After the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by a Border Patrol agent in Minneapolis, the Trump administration’s first instinct was to spin the killing as legitimate because Pretti had been armed. That strategy is failing, and an important reason why is that the country’s premier gun-rights organizations refused to go along. At a time when issue-based activist groups increasingly bind themselves to one party or the other, that show of constitutional principle is worth applauding.
Pretti, who had a concealed-carry permit and no criminal record, appears to have tried to intervene after a federal agent shoved a woman toward the sidewalk on Saturday. A scrum followed in which he was pepper sprayed, knocked to the ground and shot multiple times in the back. Videos show he had not drawn his handgun, which was taken from him before he was shot.
That hasn’t stopped the Trump administration from suggesting that Pretti’s gun meant he somehow had it coming. “Listen, you can’t walk in with guns,” President Donald Trump saidTuesday. “But it’s just a very unfortunate incident.”
Others were crasser. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said Saturday: “I don’t know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign.” A Trump Justice Department official in California spouted off on X: “If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you.” Chief White House tough guy Stephen Miller smeared Pretti as a “would-be assassin.”
The Trump administration has been a close ally of gun-rights groups, and perhaps it expected them to play along. If so, it underestimated their independence. The National Rifle Association called the post from the DOJ official “dangerous and wrong.” It said officials should be “awaiting a full investigation, not making generalizations and demonizing law-abiding citizens.”
The Gun Owners of America, another advocacy organization, said on social media: “The Second Amendment protects Americans’ right to bear arms while protesting — a right the federal government must not infringe upon.”
Gun ownership these days might be a right-wing political signifier, but Second Amendment rights remain the same no matter their owners’ political views. Perhaps this tragedy will inspire some on the left to rethink their hostility toward the right to bear arms. Former congressman Dean Phillips (D-Minnesota) apologized over the weekend for having spent years mocking Second Amendment defenders when they argued guns were necessary to protect against a tyrannical government. “I’ve seen it with my own eyes,” he said.
Gun-rights groups gravitate toward the GOP because of the current politics of gun control, just as abortion-rights groups promote Democrats. But what gives such groups their power is that they are not simply sub-units of a political party but principled advocates of a particular cause.
In recent years, political polarization has distorted many of America’s leading advocacy organizations. Groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Sierra Club grew distracted from their core missions by progressive fads and woke staffers. The NRA has built an increasingly Republican reputation after once endorsing many Democrats, though that is as much because elected Democrats changed their views on guns.
Ultimately, most politicians will be more interested in staying in power than defending any particular principle. Advocacy groups that align too closely with one party will lose credibility with the broader public. Those that apply their principles consistently will enhance their authority. American politics would be healthier if more civil society groups stuck to their political guns.
The post A show of Second Amendment principle appeared first on Washington Post.
