From this morning’s Washington Times, 16 illegals sue an Arizona rancher.

So we have 16 people, crossing illegally into the United States. We have a man that’s sick of his property being used as a “highway” for illegal border crossings, which results in things like massive amounts of trash all over his property, drug smuggling, damage to his property, death of his cattle, and risk to he and his family (and anyone rightfully on the property) because often those illegally on his land are armed. And this man is the one that gets sued?

Something’s rather bass-ackwards here folks.

Now, the Libertarian in me does struggle with this. On the one hand, you want open borders and to allow people to freely travel. But on the other, we’ve got individual property rights to maintain. This article by Per Bylund sums up the issue rather well. But while we work out the philosophical issues, for now the law is what it is. What has Roger Barnett done that was illegal? What have those 16 people done that was illegal? Let’s see… hurt feelings vs. breaking the law. The civil rights of these 16 were violated? Hell, they’re not even citizens of this country! Is there no consideration for the civil rights of Mr. Barnett being violated? The property rights of Mr. Barnett being violated? The law of the United States being violated?

I need a new tag, “flabbergasted”.