Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes but they shouldn't stay more than 1 year (deport or grant to stay) and I felt that immigration court was really overwhelmed with many cases.
I watched one film that covered under Sociology course - Lost in Detention and there are issue with private companies that mistreated detainees badly. Lost in Detention | FRONTLINE | PBS
Immigration court is overwhelmed, resources need to be added to get the illegals processed much quicker. For those few that are held for more than 1 year, as rare as it is, is usually due to their country not wanting/accepting them back or their attorney constantly filing frivolous documents continuing the hold.
Those issue with private prisons have been addressed. Those claiming otherwise have an agenda.
Immigration court is overwhelmed, resources need to be added to get the illegals processed much quicker. For those few that are held for more than 1 year, as rare as it is, is usually due to their country not wanting/accepting them back or their attorney constantly filing frivolous documents continuing the hold.
Those issue with private prisons have been addressed. Those claiming otherwise have an agenda.
Yes, now, the sequestration made much worse and you can have hope/pray that new immigrants won't enter US illegally.
Of course about issue with private prisons are addressed - they mentioned at end of film.
Yes, now, the sequestration made much worse and you can have hope/pray that new immigrants won't enter US illegally.
Of course about issue with private prisons are addressed - they mentioned at end of film.
Sequestration has made nothing worse. All it did was lessen the new total added to the old total by 3%. So instead of having an increase of say 10% per department, the department will only receive a 7% increase for the year. You are espousing rhetoric now.
Sequestration has made nothing worse. All it did was lessen the new total added to the old total by 3%. So instead of having an increase of say 10% per department, the department will only receive a 7% increase for the year. You are espousing rhetoric now.
That was the claim made by Obama, yet they were released prior to the sequestration and blamed on sequestration to make a political point against the Republicans, the problem is the issue backfired on Obama. Look at the dates of the releases and then look at sequestration and when the new budget comes out, which as of yet it hasn't so these effects are nothing more than political BS.
That was the claim made by Obama, yet they were released prior to the sequestration and blamed on sequestration to make a political point against the Republicans, the problem is the issue backfired on Obama. Look at the dates of the releases and then look at sequestration and when the new budget comes out, which as of yet it hasn't so these effects are nothing more than political BS.
It wasn't from Obama - it was reported by Janet Napolitano.
ICE already received some cuts because of sequestration and they had to release illegal immigrants from detention center because they know that they have less funding now.
I don't see as BS and the article on sequestration that I posted is real.
It wasn't from Obama - it was reported by Janet Napolitano.
ICE already received some cuts because of sequestration and they had to release illegal immigrants from detention center because they know that they have less funding now.
I don't see as BS and the article on sequestration that I posted is real.
The sequestration will getting worse eventually.
Obama made claims about sequestration before it even happened and blamed the Republicans continuously. your link is an article that says certain things. The title claims the release were tied to impending cuts, which weren't due to take effect until the next budget time frame of starting Oct 1. There were releases as far back as January, prior to the discussion of sequestration.
Your link states the following
Quote:
A spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, an arm of the Department of Homeland Security, said the detainees selected for release were “noncriminals and other low-risk offenders who do not have serious criminal histories.”
Mr. Morton also acknowledged that overall, 2,228 immigrants were released — far more than the several hundred the agency had initially acknowledged. Of those, 629 had criminal records, though Mr. Morton said they were low-level offenders.
The releases have drawn a stern rebuke from Republicans, who said it showed mismanaged priorities. They also said ICE’s concession that it released far more immigrants than it first acknowledged dents the agency’s credibility.
[LEFT]
Read more: Sequester do-over: Feds recaptured 4 immigrants released under budget cuts - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
[/LEFT]
Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 04-15-2013 at 07:50 PM..
That's why the best case scenario is to remove all of the incentives for them to remain here. This will deter future illegal immigration also. It is really so simple and wouldn't cost a dime. Jobs, benefits and birthright citizenship are the largest magnets. Most would self-deport. Unless we have been lied to about "only coming here for a better life". All those things would remove that better life for them.
In comparison to what some of them left - You can remove all the incentives that provide a "better life" and life you your country would still be better than what they are accustomed too. The better ones are here for security. The less desirable ones are here strictly for the money...with no regards to the maintaining of their host nation. For the more intelligent migrants who have settled in..They have left a place where corruption and violence have become the norm. These folks are your best bet as far as being part of the national family. I have seen those from the south come into Canada. They are not interested in contributing...They have only come to use and take advantage of kind and civilized people.
In my over view...You are going to get stuck with the bulk of them...It might be prudent if those who commit the smallest criminal offense be ejected instantaneously. Your government still have this idea that cheap labor is good for the economy. Well if you look at what took place in Britain over the last few decades - the authorities allowed migrants to come in and stay thinking they would bring more wealth to the elite...big mistake..There was internal displacement of the original populace now these immigrants have taken over a good chunk of the economy...with no real benefit to the nation as a whole..
Your problem should have been dealt with 30 years ago.
I guess from her remarks she thinks that if we can't end illegal immigration 100% we shouldn't even try to put a dent in it? Instead we should just throw in the towel and give them amnesty in spite of the negative impact it would have on our own citizens? There is no way of reaching such people so don't even bother trying anymore. You are wasting your time as I did.
What makes you believe that your high and mighty leaders care about a negative impact on their own citizens. From this point of view there does not seem to be much care about citizens. That's the problem you have in the American system. Those with all the money who run the nation...are really not effected by this stuff. They live in another world, one of privilege and separation from the unwashed masses...There is no political will to help the common person. It's the nature of full blown capitalism...those at the top don't give a damn.
In comparison to what some of them left - You can remove all the incentives that provide a "better life" and life you your country would still be better than what they are accustomed too. The better ones are here for security. The less desirable ones are here strictly for the money...with no regards to the maintaining of their host nation. For the more intelligent migrants who have settled in..They have left a place where corruption and violence have become the norm. These folks are your best bet as far as being part of the national family. I have seen those from the south come into Canada. They are not interested in contributing...They have only come to use and take advantage of kind and civilized people.
In my over view...You are going to get stuck with the bulk of them...It might be prudent if those who commit the smallest criminal offense be ejected instantaneously. Your government still have this idea that cheap labor is good for the economy. Well if you look at what took place in Britain over the last few decades - the authorities allowed migrants to come in and stay thinking they would bring more wealth to the elite...big mistake..There was internal displacement of the original populace now these immigrants have taken over a good chunk of the economy...with no real benefit to the nation as a whole..
Your problem should have been dealt with 30 years ago.
You´re gonna make a lot of the "patriots" here mad.
Cheap or free labor was and is the foundation of the economy. 30 yrs? try a few hundred.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no way of reaching such people so don't even bother trying anymore. You are wasting your time as I did.
