Florida sheriff warns rioters 'we will kill you' as protests spread across US
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
A Florida sheriff has issued a stark warning to anyone planning to protest against immigration raids in his state.
Brevard County Sheriff Wayne Ivey was speaking at a press conference ahead of roughly 1,800 protests planned across the US today (June 14).
Some of those are in opposition to the Washington military parade that marks the 250th anniversary of the US Army and coincides with president Donald Trump's 79th birthday, with others protesting immigration raids.
Protests in Los Angeles, California are continuing for an eighth day, and they have spread across the country with riot police sent to at least five more cities.
California governor Gavin Newsom filed an emergency motion to try and stop Trump sending in the National Guard and Marines, saying their presence would encourage civil unrest and increase tensions.
Meanwhile, Trump likened the protests to a 'foreign invasion'.
But Sheriff Ivey has made his stance on rioting and protests in his state and elsewhere very clear.
'You're watching what's taking place out there. You're seeing police officers that are being attacked, being spit on, being being put in harm's way just for doing their jobs,' he said at the press conference on Thursday.
'You're seeing ICE agents that are being targeted for doing their jobs and you're seeing obstructionists that are doing all of this, standing in the way of law and order.
'Not here, not in the state of Florida.
'If (you) throw a brick, a firebomb, or point a gun at one of our deputies, we will be notifying your family where to collect your remains at because we will kill you, graveyard dead.
'We're not going to play. This has got to stop.'
Florida's attorney general James Uthmeier added 'we do not allow rioting in the state of Florida' to applause from the audience.
It's been about five years since an anti-riot act, the Combating Public Disorder Act, was passed in the state.
The act came into force following thousands of Black Lives Matter protests which swept the US after the death of George Floyd in 2020.
It increased penalties for anyone taking part in a violent public disturbance and gave law enforcement more leeway in dealing with violent protesters.
The bill also allows people to sue local governments for damages caused during a riot or unlawful assembly, creates new crimes that include mob intimidation and inciting a riot, and means anyone who tears down a memorial to a historical figure could face up to 15 years in prison. More Trending
Sheriff Ivey continued: 'If you resist lawful orders, you're going to jail. Let me be very clear about that.
'If you block an intersection or roadway in Brevard County, you are going to jail. If you flee arrest, you're going to go to jail tired because we are going to run you down and put you in jail.
'If you try to mob rule a car in Brevard County, gathering around it, refusing to let the driver leave, in our county you're most likely going to get run over and dragged across the street.
'If you spit on us, you're going to the hospital and in jail. If you hit one of us, you're going to the hospital and jail and most likely get bitten by one of our big, beautiful dogs that we have here.'
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: Urgent recall for vitamin gummies over 'life-threatening health risk'
MORE: Man 'urinates on $10,000 worth of Spam and sausages forcing them to be tossed'
MORE: Lawmaker forcefully removed from Trump secretary's LA protests conference and handcuffed
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
32 minutes ago
- NBC News
Republican party divisions emerge following U.S. strikes on Iran
Divisions are showing among Republican lawmakers following President Trump's decision to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky denounced the decision and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia also spoke out. Trump maintained support from lawmakers, including Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
An Iranian attack on US military bases could draw the UK into the conflict
When I got to Chequers on Sunday morning the prime minister had clearly been up for most of the night and hitting the phones all morning with calls to fellow leaders in Europe and the Middle East as he and others scrambled to try to contain a very dangerous situation. His primary message on Sunday was to try to reassure the public that the UK government was working to stabilise the region as best it could and press for a return to diplomacy. But what struck me in our short interview was not what he did say but what he didn't - what he couldn't - say about the US strikes. It was clear from his swerve on the question of whether the UK supported the strikes that the prime minister neither wanted to endorse US strikes nor overtly criticise President Trump. Instead, his was a form of words - repeated later in a joint statement of the E3 (the UK, Germany and France) to acknowledge the US strikes and reiterate where they can agree: the need to prevent Iran having a nuclear weapon. He also didn't want to engage in the very obvious observation that President Trump simply isn't listening to Sir Keir Starmer or other allies, who had been very publicly pressing for de-escalation all week, from the G7 summit in Canada to this weekend as European countries convened talks in Geneva with Iran. 4:00 It was only five days ago that the prime minister told me he didn't think a US attack was imminent when I asked him what was going on following President Trump's abrupt decision to quit the G7 early and convene his security council at the White House. When I asked him if he felt foolish or frustrated that Trump had done that and didn't seem to be listening, he told me it was a "fast moving situation" with a "huge amount of discussions in the days since the G7" and said he was intensely pressing his consistent position of de-escalation. What else really could he say? He has calculated that criticising Trump goes against UK interests and has no other option but to press for a diplomatic solution and work with other leaders to achieve that aim. 1:15 Before these strikes, Tehran was clear it would not enter negotiations until Israel stopped firing missiles into Iran - something Israel is still saying on Sunday evening it is not prepared to do. The US has been briefing that one of the reasons it took action was because it did not think the Iranians were taking the talks convened by the Europeans in Geneva seriously enough. It is hard now to see how these strikes will not serve but to deepen the conflict in the Middle East and the mood in government is bleak. Iran will probably conclude that continuing to strike only Israel in light of the US attacks - the first airstrikes ever by the US on Iran - is a response that will make the regime seem weak. 2:38 But escalation could draw the UK into a wider conflict it does not want. If Iran struck US assets, it could trigger article five of NATO (an attack on one is an attack on all) and draw the UK into military action. If Iran chose to attack the US via proxies, then UK bases and assets could be under threat. The prime minister was at pains to stress on Sunday that the UK had not been involved in these strikes. Meanwhile, the UK-controlled airbase on Diego Garcia was not used to launch the US attacks, with B-2 bombers deployed from Guam instead. There was no request to use the Diego Garcia base, the president moving unilaterally, underlining his disinterest in what the UK has to say. The world is waiting nervously to see how Iran might respond, as the PM moves more military assets to the region while simultaneously hitting the phones.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Washington tells Trump after Iran strikes: No more ‘forever war'
The trauma of America's post-9/11 conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan was evident in Washington on Sunday as Americans reckoned with the implications of Donald Trump's decision to launch strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. Across the political spectrum, varying factions unified under the banner of opposition to the kind of nation-building ground assault that defined America's two wars launched by the Bush administration. It is the only area of agreement between a faction of progressives and pro-Trump paleoconservatives who opposed the U.S. becoming involved in what up until now had been an Israeli military campaign and their opponents, a waning neoconservative faction in Washington which has called for further escalation in the form of strikes against other facilities and targeted assassinations of Iranian political and military leadership. Sunday morning, the Trump administration publicly leaned towards the former group. Three top administration officials, Trump's vice president, Defense Secretary and Secretary of State, spoke to journalists and urged Iranian leaders to choose against responding to the U.S. strike. Pledging that the U.S. was not seeking to topple Iran's government, the trio left open an off-ramp as Vance claimed: 'We're not at war with Iran. We're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' But both Democrats and Republican opponents of military force against Iran were smarting after Saturday night's attacks, and many cast doubt on the U.S.'s ability to avoid what Senator Jim Risch, one of the administration's defenders, said would be another 'forever war'. A number of Democrats urged more of their party to sign on to a resolution aimed at reining in the president's war powers. The resolution's lone Republican supporter, Rep. Thomas Massie, called on his party to do the same while condemning the influence of AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby in Washington, in a pair of interviews. 'MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER,' wrote Trump on Truth Social, in a lengthy post against Massie. But for Democrats, the bombing of Iran represented an issue where common ground could be found. 'This is a defining moment for the Democratic party. We need to stand against war with Iran,' warned one of the resolution's co-sponsors, Rep. Ro Khanna. Rep. Adam Smith, one of the party's more centrist members who voted for the Iraq War in 2002, released a lengthy statement on Saturday for Trump's refusal to seek congressional authorization for the strikes. He also warned against the kind of Iraq-style intervention he once supported: 'The path that the President has chosen risks unleashing a wider war in the region that is both incredibly unpredictable and treacherous.' The effort to rein in Trump's military powers gained Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's support on Saturday as well. A strong supporter of Israel, Schumer nonetheless accused the administration of making 'erratic threats' and having 'no strategy'. 'The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now increased,' added the Senate Democratic leader. On the right, conservative supporters of the president who opposed Israel's sudden military strikes — which occurred during the first U.S-Iran talks in years — were furious and worried about the future of the White House's domestic agenda. Former congressman Matt Gaetz, speaking with . Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene on his OANN show, accused Israel of seeking 'regime change' in Iran. He also tore into the Netanyahu government, accusing the prime minister of trying to avoid his own electoral defeat by getting the U.S. involved in his war and attacked Israel over the alleged existence of its own nuclear weapons program. Steve Bannon, writing on Gettr, derided Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio for claiming Sunday that the U.S. still sought peace with Iran. 'Guys, please run this by [Benjamin] Netanyahu,' he quipped. Curt Mills, executive director of the American Conservative, warned that it was now going to be extremely difficult for Trump to back the U.S. out of what it had started. 'Goal posts. Instantly moved,' Mills wrote as he reacted to calls for further strikes reportedly made on Israeli media. 'They're going to keep asking Trump to do much more, forever, until he or another American president Says No.' 'The goal posts will be moved until morale collapses,' he added: 'Every drop of juice is squeezed from Trump's political capital.' Even those who defended the administration's involvement in the Israeli military campaign were hesitant to endorse the kind of foreign military footprint that America sustained during the so-called War on Terror. Risch, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, praised the president's 'decisive action' in his own statement after previously writing in May that the administration should insist on 'full dismantlement of the Iranian nuclear program', including civilian enrichment, during now-scuttled negotiations. 'This is Israel's war not our war,' the senator said. 'This is not the start of a forever war. There will not be American boots on the ground in Iran.'
