Question for everyone: Should the United States have open borders?

[OKTexas]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

"Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans)."

This is not a qualifier for asylum. Learn about shit before you make stupid statements.

Whether they qualify for asylum will be determined by a hearing. Escaping from persecution does qualify for asylum and does fit "hoping for a better life."

Learn to think before you post.

The law says it has to be governmental persecution.


.

 

[Richard-H]

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

Try to wrap your brains around this.........

1) Asylum seeker - approaches border point, and presents themselves to an agent and claim asylum.

2) Not an asylum seeker - get's busted in the middle of the night, in the middle of nowhere...and then wants to claim asylum.

Undocumented immigrant - it didn't work, Americans didn't buy the label.
Asylum seeker - the new label, somehow thinking Americans will buy it.

When people are outside of the United states they apply for Refugee status.

Asylum status is for people who are already in the United States - regardless of how they got here.

Read and learn:

Political asylum in USA

 

[OKTexas]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

Oh right, they've caught 5 MS13 gang members trying to enter with children in the last couple of months.


.

By MS13 gang members, you are referring to "people with promise"?.... that is the current PC term

You forgot the spark of divinity. LMAO


.

 

[TheDude]

Truth.View attachment 200101

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Interesting considering american Indians stole land from others, raped and pillaged the innocent. Some were great people and society, some savages.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

Try to wrap your brains around this.........

1) Asylum seeker - approaches border point, and presents themselves to an agent and claim asylum.

2) Not an asylum seeker - get's busted in the middle of the night, in the middle of nowhere...and then wants to claim asylum.

Undocumented immigrant - it didn't work, Americans didn't buy the label.
Asylum seeker - the new label, somehow thinking Americans will buy it.

When people are outside of the United states they apply for Refugee status.

Asylum status is for people who are already in the United States - regardless of how they got here.

Read and learn:

Political asylum in USA

You should read your own link.

 

[Richard-H]

Since the vast majority of these immigrants are from countries where U.S. foreign policy has dominated since the 1980s, it apparent that Reagans policies in Central America were a complete failure.

The current immigrant "Crisis" is a direct result of those failed policies.

 

[Doc1]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

"Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans)."

This is not a qualifier for asylum. Learn about shit before you make stupid statements.

Whether they qualify for asylum will be determined by a hearing. Escaping from persecution does qualify for asylum and does fit "hoping for a better life."

Learn to think before you post.

LOL, no, wanting "a better life" is not a qualifier. Are you what....12 years old? Take your ego out of this or you will continue to be spanked.

 

[jc456]

No

sure it is.

 

[Doc1]

Since the vast majority of these immigrants are from countries where U.S. foreign policy has dominated since the 1980s, it apparent that Reagans policies in Central America were a complete failure.

The current immigrant "Crisis" is a direct result of those failed policies.

If ONLY the US would simply let you god like intellects just run everything.....

 

[jc456]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

"Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans)."

This is not a qualifier for asylum. Learn about shit before you make stupid statements.

Whether they qualify for asylum will be determined by a hearing. Escaping from persecution does qualify for asylum and does fit "hoping for a better life."

Learn to think before you post.

doesn't everyone in the world want a better life? I know people who want a bigger home. can they come take yours?

 

[BluesLegend]

Question for everyone: Should the United States have open borders?

A recent study found 160 million people want to come to the USA, can we house, feed, educate another 160 million poor people?

 

[healthmyths]

Truth.View attachment 200101

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

So where did the native Indians come from?
But archeologists predicted that they either came from the Ice Bridge from Russia of Asia that led to what is now Alaska and they walked down North America.
Who's land was it then?
Plus... There are up to 200,000 Indian American millionaires in the United States. 1/9 Indians Americans are millionaires in the US. The statistics were done by Merrill Lynch Wealth Management, a subsidiary company of Bank of America. There are up to 223,000 firms own up by Indians Americans plus 20,000 hotels in the United States belong to Indian Americans. You can view the remainder of the statistics below the reference.
https://www.quora.com/How-many-Indian-are-millionaires-in-USA

Seems like they've done pretty well!
According to the 2010 Census, 5.2 million people in the United States identified as American Indian and Alaska Native,
https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/c2010br-10.pdf

Wow.. think about that: nearly 4% of all American Indians are millionaires!

 

[RDD_1210]

No.

Next question. Should we intentionally target children with the intention of traumatizing them as our focus in order to enforce policies?

Actions have consequences, the folks to blame are the one who took the wrong actions. You got what you wanted, the families will now stay together.
In prison until they are vetted and cleared. try and be happy.

So that's a yes, Children should be targeted with the intention of traumatizing them. Should children be physically harmed as well? How about thrown in to gas chambers? Where do you draw the line? Do you have a line?

Stupid people take things out to an illogical extreme. You got what you wanted, you won. They will stay together, be happy. The "targeted" folks are the law breakers. I know that's a tough thing for a Prog to understand but the blame lies squarely on the parents. Do try and grow up so you can learn to debate without being stupid.

So where do you draw the line? I asked you a question. What is NOT acceptable to you?

It wasn't a question, it was a patently stupid thing to type. Weak minded people throw out that Nazi shit when they are cornered. You won, they will stay together you can be happy now. Or is that you think we should just let them all in because they want in?

Here is my position. The "parents" broke the law, they brought the consequences down upon themselves and their children. The blame rests with the "parents".

Where do you draw the line on involving children in policy decision? I'll keep asking until you actually answer. What is not ok for you when it comes to children?

 

[jc456]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

Actually my ancestors were native Americans and thanks to those EVIL white people I'm alive at 75 versus when my great great grandfather would have died at 35!

My estimate is 90% of these immigrants are just as you said NO threat. BUT which ones are they? Are you a mind reader? Can you look at 10 immigrants and tell me
9 are ok and 1 is a drug smuggler/child abuser? Can you tell me that?

Not at all paranoid but simple like my ancestors who after hundreds of years of in-breeding with those evil white men have property, family that I'd like to protect from that
1 of 10 that wants to harm me.

What evidence do you have that the percent of immigrants who are violent criminals is any higher then the percent of any other Americans?

Why aren't you afraid of all the criminals that are born here in America?

Perhaps you suffer from stereotyping ethnic groups?

And whether or not you happen to be of native descent, the principal of what I said stands tru for the vast majority of Americans who's ancestors did migrate here.

Why aren't you afraid of all the criminals that are born here in America?

I am, we lock them up or kill em. why do you ask?

Ever hear the term armed and dangerous? you can't wait to meet those guys eh?

 

[jc456]

Actions have consequences, the folks to blame are the one who took the wrong actions. You got what you wanted, the families will now stay together.
In prison until they are vetted and cleared. try and be happy.

So that's a yes, Children should be targeted with the intention of traumatizing them. Should children be physically harmed as well? How about thrown in to gas chambers? Where do you draw the line? Do you have a line?

Stupid people take things out to an illogical extreme. You got what you wanted, you won. They will stay together, be happy. The "targeted" folks are the law breakers. I know that's a tough thing for a Prog to understand but the blame lies squarely on the parents. Do try and grow up so you can learn to debate without being stupid.

So where do you draw the line? I asked you a question. What is NOT acceptable to you?

It wasn't a question, it was a patently stupid thing to type. Weak minded people throw out that Nazi shit when they are cornered. You won, they will stay together you can be happy now. Or is that you think we should just let them all in because they want in?

Here is my position. The "parents" broke the law, they brought the consequences down upon themselves and their children. The blame rests with the "parents".

Where do you draw the line on involving children in policy decision? I'll keep asking until you actually answer. What is not ok for you when it comes to children?

why do you hide behind the children?

 

[Mike473]

I think that we will see totally open borders within the next 20 years. Only time will tell how the policy works out in the end.

 

[flewism]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

Actions have consequences, the folks to blame are the one who took the wrong actions. You got what you wanted, the families will now stay together.
In prison until they are vetted and cleared. try and be happy.

So that's a yes, Children should be targeted with the intention of traumatizing them. Should children be physically harmed as well? How about thrown in to gas chambers? Where do you draw the line? Do you have a line?

Stupid people take things out to an illogical extreme. You got what you wanted, you won. They will stay together, be happy. The "targeted" folks are the law breakers. I know that's a tough thing for a Prog to understand but the blame lies squarely on the parents. Do try and grow up so you can learn to debate without being stupid.

So where do you draw the line? I asked you a question. What is NOT acceptable to you?

It wasn't a question, it was a patently stupid thing to type. Weak minded people throw out that Nazi shit when they are cornered. You won, they will stay together you can be happy now. Or is that you think we should just let them all in because they want in?

Here is my position. The "parents" broke the law, they brought the consequences down upon themselves and their children. The blame rests with the "parents".

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

"Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans)."

This is not a qualifier for asylum. Learn about shit before you make stupid statements.

Whether they qualify for asylum will be determined by a hearing. Escaping from persecution does qualify for asylum and does fit "hoping for a better life."

Learn to think before you post.

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

Actually my ancestors were native Americans and thanks to those EVIL white people I'm alive at 75 versus when my great great grandfather would have died at 35!

My estimate is 90% of these immigrants are just as you said NO threat. BUT which ones are they? Are you a mind reader? Can you look at 10 immigrants and tell me
9 are ok and 1 is a drug smuggler/child abuser? Can you tell me that?

Not at all paranoid but simple like my ancestors who after hundreds of years of in-breeding with those evil white men have property, family that I'd like to protect from that
1 of 10 that wants to harm me.

What evidence do you have that the percent of immigrants who are violent criminals is any higher then the percent of any other Americans?

Why aren't you afraid of all the criminals that are born here in America?

Perhaps you suffer from stereotyping ethnic groups?

And whether or not you happen to be of native descent, the principal of what I said stands tru for the vast majority of Americans who's ancestors did migrate here.

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

Try to wrap your brains around this.........

1) Asylum seeker - approaches border point, and presents themselves to an agent and claim asylum.

2) Not an asylum seeker - get's busted in the middle of the night, in the middle of nowhere...and then wants to claim asylum.

Undocumented immigrant - it didn't work, Americans didn't buy the label.
Asylum seeker - the new label, somehow thinking Americans will buy it.

When people are outside of the United states they apply for Refugee status.

Asylum status is for people who are already in the United States - regardless of how they got here.

Read and learn:

Political asylum in USA

Since the vast majority of these immigrants are from countries where U.S. foreign policy has dominated since the 1980s, it apparent that Reagans policies in Central America were a complete failure.

The current immigrant "Crisis" is a direct result of those failed policies.

This is an act right? you can't be this stupid?

 

[Doc1]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

So that's a yes, Children should be targeted with the intention of traumatizing them. Should children be physically harmed as well? How about thrown in to gas chambers? Where do you draw the line? Do you have a line?

Stupid people take things out to an illogical extreme. You got what you wanted, you won. They will stay together, be happy. The "targeted" folks are the law breakers. I know that's a tough thing for a Prog to understand but the blame lies squarely on the parents. Do try and grow up so you can learn to debate without being stupid.

So where do you draw the line? I asked you a question. What is NOT acceptable to you?

It wasn't a question, it was a patently stupid thing to type. Weak minded people throw out that Nazi shit when they are cornered. You won, they will stay together you can be happy now. Or is that you think we should just let them all in because they want in?

Here is my position. The "parents" broke the law, they brought the consequences down upon themselves and their children. The blame rests with the "parents".

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

"Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans)."

This is not a qualifier for asylum. Learn about shit before you make stupid statements.

Whether they qualify for asylum will be determined by a hearing. Escaping from persecution does qualify for asylum and does fit "hoping for a better life."

Learn to think before you post.

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

Actually my ancestors were native Americans and thanks to those EVIL white people I'm alive at 75 versus when my great great grandfather would have died at 35!

My estimate is 90% of these immigrants are just as you said NO threat. BUT which ones are they? Are you a mind reader? Can you look at 10 immigrants and tell me
9 are ok and 1 is a drug smuggler/child abuser? Can you tell me that?

Not at all paranoid but simple like my ancestors who after hundreds of years of in-breeding with those evil white men have property, family that I'd like to protect from that
1 of 10 that wants to harm me.

What evidence do you have that the percent of immigrants who are violent criminals is any higher then the percent of any other Americans?

Why aren't you afraid of all the criminals that are born here in America?

Perhaps you suffer from stereotyping ethnic groups?

And whether or not you happen to be of native descent, the principal of what I said stands tru for the vast majority of Americans who's ancestors did migrate here.

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

Try to wrap your brains around this.........

1) Asylum seeker - approaches border point, and presents themselves to an agent and claim asylum.

2) Not an asylum seeker - get's busted in the middle of the night, in the middle of nowhere...and then wants to claim asylum.

Undocumented immigrant - it didn't work, Americans didn't buy the label.
Asylum seeker - the new label, somehow thinking Americans will buy it.

When people are outside of the United states they apply for Refugee status.

Asylum status is for people who are already in the United States - regardless of how they got here.

Read and learn:

Political asylum in USA

Since the vast majority of these immigrants are from countries where U.S. foreign policy has dominated since the 1980s, it apparent that Reagans policies in Central America were a complete failure.

The current immigrant "Crisis" is a direct result of those failed policies.

This is an act right? you can't be this stupid?

I'm afraid it IS that stupid.

 

[Hellbilly]

Truth.View attachment 200101

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Interesting considering american Indians stole land from others, raped and pillaged the innocent. Some were great people and society, some savages.

Oh well, I guess that makes it acceptable for white men to do it. Not.
The fact of the matter is white men came to this land, lied, raped, murdered, passed laws to end the existence of the Indian.



Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

 

[Richard-H]

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

Stupid people take things out to an illogical extreme. You got what you wanted, you won. They will stay together, be happy. The "targeted" folks are the law breakers. I know that's a tough thing for a Prog to understand but the blame lies squarely on the parents. Do try and grow up so you can learn to debate without being stupid.

So where do you draw the line? I asked you a question. What is NOT acceptable to you?

It wasn't a question, it was a patently stupid thing to type. Weak minded people throw out that Nazi shit when they are cornered. You won, they will stay together you can be happy now. Or is that you think we should just let them all in because they want in?

Here is my position. The "parents" broke the law, they brought the consequences down upon themselves and their children. The blame rests with the "parents".

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

"Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans)."

This is not a qualifier for asylum. Learn about shit before you make stupid statements.

Whether they qualify for asylum will be determined by a hearing. Escaping from persecution does qualify for asylum and does fit "hoping for a better life."

Learn to think before you post.

It appears that the question is not stupid because everything that the Democrats oppose in GOP legislation point to the Democrats favor everyone coming in at any time.

Now historically we did have that... when on August 3,1882 the first "general immigration law" was passed.
Immigration Act of 1882 - Wikipedia
And the population of the USA at that time was 50,189,209 or 1/6 what it is today.

So our country was founded on the rule of law... not emotion. Not illogic. But founded on the preamble of the US Constitution what clearly states.."provide for the common defence".

So if we have no borders. No laws regarding who can come in what do we have but back to where we were
over 136 years when EVERYONE had a gun. A lot of the country had no law and anyone could come in.

So is that what the Democrats want? Our country to revert back to the way we were in the 1880s?

I'm all in favor then as there would be open season on protecting me and my property it sounds like.

Wow what a farce!

First, there are many other functions that borders provide beside keeping immigrants out.

Second, the Democrats not supporting current Republican proposals does not equate to the Democrats wanting open borders.

Third, the majority of immigrants are not breaking any laws. They are applying for asylum and other various immigrant status. That is not against the law at all. It's these law abiding people who are having their children taken away. That gives a whole lot more incentive for people to try to enter the country illegally.

Fourth, the vast majority of these people are law abiding, peaceful people who are only hoping for a better life. They are an awful lot like your ancestors (except they don't want to kill native Americans).

Fifth, you are a paranoid idiot if you think that these people are a threat to you and your property. Just becuase you are a violent theiving idiot doesn't mean that they are.

Actually my ancestors were native Americans and thanks to those EVIL white people I'm alive at 75 versus when my great great grandfather would have died at 35!

My estimate is 90% of these immigrants are just as you said NO threat. BUT which ones are they? Are you a mind reader? Can you look at 10 immigrants and tell me
9 are ok and 1 is a drug smuggler/child abuser? Can you tell me that?

Not at all paranoid but simple like my ancestors who after hundreds of years of in-breeding with those evil white men have property, family that I'd like to protect from that
1 of 10 that wants to harm me.

What evidence do you have that the percent of immigrants who are violent criminals is any higher then the percent of any other Americans?

Why aren't you afraid of all the criminals that are born here in America?

Perhaps you suffer from stereotyping ethnic groups?

And whether or not you happen to be of native descent, the principal of what I said stands tru for the vast majority of Americans who's ancestors did migrate here.

No, their parents did not break the law. These are people who are applying for asylum and other legal immigrant status. They should all get a hearing under due process to determine if their application is accepted.

Try to wrap your brains around this.........

1) Asylum seeker - approaches border point, and presents themselves to an agent and claim asylum.

2) Not an asylum seeker - get's busted in the middle of the night, in the middle of nowhere...and then wants to claim asylum.

Undocumented immigrant - it didn't work, Americans didn't buy the label.
Asylum seeker - the new label, somehow thinking Americans will buy it.

When people are outside of the United states they apply for Refugee status.

Asylum status is for people who are already in the United States - regardless of how they got here.

Read and learn:

Political asylum in USA

Since the vast majority of these immigrants are from countries where U.S. foreign policy has dominated since the 1980s, it apparent that Reagans policies in Central America were a complete failure.

The current immigrant "Crisis" is a direct result of those failed policies.

This is an act right? you can't be this stupid?

I'm afraid it IS that stupid.

I see that you can't logically refute what I say, so you resort to childish insults. Not surprising.

It seem that we are not seeing a massive amount of immigrants from Nicaragua - the one central American country that we did not intervene.

Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvatore are all countries that the U.S. intervened on a massive scale back in the 1980s. These are the countires that the vast majority of the immigrants are coming from.

If you don't see a connection, then your an idiot.