How in the hell are the "Minutemen" allowed to do what they are doing?

The federal government is in essence allowing RW nutjobs in conjunction with white supremacists to run around the southwest declaring open hunting season on people!!! How many people are going to have to die before these lunatics stopped? This whole thing reminds me of the short story "The Most Dangerous Game" where the hunter grows tired of hunting animals and begins hunting people.

And furthermore, how dare they take the name Minutemen?!? This whole situation is just wrong!

and thats a matter of when not if

they aren't there to shoot anyone. As weird as these people are, they are being watched by the FBI, The ACLU and tons of other groups 24/7.
If they murder someone, their cause is ruined.

The assumption that somebody WILL get shot no matter what is false on its face.

This is not a nation where people are imprisoned because fo crimes they MIGHT commit. That was common in Nazi Germany and the Stalinist Soviet Union, but we are free here.

I don't think anybody should be arrested until they break a law. But that doesn't change the fact that this kind of movement *always* gets out of hand. It's just a matter of time.

They are free to pursue this if they choose, but it's a fiasco waiting to happen.

Sorry, but that argument does not hold water. You've stated emphatically that this will ALWAYS lead to violence and that statement is false on its face.

No prediction is logically certain until it happens.

I'm saying it's pragmatically certain. Even though it's technically possible that nobody will get killed from this, it won't turn out that way.

If you believe otherwise, I can't logically prove you wrong. But events will prove you wrong.

It simply will not happen because they know it would destroy their cause if it DID happen.

All I see is a recipe for disaster: A bunch of vigilantes, many carrying guns, on the border between two countries, out looking for illegal immigrants, some of whom are escorted by Coyotes, who are also carrying guns (and who aren't motivated to avoid using them).

Somebody's going to have an encounter, and things will get out of hand. In the heat of the moment, nobody is going to be strategizing about "damaging the cause", they are going to be in fight-or-flight mode.

And that's making the generous assumption that all of the Minutemen remain genuinely committed to non-violence. How long do you think it will be before the racist nut-cases show up? In fact, I saw on the local news that some of them are already showing up. The founder of the Minutemen is committed to keeping these people out, but nobody bats 1000, no matter how good their intentions.

Another scenario is that the racist-nutcase faction will simply form their own splinter group, if they lose patience with the whole "non-violence" inconvenience.

dupe

there would be pograms timed to the release of "The Passion of the Christ"

In my view of human nature, those two examples aren't very comparable. Releasing a movie is not sufficient to instigate a pogrom. Sounds like an urban legend.

On the other hand, groups of vigilantes with guns, in a tense environment, is more than sufficient to instigate a gun-fight.

Violence against Jews was widely predicted as a reaction to the releasing of Passion. Sort of the white racist fat, beer driniking trigger happy old minuteman meme now going around

And not just at DU:

ex:

http://passion-movie.gnfi.org/html/anti-semitism.html

I asked Foxman if he believed that Gibson was an anti-Semite. “Per se, I don't think that Mel Gibson is anti-Semitic,” Foxman said. “I think that he is insensitive.”

But what of “The Passion of the Christ” itself, I asked. Is the film anti-Semitic? “The film, per se, is not anti-Semitic,” Foxman said. The problem, he added, was that, as with any literal reading of the New Testament, its message of love could be twisted into something hateful. “The film can fuel, trigger, stimulate, induce, rationalize, legitimize anti-Semitism,” Foxman said.

where you can be imprisoned for a crime you might commit. You can't be tried and convicted in a court of law but you can be detained indefinitly with no formal charges or legal representation.

AValdoux

although it is being tested with the Patriot Act.

people are arrested in stings when they set up meetings with what they think are minors that might have sex with them.
there are many things that are illegal to "attempt".

It's that simple. Intent has been proven in those cases.

refused entrance to political events because of actions they MIGHT commit (if they've got the wrong bumpersticker).

We are frei here.

when there is only the POSSIBILITY of law-breaking?

If that was the case, then NOTHING would be permitted in this society and you'd be crying that it was a friggin' police state.

with the same grain of salt I used when reading on DU about the coming pograms which would be timed with the release of "The Passion of the Christ"

say that environmentalists were patroling the roads looking for trucks crossing the border that didn't meet EPA standards.

Who thinks they'd be catching all sorts of flak from the Powers the Be, hmmmm?

that would be legal. What the Law Enforcement response would be is another matter, since trucks travel much faster than people on foot.

Anything that is not specifically prohibited is allowed.

...declaring open hunting season on people!!! How many people are going to have to die before these lunatics stopped?

Hunting people is illegal AFAIK. If they kill someone other than in self-defense they will be charged with murder.

What is your source of information for this claim?

we have to lessen thier numbers so they dont overpopulate and starve </jimbo>

might be drinking too much Bud and go off half-cocked. Not to mention how they're "protecting Amerika against them terroristiz from Mexico." A lot of the news crews have packed up, no story there, just a bunch of middle-aged overweight white dudes in lawn chairs smoking cigars.

Only police states imprison people based upon a presumption of guilt for crimes they MIGHT commit.

hell even bounty hunters need to register with the government to do their jobs

in order to report a crime? That's even worse than a police state!

groups that act as an "arm of the law" should have some regulation. These people have no proper training in carrying out these kinds of activities. Bounty hunters have to take a training course and learn standard operating procedures before they are allowed to do their job. This is done to ensure the safety of both parties.

They are acting as citizens. When they view a law being broken, they report it to the appropriate authorities.

No matter how much you don't like them or the fact that they want existing immigation laws enforced, they are acting 100% within the law.

to use a cellphone to call the cops???

Do you support mandatory cellphone training for everybody before they can buy one? how about waiting periods and background checks for cellphones?

and they actually detain individuals.

As long as they don't do anything illegal I think they are performing a valuable service.

The moment one of them assaults or injures or kills someone I'll be all over their case "like ugly on a ape".

The border's too big, the debt's record-breaking and the job is shitty. Cops they manage to trick into joining the border patrol are just as likely to leave once they realize they're mostly just sitting in a truck watching the desert each shift. Those "minutemen" are more likely to shoot each other than any immigrants.

If not, then what they are doing is 100% wihtin the law, regardless of what you think about it.

but it's well armed, and it's a bigger neighborhood

potential for disaster here is huge, but it seems 100% legal as long as those participating obey the law.

...and the people in charge of this seem keenly aware how illegal activity or god forbid some tradegy would sink their cause in a heartbeat.

Whether that prevents anything from happening remains to be seen.

for the moment they are just becoming an annoyance... as they are triggering sensors

Now if enough sensors are triggered (to the point hte border patrol gets beyond annoyed) they can possibly go to a judge and ask for a restraining order. they can get it since they are interfering with the work of a police officer. So I am hoping that the BP will go to the judge on those grounds... before they go into felony territory

Not far away, the Minutemen radios were filled with excited chatter about an illegal immigrant in the area. Gilchrist drove up to an outpost, flung open the car door and shouted, "Who saw the illegal aliens?"

A tall Minuteman approached. "There are no illegals, those are our people," he said. The "immigrant" was in fact 67-year-old Dave Gessner of Fort Wayne, Ind.

"I was just answering the call of nature," he said sheepishly. "Guess I won't wander off anymore."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-mi...

Another part of the article talks with a family who choose the vigilante patrols for their "vacation." Twisted stuff.

they saw a white guy taking a leak and thought he was an illegal immigrant...

Most of them are doing "Community Watch" style work -- just reporting what they see. They know the risk is high and don't want to destroy their cause because somebody gets trigger-happy.

It's strictly a feel-good exercise. They feel weak and afraid, and this is one of the ways they can feel like they're doing something that matters.

--p!

Some of these people may be racists or whatever, though for now that is just a rumor. Nevertheless, their complaints are entirely justified. The government is colluding with big business to allow illegal immigration for cheap labor. This devalues American labor and law and order generally. I don't see how wanting a secure border immediately makes one a rascist. The government did not exactly invite these self-appointed minutemen. Nevertheless, if the southern border is a sieve for illegal aliens, why can't these other people walk around there. As far as I know, that is all they are doing. After all, the government sure as hell has demonstrated its inability to solve the problem.

I am disturbed that they are bing allowed to carry legal firearms. I think that should have been verboten -- there is no need, unless you are shooting rattlers. That having been said -- it is good and healthy to know that if the government won't take the necessary action to control the borders, the people will -- and are still allowed to, more importantly.

Don't like it? Change the Arizona law.

1,000,000,000,000,000,000 : 1 says you'd never even get a hearing in an Arizona legislature committee.

(obviously I knew that) those who put together the minutemen could have banned them from carrying them for this volunteer effort. If something bad should happen, it will destroy what they are trying to do, which I think has merit.

but not sidearms. They being the minutemen organizers.

They said no "long arms."

that the minutemen are now unwittingly setting off alarms and sending out border patrol agents where there is no activity

Why couldn't a coyote set one off?

to keep the borders safe. Something is wrong when the nation's defense is tripped up by a misfiring ADT alarm.

Say, 50 pounds and up. It's the logical way to reduce false alarms without making the sensors less effective.

...it is more likely to be motion sensors.

This article alludes to "underground" sensors but doesn;t have more info.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-02-22-border-p...

This article tells about vibration sensors but I think this is a private group

http://www.americanpatrol.com/FEATURES/030723-KUAT-ABP-...

Here's even more info which discusses seismic, magnetic & infrared sensors.

http://www.gcn.com/vol19_no3/news/1278-1.html

They use them in combination with cameras so I imagine they don;t fall for the coyote too often.

obviously not groups sneaking Northward

Its probably alot easier to differentiate between animal & human than illegal vs. minuteman.

"Why are DUers now advocates for a police state?" is a better question.

enforcement officers to break it up. I am not saying they have become a mob...yet.. but to stop one is not a police state.. It is common sense.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

To date, this is a peaceful assembly. There are no civil codes for an urban area to take into consideration here as they are not in a city, town, or village. That means they do not need a permit. That further means that trying to stop them from exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights is despotic.

It is just a moniker, a marketing tool, they use to give a patriotic sounding sanction to what they are doing--volunteering to patrol the border to prevent illegal entry,-- although, it is not beyond the imagination that they could also turn up somewhere in the north at the Canadian/US border to prevent AWOL soldiers from escaping to Canada.

Militia sounds more like it to me.

If they're lucky.

Because that's what border agents do patroling the border. They hunt illegal immigrants.

The 'Minutemen' have no legal authorization, no chain of command, and no oversight. While it's not illegal for them to do this, I'd encourage you not to compare them to professional law enforcement officers, who generally despise exactly this kind of half-assed near-vigilantism because of the additional danger and difficulty it adds for them.

Any citizen is 100% within their rights to be on the border. Any citizen is 100% within their rights to report a crime in progress.

There is nothing whatsoever illegal about what they are doing. NOTHING.

of those living near the border. They are so fed up with illegal immigrants running through their private property.

You're confusing their right to go and observe with being legally empowered as law enforcement. They have every right to sit on the border if they want, or to phone the police if they see something illegal, but it doesn't make them law enforcement officers, and it doesn't permit them to act as if they were law enforcement, which is what the person I replied to was suggesting. They said that the Minutemen were doing the exact same thing as the Border Patrol, which is incorrect. The Minutemen don't have any authority to make arrests, and they are nowhere near being law enforcement. What worries me is that they seem to think otherwise.

Though everyone technically has the power to make a "citizen's arrest," though you are really exposing yourself to liability if you do that.

who had been severely beaten and abandoned by a Coyote. Their freakish anti-brown people response? They reportedly gave him food, water, and medical attention after HE approached THEM seeking aid. Oh, the horror...

As a land owner, do i have the right to protect my land from trespassers?

Suppose i ask some friends to help?

But these guys don't own the land, which doesn't give them the same legal rights to defend it. And even whoever owns the land doesn't have carte blanche to do whatever they like with a tresspasser, nor do they have the same powers as law enforcement officers. It doesn't matter if the Minutement are just reporting as they claim, but their entire attitude speaks of a taste for vigilante justice.

Sounds like the land owners want them there. If it was BLM, that would be different.

(And even whoever owns the land doesn't have carte blanche to do whatever they like with a trespasser, nor do they have the same powers as law enforcement)

Only thing they can do on private land is report them ( at least thats how it is in TX ), they have no powers to detain.

calling the cops is OK, shooting people with sniper rifles isn't.

I have no powers to arrest or detain unless they are committing a felony.

and bounty hunting is legal

One, legal bounty hunters have some degree of oversight and rules coming from their employers. The Minutemen don't.

Two, legal bounty hunting is based on the principle that the person being hunted has committed a crime. Can you be sure the Minutemen make that distinction? Suppose they see a guy with brown skin near the border. Do they report him to the cops because they're somehow sure he's an illegal? Do they grab him and toss him back over the fence? How exactly are you so sure that they're targeting ONLY the guilty people?

If it's someone the landowner knows or a member of the MM, no problem. If it's not then he would be trespassing.

(Do they report him to the cops because they're somehow sure he's an illegal? )
NO! They report him to the LE because he is trespassing.

(Do they grab him and toss him back over the fence? How exactly are you so sure that they're targeting ONLY the guilty people? )
They can't detain, they can only report.
If hes not with the MM and he's not invited, he's guilty of trespassing.

"But if you threaten to extend your violence, this Earth of yours will be reduced to a burnt out cinder. Your choice is simple. Join us and live in peace or pursue your present course and face obliteration. We shall be waiting for your answer. The decision rests with you." Klaatu

(The Day The Earth Stood Still, 1951. Damn fine movie!)

A Day without Mexicans?

I am just wondering why no one hs mentioned that movie during all this hype about the Minutemen.

...ever want to use it on another segment of the population. Think Praetorian Guard of Rome or Nazi Brownshirts. These "special forces" groups are handy because you, as President, can deny you have any control over them whatsoever. You can even pretend to oppose their actions.

To paraphrase Max in Cabaret: Let them get rid of the illegal aliens, later we'll be able to control them.

I highly recommend you all rent Cabaretso you can get an idea of what we may be in for. Or you can read William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Assuming you haven't already.

and at some point some of them tried to return fire?...

...via the Venezuelan reserves.

How easily we see the march to war from our point of view(ie: when done by the right) but watching someone buy up arms left and right and claiming imminent invasion while issuing his supporters weaponry we would call it something quite different than what folks prefer to call it (ie: revolution)

The official police force was hardly enough to keep Chavez supporters and anti-Chavez protesters apart when the latter marched on Chavez's palace (thereby violating their protest permit), which was then surrounded by his supporters. The small police force sure could not prevent the snipers bullets from reaching the Chavez supporters.

Also the palace guard that had been left in place by the coup plotters was barely enough to retake the palace. All they had besides their weapons and training was encouragement from hordes of Chavez supporters just outside the palace gates. Not a shot was fired by the way.

Given Chavez's track record i'd be surprised if he'd use his "private army" against the interests of the majority of the Venezuelans.

...he is doing so to "defend the revolution". This is akin to Democrats setting up and army to go after anyone disagreeing with the New Deal or Great Society.

Imagine dumbass in chief creating a new national guard but one that seems to draw its recruits only from so called red areas then arming them through federal weapons buys to be called upon if necessary. Would that scare the absolute crap out of you?

But since Chavez is thumbing his nose at dumbass and is a celebrated leftist(I'm not so elated abotu his track record which seems to have more to do with solidfying his own power) every anti-freedom step he takes(and by that I mean freedom like the bill of rights not that other crappola that's on the march) is explained away as necessary.

Sitting around on lawn chairs with binoculars and calling border patrol if they see illegals? You make it sound like they are serial murderers. NOT!

Minutemen tripping sensors set out to detect intruders

TOMBSTONE - Volunteers who have converged on the Mexican border to watch for illegal immigrants are disrupting U.S. Border Patrol operations by unwittingly tripping sensors that alert agents to possible intruders, agency officials complained yesterday.

Scores of participants in the Minuteman Project began assembling late last week, and clusters of volunteers began regular patrols yesterday in an exercise some law enforcement authorities and civil rights groups fear will result in vigilante violence. Many of the volunteers were recruited over the Internet, and some planned to be armed.

Over the past few days, they have set off sensors, forcing agents to respond to false alarms, Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Jose Maheda said.

"Now we not only have to look out for aliens and drug smugglers, now we have to look out for these untrained civilians who are unfamiliar with the landscape," Border Patrol spokesman Andy Adame said.

-more-

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/index.php?page=border_news...

I didn't get to hear all of it. Half of the calls thought it was a good idea. I don't think I like this.

One of them is going to have an "oops" shooting. I think that a bunch of us should go after the minutemen. Testosterone season!

their rights?

Damn, that's fucked up right there!

I also don't advocate people being starved in this country. We have people going hungry and problems of our own. Killing poor people is not the way to go. We need to shut our boarders but it should be to everyone and not just Mexicans.

proportion.

They are sitting on the border observing. When they see somebody violating the law, they report it to the INS.

Now exactly WHAT kind of a problem do you have with that?

Sorry! We need to start at the Canadian border and work all of the way across if we want to stop everyone from coming in. We have problems in this country and people are going hungry. I don't buy the BS about Americans won't work the jobs.

buit that's secondary (or tertiary or less) to me.

The real issue is, we have immigration laws we are either unwilling or unable to enforce. Logic dictates we change the laws to be enforcable and meaningful.

So are we going to have a border war with Mexico now because of these looney tunes?

What if the Minutemen were African American? Would they be getting the blessings of our government? I think we just have another example of entitled white men throwing their weight around because they can.

Bush has repeatedly spoken out against the minutemen and disagrees with what they're doing. And they are more than outspoken themselves against the administration for it's "inaction" towards the illegal immigration problem.

about it. He has the power. If he has to piss off his KKK base to do the right thing for a change, so be it. But we've always known with Bush that to get votes he has to cater to the lunatic fringe. How does he sleep at night?

As of this post, they haven't done anything illegal for the government to do anything about?

it's his job to diffuse this situation, not sit back and watch it. These people are not a legitimate militia by any means and should be considered armed and dangerous. If the Governor doesn't comply, then he needs to take the next executive step, which is what Presidents do. Of course we have a new species, chimpster incompetensus, in charge now, so I guess we will have a situation. No doubt his good friend Vicente Fox will soon step in and put Boosh in his place.

BTW The mayor of Los Angeles would not tolerate this on the streets of his city and would take action and those militia guys do not want to mess with LA cops. So I think the President has an obligation to get the Governor of Arizona to diffuse the situation.

as in Janet Napolitano (D). Secondly, neither she nor he (chimp) has any authority under our current federal or state constitution to diffuse a peaceful assembly where no laws have been broken.

But, if it makes you feel a little easier, the federal government has dispatched FBI agents to observe that no federal laws are broken and Governor Napolitona has invited the ACLU (and they've accepted) to be on hand as observers to report any civil liberty violations that may occur. So, yes, at this point they are only sitting back and watching but that's all they're legally able to do.

edit: took out unnecessary quotations marks.

top of the situation any way she can. I don't keep up with Arizona politics because I don't give a S***, however, this is a brewing international situaton. There is no way what is going on there is legally acceptable. I'm glad they are observing. They should never have allowed this to happen to begin with. It's so wrong on so many levels. My two cents.

Sorry if I haven't been checking and double checking the last couple of days when I post. I barely am able to as I'm on a load of pain killers and having a hard time concentrating. I thought of looking up who the governor was but it was a big effort and didn't think it was important for what I wanted to say.

it is legal. Are you advocating that the government (either Federal or State) step in and break up something that is legal? They are U.S. citizens on U.S. territory, carrying legal firearms, peacefully and legally assembling. What's there to break up?

How do you know it's legal? If armed men can patrol around in public with guns with no mandate, like from a government militia, let's say the Border Patrol, why can't protesters with signs do the same thing in Washington DC? What is the legal difference?

Is it because the Minutemen have guns? Hey, guys that's the answer. Next time we want to protest the Moron in Chief, let's carry guns. We are protecting our country from HIM.

That's how I know it's legal. The fact that they're carrying guns has nothing to do with it (which is also in the Constitution, by the way). And I never said it was illegal to protest in Washington D.C. or anywhere else for that matter. People have always been allowed to protest across this nation. It's not just confined to southern Arizona.

the Constitution are not allowing legal protests in Washington, my point being that no one is acting in a lawful manner here. I guess I'll go get me a little sidearm or something and just walk around town with it slung in my holster (it's legal if it's exposed) and see just how long before I end up in the Graybar Hotel or worse with Homeland Security swooping down on me.

But that sounds like a separate issue that someone might want to be bring to the attention of the local representatives there. If you can't walk around the streets where you live without being thrown into jail for doing nothing illegal, that's another issue you might want to bring to your local representative. Neither of which has anything to do with what's going on in southern Arizona at the moment.

In Arizona, the gun laws are lax. In DC, they are tight.

The Minutemen people are whacky, but haven't broken any laws yet.

And that's precisely the point I've been trying to make for several days now!

They are breaking no laws and have broken no laws. Until they do so, there is not thing one that can be done to stop them, but they are highlighting the inadequacy fo current immigration law and enforcement. If progressives do not take the reins and start moving for reform, the regressives will.

She is going to outflank the Republicans on the Right on this issue and confuse the hell out of them come 2008.

she'll win the moderate vote hands down in 2008!

The Clintons are not dummies. They know the hot button issues and they will grab the high ground on them before anyone else.

In Arizona, the gun laws are lax. In DC, they are tight.

The Minutemen people are whacky, but haven't broken any laws yet.

You know or should know that unless a handgun was registered to you in DC by 1976, it's categorically illegal to possess in DC. Now if you want to wear a handgun unconcealed in NoVa, that IS legal in most places, even bars. Courthouses are the primary exception to this law.

the gun laws in Arizona and DC differ a fair bit. If you wanted to have an anti-Bush protest out in the middle of Bumfuck, Arizona, yes, indeed you could carry guns in the same way that the Minutemen are. Now if you had it in Phoenix, that'd most likely be different.

Oh, btw, I AM an expert on Federal Firearms laws, both in an academic (I'm "published") and a practical sense....If you have specific questions about them, please ask.

Next time, don't drive the DU highways while impaired!

Does DU have a MADD chapter now? I thought it was legal to be impaired at DU. Oh, but it's not acceptable. So you see this gun ass crowd isn't acceptable either although legal.

what laws have they violated? They're armed, sure....but LEGALLY armed.

The police can't just go out and shoot anybody they please....why you'd advocate such a thing is beyond me....

on their side of the border

However, a militia massing on the other side of the border of a country would bring out the opposing army wouldn't it? I mean if Canada started massing militia at our northern borders, I am sure we would move troops in, just in case.

You have a bunch of rednecks in pickup trucks with binoculars and walkie talkies. Frankly, Mexico sending troops to the border to watch American citizens watching Mexican citizens try to cross the border illegally strikes me as ridiculous.

which means they are organized and have a plan. That is a milita. Cheeze don't you read "Soldier of Fortune"?

So what..........specifically what..........do propose either President Bush or the governor of Arizona should do to stop American citizens from engaging in a 100% legal activity?

§ 311. Militia: composition and classes

Release date: 2004-03-18

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_se...

From the Arizona Revised Statutes:

26-122. Components of militia

A. The militia is divided into the national guard of Arizona, the state guard when organized, and the unorganized militia.

B. The national guard consists of commissioned officers, warrant officers, enlisted personnel, organizations, staffs, corps and departments of the federally recognized and regularly commissioned, warranted and enlisted militia of the state, organized and maintained pursuant to law, and all members thereof honorably retired by age or disability.

C. The numerical strength, composition, distribution, organization, arms, uniforms, equipment, training and discipline of the federally recognized national guard shall be prescribed by the governor in conformity with the allocation of units to the state by the department of the army and the department of the air force of the United States.

D. The inactive national guard consists of commissioned, warranted and enlisted personnel relieved from assignment to the national guard by the adjutant general, or at their own request, under regulations prescribed by the department of national defense of the United States, and not reassigned to another component of the armed forces of the United States.

E. The unorganized militia consists of members of the militia not members of the national guard or state guard when organized.

As long as they are on their own side of the border, they can do whatever their hearts desire, consistent with the laws of Mexico. And they know that if they cross the border, it would be an invasion. They aren't about to do that.

I find it very strange and a little disturbing, but everything seems to be perfectly legal. If anything goes wrong, I would prosecute the person who messes up as well as the leaders though.

on neighborhood watch in Santa Monica a couple of decades ago. The most lethal weapons that I saw carried were flashlights that could be used as batons for self-defense and pepper spray.

from Santa Monica to Arizona....In Santa Monica, you carried what was legally allowed. The Minutemen are carrying what is legally allowed where they are.

If these guys were on the streets of any
city in America, they'd be surrounded by
SWAT teams. Remember all those peaceful,
non-violent demonstrations...always surrounded
by heavily armed cops and Feds.

It's just easy to let these guys play
cops and robbers in an area most people
in America don't live...out of sight,
out of mind. But allowing these guys to
take the laws into their own hands is
a mistake and will lead to unarmed innocents
getting hurt and killed.

" Remember all those peaceful,
non-violent demonstrations...always surrounded
by heavily armed cops and Feds."

Not to mention, peaceful, non-violent demonstrators being caged up in a so-called "free speech zone." And they're not ARMED.

(If these guys were on the streets of any
city in America, they'd be surrounded by
SWAT teams.)
If they were on public property, they probably would be.

(It's just easy to let these guys play
cops and robbers in an area most people
in America don't live..)
These are private ranch's, are you saying, that to defend my property from trespassers is playing Cops and Robbers? Would you let someone build a camp in your front yard?

(But allowing these guys to
take the laws into their own hands is
a mistake and will lead to unarmed innocents
getting hurt and killed.)
Since when is reporting a crime, taking the law into their own hands.?

they are allowed because they are doing bush's goon work for him.