A bit of Context

Renée Good was part of an activist group called “ICE Watch” that seeks to disrupt ICE operations by: whistling (to alert immigrants’ of ICE’s presence), protesting, recording, etc. All of the preceding activities are legal. Renée had no criminal record, but she did obstruct the ICE operation by blocking one lane of traffic with her vehicle: a maroon Honda Pilot. This is illegal. Other vehicles were still able to get around her, though. Her wife was outside the car filming. Fortunately, her child was not with her, at the time.

Jonathan Ross is the ICE agent who shot her. He had previously served as a machine-gunner in Iraq then joined the US Border Patrol in 2005. He joined ICE in 2015. A few months ago, whilst dealing with an uncooperative suspect who refused to roll down his window, he broke the back window, injuring his hands and arms in the process, and tried to grab the suspect. The suspect attempted to drive away with Ross’s arms still in the vehicle, so he ended up dragging Ross for about 100 metres. There is no mention of injuries to his legs or feet.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)’s stated mission is to “Protect America through criminal investigations and enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public safety.” It does some truly noble working like investigating and taking down sex-trafficking rings. But they also do a lot of inland enforcement of immigration laws: rounding up illegal immigrants and deporting them. Even if they committed no crimes (except the illegal immigration).

Illegal immigrants commit less crime than US Citizens born in the USA. (Other than the illegal immigration, itself, of course.)

There was recently a wave of fraud in Minnesota with fake daycares, preschools, autism programs, housing programs, etc. bilking money from the government. It seems to be mainly Somali immigrants behind it. So President Trump decided to send in ICE to deport immigrants in Minnesota. At the time of the incident, ICE agents were going door-to-door in a residential neighbourhood in Minneapolis trying to round up immigrants to deport. Just before the incident, ICE’s vehicle got stuck in the snow and ICE agents were trying to get it unstuck.

See for yourself

If you haven’t seen the videos yet,

Here’s the original video (Raw video without commentary starts at aboot the 11 second mark):

Here is the video from the shooter’s perspective (Raw video without commentary starts at aboot the 26 second mark):

The Case for Ross

I will first play “defense attorney” for Ross and try my best to argue that he acted in self-defense, hwhilst sticking to the facts. From Ross’s perspective,

1. Renée was obstructing an ICE operation.

2. She was uncooperative. She had been asked by another ICE agent to get out of the car, but she didn’t.

3. There was a lot of whistling and loud noises behind them that were distracting and annoying.

4. Renée’s wife was taunting him.

5. Renée appeared to be driving toward Ross at the time he was in front of her vehicle.

6. The first shot was through the windshield. Implying that he was likely in front of her vehicle at the time he fired the first shot.

7. A vehicle can be a deadly weapon.

8. The side of Renée’s vehicle may have bumped into Ross’s legs. “It is hard to believe he is still alive”

9. Ross feared his life was in danger.

10. If Renée had the intent to hit him with her vehicle, even if she missed the first time, she might come back to try to finish the job or she might try to run over other ICE agents.

11. Ross has Supremacy Clause Immunity: He must either be charged with a federal crime (unlikely under Trump administration) or a federal judge must rule that Ross “actually and reasonably believed that [his] conduct was necessary and appropriate in the exercise of [his] federal duties.”

The Case against Ross

Now, let’s look at the case that Ross was not acting in self-defense and that he in fact murdered Renée:

1. Renée had a friendly attitude towards Ross. hWhen he came by her window, she smiled at him and said: “That’s fine, dude. I’m not mad at you. I’m not mad at you.” These do not sound like the words of somebody about to kill him.

2. Renée’s biggest offense was parking in the middle of the road and blocking one lane. “Letting her go” wouldn’t have put community safety at risk.

3. Other vehicles were still going around her. She was not blocking them, nor was she blocking the road completely.

4. DHS use of Force policies state: “Deadly force shall not be used solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing subject. However, deadly force is authorized to prevent the escape of a fleeing subject where the LEO has a reasonable belief that the subject poses a significant threat of death or serious physical harm to the LEO or others and such force is necessary to prevent escape.”

5. Tennessee v. Garner states: “A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead.” even if they are trying to flee. However, “Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given.”

6. So, he cannot justify shooting Renée just because he believed she was trying to flee. He could only shoot her if he had probable cause to believe she posed a danger.

7. Ross had captured her, her vehicle and her license plate on video. He had enough information to look her up and fine/arrest her later.

8. Ross should not have been in front of the vehicle, in the first place. He unnecessarily and stupidly put himself in danger. That’s like jumping on the subway tracks and then shooting at the oncoming train. Sure, your life may be in danger, but you put your life in danger.

9. A CBP Use of Force Review recommends that: “agents should be trained to get out of the way of oncoming vehicles as opposed to intentionally assuming a position in the path of such vehicles” (Yes, I know that CBP is not the same as ICE, but they are both part of the DHS, so you think that the recommendations would “make the rounds” right?) A DHS law enforcement officer ought to know better.

10. DHS use of Force policies state: “DHS LEOs are prohibited from discharging firearms at the operator of a moving vehicle, vessel, aircraft, or other conveyance unless the use of deadly force against the operator is justified under the standards articulated elsewhere in this policy. Before using deadly force under these circumstances, the LEO must take into consideration the hazards that may be posed to law enforcement and innocent bystanders by an out-of control conveyance.” (However, Secret Service agents and officers assisting them may fire at a moving vehicle, not the driver, to “disable” the vehicle. For example, shooting out the tires.)

11. The most effective way to protect yourself from the danger of an oncoming vehicle is to get out of the way!

12. Ross had the opportunity to get out of the way as evidenced by the fact that he got out of the way.

13. Getting out of the way effectively prevented him from getting hit by Renée’s vehicle.

14. Shooting the driver of an oncoming vehicle won’t necessarily stop that vehicle. A dead person can’t take their foot off the gas or put their foot on the brake. In fact, shooting at the driver of an oncoming vehicle is actually likely to make the situation worse as, now, no-one is in control of the vehicle.

15. Before he fired the first shot, she turned her steering wheel hard to the right, to turn away, so as to not go forward and hit Ross. This can be seen in Ross’s cell phone video. So presumably Ross saw this.

16. Ross could have still fired through the front windshield from beside the vehicle, as long as his arm was still in front of the windshield, such as from beside the hood.

17. Indeed, it appears Ross’s feet were beside the vehicle by the time he fired the first shot:

18. Therefore his body was likely no longer in front of the vehicle and he was no longer in danger by the time he fired the first shot.

19. Ross was definitely beside the vehicle by the time he fired the second and third shots.

20. Suppose Ross had not shot Renée and that Renée had not (successfully) hit him with her vehicle, but Ross believed she would come back to try to “finish the job” or try to run over other ICE agents, Ross still had time to wait and see. If she reversed or turned around and started barreling towards him at high speed, he would have time to shoot her, at that time, before she made impact. He didn’t need to shoot her immediately based on his fears of what she might do in the future.

21. DHS use of Force policies also state: “A DHS LEO [Law Enforcement Officer] may use deadly force only when the LEO has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the LEO or to another person.”

22. Her coming back and trying again is not an imminent threat.

23. Ross was walking away just fine, after supposedly getting hit by the vehicle. (Renée, not so much.)

24. Ross’s words right after shooting Renée were: “Fucking bitch!” indicating that he certainly didn’t have as peaceful and friendly an attitude towards her as she had towards him. This might be an indicator of malicious intent.

My Verdict

I think it was unreasonable for Ross to believe that his conduct was necessary or appropriate. I believe he intended to kill Renée and he purposely went in front of her car, to put himself in danger, so he could claim self-defense. I believe, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he is guilty of second-degree murder.

But Maybe I’m Biased

I am for Open Borders. I believe that we should legalize immigration and that the immigration laws that Ross is enforcing are unjust. So, of course I would find any action he takes to enforce the law to be unjust and unreasonable, right?

Hmmm… OK, How about a thot experiment: Put myself in Ross’s shoes and imagine I am enforcing some other law that’s controversial but I believe to be just: Imagine I am “Joss”, an Alabama cop who is trying to arrest an abortion doctor. Imagine “Jenée” is part of some feminist activist group that protests cops who try to arrest abortion doctors and that she parked her vehicle in the middle of the road and is blocking half the road. Other cars are going around.

Is her being there stopping me from arresting an abortion doctor? No, if the abortionist is on my side of Jenée’s vehicle, nothing is stopping me from arresting him, cuffing him and putting him in the back of my squad car. That would at least stop him from conducting abortions, for now, hwhilst I wait for Jenée to get outta the way. If he’s on the other side, I could try to drive around Jenée’s vehicle or I could find another route that takes the long way around to the other side.

I would pressure her to leave. I would threaten to fine or arrest her if she doesn’t. But I would give her the opportunity to get off scot-free if she leaves within the next ten minutes. This would accomplish my goal of getting her out of the way. hWhy punish her further? Besides, she is not the one killing babies. She’s just being annoying. If I had more time, I would love to talk with her and convince her that arresting abortionists is the right thing to do. But I don’t have enough time for that. She’s out of the way. I don’t have the passion to pursue justice for her great offense of blocking half a road for a few minutes.

I certainly would not get in front of her car. hWhy would I do that? And I certainly would not shoot her! Only a psycho killer would do something like that! (Oooooh…)

So, no, it’s not because Ross was enforcing an unjust law that I think his methods were wrong. It’s because his methods were wrong.

Doing the Wrong Thing the Right Way

Shortly after, ICE tried to arrest a lady doing a Door Dash delivery, but she ran into the customer’s home. The St Paul’s Sherrif’s Office seems to be useless, encouraging the customer to hand the DoorDash lady over with or without a warrant. However, this time, unlike Ross, these ICE agents seem to be calm, professional and doing things “by the book”:

The ICE agents:

1. Don’t have a warrant, but they knock and politely ask if they can enter or that the residents hand over the immigrant that they are seeking. They are allowed to ask.

2. Remain calm.

3. Talk to the immigrant in Spanish

4. Do not enter the home

5. Leave the homeowner’s curtilage hwhen she asks them to get off her property.

6. Don’t shout or swear

7. Don’t shoot or use violent force against the homeowners or the DoorDash lady (Although, sadly, I believe they already took her kids from her car parked on the street.)

Unlike Ross, it seems that these ICE agents did everything legally and by the book. Still, it’s kinda hard to stomach it, isn’t it? hWhy?

If Slaughterhouses had Glass Walls…

“If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would be vegetarian.”
~ Sir Paul McCartney

Now, I’m not here to debate the morality of vegetarianism or veganism. That’ll have to wait until another day. But Sir Paul McCartney’s point still resonates here. We often make moral and/or ethical decisions where we’re removed from the consequences of our decision. Dr. Bryan Caplan talks about this a bit in the following post:

The Homage Statism Pays to Liberty

Here are some more examples:

• Eating meat without ever slaughtering an animal ourselves or even watching an animal being slaughtered.

• Getting an abortion without seeing the aborted baby.

• Cheering on a military action without seeing all the people who were killed.

• Supporting the death penalty without ever watching an execution.

… Or supporting the status quo on immigration laws without seeing the brutal reality of enforcing them.

I don’t think I’m gonna convince the “right” today (they’re too heartless), but I’d like to address the “left” for just a bit. i.e. Democrats and/or “liberals”:

Dear Democrats,

As I understand it, despite the accusations coming from the right, many, if not most of y’all do not actually support Open Borders. Y’all support mostly the status quo with regards to immigration laws. But wanna abolish ICE. Less inland enforcement.

Did you know that most immigration enforcement is actually done, not in American streets, but at airline check-in desks? They will sell you a ticket, but they will not let you on the flight without a visa (or a passport from the lucky visa-free countries). These visas can be really hard to get. Even just to visit. And to live and work permanently in the US, it’s almost impossible. (Unless you have family already in the US.) Many of y’all were born in the USA and never had to even consider how hard it would be to immigrate legally to the US, if you weren’t. Luckily, Cato’s Green Card Game can give you an idea. That, or poring over dense laws and regulations! Spoiler alert: It’s a lot harder than “just get[ting] in line!”

I know y’all care about the poor. But one of the best ways to help the poor is to let them come to America to work and feed themselves and send money to feed their hungry family and friends back home!

I know y’all hate to see peaceful, hard-working, law-abiding undocumented migrants deported. But did you know there’s millions of Venezuelans starving to death? Maybe we can’t afford to feed them all. But they’re not looking for a hand-out. They just want the chance to come, live and work in the USA and feed themselves! Many of them take the dangerous trek across the Darien Gap, Central America and the deserts of Mexico, facing risks of injury, death, kidnapping, robbery, assault, rape, disease, etc. often only to get sent back once they arrive at the American border! Or, be forced to live in the shadows, in constant fear of being deported and only able to work under-the-table. Most job opportunities are not available to them.

hWhy don’t they just fly? They can’t. It’s not cause they can’t afford the airline tickets. Often the airline tix are actually cheaper than the perilous journey through the Darien Gap and such. But the airlines won’t let them on without a visa, remember? But if the US just gave them visas, they could take safe airplanes. Visas literally save lives!

• Or better yet: Let them come without visas.

• Or better yet: Let them work and stay as long as they want without visas.

• Or better yet: Let anyone, not just Venezuelans, come and work and stay indefinitely in America, without a visa!

That’s Open Borders!

If you’re still not convinced, check out Dr. Bryan Caplan’s Book “Open Borders”:

A quick note to “Bordertarians”

I find it hard to reconcile libertarian principles with closed borders. I don’t know how y’all do it! I guess I’m not quite the mental gymnast that y’all are. But, one of the best arguments that I’ve heard: Property owners can decide hwho is allowed on their property. Since we (unfortunately) still have a government, the government owns public infrastructure such as roads, airports, etc. and Citizens own the government. And Citizens have voted for Trump. They’ve voted to not allow illegal immigrants to use our public infrastructure. You may let in hwhomever you want to your own home, but they can’t use the government’s roads to get there.

Except here’s hwhere that falls apart: There are many governments in America and Trump is not in charge of all of them. Nor do all American Citizens own all governments. The Streets of Minneapolis are owned by the City of Minneapolis which is owned by the residents of Minneapolis. They don’t mind illegal immigrants on their streets. You know hwho they don’t want on their streets? ICE. Would you respect their property rights? You heard their mayor:

All we have to do now is take these lies and make them true, somehow…