What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Issues Thread #1 Immigration Issues (1 Viewer)

timschochet

timschochet

Footballguy
This is the first of a series of threads that discuss political issues rather than personalities or parties- the idea being that, if we discuss the issues free of all that clatter, we might be able to have slightly more civil discussions and debates without the insults and snark. I also want to see if, once we remove the "sides", we don't discover that we actually have more consensus than we thought.  We'll see if it works.

I want to start by discussing undocumented immigrants, and I am going to start with two statements about undocumented immigrants which I generally believe:

1. Undocumented immigrants who have committed a violent crime should, after serving punishment, be deported from this country.

2. Undocumented immigrants who have committed no violent crime should be allowed to remain in this country.

Putting aside both details and logistics for the moment, are these two statements agreeable as a general rule? If you disagree, what is the basis of your disagreement? (Keeping in mind that this is, for the moment, a discussion about the way things should be, and not yet a discussion about how we get there.)

 
Why is a nonviolent crime okay? The person is here illegally and then engages in further illegal behavior. Maybe there is a line like misdemeanors or extenuating circumstances, but a blanket okay doesn't seem right.

 
Mystery Achiever said:
Why is a nonviolent crime okay? The person is here illegally and then engages in further illegal behavior. Maybe there is a line like misdemeanors or extenuating circumstances, but a blanket okay doesn't seem right.
Click to expand...
Good question. Assuming that the person crossed our borders illegally, he or she committed a misdemeanor. But it's not a continual crime, so that the bolded doesn't seem correct to me. Somebody who lives here without papers is not engaged in further illegal behavior by doing so.

Also, a "blanket okay" is a different issue, dealing with means. For example if I were in charge, I would insist that all undocumented people appear in court and pay a fine in order to receive some sort of legal status. That fine is in itself a punishment for having broken the law by coming here.

 
I agree with Mystery Achiever that non-violent offenses should be tossed in there as well.  If an undocumented immigrant gets convicted of embezzlement, for example, they should deported.  

 
Mystery Achiever said:
By further behavior, I meant a second instance of illegal activity. 1st crossing the border, 2nd whatever this crime is.
Click to expand...
Ah OK. So your position is that an undocumented person who commits a second crime, even if it's non-violent, should be deported?

That's not something I have considered. But I suppose I wouldn't object, depending on the nature of the crime. You're talking about non-violent felonies? Or ANY crime? (In the OP I used "violent crime" instead of felony because I have learned, much to my chagrin, that some violent crimes are considered misdemeanors. That seems wrong to me.)

 
IvanKaramazov said:
I agree with Mystery Achiever that non-violent offenses should be tossed in there as well.  If an undocumented immigrant gets convicted of embezzlement, for example, they should deported.  
Click to expand...
OK. But felonies, right? A non-violent misdemeanor wouldn't be applicable. Or are you suggesting that if they even get a ticket, they're gone?

 
As I alluded in previous post, I don't know yet where the line is, but I don't believe in no consequences for continuing (not continuously) to break laws. Maybe it is at misdemeanors. Not sure how various things are classified.No to traffic tickets. Yes to embezzlement, drug dealing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mystery Achiever said:
As I alluded in previous post, I don't know yet where the line is, but I don't believe in no consequences for continuing (not continuously) to break laws. Maybe it is at misdemeanors. Not sure how various things are classified.No to traffic tickets.
Click to expand...
OK that's reasonable.

In terms of all deportable crimes, do you agree with me that first they serve the punishment, then they are deported? Even though that costs us more money?

For example: an undocumented man rapes a woman. He is sentenced to 10 years in prison. So first he has to serve the prison term. Then he is released, and immediately deported. Do you agree that this is the way things should work?

 
Have to think on that.. What is your thesis for keeping them here? That they won't be punished at home, will re-enter and commit further crime, other?.

 
Mystery Achiever said:
Have to think on that.. What is your thesis for keeping them here? That they won't be punished at home, will re-enter and commit further crime, other?.
Click to expand...
It seems wrong to me to take a rapist and unleash him onto the public of some other country. That's all. If he committed the crime here, shouldn't he be punished here?

 
timschochet said:
OK. But felonies, right? A non-violent misdemeanor wouldn't be applicable. Or are you suggesting that if they even get a ticket, they're gone?
Click to expand...
Right.  My general rule of thumb for immigration is that we should welcome anybody into our country, with the exception of people with criminal records.  I'm comfortable drawing the line at "felony convictions" although I can be talked into some misdemeanors as well.  The same standard would apply to deportations. 

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Right.  My general rule of thumb for immigration is that we should welcome anybody into our country, with the exception of people with criminal records.  I'm comfortable drawing the line at "felony convictions" although I can be talked into some misdemeanors as well.  The same standard would apply to deportations. 
Click to expand...
OK, so we're in agreement.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Yeah.  You and I have always had very similar views regarding immigration.
Click to expand...
We have, but we both know that, realistically, "welcoming anyone into the country" is never going to happen. Even so, it's pretty obvious to me, reading the current news, that there are going to be significant changes coming shortly. What is happening right now seems to me to be unsustainable.

 
Illegal aliens from wherever should be deported after committing violent crimes.   The illegals that are here and a law abiding contributing people should be able to stay as long as they are actively trying to become legal citizens.  

That being said something has to be done about the future flooding of illegals into the country due to the drain of resources. There is a process and laws that need to be followed.

I agree with Obamas stance on immigration.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Da Guru said:
Illegal aliens from wherever should be deported after committing violent crimes.   The illegals that are here and a law abiding contributing people should be able to stay as long as they are actively trying to become legal citizens.  

That being said something has to be done abouGt the future flooding of illegals into the country due to the drain of resources. There is a process and laws that need to be followed.
Click to expand...
Obviously I agree with your first paragraph and I think we have growing consensus there. 

With regard to your second paragraph I was going to raise that issue a little later on, after seeing first what stuff we could generally agree on. I’m with you that something has to be done due to the drain of resources (though you and I might disagree rather strongly as to how serious that situation is.) But the problem I have is that every proposed solution seems to make things worse, not better. 

 
Let me open this up to the wider issues that were raised in the last election cycle: 

1. Should we limit the number of new immigrants? Keep them at the same rate? Or increase them? 

2. Should we concentrate on taking in educated professionals rather than uneducated? Or should we accept everybody in line  regardless of skill level? 

3. Should we concentrate on particular countries at the expense of others, or continue to take individuals regardless of country? 

4. Should we close our doors to Immigrants from countries who we regard as enemies, particularly in the war on terror? 

5. Should we make war refugees a priority? 

These are hard questions and while I feel passionate about them, I acknowledge that there are few right and wrong answers.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Tim can you plug in the Constitutional language for the delegation of the power over naturalization in here? Thanks.
Click to expand...
On my phone and I don’t have that at my fingertips. 

But in a way, I don’t think it’s relevant. At least for the time being this is supposed to be a discussion about the way we want things to be. Existing law needn’t apply; the assumption is we can always change it. 

 
Seeking asylum from a dangerous situation isn't illegal. Yes, they need to have hearings, etc but right now they are being treated as criminals (put in prison, children being removed). And yes, I am very passionate about this because this isn't who we are as a country. This is not the American ideal. It is very disturbing to see children taken from their parents, and not to go all 1930's Europe on everyone, but that is what Nazi Germany did. We need to be speaking out against this atrocity. It isn't Christian and it certainly isn't American.

 
timschochet said:
On my phone and I don’t have that at my fingertips. 

But in a way, I don’t think it’s relevant. At least for the time being this is supposed to be a discussion about the way we want things to be. Existing law needn’t apply; the assumption is we can always change it. 
Click to expand...
Well I hear you there. To me procedure is substance, I mean if we let ‘the president’ decide then it doesn’t matter anyway either. Until 2021 anyway, because this president is completely unbound by empathy or even reality. Any serious discussion will have to include how to wrest the power away from him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Well I hear you there. To me procedure is substance, I mean if we let ‘the president’ decide then it doesn’t matter anyway either. Until 2021 anyway, because this president is completely unbound by empathy or even reality. Any serious discussion will have to be Clyde how to wrest the power away from him.
Click to expand...
Again, I get that but I don't want to get into it in this thread. Hopefully in this thread we can discuss the issues and not the personalities.

 
These are indeed tough questions. As a basis for moving the discussion forward, I'll pitch in with the fact that we have about 4 million annual births and just under a million deaths every year, in case somebody wants there to be a relationship between new immigrants and the nation's natural growth rate. I'm not a hundred percent sure that there should be one but, again, these are tough questions and we should know whatever we can to help us discuss them.

 
timschochet said:
This is the first of a series of threads that discuss political issues rather than personalities or parties- the idea being that, if we discuss the issues free of all that clatter, we might be able to have slightly more civil discussions and debates without the insults and snark. I also want to see if, once we remove the "sides", we don't discover that we actually have more consensus than we thought.  We'll see if it works.

I want to start by discussing undocumented immigrants, and I am going to start with two statements about undocumented immigrants which I generally believe:

1. Undocumented immigrants who have committed a violent crime should, after serving punishment, be deported from this country.

2. Undocumented immigrants who have committed no violent crime should be allowed to remain in this country.

Putting aside both details and logistics for the moment, are these two statements agreeable as a general rule? If you disagree, what is the basis of your disagreement? (Keeping in mind that this is, for the moment, a discussion about the way things should be, and not yet a discussion about how we get there.)
Click to expand...
“We all agree on the need to better secure the border and punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants. We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.”

 
roadkill1292 said:
These are indeed tough questions. As a basis for moving the discussion forward, I'll pitch in with the fact that we have about 4 million annual births and just under a million deaths every year, in case somebody wants there to be a relationship between new immigrants and the nation's natural growth rate. I'm not a hundred percent sure that there should be one but, again, these are tough questions and we should know whatever we can to help us discuss them.
Click to expand...
Well this leads to a fascinating question. There are currently 325 million people living in this country. What is the optimum number of people here? Is there one? How many people can we absorb and sustain our standard of living?

 
pantherclub said:
“We all agree on the need to better secure the border and punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants. We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.”
Click to expand...
I don't know who the quote is from, nor do I care. Do you agree with the quote? And do you agree with the two statements that you were responding to?

 
timschochet said:
 For example if I were in charge, I would insist that all undocumented people appear in court and pay a fine in order to receive some sort of legal status. That fine is in itself a punishment for having broken the law by coming here.
Click to expand...
Isn't that basically the way it is set up now?  In order to be here legally, they have to show up and apply for legal status.  The problem is that many of them choose not to do that, and that's why they are called illegal aliens.  

 
timschochet said:
Well this leads to a fascinating question. There are currently 325 million people living in this country. What is the optimum number of people here? Is there one? How many people can we absorb and sustain our standard of living?
Click to expand...
That's why I brought it up. I think our capacity is still much higher but the growth rate is something that an intelligent country should be able to manage in an intelligent fashion. Even if that conflicts with me wanting us to be the No. 1 destination of choice for freedom loving people from around the world.

 
psychobillies said:
Isn't that basically the way it is set up now?  In order to be here legally, they have to show up and apply for legal status.  The problem is that many of them choose not to do that, and that's why they are called illegal aliens.  
Click to expand...
My understanding is that if they were to show up in court now they risk deportation. Isn't that so?

 
timschochet said:
Well with regard to number 2, please state what you would do, as a general rule, with nonviolent undocumented people who are already here. Would you forcibly deport them? Or do you have some other solution?
Click to expand...
Yes deport them.   Right or wrong they broke the law.  It is what it is, dont like it then work to get it change.  We dont get to selectively choose which laws, and most certainly in an important issue as immigration, we get to overlook.   I dont necessarily agree with it but its the law.

 
Cowboysfan8 said:
I feel like you alreadt ran this series of threads after Trump was elected, and that series started with immigration also
Click to expand...
I've had issue threads before but they tended to discuss personalities and parties: "Trump is trying to do this; the Democrats are trying to do that." I'm trying to avoid that this time around, if possible.

As you may know, my wife has been in AA for over a year now, and one of the mottos they teach you at the meetings is "look for the similarities." I'm trying to do that here. I suspect that pantherclub (to use one example) has very different views than I do on this subject, but there may be points of agreement. I'm looking for them.

 
pantherclub said:
Yes deport them.   Right or wrong they broke the law.  It is what it is, dont like it then work to get it change.  We dont get to selectively choose which laws, and most certainly in an important issue as immigration, we get to overlook.   I dont necessarily agree with it but its the law.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Obviously we disagree, but there's a lot of people who agree with you.

That being said, with regard to the bolded: what would you like to see as the law, assuming you could wave a magic wand and change it?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
Fair enough. Obviously we disagree, but there's a lot of people who agree with you.

That being said, with regard to the bolded: what would you like to see as the law, assuming you could wave a magic wand and change it?
Click to expand...
“We all agree on the need to better secure the border and punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants. We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.”

Dude google that and see who said it.  Then ask yourself why that person didnt try and change the law?  Its there for a reason.

 
roadkill1292 said:
That's why I brought it up. I think our capacity is still much higher but the growth rate is something that an intelligent country should be able to manage in an intelligent fashion. Even if that conflicts with me wanting us to be the No. 1 destination of choice for freedom loving people from around the world.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. But even though I've been what conservatives call an "open borders" guy my whole life, I do wonder about the big picture, and I often have the same question I have about our national debt: is there a limit? How much is too much? Could the USA have a population of 600 million? A billion?

 
timschochet said:
My understanding is that if they were to show up in court now they risk deportation. Isn't that so?
Click to expand...
Probably, but I wasn't specifically referring to "court".  There is a place that currently exists that allows them to apply for legal status, and many choose to ignore it.  Why would they show up to court when they weren't interested in doing things legally in the first place?

 
pantherclub said:
“We all agree on the need to better secure the border and punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants. We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.”

Dude google that and see who said it.  Then ask yourself why that person didnt try and change the law?  Its there for a reason.
Click to expand...
You posted it twice. I'm guessing it's Obama. Again, I don't really care. I don't want to get into a discussion in this thread about who did what, who is or was a hypocrite on this issue, where the liberals stand, etc. I want to discuss what should be done.

 
psychobillies said:
Probably, but I wasn't specifically referring to "court".  There is a place that currently exists that allows them to apply for legal status, and many choose to ignore it.  Why would they show up to court when they weren't interested in doing things legally in the first place?
Click to expand...
i'm assuming that if they were told, "if you show up and pay a fine you can stay here legally", most would. I could be wrong about that, but I don't think so.

 
timschochet said:
Let me open this up to the wider issues that were raised in the last election cycle: 

1. Should we limit the number of new immigrants? Keep them at the same rate? Or increase them? 

2. Should we concentrate on taking in educated professionals rather than uneducated? Or should we accept everybody in line  regardless of skill level? 

3. Should we concentrate on particular countries at the expense of others, or continue to take individuals regardless of country? 

4. Should we close our doors to Immigrants from countries who we regard as enemies, particularly in the war on terror? 

5. Should we make war refugees a priority? 

These are hard questions and while I feel passionate about them, I acknowledge that there are few right and wrong answers.
Click to expand...
Bump for pantherclub. These are the bigger issues. Curious to get your feedback.

 
timschochet said:
1. Undocumented immigrants who have committed a violent crime should, after serving punishment, be deported from this country.

2. Undocumented immigrants who have committed no violent crime should be allowed to remain in this country.
Click to expand...
So if Bernie Madoff was an illegal  Nicaraguan immigrant he'd be allowed to stay? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

timschochet
What should we do about illegal immigration?
5 6 7
Replies
304
Views
7K
Sand
Sand
GordonGekko
The Official "Political Tweets That REALLY Didn't Age Well" Thread (10/15/22 1:23 PST)
Replies
22
Views
826
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
timschochet
Please don’t call undocumented people “illegal immigrants”
6 7 8
Replies
354
Views
8K
Opie
O

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top