Is anyone else annoyed that Bush won't pardon the border agents?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by 7960

But what they did after the shooting makes them just as "bad" as the drug dealer.

No, it doesn't. They shouldn't have done it, but what is the normal punishment for a cop who tampers with evidence?

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Why?

Because he invented enough facts to make it so. If we ignore the fact that the agents did not know anything about the suspects, shot at unarmed persons who presented no harm to them, later cleaned up the crime scene before investigators could get there and finally failed to report the incident as required, this seems like a terrible miscarriage of justice.

[7960]

Originally Posted by AVengeance

Great, I'll always remember to shoot police while NOT facing them directly, that way a jury of 7960's will help me get off, 'cause I got a bullet wound in the "wrong place" when the cops try to do their job and aprehend me.

It's not the wound being "in the wrong place" it's all of it combined.

And since this guy didn't even have a gun how about you keep in mind that running is a lot better than pretending to have a gun which is pretty much the cops' story

Sending them to prison for nabbing a wanted drug trafficker is treason.

But they're not being sent to prison for nabbing a wanted drug trafficker.

[7960]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

No, it doesn't.

Yes, it does.

It's the exact same as if you harm a police officer...shooting a cop is not just shooting that one cop, it's attacking our whole society. That's why if you shoot a cop you should go away longer than if you shoot a civilian. But when a guy's job is to uphold the law and he breaks the law he deserves a harsher punishment, ESPECIALLY since he knew it was wrong and tried to hide it and lied about it.

Originally Posted by Phantom

Because he invented enough facts to make it so. If we ignore the fact that the agents did not know anything about the suspects, shot at unarmed persons who presented no harm to them, later cleaned up the crime scene before investigators could get there and finally failed to report the incident as required, this seems like a terrible miscarriage of justice.

I don't understand why "he was an illegal alien drug smuggler" means it ok to try to kill him. Would people have the same reaction if this happened in downtown Philly?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by 7960

I don't understand why "he was an illegal alien drug smuggler" means it ok to try to kill him. Would people have the same reaction if this happened in downtown Philly?

Sure; I'm happy with anyone who takes down a drug smuggler, legal or not.

The fact that he's illegal even supports the idea that he does not have the same rights as American citizens, nor is he protected by our laws. Kill em all for all I care. He shouldn't have been here to begin with.

[7960]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

The fact that he's illegal even supports the idea that he does not have the same rights as American citizens,

he doesn't have *all* of the rights of a citizen, but that doesn't mean it's open season on mexicans crossing the border as is evidenced by that trial and jury.

nor is he protected by our laws. Kill em all for all I care. He shouldn't have been here to begin with.

WTF........ remind me to run you down next time you jay-walk. I'd love to use "he was in the street illegally, he shouldn't have been there in the first place" as my defense.

And yes I know you're a citizen and he's not. That's makes absolutely no difference.

[Donkey®]

Agents were wrong. They got what they deserved. Whatever the guy was doing (dealing drugs is not the same as smuggling drugs BTW) if it didn't include threatening the officers or someone else with harm, they should not have shot him.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Sure; I'm happy with anyone who takes down a drug smuggler, legal or not.

Just goes to show that prohibition makes criminals.

[hsmith]

interesting, not so annoyed anymore.

[Joerides]

I agree 100%. I just heard on Fox news he has succesfully smuggled in another shipment since getting shot in the butt, and is suing the American Gov't for $5 million dollars I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees a problem here.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by hsmith

interesting, not so annoyed anymore.

Yea I agree. I read this thread and I don't mind so much anymore.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

they are.

Where exactly in law, does the president get a right to be excluded from it? (Expect where mentioned, obviously).

What gives the president better judgment than the legal system put in place? He isn't king.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Originally Posted by AVengeance

Great, I'll always remember to shoot police while NOT facing them directly, that way a jury of 7960's will help me get off, 'cause I got a bullet wound in the "wrong place" when the cops try to do their job and aprehend me.

The border patrol should be doing one thing: guarding our borders from invaders, terrorist, and other "bad guys" trying to get into our country. They should have tanks, machine guns, turrets, and whatever else they need short of thermonuclear to make sure our borders are free from illegal invasion.

Sending them to prison for nabbing a wanted drug trafficker is treason.

Right you are. Although maybe not treason it is damn close.
Am I pissed at Bush for not granting a pardon? Hell yes!!
I am even more pissed that they were charged and tried in the first place!
-THATS WHAT WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Too many idiots want to protect the bad guys!!!!!!
Personally if that maggot was bringing drugs into our country I think
border agents should shoot to kill as soon as that is verified.
We need more enforcement not less!
We need border agents equipped with military firepower to start shooting
EVEREYBODY illegally entering our country.
Sound extreme does it?
Well thats what many other countries do--shoot to kill foreign invaders!
By God we should too, soooooooner better than later!-TZS

[Thorgrim]

The US Attorney was on O'Reilly, he explained it very clearly

Two experienced officers, (one who trains people on how to handle situations and file reports) got the man the lie down, saw that he was unarmed, and the agent close to the man slipped on his own and fell, the suspect saw this and ran away

Against all their training, they had an unarmed person fleeing which they are prohibited from shooting, they unloaded 15 rounds into him, then instead of filing a report like they are duty-bound to do, they picked up their shells, altered the scene, filed false papers, and otherwise totally obstructed justice

A jury of their peers was completely convinced, with the defending officers testifying, that they were guilty of the crimes

Case closed, if anything its a victory for conservatives who believe in law and order

It's pretty disturbing how people jump on issues without doing basic research

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by 7960

And yes I know you're a citizen and he's not. That's makes absolutely no difference.

It makes all the difference.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

It's pretty disturbing how people jump on issues without doing basic research

Casting the first stone...

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Casting the first stone...

examples, or just baseless insults?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

examples, or just baseless insults?

Yeah, I think you're just making baseless insults.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Yeah, I think you're just making baseless insults.

I laid out a pretty good case, where is my flaw in it?

[7960]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

It makes all the difference.

so it's legal for me to run down an illegal alien crossing the street in LA but it's illegal for me to run you down?

seriously, you believe that?