Log in

View Full Version : Fun with Factoids: Immigration!



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4

datchapin
01-17-2007, 08:58 AM
Sirona, I'm glad you responded to something that according to you didn't apply to you. I know those that sneak in are the most visible types of IA, but if they are law abiding and do what they have to do I don't see any reason why they should be denied the opportunity to work for their papers here. Sneaking accross and then getting your paperwork done is very common. Yes, I agree criminals should be treated differently, somewhat, but if IA's haven't broken any laws and are working towards assimilation, why not let them have the opportunity?

Sirona
01-17-2007, 09:27 AM
I know those that sneak in are the most visible types of IA, but if they are law abiding and do what they have to do I don't see any reason why they should be denied the opportunity to work for their papers here.

They aren't law abiding. They're in the country ILLEGALLY.


...but if IA's haven't broken any laws and are working towards assimilation, why not let them have the opportunity?

Well see they did break a law.

That's why they are call ILLEGAL aliens.

Yekhefah
01-17-2007, 10:48 AM
I don't come from a WASPy background, and it's probably why I have a different perspective on these issues.

What, and I do? :laughing: I was raised on welfare!

Deogol
01-17-2007, 01:09 PM
First of all, it was never said anywhere in this discussion that simply because someone doesn't speak English that they are not here legally. So out of everything we had to say, that's what gets to you? I have no idea what you were reading, because it certainly was not this thread, as that was never even mentioned. Not once.

And you're accusing Yek of being closed-minded? May I ask about what exactly? It was explicitly clear the parallels she was attempting to draw from what she said about emigrating to another country and how she has empathy towards people legally emigrating to the US and how it can be a pain in the ass because she herself has had first hand experience trying to emigrate to another country.

Lastly, we were not discussing people who are in the U.S. temporarily and legally. We were talking about those who are here illegally, plain and simple. And once again, it was never even brought up by anyone that someone here on a temporary work permit should try to assimilate into American culture and not send money back home. Unless I'm incredibly confused and have been hit upside the head with a baseball bat causing some sort of brain damage, I was under the impresssion that once again, we were talking about ILLEGAL immigrants.

This is quite clear to me - I am well accustomed to soft thinking people mixing up subjects and bringing up facts outside the scope of the discussion to make a totally irrelevant point.

Deogol
01-17-2007, 01:10 PM
Mia said it before I could. Australia has an excellent history of pinching pennies. They saved bullets by herding Aborigines of cliffs. Do you have any idea how many infected blankets the US could have saved had they adopted similar strategies?

Damn man - we should fucking change that shit, eh?

Maybe make a law against it and then we could put all those people in jail.

Oh wait ... it's in the past and nothing can be done about it. Huh.

Deogol
01-17-2007, 01:13 PM
Sirona, I'm glad you responded to something that according to you didn't apply to you. I know those that sneak in are the most visible types of IA, but if they are law abiding and do what they have to do I don't see any reason why they should be denied the opportunity to work for their papers here. Sneaking accross and then getting your paperwork done is very common. Yes, I agree criminals should be treated differently, somewhat, but if IA's haven't broken any laws and are working towards assimilation, why not let them have the opportunity?

At the expense of who's opportunity?

How about every liberals favorite equal opportunity hobby project:

Deogol
01-17-2007, 01:14 PM
What, and I do? :laughing: I was raised on welfare!

How could you have been on welfare? You're white and a jew! }:D

Yekhefah
01-17-2007, 01:26 PM
Yeah, no kidding. Guess my mama never got the memo!

Deogol
01-17-2007, 01:50 PM
In a vacuum, no. In a scenario where those higher wages are forcefully confiscated from other hard working people who have invested time and effort in their own skills which allows them to earn more, then yes. The basic issue of course is the 'minimum acceptable American standard of living' premise, where people whose skill level / work ethic / etc. limits them to providing a service that is not worth a sufficient amount of added value to finance that 'minimum acceptable American standard of living' for themselves must achieve it by reducing the standard of living of their more skilled higher work ethic neighbors. Unfortunately, in order to create a vacuum, the US gov't would have to cut off all imports, cut off all outsourcing of 'portable' services, and re-establish a self-contained US economy which consisted of both production and consumption (which we haven't had since the early 70's). Absent such a self-contained economy, unskilled labor rates are set at the margin by the labor costs of the least expensive imported product / service.


Partially right.

Americans certainly should have a standard of living. The whole point of society and this economic system is so we don't have people shitting in the street like Bombay.

I don't have a problem with my money being forcefully confiscated to aid people down on their luck. That is part of being in a society. What I don't like are the millions confiscated for bullshit corporate welfare (and foreign country welfare) which takes way way more money out of people's pockets than some six year old's campbell soup can.

I also believe taxes should be more oriented on wealth - not income and spending. Those 10% of the people who own 91% of the wealth in this country which is protected by military, police, and judicial means and created by this society certainly have a responsibility to pay for that more so than an autoworker humping his ass on an assembly line third shift while being threatened with outsourcing.

There certainly is a vacuum being created - and it is sucking hard at all the jobs, opportunities, technologies, and hope of this country.

The idea in Wealth of Nations was complimentary trade - I don't make this so well so you make it - you don't make that so well so I will make it. This has been perverted into who can make it the cheapest (and being made well has nothing to do with it!)

There is no need for a totally self-contained economy - only a fair trade economy.

Sirona
01-17-2007, 02:10 PM
What, and I do? :laughing: I was raised on welfare!

Oh please. We all know you were raised in a castle with maids and butlers and glass slippers and shit. ;D

Yekhefah
01-17-2007, 02:35 PM
You know it, baby. ::)

Not only was I raised on welfare, I was born to a teenage divorcee and grew up in a majority-black city (and lived for a year in an otherwise all-black housing project). Our situation had improved by my teens and I did go to private high school, but that's because my mom is one of the all-time greatest cheapskates, and I've been working since I was 15. Yeah, that's my privileged WASP background, all right!

Melonie
01-17-2007, 03:08 PM
also believe taxes should be more oriented on wealth - not income and spending. Those 10% of the people who own 91% of the wealth in this country which is protected by military, police, and judicial means and created by this society certainly have a responsibility to pay for that more so than an autoworker humping his ass on an assembly line third shift while being threatened with outsourcing.

Agreed. However, one of the unspoken truths of the American tax system is that a certain political faction will promote the idea that they are increasing taxes on the 'rich' in order to transfer more money to help the 'poor'. However, in point of fact, they increase taxes on ordinary income - which affects middle class Americans much more severely on a percentage basis than 'rich' Americans. The reason for the disproportional effect is that a large percentage of the total earnings for middle class people consists of their paycheck, as opposed to a large percentage of the total earnings of 'rich' people coming from stocks and (tax free) bonds which are taxed as capital gains (if at all) at a much lower tax rate than ordinary income.


There is no need for a totally self-contained economy - only a fair trade economy

True in theory, but an impossibility in the real world. Achieving true 'fair trade' conditions would require that the playing field somehow be levelled in regard to US gov't mandated minimum labor costs that don't exist in many foreign countries, US gov't mandated environmental compliance costs that don't exist in many foreign countries, US gov't mandated employee benefit costs (i.e. SSI, medicare, unemployment insurance, worker's comp etc.) that don't exist in many foreign countries.

If it is a political given that the US gov't is not going to reduce or eliminate these mandated costs on US businesses, the only option to truly achieve 'fair trade' conditions for US companies is to enact tariffs and/or quotas on imported products and 'portable' services to cancel out the cost / price advantage foreign companies enjoy due to lack of similar mandated costs by their own gov'ts. However, if this were to ever actually happen, it would ironically only increase the incentive for US companies to hire more illegal aliens 'off the books' in order to meet increased demand, as well as raising prices across the board i.e. inflation (which lowers the standard of living of poor, middle class and rich Americans alike).

~

lunchbox
01-17-2007, 11:16 PM
What, and I do? :laughing: I was raised on welfare!
WASP has nothing to do with economic status.

WASP = White Anglo Saxon Protestant, the dominant cultural background in this country.

virgoamm
01-18-2007, 01:10 AM
I just came up with a joke, tell me what you think:

What do you call a recreational cocaine user who cheats on their taxes?

A criminal!

What do you call a criminal who complains about someone else breaking the law?

An American!

When is it OK to be a criminal?

Well, people caught with cocaine and who cheat on their taxes go to jail, right?

PhaedrusZ
01-18-2007, 05:29 AM
The follo0wing is not a joke!

What do you call politicians who gerrymander state districts so they can never lose their seats in what really are rigged elections? Never lose their seats because they've stolen every citizen's vote via their mofo gerrymandering?

Criminals!

Since the gerrymandering amounts to "taxation without representation" even in spite of what one of their paid-off, equally crooked judges would lie to the citizenry about, they will, forevermore, be criminals themselves, until such time as the effects of gerrymandering are rendered null and void, and we actually have fair elections again.

And as I recall from my high school history class, there was a certain revolution which was fought due to taxation without representation, which resulted in the founding of a new country.

lunchbox
01-18-2007, 08:11 AM
Well, people caught with cocaine and who cheat on their taxes go to jail, right?
Incorrect.

Sirona
01-18-2007, 08:37 AM
Incorrect.

None of them go to jail? Ever? Riiiiiiiiiiight.
Methinks you argue just to listen to yourself.

Melonie
01-18-2007, 10:39 AM
WASP = White Anglo Saxon Protestant, the dominant cultural background in this country.

statistically, no longer true

PhaedrusZ
01-18-2007, 11:51 AM
Well, people caught with cocaine and who cheat on their taxes go to jail, right?In my book, it's logically impossible for anyone to cheat on their taxes anymore. A certain former president leading by example, indicated it is perfectly legitimate to commit perjury under oath (and I don't effing care WHAT the perjury was about). Since he set such a wonderful example for the citizens to follow, what's the diff if they also follow his example on their tax forms? You know, the now meaningless line above your signature about committing perjury when you sign tax forms, whether federal or state? I mean, they're only following the wonderful example of their former, so-called, "leader!"

And as to cocaine use, there was a former member of the Los Angeles City Council, about whom the following was known: he was a cocaine addict who liked to do lines off of his desk.

Then of course, someone who let his secretary at the time drown, but I guess that's perfectly within the law - at least when your family has that much money. Money which was "earned" in an "oh so legal" activity, for which his father should have been sent to prison - gee, I wonder why his father wasn't sent to prison?

So, if people are going to raise this argument about U.S. citizens not following the "letter of the law," then I'm going to expect every last politician/bureaucrap who has engaged in similar behavior to be sent to prison too, to enjoy the same treatment as any of those citizens who supposedly "broke a law" receives. End of story with me! >:(

datchapin
01-18-2007, 03:45 PM
Allow me to break down this debate. Because apparently very few know what the fuck they're really talking about. I'll start off with Illigal Immigrants being criminals. A criminal is someone who commits a crime. A crime is an act that is against the law. So I've already asked this and gotten bullshit responses. What law have Illegal Immigrants broken? Obviously I'm not gonna waste time waiting for anybody reasonable to answer this so I'll put it like this. None, they have broken no law. Is it against the law to cross the border. Duhr, no Chapin it isn't. Oh, okay so what your trying to tell me is that how one goes about doing something that is a right held by citizens of the world constitutes a crime? While I could draw up a ton of comparisons that should illustrate this point if it isn't clear by itself and you couldn't follow that logic, too bad I'm not gonna waste time explaining it.

Oh, so you still think they're criminals? Oh, funny because your the only one. Immigration cases are not handled by criminal courts. Not now, nor should they ever be. They are handled in civil courts. You think they should still be considered criminals. Nice I guess you classify everyone involved in custody battles, divorce settlements, and over 60% of the medical field criminal among other things. Think this system is flawed and should be handled some other way, maybe making it a criminal charge? You're not alone, however there are a variety of reasons why this is done this way. Reasons which if you really had any interest in the matter you would look up.

So chapin now that you've told us all that, why exactly are they called illegal? Are you shitting me, you've been using that phrase for so long and don't know that? Educate your damn self and stop spouting off ignorance.

If this doesn't apply to you, then don't respond. If it does, you are obviously ignorant in the matter. More than likely if your response is beyond stupid (Which wouldn't surprise me.) I won't respond.

Yekhefah
01-18-2007, 03:48 PM
Datchapin, I have to ask. What, in your opinion, is the purpose of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)? What about the United States Border Patrol? If you would, please sum up their duties for me.

datchapin
01-18-2007, 03:57 PM
At the expense of who's opportunity?

How about every liberals favorite equal opportunity hobby project:

http://www.blacknews.com/pr/immigrants101.html

WTF does that have to do with anything. You're bringing in facts outside of the scope of the discussion your damn self. The second to last paragraph summed up the situation. Perceived dicrimination doesn't carry any weight. Citizens have a vast advantage over IA when it comes to getting jobs. If IA are getting jobs it's because citizens are leaving them open.

datchapin
01-18-2007, 04:10 PM
Datchapin, I have to ask. What, in your opinion, is the purpose of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)? What about the United States Border Patrol? If you would, please sum up their duties for me.

To facilitate the process of acclimating to a new country. To inform and educate those that are coming in and going through said process. To maintain those things in an orderly and efficient manner. To help those who are going through or have gone through that process remain organized so that everything remains in order.

To patrol the border. J/K sort off. To observe and keep track of those who are coming accross the border. To prevent undesireable elements from entering the country. To make sure that it is done in an orderly manner.

These are general premises and each one entails many other things, but in general I think I covered most of it.

Yekhefah
01-18-2007, 04:19 PM
Oh, so the INS is really just a welcome service! I'm so glad you explained that, because it sure was news to me. I wonder why they have raids and deport people, then? I wonder why so many people who want to come to this country are stopped from doing so by the INS because they don't have permission? Are there just a few out-of-line racists driving the welcome wagon?

Sirona
01-18-2007, 04:22 PM
Allow me to break down this debate. Because apparently very few know what the fuck they're really talking about. I'll start off with Illigal Immigrants being criminals. A criminal is someone who commits a crime. A crime is an act that is against the law. So I've already asked this and gotten bullshit responses. What law have Illegal Immigrants broken? Obviously I'm not gonna waste time waiting for anybody reasonable to answer this so I'll put it like this. None, they have broken no law. Is it against the law to cross the border. Duhr, no Chapin it isn't. Oh, okay so what your trying to tell me is that how one goes about doing something that is a right held by citizens of the world constitutes a crime? While I could draw up a ton of comparisons that should illustrate this point if it isn't clear by itself and you couldn't follow that logic, too bad I'm not gonna waste time explaining it.

Oh, so you still think they're criminals? Oh, funny because your the only one. Immigration cases are not handled by criminal courts. Not now, nor should they ever be. They are handled in civil courts. You think they should still be considered criminals. Nice I guess you classify everyone involved in custody battles, divorce settlements, and over 60% of the medical field criminal among other things. Think this system is flawed and should be handled some other way, maybe making it a criminal charge? You're not alone, however there are a variety of reasons why this is done this way. Reasons which if you really had any interest in the matter you would look up.

So chapin now that you've told us all that, why exactly are they called illegal? Are you shitting me, you've been using that phrase for so long and don't know that? Educate your damn self and stop spouting off ignorance.

If this doesn't apply to you, then don't respond. If it does, you are obviously ignorant in the matter. More than likely if your response is beyond stupid (Which wouldn't surprise me.) I won't respond.

First, let me ask you a question. Why are they called Illegal Aliens?

Second, let me try to break this down in simple terms.

It is illegal for people to cross national borders in a way that violates the immigration laws of the destined country.

It is illegal for a person to enter the country illegally or reside in the United States illegally after entering legally (for example, using a tourist visa and remaining after the visa expires).

Examples of how people enter the country illegally.
1. Being smuggled across or sneaking across the US border. (Ex. Floating from Cuba to Florida on a rubber raft, Running across the US border in uninhabited areas/under cover of night/etc)
2. Some illegal immigrants enter a country legally and then overstay or violate their visa.

So... if you don't have citizenship or a valid visa/greencard for the US and you just cross a border then yes, you are breaking a law.

Sirona
01-18-2007, 06:08 PM
Oh, so the INS is really just a welcome service! I'm so glad you explained that, because it sure was news to me. I wonder why they have raids and deport people, then? I wonder why so many people who want to come to this country are stopped from doing so by the INS because they don't have permission? Are there just a few out-of-line racists driving the welcome wagon?

Well hey, The US Border Patrol is just there to make sure they sneak into the country in an orderly fashion! They must make them form a neat an orderly line or something...

Yekhefah
01-18-2007, 06:22 PM
The really sad thing is that these days, that's pretty much true.

Sirona
01-18-2007, 06:31 PM
The really sad thing is that these days, that's pretty much true.

Well, look at the border area compared to people available to patrol it. :(

ArmySGT.
01-18-2007, 07:24 PM
None, they have broken no law. Is it against the law to cross the border. Duhr, no Chapin it isn't. Oh, okay so what your trying to tell me is that how one goes about doing something that is a right held by citizens of the world constitutes a crime? While I could draw up a ton of comparisons that should illustrate this point if it isn't clear by itself and you couldn't follow that logic, too bad I'm not gonna waste time explaining it.


The World grants Citizenship? Did I miss that Customs line? I have been in and out of Europe and Asia I don't remember a sign for World citizens? Shit. My American passport only allows me to travel in Countries with reciprocal agreements. Damn I paid $60 for it and it is only good for ten years. Where do I get World Citizenship?


So yea! Draw up those comparisons. I want to know where to sign up!

Wait a minute........... Yeah I have heard these little buzz words before....

The People
Workers
Employment right.....

Ah the United World Workers Party. Sorry Red I am not buying the Party line. Look Marx was stoned when he wrote that book and I am sure he would like to apologize if he could be resurrected.
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j218/ArmySGT_photos/Webstuff/pw_sign_04.gif

ArmySGT.
01-18-2007, 07:27 PM
Well hey, The US Border Patrol is just there to make sure they sneak into the country in an orderly fashion! They must make them form a neat an orderly line or something...

Naw there just there to see that World Citizens have enough food and water for the trip and that the GPS units provided by the Mexicant Gov are used correctly. ::)

gingerlee
01-18-2007, 09:27 PM
Allow me to break down this debate. Because apparently very few know what the fuck they're really talking about. I'll start off with Illigal Immigrants being criminals. A criminal is someone who commits a crime. A crime is an act that is against the law. So I've already asked this and gotten bullshit responses. What law have Illegal Immigrants broken? Obviously I'm not gonna waste time waiting for anybody reasonable to answer this so I'll put it like this. None, they have broken no law. Is it against the law to cross the border. Duhr, no Chapin it isn't. Oh, okay so what your trying to tell me is that how one goes about doing something that is a right held by citizens of the world constitutes a crime? While I could draw up a ton of comparisons that should illustrate this point if it isn't clear by itself and you couldn't follow that logic, too bad I'm not gonna waste time explaining it.

Oh, so you still think they're criminals? Oh, funny because your the only one. Immigration cases are not handled by criminal courts. Not now, nor should they ever be. They are handled in civil courts. You think they should still be considered criminals. Nice I guess you classify everyone involved in custody battles, divorce settlements, and over 60% of the medical field criminal among other things. Think this system is flawed and should be handled some other way, maybe making it a criminal charge? You're not alone, however there are a variety of reasons why this is done this way. Reasons which if you really had any interest in the matter you would look up.

So chapin now that you've told us all that, why exactly are they called illegal? Are you shitting me, you've been using that phrase for so long and don't know that? Educate your damn self and stop spouting off ignorance.

If this doesn't apply to you, then don't respond. If it does, you are obviously ignorant in the matter. More than likely if your response is beyond stupid (Which wouldn't surprise me.) I won't respond.


Yep, I'm going to finally say something about this thread. Datchapin, if all of those people coming across the border in the middle of the night are doing it legally, why the hell do they do it in the cover of darkness? Are they night people? Do they like running around in the dark because it's not as hot? Uh, no that's not why. They do it because they KNOW they are doing something WRONG. It's a crime whether you like to believe it is or not. I'm all for people coming to this country to make a better life, but get in line behind everybody else.

We have a billboard here in Nashville that sums it up quite nicely. It says:
'Welcome to America, now get a job, pay your taxes, and speak the language!' And no, I'm not making that up, it's on a billboard over I-40.

Yekhefah
01-18-2007, 09:31 PM
Here ya go, dat, just because I think you're hilarious.


United States Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VIII,
Section 1324

§ 1324. Bringing in and harboring certain aliens

(a) Criminal penalties
(1)
(A) Any person who—
(i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring
to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place
other than a designated port of entry or place other than as
designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has
received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in
the United States and regardless of any future official action which
may be taken with respect to such alien;
(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has
come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law,
transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien
within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in
furtherance of such violation of law;
(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has
come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law,
conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal,
harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including
any building or any means of transportation;
(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in
the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that
such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law;
or
(v)
(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).
(B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in
respect to whom such a violation occurs—
(i) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in
the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in
which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or
private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more
than 10 years, or both;
(ii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv),
or (v)(II), be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years,
or both;
(iii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii),
(iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious
bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of title 18) to, or places
in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under title 18,
imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and
(iv) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii),
(iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by
death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under
title 18, or both.
(2) Any person who, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that
an alien has not received prior official authorization to come to,
enter, or reside in the United States, brings to or attempts to bring
to the United States in any manner whatsoever, such alien, regardless
of any official action which may later be taken with respect to such
alien shall, for each alien in respect to whom a violation of this
paragraph occurs—
(A) be fined in accordance with title 18 or imprisoned not more than
one year, or both; or
(B) in the case of—
(i) an offense committed with the intent or with reason to believe
that the alien unlawfully brought into the United States will commit
an offense against the United States or any State punishable by
imprisonment for more than 1 year,
(ii) an offense done for the purpose of commercial advantage or
private financial gain, or
(iii) an offense in which the alien is not upon arrival immediately
brought and presented to an appropriate immigration officer at a
designated port of entry,
be fined under title 18 and shall be imprisoned, in the case of a
first or second violation of subparagraph (B)(iii), not more than 10
years, in the case of a first or second violation of subparagraph
(B)(i) or (B)(ii), not less than 3 nor more than 10 years, and for any
other violation, not less than 5 nor more than 15 years.
(3)
(A) Any person who, during any 12-month period, knowingly hires for
employment at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that the
individuals are aliens described in subparagraph (B) shall be fined
under title 18 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
(B) An alien described in this subparagraph is an alien who—
(i) is an unauthorized alien (as defined in section 1324a (h)(3) of
this title), and
(ii) has been brought into the United States in violation of this
subsection.
(4) In the case of a person who has brought aliens into the United
States in violation of this subsection, the sentence otherwise
provided for may be increased by up to 10 years if—
(A) the offense was part of an ongoing commercial organization or
enterprise;
(B) aliens were transported in groups of 10 or more; and
(C)
(i) aliens were transported in a manner that endangered their lives;
or
(ii) the aliens presented a life-threatening health risk to people in
the United States.
(b) Seizure and forfeiture
(1) In general
Any conveyance, including any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft, that has
been or is being used in the commission of a violation of subsection
(a) of this section, the gross proceeds of such violation, and any
property traceable to such conveyance or proceeds, shall be seized and
subject to forfeiture.
(2) Applicable procedures
Seizures and forfeitures under this subsection shall be governed by
the provisions of chapter 46 of title 18 relating to civil
forfeitures, including section 981(d) of such title, except that such
duties as are imposed upon the Secretary of the Treasury under the
customs laws described in that section shall be performed by such
officers, agents, and other persons as may be designated for that
purpose by the Attorney General.
(3) Prima facie evidence in determinations of violations
In determining whether a violation of subsection (a) of this section
has occurred, any of the following shall be prima facie evidence that
an alien involved in the alleged violation had not received prior
official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United
States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the
United States in violation of law:
(A) Records of any judicial or administrative proceeding in which that
alien’s status was an issue and in which it was determined that the
alien had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter,
or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to,
entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.
(B) Official records of the Service or of the Department of State
showing that the alien had not received prior official authorization
to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien
had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of
law.
(C) Testimony, by an immigration officer having personal knowledge of
the facts concerning that alien’s status, that the alien had not
received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in
the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained
in the United States in violation of law.
(c) Authority to arrest
No officer or person shall have authority to make any arrests for a
violation of any provision of this section except officers and
employees of the Service designated by the Attorney General, either
individually or as a member of a class, and all other officers whose
duty it is to enforce criminal laws.
(d) Admissibility of videotaped witness testimony
Notwithstanding any provision of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the
videotaped (or otherwise audiovisually preserved) deposition of a
witness to a violation of subsection (a) of this section who has been
deported or otherwise expelled from the United States, or is otherwise
unable to testify, may be admitted into evidence in an action brought
for that violation if the witness was available for cross examination
and the deposition otherwise complies with the Federal Rules of
Evidence.
(e) Outreach program
The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney
General and the Secretary of State, as appropriate, shall develop and
implement an outreach program to educate the public in the United
States and abroad about the penalties for bringing in and harboring
aliens in violation of this section.





United States Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VIII,
Section 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or
inspection;
misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States
at any time or place other than as designated by immigration
officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration
officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United
States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the
willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or
imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or
imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to
enter) the United States at a time or place other than as
designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil
penalty of -
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry
(or
attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of
an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty
under
this subsection.

Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not
in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be
imposed.
(c) Marriage fraud
Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the
purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be
imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than
$250,000, or both.
(d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud
Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise
for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws
shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance
with title 18, or both.

Casual Observer
01-18-2007, 09:36 PM
Yek beat me to it, but here's the US Code from Part II (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/usc_sec_08_00001181----000-.html) of the same statute:


§ 1181. Admission of immigrants into the United States


(a) Documents required; admission under quotas before June 30, 1968
Except as provided in subsection (b) and subsection (c) of this section no immigrant shall be admitted into the United States unless at the time of application for admission he:

(1) has a valid unexpired immigrant visa or was born subsequent to the issuance of such visa of the accompanying parent, and

(2) presents a valid unexpired passport or other suitable travel document or document of identity and nationality, if such document is required under the regulations issued by the Attorney General. With respect to immigrants to be admitted under quotas of quota areas prior to June 30, 1968, no immigrant visa shall be deemed valid unless the immigrant is properly chargeable to the quota area under the quota of which the visa is issued.

(b) Readmission without required documents; Attorney General’s discretion
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1182 (a)(7)(A) of this title in such cases or in such classes of cases and under such conditions as may be by regulations prescribed, returning resident immigrants, defined in section 1101 (a)(27)(A) of this title, who are otherwise admissible may be readmitted to the United States by the Attorney General in his discretion without being required to obtain a passport, immigrant visa, reentry permit or other documentation.

Illegal immigrants are criminals. End of story.

miabella
01-19-2007, 12:12 AM
there are a lot of illegal irish and (white) canadian illegal aliens in the states. but i don't hear anyone rushing to have them deported. or for that matter, eastern europeans are here illegally in large amounts. again, no rush to dropkick them out of america. i wonder why....

Farnham
01-19-2007, 12:24 AM
there are a lot of illegal irish and (white) canadian illegal aliens in the states. but i don't hear anyone rushing to have them deported. or for that matter, eastern europeans are here illegally in large amounts. again, no rush to dropkick them out of america. i wonder why....
You haven't met me. I'd personally deport every last one of 'em if called upon to do so.

Sirona
01-19-2007, 04:51 AM
there are a lot of illegal irish and (white) canadian illegal aliens in the states. but i don't hear anyone rushing to have them deported. or for that matter, eastern europeans are here illegally in large amounts. again, no rush to dropkick them out of america. i wonder why....

That's crap.

PhaedrusZ
01-19-2007, 05:07 AM
there are a lot of illegal irish and (white) canadian illegal aliens in the states. but i don't hear anyone rushing to have them deported. or for that matter, eastern europeans are here illegally in large amounts. again, no rush to dropkick them out of america. i wonder why....I would just as soon see these groups of illegals deported first! It would lessen, though not eliminate, the use of the "R" word re: any future deportations.

But I'd actually prefer to see those members of the U.S. House and Senate, who in reality represent another country, instead of the U.S., permanently deported to that country. This would be before we even think about deporting anyone else!

Casual Observer
01-19-2007, 05:26 AM
there are a lot of illegal irish and (white) canadian illegal aliens in the states. but i don't hear anyone rushing to have them deported. or for that matter, eastern europeans are here illegally in large amounts. again, no rush to dropkick them out of america. i wonder why....

Um, perhaps because 78% of our illegal immigrant problem is from Mexico and Latin America?

Yekhefah
01-19-2007, 08:04 AM
Yeah, I can tell you who the #1 problem is in Los Angeles, and it damn sure ain't Irish or Canadians.

ArmySGT.
01-19-2007, 11:50 AM
* Enter Cartmans Mom*

Yekhefah
01-19-2007, 12:34 PM
Well, according to dat, she could always just tell the INS she doesn't need one! Maybe she's a World citizen!

Sirona
01-19-2007, 12:59 PM
Well, according to dat, she could always just tell the INS she doesn't need one! Maybe she's a World citizen!

They will ask her to sneak in undercover of night... but in an orderly fashion at which point she'll get cake! Or that's the rumor...

NinaDaisy
01-20-2007, 03:09 AM
I know I'm coming in late into this, but...I'm gonna try to break down a few points. It might be a bit long, just to warn ya.

First of all, the assertion that immigration laws weren't in place 100 years ago is a crock of shit. Anyone here ever heard of the Chinese exclusion act of 1882? The government was just allowed to be a lot more blatantly racist back then.

LA is LA, but illegal immigration is a problem in a lot of cities. I'm Latina (my family is from Puerto Rico, and Puerto Ricans are US citizens so for those of you who aren't aware of that fact, save your ignorance) and I have a lot of mixed feelings about it for several reasons.

The immigrants themselves aren't bringing the wages down, sorry. It's business owners. They hire them consciously knowing they can pay them less and don't have as many rights. But it's not just evil big corporations, a lot of the perpetrators are small business owners. But why are many of them hiring illegal immigrants? They're getting fucked on taxes and in many cases have razor thin profit margins.

The tax issue is also a vicious cycle, IMO. I truly believe that taxes are so high not solely because of illegal immigrants. A huge problem is government pork. If it was finally trimmed once and for all, there would be a fuckload more money to spend on education, healthcare and all that good stuff. Indeed, Republican senator Ted Stevens of Alaska is known as the "King of Pork" in the Senate. And the GOP is supposed to be "fiscally conservative".

And we spend waaaaay too much money on defense. Spare me the arguments about terrorists. If we weren't invading sovereign nations illegally because Bush wanted revenge on Saddam for "trying to kill" his Pappy and lining the pockets of pretty much everyone in his Cabinet (basically all linked quite intimately to the oil biz) and Bechtel and Halliburton, we COULD spend less on defense.

But I digress...back to immigration.

My mother's a doctor, and there are a lot of Latino's in the area where she practices. It does piss me off that some of her patients have been in this country for a decade or more and STILL haven't learned English. However, she is doing her part to help the issue.

She runs an organization that provides health fairs several times a year. Many doctors from the area donate their time and services for basic health screenings such as cholesterol tests, Pap smears, prostate exams, AIDS tests, blood sugar tests (diabetes is a huge problem among Latinos), lectures on staying healthy and she even snagged a mammography machine last year. Local schools donate their gymnasiums on the weekend and churches have also donated space.

So who pays for all this? My mother hustles like a motherfucker and has THE DRUG COMPANIES pay for it! So with the volunteer work provided, plus private corporate funding, it doesn't cost the government a dime. She has actually pitched the funding to the corporate executives by saying to them "these are the people who care for your kids, landscape your property, clean up after you and cook your food. It's in your best interest to keep them healthy." Oh, the donations in funding, drugs and equipment she's snagged after that gem!

At the health fairs, a lot of the people there are illegals. And when I've volunteered at them, a lot of them ask me if their info (phone and addresses for certain test results) is gonna be passed on to "La Migra" AKA the INS. I tell them that no, it's confidential.

There are no easy answers to this. It's truly a vicious cycle.

But people forget there's also a pecking order historically. From the Irish, to the Italians, to the Chinese, to the Jews who fled post-WWII Europe, to Asians such as the Vietnamese and Indians to the Latinos, to the Africans. The previous group always looks for excuses to hate on the newest group.

Of course I'm aware that laws are different now. A LOT of things have changed since this country was born. That doesn't make things right or wrong, it's just the accelerated nature of the last century or two.

Sirona, I personally interpreted SmartCookie's comment about prostitution to be about Draconian laws applied to some jurisdictions that a dancer is performing an act of prostitution for, say, dancing closer to 4 ft. from a customer.

Melonie, your comment about smokers was insensitive, and I personally think you owe SC an apology after she revealed her mother is dying from it.

Oh, and I recently had a cabbie who admitted to me he was an illegal Irish immigrant. Worked as a cabbie and bartender.

*whew"...okay, that's it for now kids!

Sirona
01-20-2007, 08:54 AM
Sirona, I personally interpreted SmartCookie's comment about prostitution to be about Draconian laws applied to some jurisdictions that a dancer is performing an act of prostitution for, say, dancing closer to 4 ft. from a customer.


I'm aware. :)
I just didn't see how the question/implied comment had anything to do with the topic at hand.

datchapin
01-20-2007, 05:15 PM
Man, I must have done a really bad job at explaining myself. Okay, allow me to put it more clearly. Yek asked me the job of INS and border patrol. I answered those questions. She then said something about deportation and raids. Those are not in the jurisdiction of the INS. They fall under the jurisdiction of ICE (Immigration and customs enforcements.) among other things.

I find it commendable that documents were brought forth, but they only serve to re-itterate what I said earlier (and served to remind me how much I hate reading them.) . It isn't a criminal offense it's a civil offense under which all IA's fall under. If you don't want to discern between the two then that's you. Some are brought against their will and there are many instances where they don't fall under criminal charges. All IA's are civil offenders not all IA's are criminal offenders. Simply being an IA does not constitute a crime. Oh, thank you, I'm glad I'm amusing. (Not being sarcastic there.)

Sgt. considering you were, I'm assuming, in the army you should be well aware of this. It is every person's natural right to migrate. If it weren't than anybody legally or illegally would be subject to criminal charges into any country which they set foot in depending on said countries laws. I'm not sure if I missed the point here, maybe I did. As far as the world citizenship is concerned we are all world citizens. Everyone is a citizen of some country and every country is a part of the world so the word association should be apparent. Party line, I'm sorry I really missed what you were trying to say there.

Gingerlee I don't know if you were just trying to be a smartass or if it was a serious question. However I'll treat it as the latter. Most of those immigrants come under the cover of night because of the smugglers who are the ones who run the bigger risk of being caught. There are alot of reason's for this, but I'm not sure what you want me to say. I won't argue about right/wrong, because you know what. I have no idea what goes through their minds that I could speak for them. This would be a question better posed to them as indivuals. Oh, I'm sorry I've never been to Nashville so I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the billboard. Does it have a picture or is it just the words?

If I missed anything sorry. I do have a suggestion though, if you don't get something or think I'm missing something ask me to clarify or elaborate. It's no skin off my back and it prevents mis-understanding.

Oh I remember somebody quoting and posting one of my posts and completely disregard it. Even though I suggested educating themselves they still asked the question. Why are they called illegal. All you gotta do is look it up in the dictionary. Illegal- not allowed. The application's differ because we use it so much when speaking about action's we carry the same associations when it's applied to nouns. (I know I did what I said I wouldn't do. Fuck it, I'm in a better mood today.)

Yekhefah
01-20-2007, 05:20 PM
It is every person's natural right to migrate.

I really wish you would tell this to the fine Australian immigration folks at DIMIA. As regards LilithMorrigan, myself, and many others, they seem to disagree. I'm so happy that they're wrong, and I have a natural right to book a flight there and show up on their shores no matter what their pesky laws say.

Sirona
01-20-2007, 07:04 PM
Oh I remember somebody quoting and posting one of my posts and completely disregard it. Even though I suggested educating themselves they still asked the question. Why are they called illegal. All you gotta do is look it up in the dictionary. Illegal- not allowed. The application's differ because we use it so much when speaking about action's we carry the same associations when it's applied to nouns. (I know I did what I said I wouldn't do. Fuck it, I'm in a better mood today.)

Look it up in the dictionary? Sure thing!

Illegal - adj.
1. Forbidden by law or structure.
2. Contrary to or forbidden by official rules/regulations.

Illegal Alien - noun
1. A foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.
2. A foreigner who enters the U.S. without an entry or immigrant visa, esp. a person who crosses the border by avoiding inspection or who overstays the period of time allowed as a visitor, tourist, or businessperson.

As for you suggestion to educate myself, maybe you ought to take some of your own advice.

In closing, it may be every person's right to migrate... within the laws laid out by whatever country it is they wish to migrate to. I find it strange that you can't seem to wrap your mind around that.

ArmySGT.
01-20-2007, 08:14 PM
First of all, the assertion that immigration laws weren't in place 100 years ago is a crock of shit. Anyone here ever heard of the Chinese exclusion act of 1882? The government was just allowed to be a lot more blatantly racist back then.




The immigrants themselves aren't bringing the wages down, sorry. It's business owners. They hire them consciously knowing they can pay them less and don't have as many rights. But it's not just evil big corporations, a lot of the perpetrators are small business owners. But why are many of them hiring illegal immigrants? They're getting fucked on taxes and in many cases have razor thin profit margins. Yes which is why there should be penalties for this. Once it is not worth it to business it will not be worth it to illegally immigrate. If it were not necessary to pay so much in taxes to support social programs for people who have never paid into, well what would be the tax burden then?



The tax issue is also a vicious cycle, IMO. I truly believe that taxes are so high not solely because of illegal immigrants. A huge problem is government pork. If it was finally trimmed once and for all, there would be a fuckload more money to spend on education, healthcare and all that good stuff. Indeed, Republican senator Ted Stevens of Alaska is known as the "King of Pork" in the Senate. And the GOP is supposed to be "fiscally conservative".

And we spend waaaaay too much money on defense. Spare me the arguments about terrorists. If we weren't invading sovereign nations illegally because Bush wanted revenge on Saddam for "trying to kill" his Pappy and lining the pockets of pretty much everyone in his Cabinet (basically all linked quite intimately to the oil biz) and Bechtel and Halliburton, we COULD spend less on defense.

"King of Pork" is probably a cute little plaque jokingly passed around Capitol hill. Who cares if Sen. Stevens is the "Republican" from Alaska. The Republicans no longer serve the interest of the Conservative. More than 50% of the active voters are on the dole. Current politics reflects this.

"And the GOP is supposed to be "fiscally conservative". " Ha Ha Ha ummmm No. Not anymore anyway. The Democrats and the Republicans have been fucking each other over so long they have fallen into a comfortable 69 with Karl Marx coaching.

No it is totally out that either party is fiscally responsible. ::)


Let me see if I understand you right Al Quaida terrorists killed three thousand people on 11 September 2001 because President Bush ordered US Forces to attack Iraq in February 2003? Well no wonder the terrorists are doing so well. They have a crystal ball!

Disregard we are locked in another Cold War. This time with China. Russia is beginning to come together. Once Europe starts feeding off the resources of Russia besides the Oil and Natural Gas it will be twice the Super power it once was.


She runs an organization that provides health fairs several times a year. Many doctors from the area donate their time and services for basic health screenings such as cholesterol tests, Pap smears, prostate exams, AIDS tests, blood sugar tests (diabetes is a huge problem among Latinos), lectures on staying healthy and she even snagged a mammography machine last year. Local schools donate their gymnasiums on the weekend and churches have also donated space.

So who pays for all this? My mother hustles like a motherfucker and has THE DRUG COMPANIES pay for it! So with the volunteer work provided, plus private corporate funding, it doesn't cost the government a dime. She has actually pitched the funding to the corporate executives by saying to them "these are the people who care for your kids, landscape your property, clean up after you and cook your food. It's in your best interest to keep them healthy." Oh, the donations in funding, drugs and equipment she's snagged after that gem!

At the health fairs, a lot of the people there are illegals. And when I've volunteered at them, a lot of them ask me if their info (phone and addresses for certain test results) is gonna be passed on to "La Migra" AKA the INS. I tell them that no, it's confidential.

This puts you squarely into part of the problem category. I am pleased you are helping the poor. The drug companies are using you as a tax break, and giving to the community and all that. You still commiting a criminal act by aiding a criminal.


There are no easy answers to this. It's truly a vicious cycle.



But people forget there's also a pecking order historically. From the Irish, to the Italians, to the Chinese, to the Jews who fled post-WWII Europe, to Asians such as the Vietnamese and Indians to the Latinos, to the Africans. The previous group always looks for excuses to hate on the newest group. and walked up hill, both ways, in the snow to school. oh yeah without shoes.....



Of course I'm aware that laws are different now. A LOT of things have changed since this country was born. That doesn't make things right or wrong, it's just the accelerated nature of the last century or two.

A population of 300 Million has that affect on a Country.



Sirona, I personally interpreted SmartCookie's comment about prostitution to be about Draconian laws applied to some jurisdictions that a dancer is performing an act of prostitution for, say, dancing closer to 4 ft. from a customer. Still irrelevant to a discussion about illegal immigration.



Melonie, your comment about smokers was insensitive, and I personally think you owe SC an apology after she revealed her mother is dying from it. I think Melonies comment was spot on, I gave up tobacco as I finally decided it was not worth my health. Sometimes it just takes being insensitive to get the point across.



Oh, and I recently had a cabbie who admitted to me he was an illegal Irish immigrant. Worked as a cabbie and bartender.

Should have taken down his cab # and hack license then turned him in to ICE



*whew"...okay, that's it for now kids!

What she said.

Yekhefah
01-20-2007, 08:58 PM
^^^ We're in a cold war with China? Says who?

Last I heard, we were doing several billion in trade with China every year, and the Governor of California (who represents the world's seventh-largest economy) just got back from there. That would be mighty odd in a cold war. Did the war start yesterday or something?

ArmySGT.
01-20-2007, 09:39 PM
China just demonstrated there ability to destroy a satellite in space recently.

From another source


The unclassified report of Congress.


Watch Congress renege on Treaties with Taiwan. Regarding Taiwan as a Sovereign country and one with a protection treaty.

Essentially China has go to expand and take resources to support its growth or curtail it growth. The South China sea has a oil field that is huge. The oil field is claimed by China, the Phillipines, Indonesia, and Viet Nam. They sink each other gun boats and raid oil wells but it rarely makes the news. Scares investors.

Take a look at the rapid expansion of the People Liberation Army (PLA) and the Peoples Liberation Army Navy (PLAN).

Purchases of Russain Kilo submarines, Cruisers, and a an Air Craft Carrier. The Cruisers and the Aircraft Carrier are not so problematic when there are satellites in the skies above. The Kilos are of more concern since Americas primary force projection platform has been an Aircraft Carrier battlegroup since 1945.

I can't find the article where in a Chinese ground based laser is suspected of blinding an American Satellite.

We are in the not so enviable position of needing China right now more than we need them.