Wolf, so I hope you see now that I don’t oppose the principle of eminent domain. I never said that but no one engaged me on the topic so I never got that far.
But you misunderstand again that I “want to allow free passage through [my] land”. First, I have family, friends, citizens in the community I know, and former employers who own property on both sides of the South Texas border, so it isn’t about “my land”. Second, none of the people and organizations that I know allow free transit on their land. They vigourously oppose it. One, a public university, even has a private security force to police it, though in the many hours, days, and nights I have walked the campus have I ever seen illegals cross. Probably because it would be stupid to cross there. But the mental image people have of the Texas border is misinformed. Some places in California and Arizona I think have all kinds of trouble and they can put up a fence if it helps there. But don’t tell me all Texans need a fence everywhere like CA and AZ have somewhere. That’s mindless, and infringes up constitutional rights without sufficient justification. I’ve lived in CA too, and I’ve learned to never underestimate the ignorance and animosity of Californians towards Texas.
So I need a fence with federal agents patrolling it when there was no problem on my land before, and the feds have no need to show there is/was a problem with illegality on my land to oppose their solution?
BTW, nice article here Wolf. We think alike. Your view on the illegal immigration problem seems identical to mine.
http://fishtacostand.blogspot.com/2007/10/americans-love-mexicans.html
Our immigration laws are broken, and they need reform. You’re right, legal immigration is related to illegal immigration. But now you’re at odds with most of the people in this thread, too bad for you. The country is going to Hell, don’t you know?
My only disagreement with you, unless you’ve changed your view as stated in the link above, is that the people wanting to claim private land don’t seem to be informed at all on border issues, immigration issues, life on the border, business on the border, trade through the border, how the Texas border differs from CA and AZ, or trade in general or borders in general. Surely one must know *something* before one’s opinion deserves to be acted upon when it entails trumping the constitutional rights of another. Is that unreasonable?
