From: BAR on
In article <lqi6u55nqa7kk6in6129j637l8enunpe10(a)4ax.com>,
bknight(a)conramp.net says...
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2010 18:44:47 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:
>
>
> >I would use the US military to secure our borders. Anyone attempting to
> >cross at any point other than an official US border crossing will be
> >shot dead on sight.
> >
>
> This kind of shallow thought is to be expected of you. The death
> penalty, without legal recourse?
>
> You're pitiful.

Shallow? Who is coming across the southern border? Do you have any idea?
It is not just poor migrant workers.

And, every government official has sworn an oath to protect us from all
enemies, foreign and domestic. The problem with the Democrats is that
the only enemies they see are their political opponents at the ballot
box.
From: BAR on
In article <20a69e5b-9f5c-41b3-890a-38f9e47ef86c@
37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says...
>
> On May 6, 9:28�pm, kenpitts <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 6, 6:09�pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 6 May 2010 18:44:47 -0400, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote:
> > > >I would use the US military to secure our borders. Anyone attempting to
> > > >cross at any point other than an official US border crossing will be
> > > >shot dead on sight.
> >
> > > This kind of shallow thought is to be expected of you. �The death
> > > penalty, without legal recourse?
> >
> > > You're pitiful.
> >
> > > BK
> >
> > That's about what the Mexicans do on their southern border.
> >
> > Ken
>
> No it isn't, but what if it were? That would make it OK for us to do
> it, too?

Reciprocity? It is an interesting concept Johnny. Hell we use it within
the USA all of the time. How do you think your marriage in one state is
recognized in another state?
From: bknight on
On Fri, 7 May 2010 07:55:52 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:

>In article <lqi6u55nqa7kk6in6129j637l8enunpe10(a)4ax.com>,
>bknight(a)conramp.net says...
>>
>> On Thu, 6 May 2010 18:44:47 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I would use the US military to secure our borders. Anyone attempting to
>> >cross at any point other than an official US border crossing will be
>> >shot dead on sight.
>> >
>>
>> This kind of shallow thought is to be expected of you. The death
>> penalty, without legal recourse?
>>
>> You're pitiful.
>
>Shallow? Who is coming across the southern border? Do you have any idea?
>It is not just poor migrant workers.
>
That gives simplistic, shallow, BAR the right to kill them all.
Benevolently, you would stop short of raping the women, unlike
LLLLLLLarry, another fool.

Once in a while you show glimmers of mediocre intelligence. This
isn't one of those times.

BK
From: bknight on
On Fri, 7 May 2010 07:57:12 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:

>In article <20a69e5b-9f5c-41b3-890a-38f9e47ef86c@
>37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says...
>>
>> On May 6, 9:28�pm, kenpitts <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On May 6, 6:09�pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Thu, 6 May 2010 18:44:47 -0400, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote:
>> > > >I would use the US military to secure our borders. Anyone attempting to
>> > > >cross at any point other than an official US border crossing will be
>> > > >shot dead on sight.
>> >
>> > > This kind of shallow thought is to be expected of you. �The death
>> > > penalty, without legal recourse?
>> >
>> > > You're pitiful.
>> >
>> > > BK
>> >
>> > That's about what the Mexicans do on their southern border.
>> >
>> > Ken
>>
>> No it isn't, but what if it were? That would make it OK for us to do
>> it, too?
>
>Reciprocity? It is an interesting concept Johnny. Hell we use it within
>the USA all of the time. How do you think your marriage in one state is
>recognized in another state?

Another inane, childish, comparison. You really ought to have your
posts edited by a fifth grader.

BK
From: MNMikeW on

"Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4be34111$0$4888$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com...
> On Thu, 06 May 2010 12:49:06 -0500, MNMikeW wrote:
>> "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote in message
>> news:2010050612314318056-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom...
>>
>>> But as to the Arizona law specifically...
>>>
>>> But where the Arizona law really runs into problems is where police
>>> in that state won't stop me because I "look" illegal, but they could
>>> stop Maria or Miguel, my neighbors, who are both second-generation US
>>> citizens, both born in this country to immigrant citizens of the US.
>>> That's where this law runs into serious constitutional questions.
>>> And that's why I oppose it. It places legal citizens in situations
>>> we've only read about in history books and seen in movies about the
>>> Gestapo in Germany. It's unAmerican.
>>
>> This is wrong Randy. The law specifically states there must be lawful
>> contact BEFORE any paper checking can happen. They cannot simply pull
>> you over for looking a specific way.
>
> Yeah, because the police would never routinely pull visible minorities
> over like that.

Like they do now right?