A few weeks ago: "regime change is bad" was updated to "regime change is good". This was a great success, so now new updates are being released.
Now, there is a new update: "must not be infringed" now means "if you're carrying a concealed gun at a protest, you are a domestic terrorist and will be summarily executed after being disarmed and restrained."
Please prepare for your next update, due to be released in a couple of months. In "We oppose Middle Eastern quagmires", strike the word 'oppose' and insert 'support'.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and remember to keep trusting the plan.
The other consideration on top of that is the morale of the ICE officers and of law enforcement in general. You're never going to get mass deportations and border enforcement on the scale you want if the administration is seen to throw ICE officers under the bus, even if one of them might deserve it. That rips the rug out from under them, and it will make them more hesitant to do their job.
This is far from an ideal situation, but just as with the other scenario that the OP is still fuming about, the side that clings to ideals in the face of an enemy cynically engaged in the realpolitik of win-at-any-cost will inevitably lose.
This needs to be hammered into people's heads. Saw so many "conservatives" joining in the frenzy bleating about muh principles. Even if I can agree with specific gun rights angles, anyone joining in the frenzy amplifying anti-ICE sentiment right now without attaching the appropriate qualifiers is undoubtedly pushing in the wrong direction and is an enemy at the moment.
FWIW, I'm not criticizing ICE (this wasn't even ICE). I'm criticizing these guys and administration officials.
But here's the deal. What do you think will make ICE more hated? If people think they can be killed by ICE with impunity, or if they think there is some rule and procedure to use of force? Did the previous "ICE killing", more justified than this one, increase or decrease opposition to ICE?
Opposing accountability comes back to bite people. But it's OK if you want to claim I'm the enemy.
I agree, and that is why I am going back and forth with another user about accountability in this thread. Public perception is important so long as we are subject to the wills of any room temperature IQ normie capable of dragging themselves to the polls to vote.
The problem is when people get frenzied and frothing at the mouth over it and don't attach the appropriate qualifiers. I saw plenty of conservatives yesterday retweeting and amplifying known terrible people who have 90% the wrong message just because they agreed with the one part where they said they don't like this shooting. People need to keep their heads on straight and be pragmatic.
Are there that many conservatives who don't agree with this shooting? If so, I'm impressed, leaving aside the strategic issue of whether it is wise to amplify posts with 90% wrong messages.