When I said out of context, I meant the totallity of the six posts I had made before your first post. I know you think you 'gotcha! me', but I think the following exchange, and my acknowledgement of my statements speak for themselves.

From: KB in Iowa - PM
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 03:20 PM
People who are here illegally (not those here legally), should have no legal rights in the United States.

But you did say this, John. Taking this comment at face value would indicate that if the illegals were shot or mauled by dogs there should be no consequences to the person who did the shooting or commanded the dogs.

From: John on the Sunset Coast - PM
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 03:30 PM

I did say that. But shooting without provocation or attack people people with out provocation is against the laws of the state. If the state prosecutes, that's one thing, but illegal folks should have no standing to sue.

From: KB in Iowa - PM
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 03:41 PM

I guess I take broader view of the term "No Legal Rights" than you do. If you mean no right to sue in the US court system then say so. "No legal rights" says much, much more to me.

From: John on the Sunset Coast - PM
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 05:07 PM

"If you mean no right to sue in the US court system then say so."

I think I did, "...illegal folks should have no standing to sue." Duh!
We are talking about folks inside the US trespassing on private property! I don't think I could be clearer than that!

Now if you want to move the subject forward with something about this rancher's case, great. I'm through responding to side issues.