June 10, 2010

He's No Innocent

Remember the Mexican teen that was shot earlier in the week by a U.S. Border Patrol Officer trying to make an arrest? It turns out he a known human smuggler and on a Border Patrol Most Wanted list.

I find myself having less and less sympathy for Sergio Adrian Hernandez Huereka and his family, which apparently profits from human smuggling... and who knows what else.

Does his criminal past justify his death? Of course not. Whether his assault on a federal law enforcement officer justified his shooting is a matter for authorities.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at June 10, 2010 06:24 AM

Human smuggler is just a cute, pro-illegal immigration term for slave trader. The United States Navy once had an entire squadron that did nothing but patrol the Atlantic looking for slave ships, and they were hardly concerned with "due process" when it came to stopping that.

Why should this be any different?

Posted by: Gunpowder Chronicle at June 10, 2010 08:22 AM

Absolutely, Gunpowder, absolutely.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at June 10, 2010 09:17 AM

So, you "play with snakes" and somehow, we're all supposed to be surprised and saddened when you get bit?


Posted by: Earl T at June 10, 2010 09:33 AM

Throwing rocks at a Border Patrol agent isn't necessarily a bright thing to do.

I presume he hoped to get in a head shot and knock the officer out in order to take his weapon, and was counting on the typical reluctance of LEOs to not respond with deadly force if not actually being shot at.

I would suggest that the Border Patrol treat all such rock throwing as potentially life-threatening.

Posted by: Russ at June 10, 2010 01:22 PM

Rock-throwing *is* life-threatening, not just "potentially"--he reacted accordingly.

Posted by: ECM at June 10, 2010 03:45 PM

"Human smuggler" ia not just another term for slave trader. Some human smugglers are slave traders. The term has been around for longer than the current debates about illegal immigration.

Gunpowder Chronicle has an interesting take on history. The Africa Squadron to which he refers did not ignore due process. Ships that were seized were entitled to trial. Most of the slavers were acquitted, though a handful received small fines. The total number of seizures averaged just over 2 per year, though there were two period of over three years during which not a single ship was seized. Of the seizures, just over half even went to trial.

So to turn your argument around, the US Navy patrolling for slave ships was very concerned about due process, so why should this be any different?

@Russ - That's a pretty heavy presumption as to what this 15-year-old boy intended, especially since you think it is strong enough to warrant forfeiting his life.

Posted by: Sol at June 13, 2010 06:54 PM