SF Officials Seek $5 Million To Protect Undocumented Immigrants From Deportation (Berkeley: unemployment, to live in)

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Refuge for whom? The war in Central America, the genocide in Guatemala that led to the birth of the sanctuary movement, is over. Now we have kids fleeing drug cartel and gang violence in Honduras and El Salvador. Immigration law could be amended to allow for that. A sanctuary movement isn't necessary just for that.

SF wants to provide sanctuary for guys like the repeat offender who shot that journalist on Pier 14? Is that a good idea?

I don't know what it's an issue of; I was just guessing, because it seems rather strange at this point in time. The number of people facing persecution in Mexico and Central America is small enough now that the whole sanctuary movement could be rolled back to the churches, where it originated. I honestly see no need to continue an outdated practice.

BTW, I've met quite a few illegals here in NM. None of them are political refugees. They're all here for jobs. I even had a couple of friends from Ecuador turn up in the Bay Area as illegals, because they'd taken on a major debt back home, and needed good pay to pay it off. They left when they'd met their financial goals.

If certain industries need cheap workers, the process by which employers apply to bring temporary workers in legally needs to be improved, so that it works more efficiently, and industry can get the workers they need. A sanctuary program is the wrong approach. The sanctuary program was born of an extraordinary crisis in Central America. The crisis has passed. It's time to look at better solutions to the variety of problems that motivate people south of our border to come north, IMO.

"Sanctuary" just means that SF will not use its funds and public service employees to carry out federal immigration law. Nothing more, nothing less. SF won't stop or prevent federal immigration employees from carrying out their duties - but SF employees are not responsible for these duties. It's really not complicated. Read more about the policy here: CHAPTER 12H: IMMIGRATION STATUS

I think you're misappropriating the term "sanctuary" with refugees of war - which is something else entirely.

Trump wants to get tough on deportation and immigration? Fine - send the federal employees here, then.

[Masterful_Man]

Originally Posted by zitsky

Bingo. What's wrong with a little compassion? Is that old fashioned these days? People act like every illegal immigrant is out to rape your women and rob your men. Most of them just want a safe place to live.

I don't think anyone has much of a problem with immigrants, the main issue is that we want them to follow our laws and come here LEGALLY. And we want them to be vetted to make sure they aren't affiliated with terrorist organizations, have criminal records, gang affiliations, or serious contagious diseases. Also immigrants who commit crimes in America (before becoming legal citizens) should be immediately deported, no questions asked.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by Masterful_Man

I don't think anyone has much of a problem with immigrants, the main issue is that we want them to follow our laws and come here LEGALLY. And we want them to be vetted to make sure they aren't affiliated with terrorist organizations, have criminal records, gang affiliations, or serious contagious diseases. Also immigrants who commit crimes in America (before becoming legal citizens) should be immediately deported, no questions asked.

Pretty much all of this already happens. Immigrating to the US legally is an incredibly difficult task. Which is partly why we have so many "illegals" here to begin with.

[Masterful_Man]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

Pretty much all of this already happens. Immigrating to the US legally is an incredibly difficult task. Which is partly why we have so many "illegals" here to begin with.

America is worth it and we should have high standards for the people who enter.
Like any amusement park ride, one must wait their turn. No skipping!

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by Masterful_Man

America is worth it and we should have high standards for the people who enter.
Like any amusement park ride, one must wait their turn. No skipping!

I never said we shouldn't do any of this?

[likealady]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

Pretty much all of this already happens. Immigrating to the US legally is an incredibly difficult task. Which is partly why we have so many "illegals" here to begin with.

I'm sure the immigrants who followed the law are just so happy to see others just come strolling in here demanding that they not be deported for whatever stupid reason they're throwing around these days. "Breaking up families" is the current excuse, right? Maybe they should have thought of that before breaking the law?

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Refuge for whom? The war in Central America, the genocide in Guatemala that led to the birth of the sanctuary movement, is over. Now we have kids fleeing drug cartel and gang violence in Honduras and El Salvador. Immigration law could be amended to allow for that. A sanctuary movement isn't necessary just for that.

SF wants to provide sanctuary for guys like the repeat offender who shot that journalist on Pier 14? Is that a good idea?

I don't know what it's an issue of; I was just guessing, because it seems rather strange at this point in time. The number of people facing persecution in Mexico and Central America is small enough now that the whole sanctuary movement could be rolled back to the churches, where it originated. I honestly see no need to continue an outdated practice.

BTW, I've met quite a few illegals here in NM. None of them are political refugees. They're all here for jobs. I even had a couple of friends from Ecuador turn up in the Bay Area as illegals, because they'd taken on a major debt back home, and needed good pay to pay it off. They left when they'd met their financial goals.

If certain industries need cheap workers, the process by which employers apply to bring temporary workers in legally needs to be improved, so that it works more efficiently, and industry can get the workers they need. A sanctuary program is the wrong approach. The sanctuary program was born of an extraordinary crisis in Central America. The crisis has passed. It's time to look at better solutions to the variety of problems that motivate people south of our border to come north, IMO.

Yep. Law enforcement should cooperate with law enforcement. I'm not really concerned about the detractors as long as we have people like Kate Steinle and the Bologna family buried six feet under. A fact that liberals are very quick to brush under a bus.

I'm curious what Jerry Brown will do with the cities that don't go along with his idiocy to make the entire state a sanctuary state. Especially since so many of its citizens don't want Sanctuary City policies to continue.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by likealady

I'm sure the immigrants who followed the law are just so happy to see others just come strolling in here demanding that they not be deported for whatever stupid reason they're throwing around these days. "Breaking up families" is the current excuse, right? Maybe they should have thought of that before breaking the law?

I'm not justifying anything, just explaining part of the reason of why we find ourselves where we are in regards to immigration.

[zitsky]

Originally Posted by Masterful_Man

I don't think anyone has much of a problem with immigrants, the main issue is that we want them to follow our laws and come here LEGALLY. And we want them to be vetted to make sure they aren't affiliated with terrorist organizations, have criminal records, gang affiliations, or serious contagious diseases. Also immigrants who commit crimes in America (before becoming legal citizens) should be immediately deported, no questions asked.

Some of these illegal immigrants are fleeing violence. Is it reasonable to ask them to wait their turn? It's like going to a mechanic with a bad oil leak, only to be told that you have to wait because the person ahead of you needs their wipers changed. Hospitals prioritize patients and it's not first come, first served. Why can't we do that with immigration?

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

"Sanctuary" just means that SF will not use its funds and public service employees to carry out federal immigration law. Nothing more, nothing less. SF won't stop or prevent federal immigration employees from carrying out their duties - but SF employees are not responsible for these duties. It's really not complicated. Read more about the policy here: CHAPTER 12H: IMMIGRATION STATUS

I think you're misappropriating the term "sanctuary" with refugees of war - which is something else entirely.

Trump wants to get tough on deportation and immigration? Fine - send the federal employees here, then.

Thank you, Mac. Yes, my response was to someone saying the sanctuary city program is for refugees. So I raised that question. Perhaps they should change the name, then, to "employment opportunity city for undocumented workers". Catchy.

But this raises the question again, that I posted earlier: why have this status if it's not a response to a refugee crisis? Is this an effort by SF and the State (the sanctuary state proposal) to support the hotel and agriculture industries in hiring cheap labor without providing benefits? Why would SF's and the State gov't do that? Because agriculture and hotels are big business, cornerstones of California's economy?

I'm sorry, I'm still not getting the concept. If the need for cheap labor were successfully addressed through an improved visa program, no sanctuary cities would be needed. They'd become obsolete (barring another humanitarian crisis south of us, somewhere). And do city and state governments really want to encourage business to hire people without providing decent salaries and benefits? Is this something voters should be supporting?