• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Illegal drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, gun offenders, no problem.

Unitedwestand13 said:
But there should be way for them to reunite and atone for any transgression.
Click to expand...

Again you fail to understand, and apparently choose to remain uneducated and call it from the gut alone. They are not united because they choose to not be united. At any time one side of that fence can go join the other. Entirely up to them.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Circumstance. Fate. Chance. A mistake. Who can tell?
Click to expand...
But I presented you with a chance to read an educational essay.

You speak as if you turned it down .. and instead posted a picture of a family separated by a fence.

That's a complete disconnect.

You purported that this picture is all you need to "understand".

But you don't say what that meaning is, or what the picture caused you to understand.

And now, when the relevant question is posed to you, you have no answer.

In the American justice system, fault is key to a conviction.

And, conviction for the specific crime is key to sentencing.

If you continue to emotionalize, you'll be wasting your time.

I could easily post pictures of Americans homeless on the streets because they lost their jobs to wage-slave illegals.

When all is said and done, what's important is the facts of what happened.

No matter how sad some situations are, some people have simply brought them on themselves.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I don't think you are educated in the other perspective
Click to expand...

No, what you have offered is an uneducated in the issue gut call that is not a perspective, it's a guilty young liberal's kneejerk.
 
Ontologuy said:
But I presented you with a chance to read an educational essay.

You speak as if you turned it down .. and instead posted a picture of a family separated by a fence.

That's a complete disconnect.

You purported that this picture is all you need to "understand".

But you don't say what that meaning is, or what the picture caused you to understand.

And now, when the relevant question is posed to you, you have no answer.

In the American justice system, fault is key to a conviction.

And, conviction for the specific crime is key to sentencing.

If you continue to emotionalize, you'll be wasting your time.

I could easily post pictures of Americans homeless on the streets because they lost their jobs to wage-slave illegals.

When all is said and done, what's important is the facts of what happened.

No matter how sad some situations are, some people have simply brought them on themselves.
Click to expand...

Just because they brought it upon themselves that does not mean they deserve to be consumed by circumstances.
 
eohrnberger said:
True. 'Obamnesty', as you call it, is not popular with the electorate, and polls very low. What's polling high is congressional legislation to 'fix' immigration. This latest action from Obama has created a situation where it is nearly impossible for Republicans to vote for it, and probably has shelved real immigration reform another 10 years. So much so for his claimed caring about immigrants. All he cares about is politics, and he has a very cynical and narcissistic approach to it.

OK. So it's not economic asylum. What is it then?

What is the great draw of the US that pulls so many of them across dangerous lands, possibly losing their lives, paying off the coyotes a huge pile of money (relative to them) to come to the US illegally, possibly face deportation if caught, and later, possible separation from their kids.

If we can identify that, and turn it down, perhaps they'd be less inclined to go through all that to get here illegally? Perhaps they'd go through the legal immigration process?
Click to expand...
Yes, there's a difference between our immigration system and illegal aliens.

Americans find violation of our laws offensive, and they find special treatment for law-breakers that allows them to get off scot free even more distasteful.

As a separate issue, our immigration system isn't "broken".

It just takes a long time for a nation to find a place for a new immigrant when that nation is still suffering from the effects of the Great Recession and the real unemployment rate is above 13 percent and many Americans who could work are homeless along with their kids because they couldn't find living-wage work, and our city roads are jam-packed and droughts are making water difficult to obtain in some areas ...

Once we take care of ourselves then we'll be able to take on more people from the outside.

But, we must take of ourselves first.

Our immigration system respects that .. and those who can't come here "now!" or "sooner" and are waiting in line and who thus are upset and react with "it's broken" .. or those similar who chose to trespass, forge or steal identities, violate federal employment law, violate U.S. customs law, other frauds, etc. and also say they "had" to because "your immigration system is 'broken'" .. are simply not qualified to make that assment, a quite erroneous assessment.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
What is a lie? The belief that some illegals can be given amnesty?
Click to expand...

There's the problem with spinning around as you have been, you're lost your own point. I explained how the taking care of their families financially and safety excuses were lies and you told us your morals required you to buy those lies. I asked what possible morals could you have that would require such.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Just because they brought it upon themselves that does not mean they deserve to be consumed by circumstances.
Click to expand...

That's precisely what it means. YOU take an action of your own accord and you enjoy the positive and negative consequences of that action.
 
clownboy said:
There's the problem with spinning around as you have been, you're lost your own point. I explained how the taking care of their families financially and safety excuses were lies and you told us your morals required you to buy those lies. I asked what possible morals could you have that would require such.
Click to expand...

My moral is to never inflict a harsh punishment to someone who did not act because of malice or evil intentions.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Just because they brought it upon themselves that does not mean they deserve to be consumed by circumstances.
Click to expand...
Your phrase "consumed by circumstances" is simply meaningless rhetoric.

You will learn in life, that people make their own beds, and then they have to lie in them.

That's a meaningful phrase.

You reap what you sow -- that's a meaningful phrase, too.

What you seem to be implying here is that people should not be held appropriately accountable for their actions.

Your implication violates the American value of justice for all.

If you allow some people to commit crimes and not be held accountable for it, and those on whom they perpetrate their crimes not to receive restitution from them and not get their stolen goods back, you've committed a gross injustice.

That's what Obama's speech was really all about -- attempting to excuse a gross injustice committed by illegal aliens against American citizens.

That doesn't fly with the great majority of Americans, and for obvious non-victim-mentality reasons, for reasons of fairness, and today reflects in the polling, a great majority now opposed to Obama's executive order.

Illegal aliens have treated Americans unfairly.

Now, they should rightly be called to pay for that unfairness.

Deportation is a lenient response, all things considered.

Had they be made to serve sentences for their crimes and be on the hook for restitution, some would owe hundreds of thousands of dollars, and most would have to serve many years in prison.

That they get off with mere deportation, and Americans get their jobs etc. back, that's clemency and mercy, for sure.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
My moral is to never inflict a harsh punishment to someone who did not act because of malice or evil intentions.
Click to expand...

So now you need education on what morals are as well? And how in the world, with your lack of education on this issue have you determined there is no malice or evil intentions or even that the punishment is harsh or even a punishment? It's not btw, deportation isn't a punishment.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
My moral is to never inflict a harsh punishment to someone who did not act because of malice or evil intentions.
Click to expand...
Malice is the behavior of the illegal alien who comes here to knowingly steal a job whose rights to that job does not belong to that illegal alien but belongs to someone else.

That's thievery.

You know .. I wonder ..

.. Do you personally know someone who is an illegal alien in America?

Are/were your parent(s) illegal aliens?

Are you somehow personally involved in this?

I'm wondering if you could answer those questions for me.

Would you do that for me, please?
 
clownboy said:
So now you need education on what morals are as well? And how in the world, with your lack of education on this issue have you determined there is no malice or evil intentions or even that the punishment is harsh or even a punishment? It's not btw, deportation isn't a punishment.
Click to expand...

Ontologuy said:
Malice is the behavior of the illegal alien who comes here to knowingly steal a job whose rights to that job does not belong to that illegal alien but belongs to someone else.

That's thievery.

You know .. I wonder ..

.. Do you personally know someone who is an illegal alien in America?

Are/were your parent(s) illegal aliens?

Are you somehow personally involved in this?

I'm wondering if you could answer those questions for me.

Would you do that for me, please?
Click to expand...

I can not bring myself to bring harm to people.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I would use the fact that they are in custody and convicted to prioritize their removal. Why use resources to catch them instead of to deport them?
Click to expand...
AlbqOwl said:
But there should be no give in the law in any circumstance. It might be okay to overlook a parking or jay walking ticket, but ALL anti-social crimes--those with the potential of harming others, committed by somebody who is here uninvited to begin with, should make that person subject to deportation immediately upon serving whatever sentence is imposed.
Click to expand...
Apparently, we'd $285 billion to deport all of the people eligible for deportation.
Since that money is not in the budget, someone somewhere must make a decision about which cases receive priority treatment.
:shrug:

If you don't like it, then cough up billions more so that there's not a need for priorities.


eohrnberger said:
Yeah, probably, and we can also tell, who's making it such, and who's going to end up paying for it.
The precedence has been set. I expect some sort of lie from the administration when this question is raised. Of course, that'll be after the wheels and actions have already been put into motion.
Click to expand...
Inorite?
The govt is infallible, so why do we need it to be held accountable for its action through processes like trials using laws and crap like that.
If you're a govt agent, you should be able to do as you damn well please--laws and rules be damned.
We don't need to stinking rule of law.
What are we? Freaking Islamo-commies?
**** due process.
**** courts.
**** the law.

eohrnberger said:
Why as a tax payer should I be expected to pay the legal fees for an illegal immigrant? Why should I be expected for their legal proceeding's court costs?
Are the tax payers a money tree that's free to be shook down whenever foolish government spending needs funding?
Click to expand...
Exactly!
The rule of law ain't worth ****.
It holds no value for us REAL Americans!
We say, "**** laws and constitutions! That **** is for French Islamo-commies"

...or maybe that's all a really, really bad idea.
 
Meister said:
If you had a daughter who was abused sexually by one, I would guarantee you that you wouldn't have made this comment of yours. just sayin....
Click to expand...
If my child had been sexually abused, I would want to have terrorists moved down the priority list?

Meister said:
So...I'm not sure you or Barry should be making the priorities in these matters.
Click to expand...
Well, despite your misgivings, Obama is the PotUS, so he actually IS the person who should be making these sorts of decisions.
just an fyi
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I can not bring myself to bring harm to people.
Click to expand...
Meaningless topical irrelevancy.

Again ..

.. Do you personally know someone who is an illegal alien in America?

Are/were your parent(s) illegal aliens?

Are you somehow personally involved in this?

I'm wondering if you could answer those questions for me.

Would you do that for me, please?
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
And what if the "home" of some these illegals is so bad that the entire reason they came here was to save their life?
Click to expand...

How many of the world's millions in that situation should we take in? But we are talking illegals who commit crimes in this thread. Can we focus on that? Sanctuary is a different subject that can be discussed elsewhere.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Yes, that is exactly what I would prefer except for a very few hardship cases where the illegals had no choice in the matter and have no 'home' elsewhere to return to. I would like for there to be a guest worker program in place that would allow those productive people with homes and businesses and jobs here and who are paying taxes to return to. But they need to get their affairs in order and leave and then come back through legal channels. The only 'amnesty' that should be involved is maybe a 180-day grace period that would allow them to do that. Those we want as citizens here would most likely be willing to do that. The rest, we will be far better off without.
Click to expand...

This is what I would prefer too.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
If my child had been sexually abused, I would want to have terrorists moved down the priority list?


Well, despite your misgivings, Obama is the PotUS, so he actually IS the person who should be making these sorts of decisions.
just an fyi
Click to expand...
So it can't be both? It has to be either-or? Really?

Yeah Barry is the pres/emperor....if these are the decisions he makes, he isn't the right person. FYI
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Apparently, we'd $285 billion to deport all of the people eligible for deportation.
Since that money is not in the budget, someone somewhere must make a decision about which cases receive priority treatment.
:shrug:

If you don't like it, then cough up billions more so that there's not a need for priorities.


Inorite?
The govt is infallible, so why do we need it to be held accountable for its action through processes like trials using laws and crap like that.
If you're a govt agent, you should be able to do as you damn well please--laws and rules be damned.
We don't need to stinking rule of law.
What are we? Freaking Islamo-commies?
**** due process.
**** courts.
**** the law.


Exactly!
The rule of law ain't worth ****.
It holds no value for us REAL Americans!
We say, "**** laws and constitutions! That **** is for French Islamo-commies"

...or maybe that's all a really, really bad idea.
Click to expand...

Can't let everyone who wants in, in.
Can't afford endless process taking an endless amount of time for each case.
Those who aren't here legally need to go back to where they came from.
Those who are here legally should be afforded the legal protects that come with legal status.

What's needed is a set of simple, easy to follow, set of defined situations with defined responses and obligations.

What's the legal requirement that each illegal alien has to have an immigration court hearing with an immigration lawyer representation?
Isn't that the most costly of all possible scenarios?
Are there no other possible scenarios that take less time and less expense, and still comply with the requirements?

Isn't it fact that there are thousands or even tens or hundreds of thousands that are illegally entering the country every year? How do we effectively deal with that? As I think it's generally accepted that we aren't right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom