Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: MillCreek on February 05, 2019, 10:40:39 PM
-
https://www.jems.com/articles/2019/01/pro-bono-guns-at-work-laws-raise-legal-issues-for-ems-agencies.html
This issue has come up periodically over the years I have been involved with EMS. Most agencies and personnel are against it, consistent with the general prohibition and opinions elsewhere in healthcare.
About the only time I have ever seen this concept in real life is some sort of medic or EMS personnel attached to, or part of, a SWAT or other special operations police team.
-
While officially prohibited from carrying a concealed weapon when I worked the Rez and a couple of inner city Trauma centers I carried a gun and so did a few docs and other nurses. I doubt there was much time in a 24 hour period there wasn't one or two armed medical personnel in the place. I have seen EMS carry also. We all did it knowing it would cost us our job if discovered. That was a price I was willing to pay if needed. I think they should be able to carry if able to legally and if they want to without the blessing of their overlords.
bob
-
EMS folks sure need to carry guns. What a job.
-
It’s not 1950’s America out there anymore.
It’s a drugged up, drunken violent America with a substantial dose of third world violence.
You know, freeer and more diverse. It’s a sign of our strength.
-
It’s not 1950’s America out there anymore.
It’s a drugged up, drunken violent America with a substantial dose of third world violence.
You know, freeer and more diverse. It’s a sign of our strength.
I have no problem with EMS personal being armed, just because you don't know where every call is going to take you, but...
You can Google this, but violent crime rate is almost down to the late 1950's levels.
Also regarding 3rd world violence, from CBS on the Fact check of the SOTU. (for the most part Trump was fairly accurate in most of his address)
Studies say that undocumented immigrants are less likely to commit violent crimes than American-born citizens. A study conducted by the libertarian Cato Institute found that in Texas the murder arrest rate for native-born Americans was "about 46 percent higher than the illegal immigrant homicide rate," according to a June 2018 research note. Another study, by researchers at the University of Wisconsin, found that "increased concentrations of undocumented immigrants are associated with statistically significant decreases in violent crime."
-
I might be curious to dig into those numbers. I have heard elsewhere that illegal immigrants are more likely to be criminals by a good percentage. It was only including legal immigrants that they look more law abiding.
-
I might be curious to dig into those numbers. I have heard elsewhere that illegal immigrants are more likely to be criminals by a good percentage. It was only including legal immigrants that they look more law abiding.
It says violent, but they are already criminals by being illegal immigrants.
-
I have no problem with EMS personal being armed, just because you don't know where every call is going to take you, but...
You can Google this, but violent crime rate is almost down to the late 1950's levels.
Also regarding 3rd world violence, from CBS on the Fact check of the SOTU. (for the most part Trump was fairly accurate in most of his address)
We also have a lot of people in prison, many of whom aren’t even citizens.
-
We also have a lot of people in prison, many of whom aren’t even citizens.
yea so and your point is?
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citizenship.jsp
80% are US citizens, I'm going to assume that this is federal prison stats. I'm also willing to be bet much of that % from Mexico are people who could not afford a decent private defense attorney.
-
Also regarding 3rd world violence, from CBS on the Fact check of the SOTU. (for the most part Trump was fairly accurate in most of his address)
I'm unsurprised to find his math is bad.
First, he compares murder arrests for illegal aliens to total murders. Now, I don't have time to look up the numbers to correct his math, but I'm fairly certain there is a large number of unsolved murders that go without arrests.
Secondly, he's also comparing arrests of citizens to arrests of illegal immigrants. Again, as I recall, illegal aliens have a tendency to leave the scene of a crime (hit and run, for example) and the police are far less likely to be able apprehend people who have a large cohort of allies who will help them "in the shadows."
Further, we have no idea the number of illegal aliens in the country, so his estimations of their crime rate are already suspect. (And I note the linked data does not provide his figures for claiming the rates he has.)
Additionally, he uses Texas, which may not be indicative of the nation as a whole as Texas is willing to work with the immigration authorities to deport criminal aliens. It would be interesting to compare numbers where the illegal aliens do not also have to fear deportation, such as California.
Put simply, Cato's numbers are suspect.
-
yea so and your point is?
There doesn’t seem to be a lack of violent criminals and the open border isn’t helping.
Over 20% of the prison population is illegal aliens.
The amount of resources needed to maintain a 1950 level of safety is insane.
Build the wall and send the illegals home.
-
There doesn’t seem to be a lack of violent criminals and the open border isn’t helping.
Over 20% of the prison population is illegal aliens.
The amount of resources needed to maintain a 1950 level of safety is insane.
Build the wall and send the illegals home.
Wall won't do anything, most illegal aliens/immigrants/workers are folks who over stay their visa.
Wall isn't going to happen either, too many people on both sides of the aisle are supported by folks who want cheap exploitable labor.
If you want to stop the flow of the folks coming into the country, push for a raise in wages and lower government entitlements so they able bodies native born and legal citizens will take those jobs that the illegals/visa folks take.
Also expect your dollar to go a lot less further because a living wage w/benefits is going to need to be paid for painting, concrete, drywall, roofing, agriculture, etc. workers.
-
Also expect your dollar to go a lot less further because a living wage w/benefits is going to need to be paid for painting, concrete, drywall, roofing, agriculture, etc. workers.
All things that will be done by robots with a couple of human supervisors/engineers withing 20 years. They had better learn to code. :)
-
Wall won't do anything, most illegal aliens/immigrants/workers are folks who over stay their visa.
Wall isn't going to happen either, too many people on both sides of the aisle are supported by folks who want cheap exploitable labor.
If you want to stop the flow of the folks coming into the country, push for a raise in wages and lower government entitlements so they able bodies native born and legal citizens will take those jobs that the illegals/visa folks take.
Also expect your dollar to go a lot less further because a living wage w/benefits is going to need to be paid for painting, concrete, drywall, roofing, agriculture, etc. workers.
We’re getting the push for a raise in wages by attempting to stop illegal immigration and tightening the legal visa process.
If you stop importing non-American cheap labor, wages will rise.
-
Wall won't do anything, most illegal aliens/immigrants/workers are folks who over stay their visa.
Wall isn't going to happen either, too many people on both sides of the aisle are supported by folks who want cheap exploitable labor.
If you want to stop the flow of the folks coming into the country, push for a raise in wages and lower government entitlements so they able bodies native born and legal citizens will take those jobs that the illegals/visa folks take.
Also expect your dollar to go a lot less further because a living wage w/benefits is going to need to be paid for painting, concrete, drywall, roofing, agriculture, etc. workers.
Costs of most stuff won't change that much. Some labor intensive jobs might be costly, but IMO they already are. The free market comes up with solutions if allowed to. Depending on an illegal source of cheap labor is not good in the long run.
The Wall will accomplish something if done. There are already walls in selected locations and from all reports they do help. And from what I have heard, it is unlikely Trump will get enough funding in the short term to put a wall across the entire border, just strategically important areas in addition to what is already there. Of course, it would be even better if Congress would agree to stop giving welfare, food stamps, unemployment, and tax credits to illegals, but that is less likely than the wall.
-
C’mon Charby, where’s that American “can do!” spirit?
-
Wall won't do anything, most illegal aliens/immigrants/workers are folks who over stay their visa.
Wall isn't going to happen either, too many people on both sides of the aisle are supported by folks who want cheap exploitable labor.
If you want to stop the flow of the folks coming into the country, push for a raise in wages and lower government entitlements so they able bodies native born and legal citizens will take those jobs that the illegals/visa folks take.
Also expect your dollar to go a lot less further because a living wage w/benefits is going to need to be paid for painting, concrete, drywall, roofing, agriculture, etc. workers.
Push for a raise in wages, eh? Wouldn't that entail, ya know, advocating for fewer illegal aliens, and fewer immigrants?
-
I have no problem with EMS personal being armed, just because you don't know where every call is going to take you, but...
You can Google this, but violent crime rate is almost down to the late 1950's levels.
Also regarding 3rd world violence, from CBS on the Fact check of the SOTU. (for the most part Trump was fairly accurate in most of his address)
The average immigrant may pose less of a threat than natives, but this is likely compensated for by the inordinate violence of the MS-13 gangmembers.
It appears that illegals murder @2,000 people in America annually, which is maybe about 5% of murder victims. That's still a substantial number.
The direct violence caused by illegals is hardly the only issue.
Our border facilities are overburdened and another ...."caravan" is due shortly. How overburdened do we have to get before the democrats, who were stupidly mocking and rolling their eyes, when President Trump brought up the caravans in his SOTU speech last night, begin to accept that it is a very real problem.
There's also the drug problem, fentynal, carfentynal, heroin, and other dangerous chemicals are smuggled in, usually through existing ports of entry from what I gather, but some are humped across by illegals, part of the price they pay coyotes and cartels for passage..
There's no excuse for opposing a wall. BOTH SIDES seem to agree we need to up rate security at the entry points to stop drug smuggling, and all should agree that more personnel, more sensors, more drones can all be part of a solution.
But a so-called "smart wall" , composed of nothing BUT sensors, is illusory and useless by itself.
-
There are already walls in selected locations and from all reports they do help. And from what I have heard, it is unlikely Trump will get enough funding in the short term to put a wall across the entire border, just strategically important areas in addition to what is already there.
A wall "from sea to shining sea" is stupid and ridiculous and given geography, likely impossible. Trump (or his team) should have rethought that soundbyte.
Strategically placed barriers are absolutely workable and efficient (see the "Their walls vs our walls" thread). Combining barriers and surveillance will absolutely have a positive operational effect. I'm speaking entirely operationally. Bureaucratic stuff like policy changes may have additional positive effects, but are just as likely to have negative effects.
-
A wall "from sea to shining sea" is stupid and ridiculous and given geography, likely impossible. Trump (or his team) should have rethought that soundbyte.
Strategically placed barriers are absolutely workable and efficient (see the "Their walls vs our walls" thread). Combining barriers and surveillance will absolutely have a positive operational effect. I'm speaking entirely operationally. Bureaucratic stuff like policy changes may have additional positive effects, but are just as likely to have negative effects.
Trump has already clarified his position on this. I think everyone should recognize it was election rhetoric and not to be taken literally....except by those with TDS.
-
It always amazes me when folks, many of whom I consider brighter than me, don’t understand Trumps use of rhetoric and visual language.
He’s a consummate propagandist in this regard.
We’re going to get the very best wall he can swing a deal on and his starting point is a sea to shining sea wall with a big beautiful door.
It’s only literal if he can get it, otherwise it’s lets make a deal.
He’s not stupid, he’s probably smarter than 90% or more of our membership. Probably 100% smarter when it comes to persuasion, influence and making deals.
-
One tires of the oft-repeated talking point about illegals supposedly being less violent than citizens. Whether or not it's true, it's an absurd and unfeeling rejoinder. If I'm robbed by an illegal alien, would stricter border controls mean that I would have been robbed by a fellow citizen, but worse? Of course not. Border controls might have kept me from being robbed, though. If Kate Steinle's killer hadn't been released, or hadn't been in the country, would she have been killed more violently by a citizen? No, she'd problably be alive and healthy today.
I will be glad for my tax dollars to go toward a wall/fence, even if it is completely symbolic. It would still be a better use of federal tax monies than unconstitutional programs, such the Dept. of Education, etc. So long as it gets the message across, to everyone, that our border is real, and that we control it - period.
-
We've had many discussions here about how the government has manipulated crime stats to show what they want us to see.
But, here we also have members pointing to government crime stats to show how wonderful the screaming hordes of illegal alieans are in reality peace loving, hard working family members just trying to make a better life for themselves.
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2013/apr/15/fbis-national-crime-data-found-to-be-flawed-manipulated/ (https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2013/apr/15/fbis-national-crime-data-found-to-be-flawed-manipulated/)
https://gcn.com/articles/2018/10/12/crime-statistics-reporting.aspx (https://gcn.com/articles/2018/10/12/crime-statistics-reporting.aspx)
https://fusion.tv/story/302325/fbi-crime-data-reporting/ (https://fusion.tv/story/302325/fbi-crime-data-reporting/)
Do any of you really believe that the reported crime stats are firmly based in reality?
Do you believe that sanctuary states that have essentially declared that illegal immigrants are more important than citizens are going to report accurate data?
:facepalm:
-
Wall won't do anything, most illegal aliens/immigrants/workers are folks who over stay their visa.
BS.
1. Overstayed visas are much easier to measure than illegal border crossings which means you're more likely to over-report the former and under-report the latter.
2. Even generous estimates for visa overstays indicates they make up about 44% of the illegal population. That's not "most".
3. Recognizing that visa overstays are a significant issue doesn't mean that addressing illegal border crossing is a bad idea.
4. Whether or not a wall is a particularly effective or efficient way of reducing illegal immigration, saying it "won't do anything" is utter nonsense. It would absolutely reduce the instance of illegal border crossing by some degree and has been shown to do so historically.
-
It always amazes me when folks, many of whom I consider brighter than me, don’t understand Trumps use of rhetoric and visual language.
The problem is that for examples like the "sea to shining sea" wall, it's actually Trump acolytes more so than TDS people that take that kind of thing literally. They really believe that when he says it, it's something that he can not only do, but do within their limited attention spans of a couple of years.
Not the at least 40-50 years such an endeavor would take if it were physically possible, both operationally and bureaucratically. Because eminent domain would tie such a thing up longer than construction. It's also interesting how many freedom lovers would be cool with eminent domain to build "the wall".
Had he started with strategic barriers and documentation of expert sources, Pelosi would have less of a foothold in the "immoral wall" argument. Also, honestly, I think Trump really did think he could build massive amounts of concrete wall when he first started talking about this. I do give him credit for stepping back and learning. I just wish he would quit saying "wall, wall, wall".
Also, wow! Talk about thread veer! :laugh:
-
It's also interesting how many freedom lovers would be cool with eminent domain to build "the wall".
Why is that? National security issues like this are precisely why eminent domain was written into the constitution.
-
The problem is that for examples like the "sea to shining sea" wall, it's actually Trump acolytes more so than TDS people that take that kind of thing literally. They really believe that when he says it, it's something that he can not only do, but do within their limited attention spans of a couple of years.
Not the at least 40-50 years such an endeavor would take if it were physically possible, both operationally and bureaucratically. Because eminent domain would tie such a thing up longer than construction. It's also interesting how many freedom lovers would be cool with eminent domain to build "the wall".
Had he started with strategic barriers and documentation of expert sources, Pelosi would have less of a foothold in the "immoral wall" argument. Also, honestly, I think Trump really did think he could build massive amounts of concrete wall when he first started talking about this. I do give him credit for stepping back and learning. I just wish he would quit saying "wall, wall, wall".
Also, wow! Talk about thread veer! :laugh:
Pelosi and liberal Democrats oppose anything Trump wants. It doesn't matter what it is. Putting the blame back on Trump for his rhetoric is pointless.
-
Why is that? National security issues like this are precisely why eminent domain was written into the constitution.
Because people almost always seem to get screwed on pennies on the dollar on these deals, and the amount of land that would have to be purchased at full market value for a "complete" wall would be astronomical. It's easy to say eminent domain is applicable when it's not your ox being gored. Just like, "Ban semi-autos! I don't have one and it's for the children!"
-
Pelosi and liberal Democrats oppose anything Trump wants. It doesn't matter what it is. Putting the blame back on Trump for his rhetoric is pointless.
Why? Our side did it with Obama. Words matter.
Look, like someone else here said, if we didn't have Trump, Hillary would be president. I like a lot of the stuff he has done, but I'm not a giddy schoolgirl hoping he'll ask me to the prom. If he does something I disagree with, I'm going to say so. I keep hearing the whole "Everyone is playing checkers while Trump is 27 moves ahead in three dimensional chess!". No. He has some good ideas, but sometimes he does stupid stuff too, and if I defend the stupid crap he says and does, then I'm no better than the people who treated Obama like the Messiah.
-
C’mon Charby, where’s that American “can do!” spirit?
Okay, lets start a labor movement and bring union membership back. You hire cheap illegal labor, oops someone burnt your house and factory down.
-
One tires of the oft-repeated talking point about illegals supposedly being less violent than citizens. Whether or not it's true, it's an absurd and unfeeling rejoinder. If I'm robbed by an illegal alien, would stricter border controls mean that I would have been robbed by a fellow citizen, but worse? Of course not. Border controls might have kept me from being robbed, though. If Kate Steinle's killer hadn't been released, or hadn't been in the country, would she have been killed more violently by a citizen? No, she'd problably be alive and healthy today.
I will be glad for my tax dollars to go toward a wall/fence, even if it is completely symbolic. It would still be a better use of federal tax monies than unconstitutional programs, such the Dept. of Education, etc. So long as it gets the message across, to everyone, that our border is real, and that we control it - period.
If you really are the Christian you say you are, she was supposed to die that day, at that moment, and nothing would of stopped it.
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/does-god-know-the-exact-day-i-will-die
-
If you really are the Christian you say you are, she was supposed to die that day, at that moment, and nothing would of stopped it.
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/does-god-know-the-exact-day-i-will-die
Aw, shucks. Looks like I've been living a lie.
-
Aw, shucks. Looks like I've been living a lie.
What if you don't believe in the same God (or any God) as the author, do his words still matter? Does he speak for all Gods or only his God? If he speaks for other Gods why does he only quote the owners manual for Christianity?
bob
-
Dat gun free workplace tho...
https://www.foxnews.com/us/former-valet-charged-in-brutal-murder-of-wisconsin-nurse-found-frozen-under-vehicle-in-parking-garage
-
Why? Our side did it with Obama. Words matter.
Look, like someone else here said, if we didn't have Trump, Hillary would be president. I like a lot of the stuff he has done, but I'm not a giddy schoolgirl hoping he'll ask me to the prom. If he does something I disagree with, I'm going to say so. I keep hearing the whole "Everyone is playing checkers while Trump is 27 moves ahead in three dimensional chess!". No. He has some good ideas, but sometimes he does stupid stuff too, and if I defend the stupid crap he says and does, then I'm no better than the people who treated Obama like the Messiah.
I opposed Obama because of what he was doing, not because he was the one who was doing it. Maybe I was alone in that.
On Trump, I just don't assume he is stupid which some seem to do out of habit. I think we have seen enough track record to stop making that assumption. At the same time, I think he has made a lot of his critics and enemies look pretty foolish, and he has been very effective as a President.
IMO, on that last it seems like you are saying is if you compliment Trump on wearing a nice tie, then that means you support everything else he says or does. I don't worship the guy, I just like what he is doing and generally support him. If you can't see the difference then I guess we just don't agree.
-
Dat gun free workplace tho...
https://www.foxnews.com/us/former-valet-charged-in-brutal-murder-of-wisconsin-nurse-found-frozen-under-vehicle-in-parking-garage
That headline sucks. I thought it meant the killer was found frozen to death.
-
That headline sucks. I thought it meant the killer was found frozen to death.
Me too. My heart really went out to the poor fellow.
-
What if you don't believe in the same God (or any God) as the author, do his words still matter? Does he speak for all Gods or only his God? If he speaks for other Gods why does he only quote the owners manual for Christianity?
bob
What if a) that response is a category error on charby's part, and b) such fatalism is not exactly the only interpretation of Christianity? (And he was just trolling, anyway.)
-
What if a) that response is a category error on charby's part, and b) such fatalism is not exactly the only interpretation of Christianity? (And he was just trolling, anyway.)
I was wasn't trolling, I found a small hole in your armor of your faith. You calling it trolling is a weak way to defend yourself. So speaking of faith, you've never really come out an said what "church" you belong to. I know your not a Catholic or Lutheran because you've poo poo both of them. So who you associate with?
-
I was wasn't trolling, I found a small hole in your armor of your faith. You calling it trolling is a weak way to defend yourself. So speaking of faith, you've never really come out an said what "church" you belong to. I know your not a Catholic or Lutheran because you've poo poo both of them. So who you associate with?
And apparently not Presbyterian, as he just poo-poo'd your belief in per-ordaination.
-
I was wasn't trolling, I found a small hole in your armor of your faith. You calling it trolling is a weak way to defend yourself. So speaking of faith, you've never really come out an said what "church" you belong to. I know your not a Catholic or Lutheran because you've poo poo both of them. So who you associate with?
I saw it as trolling. You can call it what you want. If you believe what you said, do you think murderers should be set free since they had no choice?
-
I was wasn't trolling, I found a small hole in your armor of your faith. You calling it trolling is a weak way to defend yourself. So speaking of faith, you've never really come out an said what "church" you belong to. I know your not a Catholic or Lutheran because you've poo poo both of them. So who you associate with?
As a matter of fact, you are trolling and are subscribing (well, no, you're just trolling) to a very narrow view of determinism.
Yes, she was meant to die right then. So, therefore, I should do nothing, ever in my life because I will die when I am supposed to and so will all these people murdered by illegal aliens.
BUT WAIT! Maybe Trump has been determined to build the wall and decease the number of illegal alien muderers. And maybe I am fated to support and defend him. So why are you fighting against that? God has determined it will happen, and you can do nothing about it. Just deal with the fact that fewer illegal aliens murderers will be here to do the murdering that Americans won't do.
Determinism is a highly difficult doctrine and its application is even harder. Especially when it's being done by someone who does not understand its implications, does not believe it anyway, and openly mocks it.
-
If you can't see the difference then I guess we just don't agree.
It's cool. At least it means we're not an echo chamber. :)
-
It's cool. At least it means we're not an echo chamber. :)
How boring would that be? =D
-
Mexico has a murder rate of about 20 per 100,000.
It seems highly unlikely to me that folks from Mexican culture reduce their violence to the same level of white people when they step over the border.
But, I could be wrong.
-
Mexico has a murder rate of about 20 per 100,000.
It seems highly unlikely to me that folks from Mexican culture reduce their violence to the same level of white people when they step over the border.
But, I could be wrong.
It’s our magic dirt.
It takes both third world proto Americans as well as first world socialists and magically transforms them into patriotic Americans.
-
Mexico has a murder rate of about 20 per 100,000.
It seems highly unlikely to me that folks from Mexican culture reduce their violence to the same level of white people when they step over the border.
But, I could be wrong.
Anyone else take Mexico's reported murder rate as accurate?
-
Charby, if you actually have honest questions I can refer you to better sources of Theology than John Piper.
-
I saw it as trolling. You can call it what you want. If you believe what you said, do you think murderers should be set free since they had no choice?
No, they broke law (created by people) in the society that they live in. I do believe that God knows when you are going to die, of course we can't read God's mind to determine when exactly that will be. If it wasn't a murder, then a car wreck, heart attack, fall down the stairs, etc.
-
I was wasn't trolling, I found a small hole in your armor of your faith. You calling it trolling is a weak way to defend yourself. So speaking of faith, you've never really come out an said what "church" you belong to. I know your not a Catholic or Lutheran because you've poo poo both of them. So who you associate with?
So if you're not trolling, then you really believe that Christians aren't supposed to use historical examples to inform ourselves about how government policies (or anything else) will affect people?
Or did you think I was suggesting that we go back in time (in clear violation of my supposed Christianity!), and deport all the illegals, to save Kate Steinle?
See, I really thought trolling was the more charitable explanation.
As for my religious affiliation, I was unaware the forum required such. I've listed my religious credentials in my profile. I hope that satisfies your requirements.
-
BUT WAIT! Maybe Trump has been determined to build the wall and decease the number of illegal alien muderers. And maybe I am fated to support and defend him. So why are you fighting against that? God has determined it will happen, and you can do nothing about it. Just deal with the fact that fewer illegal aliens murderers will be here to do the murdering that Americans won't do.
Why aren't we going after the people who hire the illegal immigrants, the ones who give them a reason to come to this country in the first place? This would be way more effective than any wall/increased border security.
Someone else also countered my over stayed visas, so why aren't we going after them, should be seeing busses every where escorting people to airports to be send home to their country of origins?
-
Charby, if you actually have honest questions I can refer you to better sources of Theology than John Piper.
PM sent
-
Because people almost always seem to get screwed on pennies on the dollar on these deals, and the amount of land that would have to be purchased at full market value for a "complete" wall would be astronomical. It's easy to say eminent domain is applicable when it's not your ox being gored. Just like, "Ban semi-autos! I don't have one and it's for the children!"
Easy now. It's possible to defend eminent domain as a valid, constitutional power of the government, but not be on board with every instance of it.
For me, it's mostly other people's oxen being gored on the immigration issue. I haven't noticed that it affects me directly, either way.
-
Why aren't we going after the people who hire the illegal immigrants, the ones who give them a reason to come to this country in the first place? This would be way more effective than any wall/increased border security.
Someone else also countered my over stayed visas, so why aren't we going after them, should be seeing busses every where escorting people to airports to be send home to their country of origins?
I remember that APS board meeting where we decided we only cared about a wall, and decided to never care about lapsed visas, or scofflaw employers; but I don't remember why we made that decision. I guess it was the racism.
-
Easy now. It's possible to defend eminent domain as a valid, constitutional power of the government, but not be on board with every instance of it.
Did you miss where I'm moving to Idaho, flying the Gadsden Flag, and setting up a cannon to keep the revenuers off my property? =D
-
Why aren't we going after the people who hire the illegal immigrants, the ones who give them a reason to come to this country in the first place? This would be way more effective than any wall/increased border security.
Someone else also countered my over stayed visas, so why aren't we going after them, should be seeing busses every where escorting people to airports to be send home to their country of origins?
We should be doing that.
The reason for the wall is that built infrastructure cannot be "scaled back" by the Democrats once they get into power again and decide to encourage law-breaking by foreign nationals once again.
The wall is the single most important piece of this because we cannot trust the opposition to continue enforcement actions. We need a "concrete" commitment to stopping foreign invasions. The Left has lied OVER and OVER and OVER again that "this time we'll REALLY stop the invasions, once we just naturalize another 10 million!" and then somehow the same situation continues.
Even beyond those lies, the reason for the wall is that we don't trust our political enemies to follow the law. We already see how attorneys general will refuse to defend laws they don't agree with and "settle" with litigants that they actually agree with. It is happening in Michigan as we speak, in fact.
So your other enforcement measures are welcome, but insufficient because we know the left will simply stop enforcing them once they get power. At least the wall will still be there and destroying it will exact a significant political price as it will be open defiance of the will of the voters.
-
The reason for the wall is that built infrastructure cannot be "scaled back" by the Democrats once they get into power again and decide to encourage law-breaking by foreign nationals once again.
That's a very good point. Drone money, personnel money, etc. can disappear in a heartbeat. Hard to disappear a physical barrier. Though I think that even the "strategic locations" option that I'm in favor of would require a second term for Trump. While building could start in the next year, I think even just getting sections completed will take some years.
A new dem President "with a pen and phone" could potentially halt construction. If not construction in progress, then construction scheduled for the future. Though pre-Trump, dems were in favor of barriers, so maybe they would actually continue construction and just take credit for it.
-
Why aren't we going after the people who hire the illegal immigrants, the ones who give them a reason to come to this country in the first place?
So long as the cure isn't worse than the disease (i.e., a Federal jobs registry or something) then I agree.
Someone else also countered my over stayed visas, so why aren't we going after them, should be seeing busses every where escorting people to airports to be send home to their country of origins?
Agreed and I'm not sure who here you think you're disagreeing with.
Would you then support improving reactions to overstayed visas in addition to providing for meaningful border security (whether that is a wall or something else)? Or is this in reality just more strawmanning and whataboutism?
-
So long as the cure isn't worse than the disease (i.e., a Federal jobs registry or something) then I agree.
Agreed and I'm not sure who here you think you're disagreeing with.
Would you then support improving reactions to overstayed visas in addition to providing for meaningful border security (whether that is a wall or something else)? Or is this in reality just more strawmanning and whataboutism?
We already have a federal registry, if you have a ssn and pay taxes, you're on a registry already. We have E-Verfy, etc. Just wish if a SSN pops up in multiple locations, ICE acts swiftly to see what the deal is.
No problem with a change or strengthening of border security. Not sold on a physical barrier, but we have technology to run heat signature drones to see people. We could dedicate military resources to have army or marine boots on the ground in the remote areas, especially on public land. Make it part of their training exercises since we seem to have a endless war in another desert/mountainous area of the world. Even start a new Border Patrol team that consists of folks who "backpack" out in the those areas to spot people that don't belong there and call them in to be intercepted by a larger border patrol team.
US military could fly training sortees over the border looking for heat signatures. See something, coordinates communicated and border patrol meets the unknowns. ETC.
-
We should be doing that.
The reason for the wall is that built infrastructure cannot be "scaled back" by the Democrats once they get into power again and decide to encourage law-breaking by foreign nationals once again.
The wall is the single most important piece of this because we cannot trust the opposition to continue enforcement actions. We need a "concrete" commitment to stopping foreign invasions. The Left has lied OVER and OVER and OVER again that "this time we'll REALLY stop the invasions, once we just naturalize another 10 million!" and then somehow the same situation continues.
Even beyond those lies, the reason for the wall is that we don't trust our political enemies to follow the law. We already see how attorneys general will refuse to defend laws they don't agree with and "settle" with litigants that they actually agree with. It is happening in Michigan as we speak, in fact.
So your other enforcement measures are welcome, but insufficient because we know the left will simply stop enforcing them once they get power. At least the wall will still be there and destroying it will exact a significant political price as it will be open defiance of the will of the voters.
I get what you are saying about a physical barrier.
I wish the day a visa expires and the visa holder hasn't checked in, a federal warrant is issued for their arrest and any assets are frozen. Once found and arrested, court that day and deported back to their home country. Assets are unfrozen upon proof of back in home country. Reentry to US is denied for a min of 5 year for violating us law, no exceptions.
-
I get what you are saying about a physical barrier.
I wish the day a visa expires and the visa holder hasn't checked in, a federal warrant is issued for their arrest and any assets are frozen. Once found and arrested, court that day and deported back to their home country. Assets are unfrozen upon proof of back in home country. Reentry to US is denied for a min of 5 year for violating us law, no exceptions.
That is not unreasonable at all.
-
I get what you are saying about a physical barrier.
I wish the day a visa expires and the visa holder hasn't checked in, a federal warrant is issued for their arrest and any assets are frozen. Once found and arrested, court that day and deported back to their home country. Assets are unfrozen upon proof of back in home country. Reentry to US is denied for a min of 5 year for violating us law, no exceptions.
Sounds good and I'd even throw in a few extreme case exceptions like having been in a coma preceding the expiration fo a minimum of the normal length of time it takes to get an extension.