What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Illegal immigration (1 Viewer)

MarvinTScamper said:
FBI has jurisdiction wherever they want when federal laws are being broken.  Throw them out.
Click to expand...
But that's not who they want to do it. They want cities to do it. And there is this thing it's called the Constitution it's kind of the law of the land and it says they don't have to.

 
RedmondLonghorn said:
"It seems pretty simple" isn't really the way the law works. 

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is there are a number of Constitutional issues here. Washington Post article
Click to expand...
I agree that you're not a lawyer, and when you first used "it's a simple matter of jurisdiction" I realized neither you nor I have anything but a layman's opinion.   Mine is "#### the sanctuary city if they don't want to get in line"

 
NCCommish said:
But that's not who they want to do it. They want cities to do it. And there is this thing it's called the Constitution it's kind of the law of the land and it says they don't have to.
Click to expand...
LOL - you're actually supporting state's rights now that it's helpful to your cause?   Should I look for your support of the states banning/defunding unisex bathrooms and or Planned Parenthood?   I apologize in advance if you're a huge supporter of state's rights in EVERY case.

 
MarvinTScamper said:
I agree that you're not a lawyer, and when you first used "it's a simple matter of jurisdiction" I realized neither you nor I have anything but a layman's opinion.   Mine is "#### the sanctuary city if they don't want to get in line"
Click to expand...
Some layman's opinions are better informed than others, clearly.

 
timschochet said:
Here you go:

Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck said Tuesday that reports of sexual assault and domestic violence made by the city’s Latino residents have plummeted this year amid concerns that immigrants in the country illegally could risk deportation by interacting with police or testifying in court.

Beck said reports of sexual assault have dropped 25% among the city’s Latino population since the beginning of 2017 compared with the same period last year, adding that reports of domestic violence have fallen by 10%. Similar decreases were not seen in reports of those crimes by other ethnic groups, Beck said.

“Imagine, a young woman, imagine your daughter, your sister, your mother … not reporting a sexual assault, because they are afraid that their family will be torn apart,” Beck said.

Beck’s comments — which drew criticism from immigration enforcement advocates — came during an event in East Los Angeles in which Mayor Eric Garcetti signed an executive directive expanding the LAPD’s policy of not stopping people solely to question them about their immigration status to three other city agencies: the Fire Department, Airport Police and Port Police. The LAPD stopped initiating contacts with people in order to determine their immigration status in 1979. In 2014, the city ceased honoring requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold people in custody for possible deportation.

“We want to focus on serious crime, but we also want to focus on making more citizens, not more criminals,” Garcetti said.

For months, law enforcement leaders across the U.S. have expressed fear that aggressive immigration enforcement promised by President Trump’s administration would weaken the already shaky bond between minority communities and police. In recent weeks, reports that ICE agents have identified themselves as police officers during raids and made arrests in courthouses have caused some to wonder whether immigrants in the country illegally will refuse to cooperate with police as a result.


 
Click to expand...
Deport them all and  just clean up the whole mess.

 
MarvinTScamper said:
I agree that you're not a lawyer, and when you first used "it's a simple matter of jurisdiction" I realized neither you nor I have anything but a layman's opinion.   Mine is "#### the sanctuary city if they don't want to get in line"
Click to expand...
You're entitled to your opinion, and we're entitled to your check. Send it. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
Do you think posting anecdotal evidence highlighting individual, particularly horrible violent crimes committed by illegal immigrants, while ignoring the fact that crackdowns on illegal immigrants may actually cause more violent crime by silencing victims and witnesses, is helpful in moving people towards a holistic solution? 
Click to expand...
Do you know of a better way to rectify a situation where 20% of the popuation are defying the Feds and the wishes of the other 80%?  If so I'd love to hear it.

 
MarvinTScamper said:
LOL - you're actually supporting state's rights now that it's helpful to your cause?   Should I look for your support of the states banning/defunding unisex bathrooms and or Planned Parenthood?   I apologize in advance if you're a huge supporter of state's rights in EVERY case.
Click to expand...
You should really get a little more educated on the Constitutional issues and you'd realize you are comparing apples to oranges. 

 
Higgs said:
Do you know of a better way to rectify a situation where 20% of the popuation are defying the Feds and the wishes of the other 80%?  If so I'd love to hear it.
Click to expand...
Why are those numbers important? If it was 1% defying 99%, would it make any difference to the principles involved? 

 
timschochet said:
Here you go:

Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck said Tuesday that reports of sexual assault and domestic violence made by the city’s Latino residents have plummeted this year amid concerns that immigrants in the country illegally could risk deportation by interacting with police or testifying in court.

Beck said reports of sexual assault have dropped 25% among the city’s Latino population since the beginning of 2017 compared with the same period last year, adding that reports of domestic violence have fallen by 10%. Similar decreases were not seen in reports of those crimes by other ethnic groups, Beck said.

“Imagine, a young woman, imagine your daughter, your sister, your mother … not reporting a sexual assault, because they are afraid that their family will be torn apart,” Beck said.

Beck’s comments — which drew criticism from immigration enforcement advocates — came during an event in East Los Angeles in which Mayor Eric Garcetti signed an executive directive expanding the LAPD’s policy of not stopping people solely to question them about their immigration status to three other city agencies: the Fire Department, Airport Police and Port Police. The LAPD stopped initiating contacts with people in order to determine their immigration status in 1979. In 2014, the city ceased honoring requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold people in custody for possible deportation.

“We want to focus on serious crime, but we also want to focus on making more citizens, not more criminals,” Garcetti said.

For months, law enforcement leaders across the U.S. have expressed fear that aggressive immigration enforcement promised by President Trump’s administration would weaken the already shaky bond between minority communities and police. In recent weeks, reports that ICE agents have identified themselves as police officers during raids and made arrests in courthouses have caused some to wonder whether immigrants in the country illegally will refuse to cooperate with police as a result.


 
Click to expand...
If they afraid of interacting with the police...Where is the police chief getting his information from?...Maybe sexual assault cases are down because you know..sexual assault is down?

 
Ditka Butkus said:
If they afraid of interacting with the police...Where is the police chief getting his information from?...Maybe sexual assault cases are down because you know..sexual assault is down?
Click to expand...
Yeah yeah yeah- have you sent us a check yet? Time's awasting, fella. My handyman needs a new iPhone. 

 
Higgs said:
Do you know of a better way to rectify a situation where 20% of the popuation are defying the Feds and the wishes of the other 80%?  If so I'd love to hear it.
Click to expand...
I don't think anecdotal evidence that unfairly vilifies mostly peaceful subgroups and leads people to incorrect assumptions is a "better" way to do anything.  I think it's fundamentally bad. 

You and I are mostly in agreement on dealing with immigration, to be honest.  I also favor amnesty for anyone who has been here for a while and stayed out of trouble, and a significant loosening of the restrictions on legal immigration. And I have no issue with increased border security and with deporting illegal immigrants who commit violent crimes. I'd say the only differences are that: (1) I'm not in favor of outright bans on immigration from any region (2) I recognize how much money increased border security and expanded detention centers to allow for deportation without catch-and-release cost, so I think it's absurd that there are people pushing for those things while they also push for tax cuts for the wealthy; and (3) like I said I don't like it when people use isolated incidents involving immigrants to suggest larger conclusions.

 
RedmondLonghorn said:
Who knew immigration policy reform could be so complicated?
Click to expand...
And it also represents the main problem with Tea Party types- it's not their views on issues so much as it is their views on the solutions to those issues:

Undocumented immigration: deport them all!

Obamacare: Just repeal it! 

Taxes: Lower them!

Spending: Cut it! 

Debt Ceiling: Don't raise it! 

It seems to me that at least 50% of the trouble we're having in Washington these days is dealing with these people who insist on simplistic solutions to every problem and oppose anything else. And they form the strongest base for Trump as well, because he promised them he could do most of this stuff. 

 
timschochet said:
And it also represents the main problem with Tea Party types- it's not their views on issues so much as it is their views on the solutions to those issues:

Undocumented immigration: deport them all!

Obamacare: Just repeal it! 

Taxes: Lower them!

Spending: Cut it! 

Debt Ceiling: Don't raise it! 

It seems to me that at least 50% of the trouble we're having in Washington these days is dealing with these people who insist on simplistic solutions to every problem and oppose anything else. And they form the strongest base for Trump as well, because he promised them he could do most of this stuff. 
Click to expand...
While some of that is true, the fact the establishment (true of both Democrats and Republicans, but especially Democrats) solutions to all of these issues is always to throw money at them is also a pretty big issue. And I would suggest that the reason Tea Party types are digging in their heels on the fiscal issues is that they see it as the only way to break that mindset.

Both approaches lead to more problems and unintended consequences.

 
RedmondLonghorn said:
While some of that is true, the fact the establishment (true of both Democrats and Republicans, but especially Democrats) solutions to all of these issues is always to throw money at them is also a pretty big issue. And I would suggest that the reason Tea Party types are digging in their heels on the fiscal issues is that they see it as the only way to break that mindset.

Both approaches lead to more problems and unintended consequences.
Click to expand...
That is a very good point. I never meant to imply that the Tea Party emerged out of nowhere. They have impetus to feel the way they do. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
I don't think anecdotal evidence that unfairly vilifies mostly peaceful subgroups and leads people to incorrect assumptions is a "better" way to do anything.  I think it's fundamentally bad. 

You and I are mostly in agreement on dealing with immigration, to be honest.  I also favor amnesty for anyone who has been here for a while and stayed out of trouble, and a significant loosening of the restrictions on legal immigration. And I have no issue with increased border security and with deporting illegal immigrants who commit violent crimes. I'd say the only differences are that: (1) I'm not in favor of outright bans on immigration from any region (2) I recognize how much money increased border security and expanded detention centers to allow for deportation without catch-and-release cost, so I think it's absurd that there are people pushing for those things while they also push for tax cuts for the wealthy; and (3) like I said I don't like it when people use isolated incidents involving immigrants to suggest larger conclusions.
Click to expand...
Kind of like what the Left and Black Lives Matter does with police shootings of black men?

 
Higgs said:
1 hour ago, TobiasFunke said:

I don't think anecdotal evidence that unfairly vilifies mostly peaceful subgroups and leads people to incorrect assumptions is a "better" way to do anything.  I think it's fundamentally bad. 
Click to expand...
Kind of like what the Left and Black Lives Matter does with police shootings of black men?
Click to expand...
The shootings BLM focused their protests on were actual documented police shootings, not anecdotal evidence about them. Anecdotal evidence being defined as:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes, i.e., evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedmondLonghorn said:
Both approaches lead to more problems and unintended consequences.
Click to expand...
I think some of the things going on in sanctuary cities are a good example unintended consequences.

One of my favorite liberal mayors said he didn't want to deport illegals because he didn't want to discourage their cooperation with law enforcement. "We want the information" he said and I can certainly see that point of view when trying to address crime in your city. But wouldn't that make your city a little more attractive to bad guys in the long run?

 
Illegal immigrants: build a wall and deport them!

Terrorism: ban Muslims from entering America!

Obamacare sucks: repeal and replace it!

Opioid addiction is rampant: get tough on marijuana!

We need more jobs in the USA: obliterate the EPA and raise tariffs!

It really is simple.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Higgs said:
Kind of like what the Left and Black Lives Matter does with police shootings of black men?
Click to expand...
It is statistically demonstrable that black men are shot all out of proportion to their percentage of the population. That is not anecdotal. It is further statistically demonstrable that minorities especially African Americans are charged differently and do more time for the same crimes. These aren't anecdotes they are facts. 

 
timschochet said:
In the Trump administration's most pointed warning yet, Sessions said federal law allows withholding of federal funding to sanctuary cities,

Just so wrong. How can a United States Attorney General believe this to be true? Don't those guys study the law? 
Click to expand...
Huh?   These people are her illegally.  Do you read the law?

 
Assuming this is the same thread as before with a different Title, :thumbup:

So, we solved this one or has our economy's evolution already done that?  And can I get me some more well educated specialists to help our global competitiveness, at least until we revamp our failing public education and higher education systems to provide more high skilled workers here?

TIA. 

 
squidrope said:
Obviously not.  ICYDK there are laws which explain the legal way to enter this country.  sorry about your election loss and meltdown.
Click to expand...
That's OK. Sorry about your incompetent buffoon in the White House!

there are no laws which make Sanctuary Cities illegal, which was my point. States can choose to spend state resources helping out the federal government or not helping them out as they so choose. States and cities have no obligation to help the federal government with immigration issues.  

 
timschochet said:
That's OK. Sorry about your incompetent buffoon in the White House!

there are no laws which make Sanctuary Cities illegal, which was my point. States can choose to spend state resources helping out the federal government or not helping them out as they so choose. States and cities have no obligation to help the federal government with immigration issues.  
Click to expand...
No apology needed on our upgraded president.  We're only a few months in and based on your behavior here.  Your total meltdown is going to happen much sooner than most expected.  :popcorn: The feds can and will control these (sanctuary) cities with funding until they comply :)  

 
timschochet said:
And it also represents the main problem with Tea Party types- it's not their views on issues so much as it is their views on the solutions to those issues:

Undocumented immigration: deport them all!

Obamacare: Just repeal it! 

Taxes: Lower them!

Spending: Cut it! 

Debt Ceiling: Don't raise it! 

It seems to me that at least 50% of the trouble we're having in Washington these days is dealing with these people who insist on simplistic solutions to every problem and oppose anything else. And they form the strongest base for Trump as well, because he promised them he could do most of this stuff. 
Click to expand...
Undocumented immigration: its fine!!  They deserve to be here

obamacare: it's fine!!  They deserve free health care

taxes: raise them!!  They deserve your money more than you do

spending: raise it!! We will use their money

debt ceiling: raise it!! #### the future generations, we deserve it

see, your liberal version looks just as asinine

 
1) Walls do nothing - this has been demonstrated.

2) Deporting does nothing - this has been demonstrated.

3) Hitting the business and industries employing them works - this has been demonstrated.

Which of the three appears to be left out in Trump's plan?  More importantly, why do you think it was left out?

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

Similar threads

Senor Schmutzig
What kind of lawyer do I need?
Replies
15
Views
654
fatness
fatness
Max Power
World Turtle Day
Replies
13
Views
544
Dan Lambskin
Dan Lambskin
Terminalxylem
Unclaimed life insurance
Replies
28
Views
865
fatness
fatness

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top