ICE Officer Kills Motorist In Minneapolis

Here’s what’s publicly known about how ICE (and its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security) trains officers to handle situations involving vehicles — especially regarding not placing themselves in front of one:







🚓 1.

General Use-of-Force & Vehicle-Safety Principles







Federal law-enforcement guidance that ICE incorporates (from DOJ and DHS policy) includes several core safety rules relevant to vehicle encounters:




  • Agents should not place themselves in the path of a moving vehicle or use their body to block it. That includes not standing directly in front of a vehicle that could move toward them.
  • Officers must minimize unnecessary risk and avoid positions where they have “no alternative to using deadly force.”
  • Approaching vehicles tactically: ICE training emphasizes approaching vehicles at a “tactical L” — at a 90-degree angle from the side — instead of from the front, so that an approaching vehicle doesn’t have a clear path toward an agent.
  • Federal policies generally state firearms should not be fired at a moving vehicle to disable it or simply to prevent escape; deadly force is authorized only if there is a reasonable belief the subject poses an imminent threat of death or serious injury.








📘 2. What the Policies Mean in Practice







Even though the full current ICE “Firearms and Use of Force Handbook” isn’t publicly posted in full, the DHS/DOJ policies that guide ICE’s training include the below key specific directives:




  • Avoid front and rear approach: “Agents/Officers should avoid standing directly in front of or behind a subject vehicle.”
  • Avoid blocking movement with their bodies: Officers are explicitly discouraged from placing themselves in front of a vehicle’s projected path.
  • Use deadly force only when necessary: Deadly force (including shooting at a vehicle’s occupants) is permitted only when there is a reasonable belief that someone is posing an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury — not simply to stop or detain someone.






These aren’t just theoretical phrases — they reflect long-standing federal use-of-force standards that came up again after the recent ICE shooting in Minneapolis. Experts and critics noted that putting oneself in front of a vehicle runs counter to both federal policy and best law enforcement practices, and training de-emphasizes doing so because it creates unnecessary risk.







🚧 3. Context: Why It Matters Now







The topic has been under public scrutiny because:




  • In the Minneapolis ICE shooting on January 7, 2026, bystander and official videos showed an ICE agent standing in front of a vehicle right before shots were fired. Critics — including local officials and use-of-force experts — said this contradicted basic law enforcement training about vehicles and risk avoidance.
  • Federal policy does allow agents to use deadly force if someone is imminently threatening death or serious injury, but advocates say that being positioned in front of a vehicle — rather than beside it or behind cover — undermines the principles of minimizing risk.

While ICE’s internal manuals aren’t fully public, the relevant portions in the federal use-of-force and tactics guidance that ICE trains to include:
  • Tactical vehicle approach doctrine: avoid front approaches; use side (tactical L) angles.
  • Vehicle safety in use-of-force: don’t stand directly in the path of a subject vehicle.
  • Deadly force limits: only when there’s an imminent threat of death/serious injury — not just to stop or detain someone or disable their vehicle.
All true, but the ICE agent was gathering evidence (video of the driver's face). To get a clear view of the driver's face in that situation, you need to be in front of the vehicle.
The officer trying to open her door and telling her to get out of the car approached from the side.
 
If someone on the other side could indulge, I would be grateful.
What compelling reason did Ms. Good have for not following the federal officers' directions to get out of the car when told to?
 
All true, but the ICE agent was gathering evidence (video of the driver's face). To get a clear view of the driver's face in that situation, you need to be in front of the vehicle.
The officer trying to open her door and telling her to get out of the car approached from the side.
1. You would have just as good a view through the driver's side window.

2. Pretty sure that the policy isnt "Don't place yourself in front of a vehicle unless you're trying to get a picture of the driver; if so, have at it, and make sure that you have your sidearm in your off hand.."
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: 92tide
If someone on the other side could indulge, I would be grateful.
What compelling reason did Ms. Good have for not following the federal officers' directions to get out of the car when told to?
From her perspective, she was making a nonviolent protest, and then a lot of ICE agents jumped out of their vehicles, rushed her car, and started yelling at her. Given ICE's general behavior in Minnesota, she might have had valid concerns over her safety.

She might have known that ICE had no authority to order her out of her car.

She might have already been given an order to move her car, and was trying to comply with that order.
 
Last edited:
Here's another dadgum (I want to say some words in vain, but I'll get caught by the Roomba) question:

WHY ARE THESE GUYS WEARING MASKS????

Would you be ok with your local PD wearing masks at traffic stops?

What the Hell are they hiding from?

In the words of Walter Sobchak in The Big Lebowsk: "Has the world gone CRAZY?!?!?"
 
From her perspective, she was making a nonviolent protest, and then a lot of ICE agents jumped out of their vehicles, rushed her car, and started yelling at her. Given ICE's general behavior in Minnesota, she might have had valid concerns over her safety.

She might have known that ICE had no authority to order her out of her car.

She might have already been given an order to move her car, and was trying to comply with that order.

That's the kicker. They had no authority to order her out of her car. They would need to get local PD to do it...well, if they were going to do it by the books. But as we have seen, ICE seems to not have to abide by any rules, codes, laws.
 
  • Thank You
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and 92tide
From her perspective, she was making a nonviolent protest, and then a lot of ICE agents jumped out of their vehicles, rushed her car, and started yelling at her. Given ICE's general behavior in Minnesota, she might have had valid concerns over her safety.

She might have known that ICE had no authority to order her out of her car.

She might have already been given an order to move her car, and was trying to comply with that order.
the responsibility is on the citizenry to not disrespect government authority within each exact moment. as long as they do that …
 
Here's another dadgum (I want to say some words in vain, but I'll get caught by the Roomba) question:

WHY ARE THESE GUYS WEARING MASKS????

Would you be ok with your local PD wearing masks at traffic stops?

What the Hell are they hiding from?

In the words of Walter Sobchak in The Big Lebowsk: "Has the world gone CRAZY?!?!?"
for the same reason the klan wore masks
 
Why in the world are you comparing these two deaths? Is blaming Biden always the end game?

LOL.....here we go again.

I did NOT mention Joe Biden ANYWHERE in my post.

This is what I posted...show me where I mentioned Biden, please.

==================

You think that's the issue here?

How about comparing 2 humans who lost their lives due to differing approaches to illegal immigration enforcement.

You can make all the arguments you want about whether Good deserved to die because of her actions - but compared to Laken Riley being murdered because of her actions - it's not even close.
 
From her perspective, she was making a nonviolent protest, and then a lot of ICE agents jumped out of their vehicles, rushed her car, and started yelling at her. Given ICE's general behavior in Minnesota, she might have had valid concerns over her safety.

She might have known that ICE had no authority to order her out of her car.

She might have already been given an order to move her car, and was trying to comply with that order.
Thanks for the response.
18 U.S.C. § 111 makes it a crime to “forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, or interfere with” certain federal officers and employees (including many federal law‑enforcement officers) while they are performing, or because of their performance of, official duties. Penalties range from up to 1 year for simple assault to significantly longer terms (up to 8–20 years) if a deadly weapon is used or bodily injury results.

Pulling your vehicle into the middle of the public road in front of an ICE patrol with the intent of impeding or interfering with ICE executing their federal law enforcement functions, it would seem, is a federal crime. At a minimum, it is probably cause for the law enforcement officers to investigate, which would involve the driver getting out of the car to answer questions.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: BamaHoHo
LOL.....here we go again.

I did NOT mention Joe Biden ANYWHERE in my post.

This is what I posted...show me where I mentioned Biden, please.

==================

You think that's the issue here?

How about comparing 2 humans who lost their lives due to differing approaches to illegal immigration enforcement.

You can make all the arguments you want about whether Good deserved to die because of her actions - but compared to Laken Riley being murdered because of her actions - it's not even close.
You’re kidding right? What administrations could you possibly be referring to when you say “differing approaches to illegal immigration enforcement”?

It’s not hard to understand what you mean:

Riley lost her life due to the Biden Administration’s immigration policy. That’s a terrible tragedy.

Good lost her life protesting the immigration policy you approve of. That’s sad, but not nearly as tragic as Riley.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg
Thanks for the response.
18 U.S.C. § 111 makes it a crime to “forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, or interfere with” certain federal officers and employees (including many federal law‑enforcement officers) while they are performing, or because of their performance of, official duties. Penalties range from up to 1 year for simple assault to significantly longer terms (up to 8–20 years) if a deadly weapon is used or bodily injury results.

Pulling your vehicle into the middle of the public road in front of an ICE patrol with the intent of impeding or interfering with ICE executing their federal law enforcement functions, it would seem, is a federal crime. At a minimum, it is probably cause for the law enforcement officers to investigate, which would involve the driver getting out of the car to answer questions.
I doubt it was in the middle of the road, given that a full-size SUV around it with little trouble.

They could walk up and politely ask questions through the open window. You know, attempt to de-escalate the situation instead of rushing in like a Temu SWAT team.

Of course, that would entail them getting proper training.

And even if they have the authority to arrest her, that still doesn't justify the shooter walking in front of her car.
 
I doubt it was in the middle of the road, given that a full-size SUV around it with little trouble.

They could walk up and politely ask questions through the open window. You know, attempt to de-escalate the situation instead of rushing in like a Temu SWAT team.

Of course, that would entail them getting proper training.

And even if they have the authority to arrest her, that still doesn't justify the shooter walking in front of her car.
or shooting and killing her
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg
Okay?

Literally changes nothing I said - he was likely unable to see the direction the wheels were pointed when she hit the accelerator. And she still hit him.
Reread Huck's post:

From the killer's camera, it's clear that she was quickly turning the wheel to her right before her vehicle completely stopped moving in reverse. If he was watching her, he knew exactly what she was doing.
If you'll recall, this was the camera he was looking at as this happened. If he was looking at the camera, and it was clear from that camera that the wheels were turned to the right, then he was certainly able to see the wheels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and 92tide
Her name was Laken Riley.

I did a search and found 14 posts about her in this forum.

Compare to this 14 PAGE thread about the lady shot while trying to evade law enforcement, and draw your own conclusions......

The meme you posted said she was trying to kill an ICE agent. That's not true. Riley's death was a terrible tragedy, as was Good's...even if circumstances differed slightly.
 
  • Thank You
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and 92tide
Just because he didn't follow protocol doesn't automatically mean the shooting was unjustified - an officer breaking the rules doesn't mean that someone endangering his life automatically gets a pass for their actions.
The protocol SPECIFICALLY SAYS that if you place yourself in front of a vehicle, you cannot use the threat of that vehicle as justification to shoot.

Apparently, an officer breaking the rules does automatically get a pass.
 
  • Thank You
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and 92tide
If someone on the other side could indulge, I would be grateful.
What compelling reason did Ms. Good have for not following the federal officers' directions to get out of the car when told to?
I asked this earlier and I didn't see a response. What authority does ICE have to demand people exit their vehicles or even show ID without some probable cause ?
 
  • Thank You
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and 92tide

New Posts

Advertisement

Advertisement

Latest threads