Shooting Down Drug Planes

[Berzerker]

Donald Rumsfeld has given the Colombians the blessing of the Bush administration (Bush is a "Christian") to shoot down the planes of suspected drug traffickers. The tactic was stopped in 2001 after a Peruvian fighter shot down a plane with missionaries aboard.

At what point does law enforcement become so reckless the policy makers and enforcers are guilty of negligent homicide? I'd call it murder if not for the lack of intent to kill the innocent, but when the intent is applied so recklessly, the line becomes blurred. This would certainly qualify as murder if someone other than "government" was shooting down planes...

So how did "government" acquire the magical ability to transform immoral acts like murder into something else?

[MikeH]

Guilty until proven innoccent by which time you've already been executed.

[MikeH]

Should be Shooting Up Drug Planes anyway.

[Dr Strangelove]

I'd have to wonder whether they think they have some reason to believe that they can now avoid having a similar incident, or if they just think that the storm has blown over.

[MikeH]

Doesn't matter if they are flying drugs, still wrong to shoot them out of the sky.

[DAVOUT]

Rather 100 innocents killed than a criminal unpunished.

Rather 100 Irakis killed than a Sadam unpunished.


The first part always easiest ...

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I'd have to wonder whether they think they have some reason to believe that they can now avoid having a similar incident, .

All it would have taken last time, and I assume it is is place place now is a mandate that if ANYONE in the command or survelance process says 'no shoot' that you do not shoot. Last time the local air force guys ignored the inteligence gathering crew.

[Az]

You should be able to instruct them via radiolink, to land at a specially designated airstrip. If they won't do it...

[BeBMan]

Where´s the fun in forcing them to land?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel
You should be able to instruct them via radiolink, to land at a specially designated airstrip. If they won't do it...

What if you don't get them on the radio, as happened in the Peruvian case?

[Kuciwalker]

What happened in the Peruvian case is they disobeyed.

You can't blame the system for that.

[Spiffor]

So how did "government" acquire the magical ability to transform immoral acts like murder into something else?

Ever since it had the legitimacy in using violence against "evildoers" (that he himself defines as such). Governments pretending to be moral while murdering are as old as mankind...

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by skywalker
What happened in the Peruvian case is they disobeyed.

You can't blame the system for that.

Well, since the ones who "disobeyed" were part of the system, i.e. the Peruvian cowboys, then you have problems.

VFR flight control procedures in the boonies are a bit different than in North America. Lots of slop about assigned freqs, etc. since there are relatively few controllers, control centers, airfields with VHF radio sets, etc.

The cowboys were told that the flight was totally inconsistent with drug running, but they shot anyway.

[JCG]

Funny, you'd think the Peruvians would be "friendlier" in their anti-drugs approach though...

Well, apparently there's always going to be more missionaries in Peru than in Colombia anyways, interdiction or no interdiction (especially when certain rebels kill or kidnap a number of them once in a while).

In any case, this would probably hurt arms and contraband dealers much more than drug dealers...the drug flow has just too many US entrance points and interested parties involved, thus attempts to stop it through force are never really going to fully work (so someone decriminalize already).