|
Post by ♥Fem Dem♥ on Jan 20, 2009 0:41:16 GMT -5
Sometimes field justice is the correct justice and yes go ahead label me, I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, I WEAR IT PROUDLY. Bang, bang, go get'em cowboy
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Jan 20, 2009 6:29:02 GMT -5
….and you kinda pissed me off, I care for more illegal immigrants on a daily basis than you see in a month, I feed a lot of people, I know what it is like. I know what it is like to call home a storm drain. For your information the illegal immigrants I know, think the agents should have shot the drug smuggler between the eyes. You see, the good guys hate the bad guy, that is the way American wannabees like it. Sometimes field justice is the correct justice and yes go ahead label me, I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, I WEAR IT PROUDLY.I guess I have to disagree a bit CM.I'm now thinking about the Oscar Grant case in Oakland where a young man was shot in the back while face down on the ground.Not only is it bad policy to shoot and kill a person,it's not easy to get away with it due to the surveilence cameras and phones with cameras. It may have been an accident(the Grant killing) but it's hard to believe anyone in law enforcement could mistake a stun gun for a real one,especially since they are carried on the left hip and guns on the right. I have relatives in law enforcement and they were disgusted by the Oscar Grant killing.
|
|
|
Post by daleescondido on Jan 20, 2009 6:40:12 GMT -5
Well Dale then half the people living in Escondido should be shoot down without a trial. Typical moron. Dale is the type that believes that the police should be judge and jury too. Compeon and Ramos should have stayed in jail forever. They broke the law, tried to cover it up. Their are the law, not two regular guys. Look what OJ Simpson got.....Oh oh thats right. OJ is black. Its a joke. Well now we are rid of conservatives in the White House and things will be different. No more torture and no more Gitmo. When the justice system becomes too liberal and starts to fail you start to see vigilante type orgs arise. When field justice becomes necessary it is a tradegy. When justice actually is allowed back into our legal system many problems will diminish. About one third the population of escondido should be deported and 5% should be jailed and a couple dozen lynched. Wouldnt hurt our budget either.
|
|
CM
Rookie
Posts: 0
|
Post by CM on Jan 20, 2009 9:36:38 GMT -5
I guess I have to disagree a bit CM.I'm now thinking about the Oscar Grant case in Oakland where a young man was shot in the back while face down on the ground.Not only is it bad policy to shoot and kill a person,it's not easy to get away with it due to the surveilence cameras and phones with cameras. It may have been an accident(the Grant killing) but it's hard to believe anyone in law enforcement could mistake a stun gun for a real one,especially since they are carried on the left hip and guns on the right. I have relatives in law enforcement and they were disgusted by the Oscar Grant killing. Bruce, I may not have done a good job but I was attempting to give the view from the illegal immigrant perspective and demonstrate my experience with them. They do not want the attention a drug dealer brings to them, thus the statement shoot the guy. That is their justice and protects their life and their family. Lot more to be said but duty calls.
|
|
VOR
banned
BANNED FOR LIFE
VOR
Posts: 294
|
Post by VOR on Jan 20, 2009 10:59:50 GMT -5
CM, I'm sorry but your post was moronic. I am not talking issues of immigration or drug dealing. They are not part of this equation with these Border Patrol agents. I DID read the complete transcript.
These law enforcement officers shot a fleeing suspect in the back as he crossed the border and then after doing so didn't try and help him. They then attempted a coverup. However whats more interesting is their bragging before that today they would "bag" an illegal.
Your statement that they should have shot him between the eyes instead leads me to believe that you want law enforcement to be officer, judge and jury. I also have first hand experience with police officers and know they don't have qualifications to assume those responsibilities.
So your experience with immigration is not anything we are talking about here. What we ARE talking about is freedoms in America. Innocent until proven guilty, especially where human life is a concern.
To me these officers deserved jail time.
Taking a human life irresponsibily is far more important then proving the immigration issue. These officers didn't know this person was guilty of anything until his name was identified and records searched. Not exactly the reason to shoot someone between the eyes.
So to say your comment was moronic or at best sophmoric is very responsible.
|
|
CM
Rookie
Posts: 0
|
Post by CM on Jan 20, 2009 11:51:11 GMT -5
I was attempting to give the perspective from an illegal the way them see it.
|
|
|
Post by jackoliver on Jan 20, 2009 13:00:39 GMT -5
Of course Bush did this for his right wing wacko base...
anyone breaking the law and covering it up is Ok with the GOP as long as it is againts illegal immigrants or democratic CIA aggents.
facts are the facts and that is a fking fact !!!!
Bush pardoned libby and now these two coward agents who make all agents look really bad...
Good job Bushies...!!!
Another FIne republican value....
|
|
|
Post by tpfkalarry on Jan 20, 2009 19:06:15 GMT -5
There is a line that connects absolute freedom on one side and absolute security on the other. Societies and individuals need to find their place between the two. You really cannot have absolute freedom and absolute security at the same time. Our legal system is based on the idea that it would be better to free a hundred criminals rather than imprison one innocent. I think for each of us there is a number that makes that sentence logical. Ramos and Compean shot a fleeing suspect which is not good, but they did not shoot Mother Theresa and there should be no mistake about that. That is where it gets difficult. Most everyone likes the idea of justice for all as long as we do not think the all are bad people. We would support the innocent until proven guilty idea but not if it was applied to Bin Laden.
Mores in our society are like a pendulumm. They swing from one side to the other. Many Americans were willing to give up freedoms after 9-11 that we would not have freely given up before. We do not want law enforcement or the border patrol to shoot innocent people, but when the innocent turn out to be drug dealers we often have a change of heart.
The problem with giving up a freedom is that it is hard to get it back. The problem with giving up security is that some crack head jacks your Escalade. Which will you miss most the freedom or the Escalade?
P.S.- No disrespect meant to crack-heads. They have rights also. We do not always give them their rights because we know they would trade them for more crack.
|
|
VOR
banned
BANNED FOR LIFE
VOR
Posts: 294
|
Post by VOR on Jan 20, 2009 19:28:18 GMT -5
Larry, you can't decide who you want to give rights to. You cant say, I "THINK" I know what youre going to do with them. These border patrol officers didn't know the victim, they had no idea who he was. They are not judge and jury to convict someone on the spot or we should legalize lynchings again. This person they shot could have been Mother Theresa. They didnt know. So to excuse that line of thinking is not legal or the way Americans think. The laws the last time I looked put these two felons in jail. They broke the law and were convicted by the law. 9-11 or not, they broke the law. To speak around that is not worthwhile. Although Copnservos feel that they can bypass the law. Look at Scooter Libby whos sentence was also commuted after a jail sentence. You didnt see him go back to fit the conviction in court. Republicans wanted him pardoned, yet he broke the law. Stevens and Cunningham broke the law. Conservatives wanted them pardoned. The law and insurance provides for your Escalade Larry....thats the law...to carry insurance. Who would protect your freedom once gone? ?
|
|
|
Post by tpfkalarry on Jan 20, 2009 19:48:24 GMT -5
Vor, I already argued your side of this discussion when the sentence was first handed out. The two agents were tried and convicted. They exhausted their appeals. They should have gone to jail. People who enforce our laws cannot be above them. There is no argument there. But if we are talking about what is logical and reasonable than clearly ten years is too much.
My observation on the way we conduct the trade off between security and freedom was just that. History will show you the pendulum swings. During the civil war, Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus. There was concern but no real uproar. After 911 there were a lot of Americans who felt it was okay to bypass the FISA rules when gathering evidence on terrorists. Having been alive when the laws were passed I can tell you that nobody in the seventies would have thought it was okay to do so.
I do not have an Escalade. That was a metaphor. Personally I have always been reluctant to give up freedoms for short term gains in security. I do not look at the constitution as a burden we have to bear or a barrier we need to work around. But I understand when others choose to trade their freedoms for security. Doesn't mean I am making a trade myself. being as invested as I am in young people I do not look at drugs as a victimless crime. Gateway drugs are also gateway crimes. When the money from drugs becomes large enough than guns have to be carried. This is the backdrop for many of the feelings people have about this case. Understanding those feelings just allows us to discuss the issues from both sides. It is like Obama's willingness to have dialogue with our enemies. It is important to understand the other side, it doesn't mean you have to join them.
|
|
|
Post by tpfkalarry on Jan 20, 2009 19:49:15 GMT -5
Vor, Tell me you realize the crackhead thing was satire.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Jan 20, 2009 19:59:28 GMT -5
Larry, There's a quote from the 1983 movie, "The Star Chamber", that I've posted a few times in the past: "Someone has taken justice and hidden it in the law." Aside from the extreme length of the sentences, the real cruelty of their incarceration was the requirement for solitary confinement to protect them from the general population. From what I've heard today, it seems that the conditions of the commutation did not call for immediate release since Bush is still unconvinced of their innocence. The good news is that they will still be able to pursue their appeals. I'm sure there are more than a few cockroaches that are dreading the moment when that light comes on. Well said! This sentence and the "circus" performed in the court trial was nothing more than a sop to the open borders people who never met an illegal they did not think was justified in coming here and "contributing!" This entire episode and others which the Bush admin encouraged proved that one cannot be all things to all people!
|
|
|
Post by Jack on Jan 20, 2009 20:14:40 GMT -5
lou,
I also read that the Mexican Government tried to intervene and use diplomatic channels to try and block the commutations. Pretty bold for a country that just ranked among the top two nations in peril of imploding due to corruption and failure to control massive internal organized crime.
|
|
|
Post by jackoliver on Jan 20, 2009 20:15:40 GMT -5
TOO BAD OJ SIMPSON WASNT A REPUBLICAN..
MOST IF NOT ALL REPUBLICANS WOULD HAVE BEEN OVERJOYED HE GOT OFF FOR A CRIME.
Just like these two disgraced CONVICTED FELON BORDER AGENTS.
JUST LIKE SCOOTER LIBBY..
I thank God all conservatives are not like that.
there are some who agree these officers are guilty,,,unlike the conservatives I see around here.
I guese the rule of law and the constitution means NOTHING to these type of conservo's.
|
|
VOR
banned
BANNED FOR LIFE
VOR
Posts: 294
|
Post by VOR on Jan 20, 2009 21:22:13 GMT -5
Yes Larry I got that and I uderstand that you dont drive a jacked Escalade.
My side or point was that these scum didnt have a clue why this guy was running. He could have been anyone. They still shot at him. I think I read they shot over twenty rounds.
Here is the simplicity of Jack. He read something.....where? Who said it? World Net Daily? Where the editor asked all Christians to pray Obama fails??
So Jack I read that some high ranking Conservatives tried to bribe Bush into freeing these scum.
Wow, VOR, WHERE DID YOU READ THAT??? ummmm....I don't know.....it just sounds more Liberal doesnt it???
Jack wheres the proof that the Mexican government had anything to do with Bush'd decision??? If not then all we can do is assume you made it up.
|
|