this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2025
586 points (99.8% liked)

News

32785 readers
4083 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 24 points 2 days ago

~~Federal immigration officer~~

State sponsored terrorist paramilitary.

FTFY

[–] DemandtheOxfordComma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 143 points 3 days ago (9 children)

Theoretically, what would happen if an armed US citizen was confused or scared and thought he was being kidnapped. The perpetrators refused to identify, and he shot and killed them. They weren't dressed properly and were trying to put him in an unmarked, unlicensed vehicle.

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 136 points 3 days ago (3 children)

honest answer: they will be shot and killed in return. in the rare case they are not killed they will be given the most lacking “proper trial” possible. even in castle doctrine states with no obligation to retreat, things like the 2nd amendment are only really (in effect) applicable on a civilian to civilian case. The state will always “extra judicially” take care to shock and awe in retaliation. cf: philly move bombing, waco, and the recent bombing of “drug runner boats” in international waters.

[–] Triumph@fedia.io 43 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That is the answer, and I don't think confusion would play any part here.

If the kidnapping victim in this scenario somehow survives, they'll surely be held in custody pending trial. When it comes to legal firearm use, they would need to make the case that A) they reasonably felt in imminent danger for their lives, and B) that they acted to eliminate the threat. Even in an ideal world where a jury acquits them, they still get to live with "I killed someone".

If you're carrying, you have to have already been doing everything right before any incident where you are forced to eliminate a threat to your person. If you did anything provocative, you're fucked. After the threat is eliminated, you need to stop shooting, because if you take any harmful action after threats have been eliminated, you're fucked.

But the fact is that if you're in that situation, where you have to draw and fire, there's going to be multiple people (threats) on you. The odds that you are able to eliminate all of those threats before being killed yourself are low.

[–] CatsPajamas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Self defense applies to other selves, as well. Not just your unique self. It extends to other people. Meaning YOU don't have to be the one in danger.

[–] Triumph@fedia.io 5 points 2 days ago

Yes this is true. It also adds an extra layer of “are you making the right decision”, so take extra care.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sabata11792@ani.social 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] Blade9732@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ChokingHazard@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] flandish@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

again: this won’t apply if you’re dead. or if the state has sufficient desire to ignore the law and case history.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 48 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That would be clear self-defense, but they would be jailed for life in El Salvador or some shit nonetheless because rule of law is crumbling in this country

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 days ago

Oh, no. They would be shot.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 32 points 3 days ago

It's bound to happen eventually, so we'll find out

[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 2 days ago

The muppets in the Federal government are trying their hardest to make this occur so they can try and find some loophole to go ahead with their martial law plans to arrest all the people they don't like that week. What we're likely seeing is mature restraint on behalf of firearm owners.

Some years back, the quote was something like, "as soon as you discharge your weapon, you are looking at spending at least $10,000 from legal fees" (if you don't have firearm insurance and/or if it would even be applicable) - that number is probably tenfold now. Not to mention the very likely personal harm others have mentioned.

Legal fees or not, being dead is pretty hard to come back from.

[–] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (3 children)

The van and the ppl have no record of ever existing 🤷🏻‍♂️

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

Even if they aren't slaughtered on the spot, they would become a most-wanted fugitive and their normal life would be over. Kristi Noem would be proud to announce on Fox that the standing orders for the manhunt were to shoot them dead on sight. They would have to hide in the woods or some other concealed place and at least be familiar with SERE concepts if they wanted to survive another 72 hours.

[–] Xaphanos@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

That is a workable strategy. Outnumber, execute them quickly, throw the bodies in the car and torch it. Shows others the consequences of their actions, sends a message.

However, it is escalation. Next time there are more. Maybe in an APC.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 11 points 3 days ago

Expect an escalated response.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 2 days ago

or they try to carjack you, and use your car to run them over, or defend yourself.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 84 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If you see a van or SUV without plates please call the cops on them.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

The driver answers

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Are cops allowed to protect their citizens from these guys?

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean today ICE even tear gassed a bunch of Chicago cops who were trying to clear a path out for them. The ICE thugs are cowards and will turn on local police in a heartbeat. (See also capitol police beaten on Jan 6.)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 31 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ironically that makes them easier to identify.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Easier to identify that they're ICE but still impossible to make a complaint or hold anyone accountable.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This would be interesting in the stand your ground and open carry states. Unmarked car pulls into a driveway, unidentifiable armed masked goons jump out and they run straight into a hornets nest.

[–] lando55@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"Interesting" is one way to put it. In reality anyone who practices and abides by these established doctrines to protect their freedoms will be tried for treason because they dared stand up to the undercover gestapo.

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This is why they only harass blue states. ICE wouldn't dare pull this shit in Texas. So many of them would get shot simply for stepping on someone's property.

[–] hayvan@feddit.nl 5 points 2 days ago

God please let this happen, it would be so funny.

[–] Plurrbear@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So if you defend yourself from these savages.. how would a jury hold that up in court WITHOUT A REASONABLE DOUBT?!?!

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Jury nullification would be in the rise if this ever actually ended up in court.

or a grand jury. but something tells me the proposed action would never see charges, just vengeance.

[–] Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 23 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Yeah it's a fascist country, and that's not a figure of speech. What could happen, they are backed by the army, thw FBI, the president, the supreme court. Seriously american leftist friends, run while you can, it will get worse, they will come after you.

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

They can come and get it. This is our county too. I ain't going anywhere.

[–] elfin8er@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Run with what skills and money?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 52 points 3 days ago (9 children)

This article talked about how what ICE was doing was illegal, but didn't ask anyone on the police force if they'd enforce the law against them.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 43 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

If you see a vehicle with no license plates & it’s doing anything even remotely unusual (speeding, driving erratically, etc) then call 911 and report it. If it’s driving erratically then tell 911 that you’re concerned the driver could be drunk etc. given the behavior you’re witnessing.

[–] Triumph@fedia.io 33 points 3 days ago (6 children)

"Driving without license plates" is unusual.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] maxxadrenaline@lemmy.world 25 points 3 days ago

Sporting the kidnapper look even more on point. Ask them the secret word or run

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 28 points 3 days ago (2 children)

That still leaves the VIN at the drivers side dashboard

[–] TheMinister@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 days ago

But what does that get us? This is secret police in 2025. Masked, unmarked, unidentifiable and kidnapping people to unknown and untraceable locations. Often just straight out of the country. How is this not a bigger deal

[–] rollerbang@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

If not covered up.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Fit_Series_573@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (3 children)

At this rate how are they are touching close to being considered like the klan for kidnapping people in the night, since there is 0 form of way of identifying who is taking people anymore. Threading the worst kinds of water right now

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›