Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,901
|
Post by Bick on Mar 24, 2020 5:54:08 GMT -8
If the world is willing to shut down the economy as we have just demonstrated, border security should also include enhanced immigration screening / quarantine.
Clearly a few ounces of prevention would have saved the quickly growing tons of cure.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Mar 24, 2020 7:20:14 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Mar 24, 2020 7:21:48 GMT -8
I suspect that's wishful thinking.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Mar 24, 2020 18:10:06 GMT -8
You messed up the response boxes. In any case, the problem with your "solution" is you readily accept taking away the rights of law abiding citizens in a (failed) attempt to solve a problem. That makes your solution a non starter. For example, one way to stop the spread of Coronavirus is to kill everyone who contracts it. In theory, that solves the problem, the overwhelming issue with that solution is you are trampling on the rights of law abiding citizens. |
|
|
|
Post by Oakley on Apr 17, 2020 21:19:04 GMT -8
Do any of you see it this way, that this illegal invasion of foreigners threatens the United States and it's sovereignty? Sovereignty is an important part of a nation state's government. Without it, the rights and liberties of its citizens are not fully protected by national or international standards. This being true, is the unlawful invasion of migrants and caravans a threat to our nation? I say "YES" it is. Thus giving power and authority to protect this sovereignty by any means. If military need be. Yes, I do see it the way you do - absolutely! It makes no sense to me for the US to spend billions of dollars each year to protect South Korea, Japan and other countries, but not our own. There is no logic in that! I believe that we should put our country first and then help others if we can. As you can see I have resurrected another old post. I admit to spending time reading old posts in an attempt to try and get to know you all better. |
|
|
|
Post by Oakley on Apr 17, 2020 21:55:04 GMT -8
Do any of you see it this way, that this illegal invasion of foreigners threatens the United States and it's sovereignty? Sovereignty is an important part of a nation state's government. Without it, the rights and liberties of its citizens are not fully protected by national or international standards. This being true, is the unlawful invasion of migrants and caravans a threat to our nation? I say "YES" it is. Thus giving power and authority to protect this sovereignty by any means. If military need be. To me, it is nevertheless a stretch to call caravans from third world countries an “invasion”... I mean is our national safety really threatened? Seems to me our economy would,be better without the illegals, our public schools would be better off, our emergency rooms would be much more functional... but our safety? even given the number of crimes committed by illegals, I still think that is a stretch. however, I again have to point out, I do still believe the wall should be built. You may change your mind if you read this article by the Heritage Org. The number of crimes and victims are shocking. Non-citizens (illegal aliens) constitute only 7 percent of the population. Yet the latest data from the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice statistics reveals that non-citizens accounted for nearly two thirds (64 percent) of all federal arrests! www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/crimes-illegal-immigrants-widespread-across-us-sanctuaries-shouldnt |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Apr 18, 2020 4:09:00 GMT -8
OMG! What shocking statistic! Flee! Run for your life! What are the arrests for? Mostly immigration violations. How scary. Heritage.org likes to promote an anti-immigrant agenda. The Cato Institute is a better source for reliable info on immigration issues. The second strand of research from Cato looks at criminal conviction rates by immigration status in the state of Texas. Unlike every other state, Texas keeps track of the immigration statuses of convicted criminals and the crimes that they committed. Texas is a wonderful state to study because it borders Mexico, has a large illegal immigrant population, is a politically conservative state governed by Republicans, had no jurisdictions that limited its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement in 2015, and it has a law and order reputation for strictly enforcing criminal laws. If anything, Texas is more serious about enforcing laws against illegal immigrant criminals than other states. But even here, illegal immigrant conviction rates are about half those of native-born Americans – without any controls for age, education, ethnicity, or any other characteristic. The illegal immigrant conviction rates for homicide, larceny, and sex crimes are also below those of native-born Americans. The criminal conviction rates for legal immigrants are the lowest of all.(more) www.cato.org/blog/illegal-immigrants-crime-assessing-evidence |
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,901
|
Post by Bick on Apr 18, 2020 4:23:16 GMT -8
No bias in their use of stats.
Now if ALL their Libertarian principles were adopted, it might make sense.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,901
|
Post by Bick on Apr 18, 2020 4:42:47 GMT -8
Heritage, and other conservative outlets, have a pretty clear agenda toward border security, and regularly highlight the immigration status of someone involved in a crime. With our current welfare state, I think the open borders advocated by Cato, Libertarians, and liberals is not well thought out...yet I do subscribe to many of CatoInstitute beliefs. I certainly do believe we need strong border security, patrolled by the military if necessary. But by regularly portraying illegals as heinous villains just doesn't do it for me. If anything, it damages the credibility of the people portraying them in this light...something trump has done in spades. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,378
|
Post by SK80 on Apr 18, 2020 5:26:17 GMT -8
I'm not going to go back through ALL these posts but in the "recent" brought back by SFDave, responding to me about "SAFETY"? I wrote about "SOVEREIGNTY". Look it up, its a BIG word and a BIG part of what we are about missing in todays debate.
Second, on crime, whether or not someone breaking in to the country is a good or bad person at heart, they are committing a KNOWN crime the moment the enter the country illegally. That is precedent many believe will further ones standard on whether to commit others crimes in the future. Some crimes equal "safety" to others.
I believe in the RULE of LAW. If you don't have it you have anarchy. Whether I'm Libertarian or not, either HAVE OPEN BORDERS or NOT. What we have now is a disgrace and a cop out and harms us all on many fronts.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Apr 18, 2020 5:57:28 GMT -8
Heritage, and other conservative outlets, have a pretty clear agenda toward border security, and regularly highlight the immigration status of someone involved in a crime. With our current welfare state, I think the open borders advocated by Cato, Libertarians, and liberals is not well thought out...yet I do subscribe to many of CatoInstitute beliefs. I certainly do believe we need strong border security, patrolled by the military if necessary. But by regularly portraying illegals as heinous villains just doesn't do it for me. If anything, it damages the credibility of the people portraying them in this light...something trump has done in spades. Isn’t the use of the term “heinous villains” a bit manipulative? I really only use that and similar terms in reference to villains that really are heinous (and I seldom even use the term “villain” at all). However, to your point, I see nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade: Those who break the law are, in fact, law-breakers, which we also call “criminals.” to me, it is no simple misdeed to cross an international border illegally. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,378
|
Post by SK80 on Apr 18, 2020 6:19:06 GMT -8
Isn’t the use of the term “heinous villains” a bit manipulative? I really only use that and similar terms in reference to villains that really are heinous (and I seldom even use the term “villain” at all). However, to your point, I see nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade: Those who break the law are, in fact, law-breakers, which we also call “criminals.” to me, it is no simple misdeed to cross an international border illegally. I have to agree here, not sure illegals or those crossing the borders illegally are all considered "heinous" by us as a nation. I'm sure your point was more along the lines of not wanting to de-humanize those seeking a better life by way of crossing a border illegally. |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,815
|
Post by MDDad on Apr 18, 2020 6:31:02 GMT -8
Non-citizens (illegal aliens) constitute only 7 percent of the population. Non-citizens and illegal aliens are NOT the same thing. There are millions of non-citizens in this country who are here entirely legally, including me and my family for the first five years we were here. Using the two terms interchangeably is intentionally confusing and blurs the line between the two. It is a common tactic of the liberal left. |
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,901
|
Post by Bick on Apr 18, 2020 7:48:58 GMT -8
I was referring to the big point of differentiation that gets made when an illegal commits rape or murder, and how that becomes the poster child for needing tighter border security.
It's of the same ilk of a mass shooting as being the impetus for tighter gun control, that becomes especially more interesting when the shooter is pro trump, or used an AR-15. The ones using hand guns are pretty much over with after the news cycle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakley on Apr 18, 2020 8:23:20 GMT -8
Non-citizens (illegal aliens) constitute only 7 percent of the population. Non-citizens and illegal aliens are NOT the same thing. There are millions of non-citizens in this country who are here entirely legally, including me and my family for the first five years we were here. Using the two terms interchangeably is intentionally confusing and blurs the line between the two. It is a common tactic of the liberal left. The author's use of the term non-citizens is confusing, but the article is about the crimes of immigrants so I suppose legal immigrants are included as well. |
|
