NationStates Jolt Archive

So a bunch of Latinos in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make illegal immigration a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060325/D8GIA4982.html

great logic on that one. :rolleyes:

why would they bring attention to themselves if they're already here illegally?

and besides, making it a felony, what would that do? put them in our prisons? how does that help? when thy get out, they would be naturalized!

Felony meaning illegals are locked up?

great logic on that one. :rolleyes:

why would they bring attention to themselves if they're already here illegally?

and besides, making it a felony, what would that do? put them in our prisons? how does that help? when thy get out, they would be naturalized!
Not to mention prisons are already overcrowded.

*hands out copies of Civil Disobedience*

So a bunch of Latinos in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make illegal immigration a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060325/D8GIA4982.html

This makes me sick when people advocate violating the law of the land.

This makes me sick when people advocate violating the law of the land.
It makes me sick when people advocate small-mindedness.

So a bunch of Latinos in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make illegal immigration a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060325/D8GIA4982.html

You know, I find it really hard to work up any passion for the constant whining about illegals crossing the border from the South.

Most of us aren't natives... and they were here first.

The Spanish were here second, and if one looks at Mexico City, for example, they are practically homogenous with the natives, now.

So - us (mainly) English, Dutch and French settlers are sitting here bitching about how we need to protect our borders from.... people that were already HERE when we got here, and started building our little fences...

It makes me sick when people advocate small-mindedness.
No shit. These small-minded latinos can't see past their latino identity to support their newly adopted country.

You know, I find it really hard to work up any passion for the constant whining about illegals crossing the border from the South.

Most of us aren't natives... and they were here first.
They were?

It makes me sick when people advocate small-mindedness.

:confused:

What are you going on about?

No shit. These small-minded latinos can't see past their latino identity to support their newly adopted country.
And these small-minded Americans can't see past their fear of everything to act rationally.

:confused:

What are you going on about?
You. And your small mind. That's what I'm on about.

And these small-minded Americans can't see past their fear of everything to act rationally.
Are you saying that the United States should be the only country in the world that has no immigration laws?

You. And your small mind. That's what I'm on about.

I have a small mind for not violating the law? I have a small mind to denounce those who advocate breaking the law?

You know, I find it really hard to work up any passion for the constant whining about illegals crossing the border from the South.

Most of us aren't natives... and they were here first.

The Spanish were here second, and if one looks at Mexico City, for example, they are practically homogenous with the natives, now.

So - us (mainly) English, Dutch and French settlers are sitting here bitching about how we need to protect our borders from.... people that were already HERE when we got here, and started building our little fences...
Actually Mexico's got an ongoing history of killing Indians. Why the hell should we just open our borders to anyone and everyone without any controls? What other nation does that?

I have a small mind for not violating the law? I have a small mind to denounce those who advocate breaking the law?

Our Founding Fathers broke the law too. *nod*

The United States was created by law breakers. In the early years of it's existence, one of the most honorable occupations you could have was 'smuggler'. We break laws. It's our tradition. :)

Our Founding Fathers broke the law too. *nod*

The United States was created by law breakers. In the early years of it's existence, one of the most honorable occupations you could have was 'smuggler'. We break laws. It's our tradition. :)

Yes we did but who broke the law first? King George III or the 2nd Continental Congress?

¡nadie es ilegal!

besides, in addition to making it a felony to not have the right paperwork, this bill also makes it a felony to help illegal immigrants. fuck that shit.

Actually Mexico's got an ongoing history of killing Indians. Why the hell should we just open our borders to anyone and everyone without any controls? What other nation does that?

Yeah... because all the Native Americans that died in this country, died of kitten-licks, yes?

But, as I said, you look at the population of Mexico City, you see a huge representation of 'Native' blood.

¡nadie es ilegal!

besides, in addition to making it a felony to not have the right paperwork, this bill also makes it a felony to help illegal immigrants. fuck that shit.

You don't think it should be a felony for those who help others break the law?

¡nadie es ilegal!

besides, in addition to making it a felony to not have the right paperwork, this bill also makes it a felony to help illegal immigrants. fuck that shit.
Yes, it's a great day for democracy. Criminalizing Samaritanism is the absolute fucking height of depravity.

Yes, it's a great day for democracy. Criminalizing Samaritanism is the absolute fucking height of depravity.

Non-people don't get help. Sorry, but that's what they are.

Yes, it's a great day for democracy. Criminalizing Samaritanism is the absolute fucking height of depravity.
:D Samaritanism?:D

Non-people don't get help. Sorry, but that's what they are.

Are you confusing 'legal citizens' and 'people'?

Yes we did but who broke the law first? King George III or the 2nd Continental Congress?

Sometimes the law needs to be broken.

How else are you going to test it's constitutionality?

Courts only review laws when someone breaks them. The Supreme COurt woud have nothing to do if everybody obeyed laws they don't agree with.

Breaking the law is what makes this country great. :)

Yeah... because all the Native Americans that died in this country, died of kitten-licks, yes?

But, as I said, you look at the population of Mexico City, you see a huge representation of 'Native' blood.
What I'm saying is that the US doesn't still have a policy of killing Indians. Mexico, accordint to EZLN, still does. So what if Mexican's have more native blood mixed in? They're acting like the early American settlers that you denounce for killing Indians. We're just protecting our borders, much like the Native Americans tried to do.

Are you confusing 'legal citizens' and 'people'?

A non-person is a person or a member of a group who lacks social or legal status.

Sometimes the law needs to be broken.

How else are you going to test it's constitutionality?

Courts only review laws when someone breaks them. The Supreme COurt woud have nothing to do if everybody obeyed laws they don't agree with.

Breaking the law is what makes this country great. :)

Your right about the courts but how does that answer my question on who violated the law the first? King George III or the 2nd Continental Congress?

i dont suppose any of you thought the japanese were nutz in that thread about how a guy got a prison term for stealing 2 yen from a shrine?

making it a FELONY to cross a line without the proper paperwork? are they NUTZ?

ohmygod juan crossed the border without papers so he could pick lettuce or mow someones yard! now THAT deserves 30 to life!

we dont have the prison space or the money to keep all the illegal aliens locked up for years on a felony. its stupid to think that we would want to spend that much money on a "crime" that is a violation of paperwork.

i dont see this as so much different from going to jail for sitting at a lunch counter. i guess i better look to see if albuquerque is going to have a protest so i can join it.

The Supreme COurt woud have nothing to do if everybody obeyed laws they don't agree with.

Yes. Think of the poor judges you selfish bastards.:)

I for one do not care if they stay go or light thier crotches on fire as long as they pay thier friggin taxxes.

Though i would like to see them set their crotches on fire.

You know, these Mexicans should consider themselves lucky. If they tried to get into Australia, they'd be in a detention camp (and rightfully so).

i dont suppose any of you thought the japanese were nutz in that thread about how a guy got a prison term for stealing 2 yen from a shrine?

making it a FELONY to cross a line without the proper paperwork? are they NUTZ?

ohmygod juan crossed the border without papers so he could pick lettuce or mow someones yard! now THAT deserves 30 to life!

we dont have the prison space or the money to keep all the illegal aliens locked up for years on a felony. its stupid to think that we would want to spend that much money on a "crime" that is a violation of paperwork.

i dont see this as so much different from going to jail for sitting at a lunch counter. i guess i better look to see if albuquerque is going to have a protest so i can join it.

A felony doesn't always carry a prison term. For example, a guy can be picked up for felony possesion of a concealed deadly weapon and the judge can decide not to lock him up.

:D Samaritanism?:D
this bill also makes it a felony to help illegal immigrants. fuck that shit.
Indeed, fuck that shit. These here United States weren't established as a Goddamn dictatorship.

¡nadie es ilegal!

besides, in addition to making it a felony to not have the right paperwork, this bill also makes it a felony to help illegal immigrants. fuck that shit.

I agree, helping criminals should be legal. When I hold down the girl so you can rape her, I should not be subject to prosecution as an accessory. Same thing when I help you hide a body after you've murdered someone. The very idea of making a criminal out of someone who did nothing but assist the actual criminal is dumb isn't it?

Indeed, fuck that shit. These here United States weren't established as a Goddamn dictatorship.
So helping them across the border for example is now samaritanism. Those poor smugglers.

You know, these Mexicans should consider themselves lucky. If they tried to get into Australia, they'd be in a detention camp (and rightfully so).
As long as they didn't drown along the way.

What is the point of this thread? Are we supposed to tolerate unrestricted immigration from anywhere? Just Mexico? How about the Chinese?

If we say "no", then we need to enforce whatever measures that will back up that stand. If we say "yes", then Heaven help us because we will have legitimized a sub-class of the population much like Europe has done with their guest workers.

What I'm saying is that the US doesn't still have a policy of killing Indians. Mexico, accordint to EZLN, still does. So what if Mexican's have more native blood mixed in? They're acting like the early American settlers that you denounce for killing Indians. We're just protecting our borders, much like the Native Americans tried to do.

The Zapatista situation has been almost entirely without conflict (much less, bloodshed) for decades... how do you believe this supports your argument of anti-native violence?

As long as they didn't drown along the way.

What is the point of this thread? Are we supposed to tolerate unrestricted immigration from anywhere? Just Mexico? How about the Chinese?

If we say "no", then we need to enforce whatever measures that will back up that stand. If we say "yes", then Heaven help us because we will have legitimized a sub-class of the population much like Europe has done with their guest workers.
You already have. For a long time now.

A non-person is a person or a member of a group who lacks social or legal status.

Curious. So - while I was waiting my legal change of status, having moved from the UK to the US, to live with my wife and family... I was 'not a person'?

Hey, you Americans should make a gameshow of it. Just lay down a really thick minefield, and those who don't die get citizenship.

If they lose a leg but survive they have to start again.

Curious. So - while I was waiting my legal change of status, having moved from the UK to the US, to live with my wife and family... I was 'not a person'?

I suppose.

As long as they didn't drown along the way.

What is the point of this thread? Are we supposed to tolerate unrestricted immigration from anywhere? Just Mexico? How about the Chinese?

If we say "no", then we need to enforce whatever measures that will back up that stand. If we say "yes", then Heaven help us because we will have legitimized a sub-class of the population much like Europe has done with their guest workers.
But Europe's guest workers have integrated so well. [/sarcasm]

The US has had great success in integrating new citizens from overseas. In the past those citizens have, like my parents did, entered the country legally and became citizens. Having an invasion of people who don't consider themselves Americans and who undermine the wages earned by our citizens is clearly not in our best interests.

The Zapatista situation has been almost entirely without conflict (much less, bloodshed) for decades... how do you believe this supports your argument of anti-native violence?
The Zapatistas themselves allege that the Mexican government has been slaughtering Indians.

Your right about the courts but how does that answer my question on who violated the law the first? King George III or the 2nd Continental Congress?

It's not really relevant. It's a whole can of worms in and of itself. As Monarch, could King George III even break the law? Maybe yes, maybe no. Maybe he broke the law first, maybe not. It's really not worth debating because whether or not he broke the law doesn't change the fact that a bunch of our ancestors believed that there was a time and a place to break the law too.

That hasn't changed. People break laws they don't agree with. They take upon themselves the responsibility for their actions for better or for worse. That's the American Way. Whether or not there ought to be immigration laws is really not the point. The point is that your insistence that people obey laws they don't agree with is Unamerican. People in this country have a Constitutional Right to suffer the consequences of their decisions. :)

You already have. For a long time now.
Yes and no. It is accepted but not legal. That's the contradiction that I, and many others, would like to see resolved.

The Zapatistas themselves allege that the Mexican government has been slaughtering Indians.

Really?

I can recall one fairly vocal incident (the Massacre of Acteal), where 45 people were killed by unidentified assailants who MIGHT have been government-related paramilitaries. No identies of killers were revealed. No motives declared. It isn't even certain the Massacre of Acteal was even related to the EZLN situation.

There have been other, similarly unsupported accusations on a smaller scale... but most of the EZLN related complaints have been about allegations of wrongful detention or prosecution... or the enforced relocations.

I think you are overplaying a weak hand.

A felony doesn't always carry a prison term. For example, a guy can be picked up for felony possesion of a concealed deadly weapon and the judge can decide not to lock him up.
wouldnt that make it even more stupid to make it a felony?

we would go from what we do now...

finding an illegal alien, putting him on a bus and dropping him off over the border into mexico.

to..

finding an illegal alien, arresting him, holding him in jail for months until a space opens on the docket, providing him with a lawyer, having a days trial, holding him in jail until verdict, convicting him, holding him in jail until the sentencing phase, sentencing him to time in prison that is <whatever the fuck the word is> to a few years probation, THEN PUTTING HIM ON A BUS AND DROPPING HIM OVER THE BORDER INTO MEXICO

I suppose.

So - despite the fact that I was working full-time to support a family, paying taxes and social security... I was not a person?

So - despite the fact that I was working full-time to support a family, paying taxes and social security... I was not a person?

Did anybody legally recognise you?

wouldnt that make it even more stupid to make it a felony?

we would go from what we do now...

finding an illegal alien, putting him on a bus and dropping him off over the border into mexico.

to..

finding an illegal alien, arresting him, holding him in jail for months until a space opens on the docket, providing him with a lawyer, having a days trial, holding him in jail until verdict, convicting him, holding him in jail until the sentencing phase, sentencing him to time in prison that is <whatever the fuck the word is> to a few years probation, THEN PUTTING HIM ON A BUS AND DROPPING HIM OVER THE BORDER INTO MEXICO

Maybe the strip searches will keep them from trying again. :p

Did anybody legaly recognise you?

Did anybody legally recognize YOU?

No shit. These small-minded latinos can't see past their latino identity to support their newly adopted country.
If they want to be in the US why the Hell are they waving Mexican Flags around. The US is not Mexico, why are they waving the flags of the nation they ABANDONED. Is that defending Mexico?

Did anybody legally recognize YOU?

Yeah. Australia.

So a bunch of Latinos in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make illegal immigration a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060325/D8GIA4982.html
I guess the drunk commies you deleted are back.

If they want to be in the US why the Hell are they waving Mexican Flags around. The US is not Mexico, why are they waving the flags of the nation they ABANDONED. Is that defending Mexico?
They see the US as an extension of Mexico, they're so full of shit.

Yeah. Australia.

The continent? That's some trick! :p

Did anybody legally recognise you?

They legally recognised my taxes, and my social security payments.

However, it took another three years to get my 'legal' permenant residency.

They see the US as an extension of Mexico, they're so full of shit.

Yeah... because Texas was originally.... well, you get the point...

If they want to be in the US why the Hell are they waving Mexican Flags around. The US is not Mexico, why are they waving the flags of the nation they ABANDONED. Is that defending Mexico?
Considering the US conquered a significant chunk of Mexico, maybe it's not too surprising.

And we see a Helluva lot of Confederate flags - you afraid of a flag?

I for one do not care if they stay go or light thier crotches on fire as long as they pay thier friggin taxxes.

Though i would like to see them set their crotches on fire.
But they don't pay Taxes because they're 'not' here Supposidly.


So helping them across the border for example is now samaritanism. Those poor smugglers.
drug dealers will be glad for the help.

Considering the US conquered a significant chunk of Mexico, maybe it's not too surprising.

And we see a Helluva lot of Confederate flags - you afraid of a flag?
No but I consider it tacky since these people backstabbed by fleeing Mexico like Rats fleeing a sinking ship, then they turn around and say how proud they are for being Mexican. If you are so proud of being a Mexican, then go back!

No, but as a nationalist, I see it as an insult. The only time it seems appropriate to me to wave another nation's flag here is during the Olympics.

They see the US as an extension of Mexico, they're so full of shit.

Are they?

150 years ago, it WAS an extension of Mexico.

That wasn't very long ago. Israel was 'reclaimed' after a much longer period of nonexistence.

Are they?

150 years ago, it WAS an extension of Mexico.

That wasn't very long ago. Israel was 'reclaimed' after a much longer period of nonexistence.
True, but I could have sworn this is what happened.

Group of Americans revolt in Texas, form own country, then ask to get in.

Besides, the Mexicans didn't complain until now, they had their chance.

They legally recognised my taxes, and my social security payments.

However, it took another three years to get my 'legal' permenant residency.

That's different. I don't know what that status is called, but they recognised you.

You don't think it should be a felony for those who help others break the law?

You think it should be illegal to treat an illegal immigrant's child for a mortal illness? Or to give an illegal immigrant family food if they're starving?

You think it should be illegal to treat an illegal immigrant's child for a mortal illness? Or to give an illegal immigrant family food if they're starving?

I do not support illegal immigration. If they come here illegally, they deserve to be deported back to Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, or where ever they come from.

True, but I could have sworn this is what happened.

Group of Americans revolt in Texas, form own country, then ask to get in.

Besides, the Mexicans didn't complain until now, they had their chance.

The Mexicans didn't complain....

Don't they teach history, any more?

I have a small mind for not violating the law? I have a small mind to denounce those who advocate breaking the law?
Is such fervent allegiance to authority healthy?

I do not support illegal immigration. If they come here illegally, they deserve to be deported back to Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, or where ever they come from.

Evasion.

That's not what you were asked.

True, but I could have sworn this is what happened.

Group of Americans revolt in Texas, form own country, then ask to get in.

Besides, the Mexicans didn't complain until now, they had their chance.

So the Mexican-American War was over what? Nachos?

The Mexicans didn't complain....

Don't they teach history, any more?

And here I thought the Mexican War was over Texas. :D

Evasion.

That's not what you were asked.

I do not care what you asked me. I do not support illegal immigration for whatever reason.

Is such fervent allegiance to authority healthy?

Uhh... yes. That allegiance is called "following the law."

I agree with Corneliu

Evasion.

That's not what you were asked.

Well, you can do those things, but as an American, it's your duty to call immigration and dob them in afterwards.

And here I thought the Mexican War was over Texas. :D

We might not agree on much... but if we agree on this, it should probably be taken as read that it is 'common knowledge'... no?

I find it surprising that so many Americans aren't pissed that illegal immigrants are mooching off your tax money.

A felony doesn't always carry a prison term. For example, a guy can be picked up for felony possesion of a concealed deadly weapon and the judge can decide not to lock him up.

would you be surprised that they built in mandatory minimums in the bill? it's all 5 to 10 or 10 to 20, with the penalties for 'aiding' illegals to be in the same range as the illegal gets.

I find it surprising that so many Americans aren't pissed that illegal immigrants are mooching off your tax money.
That's what P.Os me most about it, I have to pay for people who shouldn't even be here.

I do not care what you asked me. I do not support illegal immigration for whatever reason.

But, if you were a doctor... would you 'treat an illegal immigrant's child for a mortal illness'?

would you be surprised that they built in mandatory minimums in the bill? it's all 5 to 10 or 10 to 20, with the penalties for 'aiding' illegals to be in the same range as the illegal gets.

Neat. Serve time and then get tossed out! I like that arrangement. Good. I think those aiding these lawbreakers should get more time in prision.

That's what P.Os me most about it, I have to pay for people who shouldn't even be here.

I don't believe you.

If it were that simple, you'd be happy if an amnesty were declared, making all the illegals legal... because then they could be taxed.

So - would that satisfy you?

But, if you were a doctor... would you 'treat an illegal immigrant's child for a mortal illness'?

The oath to do no harm comes into play here but under the law, I would be obligated to report them to the Immigration Authorities and I will do so.

I find it surprising that so many Americans aren't pissed that illegal immigrants are mooching off your tax money.

Between Israel, South Korea and a dozen other pet projects, I'm used to foreigners mooching off my tax money. At least Mexicans pick my crops. :)

But, if you were a doctor... would you 'treat an illegal immigrant's child for a mortal illness'?
I would treat them because its a child. They are still humans.

Oh, and to your second question, I'd rather they were all deported back to where they came from.

Between Israel, South Korea and a dozen other pet projects, I'm used to foreigners mooching off my tax money. At least Mexicans pick my crops. :)
lol

But, if you were a doctor... would you 'treat an illegal immigrant's child for a mortal illness'?

I don't think that's what they mean by "aiding illegals." I think it's more along the lines of habouring them, helping them get through, etc.

I find it surprising that so many Americans aren't pissed that illegal immigrants are mooching off your tax money.

Illegal immigrants do, in fact, pay taxes, in some cases for services that they will never receive.

Between Israel, South Korea and a dozen other pet projects, I'm used to foreigners mooching off my tax money. At least Mexicans pick my crops. :)

Well that's your government's fault, not Israel's or SK's.

And here I thought the Mexican War was over Texas. :D
i thought that the mexican american war was a land grab justified by manifest destiny and sparked by minor border disputes.

Well that's your government's fault, not Israel's or SK's.

Yes, I tried telling my government that, but they won't return my phonecalls. Apparently they're too busy with the Immigration problem. :p

i thought that the mexican american war was a land grab justified by manifest destiny and sparked by minor border disputes.

Actually, it was more of a border dispute provoked by the President of the United States. Of course, the land was in dispute anyways when Texas was annexed by the United States and it was never resolved. It wasn't till after the War that we got the Mexican territories above the border and it wasn't until we bought the land that we got our current border.

I find it surprising that so many Americans aren't pissed that illegal immigrants are mooching off your tax money.

by and large, they aren't. illegals don't ever claim money owed to them from the irs, they pay their sales taxes and property taxes like everybody else, and they rarely claim any services at all.

and at least illegal immigrants aren't cheering for the slaughter of people around the world at the low low cost of hundreds of millions of dollars per day.

Uhh... yes. That allegiance is called "following the law."
Following the law is fine, but to suggest that the law not be changed just because the current government says so is lackeyism.

by and large, they aren't. illegals don't ever claim money owed to them from the irs, they pay their sales taxes and property taxes like everybody else, and they rarely claim any services at all.

Payroll taxes, too, with fake Social Security numbers.

I don't think that's what they mean by "aiding illegals." I think it's more along the lines of habouring them, helping them get through, etc.

That's the problem with that kind of law, though.

You put a phrase as open as 'aiding illegals'... because you want to be able to prosecute sumgglers... but you end up with local jurisdictions busting doctors for medicating babies.

I would treat them because its a child. They are still humans.

Oh, and to your second question, I'd rather they were all deported back to where they came from.

Then, is it not a little dishonest to even mention the taxation?

would you be surprised that they built in mandatory minimums in the bill? it's all 5 to 10 or 10 to 20, with the penalties for 'aiding' illegals to be in the same range as the illegal gets.
Good. I support that as a deterant against further illegal immigration.

Good. I support that as a deterant against further illegal immigration.

dude, come on, nobody sane supports mandatory minimums.

Good. I support that as a deterant against further illegal immigration.

Weren't you complaining about tax dollars? And now we are going to pay for immigrants to be incarcerated?

by and large, they aren't. illegals don't ever claim money owed to them from the irs, they pay their sales taxes and property taxes like everybody else, and they rarely claim any services at all.

and at least illegal immigrants aren't cheering for the slaughter of people around the world at the low low cost of hundreds of millions of dollars per day.
Many illegals work "under the table", that is with no Social Security number that the US government can use to keep track of them and assess taxes. They're just paid cash by their employer. That means that many don't pay any income tax. Also not every state has sales tax, and those that do assess tax at a low percentage like 6% in New Jersey, and exclude items like food, clothing, and other necessities. Therefore unless illegals buy expensive electronics or jewelery they're not paying out much in sales tax. Property taxes are paid by property owners. Illegals don't buy houses in the US.

Also they use up tax money by making use of hospitals without paying for their services, placing an extra burden on the police in areas where illegals live, and making use of other public services.

Weren't you complaining about tax dollars? And now we are going to pay for immigrants to be incarcerated?
The goal is to reduce illegal immigration. If we have to spend a few more dollars to incarcerate them now and it results in much less illegal immigration in the future it's not an expense, it's an investment.

If they want to be in the US why the Hell are they waving Mexican Flags around. The US is not Mexico, why are they waving the flags of the nation they ABANDONED. Is that defending Mexico?
If they could find work in Mexico, I'll bet a lot of them would have stayed. They solve a few problems for the Mexican government, mainly how to provide for the poor. These immigrants send tons of money home.

One of the things that the Georgia Legislature has done is to put a 5% surcharge on any wire transfer of funds if the sending party can't document that they are a legal resident of Georgia and the U.S. That stirred up a lot of illegals.

The goal is to reduce illegal immigration. If we have to spend a few more dollars to incarcerate them now and it results in much less illegal immigration in the future it's not an expense, it's an investment.

Your goal is to reduce illegal immigration. Why should my tax dollars pay for you to have illegal immigrants kept IN this country?

Again, though... isn't that a little dishonest?

"Illegal Immigration" isn't the problem, and you know it.

If it were, you could simply declare all Mexican immigrants legal. Bam. Problem solved in no time flat.

Your goal is to reduce illegal immigration. Why should my tax dollars pay for you to have illegal immigrants kept IN this country?

Again, though... isn't that a little dishonest?

"Illegal Immigration" isn't the problem, and you know it.

If it were, you could simply declare all Mexican immigrants legal. Bam. Problem solved in no time flat.
Illegal immigration is the problem. Declaring all Mexican immigrants legal wouldn't be solving the problem any more than calling the money a thief takes from you a donation makes it all better.

I'm going to go with DCD on this one. Before immigration was regulated the USA experienced a massive population boom that saw no end in sight. Illegal immigrants should not be allowed in the country and we should haul their ass back to Mexico or wherever if caught....or at least sent to prison and then deported.

Many illegals work "under the table", that is with no Social Security number that the US government can use to keep track of them and assess taxes. They're just paid cash by their employer. That means that many don't pay any income tax.

yeah, and? i've worked jobs like that too. it's still a fact that lots of illegals use fake papers and therefore pay payroll taxes, but never claim refunds they would have coming to them.

Also not every state has sales tax, and those that do assess tax at a low percentage like 6% in New Jersey, and exclude items like food, clothing, and other necessities. Therefore unless illegals buy expensive electronics or jewelery they're not paying out much in sales tax.

but they are paying as much as anybody else.

Property taxes are paid by property owners. Illegals don't buy houses in the US.

no, but they do rent them. and landlords pass on the cost of taxes to tenants. come on, this is basic.

Also they use up tax money by making use of hospitals without paying for their services, placing an extra burden on the police in areas where illegals live, and making use of other public services.

illegals disproportionately avoid using services like hospitals because they rightfully fear the authorities. doctors frequently complain about it actually, because that fear can allow major public health problems to develop.

Illegal immigration is the problem. Declaring all Mexican immigrants legal wouldn't be solving the problem any more than calling the money a thief takes from you a donation makes it all better.

your complaint is entirely about the legal status of some paperwork. declaring all of them legal would solve the problem as you've laid it out by definition. to say that it doesn't shows that you don't really care about the status of their paperwork, but something else entirely. what that would be, i leave as an exercise to the reader.

Illegal immigration is the problem. Declaring all Mexican immigrants legal wouldn't be solving the problem any more than calling the money a thief takes from you a donation makes it all better.

Well now, what's worse, the immigration, or the illegality? Seems to me that your problem is with the Mexicans immigrating, period, so that maybe thats whats got you in a mood about this, not that they "violate US law."

I violated US law like a hundred times this week, but that doesn't seem to bother people. Why not, I wonder. I'm not Mexican?

yeah, and? i've worked jobs like that too. it's still a fact that lots of illegals use fake papers and therefore pay payroll taxes, but never claim refunds they would have coming to them.


Most don't
but they are paying as much as anybody else. Really? Are alot of illegals working for $7/hour buying expensive electronics, jewelery, new cars, and other big ticket items? I somehow think that they're not.



no, but they do rent them. and landlords pass on the cost of taxes to tenants. come on, this is basic. illegals often live in large groups in small homes or apartments. An equivalent number of citizens would rent more apartments. That means that illegals still contribute less in terms of property taxes than actual citizens.



illegals disproportionately avoid using services like hospitals because they rightfully fear the authorities. doctors frequently complain about it actually, because that fear can allow major public health problems to develop. All the more reason to clamp down on illegal immigration. Plus they do end up using hospital emergency rooms, ambulances, and make more work for the police.

Well now, what's worse, the immigration, or the illegality? Seems to me that your problem is with the Mexicans immigrating, period, so that maybe thats whats got you in a mood about this, not that they "violate US law."

I violated US law like a hundred times this week, but that doesn't seem to bother people. Why not, I wonder. I'm not Mexican?
What bothers me is that illegals are placing a burden on the USA and endangering our security because of crime and because of the threat that a terrorist might sneak into our country with them. Legal immigration doesn't mother me.

I couldn't care less if we got the same ammount of Mexican immigrants every year as long as each of them came here legally and was subject to the same rules for citizenship as my parents were when they came here. Bringing up race is a cheap shot that pro-illegal alien people use to try to discredit and silence their opponents without making a real case for their point of view.

What bothers me is that illegals are placing a burden on the USA and endangering our security because of crime and because of the threat that a terrorist might sneak into our country with them. Legal immigration doesn't mother me.
.
terrorists dont wade the rio grande, they come into the country with all their papers in order arriving in a nice airconditioned airplane.

IF terrorists had to walk through the stinking desert to get into the US, it being a felony wouldnt bother them now would it.

terrorists dont wade the rio grande, they come into the country with all their papers in order arriving in a nice airconditioned airplane.

IF terrorists had to walk through the stinking desert to get into the US, it being a felony wouldnt bother them now would it.
As we tighten security to prevent terrorists from entering the Mexican border will become a more attractive entry point for them unless we tighten border security.

By making it a felony to assist illegals entering the country we can crack down on and reduce the number of criminals who drive truckloads of illegals into the US every year, which will make it harder for any terrorists to cross the border. They won't have as much access to people who make a living finding ways across.

You know, I find it really hard to work up any passion for the constant whining about illegals crossing the border from the South.



you have obviously never lived in a town near the border, or if you did you didn't pay much attention.

My views on illegal immigration changed drastically when I moved from OKC (which I thought was swimming with illegals) to Tucson,AZ. Illegal immigration is a huge problem, and it's not going to be fixed by us ignoring it.

I don't think that it's wise or prudent to lock up illegals, mainly because it costs a bunch of money that we don't have.

Although, the protest is funny, I don't see how it's much different than potheads who try to get the marijuana laws changed, believe me, if they tried to make possession of mary jane a felony you would see a lot of the "pot activists" out on the street corner whining about that too.

we are protesting because this can also lead to discrimination against many assume that because we speak spanish that we are immigrants your wrong I may speak spanish but I was born and raised here and having a
such as that may hinder terrorism but it also fuels rasicm and discrimination. thats why

we are protesting because this can also lead to discrimination against many assume that because we speak spanish that we are immigrants your wrong I may speak spanish but I was born and raised here and having a
such as that may hinder terrorism but it also fuels rasicm and discrimination. thats why
How does cracking down on a crime lead to discrimination?

we are protesting because this can also lead to discrimination against many assume that because we speak spanish that we are immigrants your wrong I may speak spanish but I was born and raised here and having a
such as that may hinder terrorism but it also fuels rasicm and discrimination. thats why

Nice to see you support law breakers. How do you figure this will lead to more discrimination?

because its not cracking down on crime its hindering working immigrants in the country, and people assume if you speak spanish then your an immigrant

Maybe the US should just annex Mexico, that way there wouldn't be any mexican illegal immigrants

because its not cracking down on crime its hindering working immigrants in the country, and people assume if you speak spanish then your an immigrant
No it's not. It's just increasing the penalties on those who violate US law. Of course playing the race card is a great way to silence opposition and get your way in this country, so that dishonest and divisive tactic is being used alot by those who support illegal immigration.

impractical, firstly mexico would never accept even a such a proposal, let alone if it was forceful it would fell just the same. like wise no real mexican from mexico counts themself as a american even when they do move here

because its not cracking down on crime its hindering working immigrants in the country, and people assume if you speak spanish then your an immigrant

its not cracking down on crime? So you support illegal immigration?

impractical, firstly mexico would never accept even a such a proposal, let alone if it was forceful it would fell just the same. like wise no real mexican from mexico counts themself as a american even when they do move here
well if they are all coming over here to work anyway...by the time they found out we would have possession...besides Mexico can't even deal with its own rebels...I doubt they would be more than a speed bump for the US.

great logic on that one. :rolleyes:

why would they bring attention to themselves if they're already here illegally?

and besides, making it a felony, what would that do? put them in our prisons? how does that help? when thy get out, they would be naturalized!
Wow...that is funny. And, don't think I'm a racist, but if you Mexicans want to get in here, come through legally. Get a legal job and pay taxes like everyone else.

no I never said that. I am refering to the law they are proposing. its set up to the point that it will lead to discrimination in the us to those hispanic citizens

no I never said that. I am refering to the law they are proposing. its set up to the point that it will lead to discrimination in the us to those hispanic citizens
Please explain how this law will lead to discrimination.

impractical, firstly mexico would never accept even a such a proposal, let alone if it was forceful it would fell just the same. like wise no real mexican from mexico counts themself as a american even when they do move here Wow, that's a good reason to stop immigration from Mexico altogether, not that I'm advocating that course of action.

okay well one example of the law was a proposal that current illeagal immigrants should be turned over to the government to be deported. and that those who are looking for jobs and are willing to work for lower wages be turned away

no I never said that. I am refering to the law they are proposing. its set up to the point that it will lead to discrimination in the us to those hispanic citizens

Explain how! I'm dying of curiosity.

[QUOTE=Drunk commies deleted]Wow, that's a good reason to stop immigration from Mexico altogether, not that I'm advocating that course of action.[/QUOTE

they come because they want to become citizens they come for work, jobs and money.

okay well one example of the law was a proposal that current illeagal immigrants should be turned over to the government to be deported. and that those who are looking for jobs and are willing to work for lower wages be turned away

Good! If they do not have proper paperwork, they shouldn't be here. Period. Hence why illegal immigration is a crime.

Wow, that's a good reason to stop immigration from Mexico altogether, not that I'm advocating that course of action.

they come because they want to become citizens they come for work, jobs and money.

Then why not come here legally?

This makes me sick when people advocate violating the law of the land.

Martin Luther King, Jr. must have really upset you then. How dare he not respect Jim Crow laws!

Explain how! I'm dying of curiosity.

okay. mexicans from mexico speak spanish. they are many hispanics here whom speak spanish as well. a very idiotic person who is looking to hire may make the assumption that a person who speaks spanish is an immigrant

okay well one example of the law was a proposal that current illeagal immigrants should be turned over to the government to be deported. and that those who are looking for jobs and are willing to work for lower wages be turned away
So deporting people who are here illegally is racism? No, I don't agree. If I entered Mexico illegally I don't think they'd welcome me with open arms. In fact, they're pretty hard-nosed when dealing with Central Americans who cross the border north into Mexico without papers.

Then why not come here legally?

You have no clue. No clue whatsoever.

Obviously those born on the other side of a political border are not our equals and must be kept out of here.

[QUOTE=Drunk commies deleted]Wow, that's a good reason to stop immigration from Mexico altogether, not that I'm advocating that course of action.[/QUOTE

they come because they want to become citizens they come for work, jobs and money.
If they want to become citizens they should consider themselves Americans, not Mexicans. That doesn't mean that they have to abandon Mexican culture and Spanish language, just adopt loyalty to the nation they've chosen to join. In your post you stated that no Mexican from Mexico would count himself an American even if he moves here. That's a pretty lousy attitude toward the nation that you CHOSE to adopt.

no deporting people from mexico is not rasicm I am merly stating that they're is a possiblitie that those whom can take advantage of the laws will point a finger at those citizens whom do speak spanish, and not provide them the same ample opportunite to get a job as a regular citizen becuase they might assume they they are an immigrant for the very simple fact they may speak spanish

Martin Luther King, Jr. must have really upset you then. How dare he not respect Jim Crow laws!
That's different. C'mon, not allowing immigration without paperwork is not racism. We are letting people who could possibly be:

terrorists
criminals
future criminals
people who get the same rights as Americans without paying taxes
take jobs that other people might want because corporations don't have to pay minumum wages (this doesn't just hurt Americans, it hurts those who cross the border legally).

That is not fair to the average American, and is not fair to people who cross the border legally.

So deporting people who are here illegally is racism? No, I don't agree. If I entered Mexico illegally I don't think they'd welcome me with open arms. In fact, they're pretty hard-nosed when dealing with Central Americans who cross the border north into Mexico without papers.

So we should asprire to act like Mexico? That is your argument?

Martin Luther King, Jr. must have really upset you then. How dare he not respect Jim Crow laws!

Considering those Jim Crow laws were technically unconstitutional...

Martin Luther King, Jr. must have really upset you then. How dare he not respect Jim Crow laws!
Jim Crow laws were meant to opress black citizens. Laws against illegal immigration apply to white Europeans who enter illegally as well as to Mexicans. They aren't discriminatory and they aren't opressive.

You have no clue. No clue whatsoever.

Obviously those born on the other side of a political border are not our equals and must be kept out of here.

:confused:

okay. mexicans from mexico speak spanish. they are many hispanics here whom speak spanish as well. a very idiotic person who is looking to hire may make the assumption that a person who speaks spanish is an immigrant
Not if he's got a social security card, which is necessary to get a job legally in the US anyway.

no deporting people from mexico is not rasicm I am merly stating that they're is a possiblitie that those whom can take advantage of the laws will point a finger at those citizens whom do speak spanish, and not provide them the same ample opportunite to get a job as a regular citizen becuase they might assume they they are an immigrant for the very simple fact they may speak spanish
Not if they've got documents to prove that they're citizens.

This makes me sick when people advocate violating the law of the land.
That makes me sick when people think they can just waltz into a country that's already populated and act like they have a right to be there.

*hides all the history books*

That's different. C'mon, not allowing immigration without paperwork is not racism. We are letting people who could possibly be:

terrorists
criminals
future criminals
people who get the same rights as Americans without paying taxes
take jobs that other people might want because corporations don't have to pay minumum wages (this doesn't just hurt Americans, it hurts those who cross the border legally).

That is not fair to the average American, and is not fair to people who cross the border legally.

Curious. I merely raised the morality of civil disobedience.

I never even implied that immigration laws are inherently racist. Meethinks though dost protest too much.

Moreover, people born here can be terrorists, criminals, future criminals, etc. There is no special magic to having been born in the US.

Curious. I merely raised the morality of civil disobedience.

I never even implied that immigration laws are inherently racist. Meethinks though dost protest too much.

Moreover, people born here can be terrorists, criminals, future criminals, etc. There is no special magic to having been born in the US.
Oh...opps.

So we should asprire to act like Mexico? That is your argument?
No, my argument is that calling deportation of illegal aliens racist is absurd. If it's racist to do so then Mexican latinos are racist against latinos from Central America because they deport them. Also criticizing US immigration policy while ignoring Mexico's policy is a double standard.

Jim Crow laws were meant to opress black citizens. Laws against illegal immigration apply to white Europeans who enter illegally as well as to Mexicans. They aren't discriminatory and they aren't opressive.

So protesting is only OK if you agree with it? Otherwise it is reprehensible?

So protesting is only OK if you agree with it? Otherwise it is reprehensible?
I never said that they should be stopped from protesting, I merely gave my opinion that what they're protesting for is wrong. Free speech applies to me as well.

No, my argument is that calling deportation of illegal aliens racist is absurd. If it's racist to do so then Mexican latinos are racist against latinos from Central America because they deport them. Also criticizing US immigration policy while ignoring Mexico's policy is a double standard.

Is it possible that the laws that determine who is and who is not allowed to immigrate here are racist?

Is it your contention that it is impossible for Mexico to take racist actions?

I never said that they should be stopped from protesting, I merely gave my opinion that what they're protesting for is wrong. Free speech applies to me as well.
Score!

Is it possible that the laws that determine who is and who is not allowed to immigrate here are racist?

Is it your contention that it is impossible for Mexico to take racist actions?
There are no laws on who. There are laws on how. I don't see how that's racist.

Look this is a really simple question these people have broken the law they deserve to be deported and possibly imprisioned (for a reasonble amount of time) like every other criminal. I have nothing against immigration, if you want to come here more power to you I love this country and its nice that other people want to come here. But if you really want to be here take the time to be here legally.

:headbang: Duh!:headbang:

In your post you stated that no Mexican from Mexico would count himself an American even if he moves here. That's a pretty lousy attitude toward the nation that you CHOSE to adopt.
And also an untrue statement. Many Mexicans consider themselves now loyal US citizens and have served in their armed forces, pay their taxes, occupy public posts and vote. They haven't forgotten their roots and consider themselves a mix of US and Mexico.

I never said that they should be stopped from protesting, I merely gave my opinion that what they're protesting for is wrong. Free speech applies to me as well.


Let's see:

Protesting against a law that DCD likes = bad thing. "How dare you advocate violating the law of the land. How dare you advocate a right to violate US law."

Protesting against a law that DCD does not like = good. MLK was violating unjust and oppressive laws.

By the way, free speech applies to me too. That argument is circular. I never said you had no right to disagree with the protestors.

There are no laws on who. There are laws on how. I don't see how that's racist.

Bullshit. There are laws on who.

If it was simply a matter of anyone who fills out the right form can get in, why do you think people would go to the trouble of illegal immigration -- often at risk to their own lives?

Let's see:

Protesting against a law that DCD likes = bad thing. "How dare you advocate violating the law of the land. How dare you advocate a right to violate US law."

Protesting against a law that DCD does not like = good. MLK was violating unjust and oppressive laws.

By the way, free speech applies to me too. That argument is circular. I never said you had no right to disagree with the protestors.You're just repeating the same thing. If you look at your arguement, you think that we should let anyone who wants to come into our country. For one, that is ridicolous, and two, if we did so, we would be entirely over populated.

But if you really want to be here take the time to be here legally.
This would be very nice if the US immigration laws made it easy or even possible for Mexicans to immigrate legally. The number of temporary work visas allowed every years is ridiculously small and only for agricultural jobs. Only if you have a special talent or get a job before immigration are you allowed in. Getting married is the other one.

There's no way for a regular, professional, technical or unskilled person from Mexico to emigrate legally to the US. The visas are simply not granted.

And it's not like the US doesn't have the jobs or the need for people like this, otherwise they wouldn't be hired almost as soon as they arrive.

So, ease up on the immigration requirements and then talk about how they should immigrate legally.

Bullshit. There are no laws on who.

If it was simply a matter of anyone who fills out the right form can get in, why do you think people would go to the trouble of illegal immigration -- often at risk to their own lives?It's a hard process, yet anyone who does not have a criminal record or something can get it. Why are you making such a big deal about it? And, your first paragraph makes no sense.

So a bunch of Latinos in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make illegal immigration a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060325/D8GIA4982.html


This makes me sick when people advocate violating the law of the land.

Simply assuming that <political_group> is out to destroy our way of life because they have no respect for law is an easy conclusion to draw. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10620811&postcount=82) However, in this case, the issue is more complicated.

I recommend two books: Counting on the Latino Vote: Latinos as a New Electorate by Louis DeSipio and Walls and Mirrors: Mexican Americans, Mexican Immigrants, and the Politics of Ethnicity by David G. Gutiérrez.

Taken together, the message is this: U.S. citizens of Mexican descent do not necessarily advocate immigration, of any kind. These individuals and groups have a history of raising the same objections presented by others in American society: job competition, etc. However, while immigration has been opposed, immigrants have recieved much greater sympathy. Racism in American society has led to a tendency to view U.S. citizens of Mexican/Latino descent and non-citizen immigrants as the same group, when they are not. Thus, U.S. citizens have historically suffered the concequences of laws passed against immigrants and immigration. For instance, repatriation schemes have resulted in the deportation of U.S. citizens. This is especially a problem where unauthorized immigrants have integrated into the same communities as U.S. citizens. Unauthorized immigrants have children, who by birthright are U.S. citizens. Unauthorized immigrants establish families with U.S. citizens, and have children. Thus, not only have individual U.S. citizens historically fallen victim to anti-immigrant/anti-immigration legislation, but entire families have been broken up and communities shattered when such legislation is put into force.

I would not be surprised if that is what the protesters today are fearful of. Are they protesting against the rule of law, or are they protesting against a particular law because they fear that historical injustices against U.S. citizens will again resurface? I'll bet it's the latter.

At any rate, not only does this idea that these groups of protesters "support the right to violate US law" dismiss very relevant historical issues in immigration law, but it also runs counter to studies showing a respect for American ideals among Latino citizens and a desire to integrate into American society among Latino immigrant populations. In one study ("Will the Real Americans Please Stand Up: Anglo and Mexican-American Support of Core American Political Values, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 40, No. 2, May 1996) de la Garza, Falcon, and Garcia find that "Mexican-Americans are no less likely and often more likely to endorse values of individualism and patriotism than are Anglos." Additionally, DeSipio finds, in his book I described above, that large majorities of Latino immigrants (78% of Cuban immigrants, 79% of Mexican immigrants, 93% of Dominican immigrants, 81% other Latino immigrants) to the United States desire to naturalize and become U.S. citizens, but are discouraged by the cost and confusing application process. Taken together, I actually see respect for U.S. law, society, and ideals by resident citizens, as well as a desire by immigrants to enter and become naturalized citizens legally. As such, greatly simplifying and streamlining the immigration and naturalization process would probably serve to greatly reduce the unauthorized immigration problem.

Tot assuming that "those people" don't care about law, by actually trying to examine the issue in detail to find the true motovations for behavior, would probably help too. But, as I have said before, actually solving problems would be politically disasterous. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10620811&postcount=82)

It's a hard process, yet anyone who does not have a criminal record or something can get it. Why are you making such a big deal about it? And, your first paragraph makes no sense.

Excuse me for the typo in my first paragraph.

It is not just a matter of process. There are substantive limits on who is allowed in the country. Only so many people of certain backgrounds are allowed legally.

You act like immigrants come here illegally rather than legally just to avoid the paperwork.

It is simply not true that anyone who does not have a criminal record can legally immigrate to the United States. If it were, we'd have a whole different ball game.

Let's see:

Protesting against a law that DCD likes = bad thing. "How dare you advocate violating the law of the land. How dare you advocate a right to violate US law."

Protesting against a law that DCD does not like = good. MLK was violating unjust and oppressive laws.

By the way, free speech applies to me too. That argument is circular. I never said you had no right to disagree with the protestors.
Yeah, I have opinions. I'm allowed. I also never said the protesters should be rounded up and imprisoned or anything. I just happen to disagree with them. Anybody and everybody supports laws that they consider just and fair. Also most if not all people agree with violating unjust laws through peaceful civil disobedience

You're just repeating the same thing. If you look at your arguement, you think that we should let anyone who wants to come into our country. For one, that is ridicolous, and two, if we did so, we would be entirely over populated.

I thought you said "there are no laws on who" can immigrate?!

Apparently doublespeaking contradictions don't bother you.

This would be very nice if the US immigration laws made it easy or even possible for Mexicans to immigrate legally. The number of temporary work visas allowed every years is ridiculously small and only for agricultural jobs. Only if you have a special talent or get a job before immigration are you allowed in. Getting married is the other one.

There's no way for a regular, professional, technical or unskilled person from Mexico to emigrate legally to the US. The visas are simply not granted.

And it's not like the US doesn't have the jobs or the need for people like this, otherwise they wouldn't be hired almost as soon as they arrive.

So, ease up on the immigration requirements and then talk about how they should immigrate legally.
See, now changing the immigration requirements is a worthwhile goal for these protester. It would allow increased immigration while keepin control over the border and working within the existing framework of the law that requires visas.

Yeah, I have opinions. I'm allowed. I also never said the protesters should be rounded up and imprisoned or anything. I just happen to disagree with them. Anybody and everybody supports laws that they consider just and fair. Also most if not all people agree with violating unjust laws through peaceful civil disobedience

So your complaint that "Latinos protest in support of the 'right' to violate US law" really isn't about whether it is right to protest in support of the right to violate US law.

You just want to keep some people out of the country. Say so. Don't hide behind false rhetoric.

I thought you said "there are no laws on who" can immigrate?!

Apparently doublespeaking contradictions don't bother you.
When I said "No Laws On Who" I meant laws based on race, nationality, sex, or religion. That is true. So, no, I am not a hyprocrite.

So your complaint that "Latinos protest in support of the 'right' to violate US law" really isn't about whether it is right to protest in support of the right to violate US law.

You just want to keep some people out of the country. Say so. Don't hide behind false rhetoric.
I don't agree with the protesters. I'm voicing my disagreement with them. I'm not saying that they should be silenced or punished for protesting. It's their right.

The thread title was written in that way to get people to click on it. Kind of like when the evening news, on their commercials, give one or two controversial lines about a story that they're going to cover so that you'll tune in.

I disapprove of illegal immigration. I have no problem with legal immigration. I would have no problem with legal immigration even if we get the same number of Mexican immigrants each year as long as they share the responsibilities that come with becoming a citizen and we can keep track of the people flowing across our border.

Between Israel, South Korea and a dozen other pet projects, I'm used to foreigners mooching off my tax money. At least Mexicans pick my crops. :)

LOL...this is perhaps the most sensible post I've found in this thread so far.

When I said "No Laws On Who" I meant laws based on race, nationality, sex, or religion. That is true.
No, it's not true. There are immigration laws based on nationality imposing quotas on how many people from different nations can be given visas. It's intended to keep a certain degree of diversity.

When I said "No Laws On Who" I meant laws based on race, nationality, sex, or religion. That is true. So, no, I am not a hyprocrite.

The problem is that "law on how" can be, and historically have been, administered as a means to determine the "who" question. For example, poll taxes and literacy tests administered in the American South in order to prevent African Americans from voting. Sure, technically such measures were not based directly on race or ethnicity. However, African Americans were at the time still much less likely to be able to pay the tax or pass the literacy test, so the practical effect was to exclude African American voters.

The same can be said now for the immigration and naturalization process. Latino, and more specifically Mexican, immigrants tend to be poorer and less educated (often meaning less command of the English language). As such, it is more difficult for these immigrants to pay the necessary fees or to make their way through the complicated paperwork, paperwork written in english. Sure, technically having to pay fees and fill out paperwork has nothing immediately to do with race. However, considering the economic means and education levels of the average immigrant in question, fees and paperwork can serve as significant barriers to specific ethnic or national groups.

You're just repeating the same thing. If you look at your arguement, you think that we should let anyone who wants to come into our country. For one, that is ridicolous, and two, if we did so, we would be entirely over populated.
no one is saying we shouldnt have immigration laws. the topic is about making being in the US without the proper paperwork a FELONY. as in "put the bastards in prison".

it reminds me of a story my sisterinlaw tells. she was working customs at the border stop in columbus new mexico. 2 guys came up, one guy had papers and crossed into the country the other guy was found to not have the right papers. he turned and ran as fast as he could back into mexico. she just stood there looking at him wishing that he understood that its not a crime to come to the booth and get turned back.

does anyone really want to fill the prisons of the US with mexican citizens whose "crime" is not having the right paperwork? do you really want to clog up the already full courts with these cases? do you really want to pay for these people's court appointed lawyers?

doesnt it really make better sense to send them back to mexico and work to make it less attractive to come to the united states?

The problem is that "law on how" can be, and historically have been, administered as a means to determine the "who" question. For example, poll taxes and literacy tests administered in the American South in order to prevent African Americans from voting. Sure, technically such measures were not based directly on race or ethnicity. However, African Americans were at the time still much less likely to be able to pay the tax or pass the literacy test, so the practical effect was to exclude African American voters.

The same can be said now for the immigration and naturalization process. Latino, and more specifically Mexican, immigrants tend to be poorer and less educated (especially with less command of the English language). As such, it is more difficult for these immigrants to pay the necessary fees or to make their way through the complicated paperwork, paperwork written in english. Sure, technically having to pay fees and fill out paperwork has nothing immediately to do with race. However, considering the economic means and education levels of the average immigrant in question, fees and paperwork can serve as significant barriers to specific ethnic or national groups.
To be perfectly honest, that is no analogy. I am not infringing on another person's rights by not allowing them into my country, as they have no right to be in my country. People have the right to be treated equally. They do not have the right to immigrate.

To be perfectly honest, that is no analogy. I am not infringing on another person's rights by not allowing them into my country, as they have no right to be in my country. People have the right to be treated equally. They do not have the right to immigrate.

You are begging the question.

Why should a person's natural rights depend entirely on where they were born?

So a bunch of Latinos in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make illegal immigration a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060325/D8GIA4982.html


Which is why I'm supporting the death penalty for jay-walking. I mean, it's already illegal, so in effect any people against it would be protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties. Who is with me?

You are begging the question.

Why should a person's natural rights depend entirely on where they were born?
They don't. I have no right to immigrate to Britian, Mexico, Germany, Spain, Canada, etc.

To be perfectly honest, that is no analogy. I am not infringing on another person's rights by not allowing them into my country, as they have no right to be in my country. People have the right to be treated equally. They do not have the right to immigrate.

The bolded sentence above is my entire point. The measures we enact as being required in the immigration and naturalization process do not have to be specifically based on race and ethnicity in order to discriminate against individuals and groups on the basis of race and ethnicity. The requirements enacted may be enforced against all races, nationalities, and ethnicities equally, but this does not mean that all races, nationalities, and ethnicities can meet them equally. The end result to to violate the principle, that you declare yourself above, that "people have the right to be treated equally."

And the point of my post was not to equate the plight of African Americans with that of non-citizen immigrants. The point was to demonstrate that "rules on how" can be purposefully enacted in order to restrict the "who" in a racist fashion. Whether immigrants have the right to immigrate is irrevelant; law that promotes racist ends, whether on purpose or not, is racist law.

(Edit: of course, the solution is not to throw out immigration law, but rather to find ways to accomodate the differing situations and abilities of different groups in order to encourage legal immigration and citizenship. Naturally, this will require serious changes to current immigration law.)

They don't. I have no right to immigrate to Britian, Mexico, Germany, Spain, Canada, etc.

Do you understand what begging the question means?

Do you understand what begging the question means?
Please elaborate.

So a bunch of blacks in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make sitting in the white section of the bus a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

So a bunch of blacks in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make sitting in the white section of the bus a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.
They're protesting an unjust and discriminatory law that may be unconstitutional. I'm not sure about the constitutionality, I'm not a lawyer.

The laws against illegal immigration aren't discriminatory. They apply to illegals from anywhere.

Yes, it's a great day for democracy. Criminalizing Samaritanism is the absolute fucking height of depravity.

So if you help a criminal escape your doing a good thing? I'm fine with immigration just not illegal imigration.

It's called freedom of movement. Get some.

So a bunch of Latinos in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make illegal immigration a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060325/D8GIA4982.html

at least it got them off the couch


;)

You know, I find it really hard to work up any passion for the constant whining about illegals crossing the border from the South.

Most of us aren't natives... and they were here first.

The Spanish were here second, and if one looks at Mexico City, for example, they are practically homogenous with the natives, now.

So - us (mainly) English, Dutch and French settlers are sitting here bitching about how we need to protect our borders from.... people that were already HERE when we got here, and started building our little fences...

i really doubt that any of them were here before any of the english, dutch, and french settlers.

So if you help a criminal escape your doing a good thing? I'm fine with immigration just not illegal imigration.

agreed, it is how i feel.

So if you help a criminal escape your doing a good thing? I'm fine with immigration just not illegal imigration.

I see it about the same way, If you want to get here, take the test and get the card.

True, but I could have sworn this is what happened.

Group of Americans revolt in Texas, form own country, then ask to get in.

Besides, the Mexicans didn't complain until now, they had their chance.

and you yanks had plenty of time before you got around to the boston tea party, does that mean you "had your chance" making the whole revolution thing on some level unacceptable, cause you can go back to paying colonial taxes if you like, no skin off my nose.

They don't. I have no right to immigrate to Britian, Mexico, Germany, Spain, Canada, etc.

Tell me, do you have the right to free travel? To change residence?

So a bunch of blacks in major cities in the US are protesting a bill that would make sitting in the white section of the bus a felony. It's already illegal, so in effect they're protesting for the right to violate US law without facing serious penalties.I am not racist either but... anyone helping these colored people take a seat in the white section shall be sent to Jail too. [/sarc]

Tell me, do you have the right to free travel? To change residence?He's free to travel, he just doesn't have the ability to squat on other people's property without their permission. Getting angry about that is rediculous. Generally that kind of thing is called trespassing, and is a prosecutable offense. A person has every right to tell the squatters to get out, and if they don't listen, to call the police and force them out.

The laws against illegal immigration aren't discriminatory. They apply to illegals from anywhere.

Except Cuba.

I waited in Cuba for a few years to emigrate legally.

While I support the Cuban adjustment act and
the dry foot wet foot policy as dry foot no matter what,
because it helps my people, I have to admit it is not fair to other immigrant groups no matter what the reason and it should be abolished.

Legal immigration is legal immigration and all thier rights should be respected, and illegal immigration is illegal immigration.

The government of Mexico deports thier illegal immigrants just like the US does.

Would we support illegal immigration as legal in our NS nations? I dont think so.

I have mixed feelings on the issue.

On the other hand, you come illegally into one of my 40 NS nations and I will do whatever I can to deport you back to your nation.

You come in legally and I will respect all your rights including to protest.

I have no comment on this one...too much to think about at 4:30 AM :mad:

If they enter the country illegally they should be immediately expelled once identified and caught. If you assist them in entering illegally or once they are here, assist them in evading capture and deportation, or you hire them to work for you knowing they are illegal, you should be convicted as an accessory to their crime of illegal entry. If you think I'm a racist because I want to enforce immigration laws, then by all means feel free to do so, just respect my concurrent right to think you're an idiot.

I waited in Cuba for a few years to emigrate legally.

While I support the Cuban adjustment act and
the dry foot wet foot policy as dry foot no matter what,
because it helps my people, I have to admit it is not fair to other immigrant groups no matter what the reason and it should be abolished.

Legal immigration is legal immigration and all thier rights should be respected, and illegal immigration is illegal immigration.

The government of Mexico deports thier illegal immigrants just like the US does.

Would we support illegal immigration as legal in our NS nations? I dont think so.
Pretty much my thoughts on the matter too.

I have a small mind for not violating the law? I have a small mind to denounce those who advocate breaking the law?

Yes.
Because whose law is it? not mine, I didn't sign to follow that law, I just was born in a country and therefore I have to obey the laws of that land?
Ridiculous.

It's time we cracked down on the illegal immigrants. They do no good for anyone. They take jobs away from deserving citizens. They have a right to gather and protest. They do not, however, have a right to come to our country, change the economy, then complain that they don't have enough rights. They have too many rights as it is. They break the law, then you broke the contract between the people and the government. How do they even have the right to protest? Half of them weren't citizens.

Yes.
Because whose law is it? not mine, I didn't sign to follow that law, I just was born in a country and therefore I have to obey the laws of that land?
Ridiculous.

Nice sarcasm.

Nice sarcasm.
It's far easier to pick on the n00bs than to face your peers, isn't it?

How do they even have the right to protest? Half of them weren't citizens.What? Free speech is an exclusive right for citizens now?

I waited in Cuba for a few years to emigrate legally.Interesting.. how long did you have to wait? 3 years? 5?

Pretty much my thoughts on the matter too.

One would wonder if we all had the "right" to violate any laws we felt like without any repercussions, and would have that "right" defended by people who felt sorry for us (rather than vote to change the laws), if there would be anything but total anarchy.

Gee, if it's so popular to let all immigrants off the hook forever, why don't we change the laws?

And, if you're going to put that sort of onus on the US to relegate every immigration restriction to the scrapheap, why don't we start with the same thing in the EU - eliminate all immigration restrictions, border controls, and passport checks.

Do it right now.

And, if you're going to put that sort of onus on the US to relegate every immigration restriction to the scrapheap, Who is doing that to you?
who is doing your onus?

What bothers me is that illegals are placing a burden on the USA and endangering our security because of crime and because of the threat that a terrorist might sneak into our country with them.

Yeah - because ALL crimes are committed by illegal immigrants, yes?

What you are doing here, is pinning all the ills of a culture-in-trouble on ONE ethnic group.

We are poor because of the illegal mexican. We are experiencing high crimerates because of the illegal mexican. We don't have enough jobs because of the illegal mexican.

You might want to revise your history. This is NOT an original platform.

As we tighten security to prevent terrorists from entering the Mexican border will become a more attractive entry point for them unless we tighten border security.


Canadian border would be even more attractive, surely?

Terrorists coming in through Mexico is a red-herring, and we all know it. Our ports are so open, our Northern Border is so open... we have thousands of miles of pretty open coastline... it is pretty disingenuous to pretend that the Mexican border is really going to be the most likely ingress of terror.

you have obviously never lived in a town near the border, or if you did you didn't pay much attention.

My views on illegal immigration changed drastically when I moved from OKC (which I thought was swimming with illegals) to Tucson,AZ. Illegal immigration is a huge problem, and it's not going to be fixed by us ignoring it.

I don't think that it's wise or prudent to lock up illegals, mainly because it costs a bunch of money that we don't have.

Although, the protest is funny, I don't see how it's much different than potheads who try to get the marijuana laws changed, believe me, if they tried to make possession of mary jane a felony you would see a lot of the "pot activists" out on the street corner whining about that too.

No - I haven't lived in a Mexican border town... but that doesn't mean I haven't lived where there are huge amounts of (illegal) immigrants.

My point is - WHAT is the problem with 'illegal immigration'?

People keep saying 'illegal immigration is a problem'... but they are often unspecific as to WWHY they see it as a problem... and when they state a 'reason' it is often disingenuous (at best) or dishonest... and seems to (often) just be a cover for racial prejudice.

I think MOST of our problems with 'illegal immigration' could be solved by an open border to anyone with LEGAL Mexican citizenship.

You're just repeating the same thing. If you look at your arguement, you think that we should let anyone who wants to come into our country. For one, that is ridicolous, and two, if we did so, we would be entirely over populated.

Why would we be 'over-populated'?

We have a declining birth-rate, and in another generation our 'young workers PAYING for social security' will not be enough to cover 'older, retired workers claiming'.

It is in the INTERESTS of the US to import AS MANY young workers as possible, and have them paying taxes.

The logical path, is to legalise all immigration of (legal) Mexican citizens.

Also - if you look at a nation like the UK, it would pretty much fit into... say... Georgia. Yet, it has a population about one-fifth of the ENTIRE US population.

The US is actually incredibilby SPARSELY populated at the moment... we are in no danger of 'over-population'.

I'm not too sure whether this new law is bad or good... on one side it would stop some of the illegal imigrants, and also stop US dollars from going into the Mexican economy.

On the other hand without illegal imigrants the economie migth get hurt, mexicans do jobs that need to be done, and no one else does... they are the gardeners, janitors, and they are virtually in every fast food restaurant.
If all the immigrants were to disapear, who would take those jobs. Would YOU? i know i woulndt.

And also... its not that difficult to come here legally, im from spain and not for one second have i been in the US illegally, i made sure i was legal before i even set foot in the US, and i didnt have to wait "a few years" the problem is that to stay legal and get residency, you have to hand over a lot of money to the goverment. And im pretty sure thats why theres so many illegals, it is just to expensive to stay legal.

No - I haven't lived in a Mexican border town... but that doesn't mean I haven't lived where there are huge amounts of (illegal) immigrants.

My point is - WHAT is the problem with 'illegal immigration'?

People keep saying 'illegal immigration is a problem'... but they are often unspecific as to WWHY they see it as a problem... and when they state a 'reason' it is often disingenuous (at best) or dishonest... and seems to (often) just be a cover for racial prejudice.

I think MOST of our problems with 'illegal immigration' could be solved by an open border to anyone with LEGAL Mexican citizenship.


The reason that I didn't answer the "why?" is because it's my own personal experience and I can't "prove it" nor do I have statistics to back it up, and I would end up getting called racist.

Illegals cost a lot of money esp. in border towns, they work for cash under the table, the send that money back to Mexico, then live off public assistance, use the ER as the doctor's office and don't ever end up paying any taxes in (and no you don't pay sales tax when you get your food with food stamps).

I have seen illegals that don't do this yes, but the majority of them in my own personal experience do, and that is the problem.

No - I haven't lived in a Mexican border town... but that doesn't mean I haven't lived where there are huge amounts of (illegal) immigrants.

My point is - WHAT is the problem with 'illegal immigration'?

People keep saying 'illegal immigration is a problem'... but they are often unspecific as to WWHY they see it as a problem... and when they state a 'reason' it is often disingenuous (at best) or dishonest... and seems to (often) just be a cover for racial prejudice.

I think MOST of our problems with 'illegal immigration' could be solved by an open border to anyone with LEGAL Mexican citizenship.
Do we really want to do that? Open the borders, that is. Wouldn't we really prefer to do a little screening to make sure that we're not letting legal Mexican citizens with a criminal record emigrate to the U.S.? How about financial support? Do we want to let people with absolutely no means and no way to support themselves cross the border, even if they are legal Mexican citizens. Shouldn't we require a bond or a sponsor on this side? Remember, we're talking about new permanent residents, not just day visitors.

Are these racist or bigoted concerns?

i really doubt that any of them were here before any of the english, dutch, and french settlers.

Really?

If you think I'm wrong, whip out a history book and prove me wrong.

Who 'discovered' America, by the way?

(I mean 'recently'... not the Greek/Roman trade that may have taken place 2000 years ago).

Really?

If you think I'm wrong, whip out a history book and prove me wrong.

Who 'discovered' America, by the way?

(I mean 'recently'... not the Greek/Roman trade that may have taken place 2000 years ago).
What's the point of this argument? What if the Spanish settled/conquered Florida, Texas, California, etc? Through a series of wars, the English society that settled/conquered the Thirteen Colonies won the right to the lands. That's what wars do; they give victors certain rights.

The reason that I didn't answer the "why?" is because it's my own personal experience and I can't "prove it" nor do I have statistics to back it up, and I would end up getting called racist.

Illegals cost a lot of money esp. in border towns, they work for cash under the table, the send that money back to Mexico, then live off public assistance, use the ER as the doctor's office and don't ever end up paying any taxes in (and no you don't pay sales tax when you get your food with food stamps).

I have seen illegals that don't do this yes, but the majority of them in my own personal experience do, and that is the problem.

Everywhere I have ever lived, no matter what part of the world... there have been people 'working for cash under the table'. It is not a thing that only illegal mexicans do, and you probably know that. However, if they are illegal, they often have no CHOICE but to work for cash under the table.

To my mind, that actually is a mitigation.

Regarding 'sending money back to Mexico'... the sensible way to deal with that problem is to do something that I thought was already being done... monitoring large transfers and repeat transfers across the border (any border).

Surely, it is easy enough to say 'transfers should not be allowed except when a valid Social Security card can be presented, foe example?

Living off public assistance, and food stamps? These people are, then, IN the 'system'? This is a case of the government not knowing with it's left hand, what it's right hand is doing. If they are on record for benefits, why are they not 'being taxed'? And - if they are being taxed... really, where is the problem?

Also - of course - these things are NOT peculiar to illegal immigrants. One in four Americans can't afford healthcare anyway. We have a GINI akin to sub-Saharan nations. The 'illegals' are NOT the problem here.

Do we really want to do that? Open the borders, that is. Wouldn't we really prefer to do a little screening to make sure that we're not letting legal Mexican citizens with a criminal record emigrate to the U.S.? How about financial support? Do we want to let people with absolutely no means and no way to support themselves cross the border, even if they are legal Mexican citizens. Shouldn't we require a bond or a sponsor on this side? Remember, we're talking about new permanent residents, not just day visitors.

Are these racist or bigoted concerns?

Are you thinking about this with an open mind?

Just out of curiousity... why should we only allow Mexicans that fit these 'conditions' accross the border? I know people that have lived here all their lives that have criminal records. We aren't talking about sending them out of the country. I know people here with no financial support... and yet, because they were born here, they get to stay. I know afair number of people with NO means of support... but, they are priviliged by birth. Why require a 'bond' or 'sponsor'... there are no such conditions on a foetus awaiting it's 'transition' into America.

What you are saying is... just bgecause a person might have been born half a mile to the wrong side of a certain point, they should be firced to bear an entirely different set of rights and responsibilities in this nation.

So - why not let ALL LEGAL Mexicans cross the border as they wish, so long as they 'register'? Expedite residency, and the social security program, and get them STRAIGHT into the workforce.

I'm not saying grant them instant citizenship... but then, I don't believe people BORN in this country should get AUTOMATIC citiznship, either.

What's the point of this argument? What if the Spanish settled/conquered Florida, Texas, California, etc? Through a series of wars, the English society that settled/conquered the Thirteen Colonies won the right to the lands. That's what wars do; they give victors certain rights.

All I was saying, by way of reply, is "I was here first" is a relative term.

:rolleyes:

Everywhere I have ever lived, no matter what part of the world... there have been people 'working for cash under the table'. It is not a thing that only illegal mexicans do, and you probably know that. However, if they are illegal, they often have no CHOICE but to work for cash under the table.
You want to know why they have no choice? because they break the law by even being here. They aren't allowed to work, because they are here Illegally.



Regarding 'sending money back to Mexico'... the sensible way to deal with that problem is to do something that I thought was already being done... monitoring large transfers and repeat transfers across the border (any border).
a more sensible way to deal with it would be to crack down on illegal immigration. Most of the illegals don't have bank accounts since they don't have the paper work to start them. They buy money orders at the local gas station and send the money back, how exactly are you going to track that? esp. without trampling over the rights of legal immigrants?


Living off public assistance, and food stamps? These people are, then, IN the 'system'? This is a case of the government not knowing with it's left hand, what it's right hand is doing. If they are on record for benefits, why are they not 'being taxed'? And - if they are being taxed... really, where is the problem?
ah, but in AZ they are "undocumented" which means differently than illegal, so basically it means "they couldn't find their papers" and they can't get turned over to the authorities for that.

Also - of course - these things are NOT peculiar to illegal immigrants. One in four Americans can't afford healthcare anyway. We have a GINI akin to sub-Saharan nations. The 'illegals' are NOT the problem here.
of course they aren't, but when people are pouring over the border at the rate of 2500 a day you have to wonder should you fix the crack in the boat or deal with the fact that there is a hole in the bottom.... 1 in 4 Americans can't afford insurance, I would say the number of illegals who don't have it is much higher and therefore a bigger problem, at least those 1 in 4 are paying taxes of some sort.

One would wonder if we all had the "right" to violate any laws we felt like without any repercussions, and would have that "right" defended by people who felt sorry for us (rather than vote to change the laws), if there would be anything but total anarchy.

Gee, if it's so popular to let all immigrants off the hook forever, why don't we change the laws?

And, if you're going to put that sort of onus on the US to relegate every immigration restriction to the scrapheap, why don't we start with the same thing in the EU - eliminate all immigration restrictions, border controls, and passport checks.

Do it right now.
Is making unwarranted attacks on people who essentially agree with you your way of doing things? Or did you misunderstand that I too am in favour of controlling immigration?

As of right now, 37% of our prison population is made up of non-US citizens. Of that 37%, 90% are illegal immigrants. If it were up to me, we would deport all illegal immigrants. Roughly 11 million people are here illegally. They are a drain on our economy and in America's interests, they should not be here.

We need to support Congressman Tom Tancredo's plan to build a wall to keep the illegalls out. Between crime, being on welfare, having their kids attend our schools, taking up space in hospitals, and taking American jobs, we should be up in arms over this issue.

The illegal immigrants are here illegally. Period

great logic on that one. :rolleyes:

why would they bring attention to themselves if they're already here illegally?

and besides, making it a felony, what would that do? put them in our prisons? how does that help? when thy get out, they would be naturalized!
As far as I can tell it said LATINO's not ILLEGAL latinos so what does it matter if they draw attention to themselves?

As of right now, 37% of our prison population is made up of non-US citizens. Of that 37%, 90% are illegal immigrants. If it were up to me, we would deport all illegal immigrants. Roughly 11 million people are here illegally. They are a drain on our economy and in America's interests, they should not be here.

We need to support Congressman Tom Tancredo's plan to build a wall to keep the illegalls out. Between crime, being on welfare, having their kids attend our schools, taking up space in hospitals, and taking American jobs, we should be up in arms over this issue.

The illegal immigrants are here illegally. Period
Note they are actualy a boost to the ECONOMY and a drain on the GOVERNMENT

(Note I am NOT saying that gives them a right to violate our law) rather I am saying we should work to make our law more benificial to both of us. We should be looking for a way to get them here and support our government through taxes legaly

:rolleyes:


You want to know why they have no choice? because they break the law by even being here. They aren't allowed to work, because they are here Illegally.


Which is somehow worse than those who are here LEGALLY, but CHOOSING to work illegally?

Think about your children, for a moment... and tell me how far you would be willing to bend the law to see healthcare... and food on the table... for your little ones.


a more sensible way to deal with it would be to crack down on illegal immigration. Most of the illegals don't have bank accounts since they don't have the paper work to start them. They buy money orders at the local gas station and send the money back, how exactly are you going to track that? esp. without trampling over the rights of legal immigrants?


Don't allow people to buy money orders without a valid Social Security card.


ah, but in AZ they are "undocumented" which means differently than illegal, so basically it means "they couldn't find their papers" and they can't get turned over to the authorities for that.


But they ARE still in the system. If they are receiving aid... that aid is being given somewhere, and the food stamps (or whatever) are being spent somewhere.

We are not talking about master-criminals here. We are talking about people wanting to put food on the table.

So - when they come to register for foodstamps, and they are undocumented... MAKE them new documents.


of course they aren't, but when people are pouring over the border at the rate of 2500 a day you have to wonder should you fix the crack in the boat or deal with the fact that there is a hole in the bottom.... 1 in 4 Americans can't afford insurance, I would say the number of illegals who don't have it is much higher and therefore a bigger problem, at least those 1 in 4 are paying taxes of some sort.

We aren't talking about a sinking boat. We are talking about the fact that we have an almost third-world disparity in our population. Immigrating illegally is a drop in the ocean in the scope of the problem.

Our boat has a hole in the bottom, yes. It's a problem, sure. It used to be a hole the size of a dime, and now it's the size of a dollar.

But, standing next to our boat is a group of guys with firehoses. The hole isn't the problem. But it IS a convenient scapegoat.

Personally I don't see anything worng with this solution.

1. Fine heavily anyone who hires an illegal immigrant.
2. Increase border enforcement.
3. Streamline the immigration process for immigrants that want to work in the US to make it easier for them and easier for employers.
4. Force employers who hire immigrant labor to pay the same taxes and benefits that they do to American citizens.
5. Deprt anyone who is here illegally. I'm not saying to go round them up, but when law enforcement comes across them they shoudl be deported.

This will mean that employers will look for citizens first and import immigranst for jobs they cannot fill. If an immigrant works here under the conditions above for a certain period of time, maybe two years or so, they become eligible for citizenship. Anyone see anything wrong with this?

Personally I don't see anything worng with this solution.

1. Fine heavily anyone who hires an illegal immigrant.
2. Increase border enforcement.
3. Streamline the immigration process for immigrants that want to work in the US to make it easier for them and easier for employers.
4. Force employers who hire immigrant labor to pay the same taxes and benefits that they do to American citizens.
5. Deprt anyone who is here illegally. I'm not saying to go round them up, but when law enforcement comes across them they shoudl be deported.

This will mean that employers will look for citizens first and import immigranst for jobs they cannot fill. If an immigrant works here under the conditions above for a certain period of time, maybe two years or so, they become eligible for citizenship. Anyone see anything wrong with this?

Wow I agree with you I think. Fuckin amazing :)

Wow I agree with you I think. Fuckin amazing :)
So do I.

Wow I agree with you I think. Fuckin amazing :)
Well, I think if you look at most people who are protesting against the open borders policy you will find that this is all they are asking for. Enforce existing laws and make immigration laws more realistic. I have no problem against immigration. I have a problem with unchecked illegal immigration. Someone earlier asked for reasons why. Here's one:

The city of Maywood, CA, just south of Downtown Los Angeles, just recently declared itself a haven for illegal immigration. In doing so they abolished the city's traffic enforcement division fo their police department because they found that a huge percentage of the people being arrested for DUI or having their cars towed because they were not licensed drivers or having their crs towed for excessive parking violations were illegal immigrants. They felt this was discriminatory so they basically just did away with teh enforcement of those laws. Also, they stopped enforceing habitation laws and are allowing people to build makeshift add-ons to their apartments and housing to be able to house more people in a single unit than is allowed by law. Currently there are about 45,000 people living in this city when illegal immigrants are taken into account. You can expect that number to grow exponentially as word spreads that illegal immigrants are being welcomed with open arms there.

The city is 1.2 miles square. 45,000 people in 1.2 square miles. Now with the new habitation rules that effectively say you can pack in as many people as you want, how long before Maywood is a shanty town? How long before their sewer system is overloaded? How long before their water mains become over taxed? Their ERs? Their schools? The infrastructure in many places is already near the breaking point. Maywood will be a slum in five years and I don't mean a slum by American standards. I means it will be a third world slum.

BTW - Here's the story on this:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-me-maywood21mar21,1,6561959.story

And here's the reactions:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-le-monday27.4mar27,1,3025276.story

You might need to register to read the stories, but its free and they don't sell your info.

I have been lobbying congress to drastically ease restrictions on immigration – specifically guest worker programs – for several years now. I recognize the great need for low skilled workers. That being said, I believe we should take a very hard line on illegal immigration.

The US economy relies on a large pool of workers for continued growth. We need more immigrants, but what we do not need are more illegals.

We need a coordinated effort to crack down on illegal immigration. Local municipalities should not be providing welfare payments, food stamps, and drivers licenses to illegal immigrants. If you are not here legally, you should be deported. Period.

It is very expensive to house prisoners – which is why I would also like to see a reform of out entire justice system, but that is for another topic. Locking them up in prison is just a bad idea. Our prisons are already overcrowded, throwing in illegals would exacerbate the problem – not to mention possibly instilling a criminal mentality is someone who was not otherwise a criminal. Australian style detention camps may be more feasible for repeat offenders.

[tongue-in-cheek] How about this… first time you get sent home for free. Second time we tattoo a mark on you somewhere inconspicuous – to make it easier to tell if someone has been here before or not and as a permanent warning not to try it again. Third time you get thrown into a detention camp for a while – which could be funded by setting up a factory or something at which the inmates… err… I mean the ‘guests’ could work to pay off the cost of housing them. [/tongue-in-cheek]

Seriously though, expanding guest-worker programs need to be implemented hand-in-hand with tougher immigration enforcement. Agriculture relies on immigrants – it is neigh impossible to find enough workers at harvest time. My parents pay anywhere from $7 ~ $9 an hour in cash – and only migrant workers (yes, they are legal) will take it, we cannot even get local high school students to come out.

I am sick of hearing people whine that ‘they take our jobs’. That is just bullshit. They can get those jobs because it is very hard to find people to fill them. Despite unemployment problems in some areas, there just are not a lot of people signing up to become dishwashers or landscaping. Those that do apply tend not have a very good work ethic. Finding a good worker, someone reasonably competent and industrious to take a job paying $6/hr to wash dishes is extremely hard. Even finding someone to scrub boats one summer at $8/hr was tough (plus little bonuses like crabs or fish that nice people in the marina would give us – we ate well). I went through nearly a dozen really piss poor workers before I got two 16 year olds who would do a reasonable job – and you have to be obscenely lazy for me to call you on it.

I means it will be a third world slum.
I'm strong to the finnach 'cause I eats me spinach I'm Popeye the sailor man! Too, toot!

Don't allow people to buy money orders without a valid Social Security card.


SS cards are easy to get, so this would be a bad idea.

SS cards are easy to get, so this would be a bad idea.

That is illogical.

It does not automatically follow that the idea is bad, just because SS cards are 'easy to get'.

For instance... it is harder to get a social security card... than to NOT have one, is it not?

So - you automatically filter SOME of the problem, even if the cards were easy to get.

Also - as a legal immigrant... it is NOT always easy to get a Social Security card... certainly not a 'real' one.

Maybe you think illegal immigrants are going to be faking them?

I am all for emigrants coming over here as long as they do it LEGALLY. This country was founded by emigrants, and it is not that hard to enter the U.S. legally. Our requirements to become a citizen are lower than some other countries. Illegal emigrants are a slap in the face to all U.S. citizens weather they were born here or moved here LEGALLY.

I have been lobbying congress to drastically ease restrictions on immigration – specifically guest worker programs – for several years now. I recognize the great need for low skilled workers. That being said, I believe we should take a very hard line on illegal immigration.

The US economy relies on a large pool of workers for continued growth. We need more immigrants, but what we do not need are more illegals.

We need a coordinated effort to crack down on illegal immigration. Local municipalities should not be providing welfare payments, food stamps, and drivers licenses to illegal immigrants. If you are not here legally, you should be deported. Period.


The problem with the approach you suggest, is that it harms the innocent.

A parent crosses the border illegally, in order to try to feed his infant children. He works for cash under the table. You say, we should refuse to offer foodstamps, etc. to these people.

Fine. So, we start punishing companies that hire immigrant illegals, and his two infants die of starvation...

You are making the same flawed arguments I've seen before... if the REAL problem is that we don't need 'illegals'... then the OBVIOUS solution is to make them legal.

And - when they come to sign up for all the government recognition, you keep track of them like any other national, and you tax them like any other national.

If we DID legalise our illegals, we would drastically cut this trade in 'underpaid' labour... and level the playing field. Then, we would have more productive immigrants, maybe able to actually afford healthcare insurance, etc... and productively paying taxes.

That is illogical.

It does not automatically follow that the idea is bad, just because SS cards are 'easy to get'.
sure it does. abuse of the system.

For instance... it is harder to get a social security card... than to NOT have one, is it not?
only for a lack of trying.

So - you automatically filter SOME of the problem, even if the cards were easy to get.
a better idea, imo, would be a national id card. but i think alot of people would disagree w/ me.

Also - as a legal immigrant... it is NOT always easy to get a Social Security card... certainly not a 'real' one.
if you're in the US legally... for example, as a college student, you can get one fairly easy.

Maybe you think illegal immigrants are going to be faking them?
not neccessarily... but have they not been known to fake other papers?

*edit*

besides, of all the papers to fake. Those are the easiest.

I am all for emigrants coming over here as long as they do it LEGALLY. This country was founded by emigrants, and it is not that hard to enter the U.S. legally. Our requirements to become a citizen are lower than some other countries. Illegal emigrants are a slap in the face to all U.S. citizens weather they were born here or moved here LEGALLY.

How is an illegal immigrant a 'slap in the face'?

This nation was founded by people escaping oppression and harsh conditions. NONE of the original settlers asked 'permission' to cross the border. In a sense, this is a NATION of illegal immigrants. It's a little hypocritical to get precious about the borders now that WE 'own' them.

My point is - WHAT is the problem with 'illegal immigration'?


Most people point to the illegality of it. Note the OP talks about violating US law. Other people emphasize they are for LEGAL immigration.

So the question is one of legality. Theoretically. Except I don't buy that at all. This is an "issue," jaywalking or pot smoking are not. Yet the last two are just as illegal, no? Much more prevalent ones, I might add. But no "issue" about it! Hence I think it's the other way around - people are xenophobic by nature and see immigration as a bad thing. With illegal immigration becoming the scapegoat for all their suppressed anger toward immigrants and furreners.

How is an illegal immigrant a 'slap in the face'?

This nation was founded by people escaping oppression and harsh conditions. NONE of the original settlers asked 'permission' to cross the border. In a sense, this is a NATION of illegal immigrants. It's a little hypocritical to get precious about the borders now that WE 'own' them.

why do you keep harping on about history? That was a different situation than now.

sure it does. abuse of the system.


A system being abused, is no reflection on how good an idea that system is. Medical insurance is abused. Is medical insurance a 'bad idea'?


only for a lack of trying.


No - think about it. It is easier to NOT ahve to have ANY identification, than it is to have to have SOME. If you asked for a social security card before transactions could be made, you would immediately stop some (probably most) of the 'illegal' money funneling.


a better idea, imo, would be a national id card. but i think alot of people would disagree w/ me.


I don't think a 'national ID card' would actually help.


if you're in the US legally... for example, as a college student, you can get one fairly easy.


You are talking to someone who legally changed status to become a permanent resident. It took me more than six months to get a Social Security card, AFTER my work authorisation was validated.

Trust me - it is not always easy.

The system NEEDS to be expedited. You should be able to get one in a week.


not neccessarily... but have they not been known to fake other papers?

*edit*

besides, of all the papers to fake. Those are the easiest.

Not by a long way. Don't be ridiculous.

Most people point to the illegality of it. Note the OP talks about violating US law. Other people emphasize they are for LEGAL immigration.

So the question is one of legality. Theoretically. Except I don't buy that at all. This is an "issue," jaywalking or pot smoking are not. Yet the last two are just as illegal, no? Much more prevalent ones, I might add. But no "issue" about it! Hence I think it's the other way around - people are xenophobic by nature and see immigration as a bad thing. With illegal immigration becoming the scapegoat for all their suppressed anger toward immigrants and furreners.
Bullshit.
Personally I don't see anything worng with this solution.

1. Fine heavily anyone who hires an illegal immigrant.
2. Increase border enforcement.
3. Streamline the immigration process for immigrants that want to work in the US to make it easier for them and easier for employers.
4. Force employers who hire immigrant labor to pay the same taxes and benefits that they do to American citizens.
5. Deprt anyone who is here illegally. I'm not saying to go round them up, but when law enforcement comes across them they shoudl be deported.

This will mean that employers will look for citizens first and import immigranst for jobs they cannot fill. If an immigrant works here under the conditions above for a certain period of time, maybe two years or so, they become eligible for citizenship. Anyone see anything wrong with this?
Do you have a problem with this? Is this xenophobic?
Well, I think if you look at most people who are protesting against the open borders policy you will find that this is all they are asking for. Enforce existing laws and make immigration laws more realistic. I have no problem against immigration. I have a problem with unchecked illegal immigration. Someone earlier asked for reasons why. Here's one:

The city of Maywood, CA, just south of Downtown Los Angeles, just recently declared itself a haven for illegal immigration. In doing so they abolished the city's traffic enforcement division fo their police department because they found that a huge percentage of the people being arrested for DUI or having their cars towed because they were not licensed drivers or having their crs towed for excessive parking violations were illegal immigrants. They felt this was discriminatory so they basically just did away with teh enforcement of those laws. Also, they stopped enforceing habitation laws and are allowing people to build makeshift add-ons to their apartments and housing to be able to house more people in a single unit than is allowed by law. Currently there are about 45,000 people living in this city when illegal immigrants are taken into account. You can expect that number to grow exponentially as word spreads that illegal immigrants are being welcomed with open arms there.

The city is 1.2 miles square. 45,000 people in 1.2 square miles. Now with the new habitation rules that effectively say you can pack in as many people as you want, how long before Maywood is a shanty town? How long before their sewer system is overloaded? How long before their water mains become over taxed? Their ERs? Their schools? The infrastructure in many places is already near the breaking point. Maywood will be a slum in five years and I don't mean a slum by American standards. I means it will be a third world slum.Is that a real problem? Why should your being illegal mean that you get a pass on teh laws everyone else has to obey? What about infrastructure?

BTW - Here's the story on this:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...,6561959.story

And here's the reactions:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...,3025276.story

You might need to register to read the stories, but its free and they don't sell your info.

why do you keep harping on about history? That was a different situation than now.

And this is a situation different to what we can expect in another few hundred years. At some point, EVERY time was 'now'.

The historical point is, this nation was FOUNDED on principles of equality and freedom. No other nation makes such vocal claims to equality and freedom... and yet, the US seems reluctant to keep it's founders' word.

A felony doesn't always carry a prison term. For example, a guy can be picked up for felony possesion of a concealed deadly weapon and the judge can decide not to lock him up.

Yes, but by definition a felony conviction can lead to a prison sentence of more than one year... whereas a misdemeanor cannot.

Most people point to the illegality of it. Note the OP talks about violating US law. Other people emphasize they are for LEGAL immigration.

So the question is one of legality. Theoretically. Except I don't buy that at all. This is an "issue," jaywalking or pot smoking are not. Yet the last two are just as illegal, no? Much more prevalent ones, I might add. But no "issue" about it! Hence I think it's the other way around - people are xenophobic by nature and see immigration as a bad thing. With illegal immigration becoming the scapegoat for all their suppressed anger toward immigrants and furreners.

I agree.

What we have here, is a platform for projections of the sins of society onto one group.

We've seen that before.

Some say "I dislike it because it's illegal" - but they object to the idea of legalising it, so 'illegality' isn't the REAL issue.

Some say "I dislike it because it costs money" - but they'll back imprisonment, or the construction of an armed border (think of the cost of THAT), so 'cost' isn't the REAL issue.

I've even seen the argument that illegal immigrants are a vector for disease... and yet the two big disease outbreaks of recent history (BSE and HIV) came from imported meat resources, and commercial airline flights.

Not to mention the fact that this is one of the few nations that still has a NATIVE population of Bubonic Plague.

Seems like they wouldn't want to call attention to themselves. Most of my latino clients won't even open the door if I don't reassure them that it's still me and not a Federal agent in a parent visitor mask...I can't imagine them protesting in the streets.

How is an illegal immigrant a 'slap in the face'?

This nation was founded by people escaping oppression and harsh conditions. NONE of the original settlers asked 'permission' to cross the border. In a sense, this is a NATION of illegal immigrants. It's a little hypocritical to get precious about the borders now that WE 'own' them.

The oppression your talking about is the puritans believeing that the catholic curch was to flashy. By the way law is man made and we have created a law that the majority of americans agree with. In the west we practice whatever is good for the greatest number.

(It's a little hypocritical to get precious about the borders now that WE 'own' them.)

I dont understand what that meant in the ().

Bullshit.


Do you really think people aren't inherently xenophobic? Social animals (like humans) form groups and then mistrust and sometimes attack anyone not part of the group. This tendency carries on to this day.

Do you have a problem with this? Is this xenophobic?

It's irrelevant to what I was saying. I'm saying that pointing out the dire urgency of the problem stems from xenophobia, so proposing a solution to a problem does not necessarily.

But as for your solution.

1. I don't have a problem with that.
2. I see that as unnecessary.
3. I agree, but it directly conflicts with #2.
4. Interferes with business too much for my liking. And see, this applies to "immigrant" not just illegal ones, so again is immigration something you have a problem with in general?
5. I have no opinion on this til I know what law enforcement currently does to people they know are here illegally.

why do you keep harping on about history? That was a different situation than now.

Not to mention the fact that the governments were glad that they left. How do you think Quebec got colonized by the Hugonauts? Not to mention those who came to America did have actual charters from the King of Great Britain so....