Immigration laws tear families apart

May 25, 2013 Full story: Worcester Telegram & Gazette 438

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.

Full Story
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#426 Jun 22, 2013
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Those failures are issues that need to be addressed that can tie into further errors, with regard to people entering illegally.
If individuals with such assets are restricted due to errors, then it is very likely the result will be breaking the law themselves if they are on the "outside" and the error is being "enforced" by airports and embassies.
Would they have chosen to utilize such assets in the first place to avoid legality, then it would certainly be in their power to have done so and I find it quite peculiar that such considerations are not taken into account by enforcement agencies.
Instead, their "desire to obey the law" and their "not utilizing assets to disobey the law" are considered a "higher risk."
That whole thing sounds rather like a lack of intelligence,
which I feel should be brought to attention.
Federal staff are representatives of the US and the US should not represent a lack of intelligence. Immigration laws need to be interpreted further and federal staff should receive this new intel, so that they can act accordingly.
After such implementations, cases of immigrants caught in these circumstances that end up breaking the law because the law won't hear them would be reduced and those who aren't caught in any circumstances and decide to break the law would be more fairly punished, rather than the current "issue" which has cropped up.
Con't

The costs to communities, which are, of course, people, is tremendous. Here, citizens, including legal immigrants, don't want their children attending many of our local schools because they are failing so badly. They came to this country for better opportunities and a better life for their children. A good education is required for any kind of success. This requires considerably more money to afford the better school districts, and that is further burdened by the very high property taxes to pay for those schools.

All walk-in health clinics in this city closed due to high rates of non-payers . This puts a huge burden on the local hospital and affects all citizens by limiting their access to health care, especially emergency care.

These and many other problems are not restricted to this community, but are being suffered all over the country. This is the first time since the 1800's that immigration has had such a negative impact on so many.

With the downturn in the economy, the high rate of unemployment (the true rate is in the 14% range) and with approximately 17 million Americans under employed (working part-time, or well below skill/education level), the simple truth is that we can't afford any of this any longer.

Our federal immigration laws don't need further interpretation. They need to be enforced.

The United States of America is not required, for any reason, to accept any foreign national if it chooses not to, for whatever reason.

Nor is it required to make special exceptions for particular cases, as this is the Mother of slippery slopes. An exception here, a blind eye to the law there, is exactly why we're having this debate now.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#427 Jun 23, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
Con't
The costs to communities, which are, of course, people, is tremendous. Here, citizens, including legal immigrants, don't want their children attending many of our local schools because they are failing so badly. They came to this country for better opportunities and a better life for their children. A good education is required for any kind of success. This requires considerably more money to afford the better school districts, and that is further burdened by the very high property taxes to pay for those schools.
All walk-in health clinics in this city closed due to high rates of non-payers . This puts a huge burden on the local hospital and affects all citizens by limiting their access to health care, especially emergency care.
These and many other problems are not restricted to this community, but are being suffered all over the country. This is the first time since the 1800's that immigration has had such a negative impact on so many.
With the downturn in the economy, the high rate of unemployment (the true rate is in the 14% range) and with approximately 17 million Americans under employed (working part-time, or well below skill/education level), the simple truth is that we can't afford any of this any longer.
Our federal immigration laws don't need further interpretation. They need to be enforced.
The United States of America is not required, for any reason, to accept any foreign national if it chooses not to, for whatever reason.
Nor is it required to make special exceptions for particular cases, as this is the Mother of slippery slopes. An exception here, a blind eye to the law there, is exactly why we're having this debate now.
Why we're having this debate is exactly about "a blind eye" in law interpretation and enforcement.

When we view communities that are struggling with their human resources, the idea is not "let's just reduce the resources."

You are describing efforts by people who are committing murder, drug-trafficking, and otherwise recklessly endangering the community.

Brushing those individuals away with the hope that they won't be intelligent enough to return and resume operations may address the immediate issue, but it's not a strong long-term plan.

Furthermore, "brushing away" millions of people who aren't committing murder, aren't benefiting from social services, and are generally contributing to the improvement of community development, together with these people causes an increase in long-term difficulties.

Again, in the short-term, the human resources are reduced, but such blind effort that you're pressing we enforce, CREATES people that end up breaking laws and having to use illegal resources to continue their lives.

Now you have your former "real" criminals inbound with millions of NEW government dissenters both in and outside of the US raising tension and flooding courts, etc.

We are trying to REDUCE criminal activity and INCREASE documented activity.

The proposed solution of "ousting" everyone without documentation (without interpretation or any further improvement of law) works to temporarily reduce criminal activity only; the loss of faith, both at home, and abroad, has a strong lash-back internally and externally that only adds to the long-term ignorance of law (by all parties).

If your sister-in-law's offender had their bail cover her medical bills and was lawfully bound to pay or work off (in prison) those costs, then she and you would likely struggle less with your situation.

The target,
therefore is bringing this point to bare and to federal pen and paper (unless I'm missing something).

Meanwhile, immigrant laws need to be strengthened and solutions for the creation of local jobs and zoning brought to the front of the enforcement wing.
Lynch

Fitchburg, MA

#428 Jun 23, 2013
Our leaders screwed up! They didn't protect our borders because they profited off of dividends from companies that profited off extremely low wages.

We all must ask, especially all Hispanic Americans, are you willing to accept extremely low wages upon an amnesty program? You have to understand the reality of these consequences.

If amnesty is made the law then every American will lose benefits and opportunities across the board. I see 40% less food stamps, I see 40% less health coverage, I see 40% cut in social security checks and many other social net programs.

Are all Hispanic Americans willing to see these cuts to their economic lives?

On the other hand it may be an incentive pusher. At present many Americans are comfortable with receiving a mere $700 a month in assistance, if this drops to $400 a month they may seek employment.

Another fact; at present all state inspectors in the construction industry purposeful allow massive illegal immigrant construction workers as they state we do not bother them over no workers comp, no taxes paid and no insurance because if we ticket them or fine them they will not pay, so it is like trying to bleed a stone. Meanwhile Americans are forced to abide by all the laws which strains their business as they attempt to compete against the allowed illegal immigrants.

This allowance has destroyed the American economy as America has always self supported through the service industry which everyone is forgetting.
Hmmmm

Leominster, MA

#429 Jun 23, 2013
Lynch wrote:
Our leaders screwed up! They didn't protect our borders because they profited off of dividends from companies that profited off extremely low wages.
We all must ask, especially all Hispanic Americans, are you willing to accept extremely low wages upon an amnesty program? You have to understand the reality of these consequences.
If amnesty is made the law then every American will lose benefits and opportunities across the board. I see 40% less food stamps, I see 40% less health coverage, I see 40% cut in social security checks and many other social net programs.
Are all Hispanic Americans willing to see these cuts to their economic lives?
On the other hand it may be an incentive pusher. At present many Americans are comfortable with receiving a mere $700 a month in assistance, if this drops to $400 a month they may seek employment.
Another fact; at present all state inspectors in the construction industry purposeful allow massive illegal immigrant construction workers as they state we do not bother them over no workers comp, no taxes paid and no insurance because if we ticket them or fine them they will not pay, so it is like trying to bleed a stone. Meanwhile Americans are forced to abide by all the laws which strains their business as they attempt to compete against the allowed illegal immigrants.
This allowance has destroyed the American economy as America has always self supported through the service industry which everyone is forgetting.
Now you have really lost me. Are "hispanic Americans" willing to take a cut and live on a mear $700 a month in assistance?
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#430 Jun 24, 2013
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Why we're having this debate is exactly about "a blind eye" in law interpretation and enforcement.
When we view communities that are struggling with their human resources, the idea is not "let's just reduce the resources."
.
The city I live in is merely a microcosm of what is going on nationally.

As the money wiring incident demonstrated, approximately $2.2 million anually was being wired from the country, and this was only of several wiring agencies. Worse than that, many of the people wiring their illegally earned, untaxed income are the very same people who recieve various forms of state and local aid. They show no income, their school aged children get free breakfast and lunch. There are health and wellness clinics in the schools, and there are even dental clinics, and these clinics also avail some of the parents of their services, if they qualify. Many of them don't really qualify, but on paper, yes, they look very poor...while they send their money out of the country instead of reinvesting in the community they live in.

These same individuals walk into hospitals and clinics, and they cannot be required to show ID. This isn't to say they all have funds to pay for the care they recieve, but many of them do.

As a result, those clinics are all closed. You can't run a business at a net loss. As a result, everyone living within this community is no longer availed of services, especially emergency services.

Most of us do not view these particular individuals as resources, but rather drains on the local and state economies. They recieve resources, but send much of the money they earn outside the country. That, by any accounting, is a net loss.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#431 Jun 24, 2013
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>

If your sister-in-law's offender had their bail cover her medical bills and was lawfully bound to pay or work off (in prison) those costs, then she and you would likely struggle less with your situation.
The target,
therefore is bringing this point to bare and to federal pen and paper (unless I'm missing something).
Meanwhile, immigrant laws need to be strengthened and solutions for the creation of local jobs and zoning brought to the front of the enforcement wing.
As I stated in a previous post, his bail amounts to a drop in the bucket compared to the amount owed.

Having him "work off" that debt (in prison) would require a whole lot more prisons. And it would require more government run programs and private employers to provide that "work" for which he would be paid. The U.S. government does not manufacture or produce anything, so that "work" would have to come from the private sector.

I'm sure some private businesses wouldn't mind, because when one generally makes a deal with the government, they are well compensated...not out of profits, but out of the Treasury. I mean, we pay farmers handsomely to grow nothing.

And don't forget the unions. There would be huge problems, there.

Basically, it would require the U.S. to revamp the whole prison system and the cost of all this would greatly exceed the benefits.

On the face of it, sure, that sounds great. But the reality is a completely different story, as you would quickly realize as soon as you give it serious consideration.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#432 Jun 24, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
As I stated in a previous post, his bail amounts to a drop in the bucket compared to the amount owed.
Having him "work off" that debt (in prison) would require a whole lot more prisons. And it would require more government run programs and private employers to provide that "work" for which he would be paid. The U.S. government does not manufacture or produce anything, so that "work" would have to come from the private sector.
I'm sure some private businesses wouldn't mind, because when one generally makes a deal with the government, they are well compensated...not out of profits, but out of the Treasury. I mean, we pay farmers handsomely to grow nothing.
And don't forget the unions. There would be huge problems, there.
Basically, it would require the U.S. to revamp the whole prison system and the cost of all this would greatly exceed the benefits.
On the face of it, sure, that sounds great. But the reality is a completely different story, as you would quickly realize as soon as you give it serious consideration.
You said in a previous post that he had more than enough to pay for bail, which should consequently relate to paying the bill.

The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, while housing 25 percent of the worldwide prisoners.

UNICOR or FPI, is a US Government owned corporation that uses penal labor to produce goods and services for other government owned operations.

Baring in mind that the US has the largest criminal labor base in the world for government production, I think your statement that we don't produce (could be considered a lie) and that we would have to "revamp the entire prison system...," I don't think your words are aware of the reality.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#433 Jun 24, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
The city I live in is merely a microcosm of what is going on nationally.
As the money wiring incident demonstrated, approximately $2.2 million anually was being wired from the country, and this was only of several wiring agencies. Worse than that, many of the people wiring their illegally earned, untaxed income are the very same people who recieve various forms of state and local aid. They show no income, their school aged children get free breakfast and lunch. There are health and wellness clinics in the schools, and there are even dental clinics, and these clinics also avail some of the parents of their services, if they qualify. Many of them don't really qualify, but on paper, yes, they look very poor...while they send their money out of the country instead of reinvesting in the community they live in.
These same individuals walk into hospitals and clinics, and they cannot be required to show ID. This isn't to say they all have funds to pay for the care they recieve, but many of them do.
As a result, those clinics are all closed. You can't run a business at a net loss. As a result, everyone living within this community is no longer availed of services, especially emergency services.
Most of us do not view these particular individuals as resources, but rather drains on the local and state economies. They recieve resources, but send much of the money they earn outside the country. That, by any accounting, is a net loss.
Humans are required to produce or grow individual or group efforts. These same humans are "resources."

This is why businesses and individuals deal with "foreign" and "local" humans in and outside of the law.

Focusing on resources that are currently draining more than they are outputting as a reason to remove ALL resources that resemble them in any way (we are talking about people without documentation), would turn the removed "positive" resources into "victims."

If you pass a law OR ENFORCE a law that removes both negative resources and positive resources...

...then you are basically saying saying "screw victims of law."

This is like saying "screw" your "sister-in-law."

...

I don't want your good sister-in-law or good undocumented people to be "screwed."
Chuggaboom

Austin, TX

#434 Jun 24, 2013
I believe that China is the largest user of convict labor.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#435 Jun 24, 2013
Chuggaboom wrote:
I believe that China is the largest user of convict labor.
You may believe that Chuggaboom, but China has fewer convicts than the United States, despite it's massively higher overall population.
Chuggaboom

Austin, TX

#436 Jun 24, 2013
I know America has the highest percentage based on population, which if either case it is shameful. Given that the country was populated intially with criminals, discontents, and slaves, with tens of millions of illegal aliens now this is of no great shock.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#437 Jun 25, 2013
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Humans are required to produce or grow individual or group efforts. These same humans are "resources."
This is why businesses and individuals deal with "foreign" and "local" humans in and outside of the law.
Focusing on resources that are currently draining more than they are outputting as a reason to remove ALL resources that resemble them in any way (we are talking about people without documentation), would turn the removed "positive" resources into "victims."
If you pass a law OR ENFORCE a law that removes both negative resources and positive resources...
...then you are basically saying saying "screw victims of law."
This is like saying "screw" your "sister-in-law."
...
I don't want your good sister-in-law or good undocumented people to be "screwed."
I would never say "screw" my sister in law, but that is exactly what she got.

This woman is no pushover. She contacted the states attorney's office. She contacted state congressional members. Through one of her physicians, she found a group who were trying sway legislators that they, the government, should be the ones who cover these losses, since they are the ones that allow these situations to occur due to their failure to uphold the laws they have all sworn to uphold when they were elected.

She also found that she is far from alone in her situation. This happens to a lot of people. This group has met with/presented their complaints before state legislators and also in Washington, DC on two separate occasions.

To no avail.

His bail BTW, was only a few thousand dollars. He was fingerprinted, but unlike TV, it takes time before those prints are run through the system (and even longer to be run through ICE's system). His bail was paid and he was out the door the second the police finished their reports.

When he did not show for his court appearance to answer charges, an effort was made to locate him,(for lesser incidents, authorities generally don't bother) as this was a particularly grievious accident and by then, they knew there were priors. They went to the address of the person who paid his bail, and that was where he had been living. But the court date was weeks after the incident, and they found the apartment where he had been living was vacated a little over two weeks after the incident and had since been rented to someone else.

He continued to live in this city under one of several alias' and has had more brushes with the law. My brother in law learned from someone who knew him that he did finally see the inside of a prison, but was released early and is back out. We don't know what crime he committed, but I think even you would agree that his guy should be sent home.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#438 Jun 25, 2013
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
You said in a previous post that he had more than enough to pay for bail, which should consequently relate to paying the bill.
The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, while housing 25 percent of the worldwide prisoners.
UNICOR or FPI, is a US Government owned corporation that uses penal labor to produce goods and services for other government owned operations.
Baring in mind that the US has the largest criminal labor base in the world for government production, I think your statement that we don't produce (could be considered a lie) and that we would have to "revamp the entire prison system...," I don't think your words are aware of the reality.
Unicor is more of a federally funded program, designed to teach inmates job skills, safety skills, and participants are thought to have lower rates of recidivism, among other things.

While it is a government owned corporation, by federal mandate, it can only sell products produced to the federal government. It is supposedly self sufficient.

It takes lots of space, equipment, uniforms, safety clothing and gear, government employees to train, government employees to watch the other government employees...and one could argue that at least the labor is free.

But of course, it isn't. It costs between $18,000 and $50,000 a year to house an individual prisoner in the U.S., because our government is so damned efficient.

So how is this going to help victims of uninsured illegal aliens? Let me answer that for you. It's not. This program is already losing money hand over fist.

I'm well aware of reality. You're the one who thinks that every problem has a solution that can solve it by a huge government program, by the government creating programs to create more jobs, by the government re-writing or clarifying a whole slew of laws or even having foreign governments interfere with our laws.

You think a government that can't even estimate, never mind determmine, exactly how many people are here illegally, who they are, what they're doing, where they're living, where they're working, how much they're earning, how much is or isn't being properly taxed, a government who can't find over 7 million people using fake, federally issued identities, can't enforce it's own laws, can't catch millions who are committing welfare fraud (not just illegal aliens), and can't (or won't) control its own borders...is going to be able to devise a system to allow good, law abiding, never took a dime of government money illegal aliens to stay and be awarded with citizenship, but cull out the bad guys and return them to their country of origin?

Who's not aware of realtiy??
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#439 Jun 29, 2013
People should be held accountable for their actions.

On that note,
they should not be punished for the actions of others.

With your target being how law handles coverage and justice in a traffic accident involving someone who does not have document, or someone who otherwise uses "bail" to "slip" away before such judgement comes to pass, I side with you on finding a way to correct this situation.

If there's anything I can do to help bring attention to the effort of improving law, then I'm there for you.

I only request that you do not target everyone that does not have documentation, because many of those people are victims of the same flaws in our system, who have done nothing to you or your family.
Sara

Rockland, ME

#440 Jun 29, 2013
Sam wrote:
People should be held accountable for their actions.
On that note,
they should not be punished for the actions of others.
With your target being how law handles coverage and justice in a traffic accident involving someone who does not have document, or someone who otherwise uses "bail" to "slip" away before such judgement comes to pass, I side with you on finding a way to correct this situation.
If there's anything I can do to help bring attention to the effort of improving law, then I'm there for you.
I only request that you do not target everyone that does not have documentation, because many of those people are victims of the same flaws in our system, who have done nothing to you or your family.
They are depleting resources from my family. To name a few, entitlements, jobs, emergency services such as police, fire and medical services. What part of illegal do you NOT understand?
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#441 Jun 29, 2013
Sara wrote:
<quoted text>They are depleting resources from my family. To name a few, entitlements, jobs, emergency services such as police, fire and medical services. What part of illegal do you NOT understand?
People in another area that are not in the social security system and are just working for friends are not "depleting resources from your family."

You are not "entitled" to take whatever resources you feel like from anybody in the world, especially those people working to provide for the family.

Resources are earned through interaction and effort.

If you haven't "earned" resources that you deem valuable from anyone, then you're an asshole.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#442 Jun 29, 2013
Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
People in another area that are not in the social security system and are just working for friends are not "depleting resources from your family."
You are not "entitled" to take whatever resources you feel like from anybody in the world, especially those people working to provide for the family.
Resources are earned through interaction and effort.
If you haven't "earned" resources that you deem valuable from anyone, then you're an asshole.
Everyone illegally employed is, in fact, taking resources from all who are legally employed and paying federal and state income taxes, because those taxes keep increasing to pay for everything that anyone gets from the "government". The government has no money of their own.

The states with the highest state and local taxes are, without exception, states with high percentiles of illegal aliens. They, too, get the resources they need from those who work legally and pay into the system, and from the employers who pay even more taxes per legal employee than the employee pays themselves.

No one is "entitled" to live and work in this country without paying their fair share, never mind having others pay more to make up the difference.
Chicopee

Danbury, CT

#443 Jun 29, 2013
Sam wrote:
People should be held accountable for their actions.
On that note,
they should not be punished for the actions of others.
With your target being how law handles coverage and justice in a traffic accident involving someone who does not have document, or someone who otherwise uses "bail" to "slip" away before such judgement comes to pass, I side with you on finding a way to correct this situation.
If there's anything I can do to help bring attention to the effort of improving law, then I'm there for you.
I only request that you do not target everyone that does not have documentation, because many of those people are victims of the same flaws in our system, who have done nothing to you or your family.
The solution is very simple and is already established. Anyone charged with a felony (accident due to DUI, then fleeing such an accident) should not get bail once it's discovered that said felon is an illegal alien. By esablished law, he/she should be held for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), who should then hold them for deportation.

But it doesn't happen, for a wide variety of reasons. Our own President and Attorney General announced that they will not enforce these established laws, a clear violation of their sworn oaths when they took office, and to several legal efforts under way currently, grounds for impeachment, as our Constitution clearly dictates.

The state of Connecticut announced just this past week that they will not deport anyone or issue a deportation order for anything less than a serious, violent crime. Another sworn oath disregarded.

Illegal immigrants, who make up a high percentage of our prison populations, should be deported upon completion of their sentences. But, they are merely released with an order to turn themselves in to immigration authorities, which, of course, they don't do.(Except for serious, violent crimes, like murder)

Illegal aliens caught committing identity fraud through SS#s, a federal crime, should, by law, be deported. But they aren't.

If the laws were being properly enforced, you would find many more Americans willing to compromise and find a path to citizenship for those who are here and haven't done anything wrong. Because all those who have done wrong would have been deported.

If the solution included strict enforcement of tax laws and labor laws going forward, as in very high punitive ($$$) fines for illegal employers, and loss of business licenses for repeat offenders, even more Americans would be supportive of a workable solution to this problem.

But we've done government amnesty before and the result was even more illegal immigration. We need to enforce the laws, dry up the ability to work here illegally and do more to clean up welfare fraud, so that those considering a future border jump realize that they can't survive here any longer. And without a million people a year crossing our southern border illegally, border patrols could concentrate on more serious issues at the border (drugs, terrorists) because their resources wouldn't be spread so thin.

You want to help? Then start demanding the same, because that's the only way it can work.
1 post removed
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#445 Jun 30, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone illegally employed is, in fact, taking resources from all who are legally employed and paying federal and state income taxes, because those taxes keep increasing to pay for everything that anyone gets from the "government". The government has no money of their own.
The states with the highest state and local taxes are, without exception, states with high percentiles of illegal aliens. They, too, get the resources they need from those who work legally and pay into the system, and from the employers who pay even more taxes per legal employee than the employee pays themselves.
No one is "entitled" to live and work in this country without paying their fair share, never mind having others pay more to make up the difference.
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.
Sam

Madrid, Spain

#446 Jun 30, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
The solution is very simple and is already established. Anyone charged with a felony (accident due to DUI, then fleeing such an accident) should not get bail once it's discovered that said felon is an illegal alien. By esablished law, he/she should be held for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), who should then hold them for deportation.
But it doesn't happen, for a wide variety of reasons. Our own President and Attorney General announced that they will not enforce these established laws, a clear violation of their sworn oaths when they took office, and to several legal efforts under way currently, grounds for impeachment, as our Constitution clearly dictates.
The state of Connecticut announced just this past week that they will not deport anyone or issue a deportation order for anything less than a serious, violent crime. Another sworn oath disregarded.
Illegal immigrants, who make up a high percentage of our prison populations, should be deported upon completion of their sentences. But, they are merely released with an order to turn themselves in to immigration authorities, which, of course, they don't do.(Except for serious, violent crimes, like murder)
Illegal aliens caught committing identity fraud through SS#s, a federal crime, should, by law, be deported. But they aren't.
If the laws were being properly enforced, you would find many more Americans willing to compromise and find a path to citizenship for those who are here and haven't done anything wrong. Because all those who have done wrong would have been deported.
If the solution included strict enforcement of tax laws and labor laws going forward, as in very high punitive ($$$) fines for illegal employers, and loss of business licenses for repeat offenders, even more Americans would be supportive of a workable solution to this problem.
But we've done government amnesty before and the result was even more illegal immigration. We need to enforce the laws, dry up the ability to work here illegally and do more to clean up welfare fraud, so that those considering a future border jump realize that they can't survive here any longer. And without a million people a year crossing our southern border illegally, border patrols could concentrate on more serious issues at the border (drugs, terrorists) because their resources wouldn't be spread so thin.
You want to help? Then start demanding the same, because that's the only way it can work.
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.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Obama to broaden US effort to combat militants 3 min TEA 1,262
Obama wants an election about the economy, not him 4 min Here Is One 478
Minnesota becomes 12th state to OK gay marriage (May '13) 5 min cpeter1313 1,607
Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) 8 min Here Is One 11,428
GOP types accused of 'thinly-veiled racism' for... 13 min barefoot2626 144
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 13 min John Galt 1,124,807
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 14 min cpeter1313 1,368
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 15 min X -Man- 269,549
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 32 min DanFromSmithville 120,720
Obama approves reservists for Ebola fight, gove... 2 hr barefoot2626 203

US Politics People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE