What should be done about illegal immigration?

As dumb as ebrown is, he is correct is saying that consent is not given by merely driving.

********
3) Just Say "No" to Warrantless Searches
Warning: If a police officer asks your permission to search, you are under no obligation to consent. The only reason he's asking you is because he doesn't have enough evidence to search without your consent. If you consent to a search request you give up one of the most important constitutional rights you have"your Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

A majority of avoidable police searches occur because citizens naively waive their Fourth Amendment rights by consenting to warrantless searches. As a general rule, if a person consents to a warrantless search, the search automatically becomes reasonable and therefore legal. Consequently, whatever an officer finds during such a search can be used to convict the person.

Don't expect a police officer to tell you about your right not to consent. Police officers are not required by law to inform you of your rights before asking you to consent to a search. In addition, police officers are trained to use their authority to get people to consent to a search, and most people are predisposed to comply with any request a police officer makes. For example, the average motorist stopped by a police officer who asks them, "Would you mind if I search your vehicle, please?" will probably consent to the officer's search without realizing that they have every right to deny the officer's request.

If, for any reason you don't want the officer digging through your belongings, you should refuse to consent by saying something like, "Officer, I know you want to do your job, but I do not consent to any searches of my private property." If the officer still proceeds to search you and finds illegal contraband, your attorney can argue that the contraband was discovered through an illegal search and hence should be thrown out of court.

You should never hesitate to assert your constitutional rights. Just say "no!"

********

--flexyourrights.org

Francis - I know the presentation was somewhat ponderous, but that is the nature of the actuarial calculations; economics generally isn't called the dismal science for nothing. As to the euro, you will recall it started at EU 1.2 to the USD, fell to 0.8 USD, and now is back higher from its starting point. I had occasion to meet recently with the "father of the euro" (and of our supply-side economics, not meaning to digress) Prof. Mundell, who thinks a world currency incorporating EU 1 = USD 1 = Yen 100 would solve many of our problems by removing a major source of instability from the world economy.

Separately, for a clear explanation (accessible to the non-specialist) of why>>>>
"illegal immigration equals importing poverty"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>see the many articles in the NY Times by Prof. Krugman, who also has a Nobel prize, and is far to the left of Prof. Mundell. It's the numbers, not the politics, leading to that conclusion - illegal immigration really does equal "importing poverty".

CORRECTION typo, instead of
"EU 1.2 to the USD"
please read "USD 1.2 to the EU", and instead of "fell to...."
read "rose to..."
Sorry.

Btw, the EU did fall to 0.8 USD at one point, though not at the date I indicated.

High Seas, There are some evidence of this from a recent article in the San Jose Mercury News where they detailed the cost of education (usually for multiple children), food stamps, health care, and other support services to the illegal immigrants. There is no way that their taxes pay for even a small portion of the benefits they receive from our governments. This report was provided to explain the state deficit of California where Hispanics continues to grow.

Cicerone - the calculation you quote is irrefutable. You will not find a single reputable economist to argue in favor of illegal immigrants; the evidence against them is (statistically) overwhelming. Here's another overview of the numbers:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032101146.html

P.S. even Obama's new budget cuts costs of illegals now borne by the federal government:

http://www.azcapitoltimes.com/story.cfm?id=11176

As the article you reference states, High Seas, only 7% of Latino immigrants have a college degree. Samuelson uses the correct phraseology--The MOST LUNATIC NOTION....

U.S. to Expand Immigration Checks to All Local Jails
Obama Administration's Enforcement Push Could Lead to Sharp Increase in Deportation Cases




By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 19, 2009

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/18/AR2009051803172.html?wpisrc=newsletter

half a step in the right direction.

amen

40 percent of blacks in the USA are unemployed. The bigots O'Moron, ebrown, CI, et al., could less that their sad lot is often due to competition from illegals.

http://www.rightsidenews.com/200905184807/border-and-sovereignty/illegal-aliens-only-working-jobs-americans-don-t-want-false-claim-by-pro-amnesty-crowd.html

Advocate - not right about Cicerone, who seems to concur with the general consensus. And in fairness to O'Bill and Brown-Munoz, neither of them has tried to contradict the sad statistical data posted by here. Come to think of it, I can't come up with a SINGLE topic on which so many diverse posters have reached harmonious agreement - seems, somehow, like magic....
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/42623/title/Specialis_Revelio

High Seas, Thank you for coming to my defense; but Advocate has it out for me because of my (democratic: equal protections under the laws) position on Israel.

I'm a bit confused about your "Amen" ci. I didn't think you had fascist leanings and favoured the "what we have we hold" mentality.

I thought you were a liberal.

Spendius- Cicerone Imposter does not know what a fascist or a liberal is. He is, I am very much afraid, well into senility. I think he thinks that Truman should have been impeached and jailed for ordering the Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Naasaki.

Spendius-

I have some questions concerning immigration.

Is it true that more third generation Latinos marry non-Latinos?

If so, are the issue of those marriages classified as Latinos?

Or, are the issue of the marriages of children born to the fifth generation( which may be married to non-Latinos at a similar ratio as the third generation above) considered Latinos?

Spendius-

Why are Latinos considered minorities?

How many Latinos are classified as Black?

Note Wikipedia:

Many Americans who are treated as part of minority groups are included in the census category "white." This is true for many Hispanic Americans, 47.9% of whom identified racially as white. The 2000 Census separated the question on Hispanics from the question on race, the latter being divided into the 5 categories of white, black or African American, American Indian and Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, Asian American, plus "other", with the respondent having the ability to mark more than one category. It is also true for many Arab and other Middle Eastern Americans and North African Americans, as well as non-European Jewish Americans, since the 2000 Census conflates race and geographic/national origin: white is defined to include people with original origins in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, or Asia.


This means that 47.9% of Hispanics are racially identified as White.

If true, the articles about the USA becoming mainly "minority" in a number of years will only be true if the Hispanic Ethnic group ( 47.9%) are somehow differentiated from the other ETHNICS in the USA.

There was a story on NPR's All Things Considered Tuesday that should interest yall. It was entitled something like "NYC battles immigrant wage theft." About 8 minutes long. I could go through the exercise of using things like "...(T)he etc." But it would become cumbersome to write and to read. Suffice it to say that I am cribbing from the text version of the story quite liberally in this little summary.
The NYC Dept of Labor is no longer waiting for complaints from workers about not receiving minimum wage, overtime, lunch breaks or that labor laws apply to them even if they are in the country illegally.
Instead they are going into businesses talking to employees and employers.
The NYC Labor Dept claims that:
* 1/2 of all workers (laborers?) in NYC are foreign born and consist of people here legally and illegally.
* At an upscale restaurant, bathroom attendants receive only tips.
* 3/4 of car washes do not pay overtime.
* A family-friendly chicken place pays a man $25 for an 8-hour shift (less than 1/2 the minimum wage for a waiter in NYC).
* Another employee works 12-hour shifts with no overtime.
* And a 3rd works 80 hours a week with no overtime and is paid in cash.

The NYC Commissioner of Labor claims that enforcement of labor laws in NYC, in NY state and in the rest of the country has been very weak.

So that is my summary of the story as best as I can do without quoting the whole thing. I tried to post it without expressing an opinion, but NPR listeners sure did on the web-site. There will probably be more responses to the story this afternoon.

I wonder how long this has been going on, and also what other "big" cities have the same problems?

What would happen if they were strictly enforced?