http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/1 ... 60902.html

people on the Mexican side of the border began throwing rocks at them and ignored orders to stop, the agency said.
One agent opened fire. A Mexican official with direct knowledge of the investigation said Thursday a 16-year-old boy was killed in the shooting.

Border agents are generally allowed to use lethal force against rock throwers.

In 2010, a 15-year-old boy was shot and killed by a Border Patrol agent firing his weapon from El Paso, Texas, into Juarez, Mexico. Some witnesses said people on the Mexican side of the river, including the teen, were throwing rocks at the agent as he tried to arrest an illegal immigrant crossing the Rio Grande.

A federal judge in El Paso last year dismissed a lawsuit by the family of the boy because the teen was on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande when he was shot. U.S. law gives the government immunity when such claims arise in a foreign country, the judge noted.

Border or no border, throwing rocks at people with guns is a mega-stupid idea.

SwampGrouch wrote:Border or no border, throwing rocks at people with guns is a mega-stupid idea.

Yes, but so is shooting at a teenager with a rifle for throwing a rock.

In my opinion, if you gotta shoot someone for throwing rocks at you, you might just be a pussy.

Collector1337 wrote:In my opinion, if you gotta shoot someone for throwing rocks at you, you might just be a pussy.

So rocks aren't deadly missiles? How 'bout you go to Orakzai and stand downrange at the next public lapidation?

(You're a clinical psychologist like I'm a good Catholic boy.)

Collector1337 wrote:In my opinion, if you gotta shoot someone for throwing rocks at you, you might just be a pussy.

Yeah, that whole feminine as derisive thing? Not a fan.

Fukshot wrote:

Collector1337 wrote:In my opinion, if you gotta shoot someone for throwing rocks at you, you might just be a pussy.

Yeah, that whole feminine as derisive thing? Not a fan.

Second that.

spirit4earth wrote:

Fukshot wrote:

Collector1337 wrote:In my opinion, if you gotta shoot someone for throwing rocks at you, you might just be a pussy.

Yeah, that whole feminine as derisive thing? Not a fan.

Second that.

Third

If you think rocks aren't weapons then perhaps you should talk to Goliath...

GuitarsandGuns wrote:

spirit4earth wrote:

Fukshot wrote: Yeah, that whole feminine as derisive thing? Not a fan.

Second that.

Third

Fourth. and no take backs with etymological arguments about the derivation of "pussy" as a derisive being unrelated to female anatomy.

I still don't think he deserved death at the hands of a US border patrol officer.

GuitarsandGuns wrote:I still don't think he deserved death at the hands of a US border patrol officer.

This.

Rocks are short range missiles...emphasis on short. I would think it would be one thing if a riotous crowd were bearing down on you and throwing rocks, but this was across a river, and literally in another country. This was an act of cowardice, and likely an act of infantile rage. My opinion, this act should NOT be protected by US law. When kids die because cops are tired of being laughed at, ridiculed, feel ineffective, or are simply made aware of the fact that they are not supreme law-giving entities, there is a real problem.

Back the fuck off, a few feet, and you can't be hit by rocks THROWN BY HAND, FROM KIDS FROM OUTSIDE THE BORDERS OF OUR COUNTRY! It seems like simple logic.

Ultravox wrote:If you think rocks aren't weapons then perhaps you should talk to Goliath...

And Davie didn't kill him with the rock. According to the story, he knocked G-man cold then cut his head off (perhaps with his own sword).

There's a lesson 'bout weapon retention there, ain't there?

AmirMortal wrote:

GuitarsandGuns wrote:I still don't think he deserved death at the hands of a US border patrol officer.

This.

Rocks are short range missiles...emphasis on short. I would think it would be one thing if a riotous crowd were bearing down on you and throwing rocks, but this was across a river, and literally in another country. This was an act of cowardice, and likely an act of infantile rage. My opinion, this act should NOT be protected by US law. When kids die because cops are tired of being laughed at, ridiculed, feel ineffective, or are simply made aware of the fact that they are not supreme law-giving entities, there is a real problem.

Back the fuck off, a few feet, and you can't be hit by rocks THROWN BY HAND, FROM KIDS FROM OUTSIDE THE BORDERS OF OUR COUNTRY! It seems like simple logic.

"Pardon me, Mr. Drug Smuggling Suspect. Would you be so kind as to move a few yards north while we arrest you so we'll be out of range?"

If the assailant (thrower) was an 26 year old, would it make a difference?

If there was no border in between the assailant and the victim (target), would it make a difference?

If the victim had been a civilian, would it make a difference?

However, the office didn't definitively confirm the boy had been shot by the agent, only noting that police received reports of gunshots, then found his body on a sidewalk near the border barrier.

WTF?

Swampgrouch, How would it have gone if some neighborhood kids were throwing rocks at me, and I shot and killed one of them, because even though they were across the river, I decided that I was in the right to just kill one of them? I'd be arrested, thrown in jail, and my face and name would proliferate through the media covered in blood and bruises.

I couldn't give two shits about the fact that they said there was a "suspected drug smuggler", as the "suspect" aspect shows that there is some question as to whether or not said person had anything at all to do with drugs, or if that person had just hopped across the border to visit family. I've known too many human beings in my life, including cops, to just take someone who just shot a kid at his word. Not happening. There are some circumstances that cops are placed into which I would not want to be; their job is inherently dangerous, and I respect that, but they are in fact humans. Humans who are given an arbitrary power and authority over other humans, and in my experience whether it's a small store manager, corporate CEO, or cop, anyone entrusted with such power must be watched closely to ensure that they are truly serving the greater good, and not just letting power go to their heads.

Cops hold a very odd place in our society, one that is both dangerous, and carries great responsibility. As such, most of us believe that they should be held to a higher standard than your average citizen (in fact, that's how I've always understood the agreement, otherwise, why would a population agree to it?), however what I see most often from authoritarians are excuses for bad behavior, and an unwillingness to punish those who make even grievous mistakes. There is a tendency to regard them as 'above the law', rather than being honor bound to be held to the higher standard, being that they are the only people in our society whom we pay to openly carry weapons, even beating or killing civilians in certain extenuating circumstances, enforce laws, and in most instances, their words carry greater weight in our judicial system than that of the proletariat. With that responsibility comes the great expectation of sound judgment, and accountability. I'm not declaring this guy to be a murderer, but I am pretty sure that there were other possible outcomes, most of which didn't involve shooting from one country into another, and killing minors in the process.

Shooting from one country to another is generally reserved for military units under a declaration of war, not cops investigating drugs. I really have to wonder what exactly happened, that there was a group of people standing there along the river throwing rocks at cops at 11:30pm? Clearly, we do not have the whole story.

We shouldn't shoot our neighbors unless they are shooting at us.

Right now we are one of the most aggressive nations in history.

We have more and better weapons than most of the world.

We don't need to keep upping the body count.

Kudos to Amir for such a great posting.
There is no justification for using deadly force against someone throwing rocks from a distance. None. If someone is dropping bricks on your head from a balcony, then maybe, but throwing rocks from across a river? Never.
If he is not charged at least with manslaughter, it is a miscarriage of justice.
Like so many cops, he seems to be shielded from the consequences of thoughtless abuses of force just because of the uniform.
Responding with deadly force to someone hand throwing rocks from a distance, and then saying it's justifiable. That's about as close to the definition of tyranny as I care to get. Ultra right wing all the way.

If you have a scale diagram of the scene, please post it.

If you have photographs from the relative positions of the people involved, please post them.

If you have footage of the incoming stones, please post it.

If you have current photos of the kid involved, please post them.

In fact, if you have ANYTHING beyond the news story, please post it.

I am not saying the BP agent is innocent of wrongdoing. (I do, however, stand by my first comment that throwing rocks at a person with gun, any person with a gun, is a really stupid thing to do no matter who it is.)

I AM saying that, unless someone has the above information, NONE of us knows if that agent was in reasonable fear of life or limb. I AM saying that you are reacting based only on headlines written for sensational appeal (THIS one's typical) and preconceived notions.

None of us were there. The only information we have comes from routinely sensationalized media reports.

Quite bluntly, I'm getting fed up with otherwise intelligent people, here and elsewhere, behaving like a virtual lynch mob. If I wanted that kind of company, I'd go hang out with the Right-wingers.

So, do people here who are CCW holders think that if they shot a kid for throwing a rock at them, they would get off scot-free?

If not, then why should a cop/border agent get away with it? Especially, when they should be held to a higher standard because of the power they hold, not a lower one.

Collector1337 wrote:So, do people here who are CCW holders think that if they shot a kid for throwing a rock at them, they would get off scot-free?

That, Sir, would depend upon whether or not the person firing the shot reasonably believed they were in danger of death or serious injury. The possible scenarios are infinitely variable, so all you (or any of us) can do at this point is speculate.

I can understand fearing for your life from stones being thrown, if it's from multiple assailants or in close proximity, but not from across a river, because that rules out close proximity even if it's a narrow and shallow part of the river. You are going to see the rock coming from a mile away and easily move out of its path.

This is pure speculation, but it is very possible we have another cop mentality/too big of ego, kind of thing going on here. Sort of a, "how dare you throw a rock at me, I'm a border patrol agent." So, because they think they are justified (the "how dare you throw a rock at me, I'm LE, I have a right to shoot you"), they shoot someone, and they of course get away with it, because we cut cops way too much slack. They can simply lie about the circumstances or lie about if they "reasonably believed they were in danger of death or serious injury" and we will just take their word for it. We have failed as a society to hold LE to a higher standard due to the power differential. We will pay the price for it when the police state grows even larger, and cops think they have a right to just shoot whoever they want, like what happened in New Orleans during Katrina, and people will be too scared to stand up to them, because they are the police after all. We put far too much trust in them and take their word as if it's Gospel. I think this is a huge mistake.

I can see this from both sides. Can rocks by deadly projectiles? Absolutely. Can LEO's overreact and summarily get away with such bad behavior? Certainly. Without further details we really don't know what happened. When one thinks of the term river an image of a large, deep, rapidly flowing steam of water comes to mind but perhaps in that particular region is was none of those. Maybe it was just as another person, above, described and it was the case of a cop being pissed at the situation and at people that he feels little regard of and just decided to make an example or whatever you'd call it. In a perfect world there would be no borders nor reason for LEO's to exist but we're a long ways from that utopian society. The sad thing is that we'll probably never know what exactly transpired in this altercation.

GuitarsandGuns wrote:We shouldn't shoot our neighbors unless they are shooting at us.

Right now we are one of the most aggressive nations in history.

We have more and better weapons than most of the world.

We don't need to keep upping the body count.

^^this.... This is the truth... We already have a majority of the world hating us anyway, but most in the country think the rest of the world adores us. I have been spit on and had rock thrown at me, because I was an American trying to serve my country... I am afraid one day all of these countries will decide it is time to band together, then we are in some serious shit. While I feel our borders need to be closed, it needs to be handled cautiously and as less violently as possible. We can't move the country away from our neighbors...

I think Mexico ought to declare war on Texas.

There IS video of the river shooting. The Rio Grande at that point is so shallow and narrow that it's little more than a drainage ditch that can be walked across without getting your thighs wet. The officer had a suspect in custody on the ground and was applying cuffs when numerous mexican youths started chucking baseball or larger sized rocks at him hard enough than they were landing around him.

Suspect beneath you + additional assailants yards away + gun on your wast + rock blow to the head = Fucked.

I've never understood how people minimize rocking. How about I call you over to my house and my 18 y/o nephew repeatedly throws 2-3 pound shards of shattered concrete at your head with deadly intent? Ok, he's actually a pitcher so that's not fair. So we'll separate you by a 15 foot high chain link fence then have him throw the rocks hard enough they clear the fence and still have enough velocity to reach you on the other side. Mind you the aim is lot harder so most of the time he won't hit you at least. So we'll call over 14 of his friends and have them try at the same time.

The intent of the throwers is lethal. Border Patrol agents can and do get serious injured or even maimed during rockings. The threat is real. Police do not have a duty to retreat, that's been affirmed by the courts over and over. Every last foot of that ground up to the border fence is US soil and if law enforcement believe there is evidence of illegal activity that needs to be investigated they have the right and duty to do so.