The headline should say, "Illegal alien shot by officers defending US border"

#76
#76
Weezy said:
I seem to recall a story of Bostonians throwing rocks at British soldiers, at which point British soldiers fired into the crowd killing a kid. That **** led to a revolution.

Don't mind me, just trolling along.
Click to expand...
Not really worried about a revolution, because they aren't going to be able to take over anything, and even if they did, they'd just have a new boarder to cross.
 
#77
#77
That's not the point, the point is that throwing rocks does not justify firing a weapon towards a crowd. Now if one came up behind an officer and bashed his head with a rock with the intent of killing him, then sure. But the boy died on the mexican side of the river.

I'm not expecting a Mexican revolution. But I fully expect them to be pissed.
 
#78
#78
volinbham said:
The whole "we must not criminalize migration" BS from the Mexican president is one of the biggest spin jobs I've ever heard.
Click to expand...

Especially if you heard Wolf Blitzer's interview of him before CNN buried it. Wolf asks him if immigrants were allowed to just cross their southern border without papers and he said, no, that is a violation of law, they must be subject to a background check and have proper paperwork from the Mexican government or else they can be imprisoned and/or deported (I'm paraphrasing).

The fact is, Mexico's immigration laws are much harsher than ours would be even if we enforced them, but we shouldn't let facts get in the way of good ol' emotion and political posturing. This guy is playing us for chumps.
 
#79
#79
Weezy said:
That's not the point, the point is that throwing rocks does not justify firing a weapon towards a crowd. Now if one came up behind an officer and bashed his head with a rock with the intent of killing him, then sure. But the boy died on the mexican side of the river.

I'm not expecting a Mexican revolution. But I fully expect them to be pissed.
Click to expand...

Stoning from a crowd is just as deadly an assault as firing a weapon. It used to be a favorite method of execution in olden days.
 
#80
#80
Weezy said:
That's not the point, the point is that throwing rocks does not justify firing a weapon towards a crowd. Now if one came up behind an officer and bashed his head with a rock with the intent of killing him, then sure. But the boy died on the mexican side of the river.

I'm not expecting a Mexican revolution. But I fully expect them to be pissed.
Click to expand...

Lets look at it this way

You are alone, dealing with multiple suspects. You are trying to detain one, while the rest are assaulting you with rocks and probably making verbal threats. Your closest back-up is miles away. After repeatedly telling them to stop, they continue to pound you with rocks of various sizes.

Are you going to

A)Ask them to please stop, you are hurting me
B)Let the law breaker go and flee the area with your tail between your legs
C)Display your Democratic National Committee Member Card
D)Call Rahm Emanuel on the phone and ask what he would do
E)Pull your weapon and stop the threat
 
#81
#81
Weezy said:
I seem to recall a story of Bostonians throwing rocks at British soldiers, at which point British soldiers fired into the crowd killing a kid. That **** led to a revolution.

Don't mind me, just trolling along.
Click to expand...

Clearly trolling. This act did not, in and of itself, lead to a revolution. In actuality, the soldiers were represented in court by John Adams, a Bostonian, who argued that they had a right to defend themselves against the rock throwing crowd and thus were innocent, and most of them were acquitted by a jury of Massachusetts men. Two were found guilty of manslaughter and punished by branding on their thumbs.
 
Last edited:
#82
#82
Weezy said:
That's not the point, the point is that throwing rocks does not justify firing a weapon towards a crowd. Now if one came up behind an officer and bashed his head with a rock with the intent of killing him, then sure. But the boy died on the mexican side of the river.

I'm not expecting a Mexican revolution. But I fully expect them to be pissed.
Click to expand...
Lesson here. Don't attempt to harm people with guns.
 
#83
#83
Weezy said:
That's not the point, the point is that throwing rocks does not justify firing a weapon towards a crowd. Now if one came up behind an officer and bashed his head with a rock with the intent of killing him, then sure. But the boy died on the mexican side of the river.

I'm not expecting a Mexican revolution. But I fully expect them to be pissed.
Click to expand...

With all due respect once a rock is bashed against someones head they are in no way able to defend themselves from that point on.

If they were tiny stones (gravel size) then I would have a problem with it. Any sized stone can be deadly, ever heard the expression don't bring a knife to a gun fight? It applies fairly well here.
 
#84
#84
J-P said:
Stoning from a crowd is just as deadly an assault as firing a weapon. It used to be a favorite method of execution in olden days.
Click to expand...

He could've taken the suspect (or left him for all I care) and went back to his truck. If his life was truly threatened, his best option was to leave, not fire bullets across the river to their side of the border. You're next argument will probably be along the lines of, if he leaves, who is going to protect the border....I'd like to think that regardless of if he's there or not, he's not stopping a mob of people by himself. Surely, border patrol has better ideas then just firing into the crowd.
 
#85
#85
Weezy said:
That's not the point, the point is that throwing rocks does not justify firing a weapon towards a crowd. Now if one came up behind an officer and bashed his head with a rock with the intent of killing him, then sure. But the boy died on the mexican side of the river.

I'm not expecting a Mexican revolution. But I fully expect them to be pissed.
Click to expand...

I believe you're looking at the word "rocks" as if they were small pebbles the boys were playfully tossing near the officers. From another story

[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]U.S. authorities said Tuesday a Border Patrol agent was defending himself and colleagues when he fatally shot the 15-year-old as officers came under a barrage of big stones while trying to detain illegal immigrants on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande.[/FONT]
Click to expand...
 
#86
#86
No question about it, the agents were in their full right and responsibility to protect themselves using deadly force. I am fine with a possible Mexican revolution. At least that way, the line of the border can be defined better
 
#87
#87
Weezy said:
He could've taken the suspect (or left him for all I care) and went back to his truck. If his life was truly threatened, his best option was to leave, not fire bullets across the river to their side of the border. You're next argument will probably be along the lines of, if he leaves, who is going to protect the border....I'd like to think that regardless of if he's there or not, he's not stopping a mob of people by himself. Surely, border patrol has better ideas then just firing into the crowd.
Click to expand...

I have a gun and the mob has rocks, they have a hard choice about who's to be sacrificed to keep me from arresting a criminal on my land.
 
#88
#88
I guess I'm just morally wired different than you all. I could never justify shooting into a crowd and potentially killing several people all over immigrants who are probably committing a harmless crime (the non-*********-bomb-on-the-back type of immigration). Even if they are dangerous, generally, when someone crosses the border, you have several miles to detain him. It didn't have to be done right then and there. I would have gotten on my bike, and got the **** out.

I see everybody's point. I would pull out my gun if I could not leave, but I have a hard time believing that was the case. That would have to be some serious rock hurling. Like some Braveheart type ****.
 
#89
#89
Weezy said:
He could've taken the suspect (or left him for all I care) and went back to his truck. If his life was truly threatened, his best option was to leave, not fire bullets across the river to their side of the border. You're next argument will probably be along the lines of, if he leaves, who is going to protect the border....I'd like to think that regardless of if he's there or not, he's not stopping a mob of people by himself. Surely, border patrol has better ideas then just firing into the crowd.
Click to expand...

Remind me not to pick you when I'm choosing teams. Your way of handling these matters is lilly livered, yellow, and borderline treason. How can you even begin to know whether or not his life was "truly threatened"?

How awesome it must be to be you.. Able to walk away from a situation that is potentially larger than you and then besmirch those who have the courage to do what you could not.
 
#90
#90
So will this be anything akin to the Israeli-flotilla situation?

Do we expect condemnation for this act?
 
#92
#92
Weezy said:
I guess I'm just morally wired different than you all. I could never justify shooting into a crowd and potentially killing several people all over immigrants who are probably committing a harmless crime (the non-*********-bomb-on-the-back type of immigration). Even if they are dangerous, generally, when someone crosses the border, you have several miles to detain him. It didn't have to be done right then and there. I would have gotten on my bike, and got the **** out.

I see everybody's point. I would pull out my gun if I could not leave, but I have a hard time believing that was the case. That would have to be some serious rock hurling. Like some Braveheart type ****.
Click to expand...

Your right, officers enforcing the law should just forget their job when it becomes dangerous and let someone else worry about it later.
 
#93
#93
Jesus he's border patrol. It's not Rambo sneaking into the heart of 'Nam. Walker Texas Ranger is here to stop the Mexican terrorists from taking our jobs while raping our pritstine white women. How's that for lilly livered, yellow, and borderline treason...?

I was actually trying to be civil.
 
#94
#94
I would love to know more information than this nugget.....

At least one rock came from behind the agent, who was kneeling beside a suspected illegal immigrant whom he had prone on the ground, [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]FBI [COLOR=#366388! important]spokeswoman [/COLOR][COLOR=#366388! important]Andrea [/COLOR][COLOR=#366388! important]Simmons[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] said. The agent told the rock throwers to stop and back off, but they continued. The agent fired his weapon several times, hitting one who later died, said the FBI, which is leading the investigation because it involved an assault on a federal officer. The agent was not injured, Simmons said.
Click to expand...

Not knowing every thing, if I am on a review board, the officer would have to explain to me how he felt that his life was in danger. From the above...... rock throwing doesn't fit the bill.
 
#95
#95
Weezy said:
Jesus he's border patrol. It's not Rambo sneaking into the heart of 'Nam. Walker Texas Ranger is here to stop the Mexican terrorists from taking our jobs while raping our pritstine white women. How's that for lilly livered, yellow, and borderline treason...?

I was actually trying to be civil.
Click to expand...

Cash, good to see you back!
 
#96
#96
KB5252 said:
Your right, officers enforcing the law should just forget their job when it becomes dangerous and let someone else worry about it later.
Click to expand...

No, but there are different levels of enforcement. Shooting into a crowd is last resort. Like I said earlier, this could be a last resort situation, but I, personally (to make it clear to the tar and feather type around here that this is opinion due to lack of video), doubt his life was threatened to the point of not being able to leave. He could of left, got on the radio, detain the suspect later on, and brought it in a riot team. If a riot team or backup is not available, I still would not fire into the crowd when it was not necessary.
 
#97
#97
Weezy said:
Jesus he's border patrol. It's not Rambo sneaking into the heart of 'Nam. Walker Texas Ranger is here to stop the Mexican terrorists from taking our jobs while raping our pritstine white women. How's that for lilly livered, yellow, and borderline treason...?

I was actually trying to be civil.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to be rude, I realize it may have come off that way but I was simply trying to make a point.
 
#98
#98
OrangeEmpire said:
I would love to know more information than this nugget.....



Not knowing every thing, if I am on a review board, the officer would have to explain to me how he felt that his life was in danger. From the above...... rock throwing doesn't fit the bill.
Click to expand...

Have you been to the "Force Science" training? Good stuff IMO. It touches on what you are asking.
 
#100
#100
KB5252 said:
A couple of surgical strikes won't solve anything. There's always the next cartel to take over for the previous one. There needs to be a fundamental change in the way Mexico approaches government, economy and industry. One of the big reasons we don't shut the border and force that change is that we are afraid of what system they choose to put in place. In reality what we are doing is subsidizing Mexico's economy because we fear they will replace the current structure with a communist government.
Click to expand...

That is not the reason that our politicians have consistently neglected to enforce immigration laws.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top