![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/OIP-4257582829-300x100.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Saw thebesig’s article on ICEBlock – the Apple-only app that allows people to anonymously post suspected ICE sightings. Its stated purpose is to ‘help people avoid ICE interactions’ – essentially allowing interested parties who, shall we say, don’t really want to talk to an ICE agent for whatever reason (!) to be where the ICE agents aren’t.\u00a0 The argument against the app is that:<\/p>\n
\u201cAs you know, as you stated, there\u2019s been a 500% increase in violence against ICE agents, law enforcement officers across the country who are just simply trying to do their jobs and remove public safety threats from our communities.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0TAH<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
And that may well be… although logically, if conducting ICE raids on the unprecedented scale we are told, even if the percentage of confrontations stays mostly static, you would expect to see numerically higher assaults. Plus notice how they conflate LEO assaults with assaults on ICE. Lord knows I support neither action, but I do like the facts to be unambiguous.<\/p>\n
Now, ignoring the point that “can be used to enable” should be a legal non-starter – that is the same reason silencers and machine guns are NFA items and made expensive to procure. Just because something can be used to do something wrong does not mean you should ban the item over its potential. Remember the woman who wanted something (a gun maybe) banned because it had the capacity to hurt people, and the fella who responded by telling her that her assertion would be equivalent to him calling her a whore because she had the capability to be one? And we don’t sue Ford when a drunk kills someone with his F-150, nor Dunkin’ for making people fat.<\/p>\n
But there is also the list of court decisions that protect that sort of thing as protest, protected speech. Multiple courts have agreed that flashing your headlights to warn of a speed trap is legal. Pretty sure our legal eagles and lawers here might even agree that the bulk of precedence favors that style of warning, whether you\u00a0 (and ICE) like it or not,\u00a0 and is not something they can legally block.<\/p>\n
A while back we talked about some of those detainees. Not Kilmar Abrego Garcia (although I still want to see an unretouched photo of his hands\u00a0 to compare with the one Mr. Trump was waving around.)\u00a0 Or Sayed Nasr Noori, arrested by ICE at his own immigration hearing (ICE said there was no evidence he ever worked for the US forces in Afghanistan, despite his lawyers providing that proof to ICE, their judge, and the press. He is on a fast track to deportation about now regardless of whether he helped us or not\u00a0 \u00a0Military.com<\/a>.) Nope, this is based on information from ICE itself:<\/p>\n
According to new data from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE has detained over 56,397 immigrants nationwide as of June 15th, and 46% have no criminal history.<\/p>\n
In Los Angeles, the percentage of immigrants who have been arrested and have no criminal history is higher. According to the Deportation Data Project, ICE arrested 722 people in LA in the first 10 days of June. Only 30% were convicted criminals, while 57% had no criminal history when arrested. LAMag.com<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Yes, if they are illegal they have committed a civil infraction, I get that. But ICE is supposed to be concentrating on the worst of the worst, the bad-boy criminals, Tren de Aqua (intentional), the MS-13s\u00a0 – not the folks with no criminal offenses. Get to them AFTER you get rid of the bad boys.\u00a0 Bet if ICE actually concentrated on the gang-bangers and narcotraficantes their public approval would skyrocket, too.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"