Prop HR4437
#11
RE: Prop HR4437
-Barring Terrorist Aliens from Naturalization - Bars aliens who are potential terrorists or security risks from becoming U.S. citizens.
-Crackdown on Alien Gang Members -- This provision would render alien street gang members inadmissible and deportable
-Aggravated Felony Provisions - Provisions in the bill would make aggravated felons (crimes of violence) inadmissible and would bar refugees and asylees with aggravated felony convictions from receiving green cards.
-Deportation for DUI – Would make multiple DUI offenses a deportable offense for all aliens.
-Cooperation between Border Sheriffs and Federal Law Enforcement – Provisions in the bill would authorize and reimburse local sheriffs in the 29 counties along the southern border
-Mandates the Construction of Specific Security Fencing -- The bill provides for security fencing along the Southwest border, including lights and cameras, for the purposes of gaining operational control of the border.
FTR, I'm AGAINST illegal aliens. I am FOR increasing the # of Aliens allowed to apply for status... Lemme change that, slightly, I'm FOR increasing the # of people PROCESSING applications for citizenship... Maybe a 100-fold increase.
Oh, and, technically, if you're in this country illegally, you're already a criminal, aren't you?
#12
RE: Prop HR4437
a new one will be coming soon. its b/c of some stupid laws in it. but i never heard it was rejected. The proposition passed the senate. and there were huge protest about it last monday. I doubt that would have happened if it was rejected.
#13
RE: Prop HR4437
the one rejected was about that it woul make all illegals like criminals and put behind bars.... they dont put anyboy behind bars cuz they r here illegal...that means they r not criminals!! do u really think that is the right think to do??
and listen to awd.... u might learn something...
and listen to awd.... u might learn something...
#14
RE: Prop HR4437
Good lord. There is some sloppy thinking/posting here.
Words are important when discussing anything, but especially legislation. The devil being in the details and all that.
I've been registered as a guest worker in several foreign countries and it was a pain in the ***. If I had not registered, then I would have been breaking the laws of the country I was in. That matters you know. Even if you have convinced yourself somehow that you are not really breaking the law. Guess what? You still are!
If I go to Mexico, I cannot ignore the laws there, so why should that be the case when Mexicans come to the US? The US knowing who is here (working or not) is a pain in the ***, but a necessary one.
As for this new HR and how it will look after it comes out of the conference committee, it doesn't really matter because nothing will change. The government doesn't enforce current laws, so why should we expect that it will enforce a new one?
Words are important when discussing anything, but especially legislation. The devil being in the details and all that.
I've been registered as a guest worker in several foreign countries and it was a pain in the ***. If I had not registered, then I would have been breaking the laws of the country I was in. That matters you know. Even if you have convinced yourself somehow that you are not really breaking the law. Guess what? You still are!
If I go to Mexico, I cannot ignore the laws there, so why should that be the case when Mexicans come to the US? The US knowing who is here (working or not) is a pain in the ***, but a necessary one.
As for this new HR and how it will look after it comes out of the conference committee, it doesn't really matter because nothing will change. The government doesn't enforce current laws, so why should we expect that it will enforce a new one?
#15
RE: Prop HR4437
the big difference in this one is the huge fence, more power to those gaurding the border.
NOt the fact that they plan to actually deport ppl from inside the country. The cameras may actually help a lil too.
NOt the fact that they plan to actually deport ppl from inside the country. The cameras may actually help a lil too.
#16
RE: Prop HR4437
Oh, a big fence. Who could possibly hope to get through that? I feel safer already. [8D]
It will take a huge event to change anything. We don't need a change in the law. As noted, it is already illegal to jump the existing fence and stay here forever. We need a change in attitude that will cause the government to enforce the laws we already have.
It will take a huge event to change anything. We don't need a change in the law. As noted, it is already illegal to jump the existing fence and stay here forever. We need a change in attitude that will cause the government to enforce the laws we already have.
#18
RE: Prop HR4437
^^^which is a GOOD idea because, as it NOW stands, they "keep" them, like a colloctors set. First officer to get 50 wins a *new* patrol car...
I think what you're referring to is that, under the new guidelines LOCAL municipalities will be able to prosecute local imigre as *criminals* as opposed to handling them as indigents, as they do now. But, honestly, what will they do with them, then? Hold them locally? Transfer them up to county lock-up? WHat then? Transfer to Federal, thence to a "border" holding facility until deported? Or, do we start building *new* facilities for holding these MILLIONS of new-found criminals? And, WHO, exactly, do you think is going to PAY for all this new enforcement? Pay for all the transportation and guarding of these new found criminals" Pay for the extra court personnel necessary to prosecurt these new found criminals? *NEW* legislation requires *NEW* funding. WHERE do you think the *NEW* money comes from? Lemmee guess, YOU believe all we hafta do is print MORE, right?
There are two ways to deal with ANY problem, be it natural, man-made, real, imagined, legislative, prolateriat, hydro-dynamic, epidemic, WHATEVER, and that is to treat the symptoms OR treat the cause. The legislation YOU'RE in favor of treats the symptoms, and, I'm sure, serves the needs of the constituents of what ever legislators proposed and seconded the legislation in question. Or, more specifically, serves the needs of some BUSINESS in the region that elected whatever legislators proposed and seconded the legislation in question. America's largest uniform supplier to border guards and prison bus drivers, maybe... As they say in law enforcement, "follow the money" and you'll find the culprit. This "wall," or "fence," or watever barrier is proposed? I'd be willing to bet that, if you were to do your homework you'd find that some company that has a MAJOR stake in wall, or fence, or barrier erection, is not only IN the state/region that the bills proponents are FROM, but, prolly pumped a fair anmount of $$$ INTO the reelection campaigns of the proponents of the bills original proponents, too!
Do a l'il looking APG, prove me wrong... Oh, and, stop being a knee-jerk reactionary alluh time. I realize you're young, but, you profess to have the capacity for independent, rational thought. So, why doncha, every so often. Us old guys dint get to be old by happenstance, you know (well, not ALL of us). Deja MOO comes into play. We've seen a lot of thos BULL before
Maybe
I think what you're referring to is that, under the new guidelines LOCAL municipalities will be able to prosecute local imigre as *criminals* as opposed to handling them as indigents, as they do now. But, honestly, what will they do with them, then? Hold them locally? Transfer them up to county lock-up? WHat then? Transfer to Federal, thence to a "border" holding facility until deported? Or, do we start building *new* facilities for holding these MILLIONS of new-found criminals? And, WHO, exactly, do you think is going to PAY for all this new enforcement? Pay for all the transportation and guarding of these new found criminals" Pay for the extra court personnel necessary to prosecurt these new found criminals? *NEW* legislation requires *NEW* funding. WHERE do you think the *NEW* money comes from? Lemmee guess, YOU believe all we hafta do is print MORE, right?
There are two ways to deal with ANY problem, be it natural, man-made, real, imagined, legislative, prolateriat, hydro-dynamic, epidemic, WHATEVER, and that is to treat the symptoms OR treat the cause. The legislation YOU'RE in favor of treats the symptoms, and, I'm sure, serves the needs of the constituents of what ever legislators proposed and seconded the legislation in question. Or, more specifically, serves the needs of some BUSINESS in the region that elected whatever legislators proposed and seconded the legislation in question. America's largest uniform supplier to border guards and prison bus drivers, maybe... As they say in law enforcement, "follow the money" and you'll find the culprit. This "wall," or "fence," or watever barrier is proposed? I'd be willing to bet that, if you were to do your homework you'd find that some company that has a MAJOR stake in wall, or fence, or barrier erection, is not only IN the state/region that the bills proponents are FROM, but, prolly pumped a fair anmount of $$$ INTO the reelection campaigns of the proponents of the bills original proponents, too!
Do a l'il looking APG, prove me wrong... Oh, and, stop being a knee-jerk reactionary alluh time. I realize you're young, but, you profess to have the capacity for independent, rational thought. So, why doncha, every so often. Us old guys dint get to be old by happenstance, you know (well, not ALL of us). Deja MOO comes into play. We've seen a lot of thos BULL before
Maybe
#19
RE: Prop HR4437
ORIGINAL: apg96
Why not become a legal immigrant (which isnt as hard as u think) and vote, so u can have a say in this.
ORIGINAL: a4BRZLowrider
U R AN *******!
U R AN *******!
So, please talk facts. WHen you say it is easy to become a 'legal immigrant' you are sharing an opinion...you obviously don't have any facts to back that up.
Most of your examples seem to be aimed at people of latin decent...seems a bit on the prejudice side.