Originally Posted by fnelson9

Chris,

You keep saying "I'm not against them because they are illegally here" yet 90% of your discussion is all about how they are illegally here. I'm still trying to figure out exactly why you want to kick these people out so badly.

Also, I think you might have misunderstood my post. "Illegal aliens are ILLEGAL, they are not "law-abiding" they are equivalent to felons, they didn't come here legally, etc." are your arguments, not mine. I was just re-stating what I took from your previous post.

When anyone comes to the U.S., they are moving from A to B. Whether they enter legally or illegally, that is what they are doing. Whether they enter legally or illegally, they are coming here because they believe life will be better here. I'm having a real hard time viewing that as criminal conduct.

So, what is the "real" difference between a legal entrant and an illegal entrant - not very much. One "followed the rules" and one didn't. You think that's incredibly significant for some reason - significant enough to call the person a "felon" and/or a "criminal" and use that label to justify forcibly removing them from the U.S. I, on the other hand, am not all that impressed with "the rules" so I'm not so morally outraged when someone breaks them. You complain about political pandering, yet "the rules" you hold so dear are entirely constructed of, by and through political pandering. Very, very little of what makes up our current immigration laws actually protects our security or ensures the "legal" immigrants will meet any particular moral, ethical or security standard - those laws exist, of course, but they are just a small fraction of the morasse of involuted statutes and regulations which comprise our immigration system.

If Congress had passed a law this morning making it a felony to exceed the speed limit, I would have been guilty of a couple of felonies today. You would be able to argue that I am both a criminal and a felon and try to persuade the rest of the world that I shouldn't be entitled to any government benefits because I am a criminal. However, the fact remains that all I did was drive 70 in a 65mph zone.

Immigration laws aren't any different. Congress creates illegal immigrants based on criteria which change almost constantly. An "illegal immigrant" today might very well have been a "legal immigrant" a decade ago and visa versa. In order to persuade me that illegal immigrants should be viewed and treated the same as armed robbers or child molesters (other groups of " felons"), you're going to have to convince me that what they did was "bad" - as in evil, harmful, destructive, etc. Merely telling me that it's "illegal" doesn't impress me very much.

Originally Posted by inlacal

So then I suppose we can just pick and choose the laws we follow, right?

Originally Posted by fnelson9

No, but there's a difference between speeding and murder. The punishment should fit the crime. You have yet to explain why illegal entry is such a horrible act that it justifies arresting entire families and forcibly evicting them from this country. Who knows? Maybe it IS that horrible; you just haven't bothered to explain that yet.



Our laws should reflect our social standards, not define them. That doesn't mean we can break laws we don't like. However, it also doesn't mean we have to follow all laws blindly without ever questioning them or lobbying for change.



If there's truly no difference between the two, the penalties should be the same. However, the penalties are not the same. I'm still wondering why the penalty for illegal immigration should be as severe as you propose. When you speed, you get a ticket and pay a fine. Why, for example, wouldn't it be OK for illegal immigrants to just pay a fine?



You think there is some other reason they are coming here?



I wasn't trying to defend anything; I was stating a fact.

In very brief summary, my "defense of illegal immigration" is that a significant percentage of illegal immigrants should be allowed to immigrate legally because they benefit us both socially and economically. The fact that they aren't allowed to immigrate legally is evidence that our immigration laws are f$cked up and (gasp!) need to be fixed.



You should check out the recent congressional testimony on this topic. Congress invited a whole herd of economists to talk to them about the economic impact of illegal immigration. The vast majority of them (maybe even all of them) concluded that these people benefit our economy. So much for your "leech off of our country and break our laws in the process" argument.



:bustingup
Are you serious?
:bustingup



Just as easy as it is for you to label any changes as the result of pandering - no difference at all.



I'm not the one with an agenda here. I'm not in favor of amnesty, but I am in favor of laws that make sense. Just because we have "laws in place" does not mean that they make sense. You continue to argue that these people should be kicked out because they "broke the law" without any demonstration that you know what the law is, or how it operates, or why you think permanent eviction is the appropriate punishment. Sounds to me like you're the one with the agenda. What is it?

Originally Posted by fnelson9

The U.S. didn't even have any immigration laws to speak of until 1917 and our current system of regulating immigration didn't exist until 1952. For nearly two hundred years, our immigration policy was "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free... " and all it did was make the United States an economic and political superpower. Perhaps you can explain to me why those laws were so horrible and why the laws now are so wonderful that there is no reason to even talk about changing them.

Originally Posted by fnelson9

Does that include shoplifting? DUI? What about youthful offenders? What about a 22 year old with a gun charge (simple possession - not a violent crime) who came here when he was 2 and doesn't have any other arrests or convictions?
The whole issue of criminal aliens and deciding who stays and who goes is a lot murkier than you might think.
It already is

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

WOW Interesting discussion. May I ask a question?

If someone comes here illegally ( For what ever reason) Did they brake the law?:tsk:

If after they get here they try to get a job where did they get the SS card? Did they brake the law to get it?:tsk:

If they fill out paperwork for a job were they honest when answereing the questions? Did they brake the law? :tsk:

ANYBODY KNOW WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS? ;)

If you after having arrived at the correct conclusion can honestly say that this lie after lie after lie is a valid reason for lawless behaviour then you deserve the future. Will it be a better life? If you believe a society should turn it's head when people lie lie lie because they can think of anyone else but themselves then it's the better life you deserve. I for one don't for a minute think so. Do I have an answer for all of this? Nope. and it appears that no other human does either. But to excuse, defend, or promote this kind of behaviour is a crime in and of itself. Finally, if you think about it real hard and be honest i'll bet you know just where this is all headed.