Arizona Rancher Sued by Illegals

[Garnet]

An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Roger Barnett, 64, began rounding up illegal immigrants in 1998 and turning them over to the U.S. Border Patrol, he said, after they destroyed his property, killed his calves and broke into his home.

His Cross Rail Ranch near Douglas, Ariz., is known by federal and county law enforcement authorities as "the avenue of choice" for immigrants seeking to enter the United States illegally.

The quote is from this story: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/09/16-illegals-sue-arizona-rancher/

As I said on another board, I have a lot of trouble with the issue of illegal immigration. I grew up in Arizona. I knew people who crossed the border illegally to find a better life. I knew people who crossed the border illegally and brought crime. I knew people who worked in INS. I knew people in the Maricopa County Sheriffs office and Phoenix PD and Glendale PD and hell...I was a probation officer myself for a couple of years. I've had the misfortune of having to identify a body in the morgue who was a victim of a Mexican drug cartel. I knew some of the ranchers on the borders and what illegals did when they crossed their land and what they left behind doing so. I've seen the results of the mules who bring the illegals across the border, often packed in together like so many sardines in deplorable conditions.

I don't know what the answers are. There's a part of me who agrees, at least in part, with what this rancher is doing. There's another part of me that is worried about vigilantism and how quickly that can turn sour. I have compassion for some of the folks who are crossing over but at the same time, I can get pretty angry at the damage that others of them do.

Ambivalence, thy name is Garnet.

What are your thoughts?

[Master Taran]

And in other news.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office in Arizona following requests by congressional Democrats and allegations by liberal activists that the department has violated the civil rights of illegal aliens.
(http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44899)

[Garnet]

Thanks for posting that, MT. It is relevent.

Of course you know I have a fairly extreme dislike for Sheriff Joe.

[Loren Pechtel]

And in other news.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office in Arizona following requests by congressional Democrats and allegations by liberal activists that the department has violated the civil rights of illegal aliens.
(http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44899)

Good. He needs investigating, whatever the reason.

[dancer_rnb]

Tin plated tyrants start with the ones they figure no one will care about.

[Loren Pechtel]

Tin plated tyrants start with the ones they figure no one will care about.

Haven't you read about the guy? He has no respect for the Constitution at all. His actions have resulted in tens of millions being paid out in judgments--and that's only for the few cases that can be proven.

[Garnet]

You mean Sheriff Joe? He's as dirty as the day is long yet he keeps getting re-elected. I guess his bluster is appealing to a lot of people in Arizona. I was honestly ashamed of him when I lived there.

[Loren Pechtel]

You mean Sheriff Joe? He's as dirty as the day is long yet he keeps getting re-elected. I guess his bluster is appealing to a lot of people in Arizona. I was honestly ashamed of him when I lived there.

I've seen no evidence he's dirty. He runs roughshod over the Constitution and abuses his position to go after anyone he doesn't like but he's not corrupt. He certainly is an embarrassment, though.

[Garnet]

Check into who owns the vending machines in the jails. There's a bit of back slapping and hand washing going on there.

[Xrikcus]

Right. The main question here is: What crime are the immigrants committing.

If their crime is illegal immigration, then the ranchers are on very dangerous ground acting against them because that goes against the entire purpose of concentrating the maintenance of law to the police and turns them into vigilantes. Vigilantism is invariably dangerous.

If their crime is trespass, then we have to consider what this means. If trespass is merely the act of illegally crossing his property, then I'm not sure his actions have any argument to support them. In many jurisdictions that doesn't even count as trespass (under Scots law trespass requires damage, for example). If, as the article suggests, the problem is damage, then at least he has an argument for a crime committed against him rather than the country. Who committed the crime, though? Did the group of people who are suing him damage or litter his property? Does he have any evidence to suggest that they did?

I'm also a bit suspicious over his claimed 10 year campaign. Did he really make such an effort to round people up for 10 years because of damage, or because he had some grand political idea in his head about keeping out illegal immigrants?

[dancer_rnb]

Who cares what people in the British Isles do? (Add: Are they really better?)At least we didn't hold them down and shoot them in the head, like happened to the Brazilian in England.

[Xrikcus]

I presume you're just pretending to be stupid? I can't imagine the relevance of my Scots comment is really very challenging is it?

Anyway, if you like: Police make mistakes. I don't even think that was a serious mistake given standard US practice as a comparison and the full story of the shooting. At best it just reminds the public why it's nice that the police aren't generally armed, it's much harder to make such mistakes that way.

[dancer_rnb]

I seem to remember a cover up, including trotting out that the victim was an illegal alien. I don't think there is any Western culture that doesn't have problems with this. It's not just the US.

I guess I'm also suspicious of the motives of those who "discuss problems" of another group. They often have hidden motives, almost always over simplify, and sometimes leave out inconvenient facts.

[Xrikcus]

There may have been a cover up. Of course, this is a single event, known to be a mistake, and massively overpublicised in the tabloid media - largely distorted as is ever the case in the tabloids. But even if we assume it was a major conspiracy on high to cover it all up, I don't see how the behviour of state employees doing their jobs, if badly, is relevant to whether the behaviour of one man on his property is vigilantism or reasonable.

ETA: Not to mention the problem that the Jean Charles de Menezes case was caused in a large part by the ridiculous overreaction to the perceived threat of terrorism that we have in the US and UK at the moment that causes no real gains in safety but noticeable loss of freedom. ID cards saving us from terrorists indeed...