The ICE "agent" shot her three times, the second and third shots were fired through the driver's side window as the car was passing him. That is absolutely clear. That is what the video evidence shows.

An investigation would quickly establish the facts. A trial would establish whether he knew when he fired that it was likely, either through intention or recklessness, that by firing two more shots through the side window (even if the first shot could be excused as self defence) that he would kill her. That is what makes it murder. It is obvious from the video in the public domain that that was the case, certainly clear enough to justify his arrest and detention whilst the facts are confirmed.

Many of the posts on this and similar threads on the matter effectively suggest that she was justifiably killed because of her assumed political views, or association with civil rights or lawyers groups. To kill someone for those reasons is, quite simply, summary execution, for political reasons. Such a killing is entirely unacceptable, abhorrent, and to suggest it is despicable.

A proper investigation, followed by a trial would establish that and guilt. Sadly, the current regime in The United States will almost certainly not carry out an arrest or investigation. They allowed the shooter to drive away unhindered, still in possession of the weapon, (it was a crime scene and the weapon used was evidence central to any case) before these "trained law enforcement officers" trampled all over the scene; and both Trump and Noem declared very shortly after (with no investigation) that it was justified by self defence.

4 minutes ago, JAG said:

Many of the posts on this and similar threads on the matter effectively suggest that she was justifiably killed because of her assumed political views

Rubbish. Show these comments.

From what I have seen posted most of those comments feel it was justified because she failed to listen to instructions from a government official and that she tried to injure and/or kill him.

11 minutes ago, JAG said:

The ICE "agent" shot her three times, the second and third shots were fired through the driver's side window as the car was passing him. That is absolutely clear. That is what the video evince shows

An investigation would quickly establish the facts. A trial would establish whether he knew when he fired that it was likely, either through intention or recklessness, that by firing two more shots through the side window (even if the first shot could be excused as self defence) that he would kill her. That is what makes it murder. It is obvious from the video in the public domain that that was the case, certainly clear enough to justify his arrest and detention whilst the facts are confirmed.

Many of the posts on this and similar threads on the matter effectively suggest that she was justifiably killed because of her assumed political views, or association with civil rights or lawyers groups. To kill someone for those reasons is, quite simply, summary execution, for political reasons. Such a killing is entirely unacceptable, abhorrent, and to suggest it is despicable.

A proper investigation, followed by a trial would establish that and guilt. Sadly, the current regime in The United States will almost certainly not carry out an arrest or investigation. They allowed the shooter to drive away unhindered, still in possession of the weapon, (it was a crime scene and the weapon used was evidence central to any case); and both Trump and Noem declared very shortly after (with no investigation) that it was justified by self defence.

What do you expect? The very same still think and believe The storming of Capitol Hill was peaceful

I doubt they truly believed it, but that's what sounds good for them to say, same for this, they desperately looking for evidence to justify this murder

37 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Well, I disagree this was an attack, and you get that from one who have faced knives, axes and weapons and also military training, where we learn to do as little damage as possible when needed against civilians. We where Training for specific situations ss a daily task, and for law enforcement in most civilized counties do this often, but doesnt seem to be in USA, where shoot first is the first rule.

Ai says when I look up my answer to you

Research and expert analysis as of January 2026 highlight significant differences between U.S. law enforcement training and that of many European nations, often supporting your observation regarding the duration and focus of training

. 

Training Disparities

• Duration: In the U.S., basic police training typically lasts about 20–21 weeks (roughly 833 hours). In contrast, countries like Norway, Finland, and Germany require three years of training, often including university-level degrees in criminal justice.

• Focus on Force vs. Communication: U.S. academies historically prioritize firearms and physical force training (averaging 71 hours) over de-escalation and communication (averaging 21 hours).

• Legal Standards: U.S. law does not require officers to prove that lethal force was a "last resort" or strictly proportional, whereas many European nations have much more rigorous rules for what constitutes a justified use of force

I didn't say it was an attack, I said...."When you attack, resist, or charge at ICE agents ", clearly in this case it was not an attack but she resisted by not obeying the commands to vacate the vehicle.

Refusing to exit your vehicle when lawfully ordered by an ICE agent (who is a federal officer), or driving off, can often be charged as resisting, impeding, or interfering with a federal officer under federal law — specifically 18 U.S.C. § 111.

The AI training disparities are irrelevant, as clearly this was in the USA, therefore only their laws apply here!

If this is the same guy that was drug by a car already, he has some kind of learning disability. Pretty stupid to get in front of a car, especially around icy and snowy roads. His manhood was damaged and he acted badly.

1 hour ago, mikeymike100 said:

If she had obeyed the commands to vacate the vehicle, she would not have been shot, but she didn't and we know what happened!

You are missing the point, she was executed for not getting out of the car, she would have been stopped by police a bit further up the road, runners do this every day for police to catch...FACT, not get executed.....

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

ICE have no authority over US Citizens.

Yes they do. I am shocked that you do not know this, generally you are up to date on these things.

ICE are federal law enforcement officers. Similar to the FBI, they enforce federal law. Any person, regardless of nationality, who interferes with them or blocks them or threatens them in the course of their duties can be legally detained and/or arrested. Anyone. ICE doesn't need the local police to do this. They have the power and legal authourity to do it on their own.

Your mistaken attitude here is what causes much of the trouble IMHO. Protesters think they can act with impunity because ICE aren't "real" police. So they take liberties and are shocked that there is reaction. That may be the case in this tragic event as well.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

ICE have no authority over US Citizens.

Bit late to be arguing over legal technicalities, anybody armed pointing a gun at somebody has a level of authority, in practice, and anybody with any sense at all would comply with instructions from an armed official, except perhaps an entitled lefty.

Especially when requested several times by an armed officer who rightly or wrongly was clearly "excited" If she had simply done as she was told she would still be alive, end of story.

This is a perfect example of what can happen if one disobeys a perfectly reasonable instruction Textbook FAFO

Any other radical lefties would do well to watch and learn, it may prevent a few others from achieving martyrdom

7 hours ago, riclag said:

CheckMate evidence ! Commands :Get out of the car 4X. while impeding LE.

What do you think ?

Vice President JD Vance did post and repost the cellphone video (filmed by ICE agent Jonathan Ross) multiple times on X on January 9, 2026, using it to back the administration's false narrative that Renee Nicole Good was a "radical" who endangered the agent's life by weaponizing her vehicle, akin to "domestic terrorism." The version shared cuts just after the initial confrontation and vehicle movement, with gunshots audible but not visually shown (no explicit firing or aftermath wounds), ending with Ross muttering "f***ing bitch" as he walks away.

It does not clearly depict her ramming or running over anyone—instead, Good appears conversational ("I'm not mad at you," waving agents on) before accelerating forward while turning right (away from Ross), with any "impact" seeming like camera jostling rather than bodily harm. Ross is seen walking freely immediately after, uninjured, which aligns with Mayor Jacob Frey's criticism that this contradicts self-defense claims of imminent threat or being "run over." She comes across more as a frustrated community observer or protester trying to disengage than a terrorist.

Vance's amplification adds partisan spin by insisting on "media dishonesty", much like you spread and self-defense without addressing video ambiguities, which has intensified protests in Minneapolis (now entering day 3 with clashes) and online backlash, as critics argue it inflames divisions rather than de-escalating.

3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Yes they do. I am shocked that you do not know this, generally you are up to date on these things.

ICE are federal law enforcement officers. Similar to the FBI, they enforce federal law. Any person, regardless of nationality, who interferes with them or blocks them or threatens them in the course of their duties can be legally detained and/or arrested. Anyone. ICE doesn't need the local police to do this. They have the power and legal authourity to do it on their own.

Your mistaken attitude here is what causes much of the trouble IMHO. Protesters think they can act with impunity because ICE aren't "real" police. So they take liberties and are shocked that there is reaction. That may be the case in this tragic event as well.

So, you agree with murdering a lady driving away in her car, right, got it...........🫡

With you, I am not surprised..........

She tried to run the agent over................🤣

Thanks all for your input.

My take now is that this is a tragedy brought about by a series of questionable decisions on all sides.

Clearly Good and Good knew what was going on. They wanted to creat social media content, wanted to "twist the tiger's tail", wanted to make ICE look stupid. That is why one of them exited the car to start filming. It is obvious that this was a planned disruption. One would block the street and engage with the agents, the other would film.

Also obvious that Renee Good was not scared, not intimidated, not surprised. She fully expected to be confronted. I think what she did NOT expect was to be ordered from her car. It was a lawful order and not up for debate. But she took it as a challenge. Her partner then, insanely, shouted "drive baby drive"! This set the shooting in motion.

Agent Ross was engaged with Ms Good 2nd outside. She was being antagonistic, but not so badly. He approached from behind and circled the car as she spoke. I have a feeling he never expected the car to move. IMHO his decision to stand in front of it was stupid. By this point, it was obvious that this was a stunt being played by the Goods.

But... Renee suddenly reversed, surprising both ICE agents. This was a sudden escalation. Honestly, I don't think she even noticed Ross in front of her car. She tried to take off and assumed this would make good media content- escaping from incompetent ICE goons. Her wife was ready and in position to record the entire interaction.

But Ross WAS there. He made a split second decision and shot. Good or bad decision? That is up to an investigation.

No domestic terrorists here. No Nazis. No goons. Just a series of mistakes that led to a tragic and unnecessary death.

4 minutes ago, transam said:

So, you agree with murdering a lady driving away in her car, right, got it...........🫡

With you, I am not surprised..........

She tried to run the agent over................🤣

Did I say that? You may want to read my above post...

2 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Did I say that? You may want to read my above post...

Your hero leader said she did, was he lying......? yes or no....🤫

7 minutes ago, transam said:

You are missing the point, she was executed for not getting out of the car, she would have been stopped by police a bit further up the road, runners do this every day for police to catch...FACT, not get executed.....

No your missing the point.

In the vast majority of police encounters — including those involving orders to exit a vehicle — if the person complies with lawful commands, the risk of anyone being shot drops dramatically to near zero.

Law enforcement data and studies consistently show that deadly force is overwhelmingly used in situations involving active resistance, threats, or perceived imminent danger (e.g., reaching for a weapon, fleeing aggressively, or assaulting officers)

You're right that people flee traffic stops or refuse to exit vehicles daily (runners/suspects often get pursued and arrested without lethal force), and in many routine police encounters, refusal alone doesn't lead to shooting — especially if no weapon or immediate danger is perceived. However, in this case, the key escalation (per official narrative) was the vehicle moving toward the agent, which can justify deadly force if officers reasonably fear being struck (vehicles are considered deadly weapons in law).

if Renee Nicole Good had not escalated by attempting to drive off (or accelerating her SUV in a way perceived as toward the agent), she would almost certainly still be alive today.

2 minutes ago, transam said:

Your hero leader said she did, was he lying......? yes or no....🤫

I don't have a "hero leader" but if you mean the response from the Trump administration? They are going way too far in their characterization. Not lying, but exaggerating to a ridiculous degree. I would like to see someone, anyone in political power call for restraint instead of rushing to pour gasoline on the fire.

Just now, mikeymike100 said:

No your missing the point.

In the vast majority of police encounters — including those involving orders to exit a vehicle — if the person complies with lawful commands, the risk of anyone being shot drops dramatically to near zero.

Law enforcement data and studies consistently show that deadly force is overwhelmingly used in situations involving active resistance, threats, or perceived imminent danger (e.g., reaching for a weapon, fleeing aggressively, or assaulting officers)

You're right that people flee traffic stops or refuse to exit vehicles daily (runners/suspects often get pursued and arrested without lethal force), and in many routine police encounters, refusal alone doesn't lead to shooting — especially if no weapon or immediate danger is perceived. However, in this case, the key escalation (per official narrative) was the vehicle moving toward the agent, which can justify deadly force if officers reasonably fear being struck (vehicles are considered deadly weapons in law).

if Renee Nicole Good had not escalated by attempting to drive off (or accelerating her SUV in a way perceived as toward the agent), she would almost certainly still be alive today.

Another one that agrees with a needless execution, CLEARLY seen by us all.................☹️

Just now, Hanaguma said:

I don't have a "hero leader" but if you mean the response from the Trump administration? They are going way too far in their characterization. Not lying, but exaggerating to a ridiculous degree. I would like to see someone, anyone in political power call for restraint instead of rushing to pour gasoline on the fire.

Lying, don't you know the difference, they're eating the cats.............🙄

When will these nutters learn some simple common sense ?

If they protest in live traffic there is a good chance, rightly or wrongly, that they will get run over,

If they refuse to obey armed officials (or anybody else with a gun ) there is a good chance that they may well get shot

If they insist on going on hunger strike they will die thin and hungry and best of all, their "human rights" actually prohibit the force feeding that would save them

It really isn't rocket science

2 minutes ago, transam said:

Another one that agrees with a needless execution, CLEARLY seen by us all.................☹️

I totally agree it was needless, all she had to do was vacate the the vehicle as ordered, almost certainly she would be with her 'wife; and kids

Legally, it's a disputed officer-involved shooting under review! Its not clear what happened as you seem to think, I will wait for the official investigation, unlike some who have already made their minds up!

Just now, mikeymike100 said:

I totally agree it was needless, all she had to do was vacate the the vehicle as ordered, almost certainly she would be with her 'wife; and kids

Legally, it's a disputed officer-involved shooting under review! Its not clear what happened as you seem to think, I will wait for the official investigation, unlike some who have already made their minds up!

All he had to do, was just to back off and whenever she was caught by police, be charged with her offence against Ice.

Nobody would had been hurt!

Simple as that

22 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

That is up to an investigation.

How can there be an investigation when the Fed are investigating themselves and the local police are not given access to the crime scene?

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

All he had to do, was just to back off and whenever she was caught by police, be charged with her offence against Ice.

Nobody would had been hurt!

Simple as that

Correct, that is the norm, but the shooter was a thug with a gun, one of Trumps "elite"...😬

3 minutes ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

How can there be an investigation when the Fed are investigating themselves and the local police are not given access to the crime scene?

BCA, hennepin county sheriffs office (HCSO), other state agencies ALL lack jurisdiction in federal cases as ICE are federal employees, period. In addition, Minnesota being run by fraudsters (refer to MASSIVE current/ongoing somali welfare fraud) and their refusal to cooperate with ICE /immigration has precluded them from the investigation for good reason. They cannot be trusted, obviously.

---

The federal government’s decision to exclude Minnesota from the ICE shooting investigation is a direct consequence of the state’s deliberate obstruction of immigration enforcement. Minnesota Statute § 171.12 and Minneapolis Code Chapter 19.30(a)(3) actively restrict information sharing with ICE, violating 8 U.S.C. § 1373. The Laken Riley Act mandates cooperation, yet Minnesota’s sanctuary policies—like Hennepin County’s refusal to honor detainers—prioritize political posturing over public safety. When a state repeatedly undermines federal authority, its participation in sensitive investigations becomes a conflict of interest. This isn’t about transparency—it’s about ensuring accountability isn’t sabotaged by entities that have already shown contempt for the rule of law. The DOJ’s lawsuit (U.S. v. Minnesota, 0:25-cv-03798) proves systemic noncompliance. Trust is earned, not demanded.

https://x.com/DOGEai_tx/status/2009319577730023521?s=20

35 minutes ago, transam said:

Correct, that is the norm, but the shooter was a thug with a gun, one of Trumps "elite"...😬

And, if more domestic terrorists like Renee Good attempt to weaponize their vehicles against federal (or any) LE agents, they will dealt with accordingly, proportionately in accordance with laws not the least of which was enacted by MN governor Walz himself.

• Minnesota Statute §609.066, signed by Gov. Tim Walz in July 2020, which permits officers to deploy deadly force against a vehicle accelerating toward them as an imminent threat, without requiring physical impact.

  https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.066

ICE are the new domestic terrorists in America. And Trump is the most dangerous man on the planet at the moment.

9 hours ago, riclag said:

CheckMate evidence ! Commands :Get out of the car 4X. while impeding LE.

What do you think ?

Might want to check the law on that and not a trump admin claim

7 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

ICE are the new domestic terrorists in America. And Trump is the most dangerous man on the planet at the moment.

And this level of hyperbole and hysteria will lead to what desired outcome for you, exactly?

Will it make the situation safer for protesters or more dangerous? How about for ICE agents? For illegal immigrants?

It is meaningless posturing and virtue signalling that in the end will only result in more people getting hurt for no reason.

It is of great importance that the American people rise up in a unified manner and resist government sponsored domestic terrorism with every ounce of their power, against this heinous, fascist abuse of power.

1 minute ago, Hanaguma said:

And this level of hyperbole and hysteria will lead to what desired outcome for you, exactly?

Will it make the situation safer for protesters or more dangerous? How about for ICE agents? For illegal immigrants?

It is meaningless posturing and virtue signalling that in the end will only result in more people getting hurt for no reason.

I have absolutely no interest in making things safer for the most foul ICE agents, who are not representing the vast majority of the American people with their extremist.

Just now, spidermike007 said:

I have absolutely no interest in making things safer for the most foul ICE agents, who are not representing the vast majority of the American people with their extremist.

Fine. How about making it safer for protesters? Because they are gonna get hurt if they go into protests thinking incorrectly that ICE agents have no police powers. Or thinking they are all Gestapo and nazis and the like. Because if you treat them like Nazis, they may just start to ACT like Nazis a little bit.

Protest legally. Don't endanger anyone. Don't break the law unless you are prepared to pay the price.

And you are mistaken in your belief that the vast majority of Americans are against this. THis issue is what won Trump the election.