Arizona bill 1070

[Moonlit_Angel]

Of course not. I've heard about drug smuggling along the U.S./Canada border, too, but I don't see anyone demanding a fence along that border.

I just really find it hilarious that white people think they have the right to tell ANYONE where they can and can't go. "We want our country back!"-yeah, somewhere, there's Native Americans going, "Wait, you can ask for that?" Mexicans, too, since Arizona's land mass DID belong to that area at one time.

Regarding that video clip...it's really comforting to know we've got people in power making laws based on stuff they freely admit they don't read. Seriously. That's fantastic .

Angela

 

[Bluer White]

I just really find it hilarious that white people think they have the right to tell ANYONE where they can and can't go.

...

 

[U2387]

wait, where's the heinous crimes being committed by illegals? the totally non-racial justification for this law?





i wonder what gigantic fucking liar Ms. Brewer has to say?

as ever, if these were translucent white immigrants with Irish accents, there would be no issue.

Great article!

We can always count on Irvine to produce a well written and relevant piece.

This is the central problem with the people arguing that this 1070 is somehow a response to the cartel related kidnappings and murders in Arizona.

They do not understand that, as is the case with all crime, it is a small number of people and groups that are responsible for 99.9999999% of it.

Illegal immigration needs to be addressed, but before we can address an issue, we need to deal with it honestly.

I strongly believe this, that is why, despite my disagreements, I strongly defended Diamond when he accurately interpreted and clarified what was in the actual text of the bill for us. I like to discuss honestly and on the merits.

So the facts are as you pointed out with respect to crime- it has been declining. The intensity, audacity and sheer brutality of what the cartels do makes it seem like it has increased in number, nothing more, nothing less.

It needs to be addressed, and as Obama and Giffords make clear in the article, it is being addressed.

The number of illegal immigrants in the US peaked around 2006 at 12 million and has declined to about 9 or 10 million since then.

Again, still an issue, still unacceptable, still needs to be dealt with, but pretending that it is a newly out of control problem that brings in record levels of crime is demonstrably false.

It also smacks of the kind of illegal immigration opportunistic rhetoric that the Republicans drum up every single election year without exception. If they cared, they would have joined McCain, Graham, GW Bush and Democrats in doing something constructive about the issue.

 

[U2387]

Of course not. I've heard about drug smuggling along the U.S./Canada border, too, but I don't see anyone demanding a fence along that border.

You can say that again!!

There is an immense amount of drug smuggling coming from the Canadian border. Ever since the crack downs in Miami in the 80s(Miami Vice anyone) a lot of the stuff gets flown right from Colombia, Mexico or the Dominican into Canada then smuggled here.

Most estimates have illegal drugs supplying anything north of about Richmond, VA as 90% crossing the Canadian border.

I went to school in Vermont, where most of the border is rural and the towns around it are greatly under policed. It is a serious crisis up there, and the gangs have really taken notice and advantage of the lack of policing up there since about 2004 and the results have been downright scary!

NYC based gangs have moved up, swept in a lot of local kids with the promise of money and drugs and are suspected of having been involved in the disappearance of an all American white Vermont girl who vanished after work at a local inn.

Many people living up there "hump" drugs through fields and woods over the border and into the vehicles of smugglers who wait on rural roads in Northern Vermont. The border patrol hangs out there and picks up some of the slack that is left by having the County Sheriff and 1 Deputy on duty in a lot of these counties, but they can not be everywhere. In Vermont, they focus on the 2 interstates, 89 and 91 that run into Quebec and to Montreal and Sherbrooke.

I have encountered numerous shady things on back roads near the border. My brother and I even had a gun pulled on us one time after an SUV came out from beside a barn and blocked our way. Luckily, my brother became suspicious as soon as we were blocked and we were spun around facing the other way and flooring it by the time we saw the gun, but it scared the shit out of us.

We went immediately to the nearest Vermont State Police barracks and they quickly diagnosed the problem. "You definitely ran into a look out car for drug smugglers. They pay local kids in cash and drugs and tell them to watch for certain cars that are known rivals looking to roll up and steal the loads of the people walking the drugs through the woods. Idiot kids probably had a car description matching yours, and since very few cars come through there, they did not bother to check further, they just confronted you."

Then the next quote really stuck in my mind:

"It happens all the time, but we don't have the resources, and the FEDS only care about Mexico, this is back burner here, and we are on our own."

 

[martha]

Fucking librul lamestream media.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

If this information is accurate, then I'm confused

(AP) MEXICO CITY — It's one of the safest parts of America, and it's getting safer.

It's the U.S.-Mexico border, and even as politicians say more federal troops are needed to fight rising violence, government data obtained by The Associated Press show it actually isn't so dangerous after all.

The top four big cities in America with the lowest rates of violent crime are all in border states: San Diego, Phoenix, El Paso and Austin, according to a new FBI report. And an in-house Customs and Border Protection report shows that Border Patrol agents face far less danger than street cops in most U.S. cities.

The Customs and Border Protection study, obtained with a Freedom of Information Act request, shows 3 percent of Border Patrol agents and officers were assaulted last year, mostly when assailants threw rocks at them. That compares with 11 percent of police officers and sheriff's deputies assaulted during the same period, usually with guns or knives.

In addition, violent attacks against agents declined in 2009 along most of the border for the first time in seven years. So far this year assaults are slightly up, but data is incomplete.

"The border is safer now than it's ever been," said U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman Lloyd Easterling.

He said one factor is that with fewer jobs available amid the U.S. recession, illegal immigration has dropped. And responding to security concerns after 9-11, the Border Patrol has doubled the number of agents in the region since 2004.

Nonetheless, border lawmakers and governors say their region is under siege and needs more troops.

"Violence in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border continues to increase at an alarming rate. We believe that this violence represents a serious threat to the national security of the United States as well as a serious threat to U.S. citizens that live along the 1,969-mile long border," a dozen bipartisan members of Congress from border states wrote President Obama.


In Arizona, a stringent new immigration law takes effect next month, requiring police to question suspects' immigration status if officers believe they're in the country illegally. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said in a televised interview last weekend: "We are out here on the battlefield getting the impact of all this illegal immigration, and all the crime that comes with it."

In response to the concerns from the border states, Obama pledged to send 1,200 National Guard troops to help and spend an extra $500 million on border security.

His one-time rival for the presidency, Arizona Sen. John McCain, said he should send at least 6,000 troops, which are needed because he said Arizona leads the nation in marijuana seizures, suffered 368 kidnappings in 2008 and has the highest property crime rates in the U.S.

But FBI crime reports for 2009 says violent crime in Arizona declined. And violent crimes in southwest border counties are among the lowest in the nation per capita – they've dropped by more than 30 percent in the last two decades. Of America's 25 largest cities, San Diego – with one out of four residents an immigrant – has the lowest number of violent crimes per capita.

Opponents of increased border security are frustrated by descriptions of a wave of violence when the statistics show the region to be relatively safe.

"Politicians are hyping up this incredible fear across the country about the border, but these numbers show these are lies being perpetrated on the American public," said immigrant advocate Isabel Garcia at Tucson-based Derechos Humanos. "The warnings about violence are just an excuse to crack down on migrants who want to work and be with their families."

Even residents of the border region who want more security are surprised by the talk of violence.

"I have to say, a lot of this is way overblown," said Gary Brasher of Tuboc, Arizona, who is president of the Coalition for a Safe and Secure Border.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Wait, wait, waaaaaiiiiiiit...politicians might actually be using fear tactics to drum up support for stupid ideas? Wow. That's shocking.

Thanks for sharing that, MrsSpringsteen-if that's indeed true, that's very good news, and definitely makes the issues surrounding this all the more confusing.

Also, U2387, thank you for perfectly illustrating my argument . Especially considering it now sounds like it'd be more dangerous up north than down south.

(And what a scary story, too-a gun ? Glad you and your brother weren't hurt .)

Angela

 

[U2387]

Wait, wait, waaaaaiiiiiiit...politicians might actually be using fear tactics to drum up support for stupid ideas? Wow. That's shocking.

Thanks for sharing that, MrsSpringsteen-if that's indeed true, that's very good news, and definitely makes the issues surrounding this all the more confusing.

Also, U2387, thank you for perfectly illustrating my argument . Especially considering it now sounds like it'd be more dangerous up north than down south.

(And what a scary story, too-a gun ? Glad you and your brother weren't hurt .)

Angela

I would say the South is still a lot more dangerous given how the Mexican border cities have gone from bad to in many cases entirely controlled by the cartels. Juarez, across from El Paso is a perfect example. However, most of the trouble is on the Mexican side of the border in these areas- El Paso in fact is a very safe, very charming old West type City- one of those places where blasting Joshua Tree or R&H seems to jive perfectly with the landscape.

Though the South is still way more dangerous, it is much, much better policed both by locals and border patrol, and you can isolate the danger better. You have many more options down there and are never too far from the Border Patrol. Most people crossing through the desert or the woods or the river are breaking the law, but are not violent people, just desperate.

Up North, if you are going through the woods, generally you are doing something truly criminal as it is relatively easy for a clean person to pass US-Canadian customs. You never know where you will run across these people, and again, it is very rural and under policed. The danger is less in number but harder to predict or isolate, if that makes any sense.

As for the story, thanks for the concern I too am glad nothing bad happened, even having grown up in the City and seen plenty of crime, it was extremely scary.

MA has a big insurance discount if you take defensive driving training, and my brother and I both took it. Luckily, my brother was at the wheel and he remembered how to flip a car around going 30 MPH and stay in control.

Easily the scariest thing that has ever happened to me.

 

[Irvine511]

the Canadian border is more porous because Canadians are, generally, rich, white, and English speaking.

 

[Irvine511]

it's not about race, guys, it's about how we are a nation of laws.

Altered mural fuels racial debate in Prescott

by Dennis Wagner - Jun. 4, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic



A group of artists has been asked to lighten
the faces of children depicted in a giant
public mural at a Prescott school.

The project's leader says he was ordered to
lighten the skin tone after complaints about
the children's ethnicity. But the school's
principal says the request was only to fix
shading and had nothing to do with political
pressure.

The "Go on Green" mural, which covers two
walls outside Miller Valley Elementary School,
was designed to advertise a campaign for
environmentally friendly transportation. It
features portraits of four children, with a
Hispanic boy as the dominant figure.

R.E. Wall, director of Prescott's Downtown
Mural Project, said he and other artists were
subjected to slurs from motorists as they
worked on the painting at one of the town's
most prominent intersections.

"We consistently, for two months, had people
shouting racial slander from their cars," Wall
said. "We had children painting with us, and
here come these yells of (epithet for Blacks)
and (epithet for Hispanics)."

Wall said school Principal Jeff Lane pressed
him to make the children's faces appear
happier and brighter.

"It is being lightened because of the

controversy," Wall said, adding that "they
want it to look like the children are coming
into light."

Lane said that he received only three
complaints about the mural and that his
request for a touch-up had nothing to do
with political pressure. "We asked them to fix
the shading on the children's faces," he said.
"We were looking at it from an artistic view.
Nothing at all to do with race."

City Councilman Steve Blair spearheaded a
public campaign on his talk show at Prescott
radio station KYCA-AM (1490) to remove the
mural.

In a broadcast last month, according to the
Daily Courier in Prescott, Blair mistakenly
complained that the most prominent child in
the painting is African-American, saying: "To
depict the biggest picture on the building as
a Black person, I would have to ask the
question: Why?"

Blair could not be reached for comment
Thursday. In audio archives of his radio
show, Blair discusses the mural. He insists
the controversy isn't about racism but says
the mural is intended to create racial
Advertisement

controversy where none existed before.

"Personally, I think it's pathetic," he says.
"You have changed the ambience of that
building to excite some kind of diversity
power struggle that doesn't exist in Prescott,
Arizona. And I'm ashamed of that."

Faces in the mural were drawn from
photographs of children enrolled at Miller
Valley, a K-5 school with 380 students and
the highest ethnic mix of any school in
Prescott. Wall said thousands of town
residents volunteered or donated to the
project, the fourth in a series of community
murals painted by a group of artists known
as the "Mural Mice."

The public art, funded by a $5,000 state
grant through the Prescott Alternative
Transportation Center, was selected by
school students and faculty.

"The parents and children love it," Lane said.

i'd write a response, but my girlfriend Wonkette says it best:

Hard to find even the Gallows Humor in this story, so maybe we won’t even try. Maybe it’s time to admit that large chunks of America are in the hands of unreconstructed racists and vulgar idiots, and that the popular election of a black man as president just might’ve pushed these furious, economically doomed old white people into a final rage that is going to end very, very badly. Ready? Here you go: An Arizona elementary school mural featuring the faces of kids who attend the school has been the subject of constant daytime drive-by racist screaming, from adults, as well as a radio talk-show campaign (by an actual city councilman, who has an AM talk-radio show) to remove the black student’s face from the mural, and now the school principal has ordered the faces of the Latino and Black students pictured on the school wall to be repainted as light-skinned children.

This is America, in 2010, and there’s a dozen more states and endless white-trash municipalities ready to Officially Adopt this same Official Racist Insanity.

The children depicted on the mural, as we mentioned before but feel compelled to repeat, are little kids who go to the school — “a K-5 school with 380 students and the highest ethnic mix of any school in Prescott. Wall said thousands of town residents volunteered or donated to the project.”

And these children, for the past several months as this happy mural encouraging “green transportation” was being painted by local artists, have been treated to the city of Prescott’s finest citizens driving by and yelling “******” and “Spic” at this school wall painted with pictures of the children who attend the school. And this has been encouraged by a city councilman, Steve Blair, who uses his local radio talk show to rile up these people and demand the mural be destroyed.

And now the faces are being painted white, “because of the controversy.”

Remember where you were, when you could still laugh about teabaggers and racists and Arizonans, because funny time is almost over. If the unemployment keeps up — one in five adult white males has no job and will never have a job again — and people keep walking away from their stucco heaps they can’t afford and the states and cities and counties and towns keep passing their aggressive racist laws to rile up the trash even more, shit’s going to very soon become very bad, and whether it’s the National Guard having wars in the Sunbelt Exurbs against armies of crazy old white people who are finally using their hundreds of millions of guns, or whole Latino neighborhoods burned to the ground the way the Klan used to burn down black neighborhoods a century ago, we are in for a long dark night and no light-colored paint is going to fix that.

Read more at Wonkette: Wonkette : Arizona School Demands Black & Latino Students’ Faces On Mural Be Changed To White

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

Many people living up there "hump" drugs through fields and woods over the border and into the vehicles of smugglers who wait on rural roads in Northern Vermont. The border patrol hangs out there and picks up some of the slack that is left by having the County Sheriff and 1 Deputy on duty in a lot of these counties, but they can not be everywhere. In Vermont, they focus on the 2 interstates, 89 and 91 that run into Quebec and to Montreal and Sherbrooke.

Last year these two drug smugglers ran through our backyard and hid out in the woods behind our house. It was pretty scary. Luckily the cops were chasing them and got them after a few hours. The Canadian border is only a few miles from here, and thats definetly where they were headed.

 

[bigjohn2441]

i think if we raise the salaries of the people who guard our borders, than everything will be ok.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I would say the South is still a lot more dangerous given how the Mexican border cities have gone from bad to in many cases entirely controlled by the cartels. Juarez, across from El Paso is a perfect example. However, most of the trouble is on the Mexican side of the border in these areas- El Paso in fact is a very safe, very charming old West type City- one of those places where blasting Joshua Tree or R&H seems to jive perfectly with the landscape.

I think you're right about this. I've heard stories about Juarez, wouldn't walk through that town at high noon, let alone any other time if even half the stories about it are true.

Though the South is still way more dangerous, it is much, much better policed both by locals and border patrol, and you can isolate the danger better. You have many more options down there and are never too far from the Border Patrol. Most people crossing through the desert or the woods or the river are breaking the law, but are not violent people, just desperate.

Up North, if you are going through the woods, generally you are doing something truly criminal as it is relatively easy for a clean person to pass US-Canadian customs. You never know where you will run across these people, and again, it is very rural and under policed. The danger is less in number but harder to predict or isolate, if that makes any sense.

It makes perfect sense. And I fully agree with your view of people trying to cross the desert and wooded areas down south, too-that's exactly why I can't get too mad at them for the fact they came here illegally. I know it's against the law, yes. But if they're coming here with a good reason and just haven't had the chance or the means to do all the legal work yet...I can sympathize (it's sort of like how stealing's illegal, but if a mother stole some food to feed her child, I can make an exception, you know?).

In any case, thank you for the information regarding the two borders. It certainly answers a lot of questions and further confirms a lot of my viewpoints surrounding this issue.

As for the story, thanks for the concern I too am glad nothing bad happened, even having grown up in the City and seen plenty of crime, it was extremely scary.

MA has a big insurance discount if you take defensive driving training, and my brother and I both took it. Luckily, my brother was at the wheel and he remembered how to flip a car around going 30 MPH and stay in control.

Easily the scariest thing that has ever happened to me.

I'd imagine so. Thank goodness for that course and your brother's know-how. You're welcome .

As for that mural story...wooooooooooooooowie. I realize I've been swearing a bit here and there lately, and apologize, but seriously, you've GOT to be fucking kidding me. That's really scary and really disturbing (and I love how the little kids got to hear the racial slurs. What a charming example to set for the future generations ...). Steve Blair is an asshole. Plain and simple. BS that this doesn't have any racial motivation.

I think that Wonkette bit is absolutely true, sadly. I mean, I knew that when we got our first black president, there'd be some friction and some idiots saying and doing stupid stuff. I'm not naive. I expected it. But on this grand a scale... People need to desperately get over themselves. You can disagree with Obama's policies all you want, that's totally fine, and there very well can be legitimate argument in some of the policy discussions. But to hate him simply because of his skin-you're officially a jerk if you do that, and I have no respect for your viewpoints anymore at that point. Grow up and get some functioning brain cells. I'm really tired of this.

Angela

 

[martha]

An article in the LA Times this morning.

I have to think that may supporters of this bill will read this and think "So?" I think they just don't care.

Arizona's SB 1070 immigration law an unpleasant reminder of Chandler's past - latimes.com

Some highlights:

At the end of what became known as the Chandler Roundup, 432 illegal immigrants had been arrested and deported. But during those five days, local police and federal officers also detained dozens of U.S. citizens and legal residents — often stopping them because they spoke Spanish or looked Mexican.

Teresa Rodriguez, 69, knows what it is like to be singled out. Although she — and her parents — were born in the United States, Rodriguez was stopped three times by Chandler police and Border Patrol agents during the roundup.

In one incident, she was speaking Spanish to a friend while walking to the store to pick up medicine for her grandson. A police officer on a bicycle came up on one side of her, an immigration officer on the other. She recalled one saying in Spanish, "You don't belong here, do you?"

When Rodriguez, who speaks English, answered in Spanish that she was a citizen and that her birth certificate was at home, they didn't believe her. She said the police officer grabbed her arm and forced her to sit on the curb until she finally convinced them that she was a citizen.

Arizona State University professor Mary Romero, who specializes in social justice issues and has written several articles about Chandler, said authorities even used reports with some information completed in advance: nationality, Mexican; skin color, medium; hair color, black; occupation, laborer.

And finally, the South African apartheid moment:

For Rodriguez, who said she received about $27,000 of the cash settlement, a reminder of the roundup is never far away. Whenever she leaves the house, she brings along her birth certificate.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

That Rodriguez story is crazy...so...she speaks in Spanish to a friend and gets stopped because of it, and then is ironically questioned by an immigration officer in Spanish. Seriously, WTF?

This was my favorite part of the whole thing:

police demanded proof of citizenship from children walking home from school

Nice. Real nice. Harass and scare the crap out of the children, who may not fully understand all the legalities involved and won't have their parents around to help them out or explain the situation. I can't imagine how terrifying that must've been to those kids.

This whole thing is just insane. Completely and utterly insane. What the hell happened to people in this country?

Angela

 

[bigjohn2441]

on a related note:

FOXNews.com - Holder Announces FBI Probe of Border Patrol After Shooting of Mexican Boy

just curious what the opinions are around here regarding this sort of thing (although i can probably guess ), and im not talking about the fact that he was 15, but in general. i saw a video of a BP agent getting rocks thrown at him and the vehicles, a mexican about 15 feet away rearing back to throw a rock at either him or the vehicle (you cant really tell from the video) and the agent shoots him with his M4 and he drops like a rock. at what point is deadly force justified (if at all?). and if agents or officers are being shot at or otherwise from across the border, is it ok to shoot back into mexico?

 

[BVS]

I'm so confused what does this have to do with BP?

Is deadly force justified for a rock? What kind of question is that? That should be a no brainer.

If agents are being shot at, then yes it's justifiable to shoot back.

 

[corianderstem]

I'm so confused what does this have to do with BP?

Border Patrol, not the other BP.

 

[BVS]

Friday brain mush

I was like, man they must have a hell of a throwing arm...

 

[bigjohn2441]

I'm so confused what does this have to do with BP?

Is deadly force justified for a rock? What kind of question is that? That should be a no brainer.

you dont think getting hit in the head with a rock could be deadly? Im not BP, but i sometimes patrol the island and if i had a bunch of people chucking rocks at me, you bet your ass id more than likely be shooting back.

and technically no, policy says you shouldnt shoot into mexico, even if you're being shot at.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I got confused by that for a moment, too .

Anyway, I'm all for an investigation, if for no other reason than to get the exact facts surrounding what happened there. I do agree that if you're getting pelted with rocks regardless of the situation, you don't automatically need to pull out your massive guns and start shooting away. Maybe call in someone to help calm the people throwing rocks down ('cause they shouldn't do that, either, as rocks can hurt people), and if they don't calm down, then go through whatever the next step is. That shooting likely is only going to make things worse.

Angela

 

[BVS]

you dont think getting hit in the head with a rock could be deadly? Im not BP, but i sometimes patrol the island and if i had a bunch of people chucking rocks at me, you bet your ass id more than likely be shooting back.

Wear a helmet. I'm pretty sure most 15 year olds would run after a warning shot. If you can't outrun or shield yourself from a rock maybe you need to change careers.

and technically no, policy says you shouldnt shoot into mexico, even if you're being shot at.

I'm well aware of policy, but I believe if an investigation found that you were fired upon first they would hopefully find it justifiable.

 

[bigjohn2441]

Wear a helmet. I'm pretty sure most 15 year olds would run after a warning shot. If you can't outrun or shield yourself from a rock maybe you need to change careers.

first, we arent issued helmets, and i doubt most BP agents would want to wear a helmet out in the middle of the desert. Second, i wasnt just talking only about the 15 yo, ive seen and read of numerous rock throwing incidents at the border, most of which end badly for the agents and some end worse for the throwers. And third, that's a helluva judgement to make that i need to change my career because of how i would act in a situation where my life is at stake. Rocks could kill or cause serious bodily harm especially with multiple attackers which most of these situations are, and deadly force IS justified. And the fact that agents should "run away" from such an attack is ridiculous to me.

 

[BVS]

first, we arent issued helmets, and i doubt most BP agents would want to wear a helmet out in the middle of the desert. Second, i wasnt just talking only about the 15 yo, ive seen and read of numerous rock throwing incidents at the border, most of which end badly for the agents and some end worse for the throwers. And third, that's a helluva judgement to make that i need to change my career because of how i would act in a situation where my life is at stake. Rocks could kill or cause serious bodily harm especially with multiple attackers which most of these situations are, and deadly force IS justified. And the fact that agents should "run away" from such an attack is ridiculous to me.

You find running from a rock ridiculous? Not manly enough? Saving a fifteen year old's life not worth it?

Soldiers wear helmets in the desert.

How many have died from these rock attacks?

 

[bigjohn2441]

You find running from a rock ridiculous? Not manly enough? Saving a fifteen year old's life not worth it?

Soldiers wear helmets in the desert.

How many have died from these rock attacks?

sure you can try to dodge the rocks, as long as there arent a bunch of people throwing them. but im not going to stand there and dodge rocks all day while shaking my fist at them in between throws. yeah i do find "running away" from a situation like that ridiculous. so im on patrol and a group of people start hurling rocks at me im just supposed to run away? what if they chase me? what if there is nothing to hide behind? what if backup is 20 minutes away? what if the rock hits me in the head and knocks me out and they come and take my gun and shoot me or someone else? am i really supposed to take those chances in a potentially deadly situation? and do you really want the people protecting the country to "run away" from a situation instead of dealing with it.

as for the 15 y/o aspect of it, that kid wasnt the most law-abiding person ever, to say the least. a 15 y/o could kill you just as easily as a 25 y/o, rock or otherwise.

as for the helmets, maybe you should write your congressman so they will issue them to us

i dont know how many. all i know is you try throwing rocks at mexico's federales and they'll put so many holes in you they wouldnt be able to count them all. and they wouldnt even think about it. people bitch about how the US law enforcement treats people when if you look at some other countries, we are one of the most generous. i never hear any outcry over that.

 

[BVS]

sure you can try to dodge the rocks, as long as there arent a bunch of people throwing them. but im not going to stand there and dodge rocks all day while shaking my fist at them in between throws. yeah i do find "running away" from a situation like that ridiculous. so im on patrol and a group of people start hurling rocks at me im just supposed to run away? what if they chase me? what if there is nothing to hide behind? what if backup is 20 minutes away? what if the rock hits me in the head and knocks me out and they come and take my gun and shoot me or someone else? am i really supposed to take those chances in a potentially deadly situation? and do you really want the people protecting the country to "run away" from a situation instead of dealing with it.

And what if you dodged the first one and fired a warning shot and it stopped?

If by dealing with it you mean killing people, then no. My whole point is that there had to be a better way to deal with the situation. A kill shot should be the very last response.

as for the 15 y/o aspect of it, that kid wasnt the most law-abiding person ever, to say the least. a 15 y/o could kill you just as easily as a 25 y/o, rock or otherwise.

I don't care if he was "law abiding" or not, it was not the right response.

i dont know how many. all i know is you try throwing rocks at mexico's federales and they'll put so many holes in you they wouldnt be able to count them all. and they wouldnt even think about it. people bitch about how the US law enforcement treats people when if you look at some other countries, we are one of the most generous. i never hear any outcry over that.

I hate this argument, people use this to justify torture all the time, it's an elementary school line of defense.

 

[bigjohn2441]

And what if you dodged the first one and fired a warning shot and it stopped?

this isnt tv, we dont fire warning shots, policy doesnt allow it. you only fire your weapon at something you intend to shoot. the only people authorized to use warning shots are marine interdiction agents. they are allowed to fire warning shots before they shoot the motor of a boat during a chase.

what if the 1st one hits me in the temple? what if it doesnt stop? are you willing to play the what if game when you life is potentially at stake?

what would you have done then? you are out in the middle of the desert doing a foot patrol, maybe alone, and you come across a group and they start throwing rocks at you. you cant tell how old they are, who they are, or what their intentions are. you cant fire warning shots, backup is 20 minutes away, and your vehicle is 100 yards away. what do you do?

 

[BVS]

we dont fire warning shots, policy doesnt allow it. you only fire your weapon at something you intend to shoot. the only people authorized to use warning shots are marine interdiction agents. they are allowed to fire warning shots before they shoot the motor of a boat during a chase.

what if the 1st one hits me in the temple? what if it doesnt stop? are you willing to play the what if game when you life is potentially at stake?

So policy says to kill anyone who throws something at you?

We can play the "what if" game all day long, it comes down to assesment and from the small amount of information we have I think he assessed the situation wrong. Why if there was a group throwing rocks was just one 15 year old killed? Did he miss the others?

 

[bigjohn2441]

So policy says to kill anyone who throws something at you?

We can play the "what if" game all day long, it comes down to assesment and from the small amount of information we have I think he assessed the situation wrong. Why if there was a group throwing rocks was just one 15 year old killed? Did he miss the others?

well not just anything. if someone threw a cup or shot a rubber band at me i probably wouldnt shoot them. dont you agree that rocks, escpecially thrown by a group, could cause serious bodily harm or death? if so then deadly force is justified. obviously if there were 3 agents and 1 teenager throwing, i doubt you would need to blow him away. but an agent by himself, or even 2, being pelted with rocks from a group?

i find it hard to believe that it was 1 lone 15 y/o in the middle of the desert throwing the rocks. it had to be a group. i bet once the kid was shot the others shit their pants and ran their asses off, and the agents obviously arent going to shoot someone running away.

 

[BVS]

i bet once the kid was shot the others shit their pants and ran their asses off, and the agents obviously arent going to shoot someone running away.

Yep, too bad a warning shot wasn't policy, someone would still be alive today.