Originally Posted by
Superguy
If there is probable cause to do so, yes. FB already clarified that. Should CBP not stop drugs at the border because "oh well, they'll be Mexico's problem?" There are export laws that need to be enforced as well. FB covered it much better than I could.
I'm not saying people should be harassed, but if there is intel about an illegal drug or weapons shipment that's happening and the i's can be dotted and t's crossed for it to happen legally, then why shouldn't they? Interdictions happen quite a bit based on intel.
On another note ATF is actually part of DOJ, not Treasury.
http://www.atf.gov/about/
I'm not disputing that there shouldn't be interdictions or that weapons should not be crossing the border. I'm just puzzled at the blaming of DHS for the ATF failure here.
Nothing indicates there was probable cause for a search, particularly because this was an ATF operation. Why would DHS be investigating an ATF operation or have probable cause to perform a search of the Mexican drug runners involved? Unless the argument is they should have been investigating them, which perhaps they should, but ATF was already investigating them, and gave them the weapons. Was ICE supposed to be investing ATF agents? I don't understand, at least not without more information presented than was in the article, how this was a DHS failure and why DHS is being blamed for weapons entering Mexico.
My point, which apparently I did not make well at all, is that it seems unfair to blame DHS for not investigating an ATF operation. The only other way DHS should have been involved was a suspicionless border search, which AFAIK it could not legally perform to look for contraband leaving the US. I'm confounded at the anger at DHS over this. Tell me what I'm missing here.