By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal immigration officers, a press conference was held by Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino, revealing that the agents involved remained on active duty. This directly contradicted the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) formal policy, which mandates administrative leave for officers involved in deadly force incidents. Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, subsequently expressed significant concern and disbelief regarding this decision. This departure from standard protocol raises questions about the CBP’s adherence to its own use-of-force guidelines.
Read the original article here
Lawmakers ask why the agent who shot and killed Alex Pretti is still on the job, and it’s a question that resonates deeply, highlighting a concerning lack of accountability. The situation paints a picture of potential misconduct, raising questions about whether this agent, and perhaps others involved, are being held to the same standards as the rest of society. The fact that this agent remains employed, potentially without even administrative leave, strongly suggests that something is amiss.
The silence surrounding the agent’s identity also raises alarm bells. Why is his name not being released to the public, particularly when the name of the victim, Alex Pretti, is readily available? This disparity fosters an environment of suspicion, fueling the perception of a cover-up. It’s as though there are different sets of rules depending on one’s position within the system.
The reactions within this discussion point to a larger problem: the perception that ICE, and potentially law enforcement more broadly, operates with impunity. There’s a sentiment that these agents, particularly those involved in the Pretti shooting, are not being held accountable because they were simply following orders or fulfilling their roles within an organization that prioritizes specific political objectives above all else. This has created a view that ICE has become a far-right paramilitary group.
The underlying frustration here is palpable. There’s a sense that justice is being denied and that the system is rigged to protect those in power, even when they’re accused of serious misconduct. The questions being raised go beyond a single shooting; they touch on the broader issue of how we ensure accountability in law enforcement, especially when actions may be politically motivated.
Moreover, the reactions demonstrate a broader distrust of the government. The lack of accountability, the refusal to name the agent, the belief that a cover-up is underway – these elements contribute to a crisis of confidence. The sentiment expressed here is that the agencies involved may be actively working against the interests of the public.
Some commenters drew parallels to other instances of police brutality and questioned whether the agent in this case is receiving favorable treatment. The mention of an officer being placed on limited duty for shooting a raccoon, contrasts sharply with the situation surrounding the killing of Alex Pretti. It’s understandable to wonder why such different standards are being applied.
The responses seem to point to the belief that the agent was essentially rewarded for the actions that led to Alex Pretti’s death. This kind of response is a huge problem. It implies that such actions are not only tolerated but potentially encouraged within certain law enforcement circles. The question, therefore, is not just why this agent is still on the job, but why there hasn’t been a thorough, independent investigation, and what, if any, repercussions the agent and any other actors are facing.
The focus on ICE’s mission is another important point of debate. The very definition of “illegal immigrant” that the agency uses may be called into question, leading to a discussion about whether ICE is focusing on individuals who have broken the law, or has become a tool of a political agenda, that doesn’t hold up in the legal arena. This has created a view that ICE is acting like armed thugs pursuing political goals, not a law enforcement agency.
It is clear that those commenting on this situation find the lack of action unacceptable. They are left with a feeling that those responsible for this shooting are not being held to account. The question remains, what happens next? Will there be a proper investigation? Will the agent involved face any repercussions? It’s up to the authorities to provide clear answers and ensure accountability, so that the public may regain faith in the system.