Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Immigration is not a civil right

A Peach Supreme





Posts: 2141
(2141 all sites)
Registered: 5/9/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 01:22 PM
The liberal capitalists paint uncontrolled immigration as a civil rights issue similar to integration but that is not the case. Capitalism depends on a surplus of labor to keep wages low. With 20% unemployment now, adding millions more unskilled workers would be devastating to Americans. Canada does not allow free immigration. The poverty in Mexico is a result of U.S. corporation's control of their govt. The best solution would be to allow Mexico to be run by the Mexican people.
 
Replies:

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 27533
(27822 all sites)
Registered: 2/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 03:32 PM
That makes too much sense.....be ready for the fall out.

 

____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 67541
(67902 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 03:50 PM
Problem with your argument is that the 20% unemployment is not in the 'unskilled' labor sector.....(and I don't think it is 20% yet).....

[Edited on 4/26/2010 by Sang]

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 08:39 PM
quote:
The liberal capitalists paint uncontrolled immigration as a civil rights issue similar to integration but that is not the case. Capitalism depends on a surplus of labor to keep wages low. With 20% unemployment now, adding millions more unskilled workers would be devastating to Americans. Canada does not allow free immigration. The poverty in Mexico is a result of U.S. corporation's control of their govt. The best solution would be to allow Mexico to be run by the Mexican people.


No, immigration is not a civil right, but using the color of peoples skin to determine if they may or may not have committed a crime is completely against it.

Lets find all the high crime areas in the US that have a large African American population and start stopping all of them to determine if they committed a crime. Sound like a good idea?

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by SquatchTexas]

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2141
(2141 all sites)
Registered: 5/9/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 09:16 PM
quote:
quote:
The liberal capitalists paint uncontrolled immigration as a civil rights issue similar to integration but that is not the case. Capitalism depends on a surplus of labor to keep wages low. With 20% unemployment now, adding millions more unskilled workers would be devastating to Americans. Canada does not allow free immigration. The poverty in Mexico is a result of U.S. corporation's control of their govt. The best solution would be to allow Mexico to be run by the Mexican people.


No, immigration is not a civil right, but using the color of peoples skin to determine if they may or may not have committed a crime is completely against it.



Lets find all the high crime areas in the US that have a large African American population and start stopping all of them to determine if they committed a crime. Sound like a good idea?

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by SquatchTexas]


I hope you didn't get that I was in favor of police profiling from my post. I only said I was for controlling immigration. JFK was also, to protect American workers from an oversupply of the labor pool. Rich people, including liberals, hire illegal immigrants to perform household and yard work below minimum wage and not pay any SS.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 67060
(67577 all sites)
Registered: 10/27/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 09:42 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
The liberal capitalists paint uncontrolled immigration as a civil rights issue similar to integration but that is not the case. Capitalism depends on a surplus of labor to keep wages low. With 20% unemployment now, adding millions more unskilled workers would be devastating to Americans. Canada does not allow free immigration. The poverty in Mexico is a result of U.S. corporation's control of their govt. The best solution would be to allow Mexico to be run by the Mexican people.


No, immigration is not a civil right, but using the color of peoples skin to determine if they may or may not have committed a crime is completely against it.



Lets find all the high crime areas in the US that have a large African American population and start stopping all of them to determine if they committed a crime. Sound like a good idea?

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by SquatchTexas]


I hope you didn't get that I was in favor of police profiling from my post. I only said I was for controlling immigration. JFK was also, to protect American workers from an oversupply of the labor pool. Rich people, including liberals, hire illegal immigrants to perform household and yard work below minimum wage and not pay any SS.


Lots of govt appointees on both sides have been caught in that net.

 

____________________
Hittin' The Web::Hugh Duty Memorial Giveaway has begun!

RIP Hugh Duty

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 09:45 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
The liberal capitalists paint uncontrolled immigration as a civil rights issue similar to integration but that is not the case. Capitalism depends on a surplus of labor to keep wages low. With 20% unemployment now, adding millions more unskilled workers would be devastating to Americans. Canada does not allow free immigration. The poverty in Mexico is a result of U.S. corporation's control of their govt. The best solution would be to allow Mexico to be run by the Mexican people.


No, immigration is not a civil right, but using the color of peoples skin to determine if they may or may not have committed a crime is completely against it.



Lets find all the high crime areas in the US that have a large African American population and start stopping all of them to determine if they committed a crime. Sound like a good idea?

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by SquatchTexas]


I hope you didn't get that I was in favor of police profiling from my post. I only said I was for controlling immigration. JFK was also, to protect American workers from an oversupply of the labor pool. Rich people, including liberals, hire illegal immigrants to perform household and yard work below minimum wage and not pay any SS.


I'm surprised you like JFK so much. He was no socialist.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 09:57 PM
quote:
I hope you didn't get that I was in favor of police profiling from my post. I only said I was for controlling immigration. JFK was also, to protect American workers from an oversupply of the labor pool. Rich people, including liberals, hire illegal immigrants to perform household and yard work below minimum wage and not pay any SS.


No, I was just tossing the scenario out there as a different way of thinking about the current issue of criminalizing (at the local level), illegal aliens. Your statement here is also spot on...I believe the key to the illegal immigration issue is going to be going after those that hire the illegal aliens. There are tons of businesses and individuals that do it every single day. The Feds/ICE know exactly who these businesses and individuals are but theres no prosecution of the source of the jobs.

You cannot go after the individuals..your cost per illegal is going to be huge.

You cant block the border, its just physically impossible.

You can try to eliminate the jobs, the reasons why many come here.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 11:12 PM
quote:
You cannot go after the individuals..your cost per illegal is going to be huge.

You cant block the border, its just physically impossible.


Oh, I don't know about that.

One way it could be done, not that I'm proposing it as a solution, build tall reinforced towers every 100 yards. Have a violent offender locked in the tower who is serving at least a 20 yr sentence. Inside is a locker that has a radio controlled lock. The locker contains a scoped, high powered rifle. One cartridge is dispensed to load the weapon. The convict is told that for every illegal trying to get into the country, he stops or turns away, he gets one month taken off his sentence. For each one he kills, one month is added. (Remember, these are people INVADING the country, not someone who goes through the legal means of gaining entry.) You don't want to kill them, you just want them to think quite long about the odds of them getting into the country, and the consequences of them taking the risks.
If a large group is observed, radio contact with authorities is made. The convict still gets credit for each one turned away or caught.

Of course, this could never happen?

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11157
(11157 all sites)
Registered: 9/17/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 11:28 PM
For starters it might help if the Feds would make it mandantory instead of voluntary for employers to be a part of IMAGE (ICE Mutual Agreement Between Government and Employers) and follow the guidelines for each new hire and existing employees.

http://www.ice.gov/partners/opaimage/

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8488
(8513 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/26/2010 at 11:33 PM
Illegal immigration is a big issue with me, but we all must remember a few things:

1) llegal immigrants working above table with false social security numbers do have withholdings taken from their pay. So there is atleast some portion of the illegal workforce that is paying into the employment tax pool.

2) I am pro fence/wall and am pro national guard on boarder, however, a large number of illegals are smuggled into the country and don't just wander across the border. So the toughest border fence and patrol imaginable is not going to stop the problem.

I agree with those who want the strictest penalties for those who hire illegals. BUT also, when law enforcement encounters an illegal alien they should not be allowed to remain in our country and should be deported quickly and swiftly. We don't go around and "round them up", but when one is found, they must leave. Tough laws for employers and tough deportation law coupled with strength along the border might be a winning combination to get the problem under control.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8488
(8513 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 12:01 AM
Another thing about costs, I'd be willing to bet that if every state put out a ballot issue asking for an additional sales tax of maybe 1% in order to fund increased enforcement against illegal immigration it would pass in a majority of states. Funds to cover added staffing and logistic costs would need to come from somewhere, if the people of a given state want added enforcement, let them put their money where their mouth is. This is what Arizona should do, if the will of the people support the program passed and signed by the governor then see if they are willing to pay for it.

This post would probably go better in that Arizona thread, but with it's 9 or 10 pages I'm not getting involved in that one at this point.

If law enforcement has a person that has broken the law, whether it is speeding, disorderly conduct, domestic violence, drug/alcohol chargers, any number of crimes that would trigger arrest or citation, I see no problem with a citizenship check, really isn't this merely a ssn check? Everyone should have a social security number, or if a foreigner is here legally on a work permit/visa that should have some sort of tracking like an ssn. What is wrong with verifying a person is here legally based on their driver's license, state issued ID or ssn that they present to the officer? It just seems like a no-brainer to have that be part of the process.

Squatch this is a perfect question for you. How hard is it to tell from a drivers license, state issued ID or social security number if a person is a legal citizen or not? If I am missing something on this issue I would like to know.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8488
(8513 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 12:08 AM
quote:
For starters it might help if the Feds would make it mandantory instead of voluntary for employers to be a part of IMAGE (ICE Mutual Agreement Between Government and Employers) and follow the guidelines for each new hire and existing employees.

http://www.ice.gov/partners/opaimage/


Why not make E-verify mandatory? It is like we get mechanisms for combating illegal immigration and then there are people out there fighting against a system like E-verify.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 12:16 AM
quote:
For starters it might help if the Feds would make it mandantory instead of voluntary for employers to be a part of IMAGE (ICE Mutual Agreement Between Government and Employers) and follow the guidelines for each new hire and existing employees.

http://www.ice.gov/partners/opaimage/


Absolutely. THIS is the right way to a meaningful resolution to the illegal problem.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 12:49 AM
quote:
Another thing about costs, I'd be willing to bet that if every state put out a ballot issue asking for an additional sales tax of maybe 1% in order to fund increased enforcement against illegal immigration it would pass in a majority of states.


No doubt, but how reasonably sure can we be that those funds would go for that project? Me? I dont trust any government agency to do the right thing with the specific funding. There always seems to be a loophole that allows them to spend it elsewhere. Federal grants, however, are typically very specific and quite restrictive on spending and even usage of funds and materials provided by the grant.

quote:
Funds to cover added staffing and logistic costs would need to come from somewhere, if the people of a given state want added enforcement, let them put their money where their mouth is. This is what Arizona should do, if the will of the people support the program passed and signed by the governor then see if they are willing to pay for it.


While this is a good idea (let them pay for it), the bottomline is that the law passed is most very likely unconstitutional since the states apparently cannot pass laws that involve immigration.

quote:
If law enforcement has a person that has broken the law, whether it is speeding, disorderly conduct, domestic violence, drug/alcohol chargers, any number of crimes that would trigger arrest or citation, I see no problem with a citizenship check, really isn't this merely a ssn check?


No, not really since not everyone has a SSN. Past that, remember, the 4th Amendment requires probable cause for law enforcement to 'seize' anything, be-it paper, possessions or people. Right now, the gold standard of 'probable cause' for this horrendous law starts with someones race, which is at issue with our current civil rights laws.

quote:
Everyone should have a social security number, or if a foreigner is here legally on a work permit/visa that should have some sort of tracking like an ssn. What is wrong with verifying a person is here legally based on their driver's license, state issued ID or ssn that they present to the officer? It just seems like a no-brainer to have that be part of the process.


Thats all fine and good, but whats your probable cause for approaching the Mexicans in the first place? See, with this law, you dont need PC, you can just start asking questions and thats where the law falls apart and the civil rights violations begin. Hell, even Charles Krauthammer doesnt like this law. That should tell us something

quote:
Squatch this is a perfect question for you. How hard is it to tell from a drivers license, state issued ID or social security number if a person is a legal citizen or not? If I am missing something on this issue I would like to know.


Well, on the surface, it would be difficult due to the quality of forged documents these days. The only way you are going to be able to verify the validity of the document presented (and maybe ultimately the validity of the individual) is by either running them through your dispatcher or through your incar computer. With Texas DL's, theres a number of ways we can look at them and determine if they are forgeries or not, BUT, the people that make fake Texas DL's know most of the tricks. I had two DL's about 6 months ago that were superb. They had the right font, colors etc. and even some of the validity checks done. The girls that had these paid big bucks for them...just to buy booze. I submitted the ID's to the US Secret Service so that the tracking of where those ID's came from could begin.

In short, it would be pretty difficult to 'prove' someones legitimacy because to get to that point, you need to establish reasonable suspicion --> probable cause for the contact. The issue then becomes what do you do with someone who doesnt have any documentation with them? In Texas, you can take them for identification purposes, but it wouldnt be practical in applying it to illegals.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8488
(8513 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 08:31 AM
quote:
quote:
Another thing about costs, I'd be willing to bet that if every state put out a ballot issue asking for an additional sales tax of maybe 1% in order to fund increased enforcement against illegal immigration it would pass in a majority of states.




quote:
No doubt, but how reasonably sure can we be that those funds would go for that project? Me? I dont trust any government agency to do the right thing with the specific funding. There always seems to be a loophole that allows them to spend it elsewhere. Federal grants, however, are typically very specific and quite restrictive on spending and even usage of funds and materials provided by the grant.



Right I know what you mean. Although states know their historical sales tax revenue and they project what upcoming years will bring, so by adding something like 1% to existing revenue they would have an estimate how much that would generate and could determine before hand that over the course of the year X amount of dollars will go into a specific fund for expenses related to illegal immigration enforcement.

quote:
quote:
Funds to cover added staffing and logistic costs would need to come from somewhere, if the people of a given state want added enforcement, let them put their money where their mouth is. This is what Arizona should do, if the will of the people support the program passed and signed by the governor then see if they are willing to pay for it.




quote:
While this is a good idea (let them pay for it), the bottomline is that the law passed is most very likely unconstitutional since the states apparently cannot pass laws that involve immigration.



If that is the case then it makes alot of this conversation meaningless.

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
If law enforcement has a person that has broken the law, whether it is speeding, disorderly conduct, domestic violence, drug/alcohol chargers, any number of crimes that would trigger arrest or citation, I see no problem with a citizenship check, really isn't this merely a ssn check?




quote:
No, not really since not everyone has a SSN. Past that, remember, the 4th Amendment requires probable cause for law enforcement to 'seize' anything, be-it paper, possessions or people. Right now, the gold standard of 'probable cause' for this horrendous law starts with someones race, which is at issue with our current civil rights laws.


quote:
Everyone should have a social security number, or if a foreigner is here legally on a work permit/visa that should have some sort of tracking like an ssn. What is wrong with verifying a person is here legally based on their driver's license, state issued ID or ssn that they present to the officer? It just seems like a no-brainer to have that be part of the process.




quote:
Thats all fine and good, but whats your probable cause for approaching the Mexicans in the first place? See, with this law, you dont need PC, you can just start asking questions and thats where the law falls apart and the civil rights violations begin. Hell, even Charles Krauthammer doesnt like this law. That should tell us something






I'm not suggested anyone by questioned or confronted on suspicion of being an illegal solely. What I am saying is that once you do have a suspect of another crime why not go ahead and run a citizen check then? Going around randomly asking certain people for ID, green cards, and birth certificates is crazy. However, verifying this info for a suspect of another crime seems very logical. People are asked to identify themselves in these cases anyway so in many cases the info necessary to verify the citizenship is already being given to law enforcement every single day now. It is just one extra step with info that is currently gathered under a current standard operating procedure. Which takes us to the next point...

quote:
quote:
quote:
Squatch this is a perfect question for you. How hard is it to tell from a drivers license, state issued ID or social security number if a person is a legal citizen or not? If I am missing something on this issue I would like to know.




quote:
Well, on the surface, it would be difficult due to the quality of forged documents these days. The only way you are going to be able to verify the validity of the document presented (and maybe ultimately the validity of the individual) is by either running them through your dispatcher or through your incar computer. With Texas DL's, theres a number of ways we can look at them and determine if they are forgeries or not, BUT, the people that make fake Texas DL's know most of the tricks. I had two DL's about 6 months ago that were superb. They had the right font, colors etc. and even some of the validity checks done. The girls that had these paid big bucks for them...just to buy booze. I submitted the ID's to the US Secret Service so that the tracking of where those ID's came from could begin.


quote:
In short, it would be pretty difficult to 'prove' someones legitimacy because to get to that point, you need to establish reasonable suspicion --> probable cause for the contact. The issue then becomes what do you do with someone who doesnt have any documentation with them? In Texas, you can take them for identification purposes, but it wouldnt be practical in applying it to illegals.




I'm not going to pretend to know how something works that I have no experience in that you deal with constantly. It would just seem that you (either through the computer or dispatch) are already dealing with trying to figure out who people are and if they are IDing themselves factually or not. Do not either an arresting officer or people at the police station have to verify who people are now, or do people get arrested, detained, charged and prosecuted under fictitious names and identities? My point is that law enforcement at some point along the line is determining the actual identity of these people so why not verify their legality in this country as well at that point? And again, I'm not suggesting citizenship check points or door to door checks, nothing like that. All I'm saying is that when through normal process law enforcement comes in contact with people who are suspected of breaking any other current law and gathers personal ID info that at that time the wheels should be set in motion to verify their legal status. To me, obviously as somebody outside law enforcement, seems like a very just and level headed approach.

In what I'm saying, not having your ssn, state issued ID or other form of documentation is not a crime. But if those same individuals are being arrested and charged with a crime that initiated the contact (including the smallest misdemeanor), whenever their identity is learned their legal status should be verified and determined if they are in violation of immigration law in addition to their original offenses and therefore should face additional charges and punishment.

Or when confronting a suspect for another crime, if it is learned through a computer or dispatch check that they appear not to be legal then that would be an arrestable and chargable offense in and of itself on the spot. Then the normal process of innocent until proven guilty reins and evidence offered by the suspect or the prosecution can determine if said person is in fact legal or not. But if states can not enforce immigration law, then the point is mute anyway.

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by nebish]

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 08:59 AM
quote:
I'm not suggested anyone by questioned or confronted on suspicion of being an illegal solely. What I am saying is that once you do have a suspect of another crime why not go ahead and run a citizen check then?


Sorry I missed this earlier...they already do this once they hit jail. From there, ICE investigates and if they are illegal, they are deported.

quote:
Going around randomly asking certain people for ID, green cards, and birth certificates is crazy.


Not only crazy, unconstitutional. Currently can be found in AZ.

quote:

I'm not going to pretend to know how something works that I have no experience in that you deal with constantly. It would just seem that you (either through the computer or dispatch) are already dealing with trying to figure out who people are and if they are IDing themselves factually or not. Do not either an arresting officer or people at the police station have to verify who people are now, or do people get arrested, detained, charged and prosecuted under fictitious names and identities?


Yes, absolutely, we always have to determine who we are dealing with.

quote:
My point is that law enforcement at some point along the line is determining the actual identity of these people so why not verify their legality in this country as well at that point?


Well as I mentioned already, its done (at least here) at the jail level. There is no provision in Texas law for Peace Officers to enforce Federal immigration laws, which actually highlights the same issue that AZ is currently facing. They dont have the provision either and arent allowed to create it.

quote:
And again, I'm not suggesting citizenship check points or door to door checks, nothing like that. All I'm saying is that when through normal process law enforcement comes in contact with people who are suspected of breaking any other current law and gathers personal ID info that at that time the wheels should be set in motion to verify their legal status. To me, obviously as somebody outside law enforcement, seems like a very just and level headed approach.


Well, it all comes down to whats permissible by state and Federal law. You would apparently have to change the Federal law regarding the states being able to enact immigration laws in order to start moving that direction. ICE is overwhelmed and in many cases, they count on the jails and prisons to identify the illegals so that they can ultimately be removed.

quote:
In what I'm saying, not having your ssn, state issued ID or other form of documentation is not a crime. But if those same individuals are being arrested and charged with a crime that initiated the contact (including the smallest misdemeanor), whenever their identity is learned their legal status should be verified and determined if they are in violation of immigration law in addition to their original offenses and therefore should face additional charges and punishment.

Or when confronting a suspect for another crime, if it is learned through a computer or dispatch check that they appear not to be legal then that would be an arrestable and chargable offense in and of itself on the spot. Then the normal process of innocent until proven guilty reins and evidence offered by the suspect or the prosecution can determine if said person is in fact legal or not. But if states can not enforce immigration law, then the point is mute anyway.

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by nebish]


Im sure its going to be Federally challenged in the courts, most likely all the way to the USSC. Unfortunately, it will involve people having their rights trampled before the courts step in, typically. From the other thread, I posted this:

It sounded to the Law Blog like we were heading toward a big federalism showdown. So we turned to Karl Manheim of Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and Erwin Chemerinsky of UC Irvine Law to pregame it for us. Their response: the law is DOA.

The Arizona law appears to be "facially unconstitutional," Manheim said. "States have no power to pass immigration laws because it's an attribute of foreign affairs. Just as states can't have their own foreign policies or enter into treaties, they can't have their own immigration laws either."

States have long attempted to regulate immigration and in some instances the federal government successfully challenged state laws in court, including in the 1800s, Manheim said.

But federal governments often stay out of the fight. In 1994, for example, California voters passed a law designed to deny social services to undocumented aliens. The law was challenged by private litigants and struck down by a federal court.


http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/04/23/law-profs-on-arizona-im migration-bill-its-unconstitutional/

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Sublime Peach



Karma:
Posts: 7260
(7342 all sites)
Registered: 11/29/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 10:20 AM
quote:
You cant block the border, its just physically impossible


See, we could hire a bunch of the unemployed and line them up along the border. Two birds with one stone.

 

____________________
I have an idea: let's pretend we're real human beings.

 
E-Mail User

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5490
(5497 all sites)
Registered: 2/2/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 10:33 AM
quote:
quote:
You cant block the border, its just physically impossible


See, we could hire a bunch of the unemployed and line them up along the border. Two birds with one stone.


Or hire Humphrey Bogart

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsdZKCh6RsU

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 11:04 AM
quote:
quote:
You cant block the border, its just physically impossible


See, we could hire a bunch of the unemployed and line them up along the border. Two birds with one stone.


We could gas them all, like at the dentist, transport them to Minnesota and put them on the border. When they wake up, their first instinct will be to head north into Canada. Problem solved.

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8488
(8513 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 12:06 PM
quote:
quote:
I'm not suggested anyone by questioned or confronted on suspicion of being an illegal solely. What I am saying is that once you do have a suspect of another crime why not go ahead and run a citizen check then?


Sorry I missed this earlier...they already do this once they hit jail. From there, ICE investigates and if they are illegal, they are deported.

quote:
Going around randomly asking certain people for ID, green cards, and birth certificates is crazy.


Not only crazy, unconstitutional. Currently can be found in AZ.

quote:

I'm not going to pretend to know how something works that I have no experience in that you deal with constantly. It would just seem that you (either through the computer or dispatch) are already dealing with trying to figure out who people are and if they are IDing themselves factually or not. Do not either an arresting officer or people at the police station have to verify who people are now, or do people get arrested, detained, charged and prosecuted under fictitious names and identities?


Yes, absolutely, we always have to determine who we are dealing with.

quote:
My point is that law enforcement at some point along the line is determining the actual identity of these people so why not verify their legality in this country as well at that point?


Well as I mentioned already, its done (at least here) at the jail level. There is no provision in Texas law for Peace Officers to enforce Federal immigration laws, which actually highlights the same issue that AZ is currently facing. They dont have the provision either and arent allowed to create it.

quote:
And again, I'm not suggesting citizenship check points or door to door checks, nothing like that. All I'm saying is that when through normal process law enforcement comes in contact with people who are suspected of breaking any other current law and gathers personal ID info that at that time the wheels should be set in motion to verify their legal status. To me, obviously as somebody outside law enforcement, seems like a very just and level headed approach.


Well, it all comes down to whats permissible by state and Federal law. You would apparently have to change the Federal law regarding the states being able to enact immigration laws in order to start moving that direction. ICE is overwhelmed and in many cases, they count on the jails and prisons to identify the illegals so that they can ultimately be removed.

quote:
In what I'm saying, not having your ssn, state issued ID or other form of documentation is not a crime. But if those same individuals are being arrested and charged with a crime that initiated the contact (including the smallest misdemeanor), whenever their identity is learned their legal status should be verified and determined if they are in violation of immigration law in addition to their original offenses and therefore should face additional charges and punishment.

Or when confronting a suspect for another crime, if it is learned through a computer or dispatch check that they appear not to be legal then that would be an arrestable and chargable offense in and of itself on the spot. Then the normal process of innocent until proven guilty reins and evidence offered by the suspect or the prosecution can determine if said person is in fact legal or not. But if states can not enforce immigration law, then the point is mute anyway.

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by nebish]


Im sure its going to be Federally challenged in the courts, most likely all the way to the USSC. Unfortunately, it will involve people having their rights trampled before the courts step in, typically. From the other thread, I posted this:

It sounded to the Law Blog like we were heading toward a big federalism showdown. So we turned to Karl Manheim of Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and Erwin Chemerinsky of UC Irvine Law to pregame it for us. Their response: the law is DOA.

The Arizona law appears to be "facially unconstitutional," Manheim said. "States have no power to pass immigration laws because it's an attribute of foreign affairs. Just as states can't have their own foreign policies or enter into treaties, they can't have their own immigration laws either."

States have long attempted to regulate immigration and in some instances the federal government successfully challenged state laws in court, including in the 1800s, Manheim said.

But federal governments often stay out of the fight. In 1994, for example, California voters passed a law designed to deny social services to undocumented aliens. The law was challenged by private litigants and struck down by a federal court.


http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/04/23/law-profs-on-arizona-im migration-bill-its-unconstitutional/


Maybe some kind of new initiative should be formed, granting states additional powers to enforce immigration law. Not just once in prison and handing off to ICE. If it requires a change in federal law, or what have you, I really think that if a car driver gets pulled over for a traffic violation and through the best channels available to the officer, if that person is believed to be an illegal that should be an arrestable offense. You just can't go around to "round them up" but when our local and state officers find themselves face to face with someone who might be illegal, that opportunity should be used to hopefully identify and weed out the illegals.

I think this would help the problem, to attack it on all fronts - throw the book at employers, but also crack down on the illegals themselves.

No doubt funding would be necessary on all levels including the overwhelmed ICE agency. It's going to take money and that is going to take taxes. They figure out how to account for public service levy and school district tax monies to go toward their specific causes, they should be able to figure out a form of taxation that would 100% go towards the enforcement and administration costs to bring the illegal immigration problem under control.

So maybe there is a way to have state and local law enforcement departments be a bigger part of the solution. Relying solely on the feds and not having other branches of law enforcement help the effort more hasn't done much to stem the influx of illegals. And just again, I 100% agree that employers should be targeted. It is going to take a bit of everything within this country's power.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5490
(5497 all sites)
Registered: 2/2/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 12:15 PM
Maybe some kind of new initiative should be formed, granting states additional powers to enforce immigration law. Not just once in prison and handing off to ICE. If it requires a change in federal law, or what have you, I really think that if a car driver gets pulled over for a traffic violation and through the best channels available to the officer, if that person is believed to be an illegal that should be an arrestable offense. You just can't go around to "round them up" but when our local and state officers find themselves face to face with someone who might be illegal, that opportunity should be used to hopefully identify and weed out the illegals.


I think this does (or should) exist now. History is full of murderes/serial killers who were pulled over for things like broken tailights. I can't believe that once you are pulled over the police don't have this right. They check your registration, insurance, etc. No reason that your legal status should not be able to be questioned.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 27533
(27822 all sites)
Registered: 2/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 12:28 PM
There was a case in our town several years back where two illegals were drunk and speeding and took an unsafe curve too fast, crashed into a drainage ditch and died. Their families sued the city and won. It ticked me off then and it still ticks me off that people can break the law and then claim they're the victim. I think some factions in this country have gone, in some cases, so far to the side of the criminal that law abiding citizens are victimized twice....once by the felon and again by the government.

 

____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!


 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2141
(2141 all sites)
Registered: 5/9/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 02:50 PM
I don't like being on the same page as Rush Limbaugh for the very first time consider it a coincidence more than anything else. The endless, and escalating "war on drugs" is also contributing to the problem.

[Edited on 4/27/2010 by lespaul58]

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8488
(8513 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 4/27/2010 at 03:31 PM
quote:
Maybe some kind of new initiative should be formed, granting states additional powers to enforce immigration law. Not just once in prison and handing off to ICE. If it requires a change in federal law, or what have you, I really think that if a car driver gets pulled over for a traffic violation and through the best channels available to the officer, if that person is believed to be an illegal that should be an arrestable offense. You just can't go around to "round them up" but when our local and state officers find themselves face to face with someone who might be illegal, that opportunity should be used to hopefully identify and weed out the illegals.



I think this does (or should) exist now. History is full of murderes/serial killers who were pulled over for things like broken tailights. I can't believe that once you are pulled over the police don't have this right. They check your registration, insurance, etc. No reason that your legal status should not be able to be questioned.


We're in agreement. Maybe I am missing something, but to my understanding legal status is not checked/verified in these types of situations (ie traffic stops). It seems to me to be a common sense step in the whole process.

 
<<  1    2    3  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software


Privacy | Terms of Service
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com