It’s the fog of war, for lack of a better term. The reactions to the recent shooting in Minneapolis involving Border Patrol that left Alex Pretti dead have been shambolic, and it’s on both sides. It’s not as clear-cut as the Renee Good shooting on January 7, where she clearly rammed into an ICE agent who later shot her in self-defense. There’s some serious analysis that must be done here, though Pretti was armed with a handgun. Was it his right? Sure, but the chances of things going south that could result in death, given the political climate, were also astronomical.
It’s already bad enough that we have Gov. Tim Walz comparing the situation in the city to Anne Frank and the Nazis, along with the stream of lies that the Pretti shooting was an execution. It makes things worse when FBI Director Kash Patel spreads some inaccurate information about carry laws. At the same time, bringing a gun to a political protest seems to be a recipe for disaster, which is why some states, like California, and numerous state attorneys general considered banning them at political rallies due to safety concerns.
Our own Cam Edwards at Bearing Arms was tweeting and re-tweeting some interesting takes about the incident. Moreover, he made a good point that maybe a briefing on the state’s gun laws would’ve been helpful before top officials took to the airwaves with misinformation. Patel said you cannot bring a loaded gun to a protest. That’s simply not true. Noem and even Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent even ran afoul of this. We're the side that's supposed to know the gun laws and regulations better than the Left.
It helps to remember that everything is stupid and it's only getting worse. Keeps things in perspective. https://t.co/1nRB8FPpK7
— Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) January 25, 2026
The White House should really put a lid on officials talking about gun laws and carrying at protests until they get an explainer from an attorney who actually knows federal and MN state law.
— Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) January 25, 2026
Tens of thousands of Virginia gun owners who showed up at the state capitol in 2020 would disagree with everything he said up to "you do not get to touch law enforcement." https://t.co/cMk7KKClTJ
— Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) January 25, 2026
Recommended
This is completely incorrect on Minnesota law.
— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) January 25, 2026
There is no prohibition on a permit holder carrying a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines at a protest or rally in Minnesota. https://t.co/m2EHW2zFEa
The AGs of DC, IL, CT, DE, HI, MD, MA, MI, MN, NV, NJ, NY, OR, PA, RI, VT, and WA argued in 2024 that there's no 2A right to carry guns at "events involving political speech, like political rallies and protests" because they are "often targets of violence" https://t.co/471u7bqPEi pic.twitter.com/bN5KHgMf4e
— Rob Romano (@2Aupdates) January 25, 2026
Astonishing.
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) January 24, 2026
They have the chance to legitimately show this was justified in the chaos of the moment, and instead they are going to keep repeating this “maximum damage” massacre fantasy.
This is what is killing public opinion. People hate being gaslit. https://t.co/xxwSqZA8UD
Minnesota and most states do NOT prohibit lawfully carrying a firearm in public. Claims suggesting otherwise are factually wrong.
— National Association for Gun Rights (@gunrights) January 25, 2026
What Minnesota and most states prohibit is carrying a firearm while committing a crime (or, often, with the intent to commit one). That legal… https://t.co/boSB9ogMDM
An extra magazine does not have any relevant legal significance to this situation. Many people carry a spare mag (and fwiw, most of them voted for President Trump). https://t.co/1shPOIS4in
— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) January 25, 2026
Bessent is wrong. I know plenty of people who participate in political events, including protests, and have their guns. It is their right. While we can say the man should not have gotten in an altercation with agents, merely exercising his 2A right with his 1A right is… https://t.co/v3BEY9q6RP
— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) January 25, 2026
In 2023, Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law that banned guns from being carried at "sensitive places," which included protests. https://t.co/MqPUBoViAK pic.twitter.com/2F5cAm2gM9
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) January 25, 2026
Also, notice anything?
Notice how we're barely talking about the billions of dollars of fraud in the Somali community in Minnesota?
— L A R R Y (@LarryOConnor) January 25, 2026
More from Fox News' Bill Melugin:
NEW: Since yesterday's deadly shooting in MN, I've talked to more than half a dozen federal sources involved immigration enforcement, including several in senior positions, who all tell me they have grown increasingly uneasy & frustrated w/ some of the claims & narratives DHS…
— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) January 25, 2026
...I've talked to more than half a dozen federal sources involved immigration enforcement, including several in senior positions, who all tell me they have grown increasingly uneasy & frustrated w/ some of the claims & narratives DHS pushed in the aftermath of the shooting.
Specifically, I'm told there is extreme frustration with DHS officials going on TV and putting out statements claiming that Alex Pretti was intending to conduct a "massacre" of federal agents or wanted to carry out "maximum damage", even after numerous videos appeared to show those claims were inaccurate. While they say it was a terrible decision to show up with a gun and inject himself into a federal law enforcement operation, there is no indication Pretti was there to murder law enforcement, as videos appear to show he never drew his holstered firearm.
These sources say this messaging from DHS officials has been catastrophic from a PR and morale perspective, as it is eroding trust and credibility - comparing it to when Democrats falsely claimed the border was closed or that Haitians were being whipped at the border.Some of these sources have described DHS’ response to the shooting as “a case study on how not to do crisis PR”, one said they are so “fed up” that they wish they could retire, another said “DHS is making the situation worse”, and another added that “DHS is wrong” and “we are losing this war, we are losing the base and the narrative.
"These sources all believe this is going to end up being what they call a “bad shoot”, a “shitty” situation that happened in seconds where agents likely heard “gun!”, then the disarmed firearm may have had an accidental discharge that spooked the agents, and they shot. The agents do not have the luxury of multiple slow motion angles - and had to make split second decisions.
All of the sources support the mass deportation agenda, but have serious hesitations about the way it is being carried out and the messaging that comes with it. Many of the sources have expressed frustration that ICE is routinely blamed for the actions of Border Patrol, a completely separate agency.
I reached out to DHS for comment on concerns that their rhetoric and comments have damaged their credibility.
DHS provided the following statement to Fox News:
“We have seen a highly coordinated campaign of violence against our law enforcement. This individual committed a federal crime while armed as he obstructed an active law enforcement operation. As with any situation that is evolving, we work to give swift, accurate information to the American people as more information becomes available."
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Please support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join TOWNHALL VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member