50
   

What should be done about illegal immigration?

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 05:12 pm
ebrown_p wrote:
Quote:

But if we laid down a minefield all along the border, and posted huge signs on the border attesting to this fact, we wouldn't be hurting anyone. This is our soil and we can do whatever we goddamn well please on our soil; anyone who got blown up trying to cross it has noone to blame but themselves.


Your indiscrimate use of the word "we" is a problem (shared by Foxfyre). I bet that most Americans would strongly object to laying a minefield on the southern border.

Or by "we" you mean the minutemen. They have the right to build walls on private property with the owners permisson, ride in crazy caravans of RV's and insist they aren't racist.

But they don't have the right to lay down minefields.

Are you sure you are a Democrat?


When I say 'we' I mean legal citizens of the country, who enjoy all the rights, privliges, and responsibilities accorded to citizens in this country.

There is no problem with using the word 'we' in this context, because this is a 'we' issue; us versus them. Legals versus illegals. I would never try to sneak into another country and expect them not to do anything about it! Would you?

As I just said in the other thread, I resent your questioning of whether or not I am a Democrat. There is a lot of room for ideas within the Democratic party, yet simply becuase you've got a bug up your ass about defending illegal aliens, you imply that I somehow don't measure up to the standards of other Democrats, or that I don't think like other Democrats do.

There are millions of Dems who feel the exact same way I do, I guarantee. None of my ideas is inconsistent with the democratic position: make those who are here legal, fine employers, close the border.

I find your insistence that your position is the only one supported by the Democratic party to be insulting, as frankly, you have neither the right nor the responsibility to make that judgement.

Cycloptichorn

ps

Quote:
You still didn't tell me your surefire plan to solve the drug problem.

Or did the minefield have something to do with this.


That's because you addressed that question to CI, not me. You really need to tighten up your reading skills before you post things like this.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 05:17 pm
Quote:
Only the ones who work for me.... iron my clothes, cook my food, take care of my kids, pick my lettuce, clean my toilets and serve my hamburgers. I don't need to charge them, I just take extra taxes from them that I don't need to refund.


Question You take taxes from them?

Many illegals are paid in cash and pay no taxes whatsoever. Those who 'pick your lettuce' especially. I guess you don't have a problem with that, though. Think about that next time you eat a salad.

You have a maid, who irons your clothes? Is she illegal? Because if that is the case, I'm afraid that I must insist upon fining you large amounts of money, as that is a scumbag thing to do.

Quote:
Strange thing though, now I have found that they are a part of my life, so much so that I can't live without them.


BS. You just don't want to try, becuase it would be inconvienent.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 05:28 pm
Quote:

When I say 'we' I mean legal citizens of the country, who enjoy all the rights, privliges, and responsibilities accorded to citizens in this country.

There is no problem with using the word 'we' in this context, because this is a 'we' issue; us versus them. Legals versus illegals. I would never try to sneak into another country and expect them not to do anything about it! Would you?


The problem with that "we" is that it doesn't mean legal citizens of the country. You are assuming that all legal citizens of the country think as you do. Many of us don't.

I am a legal citizen of the country. If you put my name in all the place where you guys say "we" it just wouldn't fit.

Of course, if all legal citizens wanted to lay a minefield in the southern border-- it would not only be correct to say "we would like to lay a mindfield...", but it would also happen.

And of course, if it was just "us" vs. "them" meaning "legal citizens" vs. "illegal immigrants"... the "illegal immigrants" wouldn't have a chance in hell. We would prevent them from working, keep them out of hospitals, kick their kids out of school. All of these things would be quite possible if all legal citizens agreed. Heck if all legal citizens agreed, there would be nothing to stop us from shooting them.

The fact is that American citizens are very ambivalent about this issue. Politically the anti-immigrant side is having a very difficult time getting their bill to pass. There is movement against immigrants politically, but there is also growing movement among American citizens to protect them.

It is not us vs. them. It is more like me vs. you-- American citizen vs. American citizen-- arguing about what values should guide this country that each of us loves.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 07:40 pm
I wouldn't even assume to be in agreement with other legal or illegals in this country. I just know how I "feel" about this issue; illegal immigrants should not get preference over those trying to get legal status in the proper way.

It matters squat what people think until congress makes laws and enforces them. They haven't done that in the past, and I'm not sure they're up to the task in the future. They're all playing politics with this issue now, and they're all hung up on the differences. Most of the states with high levels of illegals are making their own laws to control this problem, even though this is a federal issue.

Those are the facts.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 07:47 pm
Quote:
The problem with that "we" is that it doesn't mean legal citizens of the country. You are assuming that all legal citizens of the country think as you do. Many of us don't.


lol, no I most certainly do not!

What makes you think that I believe all citizens believe the same thing as I do? I have never made this assertion.

Quote:
And of course, if it was just "us" vs. "them" meaning "legal citizens" vs. "illegal immigrants"... the "illegal immigrants" wouldn't have a chance in hell. We would prevent them from working, keep them out of hospitals, kick their kids out of school. All of these things would be quite possible if all legal citizens agreed. Heck if all legal citizens agreed, there would be nothing to stop us from shooting them.


It is a question of us vs. them, even if you don't admit it. We can debate all day long about what the proper solution to the problem should be(and we should debate!) but in the end, it will be us who decides how to deal with them. You cannot escape this dichotomy no matter how hard you try, because the simple fact is that they do not have any say in the matter. There of course will be advocates for them on the side of the citizens, but this does not give them a vote or any sort of say in what happens whatsoever. They can protest all day long, but it won't make a lick of difference if the opinion of the electorate is against them.

To be clear, I do in fact understand and support the immigrant march against the House bill which would criminalize them and those who help them; I do not agree with that bill, I don't agree with deporting those who have committed no felonies, and I don't believe that the majority of Americans would support such a bill either.

If all citizens agreed, then we wouldn't have any of the problems we have today, would we? Of course we don't all agree. We just have to pick the best solution that we can out of all of the available options.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 07:54 pm
ebrown does not believe in the rights of the citizen or the individual. He's all about getting votes from illegals and those who support them.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:03 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
But if we laid down a minefield all along the border, and posted huge signs on the border attesting to this fact, we wouldn't be hurting anyone. This is our soil and we can do whatever we goddamn well please on our soil; anyone who got blown up trying to cross it has noone to blame but themselves.

What's your opinion about the wall Israel is building between itself and the Palestine territories, Cyclo? What would it be if that wall were on Israel's border, exactly?

Also, I'm trying to see how this logic works. Say, I put big signs all around my garden saying: "anyone who enters this garden of mine, I will shoot". Someone walks into it, I shoot him. I wouldnt be hurting anyone?

Cycloptichorn wrote:
How about, anyone we catch, we deport them to an island in the south pacific [..]. Perhaps we could tranquilizer dart them, take all their possesions, and then dump em back in mexico.

Ehm, ehm ... jesus. Shocked Sad
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:04 pm
cjhsa wrote:
getting votes from illegals

by definition impossible
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:06 pm
nimh wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
getting votes from illegals

by definition impossible


Not in San Francisco... and Boston might follow suit....

Anywhere you put enough liberal twits together, you never know what you're going to get. Peas and carrots, maybe.

Besides, this has been an ongoing part of ebrown's argument, to legitimize illegals so they can vote. He has an alterior motive.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:14 pm
cjhsa wrote:
nimh wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
getting votes from illegals

by definition impossible


Not in San Francisco... and Boston might follow suit....

Illegals can vote in SF?

In Holland, non-citizens can vote (in local elections) ... but they gotta be legal residents...
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:28 pm
nimh wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
But if we laid down a minefield all along the border, and posted huge signs on the border attesting to this fact, we wouldn't be hurting anyone. This is our soil and we can do whatever we goddamn well please on our soil; anyone who got blown up trying to cross it has noone to blame but themselves.


What's your opinion about the wall Israel is building between itself and the Palestine territories, Cyclo? What would it be if that wall were on Israel's border, exactly?

This is a complicated question because it has several different components to it. There is no clear 'border' between Israel and Palestine, at least not one accepted by the Palestinians. So there is a great deal of tension in placing the wall in the first place because the 'border' is under great dispute and involves holy cities.

From a practical standpoint, we can see that Israel has in fact built much of that wall and that terrorist attacks upon their citizens have dropped dramatically. I disagree with much of Israel's actions (and seriously question the logic which lead to it's creation) but the effects of building the wall have been what they desired.

There is zero dispute over where the border lies between the US and Mexico, so the question of where the wall would be built does not apply to us. And, for the record, I completely support whatever countries in the world building whatever defensive fortifications they please.


Also, I'm trying to see how this logic works. Say, I put big signs all around my garden saying: "anyone who enters this garden of mine, I will shoot". Someone walks into it, I shoot him. I wouldnt be hurting anyone?

Actually, in Texas, where I live, it is legal to shoot trespassers upon one's property. In the case you describe, did the intruder break into my garden? Did they jump the wall? Did I place large easy-to-read signs? Did I do everything I could to deter intruders upon my property? Did I attempt to warn the intruder that they were going to be shot using sound and hand motions? If the answers to those questions are yes, then they brought it upon themselves.

If I dig a tiger pit lined with stakes on my property, with big warning signs saying 'do not jump into this goddamn pit,' and someone does it, it isn't my fault. Do you claim that the intruder bears no responsibility for what happens to them while they are trespassing?


Cycloptichorn wrote:
How about, anyone we catch, we deport them to an island in the south pacific [..]. Perhaps we could tranquilizer dart them, take all their possesions, and then dump em back in mexico.


Ehm, ehm ... jesus. Shocked Sad

Heh, what the hell are we going to do? Give up? Not me. I refuse to believe that we aren't allowed to have closed borders just because in the past we had a different situation than other countries did.

This is of course an extreme suggestion. As I said earlier in the thread, if we could make an impregnable wall out of pillows, I would fully support that. I don't want to hurt anyone. But when you warn people that there are serious consequences of their actions, and they choose to do them anyways, it is noone's fault but their own.

I think it's pretty easy for people who don't have to deal with the effects of illegal citizens in your society the way we do here in the American south to say that it isn't a serious problem that demands serious and strict solutions, but the fact is that it impacts peoples lives every single day, in personal and drastic ways. All I suggest is shifting the burden of problems to those who are attempting to enter the country illegally from those who have done nothing wrong.


Cheers

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:42 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Actually, in Texas, where I live, it is legal to shoot trespassers upon one's property. In the case you describe, did the intruder [..] jump the wall? Did I place large easy-to-read signs? Did I do everything I could to deter intruders upon my property? [..] If the answers to those questions are yes, then they brought it upon themselves.

You dont think the notion of "disproportional force" comes into play, ever? As long as you warned 'em of whatever force you're going to use, no matter how disproportional, you're OK?

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I think it's pretty easy for people who don't have to deal with the effects of illegal citizens in your society the way we do here in the American south to say that it isn't a serious problem that demands serious and strict solutions

No lack of illegals where I'm from.

But a Berlin wall-type border (walls, minefields) will never seem proportional to me.

I consider crossing a border illegally in search for a better life an offense of the law comparable to shoplifting. Its bad; if it happens on a huge scale some greater thing needs to be done about it; but nobody deserves to die for an offence like that.

Shooting someone who shoplifts your store is and will remain disproportional (and therewith, a crime itself) no matter how many signs you put up about how you're going to do exactly that. Putting a minefield that will blow Mexican and Salvadorean families to pieces because they tried to find a better life is and will remain wrong no matter how many warning signs you'd put up about it.

Death is simply too disproportional a punishment for the offence, the mistake, that they are committing.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:51 pm
nimh, Your example is a good one; our young son stole candy from a store, and the manager called us to let us know what he did; he told our son another boy he would call the police next time. He didn't shoot them dead; thank god.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:54 pm
There's a difference between stealing candy and robbing the store.

Unless you're in Florida.

BANG! You're dead in Orlando. And your accomplice is guilty of murder.

Best to know the laws of the land you're occupying.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 08:58 pm
So, what is the appropriate punishment? A slap on the wrist? Don't think so. The problem is far too big for a misdemeanor to be the result.

If there is no appropriate deterrent, the criminal will simply repeat their behavior at the earliest possible opportunity. What are we going to do to the illegals? Fine them? What do we do when they don't pay the fines? Put them in jail? Our jails and prisons are already massively overcrowded, so that's not an acceptable solution either.

You tell me what we should do to keep people out, and keep in mind that nothing isn't an option. This problem is not only a problem of illegal immigration, but also infiltration of our society by criminals, thugs, gangs, and potentially terrorists.

Quote:
nimh, Your example is a good one; our young son stole candy from a store, and the manager called us to let us know what he did; he told our son another boy he would call the police next time. He didn't shoot them dead; thank god.


Sure, I don't want anyone to die. I want everything to work out great for everyone involved. So you tell me how we are going to close the border, and what deterrent we are going to use to keep people from crossing the border illegally.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 09:01 pm
Oh, yeah

Quote:
I consider crossing a border illegally in search for a better life an offense of the law comparable to shoplifting.


You have never had your life affected in a significant and permanent way by an illegal alien who breaks the law and then vanishes then, I assume.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 09:04 pm
Still confused that illegals can vote in some parts of the USA - I completely unknowm definition of legal/illegal to me.
(Here's the same as nimh said about the Netherlands.)
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 09:06 pm
WH, Cj is asserting that Democrats regularly encourage illegal aliens (with fake IDs) to vote illegally. Because there are so many votes and so little time to count them all, it is quite difficult to authenticate that every single person who votes is a legal citizen. This is a common assertion from Republicans, who can't seem to fathom that they lose elections every now and then.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 09:16 pm
Hardly. Dumb ass SF city supervisors actually proposed allowing illegals to vote in city elections. It didn't go over very big.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 May, 2006 09:18 pm
proposed Not Equal actually happened.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 03/17/2025 at 08:33:50