• Hill: Americans overwhelmingly oppose sanctuary cities,
    133 replies, posted
[QUOTE=archangel125;51856864] Looking for work doesn't seem to fit that bill unless they're using some really fucked up legal definition of 'benefit'. Trading labour for monetary compensation doesn't sound like much of a benefit to me.[/QUOTE] The legal definition of a benefit is "any profit or acquired right or privilege, primarily through a contract". Considering that the job she had was legitimate, she signed a contract with the intention of making money(profit) from that job. In signing the contract, she gave a false SSN, which is a felony. It is not some crazy ex post facto law, it is a clear cut felony that you cannot use a false SSN under [U]any[/U] circumstances. The fact that she had a family here is irrelevant. She is not a legal citizen, she broke the law, and she pays the price.
I really see zero reason why otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants should be deported. What gives you more right to live in the states than someone who just showed up? Its not like they can claim government benefits or anything what with the massive USCIS checks they go through if they don't have an SSN. Whats wrong with saying "yeah go ahead and stay where you are, here's your number and some paperwork" and let them be? Its literally impossible to live off the system and have any quality of life as an illegal. To say its unfair to those who entered legally, so what? Make the whole system easier for everyone to get in and not just say "tough shit I had to pay for it you should to." if the "Law's the law" is your justification for anything without understanding the reason for it existing than you need to do some critical thinking.
[QUOTE=archangel125;51856864]You people amaze me. Why should a Canadian know more about US Federal law than an American? It's ridiculous. Here's a link so all of you no longer have an excuse. [url]https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1011[/url] It explicitly states that one is only guilty of 'fraud' if one uses a fake SSN to apply for benefits. Looking for work doesn't seem to fit that bill unless they're using some really fucked up legal definition of 'benefit'. Trading labour for monetary compensation doesn't sound like much of a benefit to me.[/QUOTE] [URL="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-108.pdf"]Supreme Court rulings[/URL] identify it as fraud if they (the illegal immigrants) knowingly use a social security card that is fraudulent, even without applying for benefits as with the case linked. going by literal law code being ignorant of the context of SCOTUS rulings on other related codes does not display an understanding of american law. there are multiple codes one can (and have) been charged under the creation of a fraudulent SSN card could also be a felony under document fraud. there are multiple crimes occurring here, and fraud is definitely one of them.
[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;51857182] law abiding illegal immigrants .[/QUOTE] how can one simultaneously be law abiding and illegal?
[QUOTE=archangel125;51856431]This exactly. The Republicans don't want to target criminals - they want to target anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant, even if that person is living lawfully. Want an example? Guadalupe Garcia De Rayos, mother of two American citizens, who are teenagers. Lived in the US for eight years, doing whatever menial work she could find, checked in every year with an immigration officer for work authorization, and was deported to mexico along with hundreds of others thanks to Trump's executive order on the 25th of January. She had a criminal record, and was a registered felon. Her only crime? Trying to use a fake social security number to work to feed her family - eight years ago. [t]http://i.imgur.com/99uFliq.jpg[/t] Here is the photo of a protester who tied himself to the wheels of the van carrying her in an attempt to stop the injustice. [B]This is your America. I'm sure some of you must be very proud.[/B][/QUOTE] [QUOTE=archangel125;51856864][B]You people amaze me. Why should a Canadian know more about US Federal law than an American? It's ridiculous.[/B] Here's a link so all of you no longer have an excuse. [URL]https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1011[/URL] It explicitly states that one is only guilty of 'fraud' if one uses a fake SSN to apply for benefits. Looking for work doesn't seem to fit that bill unless they're using some really fucked up legal definition of 'benefit'. Trading labour for monetary compensation doesn't sound like much of a benefit to me.[/QUOTE]God just shut the fuck up, almost every post I see from you always reeks of "condescending prick" Like I get your points but you're always so patronizing about it. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Pascall))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=OneFourth;51857227][URL="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-108.pdf"]Supreme Court rulings[/URL] identify it as fraud if they (the illegal immigrants) knowingly use a social security card that is fraudulent, even without applying for benefits as with the case linked. going by literal law code being ignorant of the context of SCOTUS rulings on other related codes does not display an understanding of american law. there are multiple codes one can (and have) been charged under the creation of a fraudulent SSN card could also be a felony under document fraud. there are multiple crimes occurring here, and fraud is definitely one of them.[/QUOTE] Fair enough. The point I'm making is that equating this particular offense with other offenses, especially with a mind for the context, is absolutely ridiculous. I'm sure that by deporting Guadalupe, immigration officers dealt with a colossal threat to America and her people, right? What a horrible hardened criminal. For fuck's sake, she checked in with an immigration officer every single year for a work visa.
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;51857230]how can one simultaneously be law abiding and illegal?[/QUOTE] undocumented is probably a better word
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51856669]It is fraud. Currently. The law needs to be changed to accomodate this circumstance: Faking a SSN to work, not to claim benefits.[/QUOTE] What exactly do you want, like to make it legal to falsify documents while being an illegal immigrant?
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;51857230]how can one simultaneously be law abiding and illegal?[/QUOTE] reading comprehension
[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;51857182]To say its unfair to those who entered legally, so what? Make the whole system easier for everyone to get in and not just say "tough shit I had to pay for it you should to." [/QUOTE] Regardless of your view on the morality of it, illegal immigration has a real monetary cost associated with it. This line of thinking seems to ignores the very real reasons that the existing laws were put into place. Why do you think we have the existing immigration laws?
[QUOTE=OneFourth;51857355]Regardless of your view on the morality of it, illegal immigration has a real monetary cost associated with it. This line of thinking seems to ignores the very real reasons that the existing laws were put into place. Why do you think we have the existing immigration laws?[/QUOTE] That's why a harm reduction approach to law enforcement is better. Deporting people who aren't hardened criminals *Creates* hardened criminals. Their children and other dependents are usually American citizens. What happens to them when mom and dad are deported to Mexico? They go into the US's shitty foster care system, probably end up as criminals themselves later in life because they've got no opportunities to succeed and live a decent life. Which doesn't even consider the emotional cost of having their parents loaded into trucks and shipped off. This is exactly what Republicans want - to have more minority criminals to justify their self-fulfilling prophecy, in much the same way that Trump's ban on travel from Muslim countries would probably lead to a terror attack on US soil. Then they can say they were right all along and demand more power. Make America White Again. On the other hand, you give the people who are law-abiding and already in the country a path to citizenship or a green card, you turn them into citizens and ensure they become productive members of society, fix the backwards and broken immigration laws, and things suddenly get better. Then you focus your efforts on better border security to prevent MORE illegal immigrants entering the country without a valid refugee claim. Yes, killer, I often come across as condescending because I'm fucking livid all the time at how retarded the world seems to have become in the last year.
Just remember, despite what the public thinks, no law enforcement agency is going to turn them over for some other crime. Unless we're getting paid extra, we're not doing the feds job.
[QUOTE=archangel125;51857370] Yes, killer, I often come across as condescending because I'm fucking livid all the time at how retarded the world seems to have become in the last year.[/QUOTE]The world's always been retarded, the Internet just helps expose one to it a lot more. Just saying that even if you were 100% objectively correct on everything you ever say, people are less likely to agree if you come across as condescending and patronizing, people don't like being talked down to like that. The internet doesn't help with being livid, take a break from it for a week or something, walk around in the woods, smell the fresh air, get away from all this bullshit for a while and help clear your mind of the crap that is the internet, I know I definitely need to too..
[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;51857293]reading comprehension[/QUOTE] don't get sassy at him. he understood your point but you [I]did[/I] basically just say "I don't see why otherwise law abiding criminals..." like i think the fundamental point of disagreement comes from one side thinking you should just be able to walk into a country and make a home and the other side having a fondness for immigration laws. seems silly to keep arguing semantics of it, you guys just disagree at a very fundamental level.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;51856614]Are you guys really trying to compare our awful recreational drug laws, which were pushed for all the wrong reasons, to our immigration laws? You do realize that every country on the planet has an immigration process, right? "Living lawfully" doesn't fly anywhere else so why should it in the US?[/QUOTE] No, I suppose you're right. It [I]is[/I] unfair to compare a recreational activity to desperately trying to escape a hellhole to make a better life for one's family.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51856552]Imagine USA took in 1 Mexican per decade and you are a Mexican trying to get into USA. What do you do? [/QUOTE] Pick another country? I honestly don't understand why people even want to illegally enter the country via a dangerous process that probably costs them more money than if they just legally immigrated to a different country with more open immigration laws.
[QUOTE=Johnny Joe;51857230]how can one simultaneously be law abiding and illegal?[/QUOTE] This is completely circular logic. Of course you can say 100% of illegal immigrants are criminal if you include illegal immigration in their crimes. And 100% of murders in the United States are committed by murderers. That's meaningless information.
Yeah, I just don't consider illegal immigration to be a very serious crime in itself. It doesn't directly victimize anybody, it's not generally done with malice, and the large majority of undocumented immigrants are otherwise productive and peaceful members of society. There's obviously an argument to be made that undocumented immigration can increase economic or social strain, but I think that these problems are, overall, pretty marginal compared to the alternative. A heavyhanded approach to rooting out and punishing valuable groups and people in our society simply because they were born on the wrong side of a shallow river seems to do a lot more harm than good. Focus your efforts on the people who pose an actual threat, not to those who didn't bother dealing with the decades-long bureaucratic nightmare that is our immigration system.
[QUOTE=Killer900;51857479]The world's always been retarded, the Internet just helps expose one to it a lot more. Just saying that even if you were 100% objectively correct on everything you ever say, people are less likely to agree if you come across as condescending and patronizing, people don't like being talked down to like that. The internet doesn't help with being livid, take a break from it for a week or something, walk around in the woods, smell the fresh air, get away from all this bullshit for a while and help clear your mind of the crap that is the internet, I know I definitely need to too..[/QUOTE] Eh, you're right. I need a break. And to relearn how to argue properly. Swear I wasn't this bad two years ago...
Honestly, our immigration system can be fixed in various ways by making it much, much more easy to migrate. We can make immigrants a net benefit to our economy. This academic paper sheds some light on the arguments for and against immigration restrictions, which trickles down to affect illegal immigrants. Its a very interesting (if slightly libertarian in certain aspects) paper that shows that many fears of immigration aren't backed or are contradicted by research. [url]http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/pdfs/whyimmigration.pdf[/url]
"Legality is a poor barometer for morality". Immigrants have a crime rate lower than people living here already. [url]http://www.budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-effects-of-immigration-on-the-united-states-economy[/url] - While some policymakers have blamed immigration for slowing U.S. wage growth since the 1970s, most academic research finds little long run effect on Americans’ wages. - The available evidence suggests that immigration leads to more innovation, a better educated workforce, greater occupational specialization, better matching of skills with jobs, and higher overall economic productivity. - Immigration also has a net positive effect on combined federal, state, and local budgets. But not all taxpayers benefit equally. In regions with large populations of less educated, low-income immigrants, native-born residents bear significant net costs due to immigrants’ use of public services, especially education.
[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;51860077]"Legality is a poor barometer for morality". Immigrants have a crime rate lower than people living here already. [url]http://www.budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-effects-of-immigration-on-the-united-states-economy[/url] - While some policymakers have blamed immigration for slowing U.S. wage growth since the 1970s, most academic research finds little long run effect on Americans’ wages. - The available evidence suggests that immigration leads to more innovation, a better educated workforce, greater occupational specialization, better matching of skills with jobs, and higher overall economic productivity. - Immigration also has a net positive effect on combined federal, state, and local budgets. But not all taxpayers benefit equally. In regions with large populations of less educated, low-income immigrants, native-born residents bear significant net costs due to immigrants’ use of public services, especially education.[/QUOTE] Legal is fine, but is there a study on illegal immigrant crime rates?
[QUOTE=Tudd;51860099]Legal is fine, but is there a study on illegal immigrant crime rates?[/QUOTE] Sure. Starting from here: [url]https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/26/us/trump-illegal-immigrants-crime.html[/url] I found this: [url]http://www.nber.org/papers/w13229.pdf[/url] [quote] immigrants have much lower institutionalization (incarceration) rates than the native born - on the order of one-fifth the rate of natives. ... We examine whether the improvement in immigrants' relative incarceration rates over the last three decades is linked to increased deportation, immigrant self-selection, or deterrence. Our evidence suggests that deportation does not drive the results. Rather, the process of migration selects individuals who either have lower criminal propensities or are more responsive to deterrent effects than the average native. Immigrants who were already in the country reduced their relative institutionalization probability over the decades; and the newly arrived immigrants in the 1980s and 1990s seem to be particularly unlikely to be involved in criminal activity, consistent with increasingly positive selection along this dimension.[/quote] I always assumed this was because they have a much larger incentive to be careful, but apparently that isn't the driving motivation.
Edgy teens. "Fuck the police I'll smoke weed its harmless and the laws are stupid. The feds should leave states where it is legalized alone." Same people. "Well these people are illegals and need to obey the laws of our country. Cities should respect federal law and assist the federal agencies with deporting people who break any sort of law."
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51856634]your immigration laws are awful and pushed for the wrong reasons as well[/QUOTE]??? Can you provide ANY examples of modern American immigration laws that are objectively awful and/or pushed for the wrong reasons?
Milwaukee is a "sanctuary city" and if you come here right now, you will have a hard time figuring out who is here illegally without asking for papers. Most of the crime here is not done by them, its done by US citizens (and good chance that they are under 30, black, and on the north side [53206 is one of the major areas]. Just ends up how the population resides at.). Those that do have some sort of income are spending it here. If they are literally doing nothing wrong at all ([B][U]BESIDES THE WHOLE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT BULLSHIT[/U][/B]), whats the point uprooting them and throwing them across the border?
[QUOTE=Atlascore;51864050]??? Can you provide ANY examples of modern American immigration laws that are objectively awful and/or pushed for the wrong reasons?[/QUOTE] it restricts immigration depending on what work you do or where you are from, with it favoured mostly towards people who are wealthy and/or come from western countries. if you are an investor with a lot of money to throw around it's easy to become a citizen, but if you're a factory worker you're shit out of luck the other retarded restriction is that it makes it hard for seasonal workers to work and live in the USA and move over the border. you'd improve things considerably by allowing more seasonal workers (something like this could work [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracero_program[/url] )
The whole point comes down to what we're going to define as legal immigration. What's the point of having borders at all if we allow people to come in regardless? Do we make it like the old Cuba rule where if you actually make it across the border you're good to go, but if you get caught short you get thrown back in? I understand the moral and legal issues surrounding the issue, but this isn't one of those situations where we can have our cake and eat it to. You either enforce the border and your immigration, or deregulate the border and immigration. You can't do both, so don't say you support stronger borders while allowing for those who are already in to stay because at that point we might as well just make it the Cuba rule ie defacto no real border.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51865066]it restricts immigration depending on what work you do or where you are from, with it favoured mostly towards people who are wealthy and/or come from western countries. if you are an investor with a lot of money to throw around it's easy to become a citizen, but if you're a factory worker you're shit out of luck the other retarded restriction is that it makes it hard for seasonal workers to work and live in the USA and move over the border. you'd improve things considerably by allowing more seasonal workers (something like this could work [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracero_program[/url] )[/QUOTE]Favors people from western countries? Just take a look at our immigration statistics.. the vast majority of immigrants that become permanent residents and naturalized citizens are from Asia and Latin America. Why should we let in factory workers and other low-skilled people? We've already got a surplus, and it's only going to get worse as more factories close and automation starts picking up. We'd just be increasing the number of unemployed and homeless people on the streets.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;51865198]Favors people from western countries? Just take a look at our immigration statistics.. the vast majority of immigrants that become permanent residents and naturalized citizens are from Asia and Latin America.[/quote] that's why i said "wealthy and/or western" nearly half of the immigrants come from western countries, and many of the rest are those who are already wealthy [quote]Why should we let in factory workers and other low-skilled people? We've already got a surplus, and it's only going to get worse as more factories close and automation starts picking up. We'd just be increasing the number of unemployed and homeless people on the streets.[/QUOTE] if there wasn't any work for these people then how come A: a lot of immigrants are employed/seek employment and B: people die crossing the border just to get work? the idea that more people = less jobs is a fallacy btw. any unemployment (or lack therof) is a result of structural changes to the economy. temporary changes are the realm of population expansion and contraction also by making it easier for people to work and live in the USA they can actually integrate into the society more easily by paying their taxes and contributing to the local economies instead of going underground also how would you increase the homeless? won't more people mean a bigger demand for housing and therefore more construction thus stimulating the economy?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.