BUSH COMMUTES SENTENCE OF BORDER PATROL AGENTS!

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: marincounty
Many of you applaud these crazy laws, mandatory minimums and such. And when someone you admire is busted, OMG the sentence is too stiff.
These border agents were up to no good when they shot the smuggler, We still are not getting the full story. I think they were probably trying to rip the guy off.

They were sworn to uphold the law, and they broke it. They should do their time like anyone else would have, actually not, they should get a harsher sentence because they were sworn to uphold the law and were being paid to uphold the law.

Righties claim they are for the rule of law, but if they don't like the law, they ignore it.

Well, I'm fairly conservative, and I agree. So don't lump us all together, kthx

Sorry, I just see mostly righties supporting the border agents. I don't get it, they broke the law-and got convicted and sentenced. Or is it that cops are above the law?

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: marincounty
Many of you applaud these crazy laws, mandatory minimums and such. And when someone you admire is busted, OMG the sentence is too stiff.
These border agents were up to no good when they shot the smuggler, We still are not getting the full story. I think they were probably trying to rip the guy off.

They were sworn to uphold the law, and they broke it. They should do their time like anyone else would have, actually not, they should get a harsher sentence because they were sworn to uphold the law and were being paid to uphold the law.

Righties claim they are for the rule of law, but if they don't like the law, they ignore it.

Well, I'm fairly conservative, and I agree. So don't lump us all together, kthx

Sorry, I just see mostly righties supporting the border agents. I don't get it, they broke the law-and got convicted and sentenced. Or is it that cops are above the law?

You might be close to the truth there. I am pretty hardcore on the law. Criminals on either side of the badge or uniform should be appropriately punished to support the fundamental structure of our society and government.

We are way too lax in enforcing existing border patrol and other laws that are on the books, then we go ahead and make it worse by letting criminals like these go lightly punished.

We need to be firmer in both areas.

 

[marincounty]

I remember all of the right wing noise about Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich.

Text
The leniency was granted to the former agents even though the Justice Department had not completed its review of the case, according to officials at the agency. A president?s constitutional power to grant pardons or commutations is unfettered, but Justice Department officials sometimes feel resentful if leniency without their full review.

In an interview with an El Paso television station two years ago, President Bush signaled that he would at least look at the case of the former border agents. ?There are standards that need to be met in law enforcement, and according to a jury of their peers, these officers violated some standards,? Mr. Bush said.

But he went on to say that ?people need to take a hard look at the facts? of the case and added, ?I will do the same thing.?


?Nothing could be further from the truth,? the lead prosecutor in the case said in 2007, scoffing at the idea that the defendants were defending themselves. The agents said at trial that they had scuffled with the dealer, Osvaldo Aldrete Davila.

?These agents shot someone whom they knew to be unarmed and running away,? said the prosecutor, United States Attorney Johnny Sutton. ?They destroyed evidence, covered up a crime scene and then filed false reports about what happened. It is shocking that there are people who believe it is O.K. for agents to shoot an unarmed suspect who is running away.?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I wouldn't have commuted their sentences, but at least he didn't pardon them. IMO this is one case where the system got it right but they became a cause celebre regardless (Mumia Abu Jamal being another).

 

[Turin39789]

Pardon fail.

 

[Craig234]

The lack of value for human life from the supporters of this commuation - most of whom prefer a pardon - is reprehensible.

Adolf Hitler's life had value - even if he forced trying to kill him to protect those he would harm, there is a tragedy to his being killed even if also celebration at the saving of people.

When the police shoot and kill a criminal legitimately, there is a tragedy. It may have been necessary, it may have been merely justifiable, but there is a tragedy.

This Mexican illegal immigrant drug dealer is far more sympathetic than Adolf Hitler. Likely, his first 'crime' was poverty.

Where is the culpability for those who buy Marijuana, creating a compelling financial incentive for the poor in Mexico? Those on this forum who 'he he, tee hee, puff puff'?

All a big joke - except for the many billions making it the nation's largest cash crop even here much less the imports.

Would it be ok to go to the 'bad part of town' here and hold up a sign saying "Paying a HUGE amount of cash for you to steal a car", and mean it? If you did that, would it be a good defense to say all you did was offer the money and the crime was completely on the poor person who accepted the huge cash, possible in an effort to reduce the poverty for their family?

How culpable are those who support the drug laws that create the black market for marijuana, without which this killing would not have happened? Do the harms of marijuana justify the violence caused by the creation of the many-billions black market for the marijuana, includng the life here?

Is there any evidence, for that matter, that this guy was a violent person, anythijng but a poor person trying to get some money, illegally, by suppplying the marijuana demand?

That's not a crime for which he deserved to be killed, nor is the crime of illegal immigration, which so many here immorally care nothing about the welfare of the fellow human beings in Mexico but only that it 'annoys' them to have the poor from Mexico come here and cause some inconvenience - much less their ignoring the studies that show the ilegal immigrants are a large net contributor to our economy and the evidence that our politicians like a 'shadow workforce' for providing us the benefits of illegal cheap labor.

But shooting this guy in the back, unarmed? I don't know the rules they're given, but if they don't say that's illegal and murder, the rules are wrong. Catch him, yes.

Covering up the crime, though is clearly a crime. Anyone who wants them excused for that is a thug, pure and simple.

Any 'softening of the sentence' these guys deserved was done or should have been done at their sentencing already.

This is nothing but the politiciation of the justice system, the mob getting to let off the lynchers, er sorry that's the old version, the murderers and coverup of the crime.

My little 'oops' with te word lynching is a reference to the same spirit in which juries used not to conviict whites for killing blsack whatever the law said. That's the same lack of morality I see from the people here. If you want to see the problem of corruption in politics today, look in the mirror if you are for this mob-driven freeing of these criminals. The thousands of other corrupt people in our political system clearly can more easily rationalize their immorality than you can rationalize clear murder and coverup.

The peopole who are for this mob-driven commutation are a moral blight on our nation who cost us our moral right to condemn others like China and Iran for their crimes.

But they don't care - they don't even understand the moral issue. It's just a weapon for them to use hypocritically against China or Iran when it suits their convenience.

The only real rule they'll understand is 'might makes right', all the morality chit chat is just hot air, the thing they're interested in is the barrel of the gun to get more for themselves.

Which is worse than what we know about the man who was killed by these criminal agents.

 

[PrinceofWands]

WOOOOT! Not that it makes up for what they went through (nor does it excuse the other 99.9% terrible decisions the decider decided), but at least it's something.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
WOOOOT! Not that it makes up for what they went through (nor does it excuse the other 99.9% terrible decisions the decider decided), but at least it's something.

They would likely never have had to "go through" anything if they'd told the truth, and certainly not if they'd done their jobs in the first place. I am at a loss to understand how conservative radio ever got people spun up into the idea that this case represents some kind of injustice.

I can live with this outcome, since they remain convicted felons and will never be able to work in law enforcement again, but I fail to appreciate how they were ever "wronged" in the first place.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Craig234
The lack of value for human life from the supporters of this commuation - most of whom prefer a pardon - is reprehensible.

Adolf Hitler's life had value - even if he forced trying to kill him to protect those he would harm, there is a tragedy to his being killed even if also celebration at the saving of people.

When the police shoot and kill a criminal legitimately, there is a tragedy. It may have been necessary, it may have been merely justifiable, but there is a tragedy.

This Mexican illegal immigrant drug dealer is far more sympathetic than Adolf Hitler. Likely, his first 'crime' was poverty.

Where is the culpability for those who buy Marijuana, creating a compelling financial incentive for the poor in Mexico? Those on this forum who 'he he, tee hee, puff puff'?

All a big joke - except for the many billions making it the nation's largest cash crop even here much less the imports.

Would it be ok to go to the 'bad part of town' here and hold up a sign saying "Paying a HUGE amount of cash for you to steal a car", and mean it? If you did that, would it be a good defense to say all you did was offer the money and the crime was completely on the poor person who accepted the huge cash, possible in an effort to reduce the poverty for their family?

How culpable are those who support the drug laws that create the black market for marijuana, without which this killing would not have happened? Do the harms of marijuana justify the violence caused by the creation of the many-billions black market for the marijuana, includng the life here?

Is there any evidence, for that matter, that this guy was a violent person, anythijng but a poor person trying to get some money, illegally, by suppplying the marijuana demand?

That's not a crime for which he deserved to be killed, nor is the crime of illegal immigration, which so many here immorally care nothing about the welfare of the fellow human beings in Mexico but only that it 'annoys' them to have the poor from Mexico come here and cause some inconvenience - much less their ignoring the studies that show the ilegal immigrants are a large net contributor to our economy and the evidence that our politicians like a 'shadow workforce' for providing us the benefits of illegal cheap labor.

But shooting this guy in the back, unarmed? I don't know the rules they're given, but if they don't say that's illegal and murder, the rules are wrong. Catch him, yes.

Covering up the crime, though is clearly a crime. Anyone who wants them excused for that is a thug, pure and simple.

Any 'softening of the sentence' these guys deserved was done or should have been done at their sentencing already.

This is nothing but the politiciation of the justice system, the mob getting to let off the lynchers, er sorry that's the old version, the murderers and coverup of the crime.

My little 'oops' with te word lynching is a reference to the same spirit in which juries used not to conviict whites for killing blsack whatever the law said. That's the same lack of morality I see from the people here. If you want to see the problem of corruption in politics today, look in the mirror if you are for this mob-driven freeing of these criminals. The thousands of other corrupt people in our political system clearly can more easily rationalize their immorality than you can rationalize clear murder and coverup.

The peopole who are for this mob-driven commutation are a moral blight on our nation who cost us our moral right to condemn others like China and Iran for their crimes.

But they don't care - they don't even understand the moral issue. It's just a weapon for them to use hypocritically against China or Iran when it suits their convenience.

The only real rule they'll understand is 'might makes right', all the morality chit chat is just hot air, the thing they're interested in is the barrel of the gun to get more for themselves.

Which is worse than what we know about the man who was killed by these criminal agents.

Not all human life has value.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
WOOOOT! Not that it makes up for what they went through (nor does it excuse the other 99.9% terrible decisions the decider decided), but at least it's something.

They would likely never have had to "go through" anything if they'd told the truth, and certainly not if they'd done their jobs in the first place. I am at a loss to understand how conservative radio ever got people spun up into the idea that this case represents some kind of injustice.

I can live with this outcome, since they remain convicted felons and will never be able to work in law enforcement again, but I fail to appreciate how they were ever "wronged" in the first place.

It's just because I have a different view than some people, as to what constitutes threat, and necessitates the use of lethal force. Putting your life on the line repeatedly for other people's safety will do that to you after a while.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: Craig234
The lack of value for human life from the supporters of this commuation - most of whom prefer a pardon - is reprehensible.

Adolf Hitler's life had value - even if he forced trying to kill him to protect those he would harm, there is a tragedy to his being killed even if also celebration at the saving of people.

When the police shoot and kill a criminal legitimately, there is a tragedy. It may have been necessary, it may have been merely justifiable, but there is a tragedy.

This Mexican illegal immigrant drug dealer is far more sympathetic than Adolf Hitler. Likely, his first 'crime' was poverty.

Where is the culpability for those who buy Marijuana, creating a compelling financial incentive for the poor in Mexico? Those on this forum who 'he he, tee hee, puff puff'?

All a big joke - except for the many billions making it the nation's largest cash crop even here much less the imports.

Would it be ok to go to the 'bad part of town' here and hold up a sign saying "Paying a HUGE amount of cash for you to steal a car", and mean it? If you did that, would it be a good defense to say all you did was offer the money and the crime was completely on the poor person who accepted the huge cash, possible in an effort to reduce the poverty for their family?

How culpable are those who support the drug laws that create the black market for marijuana, without which this killing would not have happened? Do the harms of marijuana justify the violence caused by the creation of the many-billions black market for the marijuana, includng the life here?

Is there any evidence, for that matter, that this guy was a violent person, anythijng but a poor person trying to get some money, illegally, by suppplying the marijuana demand?

That's not a crime for which he deserved to be killed, nor is the crime of illegal immigration, which so many here immorally care nothing about the welfare of the fellow human beings in Mexico but only that it 'annoys' them to have the poor from Mexico come here and cause some inconvenience - much less their ignoring the studies that show the ilegal immigrants are a large net contributor to our economy and the evidence that our politicians like a 'shadow workforce' for providing us the benefits of illegal cheap labor.

But shooting this guy in the back, unarmed? I don't know the rules they're given, but if they don't say that's illegal and murder, the rules are wrong. Catch him, yes.

Covering up the crime, though is clearly a crime. Anyone who wants them excused for that is a thug, pure and simple.

Any 'softening of the sentence' these guys deserved was done or should have been done at their sentencing already.

This is nothing but the politiciation of the justice system, the mob getting to let off the lynchers, er sorry that's the old version, the murderers and coverup of the crime.

My little 'oops' with te word lynching is a reference to the same spirit in which juries used not to conviict whites for killing blsack whatever the law said. That's the same lack of morality I see from the people here. If you want to see the problem of corruption in politics today, look in the mirror if you are for this mob-driven freeing of these criminals. The thousands of other corrupt people in our political system clearly can more easily rationalize their immorality than you can rationalize clear murder and coverup.

The peopole who are for this mob-driven commutation are a moral blight on our nation who cost us our moral right to condemn others like China and Iran for their crimes.

But they don't care - they don't even understand the moral issue. It's just a weapon for them to use hypocritically against China or Iran when it suits their convenience.

The only real rule they'll understand is 'might makes right', all the morality chit chat is just hot air, the thing they're interested in is the barrel of the gun to get more for themselves.

Which is worse than what we know about the man who was killed by these criminal agents.

Not all human life has value.

I would rephrase that. All human life has value, but not all life is human...including many criminals.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
WOOOOT! Not that it makes up for what they went through (nor does it excuse the other 99.9% terrible decisions the decider decided), but at least it's something.

They would likely never have had to "go through" anything if they'd told the truth, and certainly not if they'd done their jobs in the first place. I am at a loss to understand how conservative radio ever got people spun up into the idea that this case represents some kind of injustice.

Here's how: because right-wing talk radio *needs* ammo for the fire, and if it's legitimate, great, if not, make it up.

Since the right probably is not gettng my point, when it's against 'their side', I'll mention the mirror problem - what's a civil rights leader to do with the civil rights bill has passed, Martin Luther King has a holiday and the KKK is all but invisible, and almost totally ostracized?

Well, remember Tawana Brawley? How many times have been been upset with civil rights leaders misrepresenting an incident, 'playing the race card'?

The less scrupulous leaders need ammo, and run into the same challenge. It's not that they want a racist incident, but a racist incident can be great 'ammo'.

Now, I have to be careful because I think there are still a lot of race issues - but I also think that there are many times when the pro-black side can be wrong on an incident.

But remember that talk radio has numbers to meet for their audience, and they're built on 'outrage' and need fuel. They can't say "well, not many problems" and get listeners.

And so if they're reckless with the truth, if they're demagogues - this is the problem with demagogues, remember Hitler's rise to power blaming the Jews - oh well.

Now, this is the more extreme picture; I don't think they're usually that corrupt to think they are doing this; the simple wrongheaded values and bigotry make them sincere.

I can live with this outcome, since they remain convicted felons and will never be able to work in law enforcement again, but I fail to appreciate how they were ever "wronged" in the first place.

It's still wrong to pander to the mob this way IMO - they had a sentence that was what it was for a reason.

It's important as well not to 'send a message' to other law enforcement that our society wants them to start bending the rules more and more and a blind eye will be turned.

What's next, commutation for the BART officers because the guy they executed was a thug? We see smoe of these same posters praising the arrest of that cop.

Or perhaps commutations for the British police who executed the guy on the subway a while back in error - and then lied about the circumstances?

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Craig234
The lack of value for human life from the supporters of this commuation - most of whom prefer a pardon - is reprehensible.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.........

Which is worse than what we know about the man who was killed by these criminal agents.

What is worse are the moronic liberal posters who don't have a damned clue about the topic of the discussion before they engage in yet another long winded bout of verbal diarrhea. No one was killed by these border patrol agents.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: RichardE

Not all human life has value.

I would rephrase that. All human life has value, but not all life is human...including many criminals.

RichardE: We disagree. I think your error is the basis for much immorality. Why should 'the terrorists' view your life as valuable, as you demand they do?

Prince: You are committing the same act as the mass murderers from Hitler to Mao do: you dehumanize human beings.

It's very common for those who commit genocide to murder to refer to the victims as not human, as 'cockroaches', as 'a disease', or other terms. *You* are the one with the moral problem even worse than the people you dehumanize. I think better of the drug deal who was killed than I do of you, since as far as I know, his crimes were less than your moral crime of dehumanizing people that way.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: RichardE

Not all human life has value.

I would rephrase that. All human life has value, but not all life is human...including many criminals.

RichardE: We disagree. I think your error is the basis for much immorality. Why should 'the terrorists' view your life as valuable, as you demand they do?

Prince: You are committing the same act as the mass murderers from Hitler to Mao do: you dehumanize human beings.

It's very common for those who commit genocide to murder to refer to the victims as not human, as 'cockroaches', as 'a disease', or other terms. *You* are the one with the moral problem even worse than the people you dehumanize. I think better of the drug deal who was killed than I do of you, since as far as I know, his crimes were less than your moral crime of dehumanizing people that way.

Actual criminals (of a certain type) are not human beings. They surrendered that which makes us human in order to try and get ahead of other people by way of a shortcut. That's how I feel after a lifetime of dealing with them. I don't give a bucket of monkey spunk if you like or respect it, cause you don't put your life on the line to keep me safe from the worthless lowlife pieces of crap who would kill me for a five-spot. You want me to ask your opinion in this matter, put yourself in harms way. Otherwise kindly fuck off and let me try and make the world a better place.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Corn
What is worse are the moronic liberal posters who don't have a damned clue about the topic of the discussion before they engage in yet another long winded bout of verbal diarrhea. No one was killed by these border patrol agents you moron.

Your incivil idiocy does not deserve a response otherwise, but since I made a mistake, I do need to say that.

1. I read the story incorrectly and thought they had killed him when they shot him.

2. Other chan changing the word killed to shot, not one word of my posts is changed by this factual detail. If Corn had a clue about the points I made, he'd know that.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Actual criminals (of a certain type) are not human beings. They surrendered that which makes us human in order to try and get ahead of other people by way of a shortcut. That's how I feel after a lifetime of dealing with them. I don't give a bucket of monkey spunk if you like or respect it, cause you don't put your life on the line to keep me safe from the worthless lowlife pieces of crap who would kill me for a five-spot. You want me to ask your opinion in this matter, put yourself in harms way. Otherwise kindly fuck off and let me try and make the world a better place.

It's common for those who deal with the 'criminal element' to develop problems from it - look at the high rate of suicides among police officers.

That does not make you right, it simply explains why you are wrong.

*I don't want* someone with your views 'protecting me'. Please - do something else. I'll take my chances with the criminals, I'll find another cop who has better morality than you.

Get off the force, is my answer to you. Really. You don't get some 'license to kill' by the fact that you risk your life for 'public safety'.

I can *easily understand and sympathize*, and do, with how police are put in a terrible situation constantly with their lives at risk for protecting the rights of criminals.

I can easily understand how you start to rationalize shortcuts to those protections as making good sense. There is unfairness to the officers.

But that does not excuse your crossing the line to saying they are not human - they are - that's how you become a monster, which is sadly possible with 'authority figures'.

Look at the common trait of otherwise 'nice people' who become soldiers where you see them with big smiles in photos desecrating the bodies of those they killed.

There's some dehumanizing that helps people who use force deal with the guilt, I expect - and that's why rules are so important for people who are in these situations.

You expressed a view that is immoral, and no debating the risks you have taken 'to protect the public' can make it other than immoral.

I have a great respect for the officers - most of them, in my view - who make the *sacrifice* needed to do the job; not for them to dehumanize the criminals.

The best cops I know of are the ones who understand the criminals are people too and have more sympathy - even if they have to shoot one or more of them.

That shooting is a tragedy for the criminal and the officer, however necessary the criminal's wrongs made it.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Craig234

2. Other chan changing the word killed to shot, not one word of my posts is changed by this factual detail. If Corn had a clue about the points I made, he'd know that.

You make me laugh. No one was killed, therefore how does your diatribe regarding the reprehensible lack of value for human live from the people who support the commutation of this sentence have anything to do with anything? I'd say the fact that no human life was taken renders no practical value to your entire post with regard to the actual topic of discussion. Congratulations, your ignorance has simply left you with nothing more than a simple strawman. Wow.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: Craig234
The lack of value for human life from the supporters of this commuation - most of whom prefer a pardon - is reprehensible.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.........

Which is worse than what we know about the man who was killed by these criminal agents.

What is worse are the moronic liberal posters who don't have a damned clue about the topic of the discussion before they engage in yet another long winded bout of verbal diarrhea. No one was killed by these border patrol agents.

Especially when cause of said verbal diarrhea has been pointed out in this thread a couple of times already. Heh.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: RichardE

Not all human life has value.

I would rephrase that. All human life has value, but not all life is human...including many criminals.

RichardE: We disagree. I think your error is the basis for much immorality. Why should 'the terrorists' view your life as valuable, as you demand they do?

Prince: You are committing the same act as the mass murderers from Hitler to Mao do: you dehumanize human beings.

It's very common for those who commit genocide to murder to refer to the victims as not human, as 'cockroaches', as 'a disease', or other terms. *You* are the one with the moral problem even worse than the people you dehumanize. I think better of the drug deal who was killed than I do of you, since as far as I know, his crimes were less than your moral crime of dehumanizing people that way.

I don't demand that they view my life as having any value, actually many of them don't just as I view there life as having value. I have no moral dilemma as I understand my own life can be deemed as having no value to some people, luckily for me, those people have no real power to inflict there opinions whereas people with my opinion hold the same view as me in regards to the value of life of certain people.

Much suffering in the world could have been avoiding by killing the right person at the right time.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Corn
What is worse are the moronic liberal posters who don't have a damned clue about the topic of the discussion before they engage in yet another long winded bout of verbal diarrhea. No one was killed by these border patrol agents you moron.

Your incivil idiocy does not deserve a response otherwise, but since I made a mistake, I do need to say that.

1. I read the story incorrectly and thought they had killed him when they shot him.

2. Other chan changing the word killed to shot, not one word of my posts is changed by this factual detail. If Corn had a clue about the points I made, he'd know that.

Cliffs;

The only thing that is important, is that an opportunity existed to have long winded bout of verbal diarrhea.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Actual criminals (of a certain type) are not human beings. They surrendered that which makes us human in order to try and get ahead of other people by way of a shortcut. That's how I feel after a lifetime of dealing with them. I don't give a bucket of monkey spunk if you like or respect it, cause you don't put your life on the line to keep me safe from the worthless lowlife pieces of crap who would kill me for a five-spot. You want me to ask your opinion in this matter, put yourself in harms way. Otherwise kindly fuck off and let me try and make the world a better place.

It's common for those who deal with the 'criminal element' to develop problems from it - look at the high rate of suicides among police officers.

That does not make you right, it simply explains why you are wrong.

*I don't want* someone with your views 'protecting me'. Please - do something else. I'll take my chances with the criminals, I'll find another cop who has better morality than you.

Get off the force, is my answer to you. Really. You don't get some 'license to kill' by the fact that you risk your life for 'public safety'.

I can *easily understand and sympathize*, and do, with how police are put in a terrible situation constantly with their lives at risk for protecting the rights of criminals.

I can easily understand how you start to rationalize shortcuts to those protections as making good sense. There is unfairness to the officers.

But that does not excuse your crossing the line to saying they are not human - they are - that's how you become a monster, which is sadly possible with 'authority figures'.

Look at the common trait of otherwise 'nice people' who become soldiers where you see them with big smiles in photos desecrating the bodies of those they killed.

There's some dehumanizing that helps people who use force deal with the guilt, I expect - and that's why rules are so important for people who are in these situations.

You expressed a view that is immoral, and no debating the risks you have taken 'to protect the public' can make it other than immoral.

I have a great respect for the officers - most of them, in my view - who make the *sacrifice* needed to do the job; not for them to dehumanize the criminals.

The best cops I know of are the ones who understand the criminals are people too and have more sympathy - even if they have to shoot one or more of them.

That shooting is a tragedy for the criminal and the officer, however necessary the criminal's wrongs made it.

I never said I was a cop, but the same principles apply. Just wanted to clear that up.

We...disagree. It's likely nothing will change that. *shrug*

Like I said, come to me again after your friends are raped and mutilated by someone. Come to me after your family loses everything so that someone can get high a few more times. Come to me after you have to hold a child's hand when she's told she's paralyzed for life because of the ego and selfishness of someone else who'll never amount to anything anyway. If you haven't experienced that, I just don't give a fuck what you think.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Cliffs;

The only thing that is important, is that an opportunity existed to have long winded bout of verbal diarrhea.

This is why I don't read Shakespeare to dogs. Ozoned has about as much place in a discussion of morality as Dick Cheney does at a Code Pink peace rally.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: Fmr12B

Originally posted by: ironwing
How many folks cheering this decision are affected by it? How many live here near the border?

Illegal immigration & illegal drugs effect every community!

This a national issue

When you consider the cost of healthcare, education, welfare and lost jobs - you soon realize illegals and drug addicts who have access to cheap drugs are a drain on society.

None of which has anything whatsoever to do with commuting the sentences of murderers; murderers who used their official positions to attempt to cover their crimes. Bush just sent a strong message to BP and federal agents everywhere: "If you murder people, don't worry, your ass is covered."

Good... now our border patrol agents are afforded the same protections as illegal aliens.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Cliffs;

The only thing that is important, is that an opportunity existed to have long winded bout of verbal diarrhea.

This is why I don't read Shakespeare to dogs. Ozoned has about as much place in a discussion of morality as Dick Cheney does at a Code Pink peace rally.

:laugh: Touch a nerve, did we?