What the hell is "very safe teargas"?

[candycorn]

If you don’t try and charge across the border there won’t be any reason to use tear gas. Since so many seem to be so outraged over the use of the tear gas what method of stopping that charging crowd would be acceptable if any?

You’re a pretty straight shooter so I’ll ask you…

Did we fire into Mexico?

If we did, was it…

Rubber Bullets
Tear Gas

Hope you can help.

Thanks.

It was tear gas fired into Mexico by border patrol agents when a large group of caravan tried to charge the border.

Then we violated international law, did we not? Firing into another nation against people who were not armed when there was no imminent danger.

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

 

[blackhawk]

If you don’t try and charge across the border there won’t be any reason to use tear gas. Since so many seem to be so outraged over the use of the tear gas what method of stopping that charging crowd would be acceptable if any?

You’re a pretty straight shooter so I’ll ask you…

Did we fire into Mexico?

If we did, was it…

Rubber Bullets
Tear Gas

Hope you can help.

Thanks.

It was tear gas fired into Mexico by border patrol agents when a large group of caravan tried to charge the border.

Then we violated international law, did we not? Firing into another nation against people who were not armed when there was no imminent danger.

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Then you are basically saying anyone can come across our border illegally as long as they are not a known terrorist or are not posing a threat while crossing illegally. Doesn’t sound like very good policy to me.

 

[candycorn]

You’re a pretty straight shooter so I’ll ask you…

Did we fire into Mexico?

If we did, was it…

Rubber Bullets
Tear Gas

Hope you can help.

Thanks.

It was tear gas fired into Mexico by border patrol agents when a large group of caravan tried to charge the border.

Then we violated international law, did we not? Firing into another nation against people who were not armed when there was no imminent danger.

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Then you are basically saying anyone can come across our border illegally as long as they are not a known terrorist or are not posing a threat while crossing illegally. Doesn’t sound like very good policy to me.

No. I’m saying until they come onto our turf, they haven’t broken a law. Can you shoot someone on the sidewalk for trespassing on your property?

Now if life is in peril, they are known terrorists, are assembling an catapult to attack you, if you see a gun and think yours or someone else’s life may be in jeopardy…all bets are off.

Isn’t that why we put the barbed wire there in the first place? To stop people from coming across?

 

[Auld Phart]

If you don’t try and charge across the border there won’t be any reason to use tear gas. Since so many seem to be so outraged over the use of the tear gas what method of stopping that charging crowd would be acceptable if any?

You’re a pretty straight shooter so I’ll ask you…

Did we fire into Mexico?

If we did, was it…

Rubber Bullets
Tear Gas

Hope you can help.

Thanks.

It was tear gas fired into Mexico by border patrol agents when a large group of caravan tried to charge the border.

Then we violated international law, did we not? Firing into another nation against people who were not armed when there was no imminent danger.

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Doesn't make much sense to pour boiling oil on the attackers after they've crossed the moat and breeched the castle walls, does it?

 

[RealDave]

Blame the parents for putting the kids in harms way, not the border patrol for protecting our country.

Blame the parents for NOT staying st home & getting them killed in gang violence. For LEGALLY trying to give them a better life.

You are a fucking moron.

Legally?

sneaking, or trying to break thru the cordon in place, is not LEGALLY trying to give them a better life

They broke through the Mexican line. They have a right to seek asylum.

The mob was offered asylum in Mexico. These "poor humble" people turned it down. But I thought that's what they wanted.
That's what we've been told by the left but they've been wrong about absolutely everything when it comes to this issue.

You don't apply for asylum by tearing down fences, throwing rocks, incendiary devices, fighting with police, etc.

Whoever recruited these people and paid for their caravan march on the U.S. border didn't bother coaching the mob.
If I was Soros I'd ask for my money back.

Did they break down our fences? Throw incendiary devices? You deny asylum to those people who did that but you DON'T FUCKING GAS CHILDREN.

But there you go with your Trumpistic lies about Soros.

You assfucks should really quit sucking Trtump's tiny mushroom dick & try thinking on your own.

 

[RealDave]

Blame the parents for putting the kids in harms way, not the border patrol for protecting our country.

Blame the parents for NOT staying st home & getting them killed in gang violence. For LEGALLY trying to give them a better life.

You are a fucking moron.

Legally?

sneaking, or trying to break thru the cordon in place, is not LEGALLY trying to give them a better life

They broke through the Mexican line. They have a right to seek asylum.

The DON'T have a right to break into our country.

They tried to enter by force, they were met with force.

Newtons Third Law

" Every action has an equal and opposite reaction."

Did they?

 

[RealDave]

What the hell is "very safe teargas"?

Teargas that can't reach you, because you stayed in your own damn country.

They were in Mexico. Are supporting the use of chemical weapons in Mexico?

Yes, we should gas the illegal aliens before they breach our border.

Before they breach they aren't illegal

 

[Auld Phart]

Blame the parents for putting the kids in harms way, not the border patrol for protecting our country.

Blame the parents for NOT staying st home & getting them killed in gang violence. For LEGALLY trying to give them a better life.

You are a fucking moron.

Legally?

sneaking, or trying to break thru the cordon in place, is not LEGALLY trying to give them a better life

They broke through the Mexican line. They have a right to seek asylum.

The DON'T have a right to break into our country.

They tried to enter by force, they were met with force.

Newtons Third Law

" Every action has an equal and opposite reaction."

Did they?

Did they what?

attempt to rush the border?

Every source I've seen says they did.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

They are using a less concentrated form of tear gas, but as ALL tear gas is SAFE, non lethal, with no damage other than discomfort, it is a somewhat erroneous statement.

The reason we were warned not to wear contacts on gas training day was because it would cause the contacts to melt onto your eyeballs. You consider that "safe"?

How about the choking and spitting that you do while on it? If one of those immigrants suffered from asthma, it could be deadly.

You ever been tear gassed? I have, and it's no picnic when you are going through it, and even with cleanup, the effects can be felt for up to an hour. Longer, if you don't have a change of clothes, because you will itch like crazy.

How many of these people were actually wearing contacts?
I mean if they can afford contacts they have zero reason to claim asylum.
I'd bet not a single one was wearing contacts.

 

[candycorn]

You’re a pretty straight shooter so I’ll ask you…

Did we fire into Mexico?

If we did, was it…

Rubber Bullets
Tear Gas

Hope you can help.

Thanks.

It was tear gas fired into Mexico by border patrol agents when a large group of caravan tried to charge the border.

Then we violated international law, did we not? Firing into another nation against people who were not armed when there was no imminent danger.

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Doesn't make much sense to pour boiling oil on the attackers after they've crossed the moat and breeched the castle walls, does it?

Perhaps we can rely on the border patrol to make the arrests once the wall is breeched as they have been doing without violating international law.

 

[candycorn]

What the hell is "very safe teargas"?

Teargas that can't reach you, because you stayed in your own damn country.

They were in Mexico. Are supporting the use of chemical weapons in Mexico?

Yes, we should gas the illegal aliens before they breach our border.

Before they breach they aren't illegal

True.

Whatever the rules are, we should follow them. I mean, do we want Mexican police firing at Americans in the Rio Grande on speculation that they may be wanting to come into Mexico?

 

[Auld Phart]

It was tear gas fired into Mexico by border patrol agents when a large group of caravan tried to charge the border.

Then we violated international law, did we not? Firing into another nation against people who were not armed when there was no imminent danger.

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Doesn't make much sense to pour boiling oil on the attackers after they've crossed the moat and breeched the castle walls, does it?

Perhaps we can rely on the border patrol to make the arrests once the wall is breeched as they have been doing without violating international law.

Their job is to prevent the wall being breached.

They are Border Patrol and National Guard.

not cops

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Safe as in not going to cause lasting harm, or death.

Do you think teargassing toddlers doesn’t cause long lasting harm?

Stop guessing and provide the evidence.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Did they break down our fences? Throw incendiary devices? You deny asylum to those people who did that but you DON'T FUCKING GAS CHILDREN.

By "they" do you mean children? You might try making your nonsense less difficult to understand.
I'm sorry but if some moron drags her children into the middle of a fight what can you expect if children are hurt (not that there is any evidence any children have been injured).
What you are demanding is impossible when Border Patrol agents are responding to violent attacks upon their own
bodies. You should be foolishly shouting at the idiots that drag their children into the center of a melee.
But of course you won't do that, will you.

But there you go with your Trumpistic lies about Soros.

If they are lies you can disprove them ....right? We both know you can't. Fuck off.

You assfucks should really quit sucking Trtump's tiny mushroom dick & try thinking on your own.

Such crude idiocy needs no reply. It refutes itself.

 

[WillPower]

It was pepper gas


.

Yep, and you could put the ingredients of pepper gas on your eggs for breakfast.....it's pepper, water, and compressed oxygen to disperse it.

 

[candycorn]

Then we violated international law, did we not? Firing into another nation against people who were not armed when there was no imminent danger.

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Doesn't make much sense to pour boiling oil on the attackers after they've crossed the moat and breeched the castle walls, does it?

Perhaps we can rely on the border patrol to make the arrests once the wall is breeched as they have been doing without violating international law.

Their job is to prevent the wall being breached.

They are Border Patrol and National Guard.

not cops

So if someone is standing in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

Can someone standing on our side be shot by Mexican authorities on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

 

[Auld Phart]

Some say we did others say we didn’t because it was non lethal they used tear gas in 2013 to deal with a similar incident no one seemed overly concerned about it. This brings us back to the question of what should be done when a large group of people tries to charge across the border? I see three lethal force non lethal or do nothing.

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Doesn't make much sense to pour boiling oil on the attackers after they've crossed the moat and breeched the castle walls, does it?

Perhaps we can rely on the border patrol to make the arrests once the wall is breeched as they have been doing without violating international law.

Their job is to prevent the wall being breached.

They are Border Patrol and National Guard.

not cops

So if someone is standing in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

Can someone standing on our side be shot by Mexican authorities on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

So if someone is standing in Mexico,

standing?

 

[candycorn]

Until they come across the border, I don’t see that we have much right to do anything unless there is an imminent threat to life or they are taking hostile action, confirmed terrorists who pose a threat, etc...

If we did so in 2013 under the same circumstances, we violated international law as well.

Doesn't make much sense to pour boiling oil on the attackers after they've crossed the moat and breeched the castle walls, does it?

Perhaps we can rely on the border patrol to make the arrests once the wall is breeched as they have been doing without violating international law.

Their job is to prevent the wall being breached.

They are Border Patrol and National Guard.

not cops

So if someone is standing in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

Can someone standing on our side be shot by Mexican authorities on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

So if someone is standing in Mexico,

standing?

okay….

So if someone is standing, squatting, doing jumping jacks, kneeling, running, swimming, hovering, or just plain located in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

If someone is standing, squatting, doing jumping jacks, kneeling, running, swimming, hovering, or just plain located on our side of the border, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall by Mexican authorities?

 

[Auld Phart]

Doesn't make much sense to pour boiling oil on the attackers after they've crossed the moat and breeched the castle walls, does it?

Perhaps we can rely on the border patrol to make the arrests once the wall is breeched as they have been doing without violating international law.

Their job is to prevent the wall being breached.

They are Border Patrol and National Guard.

not cops

So if someone is standing in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

Can someone standing on our side be shot by Mexican authorities on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

So if someone is standing in Mexico,

standing?

okay….

So if someone is standing, squatting, doing jumping jacks, kneeling, running, swimming, hovering, or just plain located in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

If someone is standing, squatting, doing jumping jacks, kneeling, running, swimming, hovering, or just plain located on our side of the border, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall by Mexican authorities?

Since those aren't the reasons they were shot at/gassed, I can only imagine you have no clue what you're talking about

 

[candycorn]

Perhaps we can rely on the border patrol to make the arrests once the wall is breeched as they have been doing without violating international law.

Their job is to prevent the wall being breached.

They are Border Patrol and National Guard.

not cops

So if someone is standing in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

Can someone standing on our side be shot by Mexican authorities on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

So if someone is standing in Mexico,

standing?

okay….

So if someone is standing, squatting, doing jumping jacks, kneeling, running, swimming, hovering, or just plain located in Mexico, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall?

If someone is standing, squatting, doing jumping jacks, kneeling, running, swimming, hovering, or just plain located on our side of the border, they can be shot on speculation that they are going to breach the wall by Mexican authorities?

Since those aren't the reasons they were shot at/gassed, I can only imagine you have no clue what you're talking about

Since you are sponsoring someone being shot at when they have not come across the border…I can only imagine you’d be fine with Mexicans picking off Americans.