U.S. jury finds rancher liable in vigilante trial - Page 5

U.S. jury finds rancher liable in vigilante trial

This is a discussion on U.S. jury finds rancher liable in vigilante trial within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Sounds like a good deal to me... Too bad the Yahoos that beleive in Atzlan dont know that......

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 111

Thread: U.S. jury finds rancher liable in vigilante trial

  1. #61
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,120
    Sounds like a good deal to me...

    Too bad the Yahoos that beleive in Atzlan dont know that...
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/


  2. #62
    VIP Member Array Spirit51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    2,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Patti View Post
    Spoken like a true anti-American with a victimhood mentality!



    HIGH FIVE, PATTI
    A woman must not depend on protection by men. A woman must learn to protect herself.
    Susan B. Anthony
    A armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one has to back it up with his life.
    Robert Heinlein

  3. #63
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,056

    Thumbs up Nice, Patti!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Patti View Post
    Oh darn.

    And here I was ready to post some historical facts about how the U.S. won the Mexican-American War, and how The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed on February 2, 1848 by American diplomat Nicholas Trist, ended the war and gave the U.S. undisputed control of Texas, established the U.S.-Mexican border of the Rio Grande River, and ceded to the United States the present-day states of California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming. In return, Mexico received US $18,250,000—less than half the amount the U.S. had attempted to offer Mexico for the land before the opening of hostilities—and the U.S. agreed to assume $3.25 million in debts that the Mexican government owed to U.S. citizens.

    Back to topic.

  4. #64
    njr
    njr is offline
    Member Array njr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    135
    So the U.S. offers 21 Mil for seven states, whose combined GDP is in the billions? What's your point? The U.S. conducted some sort of mafia business deal after it stole half of Mexico to make more room for slavery?

    See, this kind of jingoist crap is a major reason why those who have a clue about the U.S.s real role in the world, that is those who live in the big cities, flee in horror from those campaigning for ccw.

    Anyway, enjoy your provincial little towns and your [Deleted by Moderator].
    Last edited by Miggy; February 23rd, 2009 at 02:24 AM. Reason: Removing insult to members

  5. #65
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,470
    Quote Originally Posted by njr View Post
    So the U.S. offers 21 Mil for seven states, whose combined GDP is in the billions? What's your point? The U.S. conducted some sort of mafia business deal after it stole half of Mexico to make more room for slavery?

    See, this kind of jingoist crap is a major reason why those who have a clue about the U.S.s real role in the world, that is those who live in the big cities, flee in horror from those campaigning for ccw.

    Anyway, enjoy your provincial little towns and your [Deleted by Moderator].
    Huh?
    Me thinks someone has been hitting the 'kool-aid' pitcher rather heavily!...

    Stay armed...get a 'Kool-aid patch'...stay safe!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  6. #66
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,056

    No sense of historical reality

    Quote Originally Posted by njr View Post
    So the U.S. offers 21 Mil for seven states, whose combined GDP is in the billions?
    Sir, you have no sense of historical reality. At the time Mexico was paid that money, the seven states were mostly worthless desert,* and certainly not worth billions.* The Mexican government, such as it was, was no doubt happy to part with it and be done with it. It was worth what the Mexicans were willing to sell it for. Period.

    Your claim is as silly as the idea that some American Indians were cheated out of Manhattan and out of billions. At the time of the transaction, both sides were willing enough to go through with it. I think that is called matching a willing buyer with a willing seller--ah, free enterprise. You can't value the deal in today's terms--especially in the Southwest where everything was mostly unusable land-- and still is.

    We don't have little magic time machines that allow us to go back in time and have a do-over. What is, is.
    ________________________________________

    *And would still be mostly worthless desert as the Mexican government has never been able to govern in a manner that allows for economic development. Too much graft, corruption, bribery--the inheritance from, I'm sorry to say, the Spanish culture. It is that way everywhere the Spaniards ruled.

  7. #67
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    11,215
    Quote Originally Posted by njr View Post
    See, this kind of jingoist crap is a major reason why those who have a clue about the U.S.s real role in the world, that is those who live in the big cities, flee in horror from those campaigning for ccw.

    Anyway, enjoy your provincial little towns and your [Deleted by Moderator].
    Sure, sure... and this is why bordering Mexican states whined about Arizona's anti-illegal immigrant laws? How they can't support the illegals we deport back to them? Gee, what would happen if Mexico tried growing its OWN economy? Mexico's GDP would decrease by a third to a half if the illegals here stopped sending US dollars home. And maybe you can explain how Mexico squandered the profits from its own oil industry?

  8. #68
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,917
    Quote Originally Posted by stormbringerr View Post
    maybe they hopped the fence to go burglarize someone further along.or sell their drugs further inland.
    are we allowed to protect our borders or not...has to start somewhere. sheeees. anyone can see this
    Then change the law so that you can detain people at gunpoint for trespassing. As I said in an earlier post, this is an issue for the people of the State. If they want their citizens to be able to detain people at gunpoint for trespassing, or suspected illegal immigration, or whatever they want to call it, the only thing stopping them is their own laws.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  9. #69
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    The Federal Government is refusing to protect the borders. If they did their job ordinary citizens would not be in the position they are in today.
    This is no different than disarming honest citizens and then saying they have no obligation to protect you.

    Michael

  10. #70
    Member Array M1911A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Washington State
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    ...Too much graft, corruption, bribery--the inheritance from, I'm sorry to say, the Spanish culture. It is that way everywhere the Spaniards ruled.
    ...Except, maybe, Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile.
    Steve
    Retired Leathersmith and Practical Shooter

    "Qui desiderat pacem, præparet bellum."

  11. #71
    VIP Member
    Array Miggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Miami-Dade, FL
    Posts
    6,258
    Quote Originally Posted by M1911A1 View Post
    ...Except, maybe, Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile.
    You must be jesting sir
    You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
    Randy Cain.

    Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
    Signed: Me!

  12. #72
    VIP Member Array LongRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,621
    Quote Originally Posted by njr View Post
    comrade
    comrade? Really? Comrade?

    Quote Originally Posted by matiki View Post
    Then change the law so that you can detain people at gunpoint for trespassing. As I said in an earlier post, this is an issue for the people of the State. If they want their citizens to be able to detain people at gunpoint for trespassing, or suspected illegal immigration, or whatever they want to call it, the only thing stopping them is their own laws.
    I agree with you, we really need to revise our laws dealing illegal immigrants, but my guess is that it is already legal to detain a trespasser at gun point in Arizona. I know it is in our state. I can not imagine that AZ is a great deal more restrictive than WA. Maybe some one from AZ can clarify this point by posting your lethal force law along with a link for the doubters.
    WA law says

    RCW 9A.16.020
    Use of force — When lawful.


    The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:

    (1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;

    (2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;

    (3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;
    ,
    (4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public
    Abort the Obamanation not the Constitution

    Those who would, deny, require permit, license, certification, or authorization for me to bear arms are as vile, dangerous & evil as those who would molest, abuse, assault, rape or murder my family

  13. #73
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,056

    Maybe

    Quote Originally Posted by M1911A1 View Post
    ...Except, maybe, Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile.
    Maybe. But these have, as all of Latin America, recently just recovered from the worst sorts of dictatorships.

    Add to my list, The Philippines as well, which never recovered from Spanish rule even with the benefit of US and (in some way re. efficiency) Japanese occupation.

    All the more pity because Mexico in particular could be a wealthy country. It has beautiful coasts, mountains, natural resources. It has Mexico city which in some ways rivals NYC and could be made to actually work for the rest of the country. It has proximity to the US and Canada. What it lacks is a willingness of the ultrawealthy to manage the economy in an equitable fashion, and an inability of government to operate without the shmear.

  14. #74
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,917
    Quote Originally Posted by LongRider View Post
    comrade? Really? Comrade?


    I agree with you, we really need to revise our laws dealing illegal immigrants, but my guess is that it is already legal to detain a trespasser at gun point in Arizona. I know it is in our state. I can not imagine that AZ is a great deal more restrictive than WA. Maybe some one from AZ can clarify this point by posting your lethal force law along with a link for the doubters.
    WA law says
    In WA they must be maliciously trespassing for you to use reasonable force to detain them - walking through is not malicious.

    They'd have to be committing the trespass in an effort to commit some other crime against the rancher or his property - like vandalism, breaking and entering, theft of livestock, etc.

    And reasonable force is not automatically the threat of deadly force, as this particular rancher has now been successfully sued for doing (twice, including one group of hunters that were not illegal immigrants).
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  15. #75
    Member Array bbernard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Fort Myers, FL
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by matiki View Post
    In WA they must be maliciously trespassing for you to use reasonable force to detain them - walking through is not malicious.

    They'd have to be committing the trespass in an effort to commit some other crime against the rancher or his property - like vandalism, breaking and entering, theft of livestock, etc.

    And reasonable force is not automatically the threat of deadly force, as this particular rancher has now been successfully sued for doing (twice, including one group of hunters that were not illegal immigrants).
    Matiki,

    Here is the Arizona Statute currently on the books....

    13-407. Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises

    A. A person or his agent in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in threatening to use deadly physical force or in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent that a reasonable person would believe it immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises.

    B. A person may use deadly physical force under subsection A only in the defense of himself or third persons as described in sections 13-405 and 13-406.

    C. In this section, "premises" means any real property and any structure, movable or immovable, permanent or temporary, adapted for both human residence and lodging whether occupied or not.

    What say you now?????

    It looks like he will have an excellent case for appeal....

    You my friend, are in the wrong on this case.

    Illegal Aliens crossing the border illegally are in the act of "criminal trespass" both against the USA and the US citizen.

    Have you seen the heeps of trash these people are leaving on the property? What say you about his lost wages due to the "illegals" cutting the barbed wire on his fences and the cattle getting loose?

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Jury now deliberating in James Menard trial
    By rigel42 in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: January 16th, 2011, 02:10 PM
  2. Armed Citizen: Grand jury finds woman justifiably killed intruder
    By mrreynolds in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 12th, 2010, 09:53 PM
  3. Trial by Jury & Jury Nulification -- Poll
    By DaveH in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: June 9th, 2008, 09:57 PM
  4. Jury finds defendant guilty of first-degree murder
    By socuban in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 6th, 2008, 10:58 PM
  5. Jury finds Couey guilty on all charges in the murder of Jessica Lunsford
    By MattInFla in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: March 9th, 2007, 12:05 AM

Search tags for this page

can you detain a trespasser at gunpoint in washington state

,

evans matiki

,

jury finds third parties responsible but not liable in texas cases

Click on a term to search for related topics.