Trouble coming
The shooting of Renee Good looks clear-cut to me, but I can accept that not everyone feels the same way. A lot of people are incorrectly claiming she was unarmed—a motor vehicle is a weapon, for the record—and a lot of people are claiming that ICE has no authority to really interact with American citizens.
It’s all complete BS.
Sure, there can be those who figure that the car wasn’t really directed at the agent or that there was some clear lack of intent to harm the agent, which I don’t get, but that’s something we can at least discuss.
But the issue is that the BS I mentioned above is just the latest in a long string of nonsense that, frankly, I don’t see coming to an end without a lot of blood being spilled as things currently stand.
Why?
Because the rules don’t apply, apparently.
Let’s start with another woman driving in Minnesota and failing to comply with ICE agents after she allegedly tried to block the agents. This one didn’t involve shooting, thankfully, just her arrest.
She claims she’s disabled and needs to get to her doctor, then says she’s an “autistic disabled person,” as if that matters.
However, this is just one more example of a liberal white woman thinking that the rules don’t apply to her because her cause is so righteous.
And the idea that they can just do what they want to interfere with law enforcement isn’t the exclusive domain of liberal white women. Liberal white “men” seem to want to get in on the action.
Writing at The Free Press, Kat Rosenfeld noted:
The notion that Good would be able to drive away from this scene just as easily as she drove into it—and that the armed agents commanding her to exit her vehicle could be safely ignored—is as understandable as it is misguided, the product of a world in which activism and political conflict have become Disneyfied.
What was once an organized, strategic movement with high stakes and concrete political aims has evolved today into a sort of intramural sport for all comers, from influencers to wine moms to aging boomers who prefer protest marches to pickleball. And if the ease of participation has swelled the ranks of activists to include anyone with an Instagram account, it has also given the entire enterprise a distinct veneer of unreality, like a theme park populated by actors who spend their days LARPing as cops or cowboys and then retire at night to a dorm where they eat pizza and hook up with the guy who plays their nemesis. In 2026, political protest—and even political violence—might feel like a party, or a movie, but the one thing it rarely feels is serious, until it’s too late.
I think she’s right. We’ve seen a couple of other cases of activists trying to stand in front of law enforcement, impeding their ability to do their jobs, including at least one that took a dive so bad even Lebron James rolled his eyes.
But the flip side is that we’re also seeing people ready to go beyond this.
Activists on the left are talking about ICE as if they’re some kind of secret police force that is just rounding up administration opponents, and yes, they’re talking about how there should be an armed response to them.
Since there have been attacks on ICE agents and facilities already, this isn’t really an escalation except in the potential scale.
And don’t think it’ll stop with ICE.
After all, a University of Washington researcher is in hot water right now because she wanted there to be “Tyler Robinsons for you all,” alluding to the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk.
In essence, the problem is that these people legitimately don’t believe the rules and laws apply to them. They’re different, you see. They’re unique.
In his book, Inside the Criminal Mind, the late psychologist Stanton Samenow argued that criminality wasn’t an artifact of society, but of a particular personality type that lends itself toward criminality. People with this type of personality engage in what Samenow termed “thinking errors.”
One of those is thinking that you’re unique, that the rules and norms don’t apply to you because you’re special. It’s the person who doesn’t follow policies at work because they think they’re just too good at their job for them to apply. They’re the criminal who steals money from the safe at work, but shouldn’t get in trouble because they were going to pay it back.
It’s the progressive activist who ignores lawful orders from federal agents and decides they can just drive away without any repercussions. They’re the ones who think they can set fire to buildings because the people who work there are bad or because someone on the other side of town did something “wrong.”
Another thinking error on display here is where one doesn’t use the past as a learning tool. In other words, the guy who gets arrested every other year and is constantly in and out of jail, and still thinks he can get away with anything.
Or who keep interfering with ICE agents despite it being made clear that it’s illegal to do so, and they can arrest you for it, yet you still do it and are shocked when you find yourself either shoved out of the way or in handcuffs.
Now, I’m not going to go all the way through Samenow’s book, nor those of others who study the criminal personality, mostly because I’m not remotely ready for that right now, but these errors in thinking are just the tip of the iceberg in the overlap between the criminal personality and the extreme leftist activist. The Venn diagram between these two isn’t quite a pancake, but that’s because too few criminals care about politics.
Yet when you understand this, you understand that because of their egocentric nature, one masquerading as a concern for others—this is the thinking error of how the criminal thinks of themself as a good person, by the way—they see no issue with taking things to a whole new level.
The incidents are going to come, and I’m concerned that a lot of good men and women are going to die because these turdnuggets can’t wrap their heads around how this is a problem of their own making.
They wanted sanctuary cities, and strangely, these are also the same cities seeing ICE roll into town for mass deportations. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey sure doesn’t. He doesn’t know why ICE is in Minnesota instead of Texas or Florida, but as Ed Morrissey notes at Hot Air, there’s a perfectly understandable reason for that.
That's only one stupid appetizer to Frey's idiotic point, however. The reason ICE has to send teams in to find illegals with detainers to Minnesota and Minneapolis is that neither of them will cooperate with ICE on immigration enforcement. They have declared themselves sanctuary jurisdictions, refusing to hand over illegal aliens who have been arrested for actual crimes. Instead, they release these "criminal illegal aliens" back into their communities, even those with multiple arrests and convictions, and even those with transnational gang affiliations.
So they created the situation, now they’re upset over the federal government stepping in—and don’t think they wouldn’t be thrilled if this were actually happening in Second Amendment sanctuary cities and counties, by the way. They created it, and now they’re creating more situations, only to turn around and act like they’re the victims. (Samenow calls this thinking error victimstance, for the record. Do you sense a trend? I sure do.)
Because of these thinking errors, though, at least some on the left are likely to put them together and believe that not only is impeding traffic to interfere with the duties of federal agents just, they’re likely to go even farther than that, engaging in the kind of violence that others are only talking about.
Talk is cheap, but sooner or later, someone who has a criminal personality—not all are convicted criminals, for the record, but are people who most definitely find no issues in hurting others—is going to find the excuse they need to rationalize hurting people and still think of themselves as a good person.
The left needs to either rein in their own on this stuff or federal agents are going to die, and when that starts happening in enough numbers, things are going to get ugly.
We thought 2020 was bad? The whole Summer of Love thing?
That’s going to look like the highlight of our lives unless the left starts backing off, and I’m not really happy about where all that could lead.
Tilting at Windmills is 100% reader-supported. If you enjoyed this article, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription for 15% off the first year or making a one-time donation here. You can also check out our store. Or, for more content, check out my YouTube channel. Your support is greatly appreciated.
What I find most interesting about all this violence is, if a conservative group organizes and starts following ICE agents - TO PROTECT THEM from the leftist agitators - law enforcement will sweep in like a SWAT team to disarm and arrest those helping ENFORCE LAW.
We need to think about who the REAL enemies are in these situations and deal with them directly. I can't believe the average cop, even in a shithole like Minneapolis, thinks he is doing the right thing following orders from his criminal boss protecting the criminals on the street.
These leftist agitators need to understand they are a VERY small minority and the ONLY way for that to happen is for the majority to get out on the street with them and teach them a few lessons they cannot forget. We expect OUR ICE agents to do their jobs AND fight off these Bolsheviks.
Remember Kent State.
The problem with the Renee Good incident is everyone is worried about her intent. The fact is, in the last few moments of her life, her intent counted for exactly squat. All that mattered is the ICE Agent's *perception* of her intent. If he could have "reasonably believed" Good was trying to run him over and severely injure or kill him, the shooting was justified. All the Agent saw was Good looking him in the eye, backing up and shifting into drive. All he could hear was her wheels spinning on the icy road while the car advanced. The Agent isn't psychic. He had no idea if she was attempting to kill him, but he reasonably inferred she could be.
That's the definition of a good shoot. Case closed.