POLL: Should America be a Sanctuary Country?

[blastoff]

YES!

It's time our liberals came to have to swallow their own medicine. We with the means may well "vote with our feet" and move on, leaving all you lefties to wallow in your utopian shithole.

Huh? Move on to where? A utopian shithole someplace that's exactly what we strove to avoid happening to America? **** that! Let the lefty shitbags move to any already existing shithole of their choice in the world.

 

[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.

people walk out of courthouses when they've been CHARGED, not only when they are convicted, and ICE has no right to anyone who has just been accused. you can't even serve a person with legal papers in court. there is a certain decorum that has to be followed.

ICE can do it's job without making the local governments their patsies.

I don't really understand that. I figured if ICE is out to collect someone specific, they already know the person is here illegally or has a deportation order, or something. ICE is hanging around the courthouse just to look for suspicious looking Hispanics? I have a feeling they don't have time for that.
You can't serve a person with legal papers in court? Decorum? Well, they can serve the papers as soon as they step out of the courtroom, and that is what ICE is being prohibited from doing. They are doing that so illegals will not avoid coming to court, not to be "nice," but not working with the federal government when they have a solid reason to detain that person is not right, Jillian.

 

[jillian]

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.

people walk out of courthouses when they've been CHARGED, not only when they are convicted, and ICE has no right to anyone who has just been accused. you can't even serve a person with legal papers in court. there is a certain decorum that has to be followed.

ICE can do it's job without making the local governments their patsies.

I don't really understand that. I figured if ICE is out to collect someone specific, they already know the person is here illegally or has a deportation order, or something. ICE is hanging around the courthouse just to look for suspicious looking Hispanics? I have a feeling they don't have time for that.
You can't serve a person with legal papers in court? Decorum? Well, they can serve the papers as soon as they step out of the courtroom, and that is what ICE is being prohibited from doing. They are doing that so illegals will not avoid coming to court, not to be "nice," but not working with the federal government when they have a solid reason to detain that person is not right, Jillian.

that might have been true under ICE before Trump. They no longer wait until someone is convicted. They snatch people who haven't done anything and who have children here. They separate families. Ultimately, the only issue is "can the federal government force it's authority into state institutions like courts, police departments and sheriffs' offices?

there is no obligation that the states work with the federal government in this area. if there wee a "solid reason", then the feds should do what they have to and leave stat law enforcement authorities alone. The truth is that if Donald's policies weren't heavy handed, without rational basis and bigoted, then maybe the states *would* work with the feds. Those could be agreements that could have bee worked out with another administration.

you know that president Obama had the reputation of being "president deportation", in the latino community, right? because they DID arrest and deport criminals. If Donald didn't want to be indiscriminate and lump all immigrants together, again, none of this would be an issue. Just remember the insane garbage Donald has fed his bigot base about immigrants. and then read the garbage that bigot base spews on this board.

 

[Likkmee]

The Statue of Liberty is a national monument. The plaque at the base, say's it all.

View attachment 182917
SOL: "Give me your tired, your poor , your huddle masses..."

Mac: "Screw that! We need to pander to scared white people. MAGA!!! But I'm really a liberal!"

 

[BrokeLoser]

America became a sanctuary country in 1492.

NEGATIVE
Look up a pesky little document you hate...it’s called the U.S. Constitution.

 

[BrokeLoser]

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.
.

How many of the posters here are native Americans or African American? It seems to me that all the people who aren't and say no, forget that they are in the US because at some point in their past they or their forefathers needed the sanctuary that the United States provided. Be it sanctuary from religious persecution, escaping famine, wars or simply seeking a better economic future. The same reasons people come now.

That’s a not so clever spin....good people are done buying the tear jerking nobility bullshit...When REAL Americans decided to help REAL Americans in 1935 via a national welfare system all that shit changed.
Filthy Wetbacks come here today to procreate at a cockroaches pace and drop anchor babies in the laps of good, hard working Americans...Simple shit.
Lastly, you might want to look up a pesky little document you hate...it’s called the U.S. Constitution.

 

[Votto]

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.
.

I thought it was.

No matter, we will be ignored if we oppose it.

Sure, we vote for those who say they will secure the border but we are lied to with impunity.

 

[BrokeLoser]

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.

people walk out of courthouses when they've been CHARGED, not only when they are convicted, and ICE has no right to anyone who has just been accused. you can't even serve a person with legal papers in court. there is a certain decorum that has to be followed.

ICE can do it's job without making the local governments their patsies.

I don't really understand that. I figured if ICE is out to collect someone specific, they already know the person is here illegally or has a deportation order, or something. ICE is hanging around the courthouse just to look for suspicious looking Hispanics? I have a feeling they don't have time for that.
You can't serve a person with legal papers in court? Decorum? Well, they can serve the papers as soon as they step out of the courtroom, and that is what ICE is being prohibited from doing. They are doing that so illegals will not avoid coming to court, not to be "nice," but not working with the federal government when they have a solid reason to detain that person is not right, Jillian.

that might have been true under ICE before Trump. They no longer wait until someone is convicted. They snatch people who haven't done anything and who have children here. They separate families. Ultimately, the only issue is "can the federal government force it's authority into state institutions like courts, police departments and sheriffs' offices?

there is no obligation that the states work with the federal government in this area. if there wee a "solid reason", then the feds should do what they have to and leave stat law enforcement authorities alone. The truth is that if Donald's policies weren't heavy handed, without rational basis and bigoted, then maybe the states *would* work with the feds. Those could be agreements that could have bee worked out with another administration.

you know that president Obama had the reputation of being "president deportation", in the latino community, right? because they DID arrest and deport criminals. If Donald didn't want to be indiscriminate and lump all immigrants together, again, none of this would be an issue. Just remember the insane garbage Donald has fed his bigot base about immigrants. and then read the garbage that bigot base spews on this board.

“They no longer wait until someone is convicted. They snatch people who haven't done anything and who have children here. They separate families.“

Hold on a minute...you’re telling me that when law enforcement arrests criminals for breaking laws and ******* over the American people they’re “separating families”? Haha...that’s some funny shit right there. That’s BULLSHIT...we should be allowed to break laws without the risk of arrest so long as we have families...isn’t that right Loons? You people really have no clue of how ******* retarded you sound do you?
I love watching you wackos struggle to understand something we all learned by third grade...the simple principle of cause and affect....hahaha

 

[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.

Sanctuary implies illegal, Joeron.

Except you didn't prove they were drug dealers or sex offenders.

They broke a minor law. So do the white people who hire them to start with.

 

[JoeB131]

That’s a not so clever spin....good people are done buying the tear jerking nobility bullshit...When REAL Americans decided to help REAL Americans in 1935 via a national welfare system all that shit changed.
Filthy Wetbacks come here today to procreate at a cockroaches pace and drop anchor babies in the laps of good, hard working Americans...Simple shit.

Okay, buddy, here's the thing. Mexican Immigration only really became a thing after the 1980's. Before that, those bottom rung jobs were filled by Poles and other Europeans.

Hold on a minute...you’re telling me that when law enforcement arrests criminals for breaking laws and ******* over the American people they’re “separating families”? Haha...that’s some funny shit right there. That’s BULLSHIT...we should be allowed to break laws without the risk of arrest so long as we have families...isn’t that right Loons? You people really have no clue of how ******* retarded you sound do you?

When they arrest the white people who hire them at the same time, I'll take your concern for the law seriously.

 

[Billo_Really]

That was a great show! When I was a kid, I watched "All in the Family" religously.