What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

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!

CDZ Illegal Immigration: Shouln't the Punishment Fit the Crime?

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,925
Reaction score
3,586
Points
280
Don't get me wrong, I am fully in favor of IMMEDIATELY and PERMANENTLY securing our borders (and visa programs) by any means necessary, including walls, fences, etc. However, the current debate about what to do with the illegal immigrants who are already here seems to have become a contest about who has the most draconian plan to deal with them.

First, let us remember that illegal entry into the U.S. is not a felony. (Maybe it should be?) Secondly, many of these people arrived here as children and know no other country to call home. Third, many are members of families that include U.S. citizens. Thus it seems that arbitrary arrest and deportation of these people to some location (?) outside of the U.S. is grossly disproportionate to their "crime," and permanent exclusion from participating in American society is not much better.

Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

Under such a plan, even the concern about eventually "packing" the voter rolls with new (Democrat) voters will have subsided into much more significant political issues. Does anyone really think that maintaining the status quo on this subject is in our best interests?
 
Last edited:

320 Years of History

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
815
Points
255
Location
Washington, D.C.
Don't get me wrong, I am fully in favor of IMMEDIATELY and PERMANENTLY securing our borders (and visa programs) by any means necessary, including walls, fences, etc. However, the current debate about what to do with the illegal immigrants who are already here seems to have become a contest about who has the most draconian plan to deal with them.

First, let us remember that illegal entry into the U.S. is not a felony. (Maybe it should be?) Secondly, many of these people arrived here as children and know no other country to call home. Third, many are members of families that include U.S. citizens. Thus it seems that arbitrary arrest and deportation of these people to some location (?) outside of the U.S. is grossly disproportionate to their "crime," and permanent exclusion from participating in American society is not much better.

Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

Under such a plan, even the concern about eventually "packing" the voter rolls with new (Democrat) voters will have subsided into much more significant political issues. Does anyone really think that maintaining the status quo on this subject is in our best interests?

Sounds like a reasonable enough idea. I don't concur with the assumption about immigrants not paying taxes, or the "by any means" aspect of what one might consider/implement as alternative solutions to the one you've proposed, but otherwise, the basis for your proposal seems as reasonable as does the proposal itself.
 

Elvis Obama

VIP Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
852
Reaction score
140
Points
70
Sure, maintaining the status quo is in our best interests. If we didn't want to all we'd need to do is put the onus on employers. Jail some business owners for using illegal labor, and hey presto, the problem will vanish. Who wants that? The people who'll pay more for food? The people who'll lose profits? As with most issues, this one is dealt with by denial.
 

Syriusly

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
54,851
Reaction score
7,126
Points
1,840
Don't get me wrong, I am fully in favor of IMMEDIATELY and PERMANENTLY securing our borders (and visa programs) by any means necessary, including walls, fences, etc. However, the current debate about what to do with the illegal immigrants who are already here seems to have become a contest about who has the most draconian plan to deal with them.

First, let us remember that illegal entry into the U.S. is not a felony. (Maybe it should be?) Secondly, many of these people arrived here as children and know no other country to call home. Third, many are members of families that include U.S. citizens. Thus it seems that arbitrary arrest and deportation of these people to some location (?) outside of the U.S. is grossly disproportionate to their "crime," and permanent exclusion from participating in American society is not much better.

Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

Under such a plan, even the concern about eventually "packing" the voter rolls with new (Democrat) voters will have subsided into much more significant political issues. Does anyone really think that maintaining the status quo on this subject is in our best interests?

That is far, far to reasonable for anyone on either the right or the left to accept.

I am all for a path for permanent residency- but not a path to citizenship- for illegal aliens.

I think both parties pander to the extremes in this issue- the Republicans pander to the fears of those who fear Mexicans and other, the Democrats pander to the fears of recent immigrants and families of immigrants, while neither party is seriously attempting to address the issue.

Illegal immigration is a real problem- just not the problem that the extremes are screaming about- and needs a reasonable solution- and this is one time I agree with you.
 

Rouge Rover

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2016
Messages
935
Reaction score
120
Points
45
Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

They broke the law. They are adversely effecting our labor market, Americans first. Immigration policy should be about what's best for our country, I couldn't care less about reuniting families.
 

oldsoul

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
2,763
Reaction score
415
Points
140
Location
Standing with Covington Kids
Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

They broke the law. They are adversely effecting our labor market, Americans first. Immigration policy should be about what's best for our country, I couldn't care less about reuniting families.
Sometimes, as a father, I have to do things that my child does not like, because it is in the best interests of my family/child. Other times I have to do things my neighbors do not like, because it is in the best intersts of my family. Still other times, as a manager, I've had to tell customers and employees "no", because it was in the best interests of my business. Same goes for a nation, ANY nation. Sometimes they have to look out for their own best interests. This is one of those times, sorry if that seems harsh, but it is the reality. We have to get our house in order before we can help those less fortunate.
 
OP
J

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,925
Reaction score
3,586
Points
280
Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

They broke the law. They are adversely effecting our labor market, Americans first. Immigration policy should be about what's best for our country, I couldn't care less about reuniting families.
Sometimes, as a father, I have to do things that my child does not like, because it is in the best interests of my family/child. Other times I have to do things my neighbors do not like, because it is in the best intersts of my family. Still other times, as a manager, I've had to tell customers and employees "no", because it was in the best interests of my business. Same goes for a nation, ANY nation. Sometimes they have to look out for their own best interests. This is one of those times, sorry if that seems harsh, but it is the reality. We have to get our house in order before we can help those less fortunate.

So are mass arrests and deportations in our best interests?
 

Rouge Rover

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2016
Messages
935
Reaction score
120
Points
45
Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

They broke the law. They are adversely effecting our labor market, Americans first. Immigration policy should be about what's best for our country, I couldn't care less about reuniting families.
Sometimes, as a father, I have to do things that my child does not like, because it is in the best interests of my family/child. Other times I have to do things my neighbors do not like, because it is in the best intersts of my family. Still other times, as a manager, I've had to tell customers and employees "no", because it was in the best interests of my business. Same goes for a nation, ANY nation. Sometimes they have to look out for their own best interests. This is one of those times, sorry if that seems harsh, but it is the reality. We have to get our house in order before we can help those less fortunate.

So are mass arrests and deportations in our best interests?

In the long term I think they would be. Short term would hurt but I think they have to leave.
 

oldsoul

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
2,763
Reaction score
415
Points
140
Location
Standing with Covington Kids
Other than rigidly adhering to the principle of "not cutting in line," what is to be gained by this approach? Why not offer TEMPORARY residency (but NO welfare benefits) to those people with close ties to the U.S. who voluntarily register and pass criminal background checks? (Those who fail to register would then be subject to immediate deportation and imprisonment if they return.) Why not then provide, after a suitable period of paying taxes and demonstrated self-sufficiency, a means to apply for permanent residency?

They broke the law. They are adversely effecting our labor market, Americans first. Immigration policy should be about what's best for our country, I couldn't care less about reuniting families.
Sometimes, as a father, I have to do things that my child does not like, because it is in the best interests of my family/child. Other times I have to do things my neighbors do not like, because it is in the best intersts of my family. Still other times, as a manager, I've had to tell customers and employees "no", because it was in the best interests of my business. Same goes for a nation, ANY nation. Sometimes they have to look out for their own best interests. This is one of those times, sorry if that seems harsh, but it is the reality. We have to get our house in order before we can help those less fortunate.

So are mass arrests and deportations in our best interests?
Yes. We can no longer afford to send the message to the world that we will do nothing if you come here without abiding by our laws. It's that simple. We can no longer allow people to come here, at will, and do nothing about it. It would be much the same if a peson where to allow anyone who wished, to enter their home. At some point, even the most accomodating peson, would have to put a stop to it.
 
OP
J

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,925
Reaction score
3,586
Points
280
I am fully in favor of IMMEDIATELY and PERMANENTLY securing our borders (and visa programs) by any means necessary, including walls, fences, etc. However, the current debate about what to do with the illegal immigrants who are already here

Among other things, they represent a potential labor base which could bolster tax revenues and mitigate the disastrous worker/retiree ratio which is bankrupting Social Security. In order for them to qualify for permanent residency, they should have to prove self-support by filing 10 years of federal tax returns without eligibility for any benefits, including EITC and Social Security.

P.S. These people are not the cause of shrinking wages in the U.S. over the past 8 years. Rather, it has been the result of shipping jobs overseas and hiring legally admitted foreigners to perform mid-level jobs at lower salaries.
 

Rouge Rover

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2016
Messages
935
Reaction score
120
Points
45
P.S. These people are not the cause of shrinking wages in the U.S. over the past 8 years. Rather, it has been the result of shipping jobs overseas and hiring legally admitted foreigners to perform mid-level jobs at lower salaries.

Not over all sectors of the economy but definitely in some of them.
 

oldsoul

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
2,763
Reaction score
415
Points
140
Location
Standing with Covington Kids
I am fully in favor of IMMEDIATELY and PERMANENTLY securing our borders (and visa programs) by any means necessary, including walls, fences, etc. However, the current debate about what to do with the illegal immigrants who are already here

Among other things, they represent a potential labor base which could bolster tax revenues and mitigate the disastrous worker/retiree ratio which is bankrupting Social Security. In order for them to qualify for permanent residency, they should have to prove self-support by filing 10 years of federal tax returns without eligibility for any benefits, including EITC and Social Security.

P.S. These people are not the cause of shrinking wages in the U.S. over the past 8 years. Rather, it has been the result of shipping jobs overseas and hiring legally admitted foreigners to perform mid-level jobs at lower salaries.
And we just forgive them for breaking our laws by coming here outside the established process?
And what do we do about those who cannot/will not "prove" self-support?

I say send them ALL packing, and revamp our imigration laws to make it easier for those who want to come and be productive members of our nation to do so. I do not have all the answers as to HOW to do that, but it sure seems like it may be a great training exercise for our intelligence agencies and millitary to work cooperatively to defend us from all enemies, "...foreign, sir, and domestic." Maybe that opens a pandora's box of sorts though, I don't know. Just thinking "out loud" I guess.
 
OP
J

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,925
Reaction score
3,586
Points
280
And we just forgive them for breaking our laws by coming here outside the established process?
And what do we do about those who cannot/will not "prove" self-support?

1. Ten years of paying taxes without eligibility for any benefits (e.g., accrued Social Security) is a huge penalty for them and an added revenue source to support these programs.

2. Self-support is also a condition for legal immigration. If they can't prove it through tax filings, they should be deported.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
73,865
Reaction score
22,487
Points
2,250
Fuck the bullshit. It is time to FIX the problem
1. MASSIVELY fine employers
2. Mandatory e-verify for jobs and living quarters
3. They get nothing. Not schooling, drivers licenses, healthcare (even turn them down at the ER. Sometimes actual solutions are harsh) they get NOTHING
4. Make becoming a citizen easier. The current system is a bunch of bullshit. They make it seem like we don't want any immigration..
The economy you ask? The jobs?
After that gets implemented, create a work requirement for welfare(obviously not all cases). Then we fill those jobs "Americans don't want" AND we cut welfare. 2 birds 1 stone.
If they don't want to work em', then fuck em'. They obviously don't have much self-respect or respect for their families. I would do whatever I had to do to feed my family. But that is just me.
 

oldsoul

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
2,763
Reaction score
415
Points
140
Location
Standing with Covington Kids
And we just forgive them for breaking our laws by coming here outside the established process?
And what do we do about those who cannot/will not "prove" self-support?

1. Ten years of paying taxes without eligibility for any benefits (e.g., accrued Social Security) is a huge penalty for them and an added revenue source to support these programs.

2. Self-support is also a condition for legal immigration. If they can't prove it through tax filings, they should be deported.
What incentive do they have to "come out of the shadows", if they have to face "punishment? What ever tactic we use, short of amnesty, we will have to go find them. How do you propose we do that?
Using your logic in point one, I could go into YOUR house and do whatever I want, then simply pay you a "fee" and it's all good. Right? No jail, no criminal record... Just pay a pre-determined amount, regardless of how much I may have cost you, and go about my life.
 
OP
J

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,925
Reaction score
3,586
Points
280
And we just forgive them for breaking our laws by coming here outside the established process?
And what do we do about those who cannot/will not "prove" self-support?

1. Ten years of paying taxes without eligibility for any benefits (e.g., accrued Social Security) is a huge penalty for them and an added revenue source to support these programs.

2. Self-support is also a condition for legal immigration. If they can't prove it through tax filings, they should be deported.
What incentive do they have to "come out of the shadows", if they have to face "punishment? What ever tactic we use, short of amnesty, we will have to go find them. How do you propose we do that?
Using your logic in point one, I could go into YOUR house and do whatever I want, then simply pay you a "fee" and it's all good. Right? No jail, no criminal record... Just pay a pre-determined amount, regardless of how much I may have cost you, and go about my life.

Those who fail to register would be subject to immediate deportation. Please stop inserting your own terminology and then arguing against it.
 

JoeMoma

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
18,318
Reaction score
6,038
Points
360
Should the punishment fit the crime? Yes! Does a shoplifter get to keep the loot after being caught shoplifting? I don't think so? Should those that enter the country illegally be granted citizenship? See answer the shoplifter question!
 

MaryL

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
17,464
Reaction score
6,805
Points
350
Location
Midwestern U.S.
If you have 20 million people violating immigration law, felony or not, something is broken here. Often as not, the law is held to blame. Perhaps it's the lax enforcement tied to a vicious cycle of people that think they are entitled to break immigration law , perhaps actually we need to break that cycle and (common sense says) enforce immigration law and ramp up enforcement? But that's just me. What the hell do I know?
 

Old Yeller

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
9,999
Reaction score
2,311
Points
290
Location
driving
So are mass arrests and deportations in our best interests?


It seems you start with the "easier" ones. Jailed, probation, court types. presto....3mil gone. That sends a message.........many will self deport. Maybe out of 30mil or so you end up with 10mil "good"
ones. Maybe employer sponsorship? for some? Children born here? Don't know. Go out, come back fast track with Mom and Dad? If no Dad.........then what? messy.
 

Old Yeller

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
9,999
Reaction score
2,311
Points
290
Location
driving
Another thing. Why did Mexico get a pass for allowing this to go on for 30 years? USA holds the hammer. Shut the border. No visa, no tourism, no travel. Get tough, better late than never.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top