Libertarians pushing for opening of U.S. borders??
- Thread starter Patrick Graham
- Start date
CarbineCaleb
New member
Trip20: Regarding a murder commited by an illegal immigrant - you say one is enough, they should all be tossed. Trouble with that criterion is, we'd need to toss the legal immigrants as well, and the citizens... the Brits, the Swedes, the Aussies, the Italians, the men, the women, the children, the Jews, the Catholics, the Protestants, the Democrats, the Republicans - any way you slice the society, if you look at enough of them (and it really doesn't take that many), you will certainly find bad folks.
That is why one of the things that I said above is that I would like to see factual evidence, from cited, reliable sources, that really shows whether illegals are worse than legals, and whether they do more harm than good. I am willing to be educated, but I am not real impressed by statements like "Them ******* are scum" (insert whatever broad segment of society you may like).
I am not saying they are better, I am not saying they are worse. All I am saying is, show me the factual proof about the state of the broad situation since we seek a policy to cover the broad situation. You cannot say "That woman down the street shot her husband! We should throw all women out of the country, because they are what's wrong with this country!".
That is why one of the things that I said above is that I would like to see factual evidence, from cited, reliable sources, that really shows whether illegals are worse than legals, and whether they do more harm than good. I am willing to be educated, but I am not real impressed by statements like "Them ******* are scum" (insert whatever broad segment of society you may like).
I am not saying they are better, I am not saying they are worse. All I am saying is, show me the factual proof about the state of the broad situation since we seek a policy to cover the broad situation. You cannot say "That woman down the street shot her husband! We should throw all women out of the country, because they are what's wrong with this country!".
CarbineCaleb, how did we get from tossing illegal immigrants, to tossing citizens and legal immigrants...... and why are you throwing in the "the Brits, the Swedes, the Aussies, the Italians, the men, the women, the children, the Jews, the Catholics, the Protestants, the Democrats, the Republicans".
Legal citizens of this country make up more of the crime statistics than individuals here illegally. But, they're citizens and they don't just get "tossed"... The people here illegally, are the ones that should get tossed.
Usually you make very good sense to me, I enjoy a good number of your posts. But this last one doesn't even seem rational - the way your comparing crime statistics for illegals (whatever they may be) to that of the legal citizens of this country.
This is even more ridiculous IMO:
If your going to argue on the side of the illegal immigrant, you can't start comparing statistics of illegals, to statistics of legal immigrants, and citizens (whether natural or immigrant).
The fact that they're "illegal" is enough of a reason, then compound that by the fact that they're committing crimes and there's just more of a reason to act. You want statistics, I don't have them, and of course I'm sure you can tell by my opinion that I don't need them. My opinion is more based on principal than statistics.
But just to satisfy yourself, look at Southern California, do some Googling. There are so many illegals in that area, so many gangs made up of illegals, etc... that you'll get a good idea.
And for the record, I believe all illegals should be treated the same, whether Mexican, Canadian, Russian, Japanese...etc.
Legal citizens of this country make up more of the crime statistics than individuals here illegally. But, they're citizens and they don't just get "tossed"... The people here illegally, are the ones that should get tossed.
Usually you make very good sense to me, I enjoy a good number of your posts. But this last one doesn't even seem rational - the way your comparing crime statistics for illegals (whatever they may be) to that of the legal citizens of this country.
This is even more ridiculous IMO:
No one is saying anything of the sort. But I submit that you can say, an illegal down the street killed his wife, all illegals should be deported. The operative word here is "ILLEGAL" and I would be saying the same thing whether or not he butchered his wife...CarbineCaleb said:
If your going to argue on the side of the illegal immigrant, you can't start comparing statistics of illegals, to statistics of legal immigrants, and citizens (whether natural or immigrant).
The fact that they're "illegal" is enough of a reason, then compound that by the fact that they're committing crimes and there's just more of a reason to act. You want statistics, I don't have them, and of course I'm sure you can tell by my opinion that I don't need them. My opinion is more based on principal than statistics.
But just to satisfy yourself, look at Southern California, do some Googling. There are so many illegals in that area, so many gangs made up of illegals, etc... that you'll get a good idea.
And for the record, I believe all illegals should be treated the same, whether Mexican, Canadian, Russian, Japanese...etc.
Trip20,
Without taking a position either way on your argument, I'll have to say that your illustration is probably not the best one to use on this board. To wit:
Down this road lies the hysteria of MADD. It is possible to be foursquare against something without giving into the shrill hysteria of the Victim Class.
Without taking a position either way on your argument, I'll have to say that your illustration is probably not the best one to use on this board. To wit:
Down this road lies the hysteria of MADD. It is possible to be foursquare against something without giving into the shrill hysteria of the Victim Class.
Trip20,
You miss my point.
Your argument is based on Asking The Victim.
If you ask the recent victim of a wallet snatch whether pickpockets should be publically executed by flaying them alive without a trial, then your answer will probably be in the affirmative. This is not, however, a sound basis for formulating rational policies.
You miss my point.
Your argument is based on Asking The Victim.
If you ask the recent victim of a wallet snatch whether pickpockets should be publically executed by flaying them alive without a trial, then your answer will probably be in the affirmative. This is not, however, a sound basis for formulating rational policies.
The policy is already in place, they're illegal and should not be here under current law. I'm not necessarily speaking of formulating policy.
But you do make a good point, Caleb and I were trying to persuade one another by taking each side of our point to the absolute extreme. That, is not a good way to discuss rational matters. "One", as I used it is definitely an extreme.
Either way, as I'm missing your point, your missing mine. It wasn't about the victim as much as it was about one is enough because it shouldn't happen in the first place if the law was correctly enforced. I'm guilty of a faulty example, maybe, but my point is intact.
But you do make a good point, Caleb and I were trying to persuade one another by taking each side of our point to the absolute extreme. That, is not a good way to discuss rational matters. "One", as I used it is definitely an extreme.
Either way, as I'm missing your point, your missing mine. It wasn't about the victim as much as it was about one is enough because it shouldn't happen in the first place if the law was correctly enforced. I'm guilty of a faulty example, maybe, but my point is intact.
The very idea that illegal immigration is good in any way is foolish in terms of
crime or economics. I have lived and worked near our southern border for some years the changes have been dramatic, corruption, cost of public services, etc. Recent reports gave a figure of 68 billion for the year 2002 in immigration cost to the American taxpayer. Two groups profit from illegal immigration, the wealthy on this side and the wealthy in Mexico.
How anyone can think or consider 10 million plus people coming here illegal and most with less then an 8th grade education good for America is beyond me. It is simply about numbers, how can we continue to provide funding all over the world plus take in large numbers here while at the same time export manufacturing jobs to the third world is a puzzling thought. America, I have read now takes in more people then all other countries combined, how many ways can you say goodbye to quality of life and our middleclass.
Controlled, legal immigration, no debate, common sense.
crime or economics. I have lived and worked near our southern border for some years the changes have been dramatic, corruption, cost of public services, etc. Recent reports gave a figure of 68 billion for the year 2002 in immigration cost to the American taxpayer. Two groups profit from illegal immigration, the wealthy on this side and the wealthy in Mexico.
How anyone can think or consider 10 million plus people coming here illegal and most with less then an 8th grade education good for America is beyond me. It is simply about numbers, how can we continue to provide funding all over the world plus take in large numbers here while at the same time export manufacturing jobs to the third world is a puzzling thought. America, I have read now takes in more people then all other countries combined, how many ways can you say goodbye to quality of life and our middleclass.
Controlled, legal immigration, no debate, common sense.
Fred Hansen
New member
Correct. The original post has been edited. My brain said 1995, my disloyal fingers typed 2005. I'm a victim.
I'd like my .gov check now please.
glock glockler
New member
Tamara,
Perhaps you'd like to address some of my points, like if an illegal is taking one of those low paying jobs Americans don't want for 20k/yr but he is using up 70k of govt services, he is a benefit to the US economy how exactly?
Ane do you doubt that illegals do vote, and often vote for more doles for illegals? One of the reasons you won't see a state like CA crack down ultra hard on illegal voting is because illegals are such a powerful voting block.
"Lets say the number is one. One gun crime. Now, ask that one family who fell victim to this one gun crime if gun ownership is good or bad for the country."
Down this road lies the hysteria of MADD. It is possible to be foursquare against something without giving into the shrill hysteria of the Victim Class.
Tamara, I have actually seen you use the "one is too many" arguement in regards to people getting shot because of clerical errors on drug warrants.
Perhaps you'd like to address some of my points, like if an illegal is taking one of those low paying jobs Americans don't want for 20k/yr but he is using up 70k of govt services, he is a benefit to the US economy how exactly?
Ane do you doubt that illegals do vote, and often vote for more doles for illegals? One of the reasons you won't see a state like CA crack down ultra hard on illegal voting is because illegals are such a powerful voting block.
"Lets say the number is one. One gun crime. Now, ask that one family who fell victim to this one gun crime if gun ownership is good or bad for the country."
Down this road lies the hysteria of MADD. It is possible to be foursquare against something without giving into the shrill hysteria of the Victim Class.
Tamara, I have actually seen you use the "one is too many" arguement in regards to people getting shot because of clerical errors on drug warrants.
Thunder on the Border--
various FR links & stories | 04-08-05 | the heavy equipment guy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1380062/posts
various FR links & stories | 04-08-05 | the heavy equipment guy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1380062/posts
glock glockler,
I addressed that point. If you leave 70k of strawberry jam-covered bennies lying on the floor, it's gonna attract roaches, and only a complete naif would act surprised when it did.
BTW, would the paper-hat-and-nametag wearer be of more benefit to the economy if he hoovered those bennies under the name "Smith" instead of "Gonzales"?
*Sigh*
I'll type slower this time, and try to enunciate:
"Your argument is based on Asking The Victim.
If you ask the recent victim of a wallet snatch whether pickpockets should be publically executed by flaying them alive without a trial, then your answer will probably be in the affirmative. This is not, however, a sound basis for formulating rational policies."
I didn't say anything about one being too many, not enough, or just right.
I addressed that point. If you leave 70k of strawberry jam-covered bennies lying on the floor, it's gonna attract roaches, and only a complete naif would act surprised when it did.
BTW, would the paper-hat-and-nametag wearer be of more benefit to the economy if he hoovered those bennies under the name "Smith" instead of "Gonzales"?
*Sigh*
I'll type slower this time, and try to enunciate:
"Your argument is based on Asking The Victim.
If you ask the recent victim of a wallet snatch whether pickpockets should be publically executed by flaying them alive without a trial, then your answer will probably be in the affirmative. This is not, however, a sound basis for formulating rational policies."
I didn't say anything about one being too many, not enough, or just right.
Fred Hansen
New member
No. Which is why we need to clean up those "70k of strawberry jam-covered bennies " so "Smith" will go to work for once, and "Gonzales" won't bother risking his life to invade our country.
well what about the other illegal immigrants, the ones from other countries than mexico? are they allowed to be here also? by them coming into our country it just proves that they feel they can get away with anything. allowing any person to break a law in our country is wrong. illegal alien or not. if others see that we are doing nothing to control all the borders, then we will be telling the world that we cant control ourselves, so we should not be a governing voice in the world at any level. by us taking action on a world level in many ideals (Iraq, N Korea, Bosnia, Serbia, Somalia, just to name a few), then we are saying that we don't care how bad we are, you can't be bad either. a crime is a crime, no matter how small or big it is. we need to start policing ourselves as well as other countries.
Fred Hansen
New member
One of those questions that answers itself, given the tenor of the thread so far.
glock glockler
New member
I addressed that point. If you leave 70k of strawberry jam-covered bennies lying on the floor, it's gonna attract roaches, and only a complete naif would act surprised when it did.
No, you didnt address it, the problem with that approach is that it takes a helluva lot longer to clean up the mess that it does for more illegals to come in and jump on a dole. Consider that many localities are raising local property taxes through the roof to pay for the schooling of illegal alien children, which by federal law cannot be denied, now I'd really like to know how fast you think one of the oldest and most established socialist programs in the country is going to be dismantled quicker than illegals vote to increase it.
Roaches come in through the open door quicker than your ability to clean the mess, the "just get rid of the doles" idea is a simplistic non-solution and will ensure failure.
BTW, would the paper-hat-and-nametag wearer be of more benefit to the economy if he hoovered those bennies under the name "Smith" instead of "Gonzales"?
The name doesnt matter as far as dolers go, but we are going to unfortunately have a certain number of Smith dolers here already, the question is why we will apparently be better off by inviting more dolers here, regardless of name. X dolers (domestic) + Y dolers (imported) is a lot more than X.
*Sigh*
I'll type slower this time, and try to enunciate:
"Your argument is based on Asking The Victim.
If you ask the recent victim of a wallet snatch whether pickpockets should be publically executed by flaying them alive without a trial, then your answer will probably be in the affirmative. This is not, however, a sound basis for formulating rational policies."
I didn't say anything about one being too many, not enough, or just right.
Type as fast as you want.
My point was that his point was actually valid. People can generally deal with a tragedy better if it's a freak occurance of life as opposed to stupid govt policy. An innocent accident of mistaken identity leading to a family member's death is far more palatable than a family member being murdered in the name of a corrupt govt.
We don't HAVE to have our gates wide open for anyone to waltz through, so when a criminal or terrorist commits violence on Americans it's not just a byproduct of living free like an accident occuring because of the lack of total gun control. You can also look at the cost/benefit ratio to gun control v. the ratio to an open gate policy and you can easily see a difference.
No, you didnt address it, the problem with that approach is that it takes a helluva lot longer to clean up the mess that it does for more illegals to come in and jump on a dole. Consider that many localities are raising local property taxes through the roof to pay for the schooling of illegal alien children, which by federal law cannot be denied, now I'd really like to know how fast you think one of the oldest and most established socialist programs in the country is going to be dismantled quicker than illegals vote to increase it.
Roaches come in through the open door quicker than your ability to clean the mess, the "just get rid of the doles" idea is a simplistic non-solution and will ensure failure.
BTW, would the paper-hat-and-nametag wearer be of more benefit to the economy if he hoovered those bennies under the name "Smith" instead of "Gonzales"?
The name doesnt matter as far as dolers go, but we are going to unfortunately have a certain number of Smith dolers here already, the question is why we will apparently be better off by inviting more dolers here, regardless of name. X dolers (domestic) + Y dolers (imported) is a lot more than X.
*Sigh*
I'll type slower this time, and try to enunciate:
"Your argument is based on Asking The Victim.
If you ask the recent victim of a wallet snatch whether pickpockets should be publically executed by flaying them alive without a trial, then your answer will probably be in the affirmative. This is not, however, a sound basis for formulating rational policies."
I didn't say anything about one being too many, not enough, or just right.
Type as fast as you want.
My point was that his point was actually valid. People can generally deal with a tragedy better if it's a freak occurance of life as opposed to stupid govt policy. An innocent accident of mistaken identity leading to a family member's death is far more palatable than a family member being murdered in the name of a corrupt govt.
We don't HAVE to have our gates wide open for anyone to waltz through, so when a criminal or terrorist commits violence on Americans it's not just a byproduct of living free like an accident occuring because of the lack of total gun control. You can also look at the cost/benefit ratio to gun control v. the ratio to an open gate policy and you can easily see a difference.
MicroBalrog
New member
Didn't some forms of free government [local-government] schools exist already in the 18th and early 19th century?
MicroBalrog
New member
So it's fallacy to say that free public schooling is a Menace To The Republic [tm], it's been around for a long while without doing any such thing.