Minneapolis Mayor Blasts Kristi Noem's Bs Ice Shoots Kills Woman in Minnesota
Key topics
A heated debate erupts over a Minneapolis incident where an ICE officer fatally shot a woman, with some commenters defending the officer's actions, citing a video showing the woman allegedly trying to run over a cop with her car, while others argue the officer acted contrary to training and DHS policies by approaching the vehicle from the front. The discussion takes a constitutional turn, with some dissecting the 2nd Amendment and others clarifying that the National Guard is not a state militia. As the conversation unfolds, a consensus emerges that the officer's actions may have escalated the situation, with one commenter noting that the video suggests the woman was trying to avoid the officer, not hit him.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Active discussionFirst comment
4m
Peak period
16
0-2h
Avg / period
5.8
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Jan 7, 2026 at 5:47 PM EST
2d ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Jan 7, 2026 at 5:51 PM EST
4m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
16 comments in 0-2h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Jan 8, 2026 at 1:14 PM EST
1d ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed
For the vast majority of US legal history the interpretation of this confusing text focused on the first half ("A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"). Nowadays all we hear is the 2nd half.
The idea that it's about an individual's right to carry and not about the right of a state to holding a standing army is a very modern invention and actually started around the Civil Rights era. Black Panthers were actually one of the major groups that pushed for this interpretation. To be clear, that interpretation existed before that but it was definitely a niche idea.
Tim Walz is threatening to mobilize the Minnesota National Guard to expel ICE.
The 2nd amendment was made exactly for a situation like this but today its original intent feels far gone.
This was settled when Reagan sent NG units from some states overseas over the objection of said states' governors.
https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/ROA-Times/issues/1990/rt9...
> ICE officers are trained to never approach a vehicle from the front and instead to approach in a “tactical L” 90-degree angle to prevent injury or cross-fire, a senior Department of Homeland Security official told NBC News. > Officers are also instructed not to shoot at a moving vehicle and only to use force if there is an immediate risk of serious injury or death, the official said. > ICE officers are also instructed that firing at a vehicle will not make it stop moving in the direction of the officer.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/minnesota-ice...
What I think needs to happen, investigation. Most likely the ICE officer will still be released because he'll testify he thought he was going to be killed. He will likely no longer be part of ICE in a few hours.
I would bet everything I own against that without a second thought.
It's been wild watch folks who couldn't say out loud or to themselves "secret police are necessary and good" say "well, this police work is super dangerous and needed so we can't know who these brave men are".
this was just suicide by cop with extra steps