Liberal solution to illegal immigration
in [Golf]
|
Prev: March of the Titans (brief video re: White Race, 1 min, 30sec)
Next: What the heck is Tiger doing?
From: Howard Brazee on 13 May 2010 21:20 On Thu, 13 May 2010 17:59:35 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >> >If the person is charged with illegal entry only, they are NOT sent to >> >trial... they are turned over to U.S. Customs and get a "hearing," >> >which is totally different from a trial. The normal result is >> >deportation. >> >> What if the person is innocent? > >Any non-citizen of the US who is here legally is required to have proof >of their authority to be in the US on their person at all times. This is >a federal law and a condition of their entry into the US. > >Therefore, there can be no innocence. Citizens can be charged with illegal entry. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison
From: Loudon Briggs on 13 May 2010 22:17 "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> **************** >> >> If the person is charged with illegal entry only, they are NOT sent to >> trial... they are turned over to U.S. Customs and get a "hearing," >> which is totally different from a trial. The normal result is >> deportation. >>***************** >> >>I don't know whether I agree with you or not because I don't know what your position is. But since you live in Arizona, maybe you have some insight to what local law enforcement authorities are going to do with the people they arrest for illegal entry. They can't prosecute them. They can't deport them. ******************* Apparently you didn't read my whole message... see above! -- Loudon R. Briggs larebe(a)bbz.net Phoenix, AZ "How Can You Not Like A Game Where It's Okay To Get Teed Off, Tote A Six-Iron, Shoot Birdies, and If You're Under Par It's A Great Day!" (from "Frank & Ernest" by Bob Thaves -- used with permission)
From: kenpitts on 13 May 2010 23:30 On May 12, 3:12 am, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article <84uuu2F6g...(a)mid.individual.net>, > > > > > > "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > "kenpitts" <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >news:0c522f75-0d64-48e8-bac9-92a7bb5e6399(a)a34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com.... > > On May 11, 12:47 pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > > > On Tue, 11 May 2010 10:31:59 -0700, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> > > > > >My question to John remains. He seems to imply that an illegal should > > have > > > >a chance to prove himself. I think not. > > > > Of course he should. That's what the American justice system is built > > > on. Otherwise we have a police state....which is just about what > > > BAR's solution is. > > > > BK > > > The rights of which you speak are for citizens. Not for illegals > > charging across our border or terrorists in Gitmo. > > > Ken > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > Bingo. My point exactly. > > > -Greg > > "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created > equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable > Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." > > -- > Alan Baker > Vancouver, British Columbia > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Yeah, in your own country. Go back to Mexico and see if you can line up all those things. Ken
From: kenpitts on 13 May 2010 23:32 On May 12, 7:38 am, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:20:41 -0700 (PDT), kenpitts > > > > > > <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >On May 11, 12:47 pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > >> On Tue, 11 May 2010 10:31:59 -0700, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> > >> wrote: > > >> ><bkni...(a)conramp.net> wrote in message > >> >news:m44ju5hbdrpf9b2o5revnestdf2k4kt3m0(a)4ax.com... > >> >> On Tue, 11 May 2010 10:16:25 -0700, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >"John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> >> >news:971993e3-6952-4b02-90ad-f3a4ed741a87(a)b7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com... > >> >> >On May 11, 7:33 am, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > >> >> <clip> > >> >> >You've changed your standard from crossing the border to robbing and > >> >> >killing after crossing the border. So your argument now is that > >> >> >everyone who enters the country illegally should be presumed a thief > >> >> >and a murderer and shot before he gets the chance. Right? > > >> >> >-------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> >> >A chance to do what? > > >> >> >-Greg > > >> >> C'mon Greg. That's perfectly clear. I wouldn't dare ask you, or > >> >> anyone else, for the answer to the illegal alien problem because its > >> >> so complicated, , but I will ask you this: > > >> >> Do you think BAR's suggestion (now said four times here) that anyone > >> >> crossing our borders illegally should be summarily killed? > > >> >> That only requires a simple yes or no. > > >> >> BK > > >> >------------------------------------------------------ > > >> >I believe I answered the question earlier. > > >> Sorry, I didn't see that.> Bert is wrong about this but at least he has the guts to offer a solution. > > >> Hell, dropping an H bomb on Mexico could be called a solution,to > >> consider murder as a solution is more than a stretch. > > >> > I don't believe securing our borders is particularily complicated. It's a matter of political will. > > >> Since neither party, when in power, has been able to do this there > >> must be some complications. Money is the main culprit. > > >> >My question to John remains. He seems to imply that an illegal should have > >> >a chance to prove himself. I think not. > > >> Of course he should. That's what the American justice system is built > >> on. Otherwise we have a police state....which is just about what > >> BAR's solution is. > > >> BK > > >> - Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > >The rights of which you speak are for citizens. Not for illegals > >charging across our border or terrorists in Gitmo. > > >Ken > > Wrong, and that seems to have become usual for you about this. America > is not a police state and everyone that is arrested here is given a > fair trial. That is a right that is afforded every human being in the > U.S. > > BK- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - OK. Convict them of being here illegally and then deport them. Ken
From: Don Kirkman on 14 May 2010 02:18
On Thu, 13 May 2010 19:18:39 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote: >On Thu, 13 May 2010 09:56:42 -0700, Don Kirkman <donsno2(a)charter.net> >wrote: >>In this situation it's not really a matter of guilt or innocence but >>of documented or undocumented. Undocumented folks are sent home, >>convicted (not-innocent) folks generally serve their time in our >>facilities, at least in California, and are then turned over for >>deportation--thus adding to the cost of running our jails and prisons. >So I would be sent to Colorado if I didn't have my proof of >citizenship? Is that an appropriate punishment to fit the crime as determined by a modern major-general? AAR I think the folks we were discussing wouldn't have proof of their citizenship (US, at least). -- Don Kirkman donsno2(a)charter.net |