We Need Compassion for Our Border Guards

[mybackpages 0]

If the objection is that the punishment is too harsh, then shouldn't the demand be to reduce the punishment to something more reasonable? Why the demand for an outright pardon?

Because they should give them the same sentence the real criminal received. Nada.

Why not? Who needs jurisprudence anyway? We can just arbitrarily apply sentences as the general public sees fit.

[keltic 1]

The laws of the United States make it a crime for law enforcement officers to use excessive force in apprehending suspects. It is a violation of any person’s Constitutional rights to shoot at them after they have attempted to surrender, knowing that they are unarmed and pose no danger to the officers or anyone else.

ok... again... to answer the DOJ... the illegal alien does not (should not) have our constitutional rights... they are guaranteed to those who are USCs or legal residents... at least that is what makes sense

and... if we are at a "war on drugs", then why not just apply the rules of force during war?

and... a wound to the buttocks does not imply surrender so far as i could see... they may have seen he had empty hands, but did they know for sure that there wasnt a weapon concealed in his pants or shoes/boots?

if they want to suspend or kick those officers off the force IF what they did was really that wrong, then so be it... but hard jailtime with no hope of parole???? i still dont buy it

[Sofiyya 1,687]

If the objection is that the punishment is too harsh, then shouldn't the demand be to reduce the punishment to something more reasonable? Why the demand for an outright pardon?

Because they should give them the same sentence the real criminal received. Nada.

Why not? Who needs jurisprudence anyway? We can just arbitrarily apply sentences as the general public sees fit.

We could use a lot less of this kind of jurisprudence and a lot more of what the general public elects our officials to do. Uphold the Constitution to provide for a defense of its borders and citizenry. That is the PRIMARY obligation of the federal government and those in it have forgotten that.

Edited January 3, 2007 by szsz

[peejay 327]

Why not? Who needs jurisprudence anyway? We can just arbitrarily apply sentences as the general public sees fit.

That is not what I'm trying to convey.

President Bush pardoned 16 criminals including five drug dealers at Christmastime, but so far has refused to pardon the two U.S. Border Patrol agents...

All I'm saying is...if Bush can take a break from his obsession of smooching on the sphincters of Vincenti Fox and Bush's corrupt open border business cronies...maybe he can do the right thing for these 2 Border Patrol agents.

But I guess it is sexier for him to amnesty millions of illegal aliens or pardon dope dealers, and other assorted criminals instead of righting the crucifiction of a couple of frustrated errant Border Patrol agents.

It is no secret that Bush has blatantly undermined the US Border Patrol during his administration to further his personal open borders agenda. So this snub doesn't surprise me...but it isn't right. In fact...it is oh so wrong!

[mybackpages 0]

Why not? Who needs jurisprudence anyway? We can just arbitrarily apply sentences as the general public sees fit.

That is not what I'm trying to convey.

Oh I know that and believe me I think we are very close to being in complete agreement on this topic