Americans have always resisted the idea of having to carry a National Identity Document. I don't like the idea that government can demand that individuals prove their citizenship, or right to anything. The government is the servant of the People, and employees don't get to demand of their bosses proof of their authority. Our forefathers were deeply suspicious, and with good reason, of vesting so much power in the hands of any government.
It has been pointed out that social security cards and driver's licenses have come to be accepted as personal identification that can be demanded by police officers and agents of government. I bend my knee to the demand, but I don't like it much even after serving with law enforcement. Though I support the use of NSA to monitor electronic communications between suspected terrorists both inside and outside our national boundries, I'm not entirely comfortable with it. Adoption of a National Identity Document that every citizen had to carry, it seems to me is too great a step down a slippery slope we already find our selves on. Caution and care to make only the smallest possible steps away from our resistence to this sort of thing seems important to me.
Asherman.
People carry Social security cards, drivers license and etc. Why is that so different from a national identification card? A pictured social security card would serve the purpose.
In NY people who do not have drivers license can obtain a non-drivers license from the motor vehicle agency which is valid identification if you fly on commercial aircraft. There are all sorts of documents that people carry that could be used as a national identity card.
Whatever resolution the US comes with, I just hope that the border agents dont get more arrogant-paranoic-cranky-speculative than what they are currently. Crossing the border is such a hassle these days, even for people with all the proper documents.
au1929 wrote:Asherman.
People carry Social security cards, drivers license and etc.
Actuallly, the NM driving license carries more information on it than my driving license and ID-card ... combined! (And my ID-card is THE valid paper to even cross borders [when there's no Visa].)
Another intelligent post by Asherman.
And his points prove that this is not a liberal-conservative issue, but one that has to be dealt using common sense.
el_pohl wrote:Whatever resolution the US comes with, I just hope that the border agents dont get more arrogant-paranoic-cranky-speculative than what they are currently. Crossing the border is such a hassle these days, even for people with all the proper documents.
I was 2 Sundays ago in TJ and stood close to 4 hours at the border -
what a nightmare.
I'm telling you CJ, its Awfull allright. Hopefully we have the Sentri pass, but still... procedures are extremely problematic.
For a moment I thought that this thread would receive a 1 day vacation... haha.
Do you crosse daily, el_pohl?
Not daily, not even weekly nowdays. My family does though. Casual shopping and car tank fueling seems like perfect reasons to do so.
Oh by the way... first blood in Georgia against illegal inmigrants...
How horrible! Do you have a link for that el_pohl?
Yesh! But, its in spanish hehe.
Oh, and the blood part is, of course, figuratively speaking.
El Universal
HERE.
About five hours old.
Joe(hombre sincero)Nation
Q: What should be done about illegal immigration?
A: They don't assimilate well. send them back on the Mayflower.
The folks who came over on the Mayflower were immigrants only in the broadest definition of that term. There was no law of the land at that time other than what each individual group chose to live by. Once a nation is established with borders and laws, a group like those on the Mayflower would not be considered immigrants, but would be considered invadors. Since the Native Americans were already here, some think that was the case anyway.
Since that time we have forged a nation with an orderly structure and leaders who are expected to govern according to the dictates of the Constitution and all the laws by which we maintain order, discipline, and justice. An unenforced law is useless and, if enough people refuse to obey enough laws, the entire structure collapses. Nevertheless, there are a lot of silly little laws on the books here and there that are ignored because they are silly and/or unjust and/or violate other, more convincing, principles of law.
Are our existing immigration laws silly or do they violate other, more convincing, principles of law?
The question before us is "What should be done about illegal immigration?"
I have been criticized for not providing enough options in the poll but the two responses: "Take care of those who come here" easily includes all the proposals for accommodation, legalization, etc. that some think should have been on the poll. And the "Those who aid and abet illegal immigration should be subject to prosecution" easily includes employers and, in the toughest suggested proposals, the social services groups who provide safety nets for everybody including illegals.
For me the issue comes down to: a) Is it necessary to regulate who, how many, and under what circumstances people from other countries can come here to live, and I am of the opinion that it is. I do believe those who come here to live permanently must be admitted legally and must be willing to be self supporting and assimilate the culture, language, laws, and customs.
Then b) What should be done about those who do not? That is the whole crux of the debate and, while I believe we must enforce what necessary laws we enact, I am still looking for a way out of the logistical dilemma of expelling 11 or 12 million people here illegally while not encouraging tens of millions more to come.
I have a problem with the concept that if people can dodge the law, any law, long enough, they don't need to obey the law.
And I have a huge problem with those who suggest Americans are anti-immigrant or racist when they think even poor immigrants are not above the law.
I still wonder if the answer is not for all the illegals to go home, but make a provision that their employers can bring them right back under a guest workers program. Those who do that can get in line with everybody else and can apply for citizenship. Those who are not willing to do that can be deported and will not be eligible for a citizenship application to be considered.
Why wouldn't that work?
Then we can look at ways to discourage others from coming illegally.
From the Chicago Tribune,
online version and today's print edition, pages 1 & 12:
Quote:ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
As border-control device, San Diego's fence divides
Barrier cuts down on local chaos, but critics say it just shifts the problem elsewhere-- and underground
By Michael Martinez
Tribune national correspondent
Published April 19, 2006
SAN DIEGO -- If there's a war being waged over illegal immigration, then San Diego's border with Mexico is its most militarized battleground.
Disputes over the success or failure of the buildup during the past dozen years can be as dramatic as its stature: 14 miles of double or triple fencing, a no-man's land between countries for U.S. patrols, stadium spotlights, and a secret number of sensors and infrared cameras.
For many local residents, the barriers have effectively halted the sensational events of the early 1990s when illegal immigrants ran amok in back yards and on freeways. Crime is down. Illegal crossings have dropped.
On a larger scale, though, the fences have merely moved illegal traffic to more remote areas on the 1,952-mile border, experts say. And smugglers have even constructed elaborate tunnels under the wall to smuggle drugs and possibly migrants.
And the nation's population of illegal immigrants has grown steadily to record size, nearly 12 million, at a greater pace than before the San Diego improvements, about 700,000 unauthorized migrants a year, according to a Pew Hispanic Center study last year.
At the same time immigrants are dying in record numbers as illegal immigrants and smugglers have moved eastward to more forbidding areas such as the Arizona desert.
... ... ...
<continued, see link above>
Thank you for the link Joe (gringo) Nation. This is so wrong,
shame on Georgia.
Walter, unfortunately this is very true and such a sad
outcome of an initial good idea. In winter a many Mexicans
crossing illegally into the US, die of hypothermia and in
summer they die of heat exhaustion and dehydration.
Good samaritans have put water stations up and in the
wintertime they scan the area and give out blankets, but
it is not enough for everyone, sadly.
Fox is still mired in her obsessive fixation on "legality." She wants to deport all the "illegals" (after her hilarious comments about the Mayflower maggots, it constitutes low comedy).
Despite having claimed she wants to apply her monomania about legality to employers of illegal immigrants as well (she was never convincing), she now proposes rewarding those employers with a special option for a guest worker program.
I consider that the totality of Fox's "contribution" on this topic has a disgusting reek of ethnic bigotry which borders on racism.
