cop, legal immigrant, murdered by illegal immigrant in xmas day

[jc10]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Point I was making was, DUI is a national issue, not an illegal immigration issue. Yesterday coming off cape from playing golf in Hyannis a guy maybe in his 50's almost side swipes me as he passed me and after watching him almost go off the road three times, I called 911 and bourne police then patched me through to the state police. This guy was hammered and an accident just waiting to happen and I backed way off as he went up on the bridge and he came within an inch from pounding into the tall curb, which likely would have shot his small SUV right back across into oncoming traffic. Our legal system just isn't doing the job to keep these repeat offenders off our roads and most are US citizens not illegal immigrants. Again, I'm all for reporting criminals to ICE if illegal, you want to be a US citizen, then you better have respect for our laws. If not send them home.

Well said about reporting to ICE. I can't believe I live in a country in which the mayor of a major city - Oakland - can get away with doing just the opposite .... "Hey you illegals, especially those of you who are criminals, look out. ICE is coming". Why isn't she in jail?

[Jim in CT]

Here is a poll, done by Harvard ( heretofore not known to be a subsidiary of Foxnews nor a wholly owned subsidiary of the Koch brothers. In this poll, 80 % of respondents said
local law enforcement should be required to tell ICE about illegals who commit crimes. Eighty percent.

Thank god those 80% have liberals to ignore our will, because they know better than we do about such things. That will be a tremendous comfort to this cops widow
and 5 month old
child, who now enjoys all the benefits of not having a dad. who needs all that toxic masculinity anyway?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.8cc1ea3f00f1
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Spence, let’s get to the heart of this. if there was a proposed
law which said that illegal
immigrants who get multiple dui’s will be turned over to ICE for deportation...you’d oppose such a law. Correct? Because allowing these people to stay here, makes us safer. Right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

10,0000 deaths per year isn’t petty and ANYONE drinking and driving and taking life should be prosecuted, or deported; wrong is wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Slipknot]

2 minutes and 25 seconds well worth listening

America, WAKE UP

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Immigration law is federal jurisdiction, I think the local police can determine what works best in their municipalities. If you have an undocumented person working and paying taxes, hell maybe they even have a few kids that are US citizens, deporting them and breaking up the family because they got a speeding ticket isn’t going to benefit the community, even worse if they can be a witness to a crime they’re afraid to report for fear of deportation.

Need comprehensive reform.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In spite of your use of official, harmless sounding phrases like "undocumented," and meaningless ones like "Comprehensive reform" to indicate that you might consider that something is a wee bit wrong with what you consider much too harsh to call "illegal," what you say here, if you were explicit and "comprehensive," is not really different than what I said: "immigration laws are . . . useless and unnecessary. What's all the fuss about reforming immigration laws? Just scrap them. Who needs a wall when their is no reason to keep people out. If they're violent, the local police will take care of it." "If they're not committing violent crimes they have the perfect right to be here." After all, as you say, "local police can determine what works best in their municipalities."

The bread crumb you throw to the federal bureaucracy: "Immigration law is federal jurisdiction" is superfluous, irrelevant, even a contradiction to your saying " If you have an undocumented person working and paying taxes, hell maybe they even have a few kids that are US citizens, deporting them and breaking up the family because they got a speeding ticket isn’t going to benefit the community". What you said is an affirmation that they have a right to be here. That there is actually no reason to stop them from coming here.

And if it is, as you say, "even worse if they can be a witness to a crime they’re afraid to report for fear of deportation," that even more supports the idea that they have the right to be here. After all, they shouldn't, as you suggest, have to be afraid of deportation for doing the same thing that a "documented" or "legal" person would do in reporting the same crime.

So, for you, if immigration is ultimately not a question of law but of procedure, documentation (and even that is not really necessary if the "undocumented" haven't committed a violent crime) then border enforcement and immigration law are a waste of resources. If no law is broken by crossing the border without being documented, and staying here indefinitely, and being here in no way different than "legally" residing citizens with all the inherent rights and privileges, then little needs to be done to "comprehensively" reform immigration law other than scrapping most of it, if not all of it.

On the other hand, if law is broken, then penalty must follow. If we can impeach a President for misdemeanors, who among us, especially law breakers, should get a free pass?

[wdmso]

Visa Overstays Outnumber Illegal Border Crossings,

The majority of immigrants settling in the U.S. without authorization are first coming to the country legally,

how is the wall going to fix that?

Just another example of Trump's base buying into the misinformation and fear.. of brown people


Ryan would give visas to Irish workers,


why do conservatives scream states rights when it suits them? ... But dont support states rights to not to enforces federal immigration (misdemeanors ) and detentions without reimbursement ... even in mass we bring people to federal court on ICE detainers so again the lie sold by the right is again just more misinformation .. you see it in gun control... the right calls it confiscation or any other argument on any topic the rights core element is fear ..

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Visa Overstays Outnumber Illegal Border Crossings,

The majority of immigrants settling in the U.S. without authorization are first coming to the country legally,

how is the wall going to fix that?

Just another example of Trump's base buying into the misinformation and fear.. of brown people


Ryan would give visas to Irish workers,


why do conservatives scream states rights when it suits them? ... But dont support states rights to not to enforces federal immigration (misdemeanors ) and detentions without reimbursement ... even in mass we bring people to federal court on ICE detainers so again the lie sold by the right is again just more misinformation .. you see it in gun control... the right calls it confiscation or any other argument on any topic the rights core element is fear ..

"The majority of immigrants settling in the U.S. without authorization are first coming to the country legally,

how is the wall going to fix that?"

So unless the wall can fix every aspect of immigration, as well as cure cancer, it's not worth building?

People still escape from prison despite the existence of prison guards, so should we do away with prison guards (see what I did there? I used your "logic").

No ne said the wall was perfect, and that it would reduce illegal immigration to zero. What people are saying (thoughtful, sane people that is),is that it will help. I keep seeing that between 1,000 and 3,000 people a day cross the border. Some of them will have the ability to bypass a wall. Some will not. The wall will help. It won't reduce the number of people crossing illegally to zero, but it will reduce it from where it is today.

It's obvious common sense. You really disagree with that?

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"The majority of immigrants settling in the U.S. without authorization are first coming to the country legally,

how is the wall going to fix that?"

So unless the wall can fix every aspect of immigration, as well as cure cancer, it's not worth building?

People still escape from prison despite the existence of prison guards, so should we do away with prison guards (see what I did there? I used your "logic").

No ne said the wall was perfect, and that it would reduce illegal immigration to zero. What people are saying (thoughtful, sane people that is),is that it will help. I keep seeing that between 1,000 and 3,000 people a day cross the border. Some of them will have the ability to bypass a wall. Some will not. The wall will help. It won't reduce the number of people crossing illegally to zero, but it will reduce it from where it is today.

It's obvious common sense. You really disagree with that?

There is no wall. There won’t be a wall. Read the news
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

There is no wall. There won’t be a wall. Read the news
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I never said there would be. I said if there was a wall, it would reduce, but not eliminate, illegal immigration. And I said that just because an idea isn't perfect and doesn't solve every problem in the world and make us all immortal, doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

When courts legalize gay marriage, it didn't solve all problems that gays face. I still think it was the right thing to do.

The liberal arguments here, are laughably absurd. Read them, and think honestly about them for a minute. Because the wall won't reduce illegal immigration to zero, that means its not a good idea? we have laws against murder, but people still get murdered. So should we do away with those laws?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"The majority of immigrants settling in the U.S. without authorization are first coming to the country legally,

how is the wall going to fix that?"

So unless the wall can fix every aspect of immigration, as well as cure cancer, it's not worth building?

People still escape from prison despite the existence of prison guards, so should we do away with prison guards (see what I did there? I used your "logic").

No ne said the wall was perfect, and that it would reduce illegal immigration to zero. What people are saying (thoughtful, sane people that is),is that it will help. I keep seeing that between 1,000 and 3,000 people a day cross the border. Some of them will have the ability to bypass a wall. Some will not. The wall will help. It won't reduce the number of people crossing illegally to zero, but it will reduce it from where it is today.

It's obvious common sense. You really disagree with that?

Trump is the only person in the conversation lacking common sense

that a Wall doesn’t work. It does, and properly built, almost 100%! They say it’s old technology - but so is the wheel.

or “Jeb Bush just talked about my border proposal to build a ‘fence,’” he tweeted. “It’s not a fence, Jeb, it’s a WALL, and there’s a BIG difference!” or President and Mrs. Obama built/has a ten foot Wall around their D.C. mansion/compound. I agree, totally necessary for their safety and security. The U.S. needs the same thing, slightly larger version!

...The Wall will be paid for, directly or indirectly, or through longer term reimbursement, by Mexico, to bad there is no wall around the house

we could go all day now his people are backpedaling again

“To be honest, it’s not a wall,” Kelly said, adding that the mix of technological enhancements and “steel slat” barriers the president now wants along the border resulted from conversations with law enforcement professionals.

Graham “the wall has become a metaphor for border security” and referred to “a physical barrier along the border.”

this is my favorite to bad he might not have said it but i can't be 100 % Sure

[Jim in CT]

Spence, you said local
police can determine what works best in their
municipalities. but the
local police aren’t allowed to exercise that judgment, because
liberal politicians pass laws to take that ability away from them. they cannot contact ICE even if they wanted to.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) says Pelosi & Schumer have "blood on their hands" for refusing to secure the border: “Democrats have an open borders philosophy, they don’t believe in border security, they believe this is the way to change the American electorate in order to win elections.”

And once again as if on cue the conspiracy theory's flow

[detbuch]

Interesting article in the LA Times on a new migration pattern:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/mi...cid=spartanntp

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

It doesn’t mean they have a specific right to be here, but it’s an acceptance they they are here,

If not a "specific" right, then what "general" right do they have to be here? And why must we accept that they are here? If we must accept their being here, isn't that tantamount to saying that they have a right to be here?

they are an important part of our economy and their presence as undocumented isn’t a crime.

They distort our economy as well as straining the resources we have to serve "legal" residents. Our economy would work without them. It would, in my opinion, raise the value of the work they actually do if done by "legal" Americans who would demand higher wages. The so-called middle class problem we are supposed to be experiencing could be lessened. And our resources, including welfare care of all kinds would not be stretched to include the extra many millions of illegals.

And the issue is not criminal, it is "legal." Because something is illegal, doesn't mean it is necessarily a crime. They are illegal aliens. The apologetic rhetoric you always use to justify the difficulty we must go through to stop the flow of illegal residents reminds me of an immigration lawyer I dealt with who was really, when push came to shove, in favor of mass immigration from south of the border and from impoverished countries. He absolutely felt that they had a right to come and stay here and become citizens. He used the criminal and economic gibberish that you couch your apologetics with to make it sound legal and right. But he basically actually believes we have an obligation to accept the vast majority of them.

That he made his money off of them might be a factor, but I think his motives were "mostly" idealistic.

It’s a complex systems issue not something you can just boil down to extremes. Reagan understood this, HW understood this, Clinton understood this, W understood this and Obama understood this. Trump, not so much.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You do realize they all had "mostly" political motivations.