Arizona border vigilantes -- pro or con?

[RobertTB]

*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose *
**
The ranchers don’t have to “protect” their land against illegal immigrants. The illegals don’t want their land. The illegals wouldn’t have their land if you handed it to them on a platter with watercress around it. All the illegals want is to get across the land, to a place where there are jobs, so unless the ranchers in question are operating Burger Kings on their property and are worried that the illegals might sneak in and start handing out Kids Meals at the driveup without anybody noticing, the ranchers don’t have a thing to worry about.
**

That is one of the dumbest things I have heard in a long time. Since our little illegal immigrants don’t want actual land, people shouldn’t defend their property? Do YOU want a bunch of illegals running around on your land? Heck, let them come on up to your house to get some water. Steal what is not bolted down. Take a dump. Hey, they don’t want the actual land, so what is the problem?

*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose *
**…You put soldiers on the border and you’ve got yourself a war. That’s how it works. **

Not that I agree with that statement at all, but defending ones borders consititutes an act of war? I think not.

*Originally posted by SuaSponte *
…So that means we would need to spend more money on the INS, etc. How much more, exactly, are you willing to pay in taxes for the Border Patrol?..

Oh, I’d be willing to pay 11 to 22 billion dollars per year, assuming the money was taken from the programs that benefit illegal immigrants.

And since [http://www.tancredo.org/press/clippings/2002/jun/19jun-clip-dp-poll-troops-on-border.htm]68% of American citizens support putting troops on the border, and since we claim to be democratic, it should be done. Now.

[RobertTB]

*Originally posted by CBEscapee *
**Hunting illegals

Where do these assholes get the right to be judge, jury and executioner? **

You cite Aztlan??? Are you serious? A group that advocates the ‘conquering’ of American terrirtory! Sad.

[december]

*Originally posted by David Simmons *
**December, I rarely do this but I simply don’t believe you. I think it is about Mexicans. If it were just about people then you probably should organize a bunch of vigilantes to help guard the Port Of New York-New Jersey. **

The illegal immigrants crossing from Mexico are not all Mexicans.

Every year, all over Central America, hundreds of thousands of people set out on an often perilous journey north,hoping to cross the border into the United States and grab a piece ofthe American dream.

http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:dzQ4ZRTUTyYC:www.lmtonline.com/lmtbusiness/archive/010101/jrnl12.pdf+illegal+guatemalan+immigrants&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

*Originally posted by december *
sailor, I will quibble with your comment
quote:

And I’d like to see some support that the Mexicans sneaking across the border are carrying weapons of mass destruction.

We’re not talking about Mexicans sneaking across the border; we’re talking about people sneaking across the Mexican border. These people may not all be Mexican.

So, December, are you worried that all the El Salvadoran members of Al Qaeda are carrying weapons of mass destruction across the border? Proving that there are nonMexicans sneaking across the border doesn’t get you any closer to providing the support that sailor was asking for.

Daniel

[Kimstu]

Like I said above, RTB, it’s fundamentally hopeless to try to keep out neighbors, especially in an integrated economy, if they have a good incentive to immigrate and little or no incentive to stay where they are. Improving the Mexican economy and standard of living will probably reduce illegal immigration much more than your proposed tens of thousands of troops would.

68% of American citizens support putting troops on the border, and since we claim to be democratic, it should be done. Now.

Polls of popular opinion have no formal role in creating legislation, of course; especially when, as our friendly local lawyers Bricker and Sua discuss above, the proposed measure may actually be illegal.

You cite Aztlan??? Are you serious?

CBE was not talking about whether we should support the politics of Aztlan.org, but whether vigilantes were murdering migrants. The cite in question refers to a report by the Mexican Consulate in Tucson that a group of Mexican migrants were shot at—at least two killed, an unknown number injured—by snipers. (The Pinal County Sheriff’s Department confirmed the deaths.)

If you are disputing this report on factual grounds, please state your evidence. If not, then the fact that you dislike the politics of the organization that wrote the article is irrelevant.

[Debaser]

*Originally posted by sailor *
**Debaser, read what Sua wrote. It’s illegal. The government cannot do it without breaking the law. Not to mention that this is not the type of thing the military is trained for. Not to mention that the people who live along the border wiould not like to have a military occupation and would clamor against it.
**

It’s not illegal. DDG didn’t say anything about it being illegal. Explain?

The military could adapt itself to this job very easily.

The people living along the border don’t sound to happy with the current situation, either. I see no reason they would have a problem with the military there.

**

And I’d like to see some support that the Mexicans sneaking across the border are carrying weapons of mass destruction. Gimme a break. Many die in the desert. You think they can carry a nuclear weapon? **

Gimme a break yourself. msmith537 has pointed out the obvious logical flaw in your strawman here. Sheesh.

[CBEscapee]

*Originally posted by RobertTB *
**You cite Aztlan??? Are you serious? A group that advocates the ‘conquering’ of American terrirtory! Sad. **

There are a lot of sources I can site. How many would you like? Because Aztlan reports it, does that make the story false?

[Debaser]

Oh, my bad on that first point. You wrote Sua, I read Duck Duck Goose. It is Monday you know.

[Debaser]

Sua, since when is protecting the borders of the country a funciton of law enforcement. Protecting the country is exactly what we have a military for.

[sailor]

I posted: Debaser, read what Sua wrote.

Debaser answers: “It’s not illegal. DDG didn’t say anything about it being illegal. Explain?”

Huh? Explain what? I cannot explain this.

[sailor]

OK, ignore my previous post .

[Kimstu]

Debaser: Protecting the country is exactly what we have a military for.

Depends on what you’re protecting from. The military protects its country from hostile attack by other states. Protection from ordinary criminals is supposed to be supplied by police and other domestic law enforcement forces. Illegal immigrants are criminals, in that they’re violating immigration laws, but they hardly count as invading troops. As Bricker points out, “[t]he [Posse Comitatus] Act generally prohibits the military from law enforcement activities.”

There might, as Bricker said, be an exception in this case on national-security grounds, but the basic principle that troops are not cops is still there. You don’t get to deploy troops as though they were store security guards to “protect the country” against criminals.

[sailor]

Debaser the military’s role is to fight wars not to engage in domestic police action. There is a ton of precedent and jurisprudence on this.

Do you really think it is a good idea to have soldiers have the authority to detain you and question you on US territory? To hold you until you can prove your right to be where you are? You know things like this by the English triggered the revolution.

Soldiers are trained to fight not to be bureaucrats. You think their traing should include all immigration laws? To know all about visas?

If they take an illegal immigrant prisoner would he have the status of prisoner of war and be protected by the Geneva convention?

The military in the US do not now have the authority to arrest and question civilians on US soil and IMHO that is a good thing and should stay that way. Countries where the military rule inside their borders do not fare well.

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

Robert, are you a member of storm front dot org? Just asking. We’ve heard your shpiel before, you know.

Aztlan??? Are you serious? A group that advocates the ‘conquering’ of American terrirtory! Sad.

Show me where Aztlan advocates “conquering American territory”. Betcha can’t, because they don’t. But that is exactly the sort of untrue factoid crap that the anti-immigration websites spew copiously. As I said, we’ve heard it before. To anybody with any sense, what they’re saying is this, from your own link:

The radicals seek nothing less than secession from the United States whether to form their own sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification with Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico’s “lost” territories in the American Southwest.4

They’re a tiny group of radicals and as such nobody takes them seriously–except for paranoid white nationalists. Like I said, we’ve heard it before–and we’ve had this identical link posted before, with the identical agenda. :rolleyes:

Since our little illegal immigrants don’t want actual land, people shouldn’t defend their property? Do YOU want a bunch of illegals running around on your land? Heck, let them come on up to your house to get some water. Steal what is not bolted down. Take a dump.

We’re even then, 'cause I think this is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard, and I’m including the time James Watt, Secretary of the Interior, said the Beach Boys were “too dangerous” to be allowed to perform on the Washington Mall.

1. Illegals don’t “run around” on the land, they “go through it”, as quickly as possible, to a waiting van or railroad car.

2. Have you got any kind of cite at all showing that any ranchers ever had anything stolen by illegals traveling over their land? Let alone “anything that wasn’t nailed down”. I mean, if this were true, there ought to be tons of news articles out there telling how BBQ grills, lawn chairs, and dog dishes have all gone missing from Brownsville to San Diego.

3. As for the “take a dump” thing, Jeezum crow, get real. I mean, come up with some realistic objections, why don’t you? How about, “Illegals mess up the TV reception as they pass through”, or, “Illegals exhale too much carbon dioxide so they mess up the Nogales EPA’s pollution index.”

You think it matters if a few human turds get deposited in the barren hell that is the Sonoran desert? You ever been there? I visited the Chihuahuan desert once, just on the fringe, and I wanna tell you, it’s completely indifferent to the presence of human turds. Any turds deposited are dried up and blown away in 24 hours.

defending ones borders consititutes an act of war?

Well, you sure weren’t paying attention, were you? I was talking about how inevitably Vicente Fox is going to want to know what they’re doing there. Moving troops up to a border is universally acknowedged as a preparation for war. He could, if he chose, decide to take umbrage at it, go before the UN, complain officially, and then the Administration would have to pay him off with some kind of trade concessions by way of apologizing for hurting his feelings and making it look like they didn’t like him or something…

Stationing soldiers to defend a border against unarmed civilians looks totally paranoid, not to mention anal-retentive.

I’m not a lawyer, but even I can look up “posse comitatus” on Google.

Debaser and Robert, it may interest you to know that there are people as violently opposed to using the military to patrol the border with Mexico as there are people like you.

It may also interest you to know that the military is already involved, although they’re focusing on Drugs, not Illegal Aliens. And look how well it’s working, eh? :rolleyes: What makes you think it would work any better if they were told to focus on illegals? You still haven’t answered my question–what are they supposed to do? Shoot them? Detain them? What?

http://law.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-2/752-10.html
http://www.ndsn.org/JULY97/MILITARY.html

[RobertTB]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose *
Robert, are you a member of storm front dot org? Just asking. We’ve heard your shpiel before, you know.

Yeeeeehaaaw! The subtle ‘racist’ assertions begin! I know your argument is on shaky ground, but isn’t it a bit early to cry ‘racist’?

Show me where Aztlan advocates “conquering American territory”. Betcha can’t, because they don’t. But that is exactly the sort of untrue factoid crap that the anti-immigration websites spew copiously.

Whatever. But then you say…

As I said, we’ve heard it before. To anybody with any sense, what they’re saying is this, from your own link:
They’re a tiny group of radicals and as such nobody takes them seriously–except for paranoid white nationalists. Like I said, we’ve heard it before–and we’ve had this identical link posted before, with the identical agenda.

Which is it? Are they a group of radicals that only us slack-jawed Klansmen believe, or do they have no designs upon American territory?

**

1. Illegals don’t “run around” on the land, they “go through it”, as quickly as possible, to a waiting van or railroad car.
   **

Whether they run around, waltz, or walk does not matter, if they are doing so on private property. They are not supposed to be here.

**
2. Have you got any kind of cite at all showing that any ranchers ever had anything stolen by illegals traveling over their land? Let alone “anything that wasn’t nailed down”. I mean, if this were true, there ought to be tons of news articles out there telling how BBQ grills, lawn chairs, and dog dishes have all gone missing from Brownsville to San Diego.
**

I used to live in Brownsville. Irrelevant, though. You ask for cites , and cites you shall get.

**
3. As for the “take a dump” thing, Jeezum crow, get real. I mean, come up with some realistic objections, why don’t you? How about, “Illegals mess up the TV reception as they pass through”, or, “Illegals exhale too much carbon dioxide so they mess up the Nogales EPA’s pollution index.”
**

So, since my lawn isn’t the best shape, you have a ‘right’ to come on over and unload on it? You get real. You seem to not understand the concept of private property. A rather reasonable expectation for the owner of private property is that his land will not be shat upon. But the next time I am in your neighborhood, I will be more than glad to leave your property a ‘little gift’, since you don’t seem to mind.

**
Well, you sure weren’t paying attention, were you? I was talking about how inevitably Vicente Fox is going to want to know what they’re doing there. Moving troops up to a border is universally acknowedged as a preparation for war. He could, if he chose, decide to take umbrage at it, go before the UN, complain officially, and then the Administration would have to pay him off with some kind of trade concessions by way of apologizing for hurting his feelings and making it look like they didn’t like him or something…
**

Since the Mexican Army is already on our side of the border, I guess we must already be at war. Get the troops down there, toot-sweet. Let the Bosnians solve their own problems, our Army should be solving ours.

[CBEscapee]

*Originally posted by RobertTB *
**You cite Aztlan??? Are you serious? A group that advocates the ‘conquering’ of American terrirtory! Sad. **

Here’s another site. I don’t think they have any plans to conquer.

Arizona killings

And let me mention that this is just one case of many.

[Chumpsky]

*Originally posted by december *
**Armed vigilante groups in Arizona are patrolling the Mexican border, trying to keep illegal immigrants out. **

A small point of correction: The border is not there to keep Mexicans out of the U.S., but rather to keep them in Mexico.

And, obviously these maniacs should be denounced.

Carry on.

[lel]

Far be it from me to defend excessive vigilantism, but I’d like to know what extra costs are to who own large spreads of land in the border area to maintain them due to the presence of illegal immigrants crossing. Should we just ignore the fact that they are trespassing and that their litter might be harmful to the cattle? Actually, DDG, you raised a good point with the first few clauses here:

Unless they’re worried about the illegals littering, or peeing into the bushes, or chipping off little souvenir bits of rocks, or picking the flowers, or riding ATVs up and down and totally destroying the local landforms, hey, that desert soil can take centuries to form, don’t these damn wetbacks know anything about microbiotic soil crust…?

It takes good time to clean up litter and bushes.

Bricker –

Suppose, instead of the current situation, the sheriffs of Yuma, Pima, Santa Cruz, and Cochise counties swore in and trained additional deputies, and put them to work guarding the southern edges of those counties.

What, if any, objections might someone offer to that plan?

The cost? In addition, many don’t want others on their land to protect it – why should a rancher have to have law enforcement officers snooping about their land solely by virtue of living near the Mexican border?

Tomndebb –

I have seen no evidence that the vigilantes are “enforcing” any law. It appears that they are behaving in the manner of the Ku Klux Klan to terrorize people they do not like, but I have seen no mention of any laws that they are truly enforcing.

The KKK? Once they start shooting people on sight for being of a specific ethnic background, maybe. As for the laws they are enforcing, how about not only laws against illegal border crossing but also laws against trespass?

Now, let’s look at the article that december posted:

So far, there have been no known shootings by members of the armed patrols, although Ranch Rescue last month said it chased a group of marijuana smugglers back into Mexico.

The vigilantes aren’t out there shooting immigrants as if they were hunting deer. All they have to do is exercise their right to bear arms and be serious about using them if you don’t get off their property, and who in their right mind wouldn’t get off the property?

We don’t need to move the military in to protect our borders. We don’t need to step up law enforcement and ship in a bunch of outsiders. Why not let those who own land provide their own protection services – within the bounds of the law. Let them patrol their lands, armed and ready to chase trespassers who would damage their property off the land.

[CBEscapee]

*Originally posted by lel *
The vigilantes aren’t out there shooting immigrants as if they were hunting deer. All they have to do is exercise their right to bear arms and be serious about using them if you don’t get off their property, and who in their right mind wouldn’t get off the property?

Why not let those who own land provide their own protection services – within the bounds of the law. Let them patrol their lands, armed and ready to chase trespassers who would damage their property off the land. **

Oh hell yeah Bubba, them goddam Mesicans are peeing on the tumbleweeds and throwing their trash all over my place. I figgered a few rounds of my two two three oughta teach em better.

So now citizens have the right to shoot trespassers? What if some kids in Detroit (insert the city or town of your choice)decides to grafiti your garage or knock over your trash cans? I suppose you would be justified in shooting them?

These assholes are hunting down illegals like animals and in several cases have killed or wounded them.

[lel]

*Originally posted by CBEscapee *
**So now citizens have the right to shoot trespassers? What if some kids in Detroit (insert the city or town of your choice)decides to grafiti your garage or knock over your trash cans? I suppose you would be justified in shooting them?

These assholes are hunting down illegals like animals and in several cases have killed or wounded them. **

I’m not in favor of them hunting illegal immigrants down for the sheer sport of them. I am in favor of them being able to bear arms and look menacing in order to deal with a problem that affects their livelihood. As for your second suggestion, would it be such a bad idea to have neighborhood residents go around the inner city bearing arms and looking menacing if the kids were impacting your ability to make a living with their antics? Would it deter trespass?