http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/15...66636.html

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/kgun9/news/F...29491.html

http://www.newsweek.com/texas-border-cla...ence-86193

http://www.scpr.org/programs/take-two/20...ean-for-t/

 

I'm going to go out on a really long limb here and say, "Unfavorably."

 

Once again, this is biased media.  I did try to go to each story that you linked, but two of them wanted me to "sign up" which I will not do.  It's bad website design and I could easily get around it, but I digress.

 

Once again, I would bet that the ranchers and home owners that have property that  is on the border would probably be willing to either sell to the government or authorize the use.  There are many ranchers that are either on the border or close to it that have to deal with the immigration problem every day.  Of course, the bureaucrats in Washington don't have to see this happening on a daily basis.

 

I'll even tell a story that is true that I experienced in my younger days.  While working as a police officer, I remember taking an illegal into custody.  I remember a fellow officer telling him that he was going to be deported.  His answer was "and I'll be back on the first train headed north".

 

We again arrested him within a week again.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I don't see how that would be any different than a homeowner walking out to the edge of his property and holding vandals/trespassers at gunpoint until the police arrived. The trespassers don't get to sue you because you turned them over to the cops, so the simple act of ordering them to stay put while the Border Patrol worked their way over wouldn't have been a civil rights violation of any kind.

 

That said, if he actually did threaten to shoot anyone that tried to leave the scene, he's overstepped his bounds and most likely committed a crime as well as a civil rights violation. There's a fine line between holding someone for the police and kidnapping them, and if he crossed it, there's a case to be made against him. I'd be curious to see what the ultimate resolution of the case was. I suspect it was ultimately either thrown out or ruled in favor of the farmer.

 

I don't know what the resolution was either, but just think about it for a second.  These people are in the country illegally.  They were held at gun point until the authorities arrived.  How are they justified in suing in our legal system when the are not citizens?  What crime is the rancher potentially guilty of for holding illegals at gun point and giving them a verbal warning?  What crime did he commit and/or what civil rights violation was there?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Ask those very people if they are willing to give up an area for national security and see what they say.

So do you support the patriot act?

---

So do you support the patriot act?

 

No, not at all.  This can lead to a whole discussion regarding The Patriot Act that is best done in a new thread so we don't hijack this one.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Thanks for the input. /s

Say what!!!  boudreaumw, you must respect my drive by while I am at work!   :pirate:  :teehee:  :woot:

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Say what!!! boudreaumw, you must respect my drive by while I am at work! :pirate: :teehee: :woot:

I truly do my friend, I truly do

---

Once again, this is biased media.  I did try to go to each story that you linked, but two of them wanted me to "sign up" which I will not do.  It's bad website design and I could easily get around it, but I digress.

 

Once again, I would bet that the ranchers and home owners that have property that  is on the border would probably be willing to either sell to the government or authorize the use.  There are many ranchers that are either on the border or close to it that have to deal with the immigration problem every day.  Of course, the bureaucrats in Washington don't have to see this happening on a daily basis.

And based upon those stories and conversations I've had with farmers and ranchers living on or near the border in Arizona and California, I can tell you beyond any shadow of a doubt that for the vast majority of border residents, the answer would be, "I'll build my own damn fence if I want one. Get off my land."

 

You forget that I'm a political science major who went to college in Arizona then moved to San Diego. Border policy and politics has long been an interest of mine, and your notion that those living along the border--people who, for the most part, have had that land in their families for well over 100 years--would gladly hand their property over to the federal government is just plain wrong. That's not mother-in-law research. That's trips to border towns, visits to Minutemen gatherings along the California border (they, btw, would happily build their own fence on their own property, but I never met one willing to give his land up to the government for theirs), staying on top of the news, even talking to the Border Patrol on the rare occasion that I came across one interested in having a conversation more substantial than, "Are you an American citizen?". You're just wrong about this. There's no way to throw any credit to your argument because your argument is just completely incorrect.

 

I don't know what the resolution was either, but just think about it for a second.  These people are in the country illegally.  They were held at gun point until the authorities arrived.  How are they justified in suing in our legal system when the are not citizens?  What crime is the rancher potentially guilty of for holding illegals at gun point and giving them a verbal warning?  What crime did he commit and/or what civil rights violation was there?

Let's take this one from the top.

 

One must have standing to sue. Standing, in the United States requires three things:

 

1. Injury-in-fact (harm to a person's interests, basically)

2. Causation (demonstrable evidence that the defendant caused the harm to the plaintiff's interests)

3. Redressability (a favorable decision must be able to correct the injury)

 

Please note that immigration status is not a factor when determining standing. Any human being can sue in any court in the United States.

 

The claims of the illegal immigrants centered around being held at gunpoint, threatened with a dog and told that if they tried to leave, they'd be shot. Holding someone at gunpoint for trespassing is not a crime. Telling them that anyone attempting to leave would be shot is borderline kidnapping, which is definitely a violation of their rights. Being threatened with a dog, eh, maybe? It depends on the context of the threat. For now, let's focus on the gun.

 

If the rancher did, in fact, say that anyone attempting to flee would be shot, he's effectively holding them hostage, possibly even kidnapping them. Giving someone a "verbal warning" is very different from telling them, as they're effectively trapped in a deadly situation, that any attempt to leave the deadly situation will result in their being killed.

 

llegal immigrants have the same right to an lawyer that anyone else would, as per the Fifth Amendment. All it would take is one illegal immigrant saying the four magic words--"I want an attorney"--and one legally has to be provided for them. Once an attorney hears that sixteen people were held hostage until the Border Patrol arrived, and the Border Patrol then illegally took possession of people who should have been allowed to flee back to Mexico (or whatever--let's approach this from the lawyer's angle), then there are some significant problems there, and most capable, well-meaning immigration lawyers would immediately begin filing papers to block the deportation of the 16 immigrants and, at the same time, file lawsuits against all involved.

 

And that brings us to the article. That's how the illegal immigrants have standing to sue, and the crime and rights violations that the rancher--if he actually did tell people that he would kill them if they tried to leave--might have committed, as well as how other parties wound up mixed in with the lawsuit.

 

The easiest way to stop situations like this from happening, of course, is to just load illegal immigrants onto a bus and drop them off at the border, then "politely instruct" them to walk back across into Mexico without questioning them. Right now, it can take days (or longer) to get illegal immigrants from a detention facility to the border.

 

The downside of such an approach is that questioning them is essential to identifying coyotes and drug runners, as well as to identifying the persons that drug runners were going to meet up with on this side of the line. Based upon lawsuit figures vs. deportations, it would seem to me that this is a pretty rare occurrence and not something worth screaming about.

---

I have a question for you Anchor, boudreaumw and TJ, what is it you 3 do not like about Carson.  I am only at the bottom of page one of this thread (and will continue until I get to the end) but it is clear that the 3 of you have no respect for him.  Why is that?  Clearly to me he epitomizes exactly what Dr Martin Luther King stood for.  An under privileged minority man rising above his station in life to become a pioneer in his field based on his accomplishments and not the color of his skin.  What is your beef?

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I have a question for you Anchor, boudreaumw and TJ, what is it you 3 do not like about Carson.  I am only at the bottom of page one of this thread (and will continue until I get to the end) but it is clear that the 3 of you have no respect for him.  Why is that?  Clearly to me he epitomizes exactly what Dr Martin Luther King stood for.  An under privileged minority man rising above his station in life to become a pioneer in his field based on his accomplishments and not the color of his skin.  What is your beef?

I have a great deal of respect for Dr. Carson and what he's achieved. The man is unquestionably a genius and one of the great medical minds of our time.

 

That doesn't make him qualified to be President, and it certainly doesn't mean I have to agree with him.

---

I personally believe that while you are engaged in a crime on someone elses property that you should not have a reasonable expectation of safety.  Unless the home owner summarily executes someone who didn't pose a threat to their life and property i don't feel that the state should be able to hold them financially responsible for the emotional impact of the words they used to detain criminals. 

 

While your explanation is frankly eloquent, its also a sad representation of how misguided our legal system has become.

---

I'm not saying he wants to kill people. I'm saying he's at the least saying drone strikes on soil. I don't care whether it's for tunnels or to kill people. No thanks to drones firing in our own country.


I'm also able to read an article and pars the biased points. The point of the link was for the quote. I probably should have posted the source not the first link I found after reading a cnn blurb on it this morning.

 

One casual sentence does not a policy make my son.  

 

The point that he was trying to make is that there is infrastructure being used by cartels, cyotes, and other people who are no friends of this country to bring people into our land without the consent of law enforcement.  We can quibble about how that infrastructure should be eliminated, but the idea of leaving it standing is the extreme.

---

While your explanation is frankly eloquent, its also a sad representation of how misguided our legal system has become.

If by "misguided" you mean that it protects the rights and interests of all human beings, as it was designed to, then sure.

 

If it took hours as opposed to days to get immigrants back to the border, this would probably never have happened. As it is, we're raising hell and making a huge deal out of one isolated case from roughly six years ago. It's not like there are illegal immigrants suing private landowners left and right.

---

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/15...66636.html

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/kgun9/news/F...29491.html

http://www.newsweek.com/texas-border-cla...ence-86193

http://www.scpr.org/programs/take-two/20...ean-for-t/

 

I'm going to go out on a really long limb here and say, "No."

Okay so I hit links one and two.  Did not go any further but I have to ask, all things being equal the price of an acre being the same do these land owners object?

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Okay so I hit links one and two.  Did not go any further but I have to ask, all things being equal the price of an acre being the same do these land owners object?

That question never came up because none of them (nor I) are foolish enough to think that the government would ever offer market price for the land when they can just claim eminent domain and pay pennies on the dollar for it.

 

Even if the government had offered full market price, I doubt the land would have been freely given up. Again, most of those people have been there for generations, and that land is worth more than $X per acre to them.

---

I have a great deal of respect for Dr. Carson and what he's achieved. The man is unquestionably a genius and one of the great medical minds of our time.

 

That doesn't make him qualified to be President, and it certainly doesn't mean I have to agree with him.

But what is your beef with him?  Should not a man that overcame so much to be where he is be heard?  Excuse me if I am wrong and it was not you, but two of you 3 have in a sense called him a kook.  To me, this is the kind of story we need to hear more of.  A man overcoming what he has is clearly a person that needs to be championed.  He has a blue print to success.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I have a question for you Anchor, boudreaumw and TJ, what is it you 3 do not like about Carson. I am only at the bottom of page one of this thread (and will continue until I get to the end) but it is clear that the 3 of you have no respect for him. Why is that? Clearly to me he epitomizes exactly what Dr Martin Luther King stood for. An under privileged minority man rising above his station in life to become a pioneer in his field based on his accomplishments and not the color of his skin. What is your beef?

I absolutely respect Ben Carson. By all accounts he is one of the world's best and brightest neurosurgeons.



I disagree with on many political issues and his thoughts on homosexuality. I also dont think someone with zero political experience should be president.

---

One casual sentence does not a policy make my son.


The point that he was trying to make is that there is infrastructure being used by cartels, cyotes, and other people who are no friends of this country to bring people into our land without the consent of law enforcement. We can quibble about how that infrastructure should be eliminated, but the idea of leaving it standing is the extreme.

Suggesting using drone strikes on American soil for anything other than testing (I don't like then in general) is not quibbling to me. If he recantants completely and doesn't waffle or clarifies he definitely didn't mean that way I'll absolutely let it go and not hold it against him. Until then that is a very serious matter to me. It's a line I'm not willing to cross.

---

That question never came up because none of them (nor I) are foolish enough to think that the government would ever offer market price for the land when they can just claim eminent domain and pay pennies on the dollar for it.

 

Even if the government had offered full market price, I doubt the land would have been freely given up. Again, most of those people have been there for generations, and that land is worth more than $X per acre to them.

What area of land are we talking about here?  100 feet from the border or 100 acres?  From my perspective if I owned say 50 acres of boarder land and the Feds wanted to come in and procure 100 feet from that boarder into my property for the sake of securing that boarder and were offering fair market value I would be all in.  All in as long as they actually secured that said border.  If it were more of the same old lip service about securing boarders then no I am not in.  From what I have read these landowners have to put up with a lot of unnecessary crap from these criminals crossing our boarders illegally
.  

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I absolutely respect Ben Carson. By all accounts he is one of the world's best and brightest neurosurgeons.



I disagree with on many issues and i dont think someone with zero political experience should be president.

Our forefathers, you know the ones that came up with our constitution had little to no political experience.  Furthermore, look at where all of this political experience has gotten us.  We need to do something different here and maybe a complete outsider is exactly that.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Our forefathers, you know the ones that came up with our constitution had little to no political experience. Furthermore, look at where all of this political experience has gotten us. We need to something different here and maybe a complete outsider is exactly that.

One of the very popular and used by a huge amount of conservatives is Obamas lack of experience. I had that issue as well when he ran. I still have that opinion though I understand your point. Also agree with with general sentiment of the where has it got us but in a general sense of government as a whole

.

---