Minneapolis Police Chief: Doesn’t Matter if Shooting Legally Justified Because People Are Upset

Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara warned on Face the Nation Sunday that public anger over a string of federal‑involved shootings has reached a breaking point, saying the city is so overwhelmed that even a finding of legal justification in the latest incident “does not matter at this point.”

Host Margaret Brennan asked the Minneapolis police chief his opinion about the facts of Saturday’s shooting of a protester in the city. He explained that he believes the videos speak for themselves. He continued, saying, “So I think very obviously, there are serious questions that are being raised.”

“And I think the greater issue is,” O’Hara continued, “even if there is an investigation that ultimately proves that at the time of the shooting it was legally justified, I don’t think that even matters at this point, because there just- there is so much outrage and concern around what is happening in the city.”

Pressed by Brennan on what he meant, O’Hara said Minneapolis residents “have had enough” after three shootings in less than three weeks, including two fatal encounters involving federal agents. He noted that his department recovered roughly 900 guns last year without firing a shot, yet now finds itself managing escalating chaos with only 600 officers. “This is not sustainable,” he said, describing the toll on a force he says is stretched “incredibly thin” as the city waits for leaders “on both sides to come together and figure this thing out.

The chief stated:

People have had enough. This is the third shooting now in less than three weeks. The Minneapolis Police Department went the entire year last year recovering about 900 guns from the street, arresting hundreds and hundreds of violent offenders, and we didn’t shoot anyone. And now this is the second American citizen that has been killed. It’s the third shooting within three weeks. People have been speaking out, saying that this was going to happen again. And I think everyone is kind of waiting for folks on both sides to come together and just figure this thing out. This is not sustainable. This police department has only 600 police officers. We are stretched incredibly thin. This is taking an enormous toll trying to manage all of this chaos, on top of having to be the police department for a major city. It’s too much.

Chief O’Hara stated that the decedent, 37-year-old Alex Jeffrey Pretti, was legally exercising his First and Second Amendment rights to protest and to be legally armed. The chief left out that Minnesota law requires a person to carry their permit and a photo ID to legally carry a sidearm. Minnesota law also states that a person must be carrying for a lawful purpose. A finding that he was interfering with a federal law enforcement operation could also negate the chief’s claim.
From the CBS transcript of the interview:

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, because we checked the Minnesota gun permit rules allow for concealed carry, and there are no restrictions on carrying in a protest.

O’HARA: Yes, that’s right.

…

You have a Second Amendment right in the United States to possess a firearm, and there are some restrictions around that in Minnesota. And everything that we see, that we are aware of, shows that he did not violate any of those restrictions. He is not a convicted felon, and he is someone that did have a permit for the handgun to carry it.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you have not seen evidence that there were multiple magazines, but- but would it even be illegal if that were the case?

O’HARA: I don’t think there is any relevance if someone is lawfully exercising their Second Amendment right to carry. The only question would be if they were using the weapon in a- for an unlawful purpose.

The chief left out that Minnesota law requires a person to carry their permit and a photo ID to legally carry a sidearm. As O’Hara stated, Minnesota law also states that a person must be carrying for a lawful purpose. A finding that he was interfering with a federal law enforcement operation could also negate the chief’s claim.

In the end, O’Hara’s interview underscored the widening gap between the city’s political narrative and the unresolved legal questions surrounding the shooting. While he warned that public anger has reached a breaking point, nothing in his remarks suggested residents should take matters into their own hands; his concern was the volatility already on the ground, not a call for escalation.

Yet his framing of the decedent’s actions, paired with omissions about Minnesota’s carry requirements and the legal limits on “lawful purpose,” leaves key issues unsettled. As investigators work to determine whether the armed protester’s conduct constituted lawful carry or interference with a federal operation, Minneapolis remains caught between public outrage, federal‑state friction, and a police force struggling to manage the strain.