Minnesota Nice Conflicts with ICE

In the wake of the shooting that left 37-year-old Renee Good dead, the country seems to have become even more divided (if such a thing were possible) along partisan lines. Many Republicans have reaffirmed their support for ICE and labeled the shooting an act of self-defense by Officer Jonathan Ross. Democrats have been quick to condemn Ross’s actions, instead labeling him a murderer. The dichotomy of narratives is rather stark, and yet we’ve all watched the same videos. The result of this shooting has not only been polarization, but a partisan rallying in which both sides appear to be treating the situation as if it’s black and white. But perhaps, like with most things, it’s a bit more complicated.

Naturally, the division we are seeing on a national scale has manifested onto Dartmouth’s campus. Both Dartmouth’s Turning Point USA chapter and the Dartmouth Political Union have held discussions on the topic. A recent article from The Dartmouth described a recent TPUSA meeting on the topic as fairly nuanced, but described a stark division between the attitudes of TPUSA members and those uninvolved in the organization, who were merely present to offer dissent. It is unfortunate that the article failed to offer any nuance of the views of conservative students at Dartmouth.

From my perspective, the average conservative expressed skepticism towards the necessity of Ross’s use of lethal force. Moreover, several pointed out that Renee Good was clearly turning left to the right to flee from the approaching officers, and that her acceleration overlapped with her turning the wheel to the right (with Ross in the front-left area of the car). It is clear to most that the circumstances did not call for such action. It was a mistake. The same officer who shot Renee Good was involved in an incident last June in which he was dragged by a fleeing vehicle nearly 100 yards, which required 50 stitches on his arm. With this sort of trauma, it may have triggered him to react in this abrupt manner. Ultimately, however, past trauma is no justification for excessive force.

The divisive public response to the shooting has been anything but surprising. Renee Good has been portrayed by Democrats as a martyr against ICE; she is the perfect political ammunition that came at a very opportune time. In order to further their attack on federal immigration enforcement, Good’s death has been capitalized on well by the Democratic Party. It has mobilized an effective opposition to ICE and the Trump Administration’s larger agenda. With massive protests erupting across the country, millions of Americans are under the impression that the federal government is comparable to the Nazi Party. This, of course, could not be further from the truth. In America, we have to pretend to live under an oppressive government in order to feel part of a resistance. Meanwhile, over the last few weeks, thousands of actual martyrs have been killed in protesting a truly oppressive regime in Iran. We often forget how lucky we are to be living in this country; it is no wonder that immigration is such a big topic.

Renee Good was the victim of a mistake, not an oppressive regime. And while the officer should have refrained from shooting her, her actions can be described as nothing other than foolish. Some say she was at the scene attending to unrelated family matters; others contend that she was actively seeking to interfere with ICE operations. Whether either or both of these narratives is true is irrelevant: by fleeing after receiving a lawful command from an officer of the law, Good demonstrated an egregious lack of judgment.

Ultimately, Good was the victim of both an officer’s mistake and of misguided left-wing ideology. As has been established, the moral character of ICE and the federal government is equated in the public sphere to that of the Nazis. The result has been hundreds, if not thousands, of incidents of civilians interfering with federal law enforcement. It is no surprise that at some point a mistake like this would happen, given the number of hostile militants who seek to cause trouble in their encounters with law enforcement.

The Republican response to this incident was as unnuanced as the Democrats’. Of course, the response has been to stand behind Officer Ross. This is certainly an unpopular stance among the public, as it is harder to win support when zero sympathy or nuance is demonstrated. Rather than frame the incident as an inevitable mistake due to consistent interference in federal law enforcement by the militant left, the incident is apparently as black and white for the Republicans as it is for the Democrats. It’s not often that a party approaches any modern issue with nuance, but I cannot imagine this approach by Republicans will be more politically successful than if they had conceded even a bit of error. Although clearly Republican politicians would beg to differ, or else they would not be diehard defenders of the officer. After all, politics is cynical. Jonathan Ross is to the Republicans as Renee Good is to the Democrats: merely a pawn in a larger game of chess.