Cite one example of any lawsuit similar to this that actually happened. I bet you can’t. Did you read my above post? Those stories are much more insidious than mere urban legends; they are deliberately manufactured lies designed to undermine the justice system.
Did everyone just read the title of the thread and skip everything else? MGibson, this lawsuit has nothing to do with obligating the government to take any action to save the lives of people crossing the border.
Is the government obligated to allow others to set up shop in public lands to save lives?
Marc
When people die crossing the border, they don’t just die: we kill them.
I live in Tucson, and have seen first-hand some of the travails of the desperate people trying to escape from Mexico. Some of the tales are truly horrific.
For example, one woman walked across the desert some 40 miles, almost dying in the process. She had a child in Mexico, and was raising her on her own, since her husband had died. She was asked why she would risk her life to come across the border when she had a child to take care of. She said that if she were to stay in Mexico she would simply have to watch her child starve to death, and that by trying to make it out of Mexico she would at least give her child a chance to live.
Some very important things to keep in mind:
The immigration policies are not there to keep people out of the U.S., but rather to keep them in Mexico.
Many millions of people are suffering under capitalism in Mexico, and many of them see escape as their only chance for a better life.
Why does the U.S. want to keep Mexicans in Mexico? Well, it basically boils down to economics and the system of imperialist exploitation that is maintained. We must keep the Third World in its place, and the peasants in their place. In the last several decades, the U.S. has been aggressively pursuing policies that are designed to increase the disparity between the rich and the poor. NAFTA, GATT, and the upcoming FTAA are a few examples. Mexico must remain poor, and the U.S. keeps it that way deliberately. It is the U.S. that is torturing the people of Mexico, and which must erect a prison fence on the border to keep them there.
This situation is nothing new, obviously, and was explained by George Kennan in an internal planning document in 1948 PPS/23 He writes about East Asia, but the policies are more general:
>> Did everyone just read the title of the thread and skip everything else? MGibson, this lawsuit has nothing to do with obligating the government to take any action to save the lives of people crossing the border.
My thought exactly. People seem to read what they want and disregard the rest.
>> I’d rather have someone living illegally in this country than dead in the desert.
Very well and succinctly put, DoctorJ. My feeling exactly. And those who callously say the US government should prevent these migrants from being help, I hope you some day find yourself in a situation where you need help and where you do not get it because no one is obliged to give it to you. Maybe that will make you think about where humans have any moral obligation to help other humans.
How would placing water stations in the desert be different than placing water facilities along highways for overheating cars? I know that the water isn’t potable and I would assume that the state and federal governments place them because you find them in locations like Death Valley, but would it be different to place potable water stations away from highways in the desert.
I think what I’m trying to say is, if the government already can do it for motorists on government land, why not for people walking through, illegally or not.
Because it’s not a matter of ‘if they can.’ It’s a matter of, ‘if they must.’
Does the government have a responsibility to enable people entering the country illegally to do so in a manner that is free from danger?
Personally, I’d have to vote no, here. We do have a responsibility to find the people who are helping these persons enter in an unsafe manner, and to stop them from doing so, though. Just like the recent rash (John Doe springs to mind) of books and shows which feature cases of immigrants in cargo containers being found dead. Must we make sure all cargo containers are watertight and have internal oxygen?
A random thought: If they put water stations in the desert, more illegal immigrants enter via that pathway, and some die, can the government or this group be sued for creating an attractive nuisance?
It seems to be a likely consequence.
As a practical matter, a water station in the desert would be useless for illegal immigrants (hikers might appreciate it, however).
The authorities would now taht it’s there and thus watch that route for illegals. As well they should. As a result, the route would move away from the water station.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
I see no reason why the government should be held liable for the naturally-occurring hazards of lawbreakers. It’s tragic, but unavoidable that people will die in the desert if they don’t bring proper supplies. Why they’re in the desert doesn’t really matter.
A-hem. To state my preferences ahead of time, I’m in favor of legal process reform, though not necessarily tort reform. The real problem is not “lottery” awards to plaintiffs, but instead the abject difficulty in quickly and cheaply disposing of meritless cases, thus allowing litigation extortion (“I know I don’t have a case, but it will cost you $500,000 in legal fees to beat me. Save yourself time and money by giving me $400,000 now.”)
That being said, is you an idjit?! 
How does tort reform hurt me? I’ve never sued anybody in a cause of action for tort (or indeed for any other cause of action), and if you look at the percentages, it is extremely unlikely that I ever will.
OTOH, tort reform may conceivably help me, in several ways.
First, I pay insurance. My premiums will likely go down if insurance companies don’t have to pay out as much in torts claims.
Second, I pay taxes. My taxes will likely go down if (a) the government has to pay out less in torts awards, and (b) the amount of lawsuits filed is lessened, thus reducing the need for new judges and new courthouses.
Third, I buy things from corporations. The cost of goods and services I purchase will likely go down if corporations have to pay less in (a) tort awards, (b) insurance premiums, and (c) taxes.
Sua
I don’t want to get involved in a tort reform hijack. (I assume it’s been done.) After scouring the internet for any evidence of these burglar lawsuits, I was pissed off at discovering that this story had been fabricated and repeated numerous times even though it was known to be false. Who’s funding these tort reform campaigns and why do they lie so much?
Wow! I didn’t expect to see this dinasour again. Loki, it took you seven months to come up with that response!!
I agree the OP is a stupid SOB who misled everyone with regard to the title. I think he should be… um… er… never mind.
Yeah, I know it wasn’t the best choice of titles. I was hoping it would disappear into the nether-void of the internet, but like the bad penny… To bad my good posts never get brought back this way.
Zev Steinhardt
But Zev, the nuance, the delicate turn of phrase – such masterpieces take time.
Sua
[short hijack]
Sua, your listed email is bouncing. Could you email me at mine? Thanks.
[/short hijack]
Wow, I didn’t realize this was a bumped thread. I was wondering why someone was browsing old issues of the Arizona Republic.
I’m glad you acknowledge that the title was misleading, zen. I don’t think you can be blamed for other people’s failure to figure out what the topic is before they start spouting off opinions.
I didnt realize it was a bumped thread either. I was wondering what dinosaurs had to do with anything.
That is the kind of misconception that drives most of the debate. The expanse that border crossers face in southern Arizona is so vast it’s not possible for anyone to carry enough water with them to cross during the hot months. Those that do cross are unaware of what they face and rarely have more than a gallon of water with them. It’s an ugly catch-22 as there seems to be no middle ground between trying to prevent illegal border crossing and providing food and water and a safe journey for crossers.
Large signs reading “No water next 200 miles?”
If by “these people” you mean Mexicans, then you’re wrong. Most Mexicans do not come from desert climates.
In many cases they are cheated by guides who promise to take them across on foot or vehicles and abandon them in the desert.