Let me add that the Court of Appeals ruled against an appeal.

Courts of Appeals rarely overturn jury convictions. The case should never have been prosecuted because the prosecution's star witness should never have been allowed to stay in this country a free man.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the two agents were not charged or convicted of perjury. The fact that the prosecutor decided to engage in character assassination after sending these men to prison is not surprising. His decision to prosecute this case was not a popular one.

 

He does not nor should not worry about the popularity of a case. He enforces the law, right?

 

These guys were convicted because they lied/misremembered . If you read the link I provided you will see all they lied about and all they did wrong.

 

They shot a fleeing unarmed man and botched a chance to get a drug conviction. The former is illegal. The latter should forfeit their abilty to work in any form of law enforcement.

 

Why are so many people defending these guys ? It has nothing to do with the hot button du jour illegal immigration. Its about an illegal shooting. Period.

Courts of Appeals rarely overturn jury convictions. The case should never have been prosecuted because the prosecution's star witness should never have been allowed to stay in this country a free man.

 

Again, you seem to be ignoring that the witness was only free because of 100% ineptitude. The witness is now under indictment so its obvious the Feds were after him but our guys screwed it up.

As far as I am concerned any illegal violation of the U.S. border should be met with deadly force anyway.

Courts of Appeals rarely overturn jury convictions. .

 

As you know they're not in the business of granting an appeal UNLESS there was an error in procedure such as a witness who should have but was not allowed to be heard.

 

So if you were the COA and now knowing the real facts why would you have voted to grant the appeal?

As far as I am concerned any illegal violation of the U.S. border should be met with deadly force anyway.

 

Even if there's no threat to the border patrol agents? Shoot first. Ask questions later?

Even if there's no threat to the border patrol agents? Shoot first. Ask questions later?

:thumb: And that goes double for Mexican troops caught on the wrong side of the border supporting the illegal transportation of drugs.

Even if there's no threat to the border patrol agents? Shoot first. Ask questions later?

 

 

I have covered this in a previous post actually some years ago. However I will give you an abridged version of my border policy:

 

1) Improve and streamline the process for legal immigration. Allow for more applications yearly and migrant worker permits. These workers would be taxed just like any citizen of the United States but would not be eligible for the same benefits(either state or federal) private insurance is fine. I want to stress that this is the most important part of my plan.

 

2) Don't bother with building a wall or fence. Place large signs in both English, Spanish and in clear symbols indicating that this is U.S. soil and any unsanctioned crossing into said area is to be met with deadly force. With that in place, mine the border ruthlessly. Up-gun the border patrols with assault rifles and improve their training. Any survivors will be arrested and put on trial for violating U.S. soil illegally.

I have covered this in a previous post actually some years ago. However I will give you an abridged version of my border policy:

 

1) Improve and streamline the process for legal immigration. Allow for more applications yearly and migrant worker permits. These workers would be taxed just like any citizen of the United States but would not be eligible for the same benefits(either state or federal) private insurance is fine. I want to stress that this is the most important part of my plan.

 

2) Don't bother with building a wall or fence. Place large signs in both English, Spanish and in clear symbols indicating that this is U.S. soil and any unsanctioned crossing into said area is to be met with deadly force. With that in place, mine the border ruthlessly. Up-gun the border patrols with assault rifles and improve their training. Any survivors will be arrested and put on trial for violating U.S. soil illegally.

I like it. :thumb:

I have covered this in a previous post actually some years ago. However I will give you an abridged version of my border policy:

 

1) Improve and streamline the process for legal immigration. Allow for more applications yearly and migrant worker permits. These workers would be taxed just like any citizen of the United States but would not be eligible for the same benefits(either state or federal) private insurance is fine. I want to stress that this is the most important part of my plan.

 

2) Don't bother with building a wall or fence. Place large signs in both English, Spanish and in clear symbols indicating that this is U.S. soil and any unsanctioned crossing into said area is to be met with deadly force. With that in place, mine the border ruthlessly. Up-gun the border patrols with assault rifles and improve their training. Any survivors will be arrested and put on trial for violating U.S. soil illegally.

 

 

So we're going to shoot people for crossing the border? I don't believe that's what this country wants nor stands for.

So we're going to shoot people for crossing the border? I don't believe that's what this country wants nor stands for.

 

No, I am actually looking to blow them up and/or explosively maim them for trying to illegally cross the border. There is a difference.

 

I want anyone who wants a better life to be able to have it, however if you don't try to come by it legally then you had better be a combat engineer.

No, I am actually looking to blow them up and/or explosively maim them for trying to illegally cross the border. There is a difference.

 

I want anyone who wants a better life to be able to have it, however if you don't try to come by it legally then you had better be a combat engineer.

Thanks for clarifying those points. I thought your intent was clear with your first posting. I love the phrase "explosively maim." I wonder why Jack Bauer has never used it. :lol:

Well, since this thread is about the conviction and pardon of 2 agents, should we not base the discussion on actual law ? So far, you guys have only based your arguments on hopes and rumors.

I have covered this in a previous post actually some years ago. However I will give you an abridged version of my border policy:

 

1) Improve and streamline the process for legal immigration. Allow for more applications yearly and migrant worker permits. These workers would be taxed just like any citizen of the United States but would not be eligible for the same benefits(either state or federal) private insurance is fine. I want to stress that this is the most important part of my plan.

 

2) Don't bother with building a wall or fence. Place large signs in both English, Spanish and in clear symbols indicating that this is U.S. soil and any unsanctioned crossing into said area is to be met with deadly force. With that in place, mine the border ruthlessly. Up-gun the border patrols with assault rifles and improve their training. Any survivors will be arrested and put on trial for violating U.S. soil illegally.

 

I love #1. As for #2, I actually know children that were shot at while crossing the border, ages 2, 3 and 5. The two year old was in his mother's arms, the three year old was in his father's arms and the five year old was on his own two feet, holding his father's hand. Regardless of what choice their parents made (and how justified, unjustified they are), I will NEVER condone shooting unarmed individuals, particularly children.

Well, since this thread is about the conviction and pardon of 2 agents, should we not base the discussion on actual law ? So far, you guys have only based your arguments on hopes and rumors.

 

 

I actually haven't read the case so I cannot comment on it. If the law was broken then there should be repercussions no doubt, however my comment was more based on my own desire for border enforcement as opposed to the current laws on the books.