Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on April 24, 2010, 08:14:29 AM
-
70% of Arizona Voters Favor New State Measure Cracking Down On Illegal Immigration
rasmussenreports ^ | 04241200
Posted on Saturday, April 24, 2010 11:08:12 AM by VU4G10
The Arizona legislature has now passed the toughest measure against illegal immigration in the country, authorizing local police to stop and check the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 70% of likely voters in Arizona approve of the legislation, while just 23% oppose it.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
________________________ ________________________ _
-
awesome! 8)
now lets hope more states follow suit
-
ZERO was pissed off because AZ got out ahead of this and the people supprot AZ over the amnesty crap sandwich he wants to push.
FUBO!
-
hey, 54% of Americans supported a socialist marxist kenyan martian tree hugging warmonger for President.
Sometimes the masses can be wrong. Like I said, this bill opens the door to abuse. When janet napaliano decides it's okay to use this bill to profile bald white guys who might be terrorists, you can't complain 33. Any violation of civil right of legal americans is only step 1 of many :(
-
Cry me a river. I already explained to you how this will work.
-
hey, 54% of Americans supported a socialist marxist kenyan martian tree hugging warmonger for President.
Sometimes the masses can be wrong. Like I said, this bill opens the door to abuse. When janet napaliano decides it's okay to use this bill to profile bald white guys who might be terrorists, you can't complain 33. Any violation of civil right of legal americans is only step 1 of many :(
STILL WAITING...for the language of this bill 240!!!
also how this bill is any different than any other law on the books that is subjective to officers?
what law hasnt produced a civil rights violation? it isnt the law its the officers enforcing the law...this law isnt perfect but something needs to be done.
thinking politically as well 240, this will force obamas hand on immigration more than likely in some form or another...another hot button issue with voters right before the mid term elections..
YOU SHOULD ADMIRE THE SHREWDNESS OF THIS BILL...I guess its like I thought though its only when obama is being "shrewd" ::)
-
Yup - and you could tell that Obama knew yesterday that his usuall garbage is not going to work on this since AZ got out ahead on this.
Obama is going to spark a rebellion if he thinks demozing 70% of the population on this issue is going to help him.
-
hey, 54% of Americans supported a socialist marxist kenyan martian tree hugging warmonger for President.
Sometimes the masses can be wrong. Like I said, this bill opens the door to abuse. When janet napaliano decides it's okay to use this bill to profile bald white guys who might be terrorists, you can't complain 33. Any violation of civil right of legal americans is only step 1 of many :(
I got no problem proving my citizenship time and time again if it means keeping scumbag, lawbreaking illegal immigrants out of my country.
-
What is the problem with this in a scenario such as a cop pulling over someone for speeding or DWI or something and the guy hands him a drivers license that does not match up with records or is obviously bogus?
-
i'm talking about a cop pulling you over for NO REASON WHATSOEVER.
I'm talking about a cop pulling you out of line at an ice cream stand for no reason, other than "you look like an illegal".
Do they have the power with this bill - yes or no?
-
They need "REASONABLE SUSPICION" and race alone is not, never has, and never will be allowed to be a sole factor.
________________________ ________________________ ____
Reasonable suspicion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2008)
Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard in United States law that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts and inferences. It is the basis for an investigatory or Terry stop by the police and requires less evidence than probable cause, the legal requirement for arrests and warrants. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard, in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably believe a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; such suspicion is not a mere hunch. Police may also, based solely on reasonable suspicion of a threat to safety, frisk a suspect for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. A combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous, can form the basis of reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is also sometimes called "arguable suspicion".[citation needed]
Contents [hide]
1 Precedent
2 Other Uses
2.1 Schools
2.2 Border Security, Customs, and Immigration
3 Examples
4 See also
5 External links
[edit] Precedent
In Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled that a person can be stopped and frisked by a police officer based on a reasonable suspicion. Such a detention does not violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizure. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada the court further established that a state may require, by law, that a person identify himself or herself to an officer during a stop. An arrest is not permitted based on reasonable suspicion; probable cause is required for an arrest. Further, a person is not required to answer any other questions during a Terry stop, and the detention must be brief. However if the officer's suspicions were correct and the situation escalates to a point of where the officer has probable cause, the officer can arrest the suspect.
[edit] Other Uses
[edit] Schools
New Jersey v. T. L. O. set the precedent that probable cause is not necessary to search a student; reasonable suspicion is enough to search a student's belongings. Overly intrusive searches, like a body cavity search, require probable cause.
[edit] Border Security, Customs, and Immigration
Main article: Border search exception
Although U.S. Customs can do routine suspicionless searches of people and effects crossing the border (including passing through airport customs), non-routine searches, like slashing the spare tire of a car, require reasonable suspicion. United States v. Flores-Montano. Anything even more intrusive, like compelled surgery of a suspected balloon swallower, requires probable cause. United States v. Montoya De Hernandez.
[edit] Examples
Courts have ruled (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)) that a stop on reasonable suspicion may be appropriate in the following cases: when a person possesses many unusual items which would be useful in a crime like a wire hanger and is looking into car windows at 2am, when a person matches a description of a suspect given by another police officer over department radio, or when a person runs away at the sight of police officers who are at common law right of inquiry (founded suspicion). However, reasonable suspicion may not apply merely because a person refuses to answer questions, declines to allow a voluntary search, or is of a suspected race or ethnicity. At reasonable suspicion, you may be detained by a police officer (court officer on court grounds) for a short period of time and police can use force to detain you. If it is a violent crime (robbery, rape, gun run), the courts have recognized that an officers safety is paramount and have allowed for a "frisk" of the outermost garment from head to toe and for an officer to stop an individual at gun point if necessary. For a non-violent crime (shoplifting for example) an officer may frisk while at reasonable suspicion if he noticed a bulge in the waistband area, for example, but can frisk in that area only. In the city of New York, once a person is released in a reasonable suspicion stop, a "stop, question and frisk report" is filled out and filed in the command that the stop occurs.
[edit] See also
Stop and Identify statutes (refusing to identify oneself when detained may be a crime in some jurisdictions)
United States v. Arnold (searches and seizures of electronic media at a United States port of entry by Customs and Border Protection)
[edit] External links
A definition on Dictionary.com
A Checklist for Use in Workplace
-
Courtesy of Free Republic.
________________________ __________________
Obama: Show proof of health insurance but not citizenship (Vanity)
Posted on Saturday, April 24, 2010 11:31:23 AM by TigerBait
So just to be clear, it's constitutional to penalize someone for not showing proof of health insurance but not request proof of citizenship?
???
-
because IF they have the power to do this - to demand papers for processing/ID for any individual, even those who haven't committed a crime - then there is a whole lot of abuse that can occur.
They can have "a feeling" that somebody in the movie theater is an illegal, so they can empty the place and make your ass sit handcuffed on a curb for 90 minutes while they process your IDs, oe by one.
They can have "a feeling" on any group of people at anytime - and they can have large groups detained (using fenced in yards, police cehicles, whatever), until they check every single ID.
And god forbid the power go out - they'll just put anyone they want in a fence until they can get their computers working and process everyone.
I know most of you only value civil rights when a Dem comes after them, but I'm pretty surprised on this one. If they can detain ONE PERSON without cause until the paperwork checks out, they can do it to a million.
-
GMAFB. I gave you the scenario its most likely to be used in, which is exactly when it should be used.
240 - "I SUPPORT AMNESTY"
-
"Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard in United States law that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts and inferences. "
See, that part is what I'm talking about.
They can stop 10,000 people a day based upon "reasonable suspicion".
And would you be cool if Obama was targeting bald white guys with guns and muscle who "might be engaged in current terrorism actions" based upon reasonable suspicion?
See, I'm not crying about profiling - I don't bitch about that issue. Others can argue about that. I care because this opens up the ability of the govt to pull over anyone in traffic at 11 pm because "we have reasonable suspicion anyone out at that hour is driving drunk". Or to pull over anyone leaving a metallica concert because "we have reasonable suspicion to believe they use pot". Or to pull over anyone leaving the gun range because "we have resonable reason to believe their guns aren't securely encased". Or to pull over anyone leaving the gym because "we have reasonable suspicion they use steroids".
i think you're giving Obama too much credit - he's publicly talking against it, and privately, probably laughing at the repubs willing to succomg to a police state because it is painted in GOP colors ;)
-
'I gave you the scenario its most likely to be used in"
"Most likely"?
You're a lawyer. Do you like laws where a-hole cops have to be trusted not to abuse it? Do you like laws that are "most likely" applied how you'd like them to be?
I like the law black and white. I like to know that if I haven't broken the law, I can't be yanked from line at Walmart and carded wit 500 other people because of vaguely defined "resonable suspicion".
but like I said, be cool with it until Obama decides white bald guys at gun ranges are a threat... then you can value civil liberties - when it's too late.
-
Most laws allow a large degree of discretion to the police.
-
240 - "I SUPPORT AMNESTY"
Um, I do not. I heard an argument about amnesty/illegals and posted it here for discusison.
You know my position - kick them the fvck out. Those with kids - that gets really messy.
And you know I'm all for mining the border, paying militias for every one they catch, using the military, etc.
And you know I understand the reality (as do you, probably) that neither party really wants to stop them from entering.
I didn't vote for a pro-amnesty candidate like most people here did.
Bob Barr said we must end government benefits and services for illegal immigrants.
mccain and obama wanted to give them a reacharound and a warm bath.
-
"Most laws allow a large degree of discretion to the police. "
To detain an identify Americans without probable cause?
-
No to enforce the law.
-
You see where I'm coming from, right? I'm not one of these bleeding hearts crying about profiling. And I'm not pro-amnesty. Remember my idea of breaking 1 leg and returning them to the southernmost tip of mexico, and seeing how many can make the journey a second time? :)
I just worry that leaders will use this embrace of "sure, we're cool with Americans being stopped anytime, as long as its the brown ones who look like illegals".
Because once they can do it for illegals, they'll wait 6 months and quietly try it for something else. bush wanted a very few patriot act wiretaps... didn't obama halt the auditing before we ever found out how many millions of warrantless taps had taken place?
They'll abuse and advance it.
-
240, I'm not going to read all of your rantings here, but I have been stopped for "being suspicious" and had my ID ran, it takes a few minutes and if you're not doing anything wrong, what's the big deal?
And I do believe there has to be probable cause to stop someone.
Seems to me you (240) are being seriously overreacting to this, I would think that you would be supportive of protecting your country.
And when there becomes a huge influx of bald white guys invading our country and committing crimes without fear of repercussion, then yes, I can see where they would enforce this law on us.
-
it's cause I was handcuffed for 15 minutes this year because I looked like someone wanted for a crime locally.
It sucked. Really bad. I probably would have supported this before that experience. But I was stopped for no reason, and sat on the curb for 15 min cuffed. I justified it with "um, they were just doing their job".... but it sucked. And I'd hate for cops to be able to do that anytime.
I don't think this will be limited to menacing looking dudes holding Mex flags doing kidnappings in the bad areas of Arizona. I think it'll be step 1 of many.
-
Exactly. If there were 26 million zips from Italy doing this same crap, I would probably join the calzone patrol myself.
-
it's cause I was handcuffed for 15 minutes this year because I looked like someone wanted for a crime locally.
It sucked. Really bad. I probably would have supported this before that experience. But I was stopped for no reason, and sat on the curb for 15 min cuffed. I justified it with "um, they were just doing their job".... but it sucked. And I'd hate for cops to be able to do that anytime.
I don't think this will be limited to menacing looking dudes holding Mex flags doing kidnappings in the bad areas of Arizona. I think it'll be step 1 of many.
LOL, you look like a criminal. ;D
You're trying to see too far into the future with this, but hopefully it is the first step of many........other states following Arizonas lead and taking control of our illegal immigration problems since the federal government is too concerned with forcing me to pay for other peoples insurance and not worried about the economy or illegal immigration or our jobs going to Mexico and overseas. ::)
-
If I believed it would be good cops using it to nail bad guys, I'd be 100% behind it.
I just keep thinking bad cops and of course, the white house, will use it and advance it to move us more to a state where cops can pull you out of lines in movie theaters and demand to "see your papers!" Or where they can round up thousands of people after a katrina and make them live in a fenced in area (or camp lol) until the computer systems allow us to check everyone... weeks, months...
I'm all for stopping the criminals.. I just don't trust the ppl in charge all that much.
-
I'm all for stopping the criminals.. I just don't trust the ppl in charge all that much.
That's because they are one in the same. ;)
-
haha ya got that right.
-
If I believed it would be good cops using it to nail bad guys, I'd be 100% behind it.
I just keep thinking bad cops and of course, the white house, will use it and advance it to move us more to a state where cops can pull you out of lines in movie theaters and demand to "see your papers!" Or where they can round up thousands of people after a katrina and make them live in a fenced in area (or camp lol) until the computer systems allow us to check everyone... weeks, months...
I'm all for stopping the criminals.. I just don't trust the ppl in charge all that much.
so you agree its NOT THE LAW ITS THE PPL BEHIND IT?
how is that different that any other law we have on the books? FUKING SERIOUSLY IM WAITING!!!!!!!!!!!
-
oh yea whats the language in this bill?
OOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHH WAITTTTTTTTTTTTT you dont know????????? color me shocked!!!!!!!!
-
33 posted the exact line of the bill, and we had a great convo on it. "Reasonable"... very questionable.
The prob dude - and please, you are angry when it's not really necessary - is that cops can abuse this, and politicians can use it as step 1 of 'take your liberties'.
That's all. I'm all for crippling the shit out of every illegal we see. Then the limp will give them away ;) but my ass was in cuffs this year, despite doing nothing wrong, and that... shit... SUCKED. I'd hate to give cops the ability to just cuff and card people all day long.
-
33 posted the exact line of the bill, and we had a great convo on it. "Reasonable"... very questionable.
The prob dude - and please, you are angry when it's not really necessary - is that cops can abuse this, and politicians can use it as step 1 of 'take your liberties'.
That's all. I'm all for crippling the shit out of every illegal we see. Then the limp will give them away ;) but my ass was in cuffs this year, despite doing nothing wrong, and that... shit... SUCKED. I'd hate to give cops the ability to just cuff and card people all day long.
answer the damn question...how is it different than ANY OTHER LAW WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS!!!...every fuking law we have is subjective to the officer enforcing it.
EXPLAIN TO ME how this law differs...YOURE ok with officers being subjective to who the pull over for dwi's how is this law different...
EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE
-
33 posted the exact line of the bill, and we had a great convo on it. "Reasonable"... very questionable.
The prob dude - and please, you are angry when it's not really necessary - is that cops can abuse this, and politicians can use it as step 1 of 'take your liberties'.
That's all. I'm all for crippling the shit out of every illegal we see. Then the limp will give them away ;) but my ass was in cuffs this year, despite doing nothing wrong, and that... shit... SUCKED. I'd hate to give cops the ability to just cuff and card people all day long.
THEY ALREADY HAVE THAT RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!
they did that legally before this law was passed how is this law any different?
TELL ME, how this law differs from any other on the books?
-
I didnt think police could pull ppl out of line at movie theaters, buying ice cream cones, or at grocery stores, and demand to see their ID, currently. Can they?
They have that power now, if in their own belief/justification they believe that person is an illegal. Right now, thy have to make up some reason they stopped the person in their car.
They can stop you on the corner now. In the mall. Anywhere. They can stop groups of ppl at the grocery store and demand papers.
That's what I dont like - because it it step one in some very bad things. What is next? Can they see a person in their own front yard, and cuff them and demand papers there as well? Sounds like that to me.
We'll see what happens once the bil goes into effect and we see things actually happening. We're a bunch of non-lawyers arguing the ramifications of a bill not in play now. Don't get me wrong - I'm against illegals... but if 1 or 10,000 actual legal americans have to sit cuffed on their own front porch because some cop doesn't like them and feels like fvcking with them - it's legal. I dont like that.
-
I didnt think police could pull ppl out of line at movie theaters, buying ice cream cones, or at grocery stores, and demand to see their ID, currently. Can they?
They have that power now, if in their own belief/justification they believe that person is an illegal. Right now, thy have to make up some reason they stopped the person in their car.
They can stop you on the corner now. In the mall. Anywhere. They can stop groups of ppl at the grocery store and demand papers.
That's what I dont like - because it it step one in some very bad things. What is next? Can they see a person in their own front yard, and cuff them and demand papers there as well? Sounds like that to me.
We'll see what happens once the bil goes into effect and we see things actually happening. We're a bunch of non-lawyers arguing the ramifications of a bill not in play now. Don't get me wrong - I'm against illegals... but if 1 or 10,000 actual legal americans have to sit cuffed on their own front porch because some cop doesn't like them and feels like fvcking with them - it's legal. I dont like that.
the law also says "that they come in contact with" to me this means that they have reason other than your immigration status to talk to you...if in talking to you they feel that you may not be legal they ask for papers...
same thing as every other law on the books...
youre pissy about having benn hand cuffed for 15 mins but WHEN IT HAPPEND you were on here saying how yes it was a inconvience but worth it to make sure you werent the perp and that you TOTALLY understood why they did it and they were reasonable and polite about it...OR DO YOU NEED ME TO BUMP THAT THREAD?
-
I'd hate to give cops the ability to just cuff and card people all day long.
They already can.
I didnt think police could pull ppl out of line at movie theaters, buying ice cream cones, or at grocery stores, and demand to see their ID, currently. Can they?
If they have "just cause" to believe you may be doing something illegal, they can. And they need this same "just cause" under the new law. They can't just approach anyone they want and hassle them. Although "just cause" is very subjective as you found out. ;)
-
the law also says "that they come in contact with" to me this means that they have reason other than your immigration status to talk to you...if in talking to you they feel that you may not be legal they ask for papers...
same thing as every other law on the books...
youre pissy about having benn hand cuffed for 15 mins but WHEN IT HAPPEND you were on here saying how yes it was a inconvience but worth it to make sure you werent the perp and that you TOTALLY understood why they did it and they were reasonable and polite about it...OR DO YOU NEED ME TO BUMP THAT THREAD?
Ha Ha Ha - I REMEMBER THAT ONE!
-
"the law also says "that they come in contact with" to me this means that they have reason other than your immigration status to talk to you...if in talking to you they feel that you may not be legal they ask for papers..."
Can you say "come in contact with" doesn't mean, see you standing around drinking a soda?
I did understand why I ws cuffed, and as I explained here this week, I understood there was an amber alert in my area that matched - they were police as was I - still, to this day, I feel like shit driving past that parking lot where I was cuffed.
I'm starting to realize I'm debating with you for no good reason here. lol
-
"the law also says "that they come in contact with" to me this means that they have reason other than your immigration status to talk to you...if in talking to you they feel that you may not be legal they ask for papers..."
Can you say "come in contact with" doesn't mean, see you standing around drinking a soda?
I did understand why I ws cuffed, and as I explained here this week, I understood there was an amber alert in my area that matched - they were police as was I - still, to this day, I feel like shit driving past that parking lot where I was cuffed.
I'm starting to realize I'm debating with you for no good reason here. lol
Maybe you should get therapy for crying out loud, you were handcuffed and let go, you weren't even cited for anything right?
I can't believe how whiny you're being.
-
ok, so be it
have you been cuffed before? it's a fuckeked up feeling. I would hate to see a world where I'm cuffed 20 or 30 times a year in ID sweeps.
If you haven't been cuffed, you wouldn't understand. Complete loss of control.
-
ok, so be it
have you been cuffed before? it's a fuckeked up feeling. I would hate to see a world where I'm cuffed 20 or 30 times a year in ID sweeps.
If you haven't been cuffed, you wouldn't understand. Complete loss of control.
I've been cuffed and stuffed a few times, I've had cops and not so nice people put guns directly in my face, but I'm still here, and have moved on, I'd suggest you get over it, it was nothing.
Do you honestly think the cops will be pulling random white people from movie theatres to check their immigration status? WTF is wrong with you? Are you so blind you can't see why this law was put into effect? I believe it was soely for the purpose of being able to enforce the laws that already exist. What good does it do to have illegal immigration laws when the cops can't ask if you are here legally or not? This law allows them to ask those questions. ::)
-
I'm concerned about abuses of this law. The movie theater example is one that COULD happen - any cop at any time can pull any person out of any place and demand papers.
You think Obama wouldn't love some power like that? You think that the contractors capping people after Katrina woudln't have loved to be able to round up thousands of people and file the into camps (because you can't call in an ID without power, computers up).
I am really surprised it's the libs crying about the potential for abuse by the govt down the road. The repubs are just shrugging and saying "hey, they don't fvck with white people, I'm safe". The prob is, step 2 or 3 could be that. IMO, this kind of legislation opens up not only chance of abuse, but slowly numbs ppl into accepting a national ID card system as well.
And conservatives USED TO hate that idea. Now, as long as its painted in GOP colors and disses those darn illegals, they'll be lining up to get chipped ;)
-
I'm concerned about abuses of this law. The movie theater example is one that COULD happen - any cop at any time can pull any person out of any place and demand papers.
1) Any law can be abused by any number of cops.
2) "just cause", "probably cause".......a cop needs a reason to stop a person, you keep making up scenerios where cops can just approach you at any time and demand papers.
-
ok, so be it
have you been cuffed before? it's a fuckeked up feeling. I would hate to see a world where I'm cuffed 20 or 30 times a year in ID sweeps.
If you haven't been cuffed, you wouldn't understand. Complete loss of control.
So what would you do?
-
So what would you do?
He wants to cripple illegal aliens, but without the ability to identify them we'll never know if they are illegal in order to cripple them. :(
-
He wants to cripple illegal aliens, but without the ability to identify them we'll never know if they are illegal in order to cripple them. :(
240 has a jekyl and hyde like personality at times.
-
what would I do?
bring home 10% of the troops and put them on the border. At that point, the number of illegals is 15 million FLAT, and will begin shrinking slowly.
Some will apply for citizenship. Some will get kicked out as usual. With troops in the area, locals will get more bold with coming fwd with info on coyotes, safehouses, employers of illegals, etc.
I think it wouldn't take a huge legislation move. I think it would be a community effort - hell, we all know a place that employs illegals, or we see people who we know aren't here legally. If the US Army had a base 5 minutes away you could call, and they kept the area free from retaliation, people would rat out the illegals.
That current 15 mil number would also shrink as employers couldn't hire them anymore, and they just went back to mex cause the work dried up.
Guard the border and empower people to come fwd and feel safe as they rat out illegals and illegal employers.
-
what would I do?
bring home 10% of the troops and put them on the border. At that point, the number of illegals is 15 million FLAT, and will begin shrinking slowly.
Some will apply for citizenship. Some will get kicked out as usual. With troops in the area, locals will get more bold with coming fwd with info on coyotes, safehouses, employers of illegals, etc.
I think it wouldn't take a huge legislation move. I think it would be a community effort - hell, we all know a place that employs illegals, or we see people who we know aren't here legally. If the US Army had a base 5 minutes away you could call, and they kept the area free from retaliation, people would rat out the illegals.
That current 15 mil number would also shrink as employers couldn't hire them anymore, and they just went back to mex cause the work dried up.
Guard the border and empower people to come fwd and feel safe as they rat out illegals and illegal employers.
funny when reps wanted to man the border and build a big wall you shit on it...
how niave can you be 240? you really think simply putting ppl on teh border is going to do all that?
you really think putting ppl on the border is going to stop ppl from coming in? if you do you need to visit a border state and get a first hand dose of reality bro..
for someone talking about "not knowing how it feels if you werent in that sitution" you really have no clue about the ins and outs of this situation...
-
A wall is a bad idea because if you build a 10 foot wall, then people will just bring an 11-foot ladder. It'll cost a ton of money and people will just knock holes in it.
However, a few bases - simply barracks and roaming patrols, along with good intel from locals, and you stop them from coming in, and you kick a lot out.
i'd like to hear your opinions on this one. I was asked what I think would fix it - I think this would. Let the Army guard the border. use predators to watch from the sky. Use that nice infared technology to catch people in trunks. Use that nice airport ID technology at the borders. Pay $100 for every tip that leads to an illegal being deported. You don't think people will snitch on an illegal for a little cash? LOL... So those are my ideas. Spend less, keep the borders safe, and motivate people to turn them in, and let the Army remove the foreign invaders from teh USA. Stop the influx, motivate people to turn them in, and dry up their work. Their numbers will plummet.
I know you live in a border state, and I'm interested in why you don't think the US Army - treating them as foreign invaders - wouldn't be effective?
-
A wall is a bad idea because if you build a 10 foot wall, then people will just bring an 11-foot ladder. It'll cost a ton of money and people will just knock holes in it.
However, a few bases - simply barracks and roaming patrols, along with good intel from locals, and you stop them from coming in, and you kick a lot out.
i'd like to hear your opinions on this one. I was asked what I think would fix it - I think this would. Let the Army guard the border. use predators to watch from the sky. Use that nice infared technology to catch people in trunks. Use that nice airport ID technology at the borders. Pay $100 for every tip that leads to an illegal being deported. You don't think people will snitch on an illegal for a little cash? LOL... So those are my ideas. Spend less, keep the borders safe, and motivate people to turn them in, and let the Army remove the foreign invaders from teh USA. Stop the influx, motivate people to turn them in, and dry up their work. Their numbers will plummet.
I know you live in a border state, and I'm interested in why you don't think the US Army - treating them as foreign invaders - wouldn't be effective?
b/c it doesnt eliminate their desire to come here...
ive always said we need to secure the border but that is simply part of it, no matter what you do they will find away to get around it, its what they do...
you stop hiring them, giving them benefits, giving them mediacal care, CRIMINALIZE what is already a crime with them being in this country illegally and you will have a start...dont let the anchor baby bullshit go anymore
come on down to Texas 240 and see all the border patrols that roam around...they have about a 10foot strip of clean dirt on either side of the road so that when they see prints of that the dirt has been disturbed they know someone has crossed.
we already have roaming patrols, we already have officers that do exactly what your saying to do.
How do you suppose we go about identifying illegals 240?
-
if you pay people $100 for every illegal caught when they turn in an employer (and fine the employer like crazy), the work will dry up. Let's say you know of a restaurant that has probably 10 or 15 illegals working there... One call to rat, and you make $1500? That's plenty of motivation.
Their desire to come here will be a lot less if they know there is no work here...
-
There are tons and tons of mexicans hanging out in the streets near me. The overpaid gangsters w badges are told not to bother them and focus on traffic bs.
-
if you pay people $100 for every illegal caught when they turn in an employer (and fine the employer like crazy), the work will dry up. Let's say you know of a restaurant that has probably 10 or 15 illegals working there... One call to rat, and you make $1500? That's plenty of motivation.
Their desire to come here will be a lot less if they know there is no work here...
as well as making the prospect of being caught more punishing than the benefits of coming...
-
again 240 how do you suppose we find out who the illegals are?
-
I'll explain it again. You pay americans to snitch on illegals, and you have the Army remove them. You stop them on the way in. You dry up their work so they leave voluntarily.
How many decades of playing on-the-street grabass would you like to see... before yall wise up and just end the available work?
Think of it this way... you pour honey all over your porch, then spend the day stomping on ants. YOu can wear your best boots, but the next morning, there will be more ants. You remove the honey (the available jobs here) and the ants stay home.
-
I'll explain it again. You pay americans to snitch on illegals, and you have the Army remove them. You stop them on the way in. You dry up their work so they leave voluntarily.
How many decades of playing on-the-street grabass would you like to see... before yall wise up and just end the available work?
Think of it this way... you pour honey all over your porch, then spend the day stomping on ants. YOu can wear your best boots, but the next morning, there will be more ants. You remove the honey (the available jobs here) and the ants stay home.
How do you confrim that these people are illegal? Illegal immigrants don't come with a red "I" stitched on their clothes.
-
I'll explain it again. You pay americans to snitch on illegals, and you have the Army remove them. You stop them on the way in. You dry up their work so they leave voluntarily.
How many decades of playing on-the-street grabass would you like to see... before yall wise up and just end the available work?
Think of it this way... you pour honey all over your porch, then spend the day stomping on ants. YOu can wear your best boots, but the next morning, there will be more ants. You remove the honey (the available jobs here) and the ants stay home.
so let me get this straight, youre not ok with police officers making sure a person is legal but...
you are ok with civilians calling in and having police go over and check the legal status of that person?
sounds like a set up for alot of abuse ;)
-
Ha ha. True.
-
I'm okay with INS checking records with employers, who will face massive fines if caught.
I'm okay with the Army stopping bad guys with rifles from bullying locals.
I'm okay with the work drying up, at minimal cost to taxpayers, and the Army sealing up the border to assure nobody else gets in.
-
I'm okay with INS checking records with employers, who will face massive fines if caught.
I'm okay with the Army stopping bad guys with rifles from bullying locals.
I'm okay with the work drying up, at minimal cost to taxpayers, and the Army sealing up the border to assure nobody else gets in.
What if you dont know where they work? what if they dont work?
LMAO what if the army deems you to be a bad guy? they are going to stop you arent they? detain you? find out whether youre legal or not?
hows that different than police officers doing it?
you should really rethink your stance 240 sounds like your arguing more and more for this bill...
-
Also what if they present the employer with fake docs the employer thinks is true?
-
before I delve into all of that - Quick Q for you guys...
Are yall okay with a system for ID'ing and checking any american at any time without reason? Maybe some sort of national ID, or maybe even a handy chip in each of us?
THIS would be the first step in getting the public to go along with it. THAT is why I don't like this bill. I don't give a rats ass about the illegals - injure and return them. Pay neighbors to snitch them out, and guard that border so they don't come back. And punish those hiring them.
BUT I am very much against a system where police can knock on your door and demand papers - and it sounds like the only thing preventing that from happening here is "the officer wouldn't do that!"
-
I would put an ice officer in every jail, er room, school district, welfare office and dmv.
-
before I delve into all of that - Quick Q for you guys...
Are yall okay with a system for ID'ing and checking any american at any time without reason?
Quick Q for you........where are you getting that info about the bill from?
Everything I've read about the bill says the police now have the right to ask after they have engaged you for another purpose, nothing at all about randomly checking people.
-
Exactly. 240 is making stuff up here.
I already gave the example that will comprimise most of the situations under this law and I am totally ok with it.
-
cool, then I misunderstood, if that is the case.
Can anyone give clear writing from the bill that says police MAY NOT ask for ID if the person has not broken any law?
I thought it was just the cop's judgment call, if he felt like carding a person, he could. That can lead to abuse, if cops can detain anyone for no reason.
-
before I delve into all of that - Quick Q for you guys...
Are yall okay with a system for ID'ing and checking any american at any time without reason? Maybe some sort of national ID, or maybe even a handy chip in each of us?
THIS would be the first step in getting the public to go along with it. THAT is why I don't like this bill. I don't give a rats ass about the illegals - injure and return them. Pay neighbors to snitch them out, and guard that border so they don't come back. And punish those hiring them.
BUT I am very much against a system where police can knock on your door and demand papers - and it sounds like the only thing preventing that from happening here is "the officer wouldn't do that!"
LOL I sure hope you dont have a drivers liscence or social security card...I mean thats also another step in them being able to ask you for papers anytime... ::) as are about a dozen other laws on the books ALREADY
BUT I am very much against a system where police can knock on your door and demand papers - and it sounds like the only thing preventing that from happening here is "the officer wouldn't do that!"
how is it going to go in your system? whos going to go to their house and demand papers? sounds like your system will operate very similar to the one they put in place...whos to say the civilians turning ppl in will only turn in illegals?
-
cool, then I misunderstood, if that is the case.
Can anyone give clear writing from the bill that says police MAY NOT ask for ID if the person has not broken any law?
I thought it was just the cop's judgment call, if he felt like carding a person, he could. That can lead to abuse, if cops can detain anyone for no reason.
cops can ask for id now even if you havent broken the law...
all laws enforced by cops are judgement calls by the cops enforcing them...
-
"cops can ask for id now even if you havent broken the law...'
That part is the dangerous part.
Anywhere, anytime. Cops now have the ability to fvck with anyone. Right now, they cannot pull me out of the line at a movie theater just to fvck with me. But with this law, they'll have that ability.
Maybe you're cool with that. I'm not.
-
Oh brother. Can't you people make your point without the absurd exaggerations? Nobody is getting pulled out of a movie theater. Good grief.
-
"cops can ask for id now even if you havent broken the law...'
That part is the dangerous part.
Anywhere, anytime. Cops now have the ability to fvck with anyone. Right now, they cannot pull me out of the line at a movie theater just to fvck with me. But with this law, they'll have that ability.
Maybe you're cool with that. I'm not.
LMAO ::)
what part of the bill says that?
-
"cops can ask for id now even if you havent broken the law...'
That part is the dangerous part.
Anywhere, anytime. Cops now have the ability to fvck with anyone. Right now, they cannot pull me out of the line at a movie theater just to fvck with me. But with this law, they'll have that ability.
Maybe you're cool with that. I'm not.
What he is stating is that cops today anywhere in the US can say that you look suspicious and question you, it's got nothing to do with this law, this law only allows them to question your citizenship.
You seem to be having a hard time grasping this 240.
-
this law is dumb. i agree with president obama. freedom for all
-El Chapo
-
El chapo = moron.
-
El chapo = moron.
no. illegals working in kitchesn and as janitors and jobs noone wants dont hurt anyone. anthony bourdain is defender of illegals in restaurant kitchens and the work they do
-El Chapo
-
this law is dumb. i agree with president obama. freedom for all
-El Chapo
People shouldn't have the freedom to break the law. Send them home. Make them get in line and do it right.
-
no. illegals working in kitchesn and as janitors and jobs noone wants dont hurt anyone. anthony bourdain is defender of illegals in restaurant kitchens and the work they do
-El Chapo
I think they should issue hunting licences for illegal immigrants, where people can sit at the border and pick off illegals trying to cross.
-
I think they should issue hunting licences for illegal immigrants, where people can sit at the border and pick off illegals trying to cross.
not very grown up
-El Chapo
-
I would install an ice office in evrry police station, jail, hospital, school, and dmv.
-
a little more info from the gov of arizona...
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/23/immigration.obama.brewer/index.html
"This legislation mirrors federal laws regarding immigration enforcement. Despite erroneous and misleading statements suggesting otherwise, the new state misdemeanor crime of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document is adopted verbatim from the same offense found in federal statute."
"Today I am issuing an executive order directing the Airzona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board, AZ POST, to develop training to appropriately implement Senate Bill 1070. Importantly, this training will include what does and does not constitute reasonable suspicion that a person is not legally present in the United States."
-
Good for her. 240 and the rest of these illegal alien apologists can screw off.
Enough is enough and its time to boot these bums out.
-
a little more info from the gov of arizona...
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/23/immigration.obama.brewer/index.html
"This legislation mirrors federal laws regarding immigration enforcement. Despite erroneous and misleading statements suggesting otherwise, the new state misdemeanor crime of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document is adopted verbatim from the same offense found in federal statute."
"Today I am issuing an executive order directing the Airzona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board, AZ POST, to develop training to appropriately implement Senate Bill 1070. Importantly, this training will include what does and does not constitute reasonable suspicion that a person is not legally present in the United States."
gonna stil lbe racism. dumb law
-El Chapo
-
Cry me a river. No one has a right to be here illegally and freeload off the taxpayer.
-
not very grown up
-El Chapo
Not very grown up to break into your neighboring country either, but you greasy motherfuckers do it daily.
-
gonna stil lbe racism. dumb law
-El Chapo
so instead you suggest we appease the law breakers?
-
LOL @ me being called an alien apologist.
I've called for mining the border and crippling them. HAHAHAAHAHAA
-
"This legislation mirrors federal laws regarding immigration enforcement. Despite erroneous and misleading statements suggesting otherwise, the new state misdemeanor crime of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document is adopted verbatim from the same offense found in federal statute."
Whaaat. If this is true then what are people complaining about?
-
That the chaos and lawlessness might be curtailed.
-
That the chaos and lawlessness might be curtailed.
You can't stop chaos, it's been tried. :)
-
I have seen these invaders literally destroy the city where I live and have zero tolerance for their apologists.
-
'I have seen these invaders literally destroy the city where I live and have zero tolerance for their apologists. '
LOL and you know damn well that I would personally smash the knees of ANY illegal, while you held them down for me, then we'd enjoy a beer together.
I just don't like giving police an inch to abuse - and they will. And should Obama decide to do a nationwide system... ugh.
-
'I have seen these invaders literally destroy the city where I live and have zero tolerance for their apologists. '
LOL and you know damn well that I would personally smash the knees of ANY illegal, while you held them down for me, then we'd enjoy a beer together.
I just don't like giving police an inch to abuse - and they will. And should Obama decide to do a nationwide system... ugh.
You keep talking about Obama using this as a stepping stone for a nationwide system, but Obama has come out and openly blasted AZ for passing this law. He shows no support for the law at all and if I recall he's working on an amnesty for millions of illegal fuckwads to stay here.
Deport Obama back to Kenya were he belongs!!!!!!!!!
-
240 do you respect this as a political move? it will force obamas hand on immigration right before the mid terms.
-
You keep talking about Obama using this as a stepping stone for a nationwide system, but Obama has come out and openly blasted AZ for passing this law. He shows no support for the law at all and if I recall he's working on an amnesty for millions of illegal fuckwads to stay here.
Deport Obama back to Kenya were he belongs!!!!!!!!!
hes a good man and his plan werks. there are plenty of illegals werking 2 jobs to send money back home are they bad know
-El Chapo
-
240 do you respect this as a political move? it will force obamas hand on immigration right before the mid terms.
Obama will just force a different issue to get around having to face the tough choice, like forcing the public to pay attention to his Obamacare instead of dealing with the economy. ::)
-
Very good Q tony,
yes, I think it is a very shrewd move by the repubs. Obama will now feel pressure to try to legalize their asses BEFORE the nov elections, which will hurt dems further in elections.
-
I welcome mass civil unrest and revolution if maobama tries this.
-
'I welcome mass civil unrest and revolution if maobama tries this. '
You're a single young guy.
See if you feel this way in 10 years. I doubt you will.
-
The founders faced the same issue 240.
-
Illegal immigrants are brought into the US by the bus loads by Smithfield Foods and Tyson Foods to work at meat packing plants. The US government has a deal with these corporate giants to occasionally deport a few, but not too many as to not disrupt production.
-
They literally line the streets near where I am. Between the drug dealing, DWI's, child sex crimes, flop houses, etc, they are definately a net drain.
-
They literally line the streets near where I am. Between the drug dealing, DWI's, child sex crimes, flop houses, etc, they are definately a net drain.
You have Smithfield Foods and Tyson Foods to thank for that!
-
You have Smithfield Foods and Tyson Foods to thank for that!
Fine, lets drop the hammer on them mercilessly.
-
You have Smithfield Foods and Tyson Foods to thank for that!
As well as Home Depot and tons of tree trimming, yard mowing "businesses".
-
April 27, 2010
The Arizona Uproar
www.americanthinker.com
By Leo W. Banks
________________________ ___________________
Listening to the national uproar, you'd be forgiven for thinking that Arizona has marched into the civil rights apocalypse with its new state law cracking down on illegal immigrants.
Last Friday, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB1070, making it a crime to be in the state illegally and requiring cops, where "reasonable suspicion" exists, to determine a person's legal status.
Rev. Al Sharpton is promising to come to Arizona to march, the New York Times says that the state has gone "off the deep end," and the Nazi references are flying. Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony likened SB1070 to "German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques."
Riding the noise for political advantage, President Obama is summoning his Justice Department to look into the matter, saying that the law would "undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans."
But 70 percent of Arizona residents support the law, according to Rasmussen.
What's going on here? Do we know something the rest of the country doesn't?
Actually, we do. Context is everything, and it'd be nice if the national media provided some, rather than simply slamming Arizona as a redneck haven filled with nativists and bubbas with a hankering for racial profiling.
An estimated 500,000 illegal aliens live in Arizona, and many are decent folks, to be sure. But the border is still wide open, and many more are coming. Last year in Border Patrol's 262-mile-wide Tucson Sector, agents arrested 241,000 illegal aliens, a drop of more than 130,000 from 2007.
It sounds great until you understand that gotaways outnumber arrests by three to one.
Does the country realize this, or have the people bought Janet Napolitano's political fairy tale that border security has been "transformed" from where we were in 2007?
As Obama lectures Arizona, citizens here await his decision on an urgent request to send three thousand National Guard troops to the border. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl recently asked for soldiers, as did Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, to bring some security to American citizens being hammered by cross-border smugglers and thugs.
Here's an important bit of context: This isn't your father's illegal immigration, when polite farm workers offered to do chores in return for some water and a sandwich as they walked north. Today, the drug cartels have taken over the people-smuggling business. They own the trails into the country and dominate the land, the same way urban gangs control neighborhoods
Any group wanting in has to deal with them, and the going rate is $2,500 per person. If you don't have the cash, the cartel coyote will offer to bring you in for free if you carry his dope. As Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever testified to the Senate Homeland Security Committee last week, most of the groups coming up now have a gun behind them.
Along the Chiricahua Corridor smuggling route north and east of Douglas, Arizona, residents have been screaming for some time about break-ins, threats, intimidation, vandalism, and home invasions. But the feds did nothing to keep citizens safe. Instead, they talked amnesty. Then the inevitable happened.
On March 27, Cochise County rancher Rob Krentz was murdered on his land, presumably by a drug smuggler. The death occurred on a well-known drug trail, and trackers followed the killer's prints back into Mexico. He is still at large.
Now, I can't argue with those who say that SB1070 has some provisions that smack of desperation -- such as making it a crime to stop your car to pick up a day laborer or to enter a stopped car to get temporary work. That sounds impossible to enforce.
But critics also say that it will have no impact on besieged residents of southern Arizona, and I disagree. It could help.
We have a huge problem with crooks coming up from Mexico to our cities and towns, committing crimes, and bolting back south of the border. Not long ago, I wrote a story that backtracked the records of two of these border coyotes and found that between them, they'd been arrested and released by either law enforcement or the courts a total of 35 times.
One was let go after a traffic stop, and the other had worked construction in Phoenix for years. If this law had been in effect, the police might've been able to get them off the street before they were able to lead more groups into southern Arizona, break into homes, and frighten citizens.
Civil rights? What about the civil right of American citizens to drive up to their homes at night and have some reasonable assurance that no one is inside?
On March 31, four hundred people gathered outside the one-room Apache School to tell their elected reps what it's like to live in smuggler-occupied territory. The meeting was held there, in the cold, open air, in part because the nearest place to host a group that size inside was seventy round-trip miles away, and these folks didn't feel comfortable leaving their homes for that length of time.
They live by a rule of thumb: If you leave your house empty, it will be occupied by illegals or drug smugglers. We're not talking just about homes five miles from the international line. We're talking about homes up to sixty miles north of the border.
Racial profiling doesn't matter much when you're in a fight to preserve your way of life and keep your family and property safe. Let me give you a different perspective on racial profiling. Now, when Border Patrol chases down and arrests illegals south of I-10, everybody says, "Atta boy. Good police work."
But if these crossers put a toe north of I-10, they're home free. Except for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, nobody is looking for them, and if you do, it's racial profiling.
The farther you get from the line, the more people want to make this problem about race. It's the ground the left wants to fight on because it's so effective. Political correctness shuts people up and keeps the border open.
Arizona has had enough and seen enough. This bill, admittedly flawed, motivated in part by anger and frustration, is an effort to step in and do something about a serious national problem on our southern border that grows more dangerous all the time.
But the national media largely ignore it because it offers up the wrong victims and the wrong politics. They don't send reporters out to Arizona get the story, to walk the smuggling trails, to sit with beleaguered Americans at their kitchen tables and understand the torment their lives have become.
Instead, they adopt the preening pose of the self-righteous, screaming from a safe distance about the bubbas. All 70 percent of them.
It's more fun than context.
Leo W. Banks covers the border for Tucson Weekly.
Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/04/the_arizona_uproar.html at April 27, 2010 - 06:49:35 AM CDT
-
How about charging and arresting businesses that hire illegals.
No job opportunity, no reason to cross a border.
But then what would corporate farms, gardening businesses, nanny's, restaurants do withou the illegals?
GWB understood this, that is why he was for amnesty.
Walmart, et el would like to keep their workers underpaid and benefit free.
Sandra
-
How about charging and arresting businesses that hire illegals.
No job opportunity, no reason to cross a border.
But then what would corporate farms, gardening businesses, nanny's, restaurants do withou the illegals?
GWB understood this, that is why he was for amnesty.
Walmart, et el would like to keep their workers underpaid and benefit free.
Sandra
common misconception...many illegals would still be here and many illegals would still come across the border...we give them free health care...they have areas of self sustaining illegal communities...
and you will NEVER NEVER NEVER be able to eliminate companies that hire illegals ther will ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS be companies that try to skirt the law in regards to this...
going after companies that hire illegals is only one part of the solutions not THE PART
-
Even if it is just "part of the problem" Illegal is illegal.
No one gets a pass.
If you aren't paying "taxes" for your employess/paying under the table, you are just as bad as the immigrants from all nations in this country illegally.
Sandra
-
Even if it is just "part of the problem" Illegal is illegal.
No one gets a pass.
If you aren't paying "taxes" for your employess/paying under the table, you are just as bad as the immigrants from all nations in this country illegally.
Sandra
oh I agree i just think we should be realistic is all...
ive heard the "just get rid of the companie hiring them and they will go away" line so many times over the past couple days is amazing. Like ive said those who really believe that do not understand the ins and outs of this problem.
secure the borders, go after the companies that hire them, deport the illegals that you come across, get rid of the anchor baby bs...these are just a few of the things that need to be done in order to address the multiple angles of this problem
doing only one assures failure
-
I despise when politicians do things to keep themselves in office.
GWB was right in thinking that if you allow the illegals a way to get legalization, it would have been a start to working on this problem.
This a country of immigrants. Illegals have been here from the start. Deporting them all and is impossible. Building a wall? Unless it is another Great wall of China, there will always be a way to get in,over, under or around it.
Protect the borders? Utilize the militias.
Fine the companies that hire them. If companies hired citizens, unemployment would go down.
But then, the companies would have to pay a decent wage and add some sort of benefits package.
Sandra
-
I despise when politicians do things to keep themselves in office.
GWB was right in thinking that if you allow the illegals a way to get legalization, it would have been a start to working on this problem.
This a country of immigrants. Illegals have been here from the start. Deporting them all and is impossible. Building a wall? Unless it is another Great wall of China, there will always be a way to get in,over, under or around it.
Protect the borders? Utilize the militias.
Fine the companies that hire them. If companies hired citizens, unemployment would go down.
But then, the companies would have to pay a decent wage and add some sort of benefits package.
Sandra
Yeah, a country of immigrants that got in line and did it the right way and realized that they were now Americans and we do have our own way of life here. The amount of illegal immigrants is estimated to be in the millions in this country. Amnesty is nothing but a forgiveness for a bunch of law breakers...how would they enforce the penalties with amnesty? Would they start to enforce our laws and our border after amnesty? If you think that than I'm sorry but you don't have a grasp of the problem. While the business part may be a part of the solution it isn't the solution as those same businesses would continue to break the law by hiring Americans under the table, which is obviously still breaking the law.
Illegals have a way to get legalization; all they have to do is get in line and wait their turn. We already grant more legal immigrants into this country than the rest of the world combined! Funny you don't hear that in the news. Arizona is obviously desperate to control the problem and I don't think we have any right to jump down on them because of the extreme measure they are taking to not just protect this country, but to protect their homes as the minutemen have been doing for some time.
It has to suck knowing you might come home to an armed intruder just because you went out for a while. Thank God those people now have true Constitutional carry.
-
Another thing:
1. Why should we give amnesty to those whose first action is breaking the law and showing a disdain for our laws?
2. Do you guys realize that illegal aliens commit many other crimes such as identity theft, fraud, etc just to maintain their illegal status?
3. What is to stop a new flood of 20 million illegals from coming here?
4. What is the difference between full amnesty and "going to the back of the line" so long as they can stay here?
5. Is it fair that millions are doing this the right way, paying thousdands in fees and costs and waiting in line while these criminals flaunt the law?
-
Remember my idea of breaking 1 leg and returning them to the southernmost tip of mexico, and seeing how many can make the journey a second time? :)
HAHAHA THIS was back in 2010. Trump adopted my idea of dropping them off very very far away tonight.
Love it!
-
Exactly. If there were 26 million zips from Italy doing this same crap, I would probably join the calzone patrol myself.
LOL@ Calzone Patrol!! haha awesome!