“Yes, I understand that. They admitted firing their weapons with reason. Whether or not they hit him is irrelevent to assault. In other words, had the agents stated they fired their weapons over the head of Davila in an attempt to scare him and the bullets had missed, they would have still been guilty of assault.”
So, according to you, border patrol agents can not tell someone crossing into our borders to stop, then send a threat, without being charged with assault.
Please go create your own country based on this premise, then tell me how long you were able to keep it.
Assault is a term meant for the criminals, not the enforcers of the law.
Why do you have such a difficult time understanding plain English? I clearly stated that I thought Ramos and Compean did the right thing. They fired at Davila with cause. He refused to obey lawful commands and then made threatening motions. I went on to say that whether he had been hit or not was irrelevant to assault even if the officers had acted incorrectly which they, in my opinion, did not. Now if you don't understand that, get a life.