Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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: Opinion on illegal immigration/border security
Open up the border, let them all in, drugs/human trafficking as well. 1 0.47%
Secure the border, deport the "bad hombre's", offer path to citizenship for balance 72 34.12%
Secure the border, deport all illegals. 126 59.72%
Other, explain in response. 12 5.69%
Voters: 211. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-19-2019, 05:58 AM
 
58,691 posts, read 26,982,562 times
Reputation: 14150

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ohioaninsc View Post
Work on securing the boarder (not with a stupid wall...but better technology like drones) and only deport those that commit crimes...have a pathway to citizenship for every one that is currently here illegally and then make it much simpler to get approved to immigrate here legally.
"Work on securing the boarder (not with a stupid wall" Didn't know wall have the ability to be "stupid" !

Maybe the dems will give them a FREE college education!

Where we have DECENT barriers, walls etc., they have PROVEN to be effective, but, you wouldn't know that because of your choices in where you get your "news"!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-19-2019, 07:48 PM
 
Location: North Pacific
15,750 posts, read 7,540,477 times
Reputation: 2575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell View Post
Congress has decided the legal qualifications ... and yet, the POTUS has them on ignore. From where I sit the only issue is with the possibility of migrants breaking the law, but the POTUS is free to do it all day long at the taxpayer expense and it's okay. As long as he keep 'those' people out, its all good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"Congress has decided the legal qualifications ... and yet, the POTUS has them on ignore."

No different then when dems did it and you didn't complain abut THEM, why?

"On June 15, 2012, then-Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano issued a memorandum entitled “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children,” creating a non-congressionally authorized administrative program that permitted certain individuals who came to the United States as juveniles and meet several criteria—including lacking any current lawful immigration status—to request consideration of deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal, and eligibility for work authorization. This program became known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

https://www.dhs.gov/deferred-action-...-arrivals-daca

"President Obama’s recent announcement that DHS will use discretion to halt the deportations of eligible immigrant youth. They wasted no time hurling some base-stirring claims—“administrative amnesty,” “end-runs around Congress,”

"President Obama’s recent announcement that DHS will use discretion to halt the deportations of eligible immigrant youth. They wasted no time hurling some base-stirring claims—“administrative amnesty,” “end-runs around Congress,” “executive fiat.”"

President Obama Issued a Directive, Not an
Quote:
No different then when dems did it and you didn't complain abut THEM, why?
Be honest, did you know about anything on Obama and his immigration policies (not law), before Trump? Did you know he was the toughest on immigration than any other POTUS in history?

The liberal media is not going to tell it, because they don't want people to know, so as to keep their votes; and the conservative media isn't going to tell it, because they want people to believe, they are the ones tough on immigration for votes.

I am not an R or a D and Trump is the flip side of Obama ... and until people being to realize all they are getting is more of the same, tyranny wins. (there are more parties than just the two; if we were a true democracy we'd have more choices, ron paul)

Flores Case

Talks about Obama getting taken to task by the very judge he appointed ... U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles, California. Of course you will have to click through and read all that information so as to get the skinny ...

So you're not telling me anything I don't already know ... get away from your party and learn things.


btw: Trump's an idiot:
Donald Trump Derides 'Judge Flores' for Reno v. Flores Immigration Case Actually Named for Migrant Teen Jenny Lisette Flores


and that makes him even more dangerous, to our liberty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 07:59 PM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,154,285 times
Reputation: 12100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell View Post
OffT, but important to note:
Blumenthal, et al. v. Trump

"Trump’s failure to comply with the Constitution matters."


Next OnT Flores Agreement congress passed in 1997 which is in essence immigration reform; one must go through Congress to change the law, but not the Donald ...

The Trump administration wants to bypass rules that protect immigrant children

Not only does he bypass it, but he wants the ability to detain all migrants indefinitely and totally remove any protection the Flores gives to people including due process. Also, in utilizing the objections of the people on migration, he is increasing the number of private prisons in the u.s. as if the u.s doesn't haven enough of them already, as the u.s. ranks number one in the number of people incarcerated. "For four decades, the U.S. has been engaged in a globally unprecedented experiment to make every part of its criminal justice system more expansive and more punitive."

2016:
Trump vs. the Constitution: A Guide

and a year in review:
Trump and the Constitution: A year in review and our coverage
"As President Trump’s second year of office begins, these constitutional issues remain as salient as ever."

So rather than discuss the elephant in the room, people's attention is on the people who may or may not be entering the country illegally, and totally blind to the human rights violations of their nation.
When the bell tolls ... (and yes, there is history, just ask any American citizen whose name ended in the flavor of the day)
And I don’t have a problem with any of it. Lawbreakers get locked up. Why should they be rewarded by walking amongst the law abiding? They have no right to waltz right in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 08:14 PM
 
Location: North Pacific
15,750 posts, read 7,540,477 times
Reputation: 2575
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310 View Post
And I don’t have a problem with any of it. Lawbreakers get locked up. Why should they be rewarded by walking amongst the law abiding? They have no right to waltz right in.
Quote:
Lawbreakers get locked up
And POTUS gets to skate/waltz ... that's messed up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 08:22 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,857 posts, read 17,272,285 times
Reputation: 14459
Freedom of association and freedom of movement are natural rights. Only individuals have rights and only individuals can create property borders...which are private property borders.

Anything less is a violation of freedom of movement and freedom of association...a violation otherwise known as human trafficking and kidnapping.

Ok, that's the moral and logical answer and it's consistent. Go ahead and fight it out, Team Red and Team Blue. Just remember to steal my money at gunpoint in the search for your "solution" to a non-problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 08:32 PM
 
Location: North Pacific
15,750 posts, read 7,540,477 times
Reputation: 2575
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
Freedom of association and freedom of movement are natural rights. Only individuals have rights and only individuals can create property borders...which are private property borders.

Anything less is a violation of freedom of movement and freedom of association...a violation otherwise known as human trafficking and kidnapping.

Ok, that's the moral and logical answer and it's consistent. Go ahead and fight it out, Team Red and Team Blue. Just remember to steal my money at gunpoint in the search for your "solution" to a non-problem.
Quote:
Freedom of association and freedom of movement are natural rights.
If they were not, we would all still be living in Africa, believing the world is flat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 09:04 PM
 
Location: moved
13,589 posts, read 9,624,976 times
Reputation: 23363
Deport everyone for whom it is the case, that all eight great-grandparents were born in the United States.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 09:55 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,824,868 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
Freedom of association and freedom of movement are natural rights. Only individuals have rights and only individuals can create property borders...which are private property borders.

Anything less is a violation of freedom of movement and freedom of association...a violation otherwise known as human trafficking and kidnapping.

Ok, that's the moral and logical answer and it's consistent. Go ahead and fight it out, Team Red and Team Blue. Just remember to steal my money at gunpoint in the search for your "solution" to a non-problem.
It's never been the case in human history of freedom of movement into another group's territory. It's not a natural right at all but a very modern and never fully practiced notion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 11:21 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,857 posts, read 17,272,285 times
Reputation: 14459
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
It's never been the case in human history of freedom of movement into another group's territory. It's not a natural right at all but a very modern and never fully practiced notion.
Natural rights exist regardless if they are adhered to or not.

Just because others are gangsters doesn't mean you have to be one too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2019, 12:15 AM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,824,868 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
Natural rights exist regardless if they are adhered to or not.

Just because others are gangsters doesn't mean you have to be one too.
It was never adhered to because the free movement of people caused great problems to the people being moved in on since prehistoric times.

The natural right is for an united group to hold and defend their territory from encroachment of outgroups.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top