• 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.

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.
Click to expand...

That priority should be better securing the border, requiring universal use of E-verify for any W-2 or 1099 employment and cooperating with state/local law enforcement who have a much better idea of priorities since most crimes are not federal.
 
eohrnberger said:
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.
Click to expand...

One big problem is determining the nation of origin and the next getting that nation to take "the worst of the worst" back. To deport requires cooperation and a viable alternative other than maximum security prison for life.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
One big problem is determining the nation of origin and the next getting that nation to take "the worst of the worst" back. To deport requires cooperation and a viable alternative other than maximum security prison for life.
Click to expand...

Maximum security prison for life in the US for an illegal alien? Where where the crimes committed? Here, then yes. I guess so.
If in the country of origin, isn't there an extradition treat for that?
 
Lock down the Mexican border with troops (then build an Israeli style wall - cost small fraction of one year's defence budget), declare Amnesty and offer 3 year work visas/to apply for citizenship for all illegal aliens without a criminal record who register within 60 days of the border lock down (all others immediately deported when found), after 60 days - all illegals (when found) immediately deported no matter what their excuse and no matter how long they have been in America.

BTW - all those given Amnesty who are found before they gain citizenship of housing illegal aliens after the 60 days are immediately deported WITH their non-American born children/dependants.

Enough of this compromise crap or this 'no amnesty' nonsense. These illegals were practically invited by business to come to America AND government could have locked the border down long ago if they had really wanted to - they didn't. It's time these people stopped living in limbo (many of whom are collecting more and more welfare at taxpayers expense) - give those with no criminal record a chance to stay and everyone else is tossed. And if the latter group swears they will be killed if they are forced to go home, tough. Go through proper channels next time.
 
DA60 said:
Lock down the Mexican border with troops (then build an Israeli style wall - cost small fraction of one year's defence budget), declare Amnesty and offer 3 year work visas/to apply for citizenship for all illegal aliens without a criminal record who register within 60 days of the border lock down (all others immediately deported when found), after 60 days - all illegals (when found) immediately deported no matter what their excuse and no matter how long they have been in America.

BTW - all those given Amnesty who are found before they gain citizenship of housing illegal aliens after the 60 days are immediately deported WITH their non-American born children/dependants.

Enough of this compromise crap or this 'no amnesty' nonsense. These illegals were practically invited by business to come to America AND government could have locked the border down long ago if they had really wanted to - they didn't. It's time these people stopped living in limbo (many of whom are collecting more and more welfare at taxpayers expense) - give those with no criminal record a chance to stay and everyone else is tossed. And if the latter group swears they will be killed if they are forced to go home, tough. Go through proper channels next time.
Click to expand...

Amnesty with a penalty and a path to citizenship polls very high, so would be agreeable to many, and I'm sure wouldn't be agreeable to others (well that's always the case).

I too would be drawn to a clear cut, simple, and easy to understand set of 'rules' regarding various situation's disposition.

Enough is enough already. Just as long as this is the last time this problem has a recurrence.
 
AlbqOwl said:
If the Washington Examiner has it right in this news story, President Obama's newly ordered immigration policy will give top priority to deporting illegals who are involved in terrorism. Really? You mean that wasn't a priority before?

What the new immigration policy won't do is consider illegals who are convicted of drunk driving, sex abuse, drug dealing, and gun offenses as justification for immediate deportation. The offender apparently must be convicted of a lot of these kinds of crimes before he will be considered unworthy to remain in this country.

So if I'm reading this right, the illegals are no longer required to obey many of our laws in order to remain here. All they have to do is agree to pay their fair share of taxes, which of course most won't have to do as they will be immediately eligible for all manner of public assistance at our expense.

I think I'll denounce my citizenship, move somewhere else, and come back as an illegal. Seems to be a better deal, yes?

The Department of Homeland Security has just released new "Policies for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants." Designed to fill in the details after President Obama's announcement that at least four million currently illegal immigrants will be given work permits, Social Security numbers and protection from deportation, the DHS guidelines are instructions for the nation's immigration and border security officers as they administer the president's directive.

The new priorities are striking. On the tough side, the president wants U.S. immigration authorities to go after terrorists, felons, and new illegal border crossers. On the not-so-tough side, the administration views convicted drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, and gun offenders as second-level enforcement priorities. An illegal immigrant could spend up to a year in prison for a violent crime and still not be a top removal priority for the Obama administration. . . .

New DHS immigration rules: Drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, gun offenders not top deportation priorities | WashingtonExaminer.com​
Click to expand...

No, you're not reading it right. One of the requirements for this "deal" (as the President put it) is that you have to pass a criminal background check.
 
TeleKat said:
No, you're not reading it right. One of the requirements for this "deal" (as the President put it) is that you have to pass a criminal background check.
Click to expand...

With no accurate way to prove who any one of these illegals are, how would a background check accomplish anything? There is a massive industry that provides any identity an illegal wants. Just as the "prove you've been here 5 years or more" folly will result in every illegal in the nation qualifying with invented documentation, the relevant agencies will have no ability to check the veracity of the supplied proof.

I suggest this is well known by the Obama Administration.
 
ocean515 said:
With no accurate way to prove who any one of these illegals are, how would a background check accomplish anything? There is a massive industry that provides any identity an illegal wants. Just as the "prove you've been here 5 years or more" folly will result in every illegal in the nation qualifying with invented documentation, the relevant agencies will have no ability to check the veracity of the supplied proof.

I suggest this is well known by the Obama Administration.
Click to expand...
It's actually well known by anybody who is intellectually honest and pays attention to the world around them. No background check, regardless of type or purpose, is 100%. To infer that others can be while the one we want to criticize is not is disingenuous.

Really, to criticize anything because it won't be 100% perfect is disingenuous.
 
TeleKat said:
No, you're not reading it right. One of the requirements for this "deal" (as the President put it) is that you have to pass a criminal background check.
Click to expand...

What good does a criminal background check do if it doesn't result in deportation for many of those who have committed what would be serious offenses for legal citizens?
 
ocean515 said:
With no accurate way to prove who any one of these illegals are, how would a background check accomplish anything? There is a massive industry that provides any identity an illegal wants. Just as the "prove you've been here 5 years or more" folly will result in every illegal in the nation qualifying with invented documentation, the relevant agencies will have no ability to check the veracity of the supplied proof.

I suggest this is well known by the Obama Administration.
Click to expand...

This is true. The Carter administration ordered strict rules about documentation required for employment to prevent illegals from working in the USA. We employers were required to obtain three different forms of documentation one of which could be a utility bill or something to prove residence. The effect was a booming cottage industry for phony documentation. Ditto when the same thing happened in the Reagan administration.

Working work comp claims, I ran across numerous illegals who were using three or four different social security numbers--one using six different social security numbers, none of which were theirs. Those states, including ours, who issue drivers licenses to illegals--and these look little different from those issued to citizens--compounded the problem. And now the Obama administration wants to issue social security numbers to illegals which will make it virtually impossible to weed the illegals out from those who are citizens.

You can pretty well bet that the next step will be to make it a civil rights violation to refuse to hire an illegal. And at that point the benefits and value in citizenship will have vanished.
 
radcen said:
It's actually well known by anybody who is intellectually honest and pays attention to the world around them. No background check, regardless of type or purpose, is 100%. To infer that others can be while the one we want to criticize is not is disingenuous.

Really, to criticize anything because it won't be 100% perfect is disingenuous.
Click to expand...

So on what level should a suggestion that a background check could be a reasonable way to ferret out "undesirables" be placed on the disingenuous scale?
 
AlbqOwl said:
What good does a criminal background check do if it doesn't result in deportation for many of those who have committed what would be serious offenses for legal citizens?
Click to expand...

But it does.
 
AlbqOwl said:
This is true. The Carter administration ordered strict rules about documentation required for employment to prevent illegals from working in the USA. We employers were required to obtain three different forms of documentation one of which could be a utility bill or something to prove residence. The effect was a booming cottage industry for phony documentation. Ditto when the same thing happened in the Reagan administration.

Working work comp claims, I ran across numerous illegals who were using three or four different social security numbers--one using six different social security numbers, none of which were theirs. Those states, including ours, who issue drivers licenses to illegals--and these look little different from those issued to citizens--compounded the problem. And now the Obama administration wants to issue social security numbers to illegals which will make it virtually impossible to weed the illegals out from those who are citizens.

You can pretty well bet that the next step will be to make it a civil rights violation to refuse to hire an illegal. And at that point the benefits and value in citizenship will have vanished.
Click to expand...

You are undeniably, irrefutably, spot on, and 100% correct.

For example:

Not Legal but Need a License? No Sweat - Los Angeles Times


There won't be 5 million illegals who have been given a reprieve under the President's unilateral action, there will be every illegal who will be able to find the means to be included.

It's absurd to think these illegals haven't been sophisticated enough to scam their way around this country with false documents and other fraudulent activity. I've seen remarkable documents that have proven to be completely fake. Typically after the fact, and after all reasonable care.

Typically, the first time my company becomes aware of fraud is when we receive a letter from the SSA questioning a SS number from an employee. When we call the employee in and let them know they need to get the issue cleared up, they are never seen again. On to scam the next employer, putting that company, and all it's legal employees, at risk.
 
AlbqOwl said:
If the Washington Examiner has it right in this news story, President Obama's newly ordered immigration policy will give top priority to deporting illegals who are involved in terrorism. Really? You mean that wasn't a priority before?

What the new immigration policy won't do is consider illegals who are convicted of drunk driving, sex abuse, drug dealing, and gun offenses as justification for immediate deportation. The offender apparently must be convicted of a lot of these kinds of crimes before he will be considered unworthy to remain in this country.

So if I'm reading this right, the illegals are no longer required to obey many of our laws in order to remain here. All they have to do is agree to pay their fair share of taxes, which of course most won't have to do as they will be immediately eligible for all manner of public assistance at our expense.

I think I'll denounce my citizenship, move somewhere else, and come back as an illegal. Seems to be a better deal, yes?

The Department of Homeland Security has just released new "Policies for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants." Designed to fill in the details after President Obama's announcement that at least four million currently illegal immigrants will be given work permits, Social Security numbers and protection from deportation, the DHS guidelines are instructions for the nation's immigration and border security officers as they administer the president's directive.

The new priorities are striking. On the tough side, the president wants U.S. immigration authorities to go after terrorists, felons, and new illegal border crossers. On the not-so-tough side, the administration views convicted drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, and gun offenders as second-level enforcement priorities. An illegal immigrant could spend up to a year in prison for a violent crime and still not be a top removal priority for the Obama administration. . . .

New DHS immigration rules: Drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, gun offenders not top deportation priorities | WashingtonExaminer.com​
Click to expand...

Oh please don't de-nounce your citizenship... but you are welcome to renounce your citzenship and leave anytime you wish.
 
ocean515 said:
You are undeniably, irrefutably, spot on, and 100% correct.

For example:

Not Legal but Need a License? No Sweat - Los Angeles Times


There won't be 5 million illegals who have been given a reprieve under the President's unilateral action, there will be every illegal who will be able to find the means to be included.

It's absurd to think these illegals haven't been sophisticated enough to scam their way around this country with false documents and other fraudulent activity. I've seen remarkable documents that have proven to be completely fake. Typically after the fact, and after all reasonable care.

Typically, the first time my company becomes aware of fraud is when we receive a letter from the SSA questioning a SS number from an employee. When we call the employee in and let them know they need to get the issue cleared up, they are never seen again. On to scam the next employer, putting that company, and all it's legal employees, at risk.
Click to expand...

In my immediately former business--in addition to working work comp claims--I had occasion to see the employment records of hundreds of businesses and that includes the quarterly SUTA/FUTA reports that list the names and social security numbers of all the employees working for a business. On a number of these I would see employees listed but no social security number. Sometimes I would have occasion to casually inquire about that to the employer and would be told that the guy or gal said he/she didn't know the number and would get it to the employer. They almost never did though and a lot of those missing numbers, as well as the phony number, were NEVER questioned by the SSA. The few who were questioned followed by the employer asking the employee again for the number generally resulted, as you said, in the employee disappearing.

So many of the phony numbers are actually somebody else's actual number and who ever is doing data entry at the SSA just picks up the number and doesn't bother to check it against a name. So most never get caught. As long as the illegal employee stays out of trouble or doesn't get sick, it could actually be a net benefit who whoever's account is getting credit for those taxes--UNLESS the IRS finds out that no income taxes were being paid on it. But if the illegal employee gets caught breaking the law and/or gets medical treatment that could go on a permanent record somewhere, etc. all that could be going on somebody else's permanent record, could affect credit scores, etc. It is a form of identity theft that could have serious consequences for whomever's identity is being used.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Uhhhh...
Click to expand...

"Aliens described in this priority , who are also not described in Priority 1, represent
the second-highest priority for apprehension and removal. Resources should be dedicated
accordingly to the removal of the following:
(a) aliens convicted of three or more misdemeanor offenses, other than minor
traffic offenses or state or local offenses for which an essential element
3was the alien's immigration status, provided the offenses arise out of
three separate incidents;
(b) aliens convicted of a "significant misdemeanor," which for these purposes
is an offense of domestic violence ;
1
sexual abuse or exploitation;
burglary; un lawful possession or use of a firearm; drug distribution or
trafficking; or driving under the influence; or if not an offense listed
above, one for which the individual was sentenced to time in custody of
90 days or more (the sentence must involve time to be served in custody,
and does not include a suspended sentence);
(c) aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States after unlawfully
entering or re-entering the United States and who cannot establish to the
satisfaction of an immigration officer that they have been physically
present in the United States continuously since January 1, 2014 ; and
(d) aliens who, in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, USCIS
District Director, or USCIS Service Center Director, have significantly
abused the visa orvisa waiver programs."
Click to expand...



Priorities, priorities, priorities. :roll:



We don't have enough resources to kick 'em all out at once so we have to prioritize.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
What if they have family that are legal American citizens? If a mother is an illegal and is deported, what would happen to her children that are legal us citizens, especially if the kids are underage and cannot care for themselves?
Click to expand...

The child naturally goes with the parent until that child can care for themselves.
 
clownboy said:
Don't you get tired of asking the same questions expecting the answers to be different? That the definition of something, what is it again?

Look, if the child is a citizen by birth and the parents are deported, and no relatives who are citizens step forward, they are returned with their parents. They may apply for return to the US and citizenship here when they are 16.
Click to expand...

The child would not need to apply for anything as a US citizen. They can come back at any time.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
That is the level of mercy I would expect from ISIS.
Click to expand...

Really, you don't see the irony here?

Mexico is very tough on illegal border crossers from the south, mainly because they are a drain on the economy.

You think it would be wrong to treat Mexican border crossers the same inthe US as their home country treats other nationalities?
 
Ontologuy said:
And if we let people be excused from conviction and sentencing because they hide behind the shield of "I have kids -- you can't do this to me!", then everyone with a child could escape justice.

The beef these children have .. is with their parents, and no one else.
Click to expand...

What happens if a mother and father are convicted of crimes? Are they excused because they have children? Of course not. The fact that they have children would not enter into their punishment for the crime committed.

I don't see why deportation would be any different.
 
clownboy said:
Once again you show your lack of education on the issue. That last is nothing more than a bull**** excuse you're bought into because it somehow makes you feel more evolved. Btw, do you know how much coyotes charge them per head to bring them here?
Click to expand...

That is an excellent point.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Just because they brought it upon themselves that does not mean they deserve to be consumed by circumstances.
Click to expand...

There you go. That is what some Americans live be these days.

Pass the blame to other people.

Yes they created the situation, but it doesn't matter, now let's break laws and make other people pay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom