Torn on This Issue

[Ituyu]

First, by definition, a criminal is someone who commits a crime. A Crime, by definition, is a violation of the law. Therefore, whether or not you like the laws does not matter. If you break the law, by definition, you are a criminal. They may not be “felons”, but illegal aliens, by definition are “criminals” (thats what the “illegal” part refers to)

Violations of Civil Codes are not crimes. People who get a traffic citation are not criminals. Crossing the border without permission is a similar violation. It is not legally considered a crime.

Second, just because you don’t like the law, does not mean it should be ignored. I’d like to ignore our laws about paying taxes, or the speed limit laws, but it does not matter, we should not be allowed to pick and choose the laws we want to follow or not follow. If you don’t like the immigration laws, perhaps you should get like minded people to change them.

No they didn’t choose. We closed the door on “legal” immigration because we didn’t gauge our labor needs accurately. Experts on the issue have already conceded that it is not possible to deport 11 million people and that it would do us more harm than good. It would be a better idea to give these people the “legal” option that they should have had in the first place.

 

[shockerfan]

No they didn’t choose. We closed the door on “legal” immigration because we didn’t gauge our labor needs accurately. Experts on the issue have already conceded that it is not possible to deport 11 million people and that it would do us more harm than good. It would be a better idea to give these people the “legal” option that they should have had in the first place.

To equate breaking immigration laws to speeding is an insult to those who came here legally and are following the rules.

I guess we could go around and around with me making a point, and you making up definitions to fit your points. We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Fremont]

Furthermore, taxation without representation is unconstitutional. Apparently you’re willing to violate not only Human Rights but a persons Constitutional rights

What are you talking about?

There is nothing in our constitution that says, “taxation without representation is unconstitutional”.

Millions of people who cannot vote, hence no representation, are required to pay taxes. Multinational companies without any representation in our government pay taxes to the US. This is not unconstitutional nor is it a violation of constitutional rights.

Make your arguments but stick to reality and be accurate.

 

[Fremont]

To equate breaking immigration laws to speeding is an insult to those who came here legally and are following the rules.

I guess we could go around and around with me making a point, and you making up definitions to fit your points. We will have to agree to disagree.

Shockerfan,

You have made some excellent posts recently in this thread - #73, #76 & #80. These are well written and on point. I admire you and support many of your thoughts.

Do not be too offended or disheartened by some kooks from the ultra-bias left that falsely accuse you of acts like violating the constitutional rights of anyone. The authors have no idea of what they are talking about and are just thrashing around with wild emotional claims that are simply not true. It is easy enough to look up the US Constitution and see how false the accusations are. It is not a very long document and it is easy to skip the parts that have nothing to do with the point of interest.

Certainly everyone has the right to post their ideas and comments here but they do not have the right to bear false witness. Wild and contrived ranting is a common tactic by extremists who have no valid foundation for their position.

It is quite disturbing when they claim the Church supports their distorted and wild views of the world. But that is between them and God. We just have to begin with the perspective that their statements are false and based on emotion rather than truth.

We will always have these screwballs with us. Just laugh a little at their ridiculous antics and keep posting sound comments like you have done in the past.

 

[shockerfan]

Shockerfan,

You have made some excellent posts recently in this thread - #73, #76 & #80. These are well written and on point. I admire you and support many of your thoughts.

Do not be too offended or disheartened by some kooks from the ultra-bias left that falsely accuse you of acts like violating the constitutional rights of anyone. The authors have no idea of what they are talking about and are just thrashing around with wild emotional claims that are simply not true. It is easy enough to look up the US Constitution and see how false the accusations are. It is not a very long document and it is easy to skip the parts that have nothing to do with the point of interest.

Certainly everyone has the right to post their ideas and comments here but they do not have the right to bear false witness. Wild and contrived ranting is a common tactic by extremists who have no valid foundation for their position.

It is quite disturbing when they claim the Church supports their distorted and wild views of the world. But that is between them and God. We just have to begin with the perspective that their statements are false and based on emotion rather than truth.

We will always have these screwballs with us. Just laugh a little at their ridiculous antics and keep posting sound comments like you have done in the past.

Fremont,

I’m not discouraged, Its just I have argued with people before that make up things to support their arguments (after a while you just have to ignore them) For example, they say illegal immigrants don’t choose to break the immigration laws (ignoring legal immigrants that chose to follow the laws) Or, "You’re not a “criminal” if you break those laws…its no worse than a speeding ticket (they love to make up their own definitions). Or its OK to break those laws since “experts” (not judges, mind you) have determined the laws don’t work and the system is broken (See how far you get making the assertion that since our tax system is broken, you can choose to break those laws!)

What I think is that there is a political motivation behind some peoples insistance that illegals still have an opportunity to vote at some point. I would not be surprised if they are the same people who feel that requiring identification to vote is intimidation.

Hmmm, which political party always throws up roadblocks to mandating identification to be able to vote? Which political party wants to change states laws that prevent felons from voting? Which political party has suggested that non-citizens be able to vote in local elections? I see a connection here.

 

[Fremont]

Fremont,

I’m not discouraged, Its just I have argued with people before that make up things to support their arguments (after a while you just have to ignore them) For example, they say illegal immigrants don’t choose to break the immigration laws (ignoring legal immigrants that chose to follow the laws) Or, "You’re not a “criminal” if you break those laws…its no worse than a speeding ticket (they love to make up their own definitions). Or its OK to break those laws since “experts” (not judges, mind you) have determined the laws don’t work and the system is broken (See how far you get making the assertion that since our tax system is broken, you can choose to break those laws!)

What I think is that there is a political motivation behind some peoples insistance that illegals still have an opportunity to vote at some point. I would not be surprised if they are the same people who feel that requiring identification to vote is intimidation.

Hmmm, which political party always throws up roadblocks to mandating identification to be able to vote? Which political party wants to change states laws that prevent felons from voting? Which political party has suggested that non-citizens be able to vote in local elections? I see a connection here.

Thanks for the response. As usual well thought out and useful.

I guess I just wanted to tell you I like your style – if that means anything.

By the way, the US Constitution does require that only citizens can vote. It is unconstitutional for anyone who is not a citizen to vote or attempt to vote.

 

[Ituyu]

What are you talking about?

There is nothing in our constitution that says, “taxation without representation is unconstitutional”.

Yes, I agree. Advice that we should both follow.

 

[Fremont]

Your correct. “No taxation without representation” was a famous quote from the American Revolution.

I believe you owe an apology to Shockerfan and the others in this forum for your false statement used in an attempt to support your opinion and your outrageous accusations and insult when you posted:

“Furthermore, taxation without representation is unconstitutional. Apparently you’re willing to violate not only Human Rights but a persons Constitutional rights”

 

[Ituyu]

I believe you owe an apology to Shockerfan and the others in this forum for your false statement used in an attempt to support your opinion and your outrageous accusations and insult when you posted:

“Furthermore, taxation without representation is unconstitutional. Apparently you’re willing to violate not only Human Rights but a persons Constitutional rights”

I think most people can comprehend a retraction for what it is. But, some can’t.

 

[Fremont]

Crossing the border without inspection or without permission is not a “criminal” act it a violation of Civil Codes. That puts this at the same level of a traffic citation.

This is not correct. No matter how often it is repeated it is still not correct. Feeble attempts to trivialize the serious crime of illegal immigration should at least be accurate.

Criminal matters involve violation of the law. Crime is involved and the government does the prosecution of the accused. Penalties such as fines, incarceration and deportation can be imposed.

Traffic violations are crimes too, not civil matters. The law has been violated, penalties such as fines and incarceration can be imposed and convictions for moving violations are entered into the violator’s criminal record.

Federal law forbids entry into the US without permission. Violation of the law is a crime and a serious matter. Individuals who violate the law are guilty of a crime and subject to penalties such as deportation.

Deportation is good but I would like to see more penalties available to the courts such as confiscation of all monies and property acquired by the illegal immigrant as a result of residing in the US unlawfully.

As always I favor new laws, rules and regulations that will encourage illegal immigrants to leave the US voluntarily. As this develops there will be less and less need to prosecute illegal immigrants.

 

[KathleenElsie]

My grandfather came here to work for Westinghouse in East Pittsburgh, PA. He came from Switzerland prior to WWII and was a highly skilled worker (Master Tool & Die Maker). He came alone and after two years he sent for my grandmother. They were married on the boat prior to her being allowed to enter this country (eg: set foot on land in NY).

My grandfather spoke seven languages and had no problem with becoming a citizen. Other then the accent he spoke English very well. On the other hand it took my grandmother almost 18 years to pass the citizenship test. Her English was peppered with German and she failed a couple of times LOL. The day she finally made it she was so proud.

As we were growing up English was the only language spoken to us children. (at night when we went to bed you could hear them converse in German) We were taught German, bur, English was our expected language.

Some of the “new” citizens do not have to speck our language. Many don’t teach their children pride in the USA. When asked what our nationally is I proudly say American of German/Swiss descent.

 

[Ituyu]

This is not correct. No matter how often it is repeated it is still not correct. Feeble attempts to trivialize the serious crime of illegal immigration should at least be accurate

What serious crime? Crossing an arbitrary line? Working at an honest job? Helping the economy of this nation? The vast majority of experts agree that immigration legal and otherwise amounts to a net gain when all is said and done.

.

Criminal matters involve violation of the law. Crime is involved and the government does the prosecution of the accused. Penalties such as fines, incarceration and deportation can be imposed.

 

[Fremont]

What serious crime? Crossing an arbitrary line? Working at an honest job? Helping the economy of this nation? The vast majority of experts agree that immigration legal and otherwise amounts to a net gain when all is said and done.]

Violating federal law is a serious crime. Our border is not just an arbitrary line. It is much more than that, just as the door to your house is much more than an arbitrary line. We all have a right to control that line – in fact a country has a duty to do so.

Yes, illegally working a job is a violation of the law and a crime.

The vast majority of experts I see agree that illegal immigration is a net burden to the US.

Athough we differentiate between Civil law and Criminal law, you insist in calling every violation a crime and thus making the offender a “criminal”. Ok play that sound byte all you want but our legal system looks at it differently than you. One prime example was the criminal proceeding involving OJ Simpson. In a Criminal court he was found “not guilty” and he walked. In a civil court he was he was held accountable for the same charge. If the civil court were criminal, the “Double Jeopardy” laws would apply and he would have been protected from a second trial. But, it was a Civil case, these were not criminal charges. He was held accountable and yet he was not called a criminal and retained his freedom.

Civil matters are a dispute between individuals, entities such as corporations or other matters such as contract disputes. Resolution may result in a judgment where monies, property or other items are exchanged between the disputing parties. There is no crime involved and there are no penalties such as fines, incarceration or deportation imposed.

You can call illegal immigration as a violation of civil law all you want but that is not true. There are no civil laws. No civil action tries anyone for any sort of violation of any law and no punishment is imposed.

Criminal matters involve violation of the law. Crime is involved and penalties such as fines, incarceration and deportation can be imposed.

Yes, anyone violating the law is guilty of a crime.

Good example, but do not try to twist it. O. J. Simpson was never found guilty of any crime and is not called a criminal by the law. The civil action did involve the same event but by no means the same charge, it was quite different. In fact there was no charge at all. The issue was whether he was responsible for a wrongful death – and that is not a criminal charge, or any sort of charge, the way is was done in the civil trial.

Let’s not get absurd. Certainly violation of traffic laws is a crime. But there is a wide range of levels and seriousness of crimes in that arena. Just as we have venial sins and mortal sins parking violations are minor but reckless driving and DUI are very serious. I guess if you feel no guilt when you violate traffic laws you can ignore entries on job applications – but I do not know of any that request information about anything about traffic violations unless the job involves driving. In that case they check the records no matter what you say.

Interesting. One time you cry about how awful and horrible deportation is and now you say it is trivial. Nice try to have it both ways. Deportation is expedient for the Border Patrol – but illegal entry to the US is indeed a violation of the law and a crime. It has nothing to do with civil law.

I think the idea is perfectly fair. Courts confiscate ill-gotten good from criminals quite frequently.

 

[mystified]

RE: The California Republic
It lasted a very short time. Then, with the great influx of people from the East (undocumented immigrants?), California became a state. Its first state constitution was handwritten in Spanish.

 

[Ituyu]

Violating federal law is a serious crime. …quote]

A serious crime means serious harm. There is no serious harm. In fact the only harm comes not allowing them in legally in the first place. Why is everything only thier fault? Don’t you understand that, we the people, our government had a role to play. It failed to provide the necessary workers and natural forces took care of the rest.

It’s only a violation of a law that doesn’t work as intended. We decided not to enforce it. We needed their labor and we wanted them to come. We intended for unwanted labor not to come but as it turned out these people found jobs. Jobs that would not otherwise have been filled. It’s just common sense to know that what they did worked to everybodies favor and you don’t use severe and ruthless punishment for that.

The vast majority of experts I see agree that illegal immigration is a net burden to the US.

You haven’t referenced one single expert. Only stupid politicians who pander for your vote. The governments immigration agency would not propose to do what you’re recommending. Furthermore, they don’t think it wise to have such an uneven approach on our southern border because it has already put an extra burden on our northern border. What is proposed won’t make us any safer and it won’t solve our social problems. In fact, it will make them worse. Worse? We don’t have anything to gain by the action proposed against people who have become part of the fabric of this society. To act against them is to act against ourselves.

Civil matters are a dispute between individuals, entities such as corporations or other matters such as contract disputes… Resolution may result…

That would be true in our regular courts but we’re talking about our Immigration procedures which are similarly broken into Civil and Criminal violations. Crossing our borders is a Civil Code violaton. The distinction is that Civil Code violation requires no formal court proceedings and no incarceration. Usually people are simply deported and is the fine and punishment. In a criminal matter then you are talking fines plus incarceration. But in both situations it’s the government taking the action.

Yes, anyone violating the law is guilty of a crime

.

Well then I would venture to say that pretty near all of us have had a moving violation, crossed a double line, or had a parking tickets which are against the law. We’re all guilty of “illegal” acts so I guess we’re all “illegals”.

Good example, but do not try to twist it. O. J. Simpson was never found guilty of any crime and is not called a criminal by the law. The civil action did involve the same event…

Yea!!! You got it!! A violation of the Immigrations Civil Code is not a criminal offense. A criminal offense would require a formal hearing, fines and jail time. Hmmm how much do you think that might cost. We’ll probably have to have them serve their time in private homes. Maybe you have an extra room?

Let’s not get absurd. Certainly violation of traffic laws is a crime. But there is a wide range of levels and seriousness of crimes in that arena…

That’s right they ask for information on “criminal” offenses on some applications for employment. They don’t ask for information about breaking our traffic laws because they are not “criminal”. Even if I’m applying for a driving position, illegal parking tickets won’t show up unless they haven’t been paid.

Interesting. One time you cry about how awful and horrible deportation is and now you say it is trivial. …quote]

Wrong again Fremont. I’m saying that crossing the border is not necessarily a “crime” when it comes under the Civil Code. I’m saying that deportation a not a criminal proceeding it’s a Civil one. But, deporting people after we’ve all seen them day in and day out for years doing jobs that we want and need them to do is not justice. It’s just punishment for no good reason. That’s just vindictive.

I think the idea is perfectly fair. Courts confiscate ill-gotten good from criminals quite frequently.

Again. I don’t buy into your argument that any crime has been committed by a person who merely takes a job and helps our country in the process. To punish them for that is poor jurispudence and not even what the law intended. The law intended to provide for our labor needs and it failed. Natural law took care of the rest.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Ituyu]

RE: The California Republic
It lasted a very short time. Then, with the great influx of people from the East (undocumented immigrants?), California became a state. Its first state constitution was handwritten in Spanish.

And the reason Spanish was fought against? To get the upper economic postition and steal away even more land from it’s rightful owners. We couldn’t do it fairly so we did it legally.

 

[Al_Masetti]

About a million people a year LEGALLY immigrate to the United States.

About a million people a year ILLEGALLY immigrate to the United States.

So, why should the people who OBSERVE THE LAW be treated in a punitive way while we allow the ILLEGAL immigrants to have special privileges???

 

[Fremont]

RE: The California Republic
It lasted a very short time. Then, with the great influx of people from the East (undocumented immigrants?), California became a state. Its first state constitution was handwritten in Spanish.

Interesting information. Thanks your for the post.

One thing though. Back in the mid-19th century I do not think there was such a thing as undocumented immigrants, illegal immigrants or anything like that. The US had a pretty much open door immigration policy then. It was about 75 years after the California Republic that various immigration laws were passed by congress.

 

[Ituyu]

About a million people a year LEGALLY immigrate to the United States.

About a million people a year ILLEGALLY immigrate to the United States.

So, why should the people who OBSERVE THE LAW be treated in a punitive way while we allow the ILLEGAL immigrants to have special privileges???

So how have they been punished? They were the lucky ones who got in under the quotas and weren’t deprived a thing! They did nothing to deserve being considered over those who had the door closed on them. Another important fact that the current proposals would require that they work six years before applying for permanent residence. That would put them at the end of the line.

justiceforimmigrants.org/ParishKit/ResponseUndocumented.pdf

 

[Al_Masetti]

So how have they been punished? They were the lucky ones who got in under the quotas and weren’t deprived a thing! They did nothing to deserve being considered over those who had the door closed on them. Another important fact that the current proposals would require that they work six years before applying for permanent residence. That would put them at the end of the line.

justiceforimmigrants.org/ParishKit/ResponseUndocumented.pdf

The illegals are being allowed to work here, to get free medical treatment, to get free educational benefits, to have their children become automatic citizens of the United States, and to bring in to the United States a variety of contagious diseases and to come in with criminal backgrounds.

Under the procedures followed by LEGAL immigrants the disease, educational, and criminal situations are routinely screened. In addition, legal immigrants who might appear on a terrorist watch list are also screened. Illegal immigrants can evade legitimate screening.

It allows employers of illegal immigrants to underpay the illegals which puts citizens and legal immigrants at a disadvantage.

The legal immigrants and legitimate citizens also must pay taxes to provide the benefits being accorded to the illegal immigrants.

All of that constitutes a privileged status which puts LEGAL immigrants and legitimate citizens at a disadvantage.