stopping more than HALF of the illegal immigrants entering the country would be a HUGE accomplishment.. and would GREATLY reduce the problem these people bring.. FURTHER it would greatly reduce the threat of terrorists gaining entry to the country, because they would be left to fly in, and have to pass through security, thus increasing the chance of catching them..
Yes, I agree that stopping more than half of illegal immigrants would be a good thing. I don't like illegal immigrants being here not paying taxes either. I'm not sure if I got that across well enough. What I'm trying to convince you of is the method of reducing the number of illegal immigrants.
That being said, due to the cost of securing the border versus its effectiveness, I don't think it's worth it. If we had a surplus, or even a small debt, I'd say, sure, go for it. But the gross national debt is now over $12 trillion, and
rapidly rising. With a debt like that, it's difficult for me to support costly programs unless I am convinced they are completely necessary and there is no better alternative.
Not to mention, we keep mentioning the southern border. The number of terrorists entering the northern border is
far greater. Even if we reduced the number coming through the southern border, we'd still have the much larger amounts coming through the airports and through the northern border. If you suggest to heavily secure the northern border, well, that would be even more expensive, and probably wouldn't help our relations with Canada.
you want to reward illegal activity just because its easier.. that to me is NOT the proper way to deal with s**t.. court.. police.. lawyers.. etc.. are ALL expensive, and produce VERY time consuming tasks... enforcing ANY law takes TIME AND MONEY.. further.. rewarding these scumbags who slip across the border is a GROSS insult to those who have taken the time and effort to do it properly.. you say sending them back is ineffective and expensive.. in that regard we agree...
I did not say I wanted to reward illegal activity. You once again bend my words and skim over my argument. What I believe to be best would be to make the naturalization process easier for everyone. That way the illegal immigrants that are here can become citizens.
Unless you refer to my idea to give social security cards to illegal immigrants and help them through the naturalization process. Well, this would allow them to pay taxes, and we would not be rewarding them, but just guiding them through the same process everyone else has to do.
I don't see where you're getting these huge legal costs from. Could you elaborate on that? Yes, there is a price on the naturalization process, but it would be offset by helping them immediately pay taxes.
Do you realize how many people it took to actually take control of the planes and fly them into buildings on Sept. 11th.. do you realize that terrorist have NO intention of crossing the border in mass droves.. terrorist operate in isolated cells.. planning what they intend to do... if 20 terrorist crossed the US Mexican border that is 20 too many.. to argue that the amount of potential terrorist crossing the border is LOW, you have obviously not been keeping up with the media.. it took about 20 guys to commit the acts on sept 11th.. 20.. not a thousand.. not a million.. not a hundred.. not even fifty... to find ONE item that indicates these people may be crossing into our nation there should be enough to put the entire nation on high alert..because thats all it takes... ONE..
Yes, I do realize that it takes only small amounts of terrorists to do large things. But that does not mean that large numbers of terrorists will do lots of large things.
With a few hundred (at the
maximum) terrorists coming through the southern border, and many more coming in via the other passageways, we have not had an incident as grim as September, 11th. I'm not saying that something similar or something worse can not happen again, I'm just saying it hasn't. What I am trying to convey is that every 20 terrorists does not equal a September, 11th.
Yes, any one terrorist can commit great acts of terror. That does not mean they all do.
Also, how are you going to stop one terrorist from entering the country? No matter how much you secure the borders, the airports, the ports, and the coastlines, terrorists will
always get in. That is not to say that we shouldn't try to prevent terrorists from entering the country, because we should.
What I am trying to say is that your argument that there are a relatively small number of terrorists entering the southern border, so we should heavily secure the southern border, is moot. Many more enter from the other passageways, so we should focus more on securing those if you're trying to stop terrorists.
...a typical piece of .308 ammunition costs a little under a dollar.. a nice thick long length of rope and a sturdy oak tree would cost under $50.. what we need to do is get SERIOUS about these assholes invading our country and address it properly.. with REAL solutions that ELIMINATE the problem... and yeah.. I am %100 serious... death with FAIR warning.. you know why? they have been giving EVERY chance in the world to do it right.. but no.. they sneak into our country.. rape our resources.. hurt our people.. f**k THEM.. they are f**king scumbag pieces of s**t.. and that is EXACTLY what they deserve..
They have not had fair warning that we would kill them. Nobody has told them that they would be killed for entering the country illegally.
Setting aside that I think death is a far too radical punishment,
especially without a trial, it is in fact unconstitutional to suddenly lay the death punishment on them. That is called a
ex post facto law, and is unconstitutional for the federal government by Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution and for the states by Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution. Even if you suggest to amend the Constitution to allow this, there is
no way you could ever garner enough support to change such a fundamental part of our legal system.
Now that leaves all the future illegal immigrants. To make a law which allowed one to shoot an illegal immigrant without a trial would
also be unconstitutional. Every person, before he or she is convicted of a crime,
must have a trial,
even if he or she is not a citizen. Also, they may not be tried in military tribunals as long as civilian courts are available. Check
ex parte Milligan on that one.
Killing them on the spot would also be in violation of the Declaration of Non-Nationals (1985). You may want to read the document. You can find it
here. In case you are too lazy or busy, here is the most relevant excerpt. It is from Article 5, Section 1.
"
1. Aliens shall enjoy, in accordance with domestic law and subject to the relevant international obligation of the State in which they are present, in particular the following rights:
(a) The right to life and security of person; no alien shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention; no alien shall be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established by law;"
The point that I am trying to make is that it doesn't matter if you think killing all the illegal immigrants is best for the country. It is so incredibly illegal. Even if you think that's what we
should do, it does not matter unless we
can do it. And so, your argument is invalid.
Let's save some time here. Even if you amend your argument to say that we should put them all through trials (with the death sentence being the result), both the ones that are here and the ones coming in, it still doesn't work. As I said before, you can't do that to the ones that are already here. As for the ones coming in, it seems
very likely that any law saying that their punishment must be the death sentence would be ruled unconstitutional. First of all, the death penalty has been left for the states to decide upon. Forcing them all to adopt the death penalty just doesn't work. Secondly, even if that went through, it is likely that a majority of the Supreme Court would deem that cruel and unusual punishment. Even if somehow this became a legal reality, that would be a huge, time consuming, and expensive legal burden to add to the court system.
I understand what you are saying. They cant help it that they are born in another country. However, the problem with them just coming here and working is this.....
1. When they work, they take jobs away from Americans. I dont care how you look at it. If someone wants to make the argument that they do jobs Americans wouldnt do, that may be true. However, if Americans wouldnt do the job, and there were no illegal immigrants to do it, the job must be completed right? Machines come in. There are people who need to research and develop the machines, people needed to operate the machines, and people needed to repair these machines. Those are all jobs that Americans WOULD do, and those are all jobs that WOULD be created if there werent illegal immigrants here.
2. When these illegal immigrants work here, they dont pay taxes, yet they take our resources and government funding. That affects Americans in two ways. One way is that since these illegal immigrants are taking up resources and government funding, there is less for LEGAL Americans who DO deserve to dip into these resources and that funding. The second way it affects Americans is since there are more people taking resources and funding, the money has to come from somewhere. Know where its coming from? My pocket, and every other LEGAL Americans pocket.
3. They are taking the money they earn and they are sending almost all of it back to Mexico!! That means that they arent even putting any money back into our economy to help lift it back up from the garbage dump it has become.
I know you weren't taking to me, but I just want to say I agree with these points. I too would like to decrease the number of illegal immigrants in this country, and recognize the damage that they do. Just wanted to make that clear.