POLL: Should America be a Sanctuary Country?

[impuretrash]

Should America be a Sanctuary Country?


America has always been a sanctuary country - dipshit RW's are too dumb to know how their ancestors got here in the first place.

Dipshit LW's are constantly chastising RW's for "living in a past that never really existed"

 

[usmbguest5318]

Should America be a Sanctuary Country?

Sanctuary country with regard to what?

 

[Mac1958]

Note that we're seeing EXACTLY the kinds of mockery and attacks I described in the OP.

They literally can't help themselves. They know what they're doing is wrong, but they don't care.

 

[BlindBoo]

I guess I should have offered a third answer option, something like:

"I think it should be, but I don't want to admit it yet".

Perhaps you could define what it is that you call sanctuary.

Does it mean all form of asylum for undocumented immigrants who commit any number of crimes?

Does it just mean protecting innocent illegal migrant victims of crimes or witnesses to crimes?

i would say no to the former and yes to the latter.

 

[Siete]

Should America be a Sanctuary Country?

Sanctuary country with regard to what?

exactly --

 

[Siete]

the board could use some sanctuary from all the shit stirring RW's ....

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I guess I should have offered a third answer option, something like:

"I think it should be, but I don't want to admit it yet".

Perhaps you could define what it is that you call sanctuary.

Does it mean all form of asylum for undocumented immigrants who commit any number of crimes?

Does it just mean protecting innocent illegal migrant victims of crimes or witnesses to crimes?

i would say no to the former and yes to the latter.

Illegal migrant victim.......


Lol

Gtfo

 

[usmbguest5318]

Should America be a Sanctuary Country?

Sanctuary country with regard to what?

Let me clarify, Mac1958. I know you have alluded to immigration, but sanctuary country in the context of the immigration current debate doesn't really make sense. The U.S. can't be a sanctuary country for folks aiming to avoid U.S. federal officials.

If this were instead the 15th and 16th centuries and "sanctuary country" had a context similar to what it did for Huguenots who fled France and found sanctuary in the Jura Mountains of Switzerland, then I'd understand what "sanctuary country" means.

 

[OldLady]

Every time there's a thread about sanctuary cities and states, a consistent group of people jump in to mock and attack anyone who are against them.

Okay. Why just limit it to states and cities? What's the point?

So I'm sure many will vote "Yes" and proudly explain why.

My vote is No.
.

do you understand that being a sanctuary city only means that you're not turning people over to ICE?

where does it say that the feds can deputize local police forces?

I think it's going way too far when they won't allow ICE to enter a court house or a jail to collect someone. I suppose they are worried that illegals won't show up for court if that starts happening, but JEEZUM. When we had an inmate who had to serve a sentence in another jurisdiction after his bid with us was up, we'd alert that office and the sheriff from wherever would be there at the door to take him away. ICE can't even do that? That has got to be tremendously frustrating for them and I don't blame them for objecting to that.
On the other hand, overcrowded county jails shouldn't have to and legally can't detain an inmate past his release date, waiting for an ICE officer to mosey over. I know they're busy but you can't expect that from a jail. However, the jail should definitely give ICE full advance notice of when the inmate is expected to be discharged. Of course, if he is getting out on bail, that could be just about any time, and you wouldn't have more than a few hours notice.
See how complicated it gets? I think a lot of the "sanctuary city" stuff is misinformation and rumor, and different cities have different policies. Doing anything to make it harder for ICE to prosecute offenders is WRONG, though.

 

[BlindBoo]

I guess I should have offered a third answer option, something like:

"I think it should be, but I don't want to admit it yet".

Perhaps you could define what it is that you call sanctuary.

Does it mean all form of asylum for undocumented immigrants who commit any number of crimes?

Does it just mean protecting innocent illegal migrant victims of crimes or witnesses to crimes?

i would say no to the former and yes to the latter.

Illegal migrant victim.......


Lol

Gtfo

You think it's funny that illegal migrant workers are victims of untold numbers of assaults, rapes and murders?

Perhaps you think that because they are illegal they deserve to be victims and that amuses you?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Where are all the people who defend sanctuary cities and states?

Deported?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I live in a sanctuary city.

.....but the virtue signaling city council is classy about it. When they send the welcome wagon out to the houses of newly arriving M13 , it's catered by the top chefs in town.

 

[JoeB131]

Every time there's a thread about sanctuary cities and states, a consistent group of people jump in to mock and attack anyone who are against them.

Okay. Why just limit it to states and cities? What's the point?

So I'm sure many will vote "Yes" and proudly explain why.

My vote is No.

Seems to me that we've given sanctuary to lots of people- Irish fleeing British oppression, Europeans fleeing the Nazis...

 

[my2¢]

Yes, because I believe in the Constitution and the stance that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Police should not hold suspects for ICE without a warrant for arrest issued for probable cause.

 

[BlackSand]

.​

Pineapple​

.​

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I noticed most of the "usual suspects" are too cowardly to vote. Too scared to expose themselves

 

[JoeB131]

Note that we're seeing EXACTLY the kinds of mockery and attacks I described in the OP.

They literally can't help themselves. They know what they're doing is wrong, but they don't care.

Naw, you are still clueless.

Mac starts out with ridiculous premise.

We all point out that it's ridiculous.

You whine that everyone is being mean to you.

 

[JoeB131]

I noticed most of the "usual suspects" are too cowardly to vote. Too scared to expose themselves

I voted yes, but like most Mac arguments, they are silly for silly's sake.

We've known the system is broken, we've known it for 16 years now.

Yet, the loud mouth nativists are dominating the conversation.

The problem with pandering to these guys is that they don't fix the problem. YOu deport Paco, Juan will take his job the next day. You deport Juan, and Jose is already waiting for an opening. And by the time you've caught up with Jose, Paco has already snuck back into the country and is asking for his old job back.

You could solve this problem really easily.

1) Create a national ID Card, with biometrics, so that everyone who works somewhere is identified and confirmed.

2) Create a guest worker program, like Germany, to bring in labor when needed.

3) Put the focus enforcement on employers, with severe penalties for the repeat offenders.

 

[deltex1]

Every time there's a thread about sanctuary cities and states, a consistent group of people jump in to mock and attack anyone who are against them.

Okay. Why just limit it to states and cities? What's the point?

So I'm sure many will vote "Yes" and proudly explain why.

My vote is No.
.

Of corse we do. We want all the morons, drug dealers and sex offenders we can get!

 

[JoeB131]

Of corse we do. We want all the morons, drug dealers and sex offenders we can get!

Yes, because that's clearly what all the immigrants are.

That's what they said about the Irish 150 years ago.
And the Germans 100 years ago.
And the Poles 50 years ago.

and look how that turned out.