Immigration laws tear families apart

May 25, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Worcester Telegram & Gazette

Miguel Leal of Fitchburg and six others had the full attention of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden in the Oval Office on Tuesday.

Comments (Page 16)

Showing posts 301 - 320 of438
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Sam

Oostende, Belgium

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#321
Jun 18, 2013
 
Paco wrote:
Sam, lets be honest. Illegals are not coming to America for jobs. America has made it impossible to run a company here so they all moved to Mexico. The Mexicans said oh shit chico we might have to get a job so they ran to the border and hopped the fence so they could get free stuff from America.
"Illegals" can't come to America.
The term is currently used to talk about people without up-to-date government-authorized documentation that are in the country itself.

Not all illegals are from Mexico.

Millions come through airports to visit, study, or even work.

They become "illegal" when they forget or choose to not leave in the time allotted to them.

These people may come with infants/toddlers,
whom then end up growing up in the USA.

In nearly all cases, the parents are aware of their now unlawful presence in the US, but the minor may not be.

When they come of age and try to enter the workforce, military, or use other normal services, they generally come to realize that they are not properly documented.
Sam

Oostende, Belgium

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#322
Jun 18, 2013
 
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
Every illegal alien who lacks a license and insurance is committing a crime whenever they get behind the wheel, drunk or not.
Almost every legal driver involved in an accident with an illegal alien is dealing with an uninsured driver.
Insurance laws vary from state to state. In some states, auto insurance companies only pay out when the insured is the party who caused the accident, though some medical costs are mandatory.
Other "no fault" states, pay no matter who is found at fault.
There is a limit to how much auto insurance covers, and those limits are often based upon cost to the insured and also vary state to state.
In an accident that causes serious injuries, insurance limits are often quickly exceeded. That debt is assumed by the injured party, who can then go after the other drivers insurance...as long as they have coverage. If they don't have coverage, property, savings and wages can be seized or garnished.
If insurance companies had to pay coverage in perpetuity, none of us would be able to afford any insurance. Their money does not grow on trees.
If that accident involves an illegal alien, who typically carries no ID, who works under the table, who doesn't keep his/her money in a bank and doesn't own property...the injured party is stuck with the bills.
And as an officer at the scene of my sister in law's accident acridly observed, these people never have ID, an address, a job, a phone number or money to pay for their own medical treatment...but they always have plenty of cash to pay their bail.
So if a citizen finds themselves in this unlucky situation, odds are 50 to 1 that the driver is not a destitute American citizen, but an illegal alien.
Again, choosing to drive without a license is against the law.

Addressing the undocumented status of the individual driving without a license could help protect all parties, but that shouldn't be at the expense of ignoring the message that people should not drive without documentation, just as they should not drive while under the influence of alcohol (even with documentation).

Destitute American citizens engaging in criminal activity that engage in these kinds of activities are alongside undocumented people doing the same. Both peoples will be able to evade laws that are not addressing them directly.

An initial solution for your example might be that the "bail" covers the bill of the victim. Labor may be subjected to those unable to pay, while any dependents are dealt with at the discretion of the state (which I hope will come with addressing current immigration law).

The problem lies in targeting practical and just solutions that do not involve genocide in the United States...

...and bringing these solutions to those that are in the power to enact them.
magdy

Doha, Qatar

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#323
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

who can tell me what to do?
I was married legally in Missouri to an American
I left to my country two months later that was in 2007 .I have my marriage certificate we broke up 1 year later uo to now , what can I do to get back to the states is it possible
Sam

Oostende, Belgium

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#324
Jun 18, 2013
 
magdy wrote:
who can tell me what to do?
I was married legally in Missouri to an American
I left to my country two months later that was in 2007 .I have my marriage certificate we broke up 1 year later uo to now , what can I do to get back to the states is it possible
Hi magdy,

I'm not sure a 2 month marriage to an American qualifies for admission, especially if you are not involved with this person now and have no rationally acceptable reason for being stateside.

You should probably expand on your situation and reason why you are trying to enter the United States.

Depending on where you are, you will most likely be required by Embassy staff to locate and work for a company in a non-American country, purchase living accommodations, such as a house, in that non-American country, and then hunt down non-Americans that would be considered to be family by American staff.

Even if you comply to this, you will likely be required to wait a year or more. In this time, you must maintain your non-American investments before American staff will consider you.

If you have any further difficulties,
then those will likely lie on your circumstance.

This is all assuming you don't have family in the United States and have no rational reason for going.
Rewarding

Leominster, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#325
Jun 18, 2013
 
I have helped a couple people in the past get there citizenship who had green cards and although the process is tedious and since 9/11 the government is even more strict it is worth it to do it LEGALLY.

You file the proper papers.

You do your Biometrics.

You have an interview answer 10 questions about American laws and/or history (after you get the first 3 right they stop).

That's pretty much it. Why people think hey can just live here and say they are American I don't know. Especially if they don't understand or respect the laws of the land.
Sam

Oostende, Belgium

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#326
Jun 18, 2013
 
Rewarding wrote:
I have helped a couple people in the past get there citizenship who had green cards and although the process is tedious and since 9/11 the government is even more strict it is worth it to do it LEGALLY.
You file the proper papers.
You do your Biometrics.
You have an interview answer 10 questions about American laws and/or history (after you get the first 3 right they stop).
That's pretty much it. Why people think hey can just live here and say they are American I don't know. Especially if they don't understand or respect the laws of the land.
This "easy in" doesn't happen to everyone.
Especially in Arizona.

You find out your paperwork isn't in order.
You are instructed to report to ICE by local government representatives.
ICE instructs you to report to an embassy in another country.
The embassy then instructs you that you may no longer enter the United States via waiver program and that your visiting rights are removed due to their "freedom to not review evidence," which they are choosing to do because, I think, they want to further punish your parents (and I quote "You are limited because of your parents." which is BS).

That manipulation and unjust exiling does happen.

This should be a consideration for anyone "staying illegaly" atm.
Just Facts

Fairport, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#327
Jun 18, 2013
 
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi magdy,
I'm not sure a 2 month marriage to an American qualifies for admission, especially if you are not involved with this person now and have no rationally acceptable reason for being stateside.
You should probably expand on your situation and reason why you are trying to enter the United States.
Depending on where you are, you will most likely be required by Embassy staff to locate and work for a company in a non-American country, purchase living accommodations, such as a house, in that non-American country, and then hunt down non-Americans that would be considered to be family by American staff.
Even if you comply to this, you will likely be required to wait a year or more. In this time, you must maintain your non-American investments before American staff will consider you.
If you have any further difficulties,
then those will likely lie on your circumstance.
This is all assuming you don't have family in the United States and have no rational reason for going.
Magdy,

If you are no longer married to this American, you have no appropriate option for coming to the United States. Family is but one method, but your divorce from this person will diallow that method for you.

Various family members in our country, if they exist, might potentially be able to apply to sponsor you, but otherwise, you won't be allowed.
Sam

Oostende, Belgium

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#328
Jun 18, 2013
 
Just Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Magdy,
If you are no longer married to this American, you have no appropriate option for coming to the United States. Family is but one method, but your divorce from this person will diallow that method for you.
Various family members in our country, if they exist, might potentially be able to apply to sponsor you, but otherwise, you won't be allowed.
*nodding*

“Liberal Teachers ruin Kids”

Since: Mar 09

Paradise Valley Arizona

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#329
Jun 18, 2013
 
All illegals need to be caught, and deported end of story
conservative crapola

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#330
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Vance1 wrote:
'The Supreme Court on Monday delivered another rebuke to Arizona's aggressive efforts to combat illegal immigration, ruling that the state violated federal law when it added a proof-of-citizenship requirement to a federal voter.'

poor vinni alibaba.

hahahahahahahahahahaha
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#331
Jun 18, 2013
 
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, choosing to drive without a license is against the law.
Addressing the undocumented status of the individual driving without a license could help protect all parties, but that shouldn't be at the expense of ignoring the message that people should not drive without documentation, just as they should not drive while under the influence of alcohol (even with documentation).

So, basically, we should just legalize everyone to fix the problem? Or grant yet another right or privilege to people who are here illegally?

Destitute American citizens engaging in criminal activity that engage in these kinds of activities are alongside undocumented people doing the same. Both peoples will be able to evade laws that are not addressing them directly.

Not typically. Even destitute American's can be identified and located when a warrant is issued, or if they turn up anywhere in the system, even for a slight infraction, a few keystrokes on a computer shows any outstanding warrants and they are detained on the spot. It is far more difficult for them to game the system by using different names every time they're ticketed or arrested. This may not help the victim monetarily, but I know my sister in law would feel much better knowing that the gentleman who changed her life for the worst paid for his crime in some way, rather than walking out of a police department and disappearing like a ghost to love under yet another alias.

An initial solution for your example might be that the "bail" covers the bill of the victim. Labor may be subjected to those unable to pay, while any dependents are dealt with at the discretion of the state (which I hope will come with addressing current immigration law).

Bail is often a drop in the bucket compared to medical costs, especially in cases of injuries serious enough to exceed insurance coverage. I confess that I don't understand your reference to labor...are you suggesting that we return to chain gangs and workhouses?

The problem lies in targeting practical and just solutions that do not involve genocide in the United States...
...and bringing these solutions to those that are in the power to enact them.
Genocide? Overstating the situation detracts from your arguments.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#332
Jun 18, 2013
 
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
It wouldn't matter Civil Servant Supporter:
Current US immigration law may view the baby as a criminal without needing all of the facts.
I believe Civil Servant Supporter was being humorous, but the fact remains:

If the baby was not born on U.S. soil, the "baby" is an illegal alien, no matter how "Americanized" he/she might be. It's a tough situation that the "Baby's" parents got him/her into, but your quest to make this a hardship exception is fraught with complications, as I addressed in a previous post, to which you had no reply.

Even at that, I think these cases are extremely rare...not the sneaking babies in, but those babies getting deported. Because deportations hardly ever happen.

Our President was lauded for his "high" deportation numbers, but in truth, it was over the course of one out of his four years in office. The vast majority were single men, over fifty-five percent of those were criminals and many had been deported previously, and simply came back.

We had an illegal alien crime spree this weekend in our little town and it just leaves you shaking your head.

Two car accidents with, thankfully, no serious injuries. One driver bailed and ran, without success, the other tried to bribe the victim so that he wouldn't notify authorities. He had a previous deportation order.

We had a couple arrested for abusing their children, aged 8 and 9. The father had been deported five years ago for previous crimes.

We had a man arrested for sexually assaulting a twelve year old, who was then further charged for a prior warrant for the same crime, but a different victim. He had three deportation orders against him, but, like I said, actual deportation is infrequent, at best.

And that's how we've ended up with such a huge problem. The eleven million illegal aliens number is a sad joke. The actual number was estimated to be between twenty and twenty five million, eight years ago. Today, it is likely in excess of thirty million, or 10% of this country's population.

We can't afford this any longer, not the cost to our government, which of course it the cost to taxpayers, or the cost to citizens, especially those who are individually victimized and don't get the protection of their own government or the laws that are in place and by which they abide.

There's plenty of serious hardships all around.
factsonly

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#333
Jun 18, 2013
 
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
*nigger*
Reinstate slavery.
Sam

Oostende, Belgium

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#334
Jun 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
Genocide? Overstating the situation detracts from your arguments.
So does improperly replying with altered quotes.

Indiscriminate "removal" of "illegals" is a hairline definition of Genocide, which is the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

With several voices pointing to "Mexican" people sneaking across the border as a justification for complete and total removals of all peoples without paperwork whether or not they are "Mexican," whether or not they have chosen to break any laws, and whether or not they are acting in good faith, this "situation" is quite real.
Sam

Oostende, Belgium

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#335
Jun 19, 2013
 
factsonly wrote:
<quoted text>Reinstate slavery.
Falsely altering quotes detracts from your arguments.

“Work hard at work worth doing.”

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#336
Jun 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
So does improperly replying with altered quotes.
Indiscriminate "removal" of "illegals" is a hairline definition of Genocide, which is the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
With several voices pointing to "Mexican" people sneaking across the border as a justification for complete and total removals of all peoples without paperwork whether or not they are "Mexican," whether or not they have chosen to break any laws, and whether or not they are acting in good faith, this "situation" is quite real.
It is the removal of a group of people who do NOT have permission to live here...period. Quit trying to make it something it's not.
Just Facts

Fairport, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#337
Jun 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
So does improperly replying with altered quotes.
Indiscriminate "removal" of "illegals" is a hairline definition of Genocide, which is the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
With several voices pointing to "Mexican" people sneaking across the border as a justification for complete and total removals of all peoples without paperwork whether or not they are "Mexican," whether or not they have chosen to break any laws, and whether or not they are acting in good faith, this "situation" is quite real.
Sam,

I thought you had better sense than to make such a stupid claim. To claim that deporting "lawbreakers" is genocide is a ridiculous statement and is a failed effort at using emotion to obtain agreement. I can't blame you for trying it, but that won't work on those of us that see through all of that to the plain facts.

If people from other countries would stop trying to come here, for whatever reason, without processing through our system the proper way, we wouldn't have the issues to begin with...put the responsibility where it belongs.

If parents stopped bringing there children here, we wouldn't have people growing up here in that situation. It is their fault for doing it!

If women didn't come into our country to have a child (anchor baby), they wouldn't be in a situation that might get them deported while the child is supposed to remain here because the child is a US Citizen. It is her fault for doing it!

Place the blame and the negative consequences back on the shoulders of the people responsible for causing the problem and quit making excuses for them to break the law.
Genius

Fitchburg, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#338
Jun 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

"Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

PS: "Anchor Baby" is a racist term!
Genius

Fitchburg, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#339
Jun 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

When the Heritage Foundation launched an offensive against comprehensive immigration reform in early May, it focused its attention almost exclusively on one area: the legislation's price tag. After all, one of the first questions lawmakers ask in response to any proposal is, "What does it cost?" and if the bipartisan reform bill is too pricey, Congress will have a good excuse to reject it.

With that in mind, Heritage, relying on numbers that no one could take seriously, said immigration reform would cost taxpayers over $6 trillion. Yesterday, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office -- the official score-keepers for federal lawmakers -- published a very different figure.

A long-awaited analysis by the Congressional Budget Office found that the benefits of an increase in legal residents from immigration legislation currently being debated in the Senate -- which includes a pathway to citizenship -- would outweigh the costs.[...]

The report estimates that in the first decade after the immigration bill is carried out, the net effect of adding millions of additional taxpayers would decrease the federal budget deficit by $197 billion. Over the next decade, the report found, the deficit reduction would be even greater -- an estimated $700 billion, from 2024 to 2033.

The full report from the CBO is online here (pdf).
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofil...

This is incredibly important, and puts conservatives in an exceedingly awkward position. According to the CBO's non-partisan analysis, the comprehensive immigration reform plan pending on Capitol Hill would be one of the biggest deficit-reduction bills in decades, reducing the deficit by nearly $200 billion in the next decade, and nearly $900 billion over the next 20 years.

In an amusing twist, the CBO does not ordinarily score bill bills beyond the first 10-year window, but in this case, the agency made an exception -- because Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a fierce opponent of reform, asked it to, assuming it would help bolster his case. Oops.

This is simply devastating for Republican opponents of reform. Indeed, one of the pillars of the right's argument has suddenly been shattered.

But the point is, the savings would easily outweigh the costs, as immigrants become citizens and begin paying income and payroll taxes. The CBO also projects an increase in the nation's gross domestic product.

So, let's summarize the case for conservatives -- who, remember, generally describe federal budget deficits as such an extraordinary problem that they threaten the future of our civilization. According to the CBO, comprehensive immigration reform will dramatically reduce the deficit without raising taxes, boost the economy, and strengthen the fiscal future of Social Security and Medicare. It will also, incidentally, help millions of families and countless American communities.

And it's against this backdrop that most congressional Republicans are still eager to kill the legislation.
Dee Dee Dee

Emmaus, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#340
Jun 19, 2013
 
Genius wrote:
"Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
PS: "Anchor Baby" is a racist term!
Anchor baby does not refer to a race therefore it cannot be a racist term. While it may be insulting just as being called crook, lazy, ignorant, bastard, whore or any number of insulting things it is not a racist term since it can be applied to people of any race. Just like any of the insults mentioned if the term applies to you then it is not even really an insult.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 301 - 320 of438
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••

Fitchburg News Video

•••
•••

Fitchburg Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Fitchburg People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••