Illegal Aliens: This just keeps getting more and more militant by the day

[contender6030]

Do you see how you've added pretty much nothing to the conversation here? You've also, again, failed to address objectively why AMERICANS (by which I assume you mean white Americans, or at least non-Latino Americans) becoming a minority is a bad thing.

I MEAN ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS BLACK, WHITE, YELLOW, RED !!!!!! Take off your blinders!!! If we don't start requireing people to become LEGAL citizens (which means stopping illegals) Then this will become the UNunited states of mexico! Get it now????

 

[garyfdl]

Well, now that we've all agreed there is a problem, just what do you think we should do about it?

 

[ccwolff]

The people who committed the vandalism should have been arrested.

Well they say imitation is the highest form of flattery.
Illegals crossing the boarder is how the US got the South West to begin with.

Lets go to the numbers:

Mexico — Population: 106,202,903+20,000,000 illegals = 126,202,903
USA — Population: 300,000,000 - 20,000,000 illegals = 280,000,000

So if every one in Mexico walked in to America the ratio of Americans would still be about 3:1. I think it is safe to say that Americans will not be the minority any time soon.

There I think that we can all calm down.

Unless of course, there is some other critera used to determine who is an American that is not being openly stated...... :narrowseyes:

 

[JuanCarlos]

its out of control. in houston and many other places, police will not inquire into anyones citizenship status, pablo from mexico can cause a wreck, have no license or insurance, and not speak a word of english, the cops wont touch him. its a sanctuary policy. police chief will say "its a federal law, not our jobs to enforce it" well the drug laws are federal too chief, but if a cop sees someone sitting on his porch smoking a joint, hes damn well going to enforce that law. so whats the difference?

Know the difference? With the joint, there is compelling visual evidence that an actual crime is being committed...simply because somebody is Latino, or doesn't speak English, is not compelling evidence that they are here illegally. Additionally, there are plenty of people who speak perfect English, or who are not Latino, who are here illegally. The whole "it's a federal law" thing is bull, but there are still plenty of reasons the police should not be harrassing people over their citizenship status.

If a person is not under arrest, the burden should not be on them to prove their citizenship status...at least, I don't think it should be. I know I don't want to have to prove my citizenship status to an officer on the street, and thus I don't see why Pablo should either. You have a problem that causing a wreck without a license or insurance isn't cause for arrest, change that.

I MEAN ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS BLACK, WHITE, YELLOW, RED !!!!!! Take off your blinders!!! If we don't start requireing people to become LEGAL citizens (which means stopping illegals) Then this will become the UNunited states of mexico! Get it now????

Nope, excessive capitalization, punctuation didn't seem to do the trick, as usual.

Did you notice that what I propose is not to continue allowing unchecked illegal immigration, but rather to vastly expand the number of legal immigrants allowed? I don't think you did.

So, explain to me how allowing enough legal Mexican immigrants to make whites (or even non-Latinos) a minority is objectively a bad thing. Explain (again, objectively) how having our culture meet halfway with the Mexican culture is a bad thing. I have no problem being a minority, provided I still recieve all the same protections from discrimination that minorities recieve now.

EDIT: I don't think anybody here has argued that these guys shouldn't have been arrested...even this wacko-leftist-liberal agrees on that one. Not for desecrating a flag, mind you...but because it wasn't even their flag.

 

[azurefly]

I have yet to see, however, an objective explanation as to why an increased Mexicanization of the US would be a "bad" thing.

Because we don't want it to be "Mexicanized," but they're doing it to us, essentially without our consent, even over our expressed opposition, and they're doing it in violation of our laws!

The population that was already here and was already AMERICAN (regardless of what country their ancestry came from as long as they came legally) has a governing say in the destiny toward which the country as a whole is heading, and those people may not WANT the country to start becoming "Mexicanized."

What's so good about the way Mexico is that we should be welcoming having the U.S. become more like it, anyway? :barf:


-azurefly

 

[contender6030]

Well, now that we've all agreed there is a problem, just what do you think we should do about it?

That's the million dollar question. Besides vote out all the Do nothings that are in office, not much else little ole me can do.

 

[azurefly]

pablo from mexico can cause a wreck, have no license or insurance, and not speak a word of english, the cops wont touch him.

Someone should.
At this point, I don't care if it's extra-legal or not.
Because on the other hand, how can anyone possibly defend constantly looking the other way while these people commit crimes, ignore our laws (everything from coming here illegally to failure to get driver's licenses, register cars, insure their cars...) and cause harm to legitimate Americans' lives or property?


-azurefly

 

[drinks]

JC;
The town was in Kalifornia.
Exactly how do you define someone who is in violation of the law, except as "Criminal"?

 

[azurefly]

The people who committed the vandalism should have been arrested.

"Vandalism"?

In asserting "rights" for people who should not even BE here in the U.S., they committed battery on police officers!

Vandalism?! Where the hell did you get that?!


-azurefly

 

[contender6030]

So, explain to me how allowing enough legal Mexican immigrants to make whites (or even non-Latinos) a minority is objectively a bad thing. Explain (again, objectively) how having our culture meet halfway with the Mexican culture is a bad thing. I have no problem being a minority, provided I still recieve all the same protections from discrimination that minorities recieve now.

If I wanted to be "mexicanized" I'd move to Mexico (and do it legally I might add) Maybe you should.

 

[azurefly]

I think it is safe to say that Americans will not be the minority any time soon.

There I think that we can all calm down.

I think perhaps you don't live in an area of the U.S. where the worst specimens of Mexico come to commit crime in gangs like Mara Salvatrucha, etc.

They don't have to become the majority to be a major problem.


-azurefly

 

[JuanCarlos]

Exactly how do you define someone who is in violation of the law, except as "Criminal"?

You missed my point that, in many cases (such as immigration status) the law is an arbitrary construct. There is no "victim" when somebody immigrates illegally. Also, laws can change. Nowadays your ancesters would have a helluva time getting into the country...were they somehow more "worthy" than the Mexican immigrants of today? Anybody selling alcohol between 1920 and 1933 was a "criminal," yet today it's considered fine. Were they somehow worse people than those selling it today? Interracial marriage was once illegal, so were those that did it before the law was changed bad people, "criminals," and those who practice it today not? Harboring a runaway slave was once illegal, yet after slavery was abolished those that did that were no longer "criminals."

Lasw change, so labelling somebody a "criminal" when they have failed to cause harm or infringe on the rights of others doesn't hold a lot of weight to me.

We have a lot of laws in this country...and this is not necessarily a new thing. Are you sure your ancestors were not guilty of any crime? Because if they were, they could also be labelled as "criminal alien invaders."

They don't have to become the majority to be a major problem.

Same could be said of blacks in many areas. Or poor "ethnic" whites in others. They get a pass because they were here first?

If I wanted to be "mexicanized" I'd move to Mexico (and do it legally I might add) Maybe you should.

See, but I don't want to. However, not wanting to move to Mexico does not imply not wanting to see Mexicans come here. My family got to, why shouldn't theirs?

I don't like your tone, by the way.

 

[ccwolff]

In asserting "rights" for people who should not even BE here in the U.S., they committed battery on police officers!

Sorry I don't buy it for a moment that the cops did "Nothing" and if it is true that they did nothing, then they deserved to have battery commited on them.

I think perhaps you don't live in an area of the U.S. where the worst specimens of Mexico come to commit crime in gangs like Mara Salvatrucha, etc. They don't have to become the majority to be a major problem.

Right on! lets monger that fear.

Mara Salvatrucha Wha..?
So now were not afraid of being in the minority but are afraid of gangs?

Americans form gangs as well.... are we afraid of Americans to the same degree?

 

[contender6030]

However, not wanting to move to Mexico does not imply not wanting to see Mexicans come here. My family got to, why shouldn't theirs?

Noone in this thread has said "close the borders" (although it sure as H3!! wouldn't bother me) If they want to enter the US legally meeting all requirements letem knock themselves out! Laws change for a reason, your family being allowed to enter the US 100 years ago doesn't mean the same criteria they met should still be used today.
BTW what "tone" are YOU getting through the black and white.

 

[tube_ee]

1. Illegal entry into the US isn't even a misdemeanor. It's an infraction. Like speeding. So, if illegal immigrants are "criminals," then so is everyone who's been popped for 70 in a 65. You want to change the definition, fine, but you'll have to change the law first.

2. The problem is more us than it is them. It's the employers. I work for a company that subcontracts to a lot of large builders here in San Diego. Jobsite enforcement does not exist. And it won't, so long as the Building Industry Association gets to keep lining the pockets of politicians, mostly Republicans. Listen to the US Chamber of Commerce's position on employer enforcement. It's basically "We can't be expected to be sure we're following the law, and besides, it's too expensive." Try that the next time you get pulled over.

And it's more than builders and growers. It's fast food chains. It's hotels. It's every rich, white, Republican voter in the 50th Congressional district who sent Brian Bilbray to congress because he was "tough on illegals" while conveniently ignoring the illegal immigrant who was mowing their lawn, and the one who was watching their kids as they drove to the polling station in Rancho Santa Fe. The hippocracy is nauseating. "Stop the illegal invasion!!! But hands off my nanny!!"

3. The dems don't get off easy either. Racial and cultural pressure groups can motivate large numbers of 1st and 2nd generation citizens whose parents came here illegally, or who have relatives who are here illegally, or who see people who look like them and share their culture and values being targeted. Those voters are overwhelmingly Democrats, and their votes matter in places with large Latino populations.

4. Illegal immigrants don't do work that Americans won't do, they work for wages that Americans won't accept. There's a big difference there. Look at average wages in the meat packing industry if you want to see the effect. This is the other pincer of "cheap labor" policy. Send whatever good, high-paying jobs you can overseas, and the ones you can't export, fill with cheap, illegal workers who can't complain and can't vote. Sell your stuff for the same price as before, and pocket the difference.

So, what can be done when the two controlling members of our two-party system both benefit from the status quo, and a bunch of folks are getting rich off it at the same time? I don't know. I really don't. I have some ideas that would likely work (think Bill Pardee in an orange jumpsuit) but I couldn't tell you how to get them implemented.

--Shannon

 

[Al Norris]

Judging from the tone currently being used on this thread, I really can't see how it (the thread) will last much longer.

Capisce?

ETA: Shannon, that is the kind of post that makes The Firing Line what it should be. The rest of you should be paying attention!

 

[Doug.38PR]

I hate to dump cold hard fact on your statement, but .....
Germans are the largest single ethnic group to immigrate to the US to date, with about 8 million entering the country. Germans are the most widely distributed ethnic group in the US, with 6 million people of German descent living in CA and PA alone. According to the 2000 census 43 million people claim German descent, more than any other ethnic group.

But don't take my word for it. Here's a map.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...-by-County.jpg

I just looked at that. It is a little misleading to some extent. 1) a lot of those people who have German ancestry are not pure Germans but have integrated with the British Americans who are the larger majority, yet they can still claim German ancestry in their family on the U.S. Census. For example, I have "A" German last name from my mom's side of the family, her mother had a German maiden last name. The family name actually goes back to colonial Virginia as a name. But the names all along the famly tree on my mom's side are all Scotch-Irish (British). My dad's side of the family are all Sotch-Irish and English (British). Does this mean I am a German because I have "a" german ancestor somewhere back there 200 or 300 years back while I have Celtic-British names throughout the rest of my ancestry? Of course not. 2) British Americans are not identified on the Census because the U.S. Census doesn't count them as British but rather they count them as individual portions of the British Isles (Irish, Scots, Scotch Irish, Welch, English) and even most Americans that are of these background don't identify themselves as just Americans because their family background has been here since the beginning. British Americans are the largest ethnic population in America with Germans and Irish (if you don't count Irish as British) below them. See this link for more details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_American

 

[Crosshair]

4. Illegal immigrants don't do work that Americans won't do, they work for wages that Americans won't accept.

That is a fact. The store I work at caught a contractor using illegals to lay tile during our remodel. No wonder the contractor won the bidding. They took a good paying job and gave it to someone who doesn't care how little they make and send it back to Mexico.

 

[garyfdl]

First German is an ethnic designation. British is political, just like American. And if you try and say otherwise, may your Scot-Irish ancestors rise from their graves and play bagpipes while you try and sleep.

You do not have to be 100% German to be of German descent. You only have to have A German ancestor.

So YES. You are of German descent if you have a little as one German ancestor 300 years ago. And if you say otherwise, may your GERMAN ancestor come back and spit in your strudel.

Welch-is a company that makes grape juice and jelly. Welsh is a nationality. Scotch is whiskey. Scot(s) is a nationality.

If you stick to British as an ethnic designation, you should "most probably" use Germanic which means: most southern Scandinavians, major regions of western Poland, northern France, pretty much all of Switzerland and Austria-Hungary. All of whom have more in common regarding ethnicity, with German, than the Welsh-Scots-Irish have w/ British i.e. English. There are more US citizens of Germanic (political designation) than British.

Based on what seems to be a hang-up on ethnic purity, it seems your German ancestor's influence is pretty strong.

 

[concerned]

numbers

How many illegals are there? How many American citizens are there? Didnt anybody ever hear of Citizen's arrest? When exercised the responding Police must honor it. They either cite the subject for court or take him to jail.
If they refuse, you call a sheriff (who could arrest the officer for failure to honor a citizen;s arrest). If the sheriff refuses, you call a state police officer.
If he refuses, you have NO POLICE. Yup !