Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
OverSword

Border Patrol will continue lethal tactics

37 posts in this topic

From the article:

The US Border Patrol will continue to use lethal force against people throwing rocks, as well as people inside vehicles—ignoring a set of recommendations from an independent review of lethal-force practices at the agency.

Border Patrol Chief Mike Fisher told the Associated Press in an interview that the recommendations were “too restrictive” and that “just to say that you shouldn’t shoot at rock-throwers or vehicles for us, in our environment, was very problematic and could potentially put Border Patrol agents in danger.”

Twenty people have been killed by the Border Patrol since 2010, and last year sixteen members of Congress demanded an investigation into the death of Anastasio Hernandez Rojas, an undocumented immigrant who was tased and beaten by Border Patrol agents.

People on the Mexican side of the US border will often toss rocks at agents in order to create a diversion and open space in a nearby border area. The use of deadly force against people throwing rocks is an unfortunately common theme in these deaths; eight of the twenty people killed by the Border Patrol since 2010 were accused of throwing rocks at agents.

The Border Patrol reported 185 rock attacks last year, and in twenty-two cases lethal force was used. Another forty-two times, “less-than-lethal force” was used, which can include batons and pepper spray.

One particular case has galvanized activist anger against the Border Patrol: on October 10, 2012, a 16-year-old Mexican boy was shot eleven times by agents after they allegedly saw him throwing rocks in their direction. An autopsy revealed that all but one shot hit the teenager from behind.

Wow. What a bunch of gutless bungholes. Shooting and killing people because they are throwing rocks at you over a fence? Shame on you cowards.

Read it here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about the rock throwing, but they probably deal with drug dealers and traffickers fairly often, so holding the right to use lethal force on vehicles is just smart.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about the rock throwing, but they probably deal with drug dealers and traffickers fairly often, so holding the right to use lethal force on vehicles is just smart.

I suspect that eventually the BP will be castrated entirely under this president. I don't agree that unarmed people should be gunned down but if rocks are being thrown in large numbers against BP agents then they should have the right to defend themselves with deadly force. Anyone who thinks rocks are harmless should allow someone to cast a few in their direction - just for a little reality check.
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BP have every right to fight back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they should use lethal force. In every gun control thread, there is the argument that a knife, fork, spoon, anything really (even rocks) can be used to kill.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But shooting citizens in their own country from over the border is unacceptable and is actually an act of war. I'm pretty sure you can stay 30 yards away from the fence and they can't easily hit you with a rock. Also the case that has brought focus on this is where a boy was shot in the back 11 times for allegedly throwing rocks. Sounds like murder to me. Unfortunately many US police officers get away with murder far too often these days, and who cares anyways right? After all it was a Mexican not an American.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the case that has brought focus on this is where a boy was shot in the back 11 times for allegedly throwing rocks. Sounds like murder to me. Unfortunately many US police officers get away with murder far too often these days, and who cares anyways right? After all it was a Mexican not an American.

The article said that 10 of 11 bullets hit him in the back, not all 11. If the first one hit him and caused him to spin around the others would hit him in the back. Not saying this is what happened because I have no idea, but it seems possible to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

too many details are missing, there can be many explanations why it happened like that,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

too many details are missing, there can be many explanations why it happened like that,

Of course they are missing. The details would most likely remove the shock value of the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article said that 10 of 11 bullets hit him in the back, not all 11. If the first one hit him and caused him to spin around the others would hit him in the back. Not saying this is what happened because I have no idea, but it seems possible to me.

too many details are missing, there can be many explanations why it happened like that,

Of course they are missing. The details would most likely remove the shock value of the article.

Yeah, you're probably right. If somebody threw a rock at me and I was holding a gun it would no doubt be appropriate for me to shoot him once in the front and eleven times in the back. After all if I had only shot him once he may have still had the capacity to throw another rock. The only way I could be certain I was safe would be to kill him. That'll teach the little punk to throw rocks.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're probably right. If somebody threw a rock at me and I was holding a gun it would no doubt be appropriate for me to shoot him once in the front and eleven times in the back. After all if I had only shot him once he may have still had the capacity to throw another rock. The only way I could be certain I was safe would be to kill him. That'll teach the little punk to throw rocks.

Shooting him may be wrong if all he did was throw a rock, but come on. What kind of idiots decide to go and throw rocks as military personnel holding assault rifles? It's just plain stupid.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Shooting him may be wrong if all he did was throw a rock, but come on.

well, thing is, if you let them throw rocks, and do nothing, next time they will throw "molotov special", or hand granade. you can take risk like that, if it was up to me, i'd shoot anyone that threw anything at BP, you got to let them know hard way, not to throw anything. or you will be killed. do not care if they are behind the fence on their side, their rock is flying over the fence, so should bullets.

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the article:

The US Border Patrol will continue to use lethal force against people throwing rocks, as well as people inside vehicles—ignoring a set of recommendations from an independent review of lethal-force practices at the agency.

Border Patrol Chief Mike Fisher told the Associated Press in an interview that the recommendations were “too restrictive” and that “just to say that you shouldn’t shoot at rock-throwers or vehicles for us, in our environment, was very problematic and could potentially put Border Patrol agents in danger.”

Twenty people have been killed by the Border Patrol since 2010, and last year sixteen members of Congress demanded an investigation into the death of Anastasio Hernandez Rojas, an undocumented immigrant who was tased and beaten by Border Patrol agents.

People on the Mexican side of the US border will often toss rocks at agents in order to create a diversion and open space in a nearby border area. The use of deadly force against people throwing rocks is an unfortunately common theme in these deaths; eight of the twenty people killed by the Border Patrol since 2010 were accused of throwing rocks at agents.

The Border Patrol reported 185 rock attacks last year, and in twenty-two cases lethal force was used. Another forty-two times, “less-than-lethal force” was used, which can include batons and pepper spray.

One particular case has galvanized activist anger against the Border Patrol: on October 10, 2012, a 16-year-old Mexican boy was shot eleven times by agents after they allegedly saw him throwing rocks in their direction. An autopsy revealed that all but one shot hit the teenager from behind.

Wow. What a bunch of gutless bungholes. Shooting and killing people because they are throwing rocks at you over a fence? Shame on you cowards.

Read it here

We're being bombarded by thousands of missiles. So it's time to blockade Mexico from land, sea and air and build new colonies on Mexico's prime hilltop real estate. :w00t:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the articles I read stated the reason for the rock throwing was to distract the border patrol agents while their friends snuck across the border. If they are stopping to shoot at them I am going to say the strategy is working.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But shooting citizens in their own country from over the border is unacceptable and is actually an act of war.

Apparently not. No one seems to think of this as anything other than an act of self-defense, including Mexico, who would be the one responsible for declaring Casus Belli.

I'm pretty sure you can stay 30 yards away from the fence and they can't easily hit you with a rock.

Pretty difficult to catch suspected drug mules by staying 30 yards away.

Also the case that has brought focus on this is where a boy was shot in the back 11 times for allegedly throwing rocks. Sounds like murder to me.

Well, sure, but that you, so automatically we know there must be more to the story.

Unfortunately many US police officers get away with murder far too often these days, and who cares anyways right? After all it was a Mexican not an American.

Did you know the guy who shot him 15 times in the back was a Mexican?

Did you know it was actually his own brother?

Did you know he secretly snuck into the United States and posed as a Border Patrol Guard for 2 years in order to find and kill his brother for involving their family with a drug cartel that ultimately resulted in the stray gunfire death of his little sister and his mother, making the whole thing a case of family honor?

True story. Really. Don't bother checking up on it or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Apparently not. No one seems to think of this as anything other than an act of self-defense, including Mexico, who would be the one responsible for declaring Casus Belli.

Yeah, that's sad because I'm pretty sure that if a 12 year old American boy threw rocks at a mexican federal agent and the federales shot and killed him across the border there would be hell to pay. Not war of course but that agent would eventually have harsh action taken on him either by Mexico or he would be extradited and then by the USA. Possibly both.

Pretty difficult to catch suspected drug mules by staying 30 yards away.

That makes no sense since most of the border has a view of many times thirty yards. You don't have to grab them right at the fence after all.

I'm a little disappointed in you here that are pretty casual with our federal agents killing people.

Edited by OverSword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, that's sad because I'm pretty sure that if a 12 year old American boy threw rocks at a mexican federal agent and the federales shot and killed him across the border there would be hell to pay.

Probably, yeah. Then again, if it had been a 16 year old in the process of drug running, I suspect most people would have forgotten about it as well.

Not war of course but that agent would eventually have harsh action taken on him either by Mexico or he would be extradited and then by the USA. Possibly both.

Or neither. But since you have tacitly acknowledge that your claim regarding "Act of WAR!" is just another one of your coy attempts to, what was it? "make for a more dramatic effect"?, it becomes moot.

That makes no sense since most of the border has a view of many times thirty yards. You don't have to grab them right at the fence after all.

No, you chase them all the way up to the fence. In other words, you don't stay 30 feet away just in case they throw rocks at you; you actually try to capture them.

I'm a little disappointed in you here that are pretty casual with our federal agents killing people.

I really can't express how very little your personal evaluation of me affects me in any way, even basing it on nothing more than your analytical abilities and the conclusions you arrive at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you chase them all the way up to the fence. In other words, you don't stay 30 feet away just in case they throw rocks at you; you actually try to capture them.

If you're catching them on their way to the fence and back to Mexico then they won't have any drugs. You want to catch them on the way in so you can be 5 miles inside the fence as long as you bust them with the drugs, right?

I really can't express how very little your personal evaluation of me affects me in any way, even basing it on nothing more than your analytical abilities and the conclusions you arrive at.

Cute.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're catching them on their way to the fence and back to Mexico then they won't have any drugs.

And if you catch them as they are coming in and are trying to run out, they will. Not that it makes a difference to the actual point you were making about the officers staying out of rock throwing range.

You want to catch them on the way in so you can be 5 miles inside the fence as long as you bust them with the drugs, right?

Doesn't really make much of a difference.

Cute.

Yeah, I have a hard enough time tolerating "dramatic" tweaks to stories for the sole purpose of advancing agendas, but when it is done intentionally for amusement, such as you have openly admitted to doing in the past, and it results in others swallowing in hook, line, and sinker, no matter how insanely and ridiculously transparent a ploy it is...it's right in the OP that the teenager is 16-years old, and then in one page he goes from "teen" to "boy" to "12-year old". And the logic? Geez, anything that can be shoveled at the wall, in the hopes that something sticks. "It's racism!", "It's murder!", "It's bloodlust!", "It's an act of war!"...

Oh, and when all that fails, let's make it personal:

"I'm a little disappointed in you here that are pretty casual with our federal agents killing people."

Cute. Why, it's almost like you haven't been casually twisting and turning the deaths of these people any which way you like for the sole purpose of your entertainment.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just coming in here as a neutral observer, I have to give Oversword's points some respect. I don't want to see a boy getting gunned down and I know that we can all agree on that. This is a personal tragedy and maybe we should be discussing ideas on how to prevent it from happening again and again. I don't know if the post above is deserved or not. I'm a noob here compared to you guys and I don't have your facts, but OverSword was just a little disappointed and you were only pretty casual, aquatus. I have to give him a point for using gentle language.

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/rageagainstthemachine/maria.html

Even drug mules are real human beings *gasp*, often desperate adults or bullied/terrified children doing whatever they can to survive or provide for their families.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. I don't want to see a boy getting gunned down and I know that we can all agree on that.

it was his choice to throw rocks, i do not feel 1 bit sorry for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Just coming in here as a neutral observer, I have to give Oversword's points some respect.

And you are going to do that by ignoring pretty much every counter-point I made to his, I take it?

I don't want to see a boy getting gunned down and I know that we can all agree on that.

And yet, at least one person had absolutely no problem implying that everyone other than him didn't.

This is a personal tragedy

My condolences on your personal tragedy. I did not know either the victim nor the shooters, and so it is not a personal tragedy for me.

and maybe we should be discussing ideas on how to prevent it from happening again and again.

We are. Oversword's suggestion was to maintain a 30 foot distance.

I don't know if the post above is deserved or not.

I'll make it easier for you. Go down the list of things I mentioned. Check Oversword's posts in this thread. If the points I make correspond with points in Oversword's posts, then it is pretty much confirmed.

You don't have to settle for not knowing, Yamato. You can find out for yourself in literally minutes who has what level of credibility.

I'm a noob here compared to you guys and I don't have your facts,

That's kind of the point, Yamato. People who don't have the facts but do have a tendency to believe what they are told as long as it follows more or less what they want to believe don't bother to look for facts. People like Oversword confuse the issue quite literally because they enjoy the willfully ignorant run around reciting his "facts", and watching the rational be driven crazy by his actions.

but OverSword was just a little disappointed and you were only pretty casual, aquatus. I have to give him a point for using gentle language.

Gentle language doesn't hide condescension, and condescension from the likes of Oversword is insulting in its own right.

The hell?

Even drug mules are real human beings *gasp*, often desperate adults or bullied/terrified children doing whatever they can to survive or provide for their families.

Who said they weren't? Are you still stuck on Oversword's fiction that none one cares? Do you still think, even though it is a matter of looking at a handful of posts on 2 pages, that he actually cares about this kid? You didn't notice that his accusation about not caring about the kid is done precisely once, and that as merely one in a string of other accusations that I listed in my post, quickly followed by another, none of which he has revisited, as is his modus operandi, not just here, but in all threads?

Seriously, It isn't blindingly, blatantly, overwhelmingly obvious that he is playing you like a violin, and you are dancing up a jig to his tune?

Edited by aquatus1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Seriously, It isn't blindingly, blatantly, overwhelmingly obvious that he is playing you like a violin, and you are dancing up a jig to his tune?

Oh yes, I'm a master manipulator and only you can see through my nefariousness. Truth is I do sometimes exaggerate for effect and judging by the above statement I'm not alone. As long as you're enjoying your little rants at me (and you are) It's all good, I like it too! :tu:

Edited by OverSword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Oh yes, I'm a master manipulator and only you can see through my nefariousness.

That's the problem. You're not.

And it really bugs me that your actions enable the handful of non-thinkers that orbit these topics when only a minor flex of skepticism would shield them.

Truth is I do sometimes exaggerate for effect and judging by the above statement I'm not alone. As long as you're enjoying your little rants at me (and you are) It's all good, I like it too! :tu:

And in the spirit of continuing to point out your fallacies, note that I already stated that part of your motivation is seeing the reactions of both sides. Heck, half the time, all you are doing is keying off the response of the other person and adding a note of incredulity to it.

Edited by aquatus1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude you are rude.

Keep on flexing your skepticism and keep that hand full of non-thinkers shielded from my toxic drama.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.