The first implies intent to kill, and in this case without a proper trial.
The second implies authorized use of deadly force under the law to halt an aggression that threatened serious bodily injury or death.
The first is not an option available to ICE. The second is an option available under the law, as Conor ably showed when he posted the Federal force use policy document.
But, if you keep implying that the first option was taken, you just might be able to get Conor's "slow people" the set fire to Minneapolis, which I know you think would help your party out, but it would certainly damage your "I'm a holy 100% Catholic" image you've been trying to establish in the last few days.
[By the way, do you think the Capitol Police had a right to execute Ashli Babbitt? Just curious. Either way, I would be interested in hearing your theory as to why or why not.]