America - The Official Thread

[Danoff]

But because the difficulty or maybe even the impossibility of achievement being 100% perfect does not mean nor should it eliminate that you strive to achieve the highest level towards 100% of that goal that you can accomplish.

Straw man here is being used as a poor excuse to not try and would be admitting defeat or saying you do not have the ability to improve or attempt to improve against past accomplishments. Perhaps that is the way you think but I always feel like we have the capability to achieve higher levels. Maybe that is just the difference in the way a Brit thinks than a Yank thinks though.

Taking away from the finite resources we have for public safety and allocating them to something which will not improve safety (significantly) makes everyone less safe. Not more.

 

[Scaff]

But because the difficulty or maybe even the impossibility of achievement being 100% perfect does not mean nor should it eliminate that you strive to achieve the highest level towards 100% of that goal that you can accomplish.

You're not going to even come close unless you ban all visitors to the US, and even in doing that you would not address the main source of crime against your own citizens.

Straw man here is being used as a poor excuse to not try and would be admitting defeat or saying you do not have the ability to improve or attempt to improve against past accomplishments. Perhaps that is the way you think but I always feel like we have the capability to achieve higher levels.

Now you're just making things up, I've not advocated giving up in any way, I've said that the Wall is a singularly inefficient and ineffective method to achieve the aim you desire. Quite different things entirely.

Maybe that is just the difference in the way a Brit thinks than a Yank thinks though.

Careful, your xenophobia is showing again.

 

[Rallywagon]

If any U.S. citizen is attacked, beaten, robbed or killed by someone then the country has failed at protecting its legal citizens full stop, surely? Punch-for-punch somebody's got you scared about the wrong demographic, imo.

He's already pointed that out. His hate for all illegals comes from the action of 4 individuals.

 

[VFOURMAX1]

He's already pointed that out. His hate for all illegals comes from the action of 4 individuals

I would not call it hate at all but my aversion to criminals which is exactly what an illegal is also extends to thieves, rapist, murderers, pedophiles, drug dealers and about any others that a blight to society and those that try to be decent people and follow the rules.

I have tried to explain race makes no difference, country of origin makes no difference, male or female makes no difference I am a total equal opportunity despiser of all lowlifes within our society and starting to have aversions to those that want to help enable those lowlifes. You either are on the side of being part of the problems or want to eliminate the problems.

 

[Danoff]

I would not call it hate at all but my aversion to criminals which is exactly what an illegal is also extends to thieves, rapist, murderers, pedophiles, drug dealers and about any others that a blight to society and those that try to be decent people and follow the rules.

That's not really how those crimes, especially the violent ones, actually work. Being willing to illegally cross a border in order to better your family doesn't make you attracted to children.

 

[Exorcet]

I would not call it hate at all but my aversion to criminals which is exactly what an illegal is also extends to thieves, rapist, murderers, pedophiles, drug dealers and about any others that a blight to society and those that try to be decent people and follow the rules.

Being a criminal makes you a blight on society? What if the law is unfair? I'd say there is a fair difference between looking to come into the US to harm and people and looking to come into the US to find work. What you said above would imply escaped slaves during the 1800's were a blight on society when they only reason they'd be in the US was because they were kidnapped.

 

[Rallywagon]

I would not call it hate at all but my aversion to criminals which is exactly what an illegal is also extends to thieves, rapist, murderers, pedophiles, drug dealers and about any others that a blight to society and those that try to be decent people and follow the rules.

I have tried to explain race makes no difference, country of origin makes no difference, male or female makes no difference I am a total equal opportunity despiser of all lowlifes within our society and starting to have aversions to those that want to help enable those lowlifes. You either are on the side of being part of the problems or want to eliminate the problems.

Riiigghttt, thatsbwhy youbseem to be so focused on border wall then right? Cause it's not about Mexicans? I mean, why aren't you advocating for a canadian border wall then?

 

[Danoff]

I mean, why aren't you advocating for a canadian border wall then?

Everybody knows Canadians aren't criminals. They're delightsome!

*Bonus internet points for anyone that gets that reference

 

[VFOURMAX1]

That's not really how those crimes, especially the violent ones, actually work.

But the second a person knowingly decides to bypass the legal immigration process of this country and illegally cross the border and enter this country you are then a criminal and I do not care how or why you try to label it differently that is a fact jack!

I'd say there is a fair difference between looking to come into the US to harm and people and looking to come into the US to find work.

This country has a legal work visa program that allows people from other countries to enter this country and work. The citizens of this country are expected to follow this nations laws so why should an outsider not be expected to follow our rules and laws to be here?

I mean, why aren't you advocating for a canadian border wall then?

I have failed to see the news reports or hear of illegal aliens crossing illegally into this country by the 10's of thousands a year over the Canadian border. We will cross that bridge I guess when it appears the situation on the northern border has reached the epic illegal border crossings that match what we currently face on the southern border.

 

[Scaff]

I would not call it hate at all but my aversion to criminals which is exactly what an illegal is also extends to thieves, rapist, murderers, pedophiles, drug dealers and about any others that a blight to society and those that try to be decent people and follow the rules.

I have tried to explain race makes no difference, country of origin makes no difference, male or female makes no difference I am a total equal opportunity despiser of all lowlifes within our society and starting to have aversions to those that want to help enable those lowlifes. You either are on the side of being part of the problems or want to eliminate the problems.

Then you have a very odd way of going about it, focusing on an ineffective tool that targets a group than statistically are less likely to be violent criminals.

It's not an effective route to resolve crimes, it is however a very clear route to target specific racial groups and demonise them (don't forget you described them as invaders).

 

[Exorcet]

This country has a legal work visa program that allows people from other countries to enter this country and work. The citizens of this country are expected to follow this nations laws so why should an outsider not be expected to follow our rules and laws to be here?

I'm asking about what makes them a blight on society though. Sure there is an established channel for getting in, but is there damage in not using that channel? Just being in the US illegally doesn't cause harm. I wouldn't classify it anywhere near being a rapist or a murderer.

 

[Rallywagon]

But the second a person knowingly decides to bypass the legal immigration process of this country and illegally cross the border and enter this country you are then a criminal and I do not care how or why you try to label it differently that is a fact jack!

This country has a legal work visa program that allows people from other countries to enter this country and work. The citizens of this country are expected to follow this nations laws so why should an outsider not be expected to follow our rules and laws to be here?

I have failed to see the news reports or hear of illegal aliens crossing illegally into this country by the 10's of thousands a year over the Canadian border. We will cross that bridge I guess when it appears the situation on the northern border has reached the epic illegal border crossings that match what we currently face on the southern border.

I thought you said one is one to many? A thousand at least illegally cross from Canada, probably more.

 

[Scaff]

But the second a person knowingly decides to bypass the legal immigration process of this country and illegally cross the border and enter this country you are then a criminal and I do not care how or why you try to label it differently that is a fact jack!

Not sure who jack is, but you seem to be conflating very different degrees of crime here, also ignoring the fact that dome are refugees, and that doesn't make it a crime.

You are comparing a misdemeanor offence with clear felony crimes of the most serious types. Its an absurd comparison.

This country has a legal work visa program that allows people from other countries to enter this country and work. The citizens of this country are expected to follow this nations laws so why should an outsider not be expected to follow our rules and laws to be here?

A route that is very clearly biased against the actual immigration needs of your country.

I have failed to see the news reports or hear of illegal aliens crossing illegally into this country by the 10's of thousands a year over the Canadian border. We will cross that bridge I guess when it appears the situation on the northern border has reached the epic illegal border crossings that match what we currently face on the southern border.

Epic?

You seem to once again be ignoring the fact that crossings have been dropping, and were doing so before the wall.

 

[TexRex]

thatsbwhy youbseem

Obkayb, Mushmouth.

*Bonus internet points for anyone that gets that reference

Eh?

 

[Rallywagon]

Not sure who jack is, but you seem to be conflating very different degrees of crime here, also ignoring the fact that dome are refugees, and that doesn't make it a crime.



A route that is very clearly biased against the actual immigration needs of your country.



Epic?

You seem to once again be ignoring the fact that crossings have been dropping, and were doing so before the wall.

Actually. On the Northern border, it's on the Rise.

Obkayb, Mushmouth.




Eh?

Now see here! I cant help my keyboard is drunk!

 

[Danoff]

But the second a person knowingly decides to bypass the legal immigration process of this country and illegally cross the border and enter this country you are then a criminal and I do not care how or why you try to label it differently that is a fact jack!

You seem to have missed my point.

It is not immoral to violate the law. In some cases, it is immoral not to violate the law - like when the law requires you to do something immoral. In law, these are differentiated as malum prohibitum vs. malum in se. A violation of law which is illegal because of statute (prohibitum) vs. a violation of law which is illegal because of inherent moral transgression (in se). Committing a regulatory infraction (prohibitum) does not make you want to commit a moral transgression (in se).

Thus, crossing the border does not make you want to rape children.

Eh?

White and delightsome, it's from the book of mormon.

 

[TexRex]

Not sure who jack is

Fact Jack, verb, to jack facts in favor of fallacy.

 

[PocketZeven]

I would not call it hate at all but my aversion to criminals which is exactly what an illegal is also extends to thieves, rapist, murderers, pedophiles, drug dealers and about any others that a blight to society and those that try to be decent people and follow the rules.

I have tried to explain race makes no difference, country of origin makes no difference, male or female makes no difference I am a total equal opportunity despiser of all lowlifes within our society and starting to have aversions to those that want to help enable those lowlifes. You either are on the side of being part of the problems or want to eliminate the problems.

You have a black and white outlook on the world.
How would you define a child that steals a piece of candy? A criminal, a lowlife? How abouta person that is forced to leave their country because of war, homicidal family etc. or just overstays their visa by accident?

 

[huskeR32]

As far as this federal-versus-state thing goes, I've observed a lot of overlap on a Venn diagram containing people who favor the federal government when it comes to immigration/"sanctuary cities", and the people who approved of the actions of the Bundy asshats in their Nevada and Oregon standoffs. It's laughable how malleable their own "principles" are.

@VFOURMAX1, how did you feel about the situation at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge? Were you just as pro-federal government then?

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

@VFOURMAX1

Question: Are you in favor of streamlining the immigration process such that it is easier & less burdensome for immigrants to gain legal permanent status?

 

[novcze]

Not sure who jack is, but you seem to be conflating very different degrees of crime here, also ignoring the fact that dome are refugees, and that doesn't make it a crime.

you know that status of refugee is given by receiving country, if someone enter a country and not apply for it they are still illegal immigrant

 

[Joey D]

I would not call it hate at all but my aversion to criminals which is exactly what an illegal is also extends to thieves, rapist, murderers, pedophiles, drug dealers and about any others that a blight to society and those that try to be decent people and follow the rules.

You must hate Donald Trump then since he doesn't seem to want to obey the law.

 

[TexRex]

It's laughable how malleable their own "principles" are.

To paraphrase Marx (Groucho, not Karl): "Those are my principles. If I don't like them, I have others."

You must hate Donald Trump then since he doesn't seem to want to obey the law.

The notion is laughable. I addressed it not long ago, and his response was to invoke "the Bidens and the Clintons".

 

[VFOURMAX1]

It's not an effective route to resolve crimes, it is however a very clear route to target specific racial groups and demonise them (don't forget you described them as invaders).

How does describing a group of people that illegally cross your countries borders as invaders in itself target specific racial groups? How is it being racist if the only reason certain racial groups are the ones being arrested and deported because they are the majority of the ones committing that crime? Going after and arresting people that have illegally crossed your nations borders is not racist unless you capture a group and release certain detainees because they are of a different ethnic background.

I'm asking about what makes them a blight on society though. Sure there is an established channel for getting in, but is there damage in not using that channel? Just being in the US illegally doesn't cause harm. I wouldn't classify it anywhere near being a rapist or a murderer.

But it is illegal and a blatant disrespect and ignoring of our laws and apparently that they think this countries laws and rules do not apply to them. You are now applying double standards to what a citizen and illegal alien are required to abide by. If anyone got the get off easier it should be the citizen not the illegal alien criminal.

Not sure who jack is, but you seem to be conflating very different degrees of crime here, also ignoring the fact that dome are refugees, and that doesn't make it a crime

Those refugees attempting to seeking asylum in the U.S. are not following the rules as accepted by world wide organizations. A person seeking refugee status should be seeking that status in the first country they enter away from their home of danger. When it comes to South Americans they should never be seeking asylum further north than Mexico. They want in the U.S. not because of danger to qualify them as refugees but because of economic reasons which are not acceptable reasons to be allowed into this country as a refugee.

A route that is very clearly biased against the actual immigration needs of your country.

I feel we have agencies which study these demands and have the numbers and are much more qualified to set those limits than anybody posting on this board.

Thus, crossing the border does not make you want to rape children.

But it still makes you a criminal. Why is that so hard to understand, follow the rules, come here legally or go somewhere else.

How abouta person that is forced to leave their country because of war, homicidal family etc

Read the answer above concerning refugee status.

Question: Are you in favor of streamlining the immigration process such that it is easier & less burdensome for immigrants to gain legal permanent status?

I feel that once the vetting process is complete that there are reasons for other steps to be completed. Without knowing the whole process I cannot really give you a honest or reasonable response.
I will say that I feel that anyone that is considered for permanent residency should be able to document financial independence for their own support and should not be eligible for any government financial assistance for a set period of time of multiple years.
Look at the laws of other countries and they have requirements as well. I can remember reading something about Australia's requirements for a person wanting to move there and retire and the conditions were pretty brutal to meet the criteria. But most think the U.S. should admit anyone.

 

[PocketZeven]

Those refugees attempting to seeking asylum in the U.S. are not following the rules as accepted by world wide organizations. A person seeking refugee status should be seeking that status in the first country they enter away from their home of danger. When it comes to South Americans they should never be seeking asylum further north than Mexico. They want in the U.S. not because of danger to qualify them as refugees but because of economic reasons which are not acceptable reasons to be allowed into this country as a refugee.

As the grandson of an illegal immigrant (who eventually received legal status) I find that statement extremely ignorant. Who are you to determine where people take refuge to. That said the right totally exaggerate the problem of illegal immigration at the southern border. Like many point out, the majority of illegals do come in legally, only to overstay their Visa.

Even the outrage over "economic" immigration is not logic to me. A lot of people from all walks of life move from one country to another for career opportunities. What is the problem with that?

 

[Scaff]

you know that status of refugee is given by receiving country, if someone enter a country and not apply for it they are still illegal immigrant

I do indeed and the method is governed by international law, the standards of which the US are not following.

How does describing a group of people that illegally cross your countries borders as invaders in itself target specific racial groups? How is it being racist if the only reason certain racial groups are the ones being arrested and deported because they are the majority of the ones committing that crime? Going after and arresting people that have illegally crossed your nations borders is not racist unless you capture a group and release certain detainees because they are of a different

This has atready be explained to you and ignored by you.

Those refugees attempting to seeking asylum in the U.S. are not following the rules as accepted by world wide organizations. A person seeking refugee status should be seeking that status in the first country they enter away from their home of danger. When it comes to South Americans they should never be seeking asylum further north than Mexico. They want in the U.S. not because of danger to qualify them as refugees but because of economic reasons which are not acceptable reasons to be allowed into this country as a refugee.

Utterly and completely incorrect, nothing in international law requires a refugee to seek asylum in the first 'safe' country they enter. Nor does it require them to use an established checkpoint (as the US demands).

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/are...-asylum-in-the-first-safe-country-they-reach/

https://fullfact.org/immigration/refugees-first-safe-country/

https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/11/1025411

I feel we have agencies which study these demands and have the numbers and are much more qualified to set those limits than anybody posting on this board.

Who are basing it on political busses and not sound economic or data based requirements

But it still makes you a criminal. Why is that so hard to understand, follow the rules, come here legally or go somewhere else.

Still conflating different levels of offence I see.

Read the answer above concerning refugee status.

The one you made up?

 

[TexRex]

Those refugees attempting to seeking asylum in the U.S. are not following the rules as accepted by world wide organizations. A person seeking refugee status should be seeking that status in the first country they enter away from their home of danger.

Wrong.

The UN Refugee Convention does not make this requirement of refugees, and UK case law supports this interpretation. Refugees can legitimately make a claim for asylum in the UK after passing through other “safe” countries.

...

@VFOURMAX1, does the phrase "diversity is code for white genocide" ring true for you? Why or why not?

 

[Scaff]

But most think the U.S. should admit anyone.

No one here has said that at all, you're applying a Trump claim that has no substance to it at all.

To be clear you are parroting a lie.

 

[Exorcet]

But it is illegal and a blatant disrespect and ignoring of our laws and apparently that they think this countries laws and rules do not apply to them. You are now applying double standards to what a citizen and illegal alien are required to abide by. If anyone got the get off easier it should be the citizen not the illegal alien criminal.

So they are a blight for ignoring laws? If the only law they break is whether they're permitted entry or not, that doesn't strike me as a big deal - there isn't any damage done. If they think no laws apply to them that's perhaps different, but that's not implied by ignoring one set of laws (immigration). I don't see what double standard I'm applying though, my original point was that a law could be unfair. Laws can be unfair to both citizens and non citizens, but a US citizen can't illegally immigrate to the US, so the law in question only applies to one group.

 

[Terronium-12]

@VFOURMAX1 Do not ever tell anyone to ram an object some place again. If you can't handle your emotions without random outbursts and using caps locks for no reason, then perhaps this isn't the thread for you.