ICE officers with electric-shock gloves
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
A Polish immigrant was tased by Canadian police while in handcuffs, and died as a result. [1]
When investigators asked for the studies and data about how tasers were proven safe for use on humans, the answer was “what?”.
Turns out nobody tested, or certified or in any way figured out of tasers are safe on humans. Companies just started making them and selling them to police forces en mass.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Robert_Dzieka%C5%84...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium
As we all know, people get so excited when they interact with the police that sometimes it's just too much and they die. It just happens. Very normal.
And so - no clemency, no amnesty, no "just following orders", no "my orders were misinterpreted", no mass pardons, no slinking back into the shadows holding on to their "lost cause". Criminal responsibility, period. Government jackboots executing people might be considered just fun "anti-woke" entertainment in 2026, but it needs to be known that the winds will eventually shift.
The ballot box doesn't matter and the bullet box is irrelevant in the face of ICE and the militarizing of the police force.
There's no getting off this train, whether you surrender or fight changes nothing.
If it goes that far, I imagine more a guns-and-bullets solution pushing on one side with a larger, more peaceful resistance pushing from the other.
> bullet box is irrelevant in the face of ICE and the militarizing of the police force.
Only if you view it as an all-out war, which it would never be. Threat being enough works both ways.
I don’t agree with some things that they do, but what is the alternative? Just let people enter freely and not do anything about it?
ICE only exists because of mass illegal immigration.
Sure, the point is that these two things are not tied. In fact they're actually sympathetic to one another - if the job of ICE is to uphold the law, then their mission should include upholding all law and order - not merely enforcing within their scope while running roughshod on everything outside of it.
> I don’t agree with some things that they do, but what is the alternative?
Read your question again. There ARE clearly other alternatives besides "let people enter freely", right? For example, institutional accountability. When you have a case like Jonathan Ross imparting his own agenda of premeditated execution as a summary punishment for disobedience, it's straightforward to separate that act from the overall mission of the agency, right? There is no conflict for firing and prosecuting Ross for how he personally chose to act directly contrary to written agency policy, while continuing to have the rest of ICE enforce immigration law.
But rather than working to keep the agency and its members accountable under the law, we witness the exact opposite framed as part of the all-encompassing "culture war", seemingly to distract from the administration's poor performance on this topic and elsewhere. This type of poor leadership drives rot in organizations, leading us to the point we've gotten to where ICE itself seemingly needs to be disbanded and its desired function (which I agree with you is mostly sensible) performed by a replacement agency - built up person-by-person to make sure agents aren't bringing their own personal grudges and lawlessness.
Furthermore, if you truly do want immigration law to be enforced, then it actually becomes more important to adopt this stance. It's taken over two decades to finally build up the political will to enforce immigration law contra to the open wishes of big business that wants cheap labor. What is happening right now is squandering that political will as the average person sees it merely being used to enable a group of unaccountable violent thugs who aren't even that effective at the political goals.
We should ask Germany to let us hold the trials in Nuremberg.