Illegals to sue Arizona man !

[SteamWake]

Illegals to sue an Arizona man after he stopped them from trespassing on his ranch.

Good thing this dident happen in texas.

Anyhow can anyone explain to me why this would even make it into court?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490084,00.html

[Digital_Trucker]

Perhaps because our legal system is so totally screwed up that the criminals have become the victims?:hmmm: (absolutely no sarcasm intended)

[Sea Demon]

Perhaps because our legal system is so totally screwed up that the criminals have become the victims?:hmmm: (absolutely no sarcasm intended)

Yes, liberal Democrats have turned common sense on it's head.

[Zachstar]

Perhaps because our legal system is so totally screwed up that the criminals have become the victims?:hmmm: (absolutely no sarcasm intended)
Yes, liberal Democrats have turned common sense on it's head.

Are you being that way for a reason? Go back to worshiping Reagan.

Even us "Liberals" agree that this is an open and shut case for the farmer. He has a right to defend his property and the illegals are obviously trying to make it easier for others to get in.

So the next time you get the urge to use that line. Go pray at the Reagan church and ask for guidance first because Reagan sure as hell was better at dealing with the "liberals" than that.

[Aramike]

Perhaps because our legal system is so totally screwed up that the criminals have become the victims?:hmmm: (absolutely no sarcasm intended)
Yes, liberal Democrats have turned common sense on it's head.

Are you being that way for a reason? Go back to worshiping Reagan.

Even us "Liberals" agree that this is an open and shut case for the farmer. He has a right to defend his property and the illegals are obviously trying to make it easier for others to get in.

So the next time you get the urge to use that line. Go pray at the Reagan church and ask for guidance first because Reagan sure as hell was better at dealing with the "liberals" than that.He IS right ... Democrats have liberalized the courts to the point where cases like these get heard (just research who's appointing these judges or what party they belong to).

That's not to say that all liberals agree with this kind of crap, but it IS a problem that overwhelmingly comes from liberal democrats, sadly.

[Zachstar]

How do you know that. How do you know this Judge did not take it to set a legal precedent. It happens all the time.

Instead of blaming "liberals" how about researching how this rancher can defend in court.

[Sea Demon]

Perhaps because our legal system is so totally screwed up that the criminals have become the victims?:hmmm: (absolutely no sarcasm intended)
Yes, liberal Democrats have turned common sense on it's head.
Are you being that way for a reason? Go back to worshiping Reagan.

Even us "Liberals" agree that this is an open and shut case for the farmer. He has a right to defend his property and the illegals are obviously trying to make it easier for others to get in.

So the next time you get the urge to use that line. Go pray at the Reagan church and ask for guidance first because Reagan sure as hell was better at dealing with the "liberals" than that.

This is being brought on behalf of the illegals by MALDEF and the ACLU. I'm sure you're a card carrying member by at least one of them, or at least believe they both do good "civil liberties" works. This is not the only time either of these groups have gone against Americans and their real civil rights. Liberal Democrats like you have no clue.

[Zachstar]

Aww did the ACLU break a bush era policy you were in love with?

Its going to be a hard 4 years for you watching this junk come tumbling down.

BTW you can back off on the slander. Calling a progressive a liberal is slander period. I don't know how much of your brain is functional but commit that to what remains.

The only group I am a card carrying member of is Kroger Grocery BTW. My union still has not gotten back to me about my Union card :damn:

[surf_ten]

Perhaps because our legal system is so totally screwed up that the criminals have become the victims?:hmmm: (absolutely no sarcasm intended)
Yes, liberal Democrats have turned common sense on it's head.

Are you being that way for a reason? Go back to worshiping Reagan.

Even us "Liberals" agree that this is an open and shut case for the farmer. He has a right to defend his property and the illegals are obviously trying to make it easier for others to get in.

So the next time you get the urge to use that line. Go pray at the Reagan church and ask for guidance first because Reagan sure as hell was better at dealing with the "liberals" than that.

Actually I believe the Reagan adminstration offered the existing illegals amnesty in 1986 so he isn't the best example of a defender of our national Sovereignty.

[Sea Demon]

My union still has not gotten back to me about my Union card :damn:

Ah. This explains alot. You have "the union is going to take care of me" mentality. There's no hope for you son. Cheers to a lower cost Wal-mart grocer coming to a city near you. :yeah:

[Sea Demon]

Actually I believe the Reagan adminstration offered the existing illegals amnesty in 1986 so he isn't the best example of a defender of our national Sovereignty.

That was supposed to be a 1 time amnesty. The consequences were that others decided to come to the country to hopefully be granted amnesty at a later date. This was unforeseen. And those that followed Reagan used it as a precedent for more amnesty unfortunately. Clearly Reagan would have taken another approach if he could have foreseen the consequences. Despite this, Reagan was a true defender of American National sovereignty.

[Zachstar]

Actually I believe the Reagan adminstration offered the existing illegals amnesty in 1986 so he isn't the best example of a defender of our national Sovereignty.
That was supposed to be a 1 time amnesty. The consequences were that others decided to come to the country to hopefully be granted amnesty at a later date. This was unforeseen. And those that followed Reagan used it as a precedent for more amnesty unfortunately. Clearly Reagan would have taken another approach if he could have foreseen the consequences. Despite this, Reagan was a true defender of American National sovereignty.

I forgot what page the of Church of Regan bible that was on.

[Zachstar]

My union still has not gotten back to me about my Union card :damn:
Ah. This explains alot. You have "the union is going to take care of me" mentality. There's no hope for you son. Cheers to a lower cost Wal-mart grocer coming to a city near you. :yeah:

Well they haven't been "taking care of me" So far so I dont see where you get that dumbass idea from. Another page from the Regan Bible?

And actually those at Wal-Mart work a HELL of alot less than we do. TRUST me.

[Tribesman]

Anyhow can anyone explain to me why this would even make it into court?

Because the State laws covering threats of lethal violence in a situation like this only really cover you if its your land , this land isn't the ranchers he just leases grazing rights from the State .
Now if he did more than just own a temporary right for his cattle to consume foliage on the States property he would be allowed to go round threatening to kill people on that land , but as he doesn't he cannot .
Simple isn't it .
He may however be able to apply the defence that he was acting as an agent of the lands owner which would get around the fact that it wasn't his land , but then the State would have to explain how someone "representing" them was threatening to kill unarmed people .

[Sea Demon]

My union still has not gotten back to me about my Union card :damn:
Ah. This explains alot. You have "the union is going to take care of me" mentality. There's no hope for you son. Cheers to a lower cost Wal-mart grocer coming to a city near you. :yeah:
Well they haven't been "taking care of me" So far so I dont see where you get that dumbass idea from. Another page from the Regan Bible?

And actually those at Wal-Mart work a HELL of alot less than we do. TRUST me.

Actually, I've dealt many times with your ilk. The unionist ilk that is. Not everybody part of a union is like this, but many of you are. And I can tell you are one of them. This mentality is that only the union will protect your job, your salary, and your bennies. The union is your savior against "exploitation". Even as they suck down your dues, and even if they price your job out of the market. I recently watched another Food For Less (non-union) outlet open up in our county, and they were picketed by union grocers from another chain. Like it's any of their business how Food For Less conducts their business. And Food For Less's employees at this location are happy working there. Well these picketers know what this means. A competitor who can offer better quality at a more competitive price. It's no secret why this is one of the major reasons unions are so adamantly against the Wal-Mart chain.

Ultimately, I'm not against unions or collective bargaining.....just leave me and my tax dollars out of it. And I never want to be in one myself. Also leave other businesses alone who don't wish to be unionized and can offer me the consumer what I want. Anyway, This has nothing to do with the Arizona rancher who is being targeted by MALDEF, and ACLU "progressives".

[SteamWake]

Cant you people discuss a topic without personal sniping and idelog?

How this turned into a political posturing session Ill never know.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Cant you people discuss a topic without personal sniping and idelog?

How this turned into a political posturing session Ill never know.
Welcome to the internets. Best thing to do is settle down with popcorn and a drink and enjoy the show. Please be sure all cellphones are silenced, of course. ;)

[UnderseaLcpl]

Are you being that way for a reason? Go back to worshiping Reagan.

Even us "Liberals" agree that this is an open and shut case for the farmer. He has a right to defend his property and the illegals are obviously trying to make it easier for others to get in.

You might agree but your representatives generally don't. Case-in-point; New York and California, two of the most liberal states in the union in terms of percentage of population of registered Democrats, have the most complex legal systems of any state, in terms of number of regulations and pages of text.

It all comes from Liberals thinking that they are smart enough to tell other people what to do.

[Aramike]

How do you know that. How do you know this Judge did not take it to set a legal precedent. It happens all the time.

Instead of blaming "liberals" how about researching how this rancher can defend in court.I agree that its possible that the judge is simply attempting to set a precedent. In fact, I believe that this may be the case.

However, I was referring to the overall problem of the leftist judiciary which has allowed tort and the ACLU to run amok over the last decade.

[Platapus]

Wow, did not take long for this thread to go down the crapper. :nope:

Before we get all spun up on this, why don't we wait to see what the jury actually decides based on the evidence?...evidence that we don't have access to.


It is possible, just possible that Fox News and the Wash Times may not be reporting the full story or reporting the story with a bias.

According to http://www.borderaction.org/images/3%20lawsuits.pdf This is not the first time Mr Barnett has run into trouble due to his vigilante activities.

It is possible that there is more to this story...

An Internet article search on Barnett comes up with some interesting tidbits.

[SteamWake]

Wow, did not take long for this thread to go down the crapper. :nope:

Before we get all spun up on this, why don't we wait to see what the jury actually decides based on the evidence?...evidence that we don't have access to.


It is possible, just possible that Fox News and the Wash Times may not be reporting the full story or reporting the story with a bias.

According to http://www.borderaction.org/images/3%20lawsuits.pdf This is not the first time Mr Barnett has run into trouble due to his vigilante activities.

It is possible that there is more to this story...

An Internet article search on Barnett comes up with some interesting tidbits.

Yes indeed 'racisist' comments... Hindering those 'immagrents' whom seek a better life. Perhaps some of them are looking for opportunity, however I remind you that not all have such nobel intentions. Indeed there is some very very nasty things going on at that border.

Look this guy has turned over nearly 1,200 illegal ailens. Yes you read that right over 1,000. Not all of these have been mexican, a number of middle eastern have been picked up as well. Now why would a middle eastern person choose to enter the US through nefarious means?

Some of the ailens have done things like break into his house, crap on his porch, destroy his property.

That might get me a little upset too. I might just say some bad words.

Yes we have to wait to see what the jury decides. My point is WTF is this even doing in the court system. If the GD goverment was doing its job in the first place it wouldent be some rancher having to 'detain' over a thousand trespassers.

[Tribesman]

Yes indeed 'racisist' comments...
None of those really relate to racist comments , just because he is a dumb redneck who doesn't know the law it doesn't instantly mean that he is a racist .

So threatening to kill , assault and battery , false imprisonmemnt and impersonating a police officer ...yet some here are all too eager to defend this dumb idiot .
If he cannot play border vigilante without breaking the law then he shouldn't play border vigilante .

If the GD goverment was doing its job in the first place it wouldent be some rancher having to 'detain' over a thousand trespassers.
If you want the government to do its job then sign yourself up for a big tax increase , its a long border and its an expensive job to try and keep it secure .

Now why would a middle eastern person choose to enter the US through nefarious means?

You might have a point there , after all its not like the 9/11 murderers got into the States on visas is it .

[FIREWALL]

Hey ! What's all the Hoopla about. Any fool knows the...

USA is the land of Oportunity and Quick Riches. :haha:

[SteamWake]

Yes indeed 'racisist' comments...
None of those really relate to racist comments , just because he is a dumb redneck who doesn't know the law it doesn't instantly mean that he is a racist .

So threatening to kill , assault and battery , false imprisonmemnt and impersonating a police officer ...yet some here are all too eager to defend this dumb idiot .
If he cannot play border vigilante without breaking the law then he shouldn't play border vigilante .

If the GD goverment was doing its job in the first place it wouldent be some rancher having to 'detain' over a thousand trespassers.
If you want the government to do its job then sign yourself up for a big tax increase , its a long border and its an expensive job to try and keep it secure .

Now why would a middle eastern person choose to enter the US through nefarious means?

You might have a point there , after all its not like the 9/11 murderers got into the States on visas is it .

Un freakin beleavible... yea if I had dozens of people trespassing on my property day in and day out, tearing it up, defacating on my porch... Hell yes I would do all of the above... and probably worse. Of course the 'media' will do all in their power to paint this guy in a jaded light. It is after all what they do. But for Christ's Sakes... its his personal property. Or at least it is for now.

As I said before there lucky this dident happen in texas... God forbid they stumble onto Nuget's ranch.

As to the visas ... that was then this is now.

[Tribesman]

Hell yes I would do all of the above... and probably worse.
Then you would be rather silly . Unless of course you had a really really good lawyer that could convince a court that by breaking the law you were not really breaking the law .

As I said before there lucky this dident happen in texas...
Its a free country , if he doesn't like the laws in the State where he rents the grass then he can rent some grass in Texas . Then again unless this Texas you refer to is the mythical texas not the real one then he would still be facing charges for breaking its State laws .

Un freakin beleavible...
Yes it is rather . Unbelievable that people will defend the illegal actions of this idiot .

[August]

Then again unless this Texas you refer to is the mythical texas not the real one then he would still be facing charges for breaking its State laws

What makes you such an expert on Texas state law Irishman?

[longam]

He better start looking out the other side of his house because the tide is changing.

http://www.examiner.com/x-751-Immigrant-Community-Examiner~y2008m10d31-Immigrant-return-home-as-economy-sours (http://www.examiner.com/x-751-Immigrant-Community-Examiner%7Ey2008m10d31-Immigrant-return-home-as-economy-sours)

[Kapt Z]

Illegals to sue an Arizona man after he stopped them from trespassing on his ranch.

Good thing this dident happen in texas.

Anyhow can anyone explain to me why this would even make it into court?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490084,00.html

Yeah, that is crazy.

Probably easier for him in the long run to sell his ranch and move.

[SteamWake]

if he doesn't like the laws in the State where he rents the grass then he can rent some grass in Texas


"Rent"... :rotfl: :rotfl:

That kind of explains a lot actually. :O:

[1480]

Just a thought. We need this rancher on that wall.....

Seriously, a citizen has the right to use reasonable amount of force to detain a criminal until law enforcement arrive. Holding criminals by gun point and canine is not an unreasonable action.

[Tribesman]

"Rent"... :rotfl: :rotfl:

That kind of explains a lot actually.
It does doesn't it , thats why I put that little nugget in my first post in this topic ..the laws are slightly different if it is your own property .

Seriously, a citizen has the right to use reasonable amount of force to detain a criminal until law enforcement arrive.
Yes , but define "reasonble" .
That would be a matter for a court to decide on a case by case basis , though I doubt even the most crazy redneck judge could rule that threats of killing an unarmed woman who appeared to pose no threat to the individual would be considered resonable .

[Neptunus Rex]

Oh this is a fun read. But a few items to the folks that think the ranch owner is off his rocker.

1) The defendant is the property owner.

2) The plaintiffs were the trespassers.

3) Trespassing is illegal. A minor crime.

4) Willfully damaging or stealing, though possibly of a minor offense, should elevate the minor trespassing to felony trespassing.

5) Commission of any other crime, (trespassing, theft) while in the commision of another felony possibly raises the bar on all to felony crimes. This other "crime" is entering the USA ILLEGALLY!

6) It is perfectly legal to carry, either concealed or openly, a firearm on YOUR OWN PROPERTY. Doesn't make a difference if it's a hand gun, rifle, or shotgun.

7) Every citizen in the USA can make CITIZENS ARRESTS though they can not physically detain or restrain a person when a citizen knows IN FACT that a person is commiting a crime (in fact commited)(trespassing!).

8) Tough s... Don't want to be confronted, don't trespass.

9) The lawyers representing these people should be disbarred, citizenship stripped, and ejected from the USA.

10) Have a happy!

[Christopher Snow]

Perhaps because our legal system is so totally screwed up that the criminals have become the victims?:hmmm: (absolutely no sarcasm intended)
Yes, liberal Democrats have turned common sense on it's head.
Are you being that way for a reason? Go back to worshiping Reagan.

Even us "Liberals" agree that this is an open and shut case for the farmer. He has a right to defend his property and the illegals are obviously trying to make it easier for others to get in.

So the next time you get the urge to use that line. Go pray at the Reagan church and ask for guidance first because Reagan sure as hell was better at dealing with the "liberals" than that.
Do you? And are you "liberals" also so much agreed that it's "an open and shut case for the farmer" that you think he shouldn't also have to mortgage his future to just to defend himself?.

Don't doubt that they'll sue you too. Just for looking at them "sideways."

Of course, only after they sue me....

----

In my view, it should NOT be even remotely possible for "an illegal"...an alien...a non-citizen of the US.... to sue a citizen OF the US.

"United we stand, and divided we fall," as they say....

So, in my view, we citizens of the US should throw up a SOLID front against ANY finger of instrusion.

No. I DON'T have to...and definitely SHOULDN'T have to answer to any allegations made (against me) by Hugo Chavez...and nor should any of my fellow citizens similarly have to answer ANY allegations made from abroad.


CS

[Christopher Snow]

Oh this is a fun read. But a few items to the folks that think the ranch owner is off his rocker.

1) The defendant is the property owner.

2) The plaintiffs were the trespassers.

3) Trespassing is illegal. A minor crime.

4) Willfully damaging or stealing, though possibly of a minor offense, should elevate the minor trespassing to felony trespassing.

5) Commission of any other crime, (trespassing, theft) while in the commision of another felony possibly raises the bar on all to felony crimes. This other "crime" is entering the USA ILLEGALLY!

6) It is perfectly legal to carry, either concealed or openly, a firearm on YOUR OWN PROPERTY. Doesn't make a difference if it's a hand gun, rifle, or shotgun.

7) Every citizen in the USA can make CITIZENS ARRESTS though they can not physically detain or restrain a person when a citizen knows IN FACT that a person is commiting a crime (in fact commited)(trespassing!).

8) Tough s... Don't want to be confronted, don't trespass.

9) The lawyers representing these people should be disbarred, citizenship stripped, and ejected from the USA.

10) Have a happy!
I fully agree with your statement, #9. And know that my last sibling IS a lawyer.

It's the downside cost of becoming a member of "the bar," I say.


CS

[1480]

"Rent"... :rotfl: :rotfl:

That kind of explains a lot actually.
It does doesn't it , thats why I put that little nugget in my first post in this topic ..the laws are slightly different if it is your own property .

Seriously, a citizen has the right to use reasonable amount of force to detain a criminal until law enforcement arrive.
Yes , but define "reasonble" .
That would be a matter for a court to decide on a case by case basis , though I doubt even the most crazy redneck judge could rule that threats of killing an unarmed woman who appeared to pose no threat to the individual would be considered resonable .

Here I will describe reasonable, 16 people (11 being men) vs 1 senior citizen. Unless you are Bruce Lee and on a movie set, odds really suck for the man who stands alone...

[SteamWake]

Texas certanly does take a different viewpoint on such matters.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,491964,00.html