I feel bad for the guy, I do.
I can understand how he is fed up with garbage and such that gets left around.
I guess he feels this is the only way to solve the problem and it sorta seems to be working.
However, it is a hellva risk, and I fully expect to hear that he is shot when he tried to strong-arm the wrong folks.
There is a lot left out. For example, does he own the 20,000 acres, or is any of it leased for grazing rights?
They call him a rancher, not a farmer, so I don't think it is a crazy idea that some of this might be land leased for grazing.
---edit---
My bad, it does say
Barnett's 22,000-acre ranch, about five miles north of the Mexican border, includes private and federal lease holdings in addition to nearly 14,000 acres of state-leased land.
---end edit---
Now, if I was out hunting on public lands, and a man pulled a gun on my nephew (who is Hispanic) I am not sure how I would feel about that. I think someone would get shot, or we would at least have a mexican standoff.
a jury awarded a family of Mexican-Americans on a hunting trip $100,000 in damages, later upheld by the Arizona Supreme Court.
They could have been dove, quail, or even deer hunting. A reasonable assumption was that they were walking, that is why he approached them. They would have been armed, after all, they were hunting. Some kind of altercation must have occurred, they won a law suit. Seems a good way to get shot if you ask me.
While I sympathize with him and wish our government would better take care of its own citizens, I can't agree that this is a good way to handle the situation. He keeps this up, sounds like he is going to run out of money soon.
