A growing rift has emerged between the National Rifle Association (NRA) and former President Donald Trump following the controversial shooting death of Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old nurse, by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis.

Conflicting Narratives Emerge

The incident, which occurred on Saturday, has sparked intense debate over gun rights and law enforcement conduct. While federal officials initially claimed Pretti was ‘brandishing’ a weapon, subsequent investigations have failed to support this assertion. Video evidence revealed Pretti was holding only a cell phone when agents confronted him, and his firearm was secured before the fatal shooting.

Trump’s statement that Pretti ‘shouldn’t have been carrying a gun’ prompted swift pushback from the NRA. The gun rights organization issued a clear response, stating, ‘The NRA unequivocally believes that all law-abiding citizens have a right to keep and bear arms anywhere they have a legal right to be.’

Legal Gun Ownership at Center of Debate

Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara has confirmed that Pretti was a lawful gun owner with a valid permit to carry. This fact has become central to the developing controversy, particularly as some political figures have attempted to characterize Pretti as a potential threat.

Official Investigation Ongoing

A preliminary review by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Office of Professional Responsibility has made no mention of Pretti brandishing a weapon at agents, contradicting initial claims by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The White House has indicated that the administration continues to review all aspects of the incident.

Gun Rights Advocates Push Back

The NRA has also criticized other officials’ comments about the incident, including those from a Justice Department official who suggested approaching law enforcement while armed could justify the use of deadly force. The organization called such statements ‘dangerous and wrong,’ emphasizing the need for a complete investigation before drawing conclusions.

As investigations continue, the incident has highlighted tensions between gun rights advocacy, law enforcement protocols, and civilian rights, sparking broader discussions about the intersection of legal gun ownership and public safety.