51
   

May I see your papers, citizen?

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 10:13 pm
@engineer,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
That 's an interesting thawt. In theory,
is failure to execute the immigration law an impeachable offense ?

Article 2 Section 3 of the Constitution requires of the President
that: "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed".
engineer wrote:
But immigration laws are being enforced.
The question is whether thay r being "FAITHFULLY executed" or lax and only perfunctorily,
because of a decision based on choice of political philosophy.

IS the president DOING what he gets paid to DO,
or is he only ostensibly going thru the motions?
That is the question.





David
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 10:24 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Over ten million illegals in our country and someone wants to claim that immigration laws are being enforced??!!

Now THAT is funny....
mysteryman
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 05:24 am
@plainoldme,
I was refering to your comment that "all white people are immigrants, and I wonder how many are here illegally"

That was just as racist a statement as you accuse others of making.
engineer
 
  6  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 06:34 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Over ten million illegals in our country and someone wants to claim that immigration laws are being enforced??!!

Sure. Just because there are illegal drugs in this country (with millions of users) that doesn't mean that drug laws aren't being enforced. In the case of border security, I know my passport was checked every single time I entered the country. In this case the incentive to break the law is so high that people are overwhelming law enforcement, but it's silly to say that there is no law enforcement when it is omnipresent around the border. The number of illegal immigrants removed by ICE in 2009 was 387,790, a record. As I said before, lobby for significantly higher taxes and we can pay the deficit and start spending more on border enforcement. If you want to fight two wars using borrowed cash, expect the government to cut back on programs across the board including border security.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 06:36 am



I congratulate the good folks of Arizona for using some common sense and hope more states do the same.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 08:31 am
@engineer,
Quote:
lobby for significantly higher taxes and we can pay the deficit and start spending more on border enforcement. If you want to fight two wars using borrowed cash, expect the government to cut back on programs across the board including border security.
I'd rather pay for it by placing big fines on those caught employing illegals.
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 09:04 am
@hawkeye10,
I'm ok with that too.
dyslexia
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 09:18 am
@engineer,
engineer wrote:

I'm ok with that too.
no, I have to disagree, a free market economy, a libertarian economy, does have some merit. there is room for unions and there is room for labor competition as well as room for employer competition.
engineer
 
  3  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 09:22 am
@dyslexia,
Sure, but you have to change the law. Right now, the law forbids hiring illegal immigrants.
Thomas
 
  4  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 09:28 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

I was refering to your comment that "all white people are immigrants, and I wonder how many are here illegally"

That was just as racist a statement as you accuse others of making.

No, it was a value-neutral statement about the facts. Quite plausibly, North America's invasion by European settlers violated the laws of the various American-Indian nations, whose claim on the land is older than yours.
dyslexia
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 09:31 am
@engineer,
engineer wrote:

Sure, but you have to change the law. Right now, the law forbids hiring illegal immigrants.
well it's not like the law can't be changed, it's been changed many times in the past and it's certainly easier than militarizing 1,000's of miles of borders.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 10:38 am
@Thomas,
When someone says "ALL " when talking about a group of anything, it is not value nuetral.

By saying "ALL white people" that means that he is saying everyone, with no exception.
Are you an immigrant to your country?
Were you born somewhere else?

I was born here in the US, as were my parents, and their parents, etc all the way back to 1728 (on my dads side), so how does that make me an immigrant to the US?
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 10:59 am
@mysteryman,
Fair enough. I traced your exchange back to Boortz's original statement, and he did mean the actual people who crossed the border illegally.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 11:28 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:
How is someone's constitutional rights being violated? If an officer stops you for a valid reason (the way I read the bill, they cannot just walk up and stop people for no reason, but I'm sure you'll tell me if I am mistaken) the officer has a right to ask for id. If legal id is produced, no problem. If none can be produced, you can be detained on suspicion of being in the country illegally (which is a crime you know). How is any of that a constitutional violation?

I'm still catching up on this thread, so this might already have been addressed, but:

I suspect that this will violate the equal protection clause. If a white driver is stopped, but doesn't have a valid ID for whatever reason (maybe he left his wallet at home), is he going to be detained? Probably not. If someone with brown skin is stopped, but doesn't have a valid ID, he's going to be detained.

And I have questions about the legality of detaining people over a simple failure to produce an ID. I know that in a lot of jurisdictions, the police can ask your name, but can not demand that you show ID. Having a picture ID is not a requirement to live in our country (although having a picture ID is necessary to engage in many forms of commerce).
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 11:33 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:

So the argument against this law, as you see it, is that the law is racist? Nowhere in this bill is any particular race targeted. And before you make the argument, I will certainly concede that the majority of illegals in Arizona are probably Hispanic, but that does not make the law racist

Poll taxes and literacy tests didn't specifically mention race, either, but the courts found them unconstitutional. It's the impact of the law, not the specific wording, that determines whether it is racist.
0 Replies
 
Irishk
 
  3  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 11:56 am
One thing I rarely see discussed in pondering what should (or should not) be done with regard to immigration is reform in Mexico. Is it the general consensus that Mexico's government is too far gone down the path of corruption or that pressure for reform would be seen as interference? What would the scenario be for the poor of Mexico if there were an ocean between our countries? More political action by their own citizens?
ebrown p
 
  0  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 12:04 pm
@Irishk,
Do you the slightest idea about what is happening in Mexico's government?

I think this would be a rather superficial discussion.

0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 12:10 pm
@Irishk,
Irishk wrote:

One thing I rarely see discussed in pondering what should (or should not) be done with regard to immigration is reform in Mexico.


Get caught entering Mexico illegally and see what happens.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  2  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 12:23 pm
Than let us send our army to mexico so we can solve our mutual problems.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 12:38 pm
@hawkeye10,
It is a very well known, often discussed quote and engineer gave you the whole story.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/14/2021 at 02:35:08