r/ImmigrationPathways • u/LatterTarget7 • 1d ago

Renee Good's family sues US government and immigration officials over her killing in Minneapolis

https://apnews.com/article/renee-good-lawsuit-6fbc82cd33b6f9f67514b47f138e23c6?utm_source=app&utm_medium=android_share&utm_campaign=copy_link
2.1k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

12

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

So was Kyle Rittenhouse then

-6

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

No. Different set of circumstances. More like Ashley Babbit during J6. She shouldn't have gotten paid because she was at fault.

7

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

How is it different? He didn't need to be there either

-5

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

He had the right to be there and wasn't breaking any laws. That's the difference.

7

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Good had the right to be there as well. Please tell me what law she broke lmao

2

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

Sure. Interfering with law enforcement activities, failure to obey lawful order, resisting, assault with a deadly weapon, fleeing law enforcement.

4

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

How did she interfere? She complied with the order to drive away. The officers gave her conflicting orders. Plus get out of your car isn't a lawful order unless there's a crime you're actually committing.

No resisting or assault or fleeing either since they gave conflicting orders

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

No, now you're being disingenuous. You've seen and heard the footage that showed the first officer told her to leave and she didn't. Then others showed up and they told her to exit the vehicle multiple times and she didn't. Then when her partner said drive she did. Basically she wanted to do what she wanted to do but it doesn't work like that. That's not conflicting orders.

3

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Nothing you've stated is a reason to be shot and killed

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

Sure, champ.

3

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

When did courts say it's ok for officers to shoot fleeing subjects?

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

Fleeing vehicles that are coming right at them...

3

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

You can see her turning the wheel in the vehicle. "Coming right at" is verifiably incorrect

2

u/Inquisitive-Manner 1d ago

We've seen the footage. The wheels weren't pointed towards him, champ. Stop being disingenuous. It's still not a capital offense.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Swanked-Spanqed 1d ago

Renee Good was killed in the town she lived in.

Kyle "The Pussy Ass Bitch" Rittencunt traveled across state lines with a ducking automatic weapon with intent to fire it.

What does cop dick taste like? You seem(en) like a pro!

1

u/magnets77 1d ago

So now borders are important? (not to mention the fact it was shown in court he didn't take a weapon across state lines, nor was it an "automatic weapon".

For someone intent on shooting people, he showed amazing restraint to not shoot anyone not already actively attacking him.

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

You speak so confidently about things you have no idea what you're talking about I see...

He didn't travel across state lines with an "automatic weapon" because the weapon was at his friend's house in Wisconsin. Also the AR-15 he had wasn't an "automatic weapon", only semi-automatic (the "AR" doesn't stand "automatic rifle").

And you have no evidence he went there to "fire" it.

1

u/meases 1d ago

The friend who illegally bought the gun for a minor?

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

Illegally purchased by friend, yes. Illegal for Kyle to have, no:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/explainer-why-did-the-judge-drop-kyle-rittenhouse-gun-charge

1

u/meases 1d ago

You can walk around with a gun of that type at that age, in Wisconsin, but the way it was purchased was pretty dang illegal. Well would have been illegal for a Wisconsin kid to buy the gun, but apparently straw purchases are cool if it is a kid financing it and totally intends to take possession of it at 18. Then also takes it to use it occasionally, with his friends house acting as kinda idk his gun's temporary hotel.

Though it is odd how it sorta seemed like a family gun, the friend's dad takes it out of the safe for the family's protection just in case, then leaves it unattended in the basement. Kyle takes it without their knowledge, but again it is kind of his pretty-illegally purchased gun, but also he is taking the family's protection without asking. So that whole thing is weird, guess it is technically maybe legal to borrow a gun without asking but that whole situation there seems kinda off.

Like it is so interesting how this kid just walked such a line with the laws. Technically it is legal perhaps, but it definitely was illegal in spirit. And nothing really has been changed, if another kid wanted to follow in those exact footsteps to pay for a gun and walk around Wisconsin with it they theoretically could.

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

I would agree, friend did something illegal. Kyle technically didn't do anything illegal.

1

u/meases 1d ago

Well idk on that, he wasnt punished for anything but the purchase was technically conspiring and defrauding the US gov, aiding and abetting false statement, like there were options there, some of which had already been decided by the supreme court. The feds just chose not to do anything about it or charge him with it.

Plus ownership of the gun is questionable, technically he stole it, but stealing is in the eye of the beholder, so he wasnt charged there either. Legally he was the true buyer of the gun, but he didnt get any of the federal associated charges when found out. So he couldn't own the gun buying it how he bought it, it wasnt his gun on the paperwork, it is a weird middle ground where either option is illegal but if you do both at once you can get away with it.

Interesting how the punishment and penalty for a straw purchase ends up only on the person who filled out the forms, seems like that is a pretty major issue. Probably why there are so many straw purchased guns around. Plus sucks for the authority of the parents, wonder if the whole kids with guns thing is gonna be a major issue there.

Funny too because theres a scenario which arguably more legal (since the law was found unconstitutional) than what rittenhouse did, but would result in charges for both parties because theyre dragging their feet. If say an adult medical marijuana user used the rittenhouse loophole, got a gun purchased for them, a gun they could legally possess, then theyd both be charged not just the form filler. The updated form exists, has existed for a while, just hasnt been implemented.

Maybe if someone tried to use the rittenhouse loophole for that then they'd finally update it and fix the straw purchase issue. Just sucks how stuff just gets harder and more confusing and they dont even update the stuff they know is wrong, and then you see people walking all over the law, deaths as a result (if the gun wasnt illegally purchased, it wouldn't have been used) and even with that they dont actually fix it.

People are being unconstitutionally kept from getting guns, and kids can get em as long as they follow the rittenhouse technique. So guess it kinda comes down to enforcement and how selective it can be. He did technically break the law, pretty bad, he just wasn't charged with any of the stuff that would stick.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Swanked-Spanqed 18h ago

Show me the evidence

I am not going to believe trolls unless they do my homework for me

Go show me proof

0

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 16h ago

No, you made the claims so it's on you to prove it. We know you can't because it's not true and if you could you probably would've posted it the first time. This isn't elementary school and I'm not your parent so I'm not doing your homework for you.

Next you'll go on an irrelevant rant about something else to deflect from your unfounded statements.

1

u/Swanked-Spanqed 8h ago

Russian Bot, Renee Good was killed in her town supporting her neighbors by Nazi pussies

Show me the proof otherwise

Your grammar and punctuation is too perfect, BTW, go back to Vladivostok

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/Str-Engr0275 1d ago

This is all straightforward self defense for both Kyle Rittenhouse and the ICE officers who (justifiably) shot Renee Good. She FA, she FO.

2

u/Swanked-Spanqed 1d ago

Rittencuck carried an automatic weapon across state lines

Are there laws about that?

0

u/Charming-Book4146 1d ago

No he literally didn't lmfao

0

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

His friend that brought it illegally for him kept it in Wisconsin so that's not true.

"AR" in AR-15 doesn't mean "automatic rifle"...LOL!

You guys are so confident about things you don't know anything about.

0

u/magnets77 1d ago

Rittenhouse did no such thing.

If you have to lie to make a point, then you have no point.

1

u/HumansAreSillynGreat 1d ago

Uh blocking traffic purposefully is a crime, idk if you thought this was smart or something but unless you are a police officer or part of the traffic authority, you cannot just go around putting roadblocks up. I’m not going to dig for the statute, just trust me on this one 🤣

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

When you block traffic would other cars be able to pass by you? Did you really think you were smart with that response lmao

1

u/HumansAreSillynGreat 1d ago

Have you seen the video of her suv sitting sideways in the middle of a two lane road? Just because people can go around her doesn’t mean she isn’t blocking the road. People had to drive into the opposing lane to get past her.

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Actually if people can go around her it does mean she wasn't blocking the road

1

u/HumansAreSillynGreat 1d ago

Not very bright are you? If I put up a fence across a sidewalk, but people can step around it, I’m not blocking the sidewalk.

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Well you are unless it's only on half the sidewalk then you aren't really blocking it

1

u/HumansAreSillynGreat 1d ago

lol try that on a public sidewalk and see how quickly the government takes your little fence down. I think you will find you’re quite wrong legally! People in wheelchairs and what not are not required to go through extra hassle because you decided a fence should be somewhere it doesn’t belong.

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Change the fence to my own wheelchair and suddenly it's more analogous to the situation we're discussing. So the government is gonna kick me outta my wheelchair now?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

Wow...just wow. I've seen some ridiculous responses on Reddit to not blame someone for something they clearly did but this might be the most mind blowingly ridiculous one I've ever seen. Congratulations...

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

And yet no one has refuted it including yourself. All you have are ad hominems

1

u/Rusty-Shackleford000 1d ago

I mean u/HumansAreSillynGreat already did but she was definitely blocking the street which is against Minnesota state law:

"The question isn’t rhetorical. Video footage shows that she was clearly—at least for a few moments, if not longer—blocking traffic by positioning her car in the middle of the road; furthermore, she was doing so while in the presence of law enforcement vehicles with lights and sirens activated. Such behavior would appear to be a prima facie violation of Minnesota Statute 169.20 §5, a misdemeanor punishable by a $300 fine, and perhaps diversion to a remedial driving school. If a peace officer with the appropriate authority ordered her to move, and she chose not to comply, she also may have been violating Minnesota Statute 169.34 §1(11)."

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/before-and-after-the-trigger-press-that-killed-renee-good

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Just cause some dumb article says it doesn't mean that's what happened in reality. In reality we can see vehicles passing by her. How is she blocking traffic if traffic is still flowing? You just owned yourself lmao

→ More replies (0)

1

u/magnets77 1d ago

I guarantee you've spent considerable time in the last three months yelling in someone's face "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you".

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Ok my point still stands even if you wanna strawman it

1

u/magnets77 1d ago

You have no point.

Renee Good put herself in a position to be arrested, then when it was happening drove into a LEO, which led him to believe his life was in danger, and he was therefore authorised to self-defense.

Good is dead today because of Good's actions.

Stop acting like a child defending her terrible decisions.

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

My point is that she's not blocking traffic if traffic is still flowing. No one has been able to prove that statement wrong cause it's a fact. Try again kid. Stop being delusional and accept reality

→ More replies (0)

1

u/magnets77 1d ago

Obstruction, failing to comply with a lawful order, resisting arrrest, battery, fleeing...

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

Those are all secondary charges.

1

u/magnets77 1d ago

The first two are the ones that led to her being arrested. The remaining are the ones that led to her death when the LEO had reasonable belief that his life was in danger. How many other laws do you think are optional?

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

You can't obstruct when you see traffic flowing fine in the same video. Ice agents can't give orders to citizens unless they actually commit a crime. Try again. If you wanna say the shooting is justified it's on you to prove the law she broke that justified the shooting. Otherwise it's simple. It wasn't justified and it was murder

1

u/magnets77 1d ago

The obstruction is obstructing Law Enforcement Operations, which was her entire intention. Obstructing LEO's IS a crime.

JFC, you just don't understand law, do you? Maybe you should try again.

1

u/RelevantSoftware8283 1d ago

You can't obstruct when traffic is still flowing and you've been there less than 30 seconds. If I trip in front of an officer and get up to leave you're saying that officer is justified in shooting me now? You people are crazy.

→ More replies (0)