U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should there be mandatory jail time for employers who hire illegals
Yes, they are just as guilty as the illegals 49 89.09%
No way Jose 6 10.91%
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-25-2010, 11:15 AM
 
768 posts, read 936,953 times
Reputation: 337

Advertisements

Just a question before I cast my vote: Would this apply to companies owned by Native Americans who hire anyone else but Native Americans?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-25-2010, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Michigan
412 posts, read 347,318 times
Reputation: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrbiggleswurth View Post
Yes or no? You pass this law and illegals are outa here in 2 years, Arizona law or not.
I agree with it in principle, but I think jailing all people who hire illegal immigrants will put a strain on our prison system (and it really doesn't need extra strain right now). I say there should be jail sentences on the worst offenders (people who routinely hire LOTS of illegal immigrants) with heavy fines for most others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 12:10 PM
 
Location: San Diego
32,999 posts, read 30,260,840 times
Reputation: 17803
Quote:
Originally Posted by WatermelonRat View Post
I agree with it in principle, but I think jailing all people who hire illegal immigrants will put a strain on our prison system (and it really doesn't need extra strain right now). I say there should be jail sentences on the worst offenders (people who routinely hire LOTS of illegal immigrants) with heavy fines for most others.

Agreed, just like all drug dealers have buyers they should be punished too. I don't think some 90 year old lady willing to let some Illegal blow leaves out of her driveway should get the same sentence as some clown who is hiring 50 Illegals to get away from paying taxes, medical etc. There is intent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Verde Valley AZ
8,300 posts, read 9,172,581 times
Reputation: 10488
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
I see, so you think the bank robber should be blamed for robbing the bank but the guy driving the getaway care should be blameless?

We have tried to get our government to implement e-verify across the board so as to stop the employers from hiring illegal aliens but all we get is nothing from them just like we get nothing from them to secure our borders. Yet the pro-illegals don't want e-verify and they also scream when raids occur which is also another method to go after the employers. Every attempt we have made to rein in the employers is met with opposition from the pro-illegals because they know that the illegals will be caught up also. In short, they want the employers to pay but not the illegals.

Now you know why states such as Arizona has had to take matters into their own hands. The government isn't doing its job and the pro-illegals are backing them up.
I wonder how many people don't know about the employer sanctions law that was passed in AZ in 2008. We really thought that was going to be a GOOD thing and that it would discourage employers AND illegals. Far as I can tell it didn't. Not much anyway. When it was first signed into law ICE was doing some big sweeps and the employers...around here anyway...were having a fit! AZ isn't even doing it's job making sure our employer sanctions law is upheld. After the first big whoop it was right back to the same ol' same ol'. And that's what always happens. Well, actually it DID help some because we lost about 100,000 of those illegals that were here. But we've still got at least 450,000...although I've never been able to figure out how they KNOW how many are really here.

I still think the word "knowingly" is a real problem. People who subcontract wouldn't know if employees are legal or not and, I suppose, would just assume that the regular employer did an E-verify check. Should they ALL have to do that, even if they are hiring from a subcontractor? Maybe two checks are better?

Anyway, I'd say that both AZ and the Feds have fallen down on the job and I really really hope that AZ doing this gets something rolling. Lord knows it's way past time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 02:50 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,959,787 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
The readership have achieved the point where they will accept tyranny, just a bit more. That appears to be the real goal of the impotence of the Federal government with respect to the immigration issue.

In a free country, why would one need government permission to work?

Any employer should have the inalienable right to contract with whomever.

But the access to socialist entitlements and public charities by the illegals is the REAL issue, isn't it?

If there were no socialist taxes funding socialist benefits, unlawfully accessed by the illegals, would there be any problem?

If there were no socialist taxes, administrative overhead, red tape, and bureaucracy, would American wages be so depleted in buying power?

WAKE UP... the "District of Criminals" are about to snatch away another liberty with your consent.
In this free country any legal citizen is allowed to work without permission from the Gov.
The feds job is to protect its citizens. That is its first and primary job. To keep the nation secure.
Yet some would have us believe that illegals should be treated as though they are not criminals. As though they are not a burden. As though no legal citizens are or have been harmed by illegals in any way.
The fact remains that illegals are taking work that otherwise would be available to legal citizens and residents. Illegals do commit a variety of crimes everyday just to survive in a nation they are trespassing against.
How many citizens need be killed by illegals? How many robbed? How many crimes before we decide that maybe illegals are not the benign presence some try to sell?
I don't feel that I give up a single right because an employer is held accountable for their misdeeds. Nor do I feel a single right is in danger because illegals are deported as they should be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 03:03 PM
 
17,287 posts, read 25,058,274 times
Reputation: 8535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consent Withdrawn View Post
Just a question before I cast my vote: Would this apply to companies owned by Native Americans who hire anyone else but Native Americans?
"Native" to what? There are no truly indigenous people ("indigneous" meaning "originating where they are found") in the Americas that we know of.

Do you mean "American Indians?" Because, last I checked, even they came here from Eurasia. Maybe THEY drove off any TRUE indigenous peoples when they came over. We may never know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,449 posts, read 23,082,988 times
Reputation: 7248
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Once again I ask. For everyone who hires knowingly or by intent hires an illegal?
Those who hire one illegal should get fines not prison.

Quote:
Say the yuppie down the street who hires the illegal asian nanny?
Or another yuppie who hires the hispanic maid?
If the maid's legal or a US citizen there should be no problems.

But perhaps if they didn't live such lavish lifestyles they wouldn't need illegals. Americans got way overextended during the pre-recessionary years particularly during the bubble.

Those yuppies instead of living in McMansions should get used to living in small apartments, condos,duplexes, or tiny SFRs which wouldn't make it necessary for so many illegals to be hired.

I think Americans could use a "lower standard of living" when it comes to housing because it would mean fewer illegals being hired. Divide up the McMansions into apartments. Maybe abolishing zoning would be a good idea, or at least abolishing R1 zoning.

Quote:
Shouldn't these people be held accountable? Ok they didn't know for sure. They can argue that they (and I snicker) never thought to ask. Should we have a reduced penalty for them?
Minor offenders of that sort should pay a fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 03:45 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,959,787 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by majoun View Post
Those who hire one illegal should get fines not prison.



If the maid's legal or a US citizen there should be no problems.

But perhaps if they didn't live such lavish lifestyles they wouldn't need illegals. Americans got way overextended during the pre-recessionary years particularly during the bubble.

Those yuppies instead of living in McMansions should get used to living in small apartments, condos,duplexes, or tiny SFRs which wouldn't make it necessary for so many illegals to be hired.

I think Americans could use a "lower standard of living" when it comes to housing because it would mean fewer illegals being hired. Divide up the McMansions into apartments. Maybe abolishing zoning would be a good idea, or at least abolishing R1 zoning.



Minor offenders of that sort should pay a fine.
Thank you for the reply....
I agree with much of what you say. The yuppies seek to impress by living beyond their means. They compensate by using cheap illegal labor.
A hefty fine is called for for the first offense. There after they deserve a taste of prison time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 04:32 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
13,174 posts, read 9,282,487 times
Reputation: 9075
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
In this free country any legal citizen is allowed to work without permission from the Gov.
Really?
Try and get a job without a Socialist Insecurity number.

And while you're at it, ask your congressman for a copy of the law that compels all Americans to participate before they can work in their own country.


Quote:
The feds job is to protect its citizens. That is its first and primary job. To keep the nation secure.
You would think that was the case. But it appears, that the first duty is for government to gain revenue and power.


Quote:
Yet some would have us believe that illegals should be treated as though they are not criminals. As though they are not a burden. As though no legal citizens are or have been harmed by illegals in any way.
The fact remains that illegals are taking work that otherwise would be available to legal citizens and residents. Illegals do commit a variety of crimes everyday just to survive in a nation they are trespassing against.
How many citizens need be killed by illegals? How many robbed? How many crimes before we decide that maybe illegals are not the benign presence some try to sell?
I don't feel that I give up a single right because an employer is held accountable for their misdeeds. Nor do I feel a single right is in danger because illegals are deported as they should be.
If there was a law that required involuntary servitude - by compulsory participation in SocSec, then it would be a different story.

But remember, the Federal government deliberately ceased enforcing the immigration laws for decades, just so "we" would get fed up and surrender more rights and liberties.

Just look at Arizona's response to the Fed's feigned impotence.

Make no mistake - this is part of the plan to get public support behind national ID and registry.

Which makes a mockery of the anti-Arizona sneers, "Show us your paperssssssss"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,959,787 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Really?
Try and get a job without a Socialist Insecurity number.

And while you're at it, ask your congressman for a copy of the law that compels all Americans to participate before they can work in their own country.



You would think that was the case. But it appears, that the first duty is for government to gain revenue and power.



If there was a law that required involuntary servitude - by compulsory participation in SocSec, then it would be a different story.

But remember, the Federal government deliberately ceased enforcing the immigration laws for decades, just so "we" would get fed up and surrender more rights and liberties.

Just look at Arizona's response to the Fed's feigned impotence.

Make no mistake - this is part of the plan to get public support behind national ID and registry.

Which makes a mockery of the anti-Arizona sneers, "Show us your paperssssssss"
I can't argue with is in bold letters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top