9th Circus: Rancher must pay invaders

| February 15, 2011

ROS sent us this link to Fox News about an Arizona rancher, Roger Barnett, who has to pay “damages”, amounting to $87,000, to 16 illegal immigrants who he detained on his own property at gun point;

The incident occurred in March 2004 when the gun-toting Barnett detained a group of 16 unauthorized immigrants — none of them carrying weapons — on public land near the border town of Douglas, Arizona.

He held the group captive with threats that his dog would attack them if anyone moved or tried to escape. Barnett also kicked an woman while she was on the ground.

So, it looks like that not only are we supposed to scoot over to make room for these criminals, now we have to give them seed money to start their new life among us?

If you feel the need, you can contribute to Roger’s defense fund here.

Category: Illegal Immigrants

9 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Marine 83

Hmmm, might or might not be deserving of support. If he detained thm on his private property then more power to him. However, the article states he detained them on public land, in which case ya pays your money and ya takes your chances. The last paragraph indicates he has also been sued for detaining American citizens hunting on state land, not cool. Seems there is more to this one than meets the eye.

Doc Bailey

I hate to agree. On the surface this looks ridiculous, but the description of him sounds like he’s a vigilante. Still, I find it deplorable that this MIGHT be a political stunt.

Jacobite

Here’s a link to a more Barnett friendly version of the event in 2004 and the original ruling in 2009.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.2610/pub_detail.asp

Frankly I don’t care how you interpret either side’s story, the central issue here is still illegal trespassers on American soil.

Over the years it’s estimated Barnett has turned in over 12,000 illegals, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that during that time he has occasionally been off his ranch when he has called in an invasion attempt. Should it really be a crime worthy of punishment to hold CRIMINALS at gunpoint while waiting for law enforcement to come get them, whether he’s on his own land or not?
For pete’s sake, they’ve slowly been turning his 35 square mile ranch into a 35 square mile dump, and he’s had to devote over 100 days a year to nothing more than repairing the damage the illegals do to his fences and watering systems. I personally can not imagine putting up with what he has over the years and keeping my cool. I’m surprised there isn’t a stack of bodies at every common illegal entrance point to his ranch reminiscent of Vlad the Impaler.

I’m MORE THAN happy to support this man, and any other person or group doing something REAL to staunch the flow of illegals into our country.

ROS

Christ, I hate agreeing with the Italian.

Post #3 sums it up for me.

PintoNag

If that man didn’t torture, maim, or kill anyone, no American judge should rule over an American citizen in favor of an illegal — because INVADERS is exactly what they are.

Stonewall116

I have to agree with Jacobite. The guy is turning in law-breaking people. That makes them criminals and criminals should be punished. Personally, I wish we had more folks like him that would stand up for the law.

AW1 Tim

I think that what this ruling REALLY says to Americans is that, if you find yourself in this sort of a situation, just don’t leave any witnesses.

This IS a national defense issue, and there is NO legal reason why United States troops cannot be employed to halt this invasion.

USMC Steve

If I understand it correctly, it is Federal law as well as state law in many states that criminals cannot benefit from their criminal actions. They were illegally infiltrating into the US from a foreign country, and detained as a direct result of their illegal actions. They should be barred from recovery of anything other than a free ticket to Mexico.

But, he really should just have capped all of the fuckers and been done with it.

B Woodman

Thank you, #7 & #8,
I was just thinking that.
Next time, leave no witnesses.
Dead men tell no tales.
Especially after their bodies and bones have been scattered by the predators and bleached by the weather.
And use a suppressor. Less noise to bother the neighbors with. Gotta keep on the inside with the neighbors, don’t’cha’know.

And as for the ruling, I’m not surprised. After all, it IS the 9th Circuit, the most liberal and overturned Court of Appeals evah.