Border Patrol Agent shoots 15 yr old Mexican kid

Coming from Ex-Law Enforcement:

I feel that both sides are using the complete worst case scenario to make a point, giving both sides ammunition (no pun) to discredit each other. No one can pass judgement because truth be told when you're in the situation, you don't think the same way you would when sitting in your bedroom or office posting on a forum analyzing another's actions. Yes, the kid should have listened. No, he shouldn't have been throwing rocks. Is shooting the kid reasonable? Perhaps not. However, I may have done the same if I was in the situation he was in. Situations that scare us (and typically when someone is attacking you and won't stop when you're telling them to is scary) whether it be deadly or not, fear makes basic instinct kick in which is survival. Personally, I would have used a tazer since it is non lethal but downs a man quickly. Perhaps he didn't have one on him. Who is to say that the kid would have stopped with said rock? You attack law enforcement who has a gun, why would you stop there? These types of things aren't new situations and won't be something to go away because cops are people too and just because you have a badge doesn't mean you're perfect. Several factors go into how cops react to situations and they get more sh-t than they get praise. This is just getting more attention than any other firing because of the Arizona situation.
 
Karihkinz said:
No one can pass judgement because truth be told when you're in the situation, you don't think the same way you would when sitting in your bedroom or office posting on a forum analyzing another's actions..
Click to expand...

/thread :thumbsup:
 
lol, some of you people are just sad. i should expect such from the normal crowd though.

Oh, and as usual, the Honorable Representative from Raestopia is correct. Non/Less-than-lethal force should have applied here, and if it wasn't available to the agent, why the hell wasn't it?
 
I read the article and it seems there is to much gray area to know for sure what went on. There were no reports, or credible witnesses, that can tell of if the officer was shooting to kill or dissable. there is a difference between deadly and lethal force. We all know a gun can disable a person rather easily, but once you fire that bullet it lands where it may. I don't know if the officer was shooting to kill or to disable. i'd like to think the latter, but there is no way of knowing now.

While it is a shame that the kid died it is also his own fault. Like Kari said law enforcement officers make snap decisions when they feel threatened. These officers i'm sure feel on edge all the time given the nature of their job. Maybe he panic'd and shouldn't be in this line of work. Maybe he genuinly felt he was in danger and tried to kill the kid he shot. Or maybe he fired his weapon to try to scare them off and one of the children move into his direct line of fire. (The last senario opens up multiple windows of actions but we're talking about an officer in the heat of the moment where thought out planning doesn't come into play.) But all of this still come after the fact that the kid would still be alive, most likely anyway, had he not threatened the officer in the first place. I place blame on the individual for their actions, not a system.
 
I think that if the border patrol agent legitimately felt his life was in danger, then by all means use whatever force available to you for your safety. That being said, it might be tough to justify shooting a 15-year-old just throwing rocks at you, thats usually where tear gas or something non-lethal should have been used if in fact it was available to the agent.

Similar but different scenario would be a home invasion. If someone comes into your home pointing what appears to be a knife, gun, or whatever, at that point i'll use whatever means i have to protect myself and my family. If it turns out that the gun was fake or the knife was something non-lethal like a spoon or whatever, i'll have no sympathy for the invader's life to protect my loved ones. Similar to the border patrol agent, if i'm put in a situation by another person to make a decision like this, i'll make the decision i feel is right.
 
Tristam Green said:
lol, some of you people are just sad. i should expect such from the normal crowd though.

Oh, and as usual, the Honorable Representative from Raestopia is correct. Non/Less-than-lethal force should have applied here, and if it wasn't available to the agent, why the hell wasn't it?
Click to expand...

I've noticed you usually make comments vaguely like this one with people who don't share your same opinion (similarly to the BLM thread) and I'm just curious why you don't just say who you don't agree with rather than leaving it so open ended and letting everyone think you're calling them sad. You post a lot and are not afraid to say what you think so why make general comments like this? Merely asking out of curiosity :)
 
I'd wager that he's saying that the people who are all gung-ho "Shoot the little shit, he was throwing rocks and rocks are potentially dangerous" are perhaps a trace misguided.

It takes a fair amount of skill, a reasonable amount of strength, and a significant amount of luck to kill somebody with a rock. That sort of situation is why we have less-than-lethal force options, and the question must be asked why they were not used in this instance.
 
Raesvelg said:
I'd wager that he's saying that the people who are all gung-ho "Shoot the little shit, he was throwing rocks and rocks are potentially dangerous" are perhaps a trace misguided.

It takes a fair amount of skill, a reasonable amount of strength, and a significant amount of luck to kill somebody with a rock. That sort of situation is why we have less-than-lethal force options, and the question must be asked why they were not used in this instance.
Click to expand...

See this is what I've been trying to convey to some of the people here. Unless you are up close within melee range, it is near impossible to kill someone with a rock. You either A) are up close, the person is on the ground and you are crushing their head with a VERY heavy rock, or B) as stated above you are in melee range and you swing your fist at the person with the rock in hand. Otherwise its just not a possibility.
 
Oh, it's quite possible to kill someone with a thrown rock. It just takes a convergence of a variety of factors, one of which is the person having rocks thrown at them not dodging. It's stupid, and dangerous, and if there was absolutely no other option available to him, the agent was justified in shooting the kid.

That's the issue. What other options were available, why weren't they pursued, and if certain options were not available, why not?
 
Raesvelg said:
Oh, it's quite possible to kill someone with a thrown rock. It just takes a convergence of a variety of factors, one of which is the person having rocks thrown at them not dodging. It's stupid, and dangerous, and if there was absolutely no other option available to him, the agent was justified in shooting the kid.

That's the issue. What other options were available, why weren't they pursued, and if certain options were not available, why not?
Click to expand...

That's what I'm curious about as well. Living on the border, I meet up with many Border Patrol agents throughout the week, and to be honest none of them have ever come off as the "gung-ho" type, so why this guy all of a sudden decided to pull out his gun and fire as his first recourse is beyond me =/ Unfortunately for him, the cartel led "Chapo" Guzman has put a price on his head, the USA better hide him and his familys identity for his own sake.
 
Hexx said:
TUnfortunately for him, the cartel led "Chapo" Guzman has put a price on his head, the USA better hide him and his familys identity for his own sake.
Click to expand...

Lawl, nothing to see here, move along. Is how I feel about that "threat".
 
Strid said:
Lawl, nothing to see here, move along. Is how I feel about that "threat".
Click to expand...

...

If the leader of the Sinaloa Cartel, considered by Forbes Magazine to the the 41st most powerful person in the world had decided that he wanted me dead... I'd be a little concerned over it.

Wouldn't you?
 
hexx you live down there what's up with all this los zetas crap?
 
Hexx I feel I answered your question. He didn't get gun-ho. He responded to the fear of the situation. Doesn't make it right but you obviously think much clearer when you're sitting at your computer and not in the situation itself.
 
I feel a warning shot would've been more appropriate, but at this point there's really no point in arguing what-ifs. What's more important now is that this guy's life is in a lot of danger.
 
Strid said:
Lawl, nothing to see here, move along. Is how I feel about that "threat".
Click to expand...

Yeah man, the Sinaloa Cartel is mighty powerful, you don't joke around with them man.


Kari: Yeah, I see where you're coming from. Again, I don't agree with what the kid was doing, its just plain stupid to be throwing rocks at an armed man, who on top of things has firearms training. The kid brought it on himself, but I'm still of the belief that this officer could have and should have used non-lethal force. Guess only time will tell what will happen to this officer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top