Zone1 Delineation of Rights

[Mikeoxenormous]

If a person overstays their VISA, and they end up in an Administrative process, are they here illegally? I believe you are not qualified to comment on immigration issues. Ignorance disqualifies you from being able to credibly do so.

Ignorance? Bwaaahhaaaaaa.....I didnt vote for the guy who has so destroyed our justice system and is in the process of destroying our economy through the green new deal.

As for disqualification, you are cordially invited to KMA.

 

[LeroyDumonde]

If a person overstays their VISA, and they end up in an Administrative process, are they here illegally? I believe you are not qualified to comment on immigration issues. Ignorance disqualifies you from being able to credibly do so.

If a person commits murder, but hasn't been convicted of murder, did he commit murder?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

If a person commits murder, but hasn't been convicted of murder, did he commit murder?

Yes, and will continue to commit murder till he/she/it is caught. My problem is allowing the murderer a second and third chance at life, while those lives he took dont get the same rights. There are no repeat offenders for those who have been executed.


Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.

 

[Libby von H]

1: "RIghts come from DUTIES." -

This is complete nonsense. Even as an opinion, it is far out there.

2: "Fetus and embryo are biological terms" -

Human beings are biological entities. They are not spirits or other-worldly beings.

3: Your third item is so far out there I am lost on how to reply.

It is the standard view in Western Thought

De Officiis Or on Duties on Obligations
CICERO
https://books.google.com/books?id=z...=2ahUKEwiI8IXjxK2FAxWav4kEHTxoD8QQ6AF6BAgHEAI

 

[Captain John Baron]

It is the standard view in Western Thought

De Officiis Or on Duties on Obligations
CICERO
De Officiis Or on Duties on Obligations

Not the only view? Thank you.

 

[BackAgain]

So the question of rights as every US citizen enjoys is coming front and center.
Where is the line on tricky circumstances?

What rights do non-citizens have?
Recently a judge determined that aliens may carry firearms. (Armed insurrection or invasion?) Why is the Federal Government giving illegal immigrants money, food, and lodging? How about legal immigrants who lawfully go through the process? Why are they shipping illegal immigrants around from state to state?

What rights does a fetus have vs an embryo vs a child vs an adult?

Is there a gradual attainment of rights?

What about those with dual citizenship? What rights do they have vs not have?
What about banking laws? Paying taxes? Owning real estate? Voting in elections?

What say you?
Where's the line?

Simple. What does the Constitution say with regard to the rights of citizens versus the rights of aliens?

Citizens alone get the right to vote.

But “persons” get the right to a fair trial.

 

[Libby von H]

Not the only view? Thank you.

It was a blockbuster in its time and huge during the time of the American Founders. I know of nothing else liket that in history

 

[Dadoalex]

I consider illegals as non-protected as far as US Constitutional rights go.

IMHO they gave up any protections when they broke the law by entering the country uninvited.

They should not be counted in the census either.

Is that the "originalist" view?

Care to show us the "illegal exception" clause?

 

[Dadoalex]

The ruling the judge on illegals and guns is crazy. if you are here illegally you should only have the most basic of rights. I do wonder if the judge did it so those on the left could be like "Oh, so there are limits to the 2nd". The irony of this case is that the guy was in Illinois so he was violating Illinois law since there is no way he had a FOID card.

And yes, there is gradual attainment of rights, voting, drinking, legally signing a contract and more happen at 18 or 21.

A dual citizen should have no limits.

Most countries allow legal resident aliens to own land, in fact many of them use such as a way to get residency in their countries. Invest a set amount in real estate and get a visa.

I personally have no issues with local elections allowing legal non-citizens to vote since they are directly impacted by the outcome and they are paying their taxes to that area.

According to what I've read some consider the right to have a firearm "god given."

Are you saying god's "grace" doesn't apply for people you call "illegal?"

 

[Libby von H]

Is that the "originalist" view?

Care to show us the "illegal exception" clause?

YOu both fail logic. If merely being here means you are a citizen then you can't be here and not be a citizen , so what does citizen mean?

The Founders view was the same view that has held sway for almost 3000 years in the West

It has 3 aspects

1) not all immigrants are equal. Every nation has the right to decide which immigrants are beneficial, that is, “peaceful,” to the common good. As a matter of self-defense, the State can reject those criminal elements, traitors, enemies and others who it deems harmful or “hostile” to its citizens.

2) the first condition for acceptance a desire to integrate fully into what would today be considered the culture and life of the nation.

3) the granting of citizenship would not be immediate. The integration process takes time. People need to adapt themselves to the nation.

So no perverts,no folks who don't accept freedom of religion and whose beliefs include killing apostate family members,and no being a citizen of a country whose laws, history, and principles you are currently clueless about.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

According to what I've read some consider the right to have a firearm "god given."

I do not think god gives a fuck about guns. But that is just me.

Are you saying god's "grace" doesn't apply for people you call "illegal?"

Do you have a better term for someone breaking the law? I guess we could call them criminal immigrants, would that be more accurate?

 

[frigidweirdo]

The ruling the judge on illegals and guns is crazy. if you are here illegally you should only have the most basic of rights. I do wonder if the judge did it so those on the left could be like "Oh, so there are limits to the 2nd". The irony of this case is that the guy was in Illinois so he was violating Illinois law since there is no way he had a FOID card.

And yes, there is gradual attainment of rights, voting, drinking, legally signing a contract and more happen at 18 or 21.

A dual citizen should have no limits.

Most countries allow legal resident aliens to own land, in fact many of them use such as a way to get residency in their countries. Invest a set amount in real estate and get a visa.

I personally have no issues with local elections allowing legal non-citizens to vote since they are directly impacted by the outcome and they are paying their taxes to that area.

It's funny because gun loving people say that everyone should be able to have access to guns at all times. They say that's what the 2A protects.

 

[Dadoalex]

YOu both fail logic. If merely being here means you are a citizen then you can't be here and not be a citizen , so what does citizen mean?

The Founders view was the same view that has held sway for almost 3000 years in the West

It has 3 aspects

1) not all immigrants are equal. Every nation has the right to decide which immigrants are beneficial, that is, “peaceful,” to the common good. As a matter of self-defense, the State can reject those criminal elements, traitors, enemies and others who it deems harmful or “hostile” to its citizens.

2) the first condition for acceptance a desire to integrate fully into what would today be considered the culture and life of the nation.

3) the granting of citizenship would not be immediate. The integration process takes time. People need to adapt themselves to the nation.

So no perverts,no folks who don't accept freedom of religion and whose beliefs include killing apostate family members,and no being a citizen of a country whose laws, history, and principles you are currently clueless about.

As may be.
I've never been strong on understanding MAGAT logic.

But perhaps you could pass a simple reading test and show us where in the Constitution it says that people you call "illegal" are exempt from having rights?

 

[Dadoalex]

I do not think god gives a fuck about guns. But that is just me.



Do you have a better term for someone breaking the law? I guess we could call them criminal immigrants, would that be more accurate?

So Trump, in your words, is a criminal?

After all, like the people you call "illegal," he's only been accused of a crime, not convicted.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So Trump, in your words, is a criminal?

Yes, I think he is.

After all, like the people you call "illegal," he's only been accused of a crime, not convicted.

If someone is standing in my living room and I did not invite them in, they are breaking the law whether they have been tried in a court of law or not.

 

[Dadoalex]

Yes, I think he is.



If someone is standing in my living room and I did not invite them in, they are breaking the law whether they have been tried in a court of law or not.

Does your living room have invisible walls?

Maybe it escapes that this country is not your property and the Constitution doesn't leave out people because you don't like them.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Does your living room have invisible walls?

Maybe it escapes that this country is not your property and the Constitution doesn't leave out people because you don't like them.

Everyone knows where our borders are. If you are standing in NYC you know that you are in the US.

What makes you think I do not like them, just because I am honest about their actions? Most of them are here because US employers are more than willing to pay them knowing they are not here legally. It is a fucked up system that favors nobody but big business. I would love to see an actual working guest worker program so they could come here legally and have some more protections in the work place.

But neither party wants this as both parties are owned by big business. As long as people keep voting for the duopoly, nothing will change.

There are parts of the Constitution that covers everyone on our soil, and there are parts that are just for citizens. I live in Ill, where this ruling was about. There are very strict rules for gun ownership, why should those who are in the country illegally not have to follow them when the citizens do? Somehow I doubt you think that the laws of Illinois are against the Constitution.

 

[Dadoalex]

Everyone knows where our borders are. If you are standing in NYC you know that you are in the US.

What makes you think I do not like them, just because I am honest about their actions? Most of them are here because US employers are more than willing to pay them knowing they are not here legally. It is a fucked up system that favors nobody but big business. I would love to see an actual working guest worker program so they could come here legally and have some more protections in the work place.

But neither party wants this as both parties are owned by big business. As long as people keep voting for the duopoly, nothing will change.

There are parts of the Constitution that covers everyone on our soil, and there are parts that are just for citizens. I live in Ill, where this ruling was about. There are very strict rules for gun ownership, why should those who are in the country illegally not have to follow them when the citizens do? Somehow I doubt you think that the laws of Illinois are against the Constitution.

The ruling didn't say people don't have to follow the law.
The ruling says you can't exclude a group from Constitutional protections based on their immigration status.

Show me the parts of the 2nd that are for us citizens only.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The ruling didn't say people don't have to follow the law.
The ruling says you can't exclude a group from Constitutional protections based on their immigration status.

The person in the ruling in question was not following the law.

Show me the enumerated rights that are for us citizens only.

Voting in Fed elections for one.

 

[Dadoalex]

The person in the ruling in question was not following the law.



Voting in Fed elections for one.

Not an enumerated right.
Try again.