333
“They’re trying to kidnap someone” - On the scene of a brutal ICE arrest in Worcester, Massachusetts.
(www.motherjones.com)
this post was submitted on 10 May 2025
333 points (99.1% liked)
politics
23571 readers
3081 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Next time the public should brutalize the agents
Depends.
If an overwhelming crowd can come together fast - arrest can be blocked and persons de-arrested. But it has to be overwhelming, so that no cop would think of aiming a gun.
Throughout the history of resisting repression - this arrangement is hard to spontaneously produce.
As a minimum, people would have to organize with the clear goal of interrupting ICE raids. They'd likely establish a means of communcation (most likely a phone app backed up by mesh networking) and dedicate resources to offering each other legal assistance later. Possibly, everyone who goes to jail for the hypothetical anti-ICE movement should be celebrated like a rock star (with their permission) and their families should be helped through hardship, to encourage people to undertake risky actions.
The other option - working underground - would be exhausting either ICE or a local police force by persistent sabotage against them. Neutralizing the ICE would have the aim of them organizing less raids, neutralizing police might have the aim of them not backing ICE raids. While more straightforward to accomplish, this approach would bring about high risk (e.g. accusations of terrorism) to people carrying out sabotage. To avoid this, sabotage would have to be carefully considered and low-key. Perhaps, for example, it would aim to upset the agency's ability to process data - to know whom it actually wants to deport.
Of course, with local police, one should consider the potential outcomes of successfully neutralizing police: both their negative and positive functions would be neutralized, and people might start complaining about crime.
A curious tactical perspective becomes evident when thinking about this: police resources could be diverted in peaceful ways, with false reports.
When I think of how one might decrease police responsiveness to an ICE backup request, I can't avoid thinking of nice movie scenarios: e.g. while some people are busy obstructing an ICE raid, some other reliably anonymous people divert police resources by calling 911 and reporting various violent situations elsewhere. Others create a traffic jam, effectively isolating the street involved from motor vehicle traffic. Backup will have to arrive on foot, after they're done chasing the hostage-taking bank robbers who did not exist. :)
Violence begets more violence. This isn’t the way.
Empty platitudes. Pacifism doesn't work on Nazis. Mandalorianism though..
So they’ll just get to kill us without consequence. Fucking awesome
And us killing them comes without consequences?
clearly we need to wait for the death camps
And doing nothing when someone is violently assailing you seems like it would carry consequences of its own. I'm not advocating that we meet violence with murderous retribution, but when diplomacy fails and someone intends to cause you harm no matter what you do, defending yourself is the only reasonable course of action.
Just passively get into the van please.
"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
-Preamble to the Declaration of Independence (of the United States of America)
"When peaceful revolution becomes impossible, violent revolution becomes inevitable."
-John F. Kennedy, 35th President of the United States
Yeah? Why not name out the times a significant change happened without violence, and we'll compare it to the number of times it took violence. Special hint: One of these is MUCH larger than the other. Hell, like 100 people were killed over a few days just to get the US down to a 40 hour work week.
Says person whose rights have all been secured via violence.
If you view ICE as zombies that can think, it gets a lot easier.
They think?? You might be giving them to much credit
Yes, it is. They are willing to use violence against us all, we should be willing to do the same. The only downside is that when they brutalize and jail us, they get to go home. We don’t stand a fucking chance.
I most heartily agree it's simply senseless and cruel to brutalize other humans, cut their throats wide better to put them down like rabid dogs.