Returned from Border watch with Minutemen...
- Thread starter azredhawk44
- Start date
- Status
Your post insinuates -- more so specifically states -- you would be in jail for murdering people coming across the border, if you in fact lived in a border state.
Please tell me there's no need to explain further.
I understand being angered by illegal immigration. I'm as angered as any one of you.
But I don't understand talking <foolishly> especially when collectively we share the same voice in the eyes of some.
What does your post say about you? What does your post say about us as 2A supporters and gun owners?
Please tell me there's no need to explain further.
I understand being angered by illegal immigration. I'm as angered as any one of you.
But I don't understand talking <foolishly> especially when collectively we share the same voice in the eyes of some.
What does your post say about you? What does your post say about us as 2A supporters and gun owners?
Last edited:
1911 guy
Member
Can I agree and disagree at the same time?
I gotta side with Trip 20 on this one. While he and I might not agree about the eventual outcome of the situation, we're not to the skull poppin' stage yet. Hopefully, somebody somewhere with some legislative authority will come through and we won't get there at all.
I gotta side with Trip 20 on this one. While he and I might not agree about the eventual outcome of the situation, we're not to the skull poppin' stage yet. Hopefully, somebody somewhere with some legislative authority will come through and we won't get there at all.
1911 guy
Member
My opinion on justified violence.
Violence is justified if:
1) My government tells me to (I'm former military, so this one doesn't apply to me anymore).
2) I or someone else is threatened with bodily harm through no fault of their own (if you put yourself in a pickle on purpose, take your lumps).
3) Our society demands it to preserve itself. While there is a strong felling that something needs to be done, society at large is not willing to condone violence yet. I fear that day is coming, hope it does not.
Violence is justified if:
1) My government tells me to (I'm former military, so this one doesn't apply to me anymore).
2) I or someone else is threatened with bodily harm through no fault of their own (if you put yourself in a pickle on purpose, take your lumps).
3) Our society demands it to preserve itself. While there is a strong felling that something needs to be done, society at large is not willing to condone violence yet. I fear that day is coming, hope it does not.
Oh, I figure it's coming. There will likely be a civil conflict, some say there already is one that isn't being reported. The amnesty currently being pushed through the Senate may well be the spark that lights the fuse for one or both sides.
If the pols won't listen to American citizens and sell us out to a foreign country, there will be fighting in the streets. You folks in the border states are going to bear the brunt of it, but it's spreading across the country.
Biker
If the pols won't listen to American citizens and sell us out to a foreign country, there will be fighting in the streets. You folks in the border states are going to bear the brunt of it, but it's spreading across the country.
Biker
[Rant on]
This is a crucial fact that I think many citizens have failed to get a grip on, although I think more and more are catching on. The Border Patrol is not supposed to stop the flood of illegals. They are just window dressing to make gullible voters think that something is actually being done. (Not the policy of the agents -- this is way above their pay grade.)
Our 'government', BOTH PARTIES, has no desire to change the status quo, they like it just the way it is.
Because of self interest on both sides of the political spectrum, and large amounts of money, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats want the flow of illegals to stop.
Left to themselves, they would not even be talking about this. However, because something like 80% of the population is alarmed at the illegal immigration problem, they are making noises in Washington like they care.
However, the bills with any chance at all to get passed would change nothing, keeping the border open for continued illegal immigration.
The key here is 'illegal' immigration. By promoting illegal immigration, business can hire good workers without having to deal with minimum wage laws, health insurance, SS, FICA, etc. etc. etc. Business makes big bucks this way, and by "solving' the illegal immigration problem politicians would kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
Watch -- if any "Reform" bill comes out of congress, it will be structured in such a way as to make sure that the flood of illegal labor continues, not matter what it may do for 'amnesty' or other issues. After all, if you bring in the illegals and make them legal, they no longer are availble for illegal exploitation, right? So you must then bring in more people who will take their place in the illegal labor pool.
I see no way for this to be stopped -- too much money and power at stake. Our politicians will absolutely NOT pay any attention to the voters on this one, except to con us.
[Rant off]
BTW -- I don't blame the Latin/Mexican illegals for any of this. If I was stuck in poverty in those countries, I would also make my way to the U.S. as fast as I could.
This is a crucial fact that I think many citizens have failed to get a grip on, although I think more and more are catching on. The Border Patrol is not supposed to stop the flood of illegals. They are just window dressing to make gullible voters think that something is actually being done. (Not the policy of the agents -- this is way above their pay grade.)
Our 'government', BOTH PARTIES, has no desire to change the status quo, they like it just the way it is.
Because of self interest on both sides of the political spectrum, and large amounts of money, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats want the flow of illegals to stop.
Left to themselves, they would not even be talking about this. However, because something like 80% of the population is alarmed at the illegal immigration problem, they are making noises in Washington like they care.
However, the bills with any chance at all to get passed would change nothing, keeping the border open for continued illegal immigration.
The key here is 'illegal' immigration. By promoting illegal immigration, business can hire good workers without having to deal with minimum wage laws, health insurance, SS, FICA, etc. etc. etc. Business makes big bucks this way, and by "solving' the illegal immigration problem politicians would kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
Watch -- if any "Reform" bill comes out of congress, it will be structured in such a way as to make sure that the flood of illegal labor continues, not matter what it may do for 'amnesty' or other issues. After all, if you bring in the illegals and make them legal, they no longer are availble for illegal exploitation, right? So you must then bring in more people who will take their place in the illegal labor pool.
I see no way for this to be stopped -- too much money and power at stake. Our politicians will absolutely NOT pay any attention to the voters on this one, except to con us.
[Rant off]
BTW -- I don't blame the Latin/Mexican illegals for any of this. If I was stuck in poverty in those countries, I would also make my way to the U.S. as fast as I could.
Dave Markowitz
Member
azredhawk44, thank you for your service.
I weep for the future of my country, and fear for my childrens' tomorrows.
I weep for the future of my country, and fear for my childrens' tomorrows.
RE: Not helping the AGENT!!!
I don't get it. What the hell does the ACLU have to do with not helping an injured man in the desert regardless of whether or not he is a border patrol agent?
What logical reason could there be for not helping the agent into his truck. What logical reason could there be for not touching him at all?
I suppose if he was laying there with a broken leg and a complex fracture bleeding to death you'd just have brought his truck and left him to his own devices to get in and drive to the hospital.
Why the STUPID rule?
I don't get it. What the hell does the ACLU have to do with not helping an injured man in the desert regardless of whether or not he is a border patrol agent?
What logical reason could there be for not helping the agent into his truck. What logical reason could there be for not touching him at all?
I suppose if he was laying there with a broken leg and a complex fracture bleeding to death you'd just have brought his truck and left him to his own devices to get in and drive to the hospital.
Why the STUPID rule?
utahminirevolver
Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2003
- Messages
- 182
Sanjuro +1
I remember President Jimmy Carter saying that Mexico was so far from God and too close to the United States. Even though he was smiling and presumably joking, and I considered Carter a fellow Christian, I didn't quite like that anti-American tone.
Since then, my opinion of Carter's treasonous actions and words on many occasions has become much worse. But he's just one of the many in our suicidal elite who have given us such things as open borders, the loss in Vietnam, political 'correctness', all kinds of aid and comfort to our enemies, the encouragement of perversity, the mollycoddling of criminals, the wasting of taxpayer dollars, and generally anything to try to destroy America.
Sorry about the rant. Brave Minutemen out there helping to defend our borders is cause for optimism.
I remember President Jimmy Carter saying that Mexico was so far from God and too close to the United States. Even though he was smiling and presumably joking, and I considered Carter a fellow Christian, I didn't quite like that anti-American tone.
Since then, my opinion of Carter's treasonous actions and words on many occasions has become much worse. But he's just one of the many in our suicidal elite who have given us such things as open borders, the loss in Vietnam, political 'correctness', all kinds of aid and comfort to our enemies, the encouragement of perversity, the mollycoddling of criminals, the wasting of taxpayer dollars, and generally anything to try to destroy America.
Sorry about the rant. Brave Minutemen out there helping to defend our borders is cause for optimism.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
coat4gun, whether you know it or not, you're twisting the meaning of "foreign invasion". From the standpoint of an armed response by any citizen or official group, you're using the phrase as though these border-jumpers were armed and coming with hostile intent toward the U.S. as a nation.
The real-world aspect from the standpoint of punishment for what border-jumpers are doing is akin to "trespass". Trespass does not carry a death penalty, at least not this side of the old USSR.
Only after (or within the appearance of "imminent") physical action of a criminal nature is directed against person or property can any response be made beyond informing the authorities.
I suggest that learning this difference will keep you from looking foolish. It will certainly keep you out of trouble.
Art
The real-world aspect from the standpoint of punishment for what border-jumpers are doing is akin to "trespass". Trespass does not carry a death penalty, at least not this side of the old USSR.
Only after (or within the appearance of "imminent") physical action of a criminal nature is directed against person or property can any response be made beyond informing the authorities.
I suggest that learning this difference will keep you from looking foolish. It will certainly keep you out of trouble.
Art
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
LAR-15, so am I. Until I actually threaten somebody...
Until that armed border-jumper manifests himself as a threat, the laws as written speak to such things as "Illegal possession", etc. No death penalty for that.
Nowhere is it written that a prson should not be cautious and prepared to deal with violence. But, that's a self-defense issue. What we're drifting into, here, is how one deals with somebody who's trespassing, and whose most usual criminal act after the trespass is littering.
Frankly, my problem with these threads is the shortage of thinking and the surplus of emoting.
So I'll drift and spout for a moment:
The US has an aging population and a shortage of younger people in a growing job market. We create about 2.5 million or so new jobs per year; sometimes more. We have some one million legal immigrants per year coming in. There is thus a demand for labor beyond what we can legally process. (Sure, we have native-born. We also have retirees, remember?)
Mexico has the opposite problem. Due to their Socialism and chauvinistic socio-economic system, they are not creating jobs as fast as they are creating people.
Our legal structure and budgets cannot deal with the resulting problem. The only solution is to get action from Congress. Due to the politics of all this mess, nothing meaningful has been done over the last thirty years of development of today's problems. It is quite probable that--again, due to politics--little worthwhile legislation will be done.
For anything meaningful to occur, pressure must be kept upon the Congress and the Administration. The Minutement help by the publicity they create. Others must do the usual phoning and writing to all the political types whose addresses and phone numbers they can find.
But advocating that folks sit out in the boonies and go to shooting is somewhere down towards total stoopid.
Art
Until that armed border-jumper manifests himself as a threat, the laws as written speak to such things as "Illegal possession", etc. No death penalty for that.
Nowhere is it written that a prson should not be cautious and prepared to deal with violence. But, that's a self-defense issue. What we're drifting into, here, is how one deals with somebody who's trespassing, and whose most usual criminal act after the trespass is littering.
Frankly, my problem with these threads is the shortage of thinking and the surplus of emoting.
So I'll drift and spout for a moment:
The US has an aging population and a shortage of younger people in a growing job market. We create about 2.5 million or so new jobs per year; sometimes more. We have some one million legal immigrants per year coming in. There is thus a demand for labor beyond what we can legally process. (Sure, we have native-born. We also have retirees, remember?)
Mexico has the opposite problem. Due to their Socialism and chauvinistic socio-economic system, they are not creating jobs as fast as they are creating people.
Our legal structure and budgets cannot deal with the resulting problem. The only solution is to get action from Congress. Due to the politics of all this mess, nothing meaningful has been done over the last thirty years of development of today's problems. It is quite probable that--again, due to politics--little worthwhile legislation will be done.
For anything meaningful to occur, pressure must be kept upon the Congress and the Administration. The Minutement help by the publicity they create. Others must do the usual phoning and writing to all the political types whose addresses and phone numbers they can find.
But advocating that folks sit out in the boonies and go to shooting is somewhere down towards total stoopid.
Art
TX35
Member
Heck I remember the old signs all over fences of my hunting spots (neighboring lands) of TRESSPASSSERS WILL BE SHOT. What's wrong with that now???
sturmruger
Member
That is really scary!! I can only imagine the huge amount of drugs that are coming via the border. I am sure only 2-3% of the border crossers are drug runners, but it sounds like they have plenty of room to sneak in. This is so frustrating!!
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
No, LAR. "Illegally-armed trespasser", from a legal standpoint--and we're stuck with the laws as written, like them or not.
Now, with Arizona being an open-carry state, I'm not even sure if that trespasser is "illegally armed". That would depend on US and Arizona laws about non-citizens and firearms. If he can get a Green Card before he gets caught, he's golden.
Wacky world, ain't it?
, Art
Now, with Arizona being an open-carry state, I'm not even sure if that trespasser is "illegally armed". That would depend on US and Arizona laws about non-citizens and firearms. If he can get a Green Card before he gets caught, he's golden.
Wacky world, ain't it?
, ArtDaniel T
Member
Scary sign and all, but it wasn't legal then, and it isn't legal now. Not in Texas anyhow.
azredhawk44
Member
Werewolf:
We had a pretty thorough discussion about this as it was happening. If he were more injured than he was (it was a sprain or torn ligament... he was still walking, just in pain), we would have gladly intervened and either carried him, loaded him in one of our trucks, or whatever was necessary to save him. He was in pain, but still wanted to bring in his illegal catch. In order to help him in this situation, we would be on film, driving a BP vehicle marked with government plates, to a BP agent in the field who is detaining an illegal. We would have gotten out of the truck, handed the keys to the agent, and he would have put his dog in the truck and the illegal in the cage in the back.
We would have been on film with the ACLU, assisting in a means we weren't authorized to do. That would open up the Minutemen to civil lawsuits or even prosecution by our wonderful presidente, Jorge Bush. I don't believe that agent really can authorize us to assist in an arrest. He does not have deputization powers.
Were he to have broken bones, or bullet wounds, or oozing blood somehow, or unconscious, there would have been no hesitation and he would have been in a hospital as fast as my truck or any other minuteman's truck can manage 100mph on those roads. But he was rational and still empowered to do his job, just with discomfort and pain.
Just realize how litigious the ACLU is, and how they are drooling for any opportunity to hurt the minutemen.
Hope that helps explain the situation.
Waywardmonk
Member
Here's a tricky one for you, unlikely? maybe but so was 9/11, you're doing your one or two nights of Minuteman duty when you hear voices speaking but not spanish, sounds a lot like a middle eastern dialect just like those folks we see on tv everyday for the past few years. You spot 'em with the night scope and they don't quite look like the other border crossers you have seen. Your call to BP goes unanswered because they are conducting a big operation 50 miles south. You light them up with a spotlight and they start running, their hands appear empty however yours is holding your scoped rifle...
ART-
It is true that several illegals only want jobs,. (and free health care, and benifits and free education for their kids, and a car, etc)
I personally don't fault them for that, but I have a few problems with the method. 1. Several are criminals Ie. drug mules runners etc. 2. If they come into the states to live and work etc. They need to integrate (learn the language learn the rules etc.) Just take a look at France to see what happens when you let massive amounts of people come in without integrating for the sake of "Diversity".
3. (this is the big one) The U.S. does not need to be the bleed off valve for Mexicos failed government. The longer we allow them into the States, the longer Fox and friends get away with being a bunch fo Corrupt S****bags. Mexico needs to boil over.. The more time we spend absorbing Mexico's problems the worse off we'll be when it's all over.
4. While I don't condone shooting aliens, I wouldn't loose too much sleep if some of the larger Armed groups (drug runners etc.) ended up as buzzard meat. There is a big difference between shooting unarmed people and defending the border from armed insurgents and criminals, despite what the ACLU might tell you.
It is true that several illegals only want jobs,. (and free health care, and benifits and free education for their kids, and a car, etc)
I personally don't fault them for that, but I have a few problems with the method. 1. Several are criminals Ie. drug mules runners etc. 2. If they come into the states to live and work etc. They need to integrate (learn the language learn the rules etc.) Just take a look at France to see what happens when you let massive amounts of people come in without integrating for the sake of "Diversity".
3. (this is the big one) The U.S. does not need to be the bleed off valve for Mexicos failed government. The longer we allow them into the States, the longer Fox and friends get away with being a bunch fo Corrupt S****bags. Mexico needs to boil over.. The more time we spend absorbing Mexico's problems the worse off we'll be when it's all over.
4. While I don't condone shooting aliens, I wouldn't loose too much sleep if some of the larger Armed groups (drug runners etc.) ended up as buzzard meat. There is a big difference between shooting unarmed people and defending the border from armed insurgents and criminals, despite what the ACLU might tell you.
seeker_two
Member
spartacus2002 said:
Already being done....
...unfortunately, all the bullets seem to be traveling from south to NORTH...
Art Eatman said:
...and just when IS it OK to shoot, then?
TX35
Member
Very true, but it also kept me from jumping that fence too!!!!!
- Status
