retreat instead of firing back even when fired upon. Now how is that right?
2007-02-16 07:04:22 · 4 answers · asked by elaeblue 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Isn't it a great theatrical gesture? Much like televised wrestling, all show and no blow.
2007-02-20 03:52:56 · answer #1 · answered by OldGringo 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because the military should not be using their weapons inside US borders unless we are being invaded by an enemy that congress had declared war on. First off that is not their function as defined by the constitution and secondly, There other are REALLY GOOD historical reasons for this rule. I strongly encourage you to crack a history or political science book, it's all in there.
The military's orders are to keep contact with the enemy, fall back, and call in armed reinforcements from the border patrol. That is what they do, and what they have done, and they should be commended for it, not criticized.
Linda K's description of the incident is totally distorted from reality. The agent in question was in no danger, shot a suspect and lied about it. That's illegal, no matter how "illegal" the suspect was.
2007-02-16 15:14:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is way worse than that!
The government and laws have the guards hands tied to where they can do nothing but let them come here even if they are smuggling drugs. Now they have some guards in jail for up to 11 years for trying to stop some drug smugglers. To top it off the illegals they were trying to stop are being given immunity to come and testify against the guards. Bush is allowing them in so that he can do away with the borders. He has the guards there simply to make it look like he is trying to do something so his ratings don't drop to zilch.
2007-02-16 15:18:16 · answer #3 · answered by sapphire_630 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
One word - SUPERCORRIDOR!
2007-02-16 15:22:45 · answer #4 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋