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 22)

Showing posts 421 - 438 of438
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#447
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

2

So just to be clear:

I am "demanding" that "illegal aliens" not be viewed as unlawful or "illegal" unless they actually have no good faith and/or are not victims of prior unlawful action.

At the same time, I am "demanding" that courtrooms not give special exemptions to people because "they have no paperwork."

The latter falls closer to our banner of addressing "bail" and proper retribution.
Hmmmm

Leominster, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#448
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

So Sam who exactly pays for the courts, lawyers, prisons, police, new roads and bridges etc. if nobody has to pay taxes?
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#449
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Hmmmm wrote:
So Sam who exactly pays for the courts, lawyers, prisons, police, new roads and bridges etc. if nobody has to pay taxes?
What do you mean? People pay taxes.
When you go to the store and you buy an item,
you are paying a tax <_<...

When you buy property, you also pay your taxes.

You are taxed every year.
Hmmmm

Leominster, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#451
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you mean? People pay taxes.
When you go to the store and you buy an item,
you are paying a tax <_<...
When you buy property, you also pay your taxes.
You are taxed every year.
Very true Sam for me but what about Illegals? Do they walk into a bank and say Hi I have no proof of identity or work history but I want a 30 year mortgage to buy a house in America?
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#452
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Hmmmm wrote:
<quoted text>Very true Sam for me but what about Illegals? Do they walk into a bank and say Hi I have no proof of identity or work history but I want a 30 year mortgage to buy a house in America?
I don't know; not everyone goes to buy houses right away.

Most live with someone else and pay rent to the owners to help cut costs.
Hmmmm

Leominster, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#453
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know; not everyone goes to buy houses right away.
Most live with someone else and pay rent to the owners to help cut costs.
"I don't know", that may be the first intelligent thing you have ever posted.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#454
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Hmmmm wrote:
<quoted text>"I don't know", that may be the first intelligent thing you have ever posted.
Hmmmm
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#455
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not about entitlement when the paperless person is denied paperwork regardless of their quo.
Paying into service is not based purely on money, which is a materialization of this very facet.
C'mon, Sam. A lot of the "paperless" people have never requested paperwork. And many of them, given the opportunity to step forward without penalty or punishment of any kind, would still choose to remain paperless.

It's expensive to live and work legally. To drive legally. To carry health insurance or pay your own medical costs. And many of the newly legalized, on the books people would find themselves in the same position as millions of Americans are right now:

Competing against the paperless workers for jobs. It's not an enviable position to be in.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#456
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
You see, now I totally agree with you on that.
Upholding oath is exactly that:
Viewing the constitution, our declaration,
and carrying out action or choice inaction that implores the very goodness that those documents try to capture in writing.
When people in law fail to live up to this oath, then they inevitably create an injustice.
With the law the way it is now, such injustice has no basis for reform if the victim is removed.
We can't go back in time to remove the first instance (as far as I know), and complete removals like the ones being advocated are effectively enforcing the further creation of such injustice: by repeating the error.
Those people who end up stateside that are messing around with false documentation, might have been the very victims that were removed to begin with:
The human heart can carry a person back home if strong enough cause is given and any measure of logic can interpret the current state of affairs after many years on the outside, when there are no courtrooms to receive you and no representatives that hear you.
You always give those who enter the U.S. illegally a complete pass and hold them harmless in regard to illegal immigration.

When anyone crosses the border illegally, intent on residing here without consent or permission, they know full well that they are breaking laws, irregardless of whether those laws are being enforced or not.

If you see a car sitting with the keys in the ignition, and you decide to get in, start it and drive off, knowing it's not your car, are you still guilty of stealing it, even though the keys were there? Yes. It's not your car.

When one overstays their visa, they too, know that they are residing here illegally. As my friend from Brazil always pointed out...no one ever called or contacted him in any way when his visa expired. Did he know he was breaking the law? Certainly. And he continued to do so until they finally caught up with him.

Failure to enforce laws does not negate those laws, or hold harmless those who violate those laws. Nor does it render those who were allowed to violate them for a time as "victims" if and when they are suddenly enforced. They violated laws and run the risk of consequences by doing so.

As Reagan proved, awarding lawbreakers by giving them that which they tried to steal only leads to more of the same. There can be no workable reform without putting a complete and total stop to this going forward.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#457
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
You always give those who enter the U.S. illegally a complete pass and hold them harmless in regard to illegal immigration.
When anyone crosses the border illegally, intent on residing here without consent or permission, they know full well that they are breaking laws, irregardless of whether those laws are being enforced or not.
If you see a car sitting with the keys in the ignition, and you decide to get in, start it and drive off, knowing it's not your car, are you still guilty of stealing it, even though the keys were there? Yes. It's not your car.
When one overstays their visa, they too, know that they are residing here illegally. As my friend from Brazil always pointed out...no one ever called or contacted him in any way when his visa expired. Did he know he was breaking the law? Certainly. And he continued to do so until they finally caught up with him.
Failure to enforce laws does not negate those laws, or hold harmless those who violate those laws. Nor does it render those who were allowed to violate them for a time as "victims" if and when they are suddenly enforced. They violated laws and run the risk of consequences by doing so.
As Reagan proved, awarding lawbreakers by giving them that which they tried to steal only leads to more of the same. There can be no workable reform without putting a complete and total stop to this going forward.
The minors aren't always "intent on residing there" blah blah blah.
They still fall under the "illegal" or "lawbreaker" umbrella.
That is, unless you have a new term.

In this case the lawbreakers are the law enforcement, border patrol, immigration authority, and embassy staff officials who fail to uphold the oath.

If these people who are "guided" out of the country are then also ignored, then they very much play into the group of people "entering the US knowingly" unlawfully.

Also that's a pretty bad simile.
The US isn't a car owned by someone else.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#458
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
C'mon, Sam. A lot of the "paperless" people have never requested paperwork. And many of them, given the opportunity to step forward without penalty or punishment of any kind, would still choose to remain paperless.
It's expensive to live and work legally. To drive legally. To carry health insurance or pay your own medical costs. And many of the newly legalized, on the books people would find themselves in the same position as millions of Americans are right now:
Competing against the paperless workers for jobs. It's not an enviable position to be in.
Those are broad, sweeping assumptions of others.

To follow suit with bad similes:
That's like flying a plane into a building and saying, "A lot of people in that building push ideas onto others, so that justifies this act."
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#459
Jul 2, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
The minors aren't always "intent on residing there" blah blah blah.
They still fall under the "illegal" or "lawbreaker" umbrella.
That is, unless you have a new term.
In this case the lawbreakers are the law enforcement, border patrol, immigration authority, and embassy staff officials who fail to uphold the oath.
If these people who are "guided" out of the country are then also ignored, then they very much play into the group of people "entering the US knowingly" unlawfully.
Also that's a pretty bad simile.
The US isn't a car owned by someone else.
The minors you keep referring to are not, or very rarely, being deported. The numbers are miniscule.

I've said this before, without reply from you. If an exception was made for these minors, everyone would claim to be one. And with all the fraud, with the millions residing here that our government doesn't even know are here and can't trace...everyone would claim this hardship and no one would ever be deported again. There is no way to verify most of these cases.

And if they sneak back in, they would no longer be considered as a hardship case. Threatening as much detracts from your argument.

This is more collatoral damage due to illegal immigration, and again, the blame falls in equal parts on the parents who smuggled these babies in just as much as it falls on the government which doesn't enforce the laws.

Snarkiness doesn't suit you, Sam. I know the U.S. isn't a car. But stealing a car because it was the keys were in it is still stealing. Sneaking into a country in violation of laws is still violating laws. Histrionics don't change that fact.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#460
Jul 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Those are broad, sweeping assumptions of others.
To follow suit with bad similes:
That's like flying a plane into a building and saying, "A lot of people in that building push ideas onto others, so that justifies this act."
These are not broad, sweeping assumptions. The stats are readily available...try the Pew Hispanic Center.

Over half of (6 to 7 million) illegal aliens currently residing in the country entered through illegal border crossings. No paperwork whatsoever.

Between 4 and 5.5 million illegal aliens currently residing in the U.S. overstayed visas.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#461
Jul 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
These are not broad, sweeping assumptions. The stats are readily available...try the Pew Hispanic Center.
Over half of (6 to 7 million) illegal aliens currently residing in the country entered through illegal border crossings. No paperwork whatsoever.
Between 4 and 5.5 million illegal aliens currently residing in the U.S. overstayed visas.
Saying that someone "wants" to not have paperwork is a broad sweeping assumption.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#462
Jul 2, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
The minors you keep referring to are not, or very rarely, being deported. The numbers are miniscule.
I've said this before, without reply from you. If an exception was made for these minors, everyone would claim to be one. And with all the fraud, with the millions residing here that our government doesn't even know are here and can't trace...everyone would claim this hardship and no one would ever be deported again. There is no way to verify most of these cases.
And if they sneak back in, they would no longer be considered as a hardship case. Threatening as much detracts from your argument.
This is more collatoral damage due to illegal immigration, and again, the blame falls in equal parts on the parents who smuggled these babies in just as much as it falls on the government which doesn't enforce the laws.
Snarkiness doesn't suit you, Sam. I know the U.S. isn't a car. But stealing a car because it was the keys were in it is still stealing. Sneaking into a country in violation of laws is still violating laws. Histrionics don't change that fact.
Well isn't it snide to say that theft is the idea.

I'm not sure what exception you'd care to promote,
but telling others to view people as criminals when they have no courtroom that will hear them is exceptional.

If home is the US, and cases are only to be judged at home, then just you try pleading your case from overseas as an everyman, when you can't even get a hearing and everybody (that matters) back home is waiting for you.

It is not a case of histrionics; it is an honest assessment.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#463
Jul 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Well isn't it snide to say that theft is the idea.
I'm not sure what exception you'd care to promote,
but telling others to view people as criminals when they have no courtroom that will hear them is exceptional.
If home is the US, and cases are only to be judged at home, then just you try pleading your case from overseas as an everyman, when you can't even get a hearing and everybody (that matters) back home is waiting for you.
It is not a case of histrionics; it is an honest assessment.
I'm not in the business of telling anyone how to view another person, so who's making assumptions now?

Nor did I say theft is the idea. The analogy was used (as clearly explained) that just because violating the law presents itself and is easy to do, it is still violating the law. Lack of enforcement does not negate, excuse or nullify those laws. And unfortunately, the alleged cases you are talking about don't negate, excuse or nullify the laws, either.

There is no lawful addendum or exception clause for individuals that may be caught in this trap. If they came here as youngsters, this has always been home and everyone that matters is here, but they are, in fact, illegally residing here, even through no fault of their own...the law as written is indifferent to this. Further, there is no requirement of defining "home" as a legal basis for whom should here, or where a case is to be heard.

So, what do you expect can or should be done about this?
EXPERT

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#464
Jul 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not in the business of telling anyone how to view another person, so who's making assumptions now?
Nor did I say theft is the idea. The analogy was used (as clearly explained) that just because violating the law presents itself and is easy to do, it is still violating the law. Lack of enforcement does not negate, excuse or nullify those laws. And unfortunately, the alleged cases you are talking about don't negate, excuse or nullify the laws, either.
There is no lawful addendum or exception clause for individuals that may be caught in this trap. If they came here as youngsters, this has always been home and everyone that matters is here, but they are, in fact, illegally residing here, even through no fault of their own...the law as written is indifferent to this. Further, there is no requirement of defining "home" as a legal basis for whom should here, or where a case is to be heard.
So, what do you expect can or should be done about this?
Just apply the immigration laws of the Nation the immigrant is coming from. Wait, that would disarm all the claims of racist, bigots...also claims of imposing will
spud

Bangor, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#465
Jul 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Blaming our laws for tearing families apart isn't a valid argument. The parents who originally broke the law are ultimately responsible for any hardships caused by us enforcing our laws.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 421 - 438 of438
|
next page >
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

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Fitchburg People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Fitchburg News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Fitchburg
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••