Water for Illegals Nets Man 300 Hours of Service and Probation

a saved life is worth the law breaking.

On Tuesday, a judge in Arizona sentenced Walt Staton to 300 hours of community service and a year of probation. While this seems like a normal sentence for a small crime, the crime itself was not normal. Staton had been leaving bottles of water in the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge for illegal aliens who were crossing through the Refuge on their way to a better life.

Now, the facts of the case are quite clear, and nobody is debating them. Staton was leaving water for illegals, who, frankly need it. Hundreds of these people die each year, simply trying to get into America. Their being here might be wrong, but we shouldn’t let them die on the way. Staton admits to this, so his guilt is not the issue.

The issue is the fact that he was brought up on this at all. The federal government argued that Staton was aiding and abetting crime, by helping keep the Mexicans alive. They claimed that he was “protesting the actions of the government” by helping the fugitives. Staton, of course, simply argued that he was being a humanitarian.

Now, for starters, I see a glaring problem with what the government was arguing. Instead of simply saying he was aiding crime, they said he was doing this in protest. That immediately moves this to the freedom of speech realm, and that is a different issue entirely. If the government doesn’t want protest speech involved here, then don’t bring that up.

Then, I have an issue with the actual charge. Leaving water out for somebody is not helping them commit a crime, it is helping them live. If Staton was standing around with a car, or a map, or something like that, I could understand the government’s point. However, all he was doing was saving lives, and it is wrong to convict on that. What’s next, charging a doctor for treating an illegal alien?

The park, of course, acted extremely rational in this issue. They pointed out that not only was it littering, but it could endanger the animals. Plastic bottles can choke smaller animals, and become lodged on the body of bigger ones. This, of course, serves as a disadvantage to the animals. Additionally, if they can get the water open, it causes a dependence on humans, which is bad. This is the angle that the government should have taken.

In all honesty, I think that what Staton was doing is good, but he was doing it in the wrong way. He should have left water out in canteens, not plastic, as those serve very little danger to animals (and they can’t get in). He also should never have written good luck on the bottles, as that harms his claims. One day, I hope that the federal government will leave water out for these crossers, as a saved life is worth the law breaking.