明尼蘇達發生的示威抗議分子阻礙ICE行動而被槍殺的事件引起掀起了大風波，當然更多的是情緒宣泄，極少真正清醒的分析。這是我在X上發現的最清醒的一篇分析，用一句話來形容：就是碰瓷踢到了鋼板。如果是一個人站在路中間阻礙交通被警察槍殺，很明顯是警察濫用權力。但駕駛一輛SUV，並不服從執法者的命令，很顯然構成了現實的致命威脅，尤其是已經多次先例的情況下。
I don’t think suspect in yesterday’s confrontation with federal agents, woke up that day planning to get killed. I really don’t. What I do think is that she probably thought she was provoking them in a way that would end with her getting yanked out of the car, maybe shoved to the ground, detained, something ugly but non-lethal. The kind of thing that turns into a viral video where they get to play the victims and paint ICE as monsters. That’s a scenario people assume is safe, especially if they’ve been around activism long enough to believe the script always ends the same way. If her girlfriend was already outside the vehicle filming, that tells me this wasn’t spontaneous panic. That looks like intent to capture a moment. Maybe they thought, “We’ll push, they’ll overreact, we’ll get content.” I’m sure she didn’t think she’d get shot. I’m sure she thought she was in control of the situation. But then reality intervenes. Maybe she didn’t see the officer in front of the car. Maybe she had tunnel vision and was focused on the agent next to her. But she did accelerate forward, and once a vehicle is moving toward an officer, the situation changes instantly. At that point, whether she meant to or not, she put herself into a lethal scenario, and she lost her life. That’s tragic. It’s also not the same thing as “this just happened for no reason.” And if it turns out there’s evidence that this was coordinated... that the girlfriend was setting this up, encouraging it, orchestrating it to get a viral confrontation... then yeah, I think she should face charges too. Not just because someone died, but because if you help engineer a dangerous situation and someone ends up dead, you don’t get to wash your hands of it afterward. Sympathy doesn’t mean pretending people had no agency. And accountability doesn’t mean saying someone deserved to die. Both things can be true at the same time.
我不認為昨天與聯邦探員發生衝突的嫌疑人那天醒來就計劃著要被殺。我真的不這麽認為。但我認為，她當時可能以為自己是在挑釁，最終會被拖出車外，或許會被推倒在地，被拘留，總之會遭遇一些不愉快的、但不會致命的對待。這種事很容易被拍成病毒視頻，讓他們扮演受害者，把移民執法局（ICE）描繪成怪物。人們通常認為這種情景是安全的，尤其是那些長期參與維權活動的人，他們往往會覺得所有事情的結局都一樣。如果她的女友當時已經在車外拍攝，那就說明這不是一時衝動。這看起來像是故意要捕捉某個瞬間。也許她們當時想的是：“我們挑釁一下，他們肯定會反應過度，這樣我們就能獲得素材了。” 我相信她當時肯定沒想到自己會被槍擊。我相信她當時肯定覺得自己能掌控局麵。但現實並非如此。也許她根本沒看到車前的警官。或許她當時目光短淺，隻盯著旁邊的警員。但她的確加速向前行駛，一旦車輛衝向警員，情況就會瞬間改變。那時，無論她是否出於本意，她都把自己置於致命的境地，最終失去了生命。這很悲慘。但這並非“無緣無故發生的”。如果最終有證據表明這是一起有預謀的事件……是她的女友策劃、慫恿、安排這一切，意圖製造一場網絡熱議的衝突……那麽，我認為她也應該受到指控。這不僅僅是因為有人喪生，而是因為如果你參與製造危險局麵，導致有人死亡，事後你不能置身事外。同情並不意味著假裝人們沒有自主權。而追究責任也不意味著說某人罪有應得。這兩點可以同時成立。
