Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara said Pretti had a valid permit to carry a gun and videos from the incident do not show Pretti approaching agents with a weapon in his hands.
A legal and tactical analysis of the Minneapolis Border Patrol shooting argues the officers’ use of force was lawful, centering on the suspect’s possession of a high-end, modified SIG Sauer P320 pistol and the “reasonable perception of imminent deadly force” established during a physical struggle.
⚡️🇺🇸JUST IN:
ICE agent in Minneapolis Minnesota realized too late that Alex Jeffrey Pretti was ALREADY DISARMED, after shooting he said: "Where's the Gun?” pic.twitter.com/6NJ0aXe4Lj
— Commentary: Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) January 24, 2026
The firearm matters—and the media is hiding it. At the Minneapolis Border Patrol shooting, the suspect was armed with a SIG Sauer P320 AXG Combat, a high-capacity 9mm pistol with a threaded barrel, extended 20–21 round magazine, and a SIG Romeo optic—a setup costing… pic.twitter.com/NECAGsjlbz
— Andrew Branca Show (@TheBrancaShow) January 24, 2026
The firearm matters—and the media is hiding it. At the Minneapolis Border Patrol shooting, the suspect was armed with a SIG Sauer P320 AXG Combat, a high-capacity 9mm pistol with a threaded barrel, extended 20–21 round magazine, and a SIG Romeo optic—a setup costing $1,500–$2,000. This was not a cheap carry gun.
Officers were in a physical struggle with an armed suspect when a gun was perceived and the word “gun” was shouted. Under settled self-defense law, officers are entitled to rely on fellow officers’ reasonable perceptions. They do not have to personally confirm the threat.
Once a firearm appears during active resistance, the legal standard is simple: reasonable perception of imminent deadly force. That standard was met here. Freeze-frame activism doesn’t override real-time dynamics, and the law does not require officers to wait to be shot. This was a tragic—but lawful—use of force.
The video does not show an “unarmed Good Samaritan.” It shows a chaotic physical struggle where a man later found to be armed intervenes, is pepper-sprayed, goes to the ground, and is then actively wrestled as ICE agents move in to regain control.
As the suspect stands up during… pic.twitter.com/lpUGgZ7gW8
— Andrew Branca Show (@TheBrancaShow) January 25, 2026
The video does not show an “unarmed Good Samaritan.” It shows a chaotic physical struggle where a man later found to be armed intervenes, is pepper-sprayed, goes to the ground, and is then actively wrestled as ICE agents move in to regain control.
As the suspect stands up during the struggle, agents reasonably perceive a firearm coming into play—and the first shot is fired. Under settled self-defense law, officers are not required to wait until a gun is fully raised or fired. Imminence includes the moment a weapon is accessed during resistance.
Freeze-frame activists keep asking “can you see the gun?” That’s the wrong legal question. The standard is reasonable perception in real time, including shouted warnings, movement, and the dynamics of a fight. This was a rapidly evolving use-of-force encounter, not an execution. The law does not require officers to gamble with their lives.