I had a conversation this weekend with Shai Goldstein, the Executive Director of the New Jersey Immigration Policy Network (NJIPN), a liberal immigration-policy organization in New Jersey, regarding illegal immigration. Shai and I are friends despite the fact that he's a lib and I'm, well... I'm not. I love him like a brother, and his family and mine are really close (as in 3 houses apart from each other). Our kids play together and Shai and I, and my wife and his, are really great friends. DESPITE the fact that I think he's wrong on a lot of issues.

Shai made a comment this weekend that I couldn't refute because I didn't have the details in front of me. He stated that illegal immigration is not, in and of itself, a crime. He stated that current immigration law makes illegal immigration a CIVIL violation, not a criminal one. My understanding is that the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 made illegal immigration a criminal offense, but he said that it does not. That, he claims, is the reson that illegal immigrants are "detained" rather than "incarcerated". Detention is a civil action, while incarceration is a criminal law action. Again, I disagree with that statement, but I don't have the facts to back it up.

Anyone have any opinions on his statement? Does the INA of 1965 make illegal immigration a civil or a criminal offense? Or is there some other legislation that makes illegal immigration a criminal offense.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

I had a conversation this weekend with Shai Goldstein, the Executive Director of the New Jersey Immigration Policy Network (NJIPN), a liberal immigration-policy organization in New Jersey, regarding illegal immigration. Shai and I are friends despite the fact that he's a lib and I'm, well... I'm not. I love him like a brother, and his family and mine are really close (as in 3 houses apart from each other). Our kids play together and Shai and I, and my wife and his, are really great friends. DESPITE the fact that I think he's wrong on a lot of issues.

Shai made a comment this weekend that I couldn't refute because I didn't have the details in front of me. He stated that illegal immigration is not, in and of itself, a crime. He stated that current immigration law makes illegal immigration a CIVIL violation, not a criminal one. My understanding is that the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 made illegal immigration a criminal offense, but he said that it does not. That, he claims, is the reson that illegal immigrants are "detained" rather than "incarcerated". Detention is a civil action, while incarceration is a criminal law action. Again, I disagree with that statement, but I don't have the facts to back it up.

Anyone have any opinions on his statement? Does the INA of 1965 make illegal immigration a civil or a criminal offense? Or is there some other legislation that makes illegal immigration a criminal offense.

Elliot

---

FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Case Law, Federal and State Resources, Forms, and Code

Elliot

He may be on to something if you listen to the courts. Recently a Ks. Appeals court made a ruling that although it is illegal to enter the country without the proper documents and permissions, it is not necessarily illegal to be in the country. They based it on their interpretation of US law.

96613 -- State v. Martinez -- McAnany -- Kansas Court of Appeals

The opinion says :

Quote:

---

"While Congress has criminalized the illegal entry into this country, it has not made the continued presence of an illegal alien in the United States a crime unless the illegal alien has previously been deported,"

---

They also cite a 1958 decision ;US v Cores FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Case Law, Federal and State Resources, Forms, and Code

Quote:

---

laws regarding illegal entry into the country "are not continuing ones, as 'entry' is limited to a particular locality and hardly suggests continuity."

---

The sophistry of the criminal code continues. Your friend finds such nuance in the language of the law because the same people who write the laws intends the ambiguity to exist. That way they can stump and say "see ..... we got tough on immigration ! " . Yes it is illegal to cross the border without proper documentation but according to the ruling;and I assume it was based on an interpretation of existing law , once in the country being here without proper papers is a civil violation .

Edit :


Here is a news article link to the ruling

www.kansascity.com | 08/23/2007 | Appeals panel overturns illegal immigrant’s sentence

ET,
Is that safe to post the conversation between Goldstein and you here on AMHD?
I have something to say about this post, but I am a little bit intimidated...

NSG,

Well, I don't mind it at all, and since Shai makes public statements on immigration policy all the time as part of his job, and is well known in NJ political circles, I doubt that he would mind. So go for it.

Elliot

DC,

According to the link you posted:

1) attempting to bring an illegal alien to the USA,
2) movement an illegal alien within the USA,
3) harboring of an illegal alien within the USA,
4) inducing an illegal alien to come to the USA in violation of law,
5) aiding or abetting or conspiracy to ommitt any of the above acts,

Are all criminal acts punishable by fine and/or up to 10 years of jail time. I would assume that if the alien in question is part of the planning process and commissions of these acts, he too would be subject to these criminal penalties.

Elliot

Okay, my concern is about "ID Theft".
Millions of undocumented workers are someone else's documents. To get a job, illegal immigrants need a Social Security number, and they often "borrow" one.
Thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of Americans are right now sharing their identities with immigrants and don't know it.
Original ID holder can be denied unemployment because records showed he or she had a job. That is not a victmless crime. It is a crime!

NSG,

You make a good point, and I'm sure that at least some illegals are using stolen identities.

However, for the most part, they are using forged documents that have fake Tax ID/SS numbers that don't belong to anyone. At the end of the year, the government will send the employers of these illegal aliens a notice saying that the SS# of the illegal alien doesn't correspond to any numbers in their files, and could they please make the appropriate check and change. The employer will simply ignore this notice, ontinue to "pay taxes" for the illegal alien, and business goes on as usual. Unless the employer is VERY unlucky, he can go for years paying taxes for employees he knows are illegal and that have SSNs that he knows are fake without having to take any sort of action at all. In the few cases where he does have to take action, he tells the government that he got rid of that employee "months ago" when he "found out" that the employee was illegal. Meanwhile, the employee is still on the books, but under another fake SSN, and the process of notification and lack of action begins again.

So what's happening isn't so much a case of ID theft, though that is undoubtedly an issue. In more cases the illegals are simply using fake SSN #s, with the tacit approval of the employers, and with the government not taking any action until much too late. The government is simply unable to take timely action for anything, and the illegals and their employers use that to their advantage.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

DC,

According to the link you posted:

1) attempting to bring an illegal alien to the USA,
2) movement an illegal alien within the USA,
3) harboring of an illegal alien within the USA,
4) inducing an illegal alien to come to the USA in violation of law,
5) aiding or abetting or conspiracy to ommitt any of the above acts,

are all criminal acts punishable by fine and/or up to 10 years of jail time. I would assume that if the alien in question is part of the planning process and comissions of these acts, he too would be subject to these criminal penalties.

Elliot

---

Whatever the case, there is something inherently wrong with the concept of regulating immigration by not regulating it completely. That sounds a lot like a contradiction in purpose to me.

The most interesting part about the policy is the answer to the question, “Why”. It is obvious that our government is purposefully and flagrantly not regulating immigration; it is unquestionably a violation of the oath of office for every member of congress who does not speak against this crime- a crime against the people of the Untied States.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

Whatever the case, there is something inherently wrong with the concept of regulating immigration by not regulating it completely. That sounds a lot like a contradiction in purpose to me.

The most interesting part about the policy is the answer to the question, “Why”. It is obvious that our government is purposefully and flagrantly not regulating immigration; it is unquestionably a violation of the oath of office for every member of congress who does not speak against this crime- a crime against the people of the Untied States.

---

I agree with you on this point 100%. Whether you are for or against immigration enforcement, the government's half-and-half approach doesn't work, sends mixed signals, and actually makes the problem worse from both points of view. Any government official (elected or appointed) who does not enfoce the laws of the United States that are under his/her responsibility to enforce is breaking faith with the people of the United States.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

a violation of the oath of office for every member of congress who does not speak against this crime- a crime against the people of the Untied States.

---

Hello again, DC:

Hold on, Podner. Let's not get your britches in an uproar. It's a crime... But, not against anybody I know - certainly not ME. Most of 'em just want to blow your leaves. I'm not too threatened by leaf blowers.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, DC:

Hold on, Podner. Let's not get your britches in an uproar. It's a crime....... But, not against anybody I know - certainly not ME. Most of 'em just wanna blow your leaves. I'm not too threatened by leaf blowers.

excon

---

Always good to hear another point of view, but ignorance and leafblowers are not relavant, Exon.

Just as ignorance of a Law provides no protection, so it is that ignorance of a crime provides no protection.

By introducing ignorance, and leaf blowing you are introducing the fallacy of denying the correlative i.e. where an attempt is made to introduce another option into a true correlative.

That is, that America has an immigration policy: a truth.

America is not requiring compliance to its immigration policy by everyone: a truth.

Therefore some government officials are not fulfilling their oath of office; hence, betrayal a the least, a crime at worst
:D

P.S. Shai Goldstein, by the way, has committed the same fallacy by introducing the fact, if it is, that entering the US by other than through immigration policy is not a crime.

I am also intimidated by everyone's pics here.
You guys are either criminal in jail ,muscular alien,or wild animals...

Trust me, NSG, you don't really want to see my picture. That's why I use a comic book character as my avatar. (And Wolverine is not an alien, he's a mutant.)

You, on the other hand, are very photogenic.

Elliot

Hello again, DC:

Well, if you're talking about the CRIME that congress perpetrates on US, then I agree wholeheartedly with you.

However, I can think of much BIGGER crimes they're committing than just letting a few leaf blowers sneak in.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicespringgirl

Okay, my concern is about "ID Theft".
Millions of undocumented workers are someone else's documents. To get a job, illegal immigrants need a Social Security number, and they often "borrow" one.
Thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of Americans are right now sharing their identities with immigrants and don't know it.
Original ID holder can be denied unemployment because records showed he or she had a job. That is not a victmless crime. It is a crime!

---

Identity theft can have an effect on more than just the individual. Employers can be sited and forced to explain why they employ individuals misconstrued as illegals: If a person that has stolen another's identity commits a crime, and that "identity" shows that the real person works at that company, valuable time and resources can be tied up defending a ruse. More qualified and trained immigration examiners are desperately needed.

Another thing is that illegal aliens are NOT necessarily coming here to work. 1/3 of the US prison population is now comprised of non-citizens. Plus, over 1/3 of illegal aliens are on welfare. So, for a good proportion of these people, the American dream is crime and welfare, not coming here to work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicespringgirl

Another thing is that illegal aliens are NOT necessarily coming here to work. 1/3 of the US prison population is now comprised of non-citizens. Plus, over 1/3 of illegal aliens are on welfare. So, for a good proportion of these people, the American dream is crime and welfare, not coming here to work.

---

Very astute observation.

Even though temporary, the choice of illegal and/or criminal activity provides quick, tax-free cash without the need to apply or qualify.

Being incarcerated here must be better than life on the outside there...

Hello nice girl:

There's the numbers, and then there's the spin on what the numbers mean. You're spinning.

There's 300 million of us. 50 million of us are illegal. That's 20%. If that's the number of illegal's in jail (and it is), that means they commit NO MORE crime than citizens do. Same thing with welfare.

The problem is the right wing spin machine. It's been going on forever. Look around. If you see a problem, it's the Mexicans fault, it's the blacks fault, it's the Jews fault.

They do a good job too, cause you people buy into it. Me?? Nahhh. I'm no bigot. These people are no different than you and me.

excon

PS> (edited) Before I'm misunderstood, let me be clear. I don't support illegal immigration. The problem, however, is with YOUR GOVERNMENT – NOT the leaf blowers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

The problem, however, is with YOUR GOVERNMENT – NOT the leaf blowers.

---

Alleging bigotry isn't a solution either.

I don't consider myself a bigot, but prison (incarceration) demographics are what they are. There is definitely a cross-section of peoples. But numbers of national origin doesn't address the causation of incarceration: why are they behind bars?

And you last statement seems unclear. The gov't isn't inviting anyone to immigrate illegally. Granted, not enough is being done about one issue to then complain about the resulting implications. I do feel the government is half-stepping when it comes to not only immigration reform but also border "security".

And you seem to have your own jaundice view on immigrants: referring to them as dishwashers and lawn help, when they may well be highly educated and desired, or uneducated and unemployable. I'm sure you'll pounce on this...

Hi ETW-

I think the laws that are broken are addendum's of the immigration issue, for example: ID theft. When an individual does not follow the immigration process they forfeit the possibility of any future privilege. Those that are here illegally are detained are usually sent back from where they came. Of course if Homeland Security has any suspensions that need to come to light then I suspect that illegal activities are involved. But I can see why Shai could very well be correct. If we look at the formation of the US govt, everyone originally being aliens with exception to the Native Americans, at what point did "illegal" become relevant?


Bobby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRich

Alleging bigotry isn't a solution either....And you seem to have your own jaundice view on immigrants: refering to them as dishwashers and lawn help, when they may well be highly educated and desired, or uneducated and unemployable. I'm sure you'll pounce on this...

---

Hello again, Captain:

I don't know about pounce, but I'll certainly discuss it with you.

I agree, alleging bigotry isn't a solution, unless one is pointing out bigotry. In my view, anytime you point to a people and start calling them "they" and start saying they do this, and they do that... It's bigotry.

THEY don't do anything other than what YOU would do. They're like us. They're seeking a better life. I doubt their highly educated. The educated are the moneyed class and they can PAY their way here legally. So yes, they're leaf blowers.

Let me ask you this, Captain. Here's a real life question. Let's say you live in Montana. Montana has no jobs. People in Montana are hungry. Idaho, on the other hand, has a lots of jobs. But they don't want Montanans taking them, so they make it illegal to cross their border.

So, there you are - a willing hard worker in Montana, and your family is hungry. You walk up to the border. You look over there and see a help wanted sign. You're going to walk over there and get that job, aren't you?

No, the problem is your congress. Look, I smoke pot. You know I do. I'm not the problem. The law that would make what I do illegal IS the problem. You know that to be true.

Same thing with illegal's.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BABRAM

Hi ETW-

I think the laws that are broken are addendum's of the immigration issue, for example: ID theft. I can see why Shai could very well be correct. If we look at the formation of the US govt, everyone being aliens with exception to the Native Americans, at what point did "illegal" become relevant?!


Bobby

---

Very good point, Bobby!

The original native occupants (they weren't American's until labeled as such) didn't recognize any need for a universal body of representatives, to protect their various nations from unseen threats and invasion.

What if someone, with sufficient backing, came into your home, declared that they had "discovered" it? You'd be moved to a far corner of a distant neighbors backyard. And the best you could hope for is a casino with your (unfortunately) diminishing tribe's name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRich

Very good point, Bobby!

The original native occupants (they weren't American's until labeled as such) didn't recognize any need for a universal body of representatives, to protect their various nations from unseen threats and invasion.

What if someone, with sufficient backing, came into your home, declared that they had "discovered" it? You'd be moved to a far corner of a distant neighbors backyard. And the best you could hope for is a casino with your (unfortunately) diminishing tribe's name.

---

Yes. In reference to when I mentioned "Native Americans" that has more to do with the continent considering there were/are so many tribes. Historically the conquering territories are sometimes disguised in our text books as annexed land. I remember when our govt and society would vilify the former the USSR when in effect, we did the same. I suppose we could say that national organization of former immigrants occurred more so following the civil war onward. Of course, then came big brother.


Bobby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello nice girl:

There’s the numbers, and then there’s the spin on what the numbers mean. You’re spinning.

There’s 300 million of us. 50 million of us are illegal. That’s 20%. If that’s the number of illegal’s in jail (and it is), that means they commit NO MORE crime than citizens do. Same thing with welfare.

The problem is the right wing spin machine. It’s been going on forever. Look around. If you see a problem, it’s the Mexicans fault, it’s the blacks fault, it’s the Jews fault.

They do a good job too, cause you people buy into it. Me??? Nahhh. I’m no bigot. These people are no different than you and me.

excon

PS> (edited) Before I’m misunderstood, let me be clear. I don’t support illegal immigration. The problem, however, is with YOUR GOVERNMENT – NOT the leaf blowers.

---

There are 21,075,434 illegal immigrates in the US today, and there is 33% of the prison population made up of illegal immigrates. That means they have a higher crime rates than legal citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BABRAM

national organization of former immigrants

Bobby

---

NOFI isn't new. The concept has been in use virtually since the beginning of time. It probably began with the Neanderthal. Before any concept of "borders" was even contrived. Someone see's something, wants it and so takes it. If not enough resistance is offered... or submission is easier, no additional conflict will arise. Family or clan, gregarious groups or individuals, have all been engaged in this type behavior. But that line of thought should have it's own thread.

Let's not get off the topic. Since man has civilized, at least a little, many sovereign borders have been agreed upon, rescinded, fought over, redrawn and/or completely forgotten. But of the all the borders agreed upon, our nations borders are what we want recognized. And having had them recognized by most of the nations of the world, Mexico included, is really the sum of our concern. For very good reasons.

What if 21 + million American's, as individuals of our own volition, chose to disregard our nations agreement with another country, and we descended upon them, we'd be arrested in that country and charged, possibly worse. And we'd be put in their pretty jails. And held accountable by their standards. Maybe we'd get one phone call. Maybe we'd be protected by their constitution. Maybe we'd have a court appointed lawyer. We still would have no right to be there.

Quote:

---

CaptainRich agrees: My pic is one of my favorite views of life...

---

Are you a pirate? :D

http://www.weatherby.info/shazam/gen.../PirateDog.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicespringgirl

There are 21,075,434 illegal immigrates in the US today, and there is 33% of the prison population made up of illegal immigrates. That means they have a higher crime rates than legal citizens.

---

Thanks for sharing the stats. BTW because of your astute observation on board members avatars displayed earlier, I decided to post a picture on the forum. The picture was taken in February 2007 of my wife and I on the Mt. Charleston resort about 45 minutes outside of Las Vegas. I'll post some different photos in the future. :)



Bobby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicespringgirl

There are 21,075,434 illegal immigrates in the US today,

---

Hello again, spring girl:

I don't know. That's an awfully specific number. Because it's so specific, I tend to doubt its authenticity. Citizens are hard enough to get an accurate count on. I can't imagine we would know exactly how many illegal's are here.

Since one of the numbers you use is suspect, the other is similarly questionable. Unless, of course, you can site a reliable source.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicespringgirl

Are you a pirate??:D

http://www.weatherby.info/shazam/gen.../PirateDog.jpg

---

No, I'm not a bonafide pirate. But that's my dog, Tripod! :p :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, spring girl:

I dunno. That's an awfully specific number. Because it's so specific, I tend to doubt its authenticity. Citizens are hard enough to get an accurate count on. I can't imagine we would know exactly how many illegal's are here.

Since one of the numbers you use is suspect, the other is similarly questionable. Unless, of course, you can site a reliable source.

excon

---

Yea, I know... but the point is that illegal immigrants have a higher criminal rate. I mean, buddy, you are in jail, you know most of your homies there don't speak english.;)
I read the 1/3 of prison population thing ang googled the other specific no.
Here I found something but it's a bit old."Citing an Urban Institute study, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies Steven Camorata noted in 2004: "Roughly 17 percent of the prison population at the federal level are illegal aliens. That's a huge number since illegal aliens only account for about 3 percent of the total population."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRich

NOFI isn't new. The concept has been in use virtually since the beginning of time. It probably began with the Neanderthal. Before any concept of "borders" was even contrived. Someone see's something, wants it and so takes it. If not enough resistance is offered...or submission is easier, no additional conflict will arise. Family or clan, gregarious groups or individuals, have all been engaged in this type behavior. But that line of thought should have it's own thread.

---

Rich- I agree. Notice I didn't capitalize the word "organization." It was not suggesting a group by using an Acronym. It was in reference to becoming organized as a government, more so after the Civil War as how we've reached this current govt..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRich

Let's not get off the topic. Since man has civilized, at least a little, many sovereign borders have been agreed upon, rescinded, fought over, redrawn and/or completely forgotten. But of the all the borders agreed upon, our nations borders are what we want recognized. And having had them recognized by most of the nations of the world, Mexico included, is really the sum of our concern. For very good reasons.

---

I agree. But remember those borders in the Southwest part of the current US were a part of Mexico's northern territory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRich

What if 21 + million American's, as individuals of our own volition, chose to disregard our nations agreement with another country, and we descended upon them, we'd be arrested in that country and charged, possibly worse. And we'd be put in their pretty jails. And held accountable by their standards. Maybe we'd get one phone call. Maybe we'd be protected by their constitution. Maybe we'd have a court appointed lawyer. We still would have no right to be there.

---

I have no doubt. However, usually the case is that it's much easier to become a resident in other countries. In fact many US citizens upon retirement have chosen to move elsewhere.



Bobby

Bobby
I know you didn't suggest the acronym to be a real org.
But our borders, particularly our southern border, having been established and acknowledged globally, even like I said by the Mex gov't, those borders have been blurred by complacency. That was then, this is now. Maybe the people there disagree with history.

We gave up our political rights to the Panama Canal. Personally, I didn't like the decision, but I can't control my gov't, or any other, by ignoring laws and agreements we inadvertently approved of.

And, yes, many have chosen to take their retirements elsewhere, making the dollar go further by moving to a place that has a poorer economy. That's a personal decision. And to what end? I think it shows lack of honest support for the U.S. Agree or disagree, I'll categorize them with big business outsourcing and moving to third world countries. It's the same mentality. I can't blame them but I don't have to approve.

Hi Rich-

If that means living elsewhere I can't blame the retirees either. I'd do the same. In fact I have a second home in SE Asia. I wouldn't mind having a third pad in Mexico except that I'm not a citizen and can't own the land. I also have a birthright to live in Israel. My ideal spot would be to retire to the backwoods of Texas and do some fishing. Maybe I can afford this if my brother or other family members decide to split costs. Anyway, the large corporations of our nation have outsourced and our dollar is not as strong as it once was. Is this international/global economics? We import daily and the average American will buy a product made from other countries many times over during a lifetime. For example: many of the cars, as Americans, we enjoy driving are owned by foreign companies. The only profit we capitalize upon is taxation (tariffs), the maintenance labor, and that some of the parts are produced from American factories.


Bobby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

In my view, anytime you point to a people and start calling them "they" and start saying they do this, and they do that........ It's bigotry.

---

*ahem* *coughcough*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

THEY don't do anything other than what YOU would do. They're like us. They're seeking a better life. I doubt their highly educated. The educated are the moneyed class and they can PAY their way here legally. So yes, they're leaf blowers.

---

*coughcough*

Bigot :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRich

What if 21 + million American's, as individuals of our own volition, chose to disregard our nations agreement with another country, and we descended upon them, we'd be arrested in that country and charged, possibly worse. And we'd be put in their pretty jails. And held accountable by their standards. Maybe we'd get one phone call. Maybe we'd be protected by their constitution. Maybe we'd have a court appointed lawyer. We still would have no right to be there.

---

So perhaps we should treat this as an invasion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jillianleab

So perhaps we should treat this as an invasion?

---

We? Invaded?
Yes, in a way... One by one, ten by ten, sometimes larger groups. "They've" declared it as such in California. Several month ago, they called it a migration and they would slowly out number us because the federal gov't doesn't have the 'nads to step up. And so far, that's been a fairly accurate assessment.
Haven't you noticed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRich

We? Invaded?
Yes, in a way... One by one, ten by ten, sometimes larger groups. "They've" declared it as such in California. Several month ago, they called it a migration and they would slowly out number us because the federal gov't doesn't have the 'nads to step up. And so far, that's been a fairly accurate assessment.
Haven't you noticed?

---

I know my post sounds snarky, but yes, in a way it could be viewed as an invasion of sorts. My husband and I discussed this a while ago, and he said something similar to what you said in your previous post. We joked and asked why the immigration hasn't been seen as a hostile takeover! :)

I'm honestly sort of on the fence (get it?) about the issue. On the one hand I respect the fact that these people are trying to make a better life for themselves and their families, and that they are trying to get out of horrible living conditions in Mexico. But on the other hand, I don't see why our border should have a big neon OPEN sign on it... There are plenty of people who come here legally, after all. I have several close friends who came to the US from Africa who are TICKED OFF about the special treatment illegal immigrants get, and that's from some of the most liberal people I've ever met. I'd say I'm sure our federal gubment will come up with a suitable plan that makes sense, but well... then I'd just be wrong. So I'll say this; I'm sure our gubment will come up with a plan that makes no one happy, more people angry and costs us a whole bunch o' money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jillianleab

But on the other hand, I don't see why our border should have a big neon OPEN sign on it...

---

Hello again, jillian:

You make a key point. However, I think it defeats your argument.

I maintain that IF the door was open to legal immigration (like all you people keep saying it is), then there would be NO NEON sign. The jobs WOULD be filled by LEGALS.

But, they're not. That tells me the spigot isn't open wide enough. Indeed. When legal immigration takes YEARS and costs $1,000's, the spigot is way backed up. When the spigot backs up, the neon sign comes ON.

Clearly, anybody who DID wait all those years and PAID all that money isn't going to be happy about people who didn't. I'M not happy about people who didn't! But, I certainly understand why they come. And, I certainly know who to blame.

excon

It hasn't been seen as a hostile takeover because it's more like water torture... a steady trickle. "Oh, it's only a few more..."

Plenty could and probably should be done. Or more correctly, should have been done.

But the problem today is something that could have controlled the leak hasn't been given the air time in the past that the issue deserved. Now, something that cost fifty bucks when it would have helped will cost several million bucks now, and won't likely be enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, jillian:

You make a key point. However, I think it defeats your argument.

I maintain that IF the door was open to legal immigration (like all you people keep saying it is), then there would be NO NEON sign. The jobs WOULD be filled by LEGALS.

But, they're not. That tells me the spigot isn't open wide enough. Indeed. When legal immigration takes YEARS and costs $1,000's, the spigot is way backed up. When the spigot backs up, the neon sign comes ON.

Clearly, anybody who DID wait all those years and PAID all that money isn't going to be happy about people who didn't. I'M not happy about people who didn't! But, I certainly understand why they come. And, I certainly know who to blame.

excon

---

Actually, excon, I agree with you; there would be no glowing OPEN sign if legal immigration policies were changed. And I don't know why you insist on considering me one of "those people" (is that you being a bigot again?? :)) I've told you time and time again, I'm not elephant, nor am I a donkey. But whatever.

The current system is broken - I think that's one thing we all agree on. The question is what to do about it? Some people think we should close our borders and not let another brown person into the country ever again. Some people think we should make Mexico a state. Both those ideas are horrible. My opinion is, we should work on policies which allow for legal immigration in reasonable time frames and for reasonable prices so the people who want to come here can get here and receive fair wages, pay taxes, be contributing members of our society, even vote someday. The nagging second question is what to do with the illegals who are here presently, which is where tensions usually arise. The blame lies with the gubment, you're certainly right about that. And not just the US gubment, but the Mexican gubment, the Guatemalan gubment, the Venezuelan gubment...