The U.S. Border Patrol told its agents on Friday that when they confront suspected illegal immigrants crossing the frontier who throw rocks at them, they should try to take cover or move away rather than immediately open fire.
Michael J. Fischer, head of the Border Patrol, said in a conference call with reporters that immigrant smugglers were increasingly using rock-throwing as a way to drive away patrols.
Since 2010, agency personnel have opened fire 43 times, killing 10 people, in response to 1,713 rock-throwing attacks against them, Fischer said in the preface to a directive he issued to agents.
He said three officers had been killed in more than 6,000 assaults on agents since 2007.
So illegal aliens sneaking into the country are throwing rocks at border officers to drive them away, and the agency policy is “That sounds like a good idea! Make sure that tactic works!”
This tactical action makes some sense if it was legal US citizens on US streets, because you can call in the riot teams with better armor and tear gas and arrest them. Still most of these illegal border crossings exist because backup and tactics are near impossible to get and execute.
Look, this is a clean shoot:
Ugly, but clean. This situation was easy to avoid. Step 1, don’t get unreasonably drunk in a public place. That’s against the law. Step 2. Don’t fight with the officer who’s arresting you. This also goes for cases where the officer is NOT justified in slapping the cuffs on your ass. Once the officer is arresting you, your fight is in the courts, not in the streets. In this case the officer was justified in his arrest, and it is obvious in the video. Once the officer was on his back and getting his head punched that’s deadly force.
Now think of illegal aliens throwing rocks at boarder agents. Now think of this new policy.
Yeah…
In cellular biology one way cells kill other cells, either by pathogen attack, or immune response, is by rupturing the cellular membrane. When a cell can no longer regulate its inside from its outside, that cell is dead.
Same goes for macro biology. Put a big enough hole in a person, or give them a disease where extreme vomiting and diarrhea occur, they die.
This is what’s happening to this country right now.
Many thanks for putting this up, Weerd! I think I can offer a bit more info on what’s going on; the official policy has not changed, but the BP is being “advised” to “ensure alternate force options” are available (In short, DHS called in a third-party to “review” rock-vs-gun shootings; said third-party declared it always unjustifiable. USBP told them to pound sand). Deadly force (large rocks) can still be replied to with deadly force (firearms), but they’re putting an emphasis on having additional and “less-lethal” tools available. “Pepperball Launching Systems” are a common tool (essentially a paintball gun firing hard plastic spheres filled with OC powder) and are quite unpleasant to get hit by (which I have). Also available is the more-powerful FN 303; that thing’s frankly kick-ass; IIRC, Lawdog mentioned them at the end of one of the Vicious Circle episodes, and was beside himself with glee over the things, so you know that has the “Paw of Approval.”
Moving back from the rock throwers has also -always- been a recommended course of action, when possible; it’s not done to “retreat,” but to give the agent some breathing room if he doesn’t have a Pepperball launcher or an FN 303 at hand. Since most (not all) of the rock-throwers are on the south side of the fence when they start lobbing stuff, there IS a little room to maneuver in most places.
In fact, these three options have been preferred responses for years. The shootings that make headlines are a rarity, usually occurring when the agent has no other real option: for example, on foot, chasing illegals, with weight considerations to factor in (gear, gun, water, etc). If you’re chasing someone through the Arizona desert and have the option of carting along 5 pounds of water, or 5 pounds of “less-lethal device,” you’re going to choose water every time. If you choose both, you’ll probably lose ground to the illegals who only have water and a little food with them (not to mention the weight from the agent’s gun, bat-belt, radio, and a myriad other things). Or another example: an agent has a group in-custody, just north of the fence, and rock-throwers start lobbing Mother Earth’s oldest weapon. He may take action against them, not to protect himself, but to prevent the illegals in custody from getting hit.
And for anyone who thinks, “It’s only a few little pebbles, that’s no reason to shoot,” you’re wrong. If it were only pebbles, you’d be right, but these are fist-sized and up. Get hit in the head by one of them, and you’re hurt, possibly knocked out, and easy prey for other rocks or a more direct attack. Bigger rocks can kill in one hit. I’ve seen the pictures from an agent that got hit in the head by a fairly large rock – thrown -through- his driver-side window. The rock smashed the window and fractured his skull. Had the window been down, he probably would be dead.
Back to the topic at hand: like I said, this isn’t a change in policy, but an emphasis on certain portions of the policy in an effort to mollify the rabble-rousers by appearing to change. The money-quote from the article, itself quoting Chief Fisher, is this: In the directive, Fischer told agents not to open fire “unless the agent has a reasonable belief, based on the totality of the circumstances, to include the size and nature of the projectiles, that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious injury.” In other words, if an agent is right there, right now, and reasonably believes his life or health is in imminent danger, he can take care of business. He doesn’t have to retreat, doesn’t have to call in pepperballs to give the rock-thrower a rash, and doesn’t have to stand there and take it. “Size and nature of the projectiles” is merely a reminder that a plastic bottle or a pebble does not contribute to “reasonable belief,” but good-sized rocks, molotovs, and the like do.
Cool thanks for your insight and information!
Yep, I’m very familiar with the FN 303, as one killed a girl, and severely injured a man when the Boston PD started breaking them out to untrained officers during the first Red Sox World Series Victory riot.
I think this advisement sounds pretty good if they have pepper launchers or some other aggressive less-lethal ordinance. Especially given if the rocks are BIG and well aimed they can still go to their firearms. Certainly Molotovs and other IEDs, it should be “Weapons Hot” for those encounters.
I have heard of the Boston Victory Riot’s FN 303 fatality more than once. Way I heard it, the lady that was killed wasn’t even the target; the target was a dude in-process of throwing a molotov (and a valid target), and for whatever reason or other, poor aim, moving target, etc., the officer missed and hit a woman in the eye while she was bending/crouching/hiding behind the target. Whatever the cause of the miss, though, the failure was in the brass that handed them out saying “it’s like a paintball gun, it’s ‘non-lethal’.”
There’s a reason the 303 has a “minimum safe distance.”
Interesting. According to Wikipedia (I know, I know), a significant issue in that was that the FN 303 lost accuracy after a certain number of firings.
Of course, the report was by Boston PD, so it’s very possible the “test” results were fabricated/altered significantly or entirely.
Failure to observe the “minimum safe distance” seems more likely to me than that much loss of accuracy.
I apologize in advance because I never do this. (until now anyway)
For the love of everything that breathes, sleeps, grows, sh!ts, and fu(ks, it’s “border” NOT “boarder”.
Maybe if I didn’t live so close to our national southern boundary, and bear daily witness to the illegal tumult in my own neighborhood, I wouldn’t be so sensitive. On the other hand, I’ve been holding this in for over a decade, and I guess something had to give eventually.
Just, just, just don’t do that anymore.
Again, my sincere apologies. (phew!) (nap time)
I am a TERRIBLE spellers and this one is one of those guys that KILLS me every time.
Thanks for the correction, post fixed!
I never would have posted the comment if I was unsure of your beard being able to handle a bit of innocent fun.
On the other hand, you said:
“I am a TERRIBLE spellers and this one is one of those guys that KILLS me every time.”
You’re yankin’ me, right? I mean, look at that sentence! (this is my final grammar-nazi post. It’s only my knowledge that you have a sense of humor that allows me to poke at you a bit)
Don’t worry about spelling, we know what you mean. Now, go change a diaper, or do some other sciencey stuff.
AZRon, I thought I was the only one Weerd was driving nuts with that!
Weerd does not own this mistake. It’s rampant on the web…rampant I tell you.
I long for the day when a man is not judged by the color of his skin, but by how he spells “border”.