(5/18/10) 16 Illegals Sue Arizona Rancher (American Renaissance News)

[Jim744]

Get a load of this gall and audacity! Yes, I'd like to know what Mexico's civil rights are since those are the only civil rights they have. And they aren't valid in American courts! Last I heard people in this country are within their rights to defend their property from illegal intruders.

16 Illegals Sue Arizona Rancher

Jerry Seper, Newsmax, May 18, 2010

An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Roger Barnett, 64, began rounding up illegal immigrants in 1998 and turning them over to the U.S. Border Patrol, he said, after they destroyed his property, killed his calves and broke into his home.

His Cross Rail Ranch near Douglas, Ariz., is known by federal and county law enforcement authorities as “the avenue of choice” for immigrants seeking to enter the United States illegally.

Trial continues Monday in the federal lawsuit, which seeks $32 million in actual and punitive damages for civil rights violations, the infliction of emotional distress and other crimes. Also named are Mr. Barnett’s wife, Barbara, his brother, Donald, and Larry Dever, sheriff in Cochise County, Ariz., where the Barnetts live. The civil trial is expected to continue until Friday.

The lawsuit is based on a March 7, 2004, incident in a dry wash on the 22,000-acre ranch, when he approached a group of illegal immigrants while carrying a gun and accompanied by a large dog.

Attorneys for the immigrants—five women and 11 men who were trying to cross illegally into the United States—have accused Mr. Barnett of holding the group captive at gunpoint, threatening to turn his dog loose on them and saying he would shoot anyone who tried to escape.

The immigrants are represented at trial by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which also charged that Sheriff Dever did nothing to prevent Mr. Barnett from holding their clients at “gunpoint, yelling obscenities at them and kicking one of the women.”

In the lawsuit, MALDEF said Mr. Barnett approached the group as the immigrants moved through his property, and that he was carrying a pistol and threatening them in English and Spanish. At one point, it said, Mr. Barnett’s dog barked at several of the women and he yelled at them in Spanish, “My dog is hungry and he’s hungry for buttocks.”

The lawsuit said he then called his wife and two Border Patrol agents arrived at the site. It also said Mr. Barnett acknowledged that he had turned over 12,000 illegal immigrants to the Border Patrol since 1998.

{snip}

“This is my land. I´m the victim here,” Mr. Barnett said. “When someone´s home and loved ones are in jeopardy and the government seemingly can´t do anything about it, I feel justified in taking matters into my own hands. And I always watch my back.”

You can send a message of support to Roger Barnett at info@barnettsaz.com.

If you want to help Roger Barnett with his defense costs send a check to:

Roger Barnett Legal Defense Fund
1498 E. Fry Blvd
Sierra Vista, AZ 85635

To use a credit card please call Barnett’s Towing at 1-800-843-4398 (24 hours a day).



http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/05/16_illegals_sue_1.php

[Jim744]

But violence remains unabated, and the unintended consequences of Calderon's efforts have become distressingly clear: The number of cases of human rights violations brought before the Mexican Human Rights Commission has risen by 600% over the last two years.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/03/08/mexico-human-rights-watch-statement-human-rights-committee

Calderon criticizes our human rights relating to illegal immigration???? Read about the military committing a great number of the abuses in Mexico.

[VotingHillary]

Caledron needs to spend more time cleaining up the mess that is Mexico at this point in time than he does preaching to our Congress.

[Laura Cereta]

Get a load of this gall and audacity! Yes, I'd like to know what Mexico's civil rights are since those are the only civil rights they have. And they aren't valid in American courts! Last I heard people in this country are within their rights to defend their property from illegal intruders.

Constitutional rights for undocumented immigrants are absolutely valid in a court of law. They are provided with the same set of rights as a citizen.

[samurai007]

Can you imagine how completely worthless his property is if he should ever try to sell it? He and his family are the victims here, and they have a right to defend their property against trespassers and vandals. And he ought to be put on the border patrol payroll... I wonder how many border agents can claim to have single-handedly stopped 12,000 illegals from coming into the US?

[samurai007]

Constitutional rights for undocumented immigrants are absolutely valid in a court of law. They are provided with the same set of rights as a citizen.

For the most part, but it doesn't matter, because making a citizen's arrest against trespassers isn't a civil rights violation.

[Jim744]

Caledron needs to spend more time cleaining up the mess that is Mexico at this point in time than he does preaching to our Congress.

Do you know why he won't and speaks out against the US?

His country gets millions and millions of dollars from illegal immigrants in the US sending it to Mexico and of course those receiving it spend it there.

Also, his country is so corrupt that he fears uprisings, retribution from drug cartels against him and his government.

It is interesting and very disconcerting that much of his own military and other groups cannot be trusted to support Mexico's government.

Overthrow of the government there as well as civil uprisings about it and drug cartels are a distinct possibility if he sides too much with the US.

He is, of course, a coward. I think regardless of these possibilities, he should stand up and speak more favorably about the US especially when it comes to illegal immigration by his citizens.

(PS, he is prob. on the take from many cartels so he's in no hurry to get too serious)

[Laura Cereta]

For the most part, but it doesn't matter, because making a citizen's arrest against trespassers isn't a civil rights violation.

It does matter. I wonder if their suit includes mental anguish? It should; that's actually a better case.

[VotingHillary]

One way for those that truly want to help Mexico may be to STOP BUYING THEIR DRUGS.

Funny how that is just never brought up....

[Spang]

One way for those that truly want to help Mexico may be to STOP BUYING THEIR DRUGS.

Funny how that is just never brought up....

I've brought it up several times.

[Jim744]

When I say illegals don't have civil rights, that is my opinion of the way it should be. I don't advocate mistreatment of any kind but this I do advocate since they are illegally here:

The big issue is that illegal aliens cannot do anything to enforce most of these rights. If they are being mistreated by an employer, they cannot go to court to enforce their rights because if authorities become aware of their illegal status, they can be deported. So while they technically have these rights, their illegal status keeps them from being able to enforce those rights against those who violate them.

For more info, you may find this site helpfu:

http://www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/11663res20040806.html

If they knew they could not have access to courts as these 6 do, that might discourage them from coming here.

Nothing like being here illegally and hoping to obtain $32 million for doing so!

Everything is upside down!

These 6 and others should simply be deported and their case thrown out! In Mexico, an illegal immigrant would very likely go to jail for the same behavoprs they have exhibited. (two yrs. at least)

[Jim744]

One way for those that truly want to help Mexico may be to STOP BUYING THEIR DRUGS.

Funny how that is just never brought up....

And/or they should be stopped from bringing them here in the first place. regardless of the demand. Unfortunately, we likely won't be able to stop the demand because it is big business there and here! Also, addicts don't think rationally about stopping buying drugs. They are addicts, after all so it isn't simply a matter of stop buying!

[Laura Cereta]

I've brought it up several times.

You have and I notice you've brought up the proper way to do it. If we end the failed War on Drugs then we will stop funding the organized criminals and we can choose where drugs in this country are obtained, to a large degree. That is just one of the benefits of legalization and regulation.

[Jim744]

It does matter. I wonder if their suit includes mental anguish? It should; that's actually a better case.

What about the rancher's mental anguish and fear? Doesn't that come first in consideration and his right to protect his family and property?

[Laura Cereta]

And/or they should be stopped from bringing them here in the first place. regardless of the demand. Unfortunately, we likely won't be able to stop the demand because it is big business there and here! Also, addicts don't think rationally about stopping buying drugs. They are addicts, after all so it isn't simply a matter of stop buying!

The demand will never be 100% stopped here or anywhere else but we can reduce demand through treatment, education, and increased funding to medical research. That is a very simplistic explanation, but I doubt anyone wants to hear the long form, lol. :p

[Laura Cereta]

What about the rancher's mental anguish and fear? Doesn't that come first in consideration and his right to protect his family and property?

That's up to a jury of his peers, if it ever gets that far.

[Jim744]

The demand will never be 100% stopped here or anywhere else but we can reduce demand through treatment, education, and increased funding to medical research. That is a very simplistic explanation, but I doubt anyone wants to hear the long form, lol. :p

If it ever gets that far the jury or the judge will laugh it out of court, esp. after all this AZ law controversy. An AZ jury probably won't be too receptive to the illegals' claim. A liberal judge might though but then I pretty much doubt it. It would set a really nasty precedent regarding defending your property and your family from potential danger. Most Arizonans and most citizens wouldn't like that precedent if they were ever in a similar situation.

[Laura Cereta]

If it ever gets that far the jury or the judge will laugh it out of court, esp. after all this AZ law controversy. An AZ jury probably won't be too receptive to the illegals' claim. A liberal judge might though but then I pretty much doubt it. It would set a really nasty precedent regarding defending your property and your family from potential danger. Most Arizonans and most citizens wouldn't like that precedent if they were ever in a similar situation.

What? I'm talking about drugs. Did you quote the wrong post? :confused:

[kyforhillary]

I'm curious as to all of you that want drugs legalized, do you actually have anyone in your family that is a drug addict? Or is it just more legal mumbo jumbo to keep people out of prison? If you've never had a child or children on drugs and watched what happens to them or is happening to them, I'm not sure you would be so keen on legalizing this evil thing, because evil it is. I have two children that are addicts and it is bad enough that they are killing themselves and their families with it illigally, I can't imagine what it would be like if they could just walk into a store and buy all they wanted legally. Rehab is not an option, because they don't see that what they are doing is causing anyone harm. They don't mind going to jail, been there done that, they just think oh well, I'll be out in awhile. One went straight for two years after getting out of jail, but with the lure of it he went right back at it. He is out there somewhere, I don't know where, the only time he gets in touch with me is if he needs bail money, or some other trumped up thing for money. Don't go there with me to legalize drugs. Pot maybe, but I doubt that even, because that is how both of them started on the hard stuff.

[devildog]

Laura, here's a topic where we will have to agree to disagree. :D

I'm on the side of the rancher. These individuals are trespassing on his land, and I believe he has a right to protect his property. Tensions are even higher now, after the murder of a well-known Arizona rancher named Rob Krentz (http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_bfac06dd-7495-5750-9ed2-d590c7bc913c.html)

On the other hand, just because you are armed doesn't give you a right to be a jackass on a power trip (if this is true). He could have offered them water and a place to sit in the shade until authorities arrive.

[Valin]

Caledron needs to spend more time cleaining up the mess that is Mexico at this point in time than he does preaching to our Congress.

1. I could not agree more. The ultimate solution to the illegal immigration problem will be found south of the border....ie there is not a problem with Canadian illegal immigration.

2. I would not hold my breath waiting for this to happen.There are too many powerful interests invested in maintaining the status quo in Mexico and Central America.

[Valin]

One way for those that truly want to help Mexico may be to STOP BUYING THEIR DRUGS.

Funny how that is just never brought up....

I've brought it up several times.

RADICAL CONCEPT ALERT!
:thumbsup:

[Kbentleyis]

Something is definitely going to happen here. These ranchers have a right to protect their property. Seeing the documentary regarding the violence happening in AZ, I, myself, wouldn't hesitate one bit to shoot and ask questions later--and, I don't even own a gun or ever shot one!

If, this can happen to this rancher, what do you think is next? These ranches have several thousands of acreage. All they need is a backhoe. Why turn illegals in, when you can shoot them and bury the crime? If the ranchers don't think the government will support their rights of life, liberty, and their property from illegals to threaten and destroy that property, what do you think will come next?

When the head of ICE announces he may not take illegals from AZ sparked a flame of self-preservation to me.

Illegal is what it is--illegal. If you're not the one be threatened and your property destroyed, it's probably easy to see logic in "illegal's rights." Hope those ranchers can hang on to the thought of civility.

[foxyladi]

this is the fault of the feds.for not doing their job

[observer21]

It does seem rather odd that a man is threatened with punishment for attempting to keep individuals from traveling illegally through his property. Of course, if he was being a complete jerk about it, I could understand, but I could also see his point of view.

On the other hand, just because you are armed doesn't give you a right to be a jackass on a power trip (if this is true). He could have offered them water and a place to sit in the shade until authorities arrive.

Without knowing the nature or appearance of an individual or group, I don't know if it's entirely that easy or wise to be so accommodating. For all he could have known, they may have been from a gang. In those encounters, it is best to not allow anything to chance.

I wonder if their suit includes mental anguish? It should; that's actually a better case.

Knowing the circumstances of the situation, I'd say that charge being found accurate in court is as likely as a robber being found to be a victim of assault because he was attacked by a person while breaking into his home.

[foxyladi]

a lot of different views on this..as a homeowner i,m with the farmer

[Suzan]

I also think the rancher has a right to defend himself and his land, but it depends on how he does it. Did no one notice what this suit is about?

Attorneys for the immigrants—five women and 11 men who were trying to cross illegally into the United States—have accused Mr. Barnett of holding the group captive at gunpoint, threatening to turn his dog loose on them and saying he would shoot anyone who tried to escape.

The immigrants are represented at trial by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which also charged that Sheriff Dever did nothing to prevent Mr. Barnett from holding their clients at “gunpoint, yelling obscenities at them and kicking one of the women.”

In the lawsuit, MALDEF said Mr. Barnett approached the group as the immigrants moved through his property, and that he was carrying a pistol and threatening them in English and Spanish. At one point, it said, Mr. Barnett’s dog barked at several of the women and he yelled at them in Spanish, “My dog is hungry and he’s hungry for buttocks.”

[devildog]

I did read that, Suzan. Hence the part in my post saying "if this is true." :p

[Suzan]

I'm curious as to all of you that want drugs legalized, do you actually have anyone in your family that is a drug addict? Or is it just more legal mumbo jumbo to keep people out of prison? If you've never had a child or children on drugs and watched what happens to them or is happening to them, I'm not sure you would be so keen on legalizing this evil thing, because evil it is. I have two children that are addicts and it is bad enough that they are killing themselves and their families with it illigally, I can't imagine what it would be like if they could just walk into a store and buy all they wanted legally. Rehab is not an option, because they don't see that what they are doing is causing anyone harm. They don't mind going to jail, been there done that, they just think oh well, I'll be out in awhile. One went straight for two years after getting out of jail, but with the lure of it he went right back at it. He is out there somewhere, I don't know where, the only time he gets in touch with me is if he needs bail money, or some other trumped up thing for money. Don't go there with me to legalize drugs. Pot maybe, but I doubt that even, because that is how both of them started on the hard stuff.
I have great sympathy for you and the situation you face with your children. My son was on drugs at one point in his teens. Rehab worked for him, thank God, but it doesn't work for many. I believe it's just 10% that don't relapse.

That said, my understanding of the argument for legalizing drugs is that it would help stop the flow of illegal drugs and trafficking coming from Mexico, which is what's causing the violence, killing, kidnapping here and in Mexico.

[Suzan]

I did read that, Suzan. Hence the part in my post saying "if this is true." :p
Yes, I saw your post afterward and I agree with you! :D

[devildog]

Yes, I saw your post afterward and I agree with you! :D

Hey, common ground! :D

[samurai007]

I have great sympathy for you and the situation you face with your children. My son was on drugs at one point in his teens. Rehab worked for him, thank God, but it doesn't work for many. I believe it's just 10% that don't relapse.

That said, my understanding of the argument for legalizing drugs is that it would help stop the flow of illegal drugs and trafficking coming from Mexico, which is what's causing the violence, killing, kidnapping here and in Mexico.
Legalization would greatly increase the usage of drugs, lead to many more addicts, many more jobs lost and lives ruined by drugs, and more crime in the US by people trying to feed their habit. And the criminal gangs that already have established sources and supply lines for drugs will be able to import them to their hearts' content without any more trouble from the cops, making it more lucrative and profitable than ever.

Ky, my brother was the same way, and he too started with pot, so I know what you mean. No way am I for legalization.

[kyforhillary]

How for God's sake is legalizing it going to stop the flow into the country? Have you even thought about that argument logically? If it is not illigal, then they just become citizens and carry it over by the carloads, the price may go down and it may take more to make the same money, but stop it?

[Spang]

How for God's sake is legalizing it going to stop the flow into the country?

Because a person would no longer have to depend on a shady dealer to get their drugs. They could just go to the store. Ever notice how you rarely if ever see people trying to sell tobacco products on street corners or down dark alleys? Tobacco is legal, that's why.

[Suzan]

How for God's sake is legalizing it going to stop the flow into the country? Have you even thought about that argument logically? If it is not illigal, then they just become citizens and carry it over by the carloads, the price may go down and it may take more to make the same money, but stop it?
No, there would be no need to buy drugs from Mexico. If it's legal, it's produced and sold here. And regulated and taxed, of course.

[samurai007]

No, there would be no need to buy drugs from Mexico. If it's legal, it's produced and sold here. And regulated and taxed, of course.

No, it won't be. Because no US company is going to be willing to start a business as incredibly controversial, hated, on shaky legal grounds that could easily be overturned next administration, probably highly taxed, and definitely open to lawsuits that would make the cigarette company lawsuits pale by comparison. Instead, there are already sources of massive amounts of drugs just south of the border, with no fear of lawsuits, no regulation or taxation, and suddenly free of legal hassles and confiscations making it even MORE profitable.

Why are there not a lot of cigarettes being sold on the black market? Because they have been legal all this time. Find me something that has been illegal for a very long time, has a well-established illegal supply network, and then succeeded in being transferred to a legal product. Otherwise, you are comparing apples and oranges.

[Spang]

Find me something that has been illegal for a very long time, has a well-established illegal supply network, and then succeeded in being transferred to a legal product.

Define "very long time".

[samurai007]

Define "very long time".

I'm thinking a minimum of several decades, but if you have a product in mind, name it.

[Spang]

I'm thinking a minimum of several decades...

Define "several decades".

[samurai007]

Define "several decades".

And next you'll ask what "is" means. I'm not playing your game, you're a waste of time. My comment was to Suzan.

[Spang]

And next you'll ask what "is" means.

No, I just want to know what the rules are before I start naming off shit that used to be illegal but isn't any longer. If it was illegal in Canada for "several decades", would that count?

[foxyladi]

No, there would be no need to buy drugs from Mexico. If it's legal, it's produced and sold here. And regulated and taxed, of course.

like California

[kyforhillary]

That's all we need for companies to manufacture the stuff and set up stores. I'll bet if it happens in your neighborhood you would change your mind real fast. I can't even believe that anyone believes this is the answer. I don't think most of you even know what is actually going on in our communities and with our kids. Then, when it is legalized, and all the kids and young adults are hooked on it and the Rehabs start popping up in your neighborhoods, you all gonna be one happy bunch of puppies. Or, better yet, when one of your family members are accosted or worse, by one of the oh so high (just having a little fun), neighborhood kids, I'll just bet it won't be so politically grand then.

[cinnamongirl]

That's all we need for companies to manufacture the stuff and set up stores. I'll bet if it happens in your neighborhood you would change your mind real fast. I can't even believe that anyone believes this is the answer. I don't think most of you even know what is actually going on in our communities and with our kids. Then, when it is legalized, and all the kids and young adults are hooked on it and the Rehabs start popping up in your neighborhoods, you all gonna be one happy bunch of puppies. Or, better yet, when one of your family members are accosted or worse, by one of the oh so high (just having a little fun), neighborhood kids, I'll just bet it won't be so politically grand then.

I'm sorry you've had bad experiences, but it's all going to come down to personal responsibility. Cigarettes are legal, and not everyone abuses them. Alcohol is legal and can have horrific consequences, and not everyone abuses that. Some people are going to fall prey no matter what. Criminalizing addiction clearly doesn't stop people from using drugs. So why does decriminalizing it mean that suddenly everyone will be using drugs all the time? There will be regulations in place, just as there are for alcohol (public intoxication, DUI, age restrictions, etc.).

[Suzan]

No, it won't be. Because no US company is going to be willing to start a business as incredibly controversial, hated, on shaky legal grounds that could easily be overturned next administration, probably highly taxed, and definitely open to lawsuits that would make the cigarette company lawsuits pale by comparison. Instead, there are already sources of massive amounts of drugs just south of the border, with no fear of lawsuits, no regulation or taxation, and suddenly free of legal hassles and confiscations making it even MORE profitable.

Why are there not a lot of cigarettes being sold on the black market? Because they have been legal all this time. Find me something that has been illegal for a very long time, has a well-established illegal supply network, and then succeeded in being transferred to a legal product. Otherwise, you are comparing apples and oranges.
I don't agree. If there's money there--and there is, billions I'm sure--people will start businesses and sell legal drugs. I thought you were for free-market capitalism?

[kyforhillary]

Cinnamon, my experience personally is only one reason I am adamently opposed to this.
How many kids personally do you know that have died from drugs? How many of your children are hooked on drugs? How many of your neighbors are hooked on drugs? How many children do you know that have lost their families and are living with grandparents because of drugs? If you think for one minute, that limiting legal drugs to people say, 18 and over is going to stop the problem and make it all magically go away, you've been smoking a crack pipe. Maybe where you all live, it may be some kind of Utopia, but believe me here it is not like that. I can imagine legal crack houses all over the place........frankly, I find it hilarious, that it will be legalized. You aint seen nothing yet if de-criminalizing and making drugs legal happens. Can't you all just see people laying all over sidewalks and hanging out doorways and on street corners more than they are now, and guess what it would be all legal. Lose more people than we already have just because some educated fools out there think legalization is the answer, because it is the politically correct thing to do, why, because more blacks get arrested for drugs than whites, so it must be a bad law and morally wrong.

[samurai007]

I don't agree. If there's money there--and there is, billions I'm sure--people will start businesses and sell legal drugs. I thought you were for free-market capitalism?

Free-market capitalism weighs risk and reward, chance to lose invested capital, whether politicians and lawyers will seek to make them scapegoats with laws, taxes, regulations, and lawsuits, and a whole host of other things, including illegal drug traffickers leaning heavily on anyone that would try to horn in on their business. I'm telling you, you may get people growing some weed in their back yard, but you won't have an RJ Reynolds or Marlboro turning to drugs. The risks and detriments are far too great.

[Brooke]

I'm curious as to all of you that want drugs legalized, do you actually have anyone in your family that is a drug addict? Or is it just more legal mumbo jumbo to keep people out of prison? If you've never had a child or children on drugs and watched what happens to them or is happening to them, I'm not sure you would be so keen on legalizing this evil thing, because evil it is. I have two children that are addicts and it is bad enough that they are killing themselves and their families with it illigally, I can't imagine what it would be like if they could just walk into a store and buy all they wanted legally. Rehab is not an option, because they don't see that what they are doing is causing anyone harm. They don't mind going to jail, been there done that, they just think oh well, I'll be out in awhile. One went straight for two years after getting out of jail, but with the lure of it he went right back at it. He is out there somewhere, I don't know where, the only time he gets in touch with me is if he needs bail money, or some other trumped up thing for money. Don't go there with me to legalize drugs. Pot maybe, but I doubt that even, because that is how both of them started on the hard stuff.

Yes, I do. My mother is in recovery from prescription drugs. I have seen what addiction does. But I support legalizing marijuana only and that's just for tax and regulation purposes. The "war on drugs" is a failure and has cost this country BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars over the past 20-30 some years and it hasn't worked.

[Jim744]

How for God's sake is legalizing it going to stop the flow into the country? Have you even thought about that argument logically? If it is not illigal, then they just become citizens and carry it over by the carloads, the price may go down and it may take more to make the same money, but stop it?

Right! They will just undercut the cost of legal drugs and sell them illegally at lower prices.

[Laura Cereta]

Knowing the circumstances of the situation, I'd say that charge being found accurate in court is as likely as a robber being found to be a victim of assault because he was attacked by a person while breaking into his home.

That has actually happened before.

Also, another point to this is whether the defendant held them at gunpoint before they were on American soil or not.

[Laura Cereta]

Right! They will just undercut the cost of legal drugs and sell them illegally at lower prices.

Because this happens all the time with tobacco and alcohol?

[Jim744]

Because this happens all the time with tobacco and alcohol?

Tobacco & alcohol have long been legal so there is little or no "industry" in tobacco or alcohol being sold by others at lower prices. However, you can get cigarettes online and on Indian reservations quite a bit cheaper and people do.

Since the cartels want to stay in business and continue to make money, I'm sure many of them will continue either way.

One can buy prescription drugs in Mexico for about 1/3 or 1/2 the price of US drugs. As far as I know there are not cartels for these type drugs or a black market but the point is, many people will go where the prices are cheaper. Since cartels are already here all over the country, there is every liklihood they will continue at cheaper rates.

[kyforhillary]

You know, not every place in the country has legal alcohol sales, yes, I know even in this day and age there are still communities that live in the dark ages. We do have bootleggers here where I live, so yes they will circumvent the laws.

[Laura Cereta]

Tobacco & alcohol have long been legal so there is little or no "industry" in tobacco or alcohol being sold by others at lower prices. However, you can get cigarettes online and on Indian reservations quite a bit cheaper and people do.

Since the cartels want to stay in business and continue to make money, I'm sure many of them will continue either way.

One can buy prescription drugs in Mexico for about 1/3 or 1/2 the price of US drugs. As far as I know there are not cartels for these type drugs or a black market but the point is, many people will go where the prices are cheaper. Since cartels are already here all over the country, there is every liklihood they will continue at cheaper rates.

So, the answer is no.

[sojourner]

Because this happens all the time with tobacco and alcohol?
Alcohol and tobacco

It has been reported that smuggling one truckload of cigarettes from a low-tax US state to a high-tax state can lead to a profit of up to $2 million.[7] The low-tax states are generally the major tobacco producers, and have come under enormous criticism for their reluctance to increase taxes. North Carolina eventually agreed to raise its taxes from 5 cents to 35 cents per pack of 20 cigarettes, although this remains far below the national average.[8] But South Carolina has so far refused to follow suit and raise taxes from seven cents per pack (the lowest in the USA).[9]

In the UK it has been reported that "27% of cigarettes and 68% of roll your own tobacco [is] purchased on the black market".[10]
[edit]
Booze Cruise
Main article: Booze Cruise

In the UK, the Booze Cruise— a day-trip ferry to continental Europe simply to get alcohol and tobacco at lower tax rates— is still very popular. Its popularity varies on the Euro to Sterling exchange rate, and the relative tax rates between the different countries. Some people do not even bother to get off the boat, they buy their stock on board and sail straight back. Ferry companies offer extremely low fares, in the expectation that they will make the money up in sales on the boat. The same system exists for boats between Liverpool and Dublin, Ireland.

Providing the goods are for personal consumption, "Booze Cruises" are entirely legal. Because there are no customs restrictions between European Union countries it is not strictly a black market, but closer to a grey market. The UK and Ireland are both European Union members and are both in a Common Travel Area so there are neither customs nor passport checks between the two countries.

If taxes and the added costs of government regulation drive the cost of legal drugs above the market rate, there will continue to be a black market for drugs and the flow of drugs from Mexico.

[kyforhillary]

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner........SoJourner. We also just had a case here in Ky. about bootleg cigarettes worth millions and millions. Two or three guys together, they are in court now. So, no legalization will not stop the illigal drug trade.

[mack20]

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner........SoJourner. We also just had a case here in Ky. about bootleg cigarettes worth millions and millions. Two or three guys together, they are in court now. So, no legalization will not stop the illigal drug trade.

Uh, I'm not sure anyone here who is arguing for legalization thinks that it would be the magic band-aid that would immediately stop all drug trafficking and that all black markets would instantly become obsolete.