http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/19/national/19ranch.html?ei=5090&en=d9c2a3cd4e97d231&ex=1282104000&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
2006-09-10 07:30:10 · 11 answers · asked by jgmcs 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
no, the illegals need to be in prison
2006-09-10 07:35:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
This scenario says it all. What is going on in the USA currently really is a travesty against justice and to a degree against common sense.
Property owners no longer have the right to defend their property apparently.
It is hard to say really if the decission is just in the sense that all the details of the trial and circumstance are not known. However, to award an individual who is breaking the law such an award sends a pretty loud and clear message to any Americans. That is: It's OK to break the law as a non American who has nothing to lose and perhaps much to gain but if you are an American citizen, you will be held to full account for the laws of our country.
It is a double standard that signals equality and justice for all is no longer in place.
I don't agree with physical violence in such matters except to defend one's self and property. I don't think the pistol whipping was right at all but the award given as punisment was extreme to my way of thinking, given that the two illegals were trespassing on private property, breaking Federal and State immigration laws and should certainly now be prosecuted for that so that these new found riches at the expense of a somewhat overzealous, violent ex felon be mitigated to a more even justice. If there really is any justice left, these two illegals should be pursued by our Federal and State governments for compensation for their crimes of illegality against our country, now that they have tangible assets in this country. Fairs's fair.
Let's face it folks. In the USA, it's all about money. If you have no money, you can get away with murder. If you have assets to garner, you better mind your P's and Q's.
2006-09-10 08:28:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
They didn't deserve the land if that's what you mean. They should have only been granted American Citizenship. People have to understand that not everybody was privileged and born in the "land of the free" and that immigrants are not here to take over the U.S., but to get better lives and help their children have better opportunities in life and a better education. Imagine if the U.S. was a third-world country and Mexico was a thriving country. Wouldn't you want freedom and a better life? Wouldn't you jump a fence to have a chance at a better life? I see nothing wrong with the immigrants coming over and receiving U.S. Citizenship and these two immigrants did nothing wrong. They did not have drugs, they did not have weapons so they had every right to come here. But to win that land was perhaps too much and the fact that their selling it shows they did not intend to take it. It was just a perk because the American tried to give it to his sister so he wouldn't lose it and in giving to his sister, he lost it. (Talk about Ironic.) In short, the immigrants rights were violated when they were held captive for an hour, assaulted and then released. But perhaps the Judge's decision to award them that ranch was a little too much.
2006-09-10 07:46:20 · answer #3 · answered by Simply Put 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think as long as we have pro-illegal policies in our government, we'll continue to see disenfranchised americans. This is the 21st century, if we can take pictures of Pluto, and protect North Korea from South Korea or vice versa, then in theory at least we should be able to prevent illegal immigration across the US/Mexico border. The missing 'componement' is the backing for that from Washington, I believe...as long as the bleeding-heart/business coalition holds sway over our legislative process, the border will remain unsecured, and soap-opera segments such as that one will be repeated....I don't necessarily like a lot of rednecks, some of them can be pretty ornery and abrasive, but at the same time, they developed the land, they paid for the land, likely paid property taxes on the land, etc etc etc. I don't think what they did was right, we don't need violent militias, but we DO need the border patrolled, and effectively secured to prevent what amounts to a mexican human wave from moving north en masse. I don't know, maybe the whole thing's a power play, Bush and friends felt their oil franchise was in jeopardy, now they're taking it out on the whole country, I don't know, but I DO wish that we were seeing those extra border patrolmen like they said there was going to be, along with a physical barrier that will deny people easy access to our country. Mexico's got serious problems, and you have to ask yourself if you want to see those problems in OUR country, or if there's maybe a more enlightened way to help them out, that is, if they genuinely NEED and will ACCEPT help. People gotta wanna change, and if they don't wanna, and all they wanna do is move to 'el norte' where the streets are 'paved with gold' or whatever, then it's up to the voters, actual american citizens, to decide if we want to allow that to happen. All that has to happen for Mexico to move north is for 280 million US citizens to let it happen. And, it's not one of those things that can be undone once it's done. So, question is, do we want an effective annexation of Mexico? IS that maybe the PLAN, here? Hmmm....lots to think about, decisions, decisions...
2006-09-10 07:42:01 · answer #4 · answered by gokart121 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Illegals HAVE NO RIGHTS TO ANYTHING IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!
Rights are for citizens not anyone who crawls over our borders illegally!! As Carlos Mencia would say: "Dee Dee Dee! You have won the Mencia Dee Dee Dee award of the week! Congrads!!
2006-09-10 14:55:48 · answer #5 · answered by Island Queen 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I did not follow the link you provided. The information in your question was enough already. Being they are illegal they have no rights. Period. Their rights are in their home country, not in this country where they came to illegally. Let them go home and re-inter this country legally, then they will have rights here.
2006-09-10 07:46:39 · answer #6 · answered by swm_seeks_sf 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Uhm, no. I believe the American people were violated by these two illegal aliens.
2006-09-10 07:46:19 · answer #7 · answered by Cherie 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
if they would have shot them instead of just hitting them with a pistol everything would have been fine . i am going to mexico to see if i can get some free land for breaking the law
2006-09-10 07:36:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Illegal = illegal - they shouldn't be here, therefor should have no rights.
2006-09-10 07:41:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
No, they were not violated... And why can they get AMERICAN property when they are not even CITIZENS!!!
2006-09-10 07:41:47 · answer #10 · answered by niknikki86 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋