HomeFeaturesDailyBriefingsRapidReconSpecial ReportsAbout Us

Illegal Immigration and the Border of the Ridiculous

The lack of security on our border with Mexico is so lax that the situation now borders on the ridiculous. Roger Barnett owns 22,000 acres (35 square miles) along the border in southeastern Arizona. He is now being sued for defending his property.

This subject was brought to my attention this morning at a meeting of security professionals (Infragard). The source was unquestionably credible. The subject was still unimaginable and almost nonsensical until I realized that it was true. You see, Barnett is being sued by 16 illegal immigrants who attempted to cross his land. When he intercepted them, he detained them (at gun point) until Border Patrol agents could arrive,

Our southern border is so out of control you can now be sued by those illegally entering the country and trespassing on your property. Illegal aliens, it seems, have a right to interstate travel.

Apparently, the illegal immigrants and their lawyers are claiming that because Barnett failed to inform them that they were trespassing on his land, and that while holding them at gunpoint, he also threatened to release his big dog, and that he would shoot any of them that tried to escape.

The immigrants are represented at trial by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which also charged that Sheriff Dever did nothing to prevent Mr. Barnett from holding their clients at "gunpoint, yelling obscenities at them and kicking one of the women." In the lawsuit, MALDEF said Mr. Barnett approached the group as the immigrants moved through his property, and that he was carrying a pistol and threatening them in English and Spanish. At one point, it said, Mr. Barnett's dog barked at several of the women and he yelled at them in Spanish...

This law suit goes back to an incident that occurred on March 7, 2004. The suit has been upheld by a U.S. District Judge, John Roll who refused to dismiss it. And yes, I fully realize that this situation is a function of the courts and lawyers, and not the actions of the illegal immigrants.

However, the Mexican government is on the verge of collapse, the economic spread between the wealthy and the poor in Mexico continues to grow wider, and yet, apparently, people who have entered this country illegally, still have the rights of free passage across private property. Change? I'd like to see a change that I can believe in with stricter enforcement of our immigration laws and security at the border.


I thought the whole point of the second amendment was so that people could protect their property from trespassers. Has this judge not analyzed the constitution? Never mind the fact that these people were trying to enter America illegally?

Well, Jake, it appears that MALDEF held sway over U.S. District Judge John Roll. I suppose they could be arguing that he didn't have enough signs posted that said PRIVATE PROPERTY. Or maybe that Mr. Barnett screamed at them in Spanish that "his dog was hungry."

The legal system that allows such suits (including the lawyers and judges) is the problem here, however, IMO. Personally, I also have issue with the concept of rights for people who have crossed the border illegally.

Technically the 2nd Amendment doesn't really do what you said, but here isn't the place to debate that.

A comment was made that suggested that more "Do Not Tresspass" signs would enable a "point and shoot" mentality.

However, while I hesitate to debate the 2nd Amendment, it should be noted that as the U.S. is a federal republic, that while states' rights are important, so was the preservation of the central federal government. In some interpretations, therefore, the need for a "well regulated militia."

Thus, from Findlaw.com

Leave a comment