Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 4 votes

Trump considering deploying National Guard for mass deportations


  • Please log in to reply
258 replies to this topic

#241 alienrace

alienrace

    Don't run - we are your friends!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28,258 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:26 PM

Honestly guys, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

And yet you still keep missing.  Many Latinos are "white" Caucasians.  Now run along and try and tell someone with a fifth grade education that people mistrust Muslims because of their race.


The time has come for a centrist political party. Rational Americans are not comfortable with extreme views to the left or to the right, and our current parties have no intentions of ever abandoning their ever increasing distance from sane, reasonable thinking.

#242 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90,791 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:48 PM

And yet you still keep missing. Many Latinos are "white" Caucasians. Now run along and try and tell someone with a fifth grade education that people mistrust Muslims because of their race.


Trump supporter views:

"An unauthorized immigrant from France fared better than a legal immigrant from Mexico, but an unauthorized immigrant from Mexico fared better than a legal immigrant from Somalia."

http://www.vox.com/2...ist-deplorables

Do you live in a cave by any chance?

Edited by hst2, Yesterday, 05:52 PM.

"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#243 veritas

veritas

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44,989 posts

Posted Yesterday, 06:08 PM

It is illegal for people who have grown up here but lack legal status to be here. You want to deport them because it is illegal. It was illegal to protect a runaway slave.

It was illegal for a runaway slave to be free in a free state. He had to be returned.

To answer your question, both of these laws should have been ignored.

Would you then not apply the same logic and punish them because it was illegal to do so? If not, please explain why.

The only people I've specified that absolutely have to be deported are illegal alien felons.  Now, as to your example, would we have both the legal and moral right to deport them?  Yes, we would.  If we do not then we must admit that any effort to keep out illegal aliens and/or deal with those here is, de-facto, an immoral proposition.  Is that what you claim?  The bottom line is that the law is the law and if we do not want to enforce the law, then the law should go.  

 

Your slavery comparison is a specious one, not for the reason that the Fugitive Slave Law lacked the legal status necessary to force adherence to it but because returning a person to servitude is hardly the same as returning them to their country of origin, as long as they are not subject to political or religious persecution.


Ne Nuntium Necare

#244 cprenegade

cprenegade

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,561 posts

Posted Yesterday, 07:50 PM

It's a bogus issue, made up to create scapegoats for those who feel ripped off or left behind by free market capitalism. They imagine these foreigners are getting more out of it than they are. And they are so much more optimistic than they are! That will never do.

During the election, the mass deportations of tens of millions of people was considered by many, even those who supported Trump, to be hyperbole. The image of armed officers dragging family members out of their homes and shipping them to countries they scarcely know would be inhumane and un-American. Even Trump hedged around it.

He hedges around it now, never being entirely clear about his motives and goals, tyrants like to keep the people guessing. The Congress, meanwhile, appears to be living in the shadows.

The saddest part of both the ban and the deportations is neither does anything to help the country, and are much more likely to hurt us. Other than using these policies to show what a strong leader he is by being needlessly cruel to the weakest segments of society, and the titillation this gives his white nationalists supporters, one would be hard pressed to find a legitimate purpose for either policy.

As pointed out earlier, our history of deportations and bans are pretty much always looked back upon with shame. These will be no exception.

Needless to say, or at least it should be, reality contradicts your assertion that the 11 million people who are here illegally could simply fill out some paperwork and be here legally. But people in your position have to cling to falsehoods in order to justify this terribly inhumane policy.


The issue is not bogus, it's about being a nation with rules and laws and expecting those rules and laws to be obeyed. We have plenty of them, look it up. Do we get to decide which ones we will follow, and which we will not. Let me know because their are a few I would love to break without fear of consequences. You continue to cloud the issue by making it about racism, or scapegoating when the issue is simply following the rules that a nation sets down.

And I never asserted that all 11 million people here illegally could somehow magically be here simply by filling out a form. You are intentionally twisting my words to fit your agenda. What I said was there are legal avenues to come here, opposing your view that we have shut them off. Can everyone who wants to be here get here immediately? No. Some will have to wait and apply again. But roughly 1 million per year are coming in, via our legal immigration policy. An overwhelming majority of people in the US want a clear, comprehensive immigration policy. And they want the people wishing to come here to follow it, or suffer the consequences. Even the people who have legally immigrated here agree that those not following the rules deserve to be penalized for it.
You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice.
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill;
I will choose a path that's clear
I will choose freewill.

#245 karlydee2

karlydee2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,021 posts

Posted Yesterday, 07:53 PM

The only people I've specified that absolutely have to be deported are illegal alien felons.  

 

 

Which is an astoundingly small fraction of the 12-20 Million  Undocumented aliens that are currently in country.

 

Being unlawfully present is NOT a felony (unless you were deported previously)



#246 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90,791 posts

Posted Yesterday, 08:42 PM

The only people I've specified that absolutely have to be deported are illegal alien felons. Now, as to your example, would we have both the legal and moral right to deport them? Yes, we would. If we do not then we must admit that any effort to keep out illegal aliens and/or deal with those here is, de-facto, an immoral proposition. Is that what you claim? The bottom line is that the law is the law and if we do not want to enforce the law, then the law should go.

Your slavery comparison is a specious one, not for the reason that the Fugitive Slave Law lacked the legal status necessary to force adherence to it but because returning a person to servitude is hardly the same as returning them to their country of origin, as long as they are not subject to political or religious persecution.


You are contradicting your own assertion that laws must be enforced just because they are laws when you claim that you insist that only felonious undocumented immigrants must be deported.

So I don't know what your argument is anymore. You seem to want it both ways.

Mindlessly following laws is not a moral imperative. The laws that permitted slavery and the laws that punished runaway slaves and those who helped them are certainly examples of that. So are laws that would tear families and communities apart with deportations of those who have been here for decades.

Edited by hst2, Yesterday, 08:43 PM.

"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#247 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90,791 posts

Posted Yesterday, 08:50 PM

The issue is not bogus, it's about being a nation with rules and laws and expecting those rules and laws to be obeyed. We have plenty of them, look it up. Do we get to decide which ones we will follow, and which we will not. Let me know because their are a few I would love to break without fear of consequences. You continue to cloud the issue by making it about racism, or scapegoating when the issue is simply following the rules that a nation sets down.And I never asserted that all 11 million people here illegally could somehow magically be here simply by filling out a form. You are intentionally twisting my words to fit your agenda. What I said was there are legal avenues to come here, opposing your view that we have shut them off. Can everyone who wants to be here get here immediately? No. Some will have to wait and apply again. But roughly 1 million per year are coming in, via our legal immigration policy. An overwhelming majority of people in the US want a clear, comprehensive immigration policy. And they want the people wishing to come here to follow it, or suffer the consequences. Even the people who have legally immigrated here agree that those not following the rules deserve to be penalized for it.


Laws should have a purpose. A society built on mindlessly following laws is a sorry one indeed.

You refer to people coming here. The discussion is really around people who are already here. There is a bi-partisan bill, passed by rather Senate, sitting in Ryan's office that would deal with these people on a humane way. With the demagogic Trump wiping his base up into a frenzy over thus issue, The House lacks the courage to do the right thing.

There are thousands of laws on the books that are no longer enforced and no one follows. You can look them up.

Look out your car window at the guy passing you on the highway; he's probably breaking the law.

Edited by hst2, Yesterday, 08:50 PM.

"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#248 Twister

Twister

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 498 posts

Posted Today, 06:42 AM

Laws should have a purpose. A society built on mindlessly following laws is a sorry one indeed.

 

Do people in our country illegally have any right to stay in our after committing a felony crime?

 

Simple yes or no.

 

Does any other country in the world allow an illegal alien to stay after a conviction for a felony?



#249 Twister

Twister

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 498 posts

Posted Today, 06:55 AM

The image of armed officers dragging family members out of their homes and shipping them to countries they scarcely know would be inhumane and un-American. Even Trump hedged around it.

 

Bubba embraced it.

 

http://www.msnbc.com...an-gonzalez.jpg



#250 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90,791 posts

Posted Today, 07:27 AM

 

Doesn't mean you have to.


"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#251 Twister

Twister

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 498 posts

Posted Today, 07:30 AM

Doesn't mean you have to.

 

Do people in our country illegally have any right to stay in our after committing a felony crime?

 

Simple yes or no.

 

Does any other country in the world allow an illegal alien to stay after a conviction for a felony?

 

You skipped this post.

 

Waiting for your "yes" or "no" answer for Question 1, and for you to "name a country" in Question 2.



#252 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90,791 posts

Posted Today, 07:31 AM

Do people in our country illegally have any right to stay in our after committing a felony crime?

 

Simple yes or no.

 

Does any other country in the world allow an illegal alien to stay after a conviction for a felony?

 

Yes. If a mother of two American children who is supporting a middle class life, is a contributing member of society, but committed a felony ten years ago by using a fraudulently obtained Social Security number so she could eat and put a roof over her head, and has done her time and done what the government has asked of her, she should absolutely be allowed to stay in this country.

 

When I was 17, I used to use a friend of mine's draft card to get served in bars. "There but for the grace of God go I." right?

 

I don't know if other countries do this, but I hardly take my cues from them.


Edited by hst2, Today, 07:32 AM.

"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#253 Twister

Twister

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 498 posts

Posted Today, 07:40 AM

Do people in our country illegally have any right to stay in our after committing a felony crime?

 

Simple yes or no.

 

Yes.

 

Then there is nothing more to discuss.  You believe illegal aliens who commit felonies while illegally in our country should be allowed to stay in our country instead of being deported back to their own homeland.  Those of us who believe in the rule of law think differently.

 

You should work on changing the laws you don't like, because your belief failed miserably.  She's been deported, rightfully and lawfully, and would have been booted regardless of who was president.  The only difference is you would have never posted about it had it happened under Obama.



#254 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90,791 posts

Posted Today, 07:53 AM

Then there is nothing more to discuss.  You believe illegal aliens who commit felonies while illegally in our country should be allowed to stay in our country instead of being deported back to their own homeland.  Those of us who believe in the rule of law think differently.

 

You should work on changing the laws you don't like, because your belief failed miserably.  She's been deported, rightfully and lawfully, and would have been booted regardless of who was president.  The only difference is you would have never posted about it had it happened under Obama.

 

Actually, under Obama ICE saw fit to allow this woman to stay in the country for 9 years.

 

 

Trump has now deported her. What's the point? To be nasty and small?  How is the public interest served?

 

 

Based on your logic, you would have returned a runaway slave.


"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#255 Papi

Papi

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,835 posts
  • LocationHarford County Maryland

Posted Today, 08:27 AM

Actually, under Obama ICE saw fit to allow this woman to stay in the country for 9 years.

 

 

Trump has now deported her. What's the point? To be nasty and small?  How is the public interest served?

 

 

Based on your logic, you would have returned a runaway slave.

That would have depended on whether one was living in a slave state or a free state. Runaway slaves who made it to a free state in which slavery was not legal were protected by the law of that state, and a resident of a free state who would seek to turn in a runaway slave back to slavery would be breaking the law of that state. A resident of a slave state who sought to protect or hide a runaway slave would have been breaking the law of that state.

 

Historically both situations very likely happened, since there were people living in slave states who opposed slavery on a moral basis (and helped the underground railroad function), and there were people living in free states who approved of the practice and would have been willing to return a runaway slave to his owner. And people who broke the laws of the state they were in were subject to prosecution. It was not until slavery was made illegal by the federal government that a single law would apply to the issue of slavery. 

 

You are arguing the moral issue of letting illegal immigrants who have committed a felony stay in this country as somehow being equal to the moral issue of persons who opposed slavery in places where it was legal and sought to protect and aid runaways. In my opinion that is a specious comparison from the point of view of a willingness to ignore a valid law on the basis of morality. Illegal imigrants who commit a felony have come here illegally and committed a felony of their own free will, something that a slave was denied. Seeking to equate those two situations is simply absurd.



#256 alienrace

alienrace

    Don't run - we are your friends!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28,258 posts

Posted Today, 08:43 AM

Then there is nothing more to discuss. 

 

 

 

 Seeking to equate those two situations is simply absurd.

 

Exactly.  Hst2 has made it clear.  There is no changing his mind, and he's certainly not changing anyone elses.  He lost, the woman has been deported, I'd suggest he simply move on and pick another battle.  This one was a loser(for him) from the start.


The time has come for a centrist political party. Rational Americans are not comfortable with extreme views to the left or to the right, and our current parties have no intentions of ever abandoning their ever increasing distance from sane, reasonable thinking.

#257 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90,791 posts

Posted Today, 08:55 AM

That would have depended on whether one was living in a slave state or a free state. Runaway slaves who made it to a free state in which slavery was not legal were protected by the law of that state, and a resident of a free state who would seek to turn in a runaway slave back to slavery would be breaking the law of that state. A resident of a slave state who sought to protect or hide a runaway slave would have been breaking the law of that state.

 

Historically both situations very likely happened, since there were people living in slave states who opposed slavery on a moral basis (and helped the underground railroad function), and there were people living in free states who approved of the practice and would have been willing to return a runaway slave to his owner. And people who broke the laws of the state they were in were subject to prosecution. It was not until slavery was made illegal by the federal government that a single law would apply to the issue of slavery. 

 

You are arguing the moral issue of letting illegal immigrants who have committed a felony stay in this country as somehow being equal to the moral issue of persons who opposed slavery in places where it was legal and sought to protect and aid runaways. In my opinion that is a specious comparison from the point of view of a willingness to ignore a valid law on the basis of morality. Illegal imigrants who commit a felony have come here illegally and committed a felony of their own free will, something that a slave was denied. Seeking to equate those two situations is simply absurd.

 

You are incorrect with regard to the status of runaway slaves in free states. Everyone was required by law to assist in their return.

 

"The Fugitive Slave Law or Fugitive Slave Act was passed by the United States Congress on September 18, 1850, as part of the Compromise of 1850 between Southern slave-holding interests and Northern Free-Soilers.

This was one of the most controversial elements of the 1850 compromise and heightened Northern fears of a "slave power conspiracy". It required that all escaped slaves were, upon capture, to be returned to their masters and that officials and citizens of free states had to cooperate in this law. Abolitionists nicknamed it the "Bloodhound Law" for the dogs that were used to track down runaway slaves.[1]"

 

https://en.wikipedia...ave_Act_of_1850


"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#258 veritas

veritas

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44,989 posts

Posted Today, 12:25 PM

You are contradicting your own assertion that laws must be enforced just because they are laws when you claim that you insist that only felonious undocumented immigrants must be deported.

So I don't know what your argument is anymore. You seem to want it both ways.

Mindlessly following laws is not a moral imperative. The laws that permitted slavery and the laws that punished runaway slaves and those who helped them are certainly examples of that. So are laws that would tear families and communities apart with deportations of those who have been here for decades.

I said that illegal alien felons need to go.  As for all the other illegals here, we certainly have the legal right to deport them but if we want to make exceptions we can make exceptions.  That doesn't invalidate the idea of having a border and a prescribed legal way to come into the country.


Ne Nuntium Necare

#259 Papi

Papi

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,835 posts
  • LocationHarford County Maryland

Posted Today, 02:11 PM

You are incorrect with regard to the status of runaway slaves in free states. Everyone was required by law to assist in their return.

 

"The Fugitive Slave Law or Fugitive Slave Act was passed by the United States Congress on September 18, 1850, as part of the Compromise of 1850 between Southern slave-holding interests and Northern Free-Soilers.

This was one of the most controversial elements of the 1850 compromise and heightened Northern fears of a "slave power conspiracy". It required that all escaped slaves were, upon capture, to be returned to their masters and that officials and citizens of free states had to cooperate in this law. Abolitionists nicknamed it the "Bloodhound Law" for the dogs that were used to track down runaway slaves.[1]"

 

https://en.wikipedia...ave_Act_of_1850

In reality how many northern (free) states enforced that compromise? But my point remains. Even if people used a moral justification to help runaway slaves remain free, in violation of the law, seeking to equate that moral refusal to follow the law to ignoring illegal immigrant felons and providing them sanctary is absurd. The circumstances were completely different.  


Edited by Papi, Today, 02:12 PM.





4 user(s) are reading this topic

3 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Smokey 1, jdsample, Papi