Over the past decade, US immigration agents have shot and killed more than two dozen people. Not a single agent appears to have faced criminal charges.
For me, the scariest part is that they have used the defense that a human has a body and that body is inherently a weapon. By saying that ownership of a body is reasonable grounds for an ICE officer to fear for their lives, it clears the way for them to legally claim that any shooting of any human at any time is justified because that person had a body and so they had reason to fear for their lives.
Also completely disregards the credible fear of having an armed federal agent pointing a gun at you. Any reflexive act to preserve life and liberty suddenly becomes justification for your own death.
This is the part I’ve never quite understood. If you don’t trust the person pointing the gun to not shoot you, you have no reason to comply. Everything is self defense.
This exact question got me kicked from the jury pool for a murder trial. If you’re dead, how do we know if you felt threatened like the gun holder claims to have been? You obviously were the one under threat, but now you’re dead!
I don’t think that matters at all tbh, defenses like those are only really relevant if there’s a case that goes to trial. According to the article not a single agent has been charged from killing someone. Not convicted, just charged with a crime. Including at least one example where the agent was clearly lying and just shot someone who posed no threat at all. That tells me that investigations are just not being done at all, they don’t give a single rat’s ass about accountability.
For me, the scariest part is that they have used the defense that a human has a body and that body is inherently a weapon. By saying that ownership of a body is reasonable grounds for an ICE officer to fear for their lives, it clears the way for them to legally claim that any shooting of any human at any time is justified because that person had a body and so they had reason to fear for their lives.
Also completely disregards the credible fear of having an armed federal agent pointing a gun at you. Any reflexive act to preserve life and liberty suddenly becomes justification for your own death.
This is the part I’ve never quite understood. If you don’t trust the person pointing the gun to not shoot you, you have no reason to comply. Everything is self defense.
This exact question got me kicked from the jury pool for a murder trial. If you’re dead, how do we know if you felt threatened like the gun holder claims to have been? You obviously were the one under threat, but now you’re dead!
So in a nutshell, existence is a threat. Yeah that tracks.
I don’t think that matters at all tbh, defenses like those are only really relevant if there’s a case that goes to trial. According to the article not a single agent has been charged from killing someone. Not convicted, just charged with a crime. Including at least one example where the agent was clearly lying and just shot someone who posed no threat at all. That tells me that investigations are just not being done at all, they don’t give a single rat’s ass about accountability.