OT/Immigration

Page 1 of 3  
I keep hearing that our immigration laws are broken, but I can't find anyone to tell me what exactly is broken. Outside of our borders being porous, what exactly is broken? We have a set amount of people that can immmigrate each year, besides speeding up the process what is broken? The only problem that I see is the anchor babies that create the broken family and the failure to enforce our existing laws. Am I missing something? My parents immigrated from Canada with the help of my sister and took less than a year, where's the problem. Other countries have much harsher immigration laws and I don't hear anyone saying that theirs are broken. Mexico has much harsher laws than us, but no one is saying its broken. Go to Mexico illegally and your ass willl be in jail for a long time as it would be in many countries. What is BROKEN?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ChairMan wrote:

Can you say ENFORCEMENT??? I have nothing against those who would like to live in this country, but I do for those who feel they do not need to obey the law. Like you said, try to do what they did in another country, and you will land in a cell.
Allowing people to enter the country illegally and stay is like having someone break into your home and expect you to set up a bedroom for them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The laws are fine, it is just as others say, there in no enforcement of the laws. It is not only Obama, but many before him. Not sure about what Obama has done, but if we can give them Social security numbers and get them on the tax books where we get tax out of their checks I am all for it.
I would really like to see all the illegals deported , but as that does not seem to be hapning, make them citizens and get the tax out of them like everyone else.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/22/2014 03:41 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote: X <snip> >

Problem certainly did not start with Obama.
I like the suggestion however, of making them citizens and paying tax like everyone else.
I am not saying I am in favor of breaking the laws...just saying though...the Mexicans are coming here to make a better life for themselves ...NOT to blow things up like /some/ people I've heard of...so I can't say I can blame them much.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/22/2014 5:08 PM, philo wrote:

I'm not pleased with elected reps who make a point to give tax payer dollars to folks. Even to the point of recruiting, advertising, and so on to get more welfare leeches signed up.
- . Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 5:09:04 PM UTC-5, philo  wrote:

the

Obama

on

not

How about George Soros or some other kook lib starts 747 service from Haiti, India, Sudan.... Bring them all here, they just want a better life. If people can walk across the southern border from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, why not just let everyone and anyone in? And BTW, I don't think the idea of some lib organization doing that is far fetched either. We're about one step away.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/22/2014 6:57 PM, trader_4 wrote:

Rush Limbaugh had some fun with that a couple decade ago in, was it San Francisco? Bussed in a bunch of homeless.
- . Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/23/2014 7:58 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:

What we need is a 1-for-1 exchange program. We, the US taxpayers, trade a willing-to-work immigrant for a lazy obese entitled disability fraudster.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/22/14, 5:08 PM, philo wrote:

Are you talking about me? I don't know what they're saying behind my back, but I have to blow things to avoid riding on flat tires. :)
Those who fund American politicians are ambivalent about immigration. The economy needs the work ethic of uneducated immigrants because Americans won't do some jobs well regardless of wages. If employers can't get immigrants legally, they'll hire them illegally.
The first step is to abolish college. Ben Franklin said it's unAmerican. He said the average freshman is a blockhead, and the average graduate is a blockhead who has learned to close a door elegantly.
The second step is to abolish compulsory education, recognizing the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Kids are forced to sit on their ass 12 years, and all that counts is figuring out what to say to please the authorities, whether or not the kid agrees or understands. Who can expect graduates to have a work ethic?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The real problem as I see it is that this is about the 4th or 5th time that a US President has declared a general amnisty to illegal aliens.
Lots of LAW ABIDING immigrants wait their turn to come to the USA only to be told that the US is declaring a general amnisty for illegal immigrants, and therefore they won't be accepting any more legal immigrants this year or next.
You can see how that encourages law abiding legal immigrants to go the illegal route. They just get across the border on a visitor's permit (or whatever it's called) and then don't go back. Or, they wait until they're across the border to start a family. Each kid born in the USA is an American citizen and an anchor that will keep them in the USA.
What the USA needs to do is send illegals back where they came from and only allow LEGAL immigration to the USA. As it stands now, you guys are sending entirely the wrong message by declaring a general amnisty every couple of years to everyone that's in your country illegally. It rewards those that get into your country illegally and infuriates those who are playing by the rules and waiting their turn.
--
nestork


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/22/2014 4:45 PM, nestork wrote:

At least a few people in the USA share this view. Sadly, none of us who share this view hold elected office, and can do much about the situation.
A few groups have formed such as Ranch Rescue and Border Rescue. They have tried to assist the legal border agents. With varying level of success.
With the present lack of enforcement, I'm surprised there isn't more 3 S behavior. But then, the third S prevents news from getting out.
- . Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 5:17:10 PM UTC-5, nestork wrote:

Who were the other 3 or 4 presidents who declared general amnesties for illegal aliens?

AFAIK, that isn't happening. I haven't heard anyone saying that the number of legal immigrants is being affected one way or the other.

Yes, another amnesty just encourages more of that. Just like when Emperor Obama decreed when he was running for his second term that he was no longer going to deport certain children. We now have train loads, 120K in less than a year, of new kids flooding across the borders from Central America. Expect similar to come from this latest fiasco. I can see the trafficers passing out flyers right now. For $3K I can take you to America and if you have a kid or get pregnant there, they will no longer deport you. Obama said so.

We haven't been doing it every few years. The last amnesty was back in the 80s and that wasn't declared by a president, which is illegal. It was passed by Congress and signed into law by Reagan, ie the constitutional process was followed. And part of that was that it was a one time thing, the border security was to be increased to effectively stop illegals from entering. That of course, never happened.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/22/2014 4:45 PM, nestork wrote:

US immigration law written about 1895 allowed immigration through certain areas. Those allowed in could not be ill, mentally retarded, someone convicted of a crime or incapable of work. Immigration agents would actually go on the ships and not even let those rejected disembark. The shipping company was responsible for taking them back.
Book I was reading about this was written at the time in England and author admired US system and did not like other European nations dropping their trash on them and giving them low paid workers that took citizens jobs. Today the UK is pissed off that EC people from poorer areas are coming in to get a better "dole".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

are you in favor of 6 million more people paying into social security without the ability to receive any of those benefits?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

this is actually what I favor. an immediate roundup of all illegals, even to the point of paying a bounty for their capture, and then just dump them back over the border. I mean the Mexican Government wouldn't interfere and think of all the new jobs in farm, hotels, nanny, construction, landscaping, etc, not to mention the sudden availability of millions of housing units. although the landlords won't be happy about it, but they could sell all the belongings and cars left behind.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

amazing that Franklin knew you
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

are you kidding? it would definitely be some "businessman" with republican leanings who would want to make all the money they could get for such a service
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, November 23, 2014 12:12:40 AM UTC-5, Malcom Mal Reynolds wrote:

t of

hat

hem on

does

like


ife.

ink

're


Malcolm, I see you're back. You've been missing since the election. Must be still licking those wounds, eh? What a total debacle for you libs. The fortune tellers in the media were predicting that the Repbulicans had about a 70% chance of taking the 6 seats they needed for control of the Senate. We got 8 so far and we're about to get #9. Cleaned up on the sta te level too, legislators, governors, including Scott Walker, who won handily, despite you libs doing everything possible to try to defeat him.
And with Obama's latest stunt, he's screwed himself and the country for his last two years. He's now so poisoned the environment with the new Congress that nothing much will get done. Except some obvious things, like the Keystone pipeline that's going to get rammed down his throat in January. He'll finally have to actually make a decision. Any bets? And if he vetoes it, there's a very good chance Congress will have the votes to override it, handing him another major defeat. They just had 59 votes in favor of it in the Senate, before Republicans take control. Even many Democrats are looking at the carnage that Obama has brought them and have had enough. But we still have two more years of this, my oh my.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

the real interesting aspect of this is that when the SouthWest became a part of the United States, any Mexicans living there automatically became citizens as did their offspring, and their offspring, and their offspring, etc. Imagine that those Mexicans in the SouthWest decided for whatever reason to emigrate back to what was left of Mexico but never gave up their citizenship, imagine that some of their offspring several generations removed didn't actually know that or that they did and they aren't illegal at all and when they come back they show documentation that their great-great-great grandpappy and grandmammy lived on a ranch in Texas at the time
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The main thing that is broken - other than non-enforcement - is the anchor baby thing.
Why in the world should the child of an alien be given American citizenship just because its mother happened to be in the country at the time? Far better to award citizenship only to those whose mothers have American citizenship, either by birth or naturalization. Note that papa's citizenship doesn't count.
All we need is to change the law. What, change long standing precedent? Sure, why not...for most of the time the US has existed, only caucasions could become naturalized Americans and they changed that.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.