Town to establish "occupancy permit" for renters

[RocketMan]

Heh.

Years ago I was at the DMV in Brooklyn. There was a guy ahead of me who wanted to get a license. The girl at the counter told him she could not accept his SS card as ID because it was fake. The following dialog ensued:

-"I'm sorry, sir, this card is no good"
-"But it's got to be good! I paid $200 for it!"

At the Oregon DMV, if an illegal handed the clerk their Mexican Matricula Consular card, they received a drivers license if they passed the appropriate driving skills tests.  They were even handed voter registration forms, thanks to the Motor Voter law.
Our fearless Governor, Ted Kulongoski, claimed in 2009 that he was going to issue an executive order ending that process.  The predictable hue and cry was raised by the usual suspects.  I don't know whether he ever did issue the order.

[White Horseradish]

And where was it you specifically asked me those questions?  In a previous post?  You didn't, so don't accuse me of evading them.

Can I accuse you now? You know, since it was directed specifically at you in a previous post, the one you refer to above? Or do I have to address you by name and submit my request in triplicate with notarized signatures?

Once again. Are you, RocketMan, OK with NICS checks being required for every private gun sale? Do you, RocketMan, seriously think that either one of these would affect anyone but law-abiding citizens?

Okay, since you obviously equate the e-verify system with a permit system (not sure how you leaped to that conclusion), that's right out.  Yet many of the existing laws you listed sound similar in their level of invasiveness.  

What is invasive in your world? Where do you draw the line?

"permits" are what the original post is about. Just because you make this permit electronic does not make it anything other than a permit.

What is the solution, aside from enforcing the existing laws that aren't working for various reasons?

Which of these laws do not work because of intrinsic flaws rather than lax enforcement?

Or aside from the laws that the government refuses to enforce at the national level?

If it doesn't work, we should get a new one. These guys are elected, not put in charge by divine power.

[longeyes]

So what do you do when government won't enforce existing laws?

[dogmush]

So what do you do when government won't enforce existing laws?

You start with the first of the three boxes.

You make it a point to explain in clear, reasonable terms to everyone you meet how important it is to elect folks who will enforce the rule of law.

You pray to the God of your choice that it stops at the ballot box, as the alternitive is really, really bad.

Sometimes you make a carrer of vague, apocoliptic predictions on internet forums.

[kgbsquirrel]

You start with the first of the three boxes.

There were four boxes last I counted. 

Soap
Ballot
Jury
Ammo

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Step 3: Make State funded programs (WIC, Sec 8 housing, Chip, Medicaid) dependent on being here legally, and proving it.  Enforce that.

which of those can an illegal get?

[White Horseradish]

Step 3: Make State funded programs (WIC, Sec 8 housing, Chip, Medicaid) dependent on being here legally, and proving it.  Enforce that.

which of those can an illegal get?

WIC - yes
Section 8 Housing - no
Medicaid - no

Dunno what Chip is . 

[roo_ster]

And that is the seriously scary part. It won't be terrorists, illegals, or anybody else that will kill this country. It will be the people that think this is in any way acceptable.

Get thee to a fainting couch, I fear you're having a case of the vapors.

If there are actual problems then there are actual laws to take care of it. Bunkhouses are illegal already. Crime is against the law. Do I need to spell out the obvious parallel with gun laws here?

Yes, there are actual laws, some of which are enacted at the municipality in our constitutional, federal system.  See, that's the beauty of a federal system.  The state & DC tell them to piss off, but they have enough influence at the local level to make them listen.

Your "obvious parallel" is more a perpendicular being twisted around.

This is the same logic gun control proponents use:

"So, you don't want to ban the AK-47s gangsters use to slaughter our little children? Well, Mr. Smartypants, how are you going to solve the violence crisis then? Huh? "

Uh, no.

First off, non sequitur much?

Second, AK47 gangsters are not slaughtering our wee ones.  Illegal aliens bunking up in high density are ruining neighborhoods.  Fundamental reality does not favor your or the Brady argument.

Third, such ordinances are in-line with the US Const, the various state consts, and the city charters.  From both a common-sense "they mean what they say" reading and litigation-wise.

Fourth, housing criminals like cord wood is no where enumerated in any of the aforementioned charters.  The RKBA (and its ultimate purpose) is.  RKBA was specifically taken out of the realm of small-d democratic debate by the COTUS.  Illegal alien housing, OTOH, is in that realm.  Some polities will come down in favor of such laws, others not so much.  Long live federalism.


"You want to do X!?!?  They did X in the Soviet Union! <gasp>"

Sorry, that argument is bunk.  The logic is pathetically juvenile and easily punctured. 

For instance, I hear tell they tracked down, arrested, and tried rapists.  Ditto for murderers.  They also drank milk and ate cabbage, the rumors go.

WIC - yes
Section 8 Housing - no
Medicaid - no

Dunno what Chip is . 

At Parkland & many other hospitals, illegal aliens are even less on the hook to pay their way than those on Medicaid.  First & foremost, they can't be denied emergency care.  Second, once the illegal alien & hispanic population is large enough, they can vote in folks who stick it to the taxpayers and pay for the non-emergency care of illegal aliens. 

[MicroBalrog]

Fourth, housing criminals like cord wood is no where enumerated in any of the aforementioned charters.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is an argument they specifically shot down back in 1791.

[roo_ster]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is an argument they specifically shot down back in 1791.

You deliberately leave out the rest of my point four, which eviscerates your response.

All this sort of thread illustrates is the difference between people who believe in a federal, constitutional order for liberty and those who would impose an extra-constitutional utopian libertarian dictatorship on all.  The difference between the latter and an extra-constitutional utopian progressive dictatorship pales relative to their similarities.

[MicroBalrog]

You deliberately leave out the rest of my point four, which eviscerates your response.

The reason I omit your point because it's not a point. "Stacking criminals like cordwood" is not what this is about, and you know that quite well.

[Jamisjockey]

Sometimes you make a carrer of vague, apocoliptic predictions on internet forums.

I see what you did there!

[longeyes]

Sometimes you make a carrer of vague, apocoliptic predictions on internet forums.

Dogmush, stop living up to your name.  Trading gratuitous personal jabs is not the way of this forum.

[RocketMan]

Incidentally, I did give an answer. Did you not notice? Or is it that you don't accept it?

Went back through the thread.  No, you did not, at least until you said this, right under the above in your reply #20:

The answer is - enforce existing laws.

I would answer that existing laws do not work, either because they are poorly written, or the federal government refuses to enforce them.  Hence this town's attempt to deal with a problem that has gotten out of hand.
Like you, I'm not a fan of a permit system.  However, calling an e-verify system the same as a permit system is just too big a leap, IMO.

[Jimmy Dean]

I will answer the question noone will touch...

how do we stop the wee-ones from getting lit up by AK47 wielding gangsters?   Arm the wee-ones so they can shoot back of course!

[Jamisjockey]

WIC - yes
Section 8 Housing - no
Medicaid - no

Dunno what Chip is . 

Chip is the child care health thing that Bush expanded.

It is a part of medicaid.

Anchor babies do get chip, so it is defacto free health care for the children of poor illegals.
http://www.chipmedicaid.org/english/qualify.asp

Who qualifies?
To qualify for CHIP or Children's Medicaid, a child must be age 18 or younger, a Texas resident and a U.S citizen or legal permanent resident. The citizenship or immigration status of the parents does not affect the children's eligibility and is not reported on the application form.

[sanglant]

I will answer the question noone will touch...

how do we stop the wee-ones from getting lit up by AK47 wielding gangsters?   Arm the wee-ones so they can shoot back of course!

or we could train and arm there mothers and grandmothers. "i pity the fool" and all that.