16 illegals sue Arizona rancher - Page 5

glatt · 02-11-2009, 10:58 AM

Roger Barnett is an asshole who belongs in jail.

OnyxCougar · 02-11-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux

Was he doing "what he should have done" in this case:

No, Morales was not on this guy's private property. Ranch owner was wrong in that case, but not in this one.

sugarpop · 02-11-2009, 12:11 PM

I don't understand why the government is so unwilling to deal with this problem.

...nvm, yes I do. It's because corporate America wants cheap labor, and corporate America gets what they want.

02-11-2009, 12:36 PM

I see a slippery slope among some of the vigilantes, including Barnett...perhaps you dont.

This is worth re-posting:

Quote:

You a lawyer?" he asked with a sneer. "You're full of shit. I can stop 'em out on the road if I want. Didn't you hear what Bush said? Everybody needs to be vigilant and help the homeland security. I can do whatever I want." - Roger Barnett

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feat...te/index2.html

Bullitt · 02-11-2009, 01:02 PM

What Onyxcougar said.

Also what Redux said.

I see it like this: the man has good reason to be suspicious of groups of strangers on his property due to the location of his property, past problems with trespassers, and the current violent instability across Mexico. I don't see anything wrong with what he did on his property as long as he wasn't physically abusive (beating, etc.) and immediately notified the authorities as to the situation and promptly turned the people over as they were found (all possessions, no harm done as said before, etc.). However, this is most certainly a slippery slope as evidenced by his misbehavior in this other event with a perfectly legal group of people and their actions. That article is so slanted you couldn't stand on it, but the fact remains he acted inappropriately in that situation on BLM land and should be punished for it. The man needs to learn the legal limits of dealing with these people and put that into practice. If he keeps up this overly aggressive behavior he's going to kill somebody who doesn't deserve it, and then the major shit-storm will kick up.

02-11-2009, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullitt

That article is so slanted you couldn't stand on it....

I cant argue with that...but I did like the part where 11 yr "Vanese had the deer in her crosshairs...!

sugarpop · 02-11-2009, 01:13 PM

Hell, with all the violence happening along the border because of Mexican drug cartels, and that violence slipping over the border in some cases into America, I wouldn't really have a problem with a landowner shooting someone illegally on their property, if they posed a threat. Or in containing someone at gunpoint.

lookout123 · 02-11-2009, 01:19 PM

If they enter his property he should be able to detain them with whatever means are necessary until the authorities arrive. Trying to round up people not on his property is absolutely idiotic.

glatt · 02-11-2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

Trying to round up people not on his property is absolutely idiotic.

And criminal. This asshole should be in jail.

lookout123 · 02-11-2009, 01:26 PM

He was tried for that crime and it is behind him. The current issue is whether or not he can be sued by illegals for detaining them and turning them over to authorities on his private property.

Chances are this guy is not someone I'd like very much, but that is irrelevant.

sugarpop · 02-11-2009, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

He was tried for that crime and it is behind him. The current issue is whether or not he can be sued by illegals for detaining them and turning them over to authorities on his private property.

Chances are this guy is not someone I'd like very much, but that is irrelevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Originally Posted by lookout123

Trying to round up people not on his property is absolutely idiotic.

I agree with both of those statements.

glatt · 02-11-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

He was tried for that crime and it is behind him.

It sounds from the quoted text like he was not tried for that crime. He was sued in civil court by the victims and lost. I think he should have been prosecuted in criminal court. But what do I know? I didn't Google him or anything. Just reading what's posted here.

lookout123 · 02-11-2009, 01:38 PM

fair enough glatt. I had assumed that if an actual crime was committed those people would have filed charges against him and the legal process would move on it. I'm too lazy to google the guy because it doesn't really change my opinion. asshole or not, previously should have been convicted or not, he is only being sued over this one incident on his property.

classicman · 02-11-2009, 01:57 PM

I read in one of the articles that he is leasing the Gov't land where this incident happened. Still doesn't make it right though. I would defend his right to do what is necessary to defend his property, but it seems he is going way overboard.

glatt · 02-11-2009, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman

I read in one of the articles that he is leasing the Gov't land where this incident happened. Still doesn't make it right though.

Interesting. Well, I don't know what rights a leasor of gov't lands has, but if he lost a civil suit over the incident, they apparently don't include pointing a loaded gun at someone in front of their kids and threatening to kill them.

02-11-2009, 01:02 PM	#5
Bullitt This is a fully functional babe lair Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Akron, OH Posts: 2,324	What Onyxcougar said. Also what Redux said. I see it like this: the man has good reason to be suspicious of groups of strangers on his property due to the location of his property, past problems with trespassers, and the current violent instability across Mexico. I don't see anything wrong with what he did on his property as long as he wasn't physically abusive (beating, etc.) and immediately notified the authorities as to the situation and promptly turned the people over as they were found (all possessions, no harm done as said before, etc.). However, this is most certainly a slippery slope as evidenced by his misbehavior in this other event with a perfectly legal group of people and their actions. That article is so slanted you couldn't stand on it, but the fact remains he acted inappropriately in that situation on BLM land and should be punished for it. The man needs to learn the legal limits of dealing with these people and put that into practice. If he keeps up this overly aggressive behavior he's going to kill somebody who doesn't deserve it, and then the major shit-storm will kick up. __________________ Kiss my white Irish ass.

02-11-2009, 01:19 PM	#8
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	If they enter his property he should be able to detain them with whatever means are necessary until the authorities arrive. Trying to round up people not on his property is absolutely idiotic. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

02-11-2009, 01:26 PM	#10
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	He was tried for that crime and it is behind him. The current issue is whether or not he can be sued by illegals for detaining them and turning them over to authorities on his private property. Chances are this guy is not someone I'd like very much, but that is irrelevant. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

02-11-2009, 01:38 PM	#13
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	fair enough glatt. I had assumed that if an actual crime was committed those people would have filed charges against him and the legal process would move on it. I'm too lazy to google the guy because it doesn't really change my opinion. asshole or not, previously should have been convicted or not, he is only being sued over this one incident on his property. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

02-11-2009, 01:57 PM	#14
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	I read in one of the articles that he is leasing the Gov't land where this incident happened. Still doesn't make it right though. I would defend his right to do what is necessary to defend his property, but it seems he is going way overboard. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

02-11-2009, 10:58 AM	#1
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	Roger Barnett is an asshole who belongs in jail.

02-11-2009, 12:11 PM	#3
sugarpop Professor Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: the edge of the abyss Posts: 1,947	I don't understand why the government is so unwilling to deal with this problem. ...nvm, yes I do. It's because corporate America wants cheap labor, and corporate America gets what they want.

02-11-2009, 01:13 PM	#7
sugarpop Professor Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: the edge of the abyss Posts: 1,947	Hell, with all the violence happening along the border because of Mexican drug cartels, and that violence slipping over the border in some cases into America, I wouldn't really have a problem with a landowner shooting someone illegally on their property, if they posed a threat. Or in containing someone at gunpoint.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)