Most of the time when some clod Pits something that puts them way outside the bounds of reason, and they get jumped on by logic, fact and reason, after a few insults and some flaming, they just sulk away.
He’s hanging in here. Granted, he’s dodging questions, throwing clay pigeons and 800 lb gorillas (Thanks Doors) and standing by whatever principle or rationale he originally had, even if it’s still incomprehensible to most everyone else, but he’s here.
Well there’s some generalization for you, eh? Simply put then, Americans couldn’t possibly understand why other countries think we should open our borders, and why it’s ok to assault law enforcement with rocks and not expect to get targeted because the law in other countries is always administered so even-handedly, right? Because everyone knows that only a Gringo lawman would ever shoot someone for assualting him/her with rocks, right?
And I only had to go to back as recently as post 136 to find the most recent question begging a logical answer from you.
CBEscapee, why are you so distraught about this? If an American had tried to illegally enter another country and was shot and killed after threatening a police authority, would I make any attempt to defend the American’s actions? I think not. I don’t get it…
*“Los peritajes revelan que recibió un balazo de calibre 9 milímetros mientras estaba en territorio de EU Elementos de la Patrulla Fronteriza estadounidense asesinaron por la espalda y a una distancia menor de cinco metros a Guillermo Martínez Rodríguez, cuando trataba de internarse de manera ilegal a Estados Unidos, reveló la Procuraduría General de Justicia del Estado (PGJE)”
“Con relación a la agresión, explicó que el disparo lo hicieron a una distancia mayor de 2 metros, pero menor de 5 metros, con una pistola 9 milímetros.”*
Ok, so he was shot in the back from a distance of more than 2 meters, but less than 5 meters. I wonder how they assessed this. For distances greater than about 3 1/2 feet (just over one meter), there is neither soot stippling nor gunshot residue present in sufficient quantities to further make a determination as to the firing distance with small-caliber arms. See this basic text on forensic pathology:
Certainly the range give, 2-5 meters falls well outside the ability of a forensic determination to be made in such a case. A shotgun wound is a different matter, since the shot spread can give a close-order approximation of the shooting distance. But a bullet wound has no such distance-related characteristics beyond shot residue and expelled particulates. Based on this–and this alone–I must question the validity of your cite.
I know I can kill/injure someone easily with a rock (1/8 to 1 kilo) from a distance of 2-5 meters. I’m pretty sure an 18 year old would be quite capable of doing the same.
You know what fascinates me the most about this kind of discussion? It’s the simple fact that the people about whom the government of Mexico is so concerned at the moment are the very same people the very same government couldn’t care less about when they’re not either in the US or trying to get into the US.
Here is some interesting reading for you, CBEscapee.
BTW, what exactly are (a) the penalty for assualting a federal police officer in Mexico and (b) the rules on use of deadly force by federal police officers in Mexico? For (a), of course, I mean the actual law on the matter. If (b) includes responding to an ADW with deadly force and a rock (as I think it most likely is) is included as a deadly weapon, then you certainly owe both Clothahump and the Border Patrol officer an apology. You certainly owe the BP officer an apology for calling him chicken~.