Ohio Chatter DEV

Ty Webb

CenterBHSFan;594723 wrote:No prob.

But, that's still another discussion for another day, right? lol

True....but it's not like he's lying right?

Ty Webb

Then we might as well throw every non-American Indian out of the country too

I Wear Pants

CenterBHSFan;594467 wrote:1. I was playin with ya. That's why I used all of your words, just twisting some.

2. So you think the illegals should have those rights before the people who respect this country enough to go through the correct process? Even the ones whose lives have been in danger just thinking about escaping their country? Do you not think that they are bright, intelligent, courageous people? Do you not think that some or alot of those folks might want to join our military?

Hypothetically, let's imagine that your a single guy, works hard, is engaged to become married. Bear with me.

If I broke into your house and moved some of my stuff into your living room and commenced to living there against your initial knowledge, without your welcome, ignoring your requests to knock on the door first? Would you think that was "alright" because I wanted to go to college?

What then if I decided to move my stuff into your bedroom and tried to make you act like there's nothing wrong with that? Would you think it was "OK" because I wanted to join the military?

What if I told you, as an aside, that I was never going to help you pay for your house, your electricty, water, oil/propane, etc?
That I was only going to buy whatever food that I alone wanted to eat? That I would buy a car that only I could drive, while living in my comfy arrangement? Would you think it was "just fine" because it was just easier than calling the cops?

What if I started to bring in some family member, or maybe 3 or 4 of my friends? Would you put me and my family/friends onto your insurance because ... well 3 of us are pregnant and 1 of us had the sniffles and we deserved to use your doctor?

What if I somehow found out a way to make you marry me, totally disregarding the fact that somebody else was already waiting to do that? What if I didn't care that your fiancee invested alot of her time into your relationship? What if I didn't give a damn that she's already spent thousands of dollars on a wedding dress? What if I laughed at the fact that she's already paid for the preacher and marriage liscence, and was just waiting for her "Big Day" to come?
Would what I was doing seem "fair" to you? Would it seem "fair" to her? How do you think that your hypothetical fiance would feel about what I'm doing?

What if you finally got the courage to call the cops in order to try and get me kicked out so that your significant other can finally get what she deserves and the cops told you it was too late?

What if the mayor of your town brought you into his office and told you to shut your mouth? That I and my family were just enough of the extra votes he needed to get him reelected for his job; and when he got reelected he would build a new homeless shelter, thanking me and my family and friends. Would you be angry at him?

Where is your girlfriends rights in all of this? I mean, here's this girl who has done everything right. She's respected you, thought about you, planned a future with you, spent money for her dream of spending the rest of her life with you, was counting down the days till she could make it official and move it with you - only to be told that somebody else forced their way in and took her place.

Is there justice in that? What sort of fairness? How about honor?

I half figured that Center.

If they want to join our military I think they should be allowed to become citizens after a certain period of service.

tk421

Ty Webb;594755 wrote:Then we might as well throw every non-American Indian out of the country too

This is a bullshit quote. I don't know about you and your family, but I AM a native American. I was born in this country, my parents were born in this country, their parents were born in this country, their parents were born in this country. The people this Dream Act would effect ARE NOT native to this country. They are here ILLEGALLY. I really don't know what is so hard about the word illegal that Democrats seem to not understand it. If I break into your house and say I'll do some yard work and help out a little around the place, will you let me stay there for 5 years or so and then give me the keys? Illegal, not a hard concept to understand.

bigdaddy2003

tk421;594821 wrote:This is a bullshit quote. I don't know about you and your family, but I AM a native American. I was born in this country, my parents were born in this country, their parents were born in this country, their parents were born in this country. The people this Dream Act would effect ARE NOT native to this country. They are here ILLEGALLY. I really don't know what is so hard about the word illegal that Democrats seem to not understand it. If I break into your house and say I'll do some yard work and help out a little around the place, will you let me stay there for 5 years or so and then give me the keys? Illegal, not a hard concept to understand.

+1

I Wear Pants

Many of us obviously disagree with the status of our immigration laws.

I think that if you're willing to serve in our military for a few years you should definitely be able to be a legal citizen.

Hence they wouldn't be illegal.

O-Trap

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what I see thus far.

Currently, we have a process in place for gaining citizenship. We'll call this Option A. As it exists currently, that is the only option.

Now, if this passes, it seems to me (and again, if I'm wrong, just point out where) that it's simply creating additional options.

Option B: You can join the military.

Option C: Get a college education and gain productive employment (AND pay income tax).

Option A: If you don't want to join the military or go to college, you can use the same process in place.

Where is the problem?

tk421

O-Trap;594885 wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what I see thus far.

Currently, we have a process in place for gaining citizenship. We'll call this Option A. As it exists currently, that is the only option.

Now, if this passes, it seems to me (and again, if I'm wrong, just point out where) that it's simply creating additional options.

Option B: You can join the military.

Option C: Get a college education and gain productive employment (AND pay income tax).

Option A: If you don't want to join the military or go to college, you can use the same process in place.

Where is the problem?

The problem is that this bill is for illegal immigrants who have been in this country for at least 5 years. It is not a new way for anyone who wants to come to this country legally to gain citizenship. It is designed solely for the purpose of rewarding the breaking of our immigration laws.

If the Dream Act passed and someone from another country wanted to gain citizenship, this bill would do NOTHING for them. It is expressly for illegal immigrants who are already in this country.

Would I qualify?

The following is a list of specific requirements one would need in order to qualify for the current version of the DREAM Act.

Must have entered the United States before the age of 16 (i.e. 15 and younger)

Must have been present in the United States for at least five (5) consecutive years prior to enactment of the bill

Must have graduated from a United States high school, or have obtained a GED, or have been accepted into an institution of higher education (i.e. college/university)

Must be between the ages of 12 and 35 at the time of application

Must have good moral character

I Wear Pants

Would you support what we said if this was for people wishing to gain citizenship though? That seems reasonable.

What you just listed in quotes is a bit more complicated for me to simply agree with. I think any measure needs to be paired with securing/discouraging illegal immigration by some means. But then we still have the many illegals currently in the country. And frankly for monetary reasons alone I think it'd be beneficial to extend to them the "serve in the military" deal instead of hunting them all down and shipping them away.

tk421

I Wear Pants;594910 wrote:Would you support what we said if this was for people wishing to gain citizenship though? That seems reasonable.

What you just listed in quotes is a bit more complicated for me to simply agree with. I think any measure needs to be paired with securing/discouraging illegal immigration by some means. But then we still have the many illegals currently in the country. And frankly for monetary reasons alone I think it'd be beneficial to extend to them the "serve in the military" deal instead of hunting them all down and shipping them away.

Yes, if someone who currently isn't an illegal immigrant wants to serve in our military and does so, I don't have a problem at all giving them a path to citizenship. In fact, I think they've already started this very same program.

This is an older article from last year, but it's what we've been talking about. Note that the military doesn't currently allow illegal immigrants to serve and nothing in the Dream Act would change that, I think.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/us/15immig.html

I Wear Pants

Someone should get on that then because it makes sense.

BoatShoes

Would I qualify?

The following is a list of specific requirements one would need in order to qualify for the current version of the DREAM Act.

* Must have entered the United States before the age of 16 (i.e. 15 and younger)
* Must have been present in the United States for at least five (5) consecutive years prior to enactment of the bill
* Must have graduated from a United States high school, or have obtained a GED, or have been accepted into an institution of higher education (i.e. college/university)
* Must be between the ages of 12 and 35 at the time of application
* Must have good moral character

I sympathize with points made by Writer and CHS, etc. But, if we read this language here, the DREAM Act applies to illegal immigrants who entered into the U.S. prior to an age when persons achieve much legal responsibility. In most instances, they were probably brought here by their parents. America is all they know. I'm not sure it's a reasonable to expect someone who crossed the border illegally at 10 years old to either 1. allow herself to be deported/jailed/fined 2. return to their country of citizenship to which they have no real allegiance.

And, naturalization is not really realistic for persons brought here illegally as children. In order to obtain naturalized citizenship, they must be a lawful permanent resident for 5 years and cannot apply for naturalization until they are 18. Hence the problem as these children are not lawful permanent residents to begin with.

If we are talking about grown adults with free will then I hear what Writer and others are saying. This bill applies to children who grew up placing their hands over their hearts pledging allegiance to our flag.

believer

BoatShoes;594988 wrote:This bill applies to children who grew up placing their hands over their hearts pledging allegiance to our flag in Spanish.

Fixed

Writerbuckeye

Oh for God's sake.

Can we take the emotion out of this?

This bill applies to children who grew up placing their hands over their hearts pledging allegiance to our flag.

So what?

They still don't deserve to jump in front of people who have FOLLOWED THE LAW and waited patiently to become citizens. It's not fair. I don't give a damn if they profess undying love for this country; that's NOT the point.

I want people who have been in line, followed all the rules, crossed all their t's and dotted all their i's to be given first consideration for citizenship.

If the people you're talking about want to go to the back of the line and wait their turn...fine. Otherwise, no.

Yes, I realize they were brought here as children illegally and had no say in the matter. But if they are adults now, then they need to go back to their country of origin (citizenship) and start over. If they aren't of age, then their parents need to take them back and do the same.

BoatShoes

Writerbuckeye;595504 wrote: Yes, I realize they were brought here as children illegally and had no say in the matter. But if they are adults now, then they need to go back to their country of origin (citizenship) and start over. If they aren't of age, then their parents need to take them back and do the same.

So you think a Canadian Citizen brought here by their parents when she is 8 years old and grew up in America, upon turning 18 ought to return to Canada, return to the United States lawfully and then wait several years to obtain permanent residency and then 5 more years to be naturalized when they were permanent residents for their entire life. And, they did not have the necessary mens rea to be an illegal immigrant because they were children brought here by their parents. There's no reason that the time they spent here at the command of their parents shouldn't count towards permanent residency and subsequent naturalization.

I can tell you for sure, as a practical matter, this is never going to happen.

You want to build a wall and stop parents from bringing their children into the country illegally ok I hear all of that. You don't want there to be an opportunity to skirt around the naturalization process, ok I hear that...but these kids who have no wanton or willful disregard for America's borders ought not to be swept under this shell.

tk421

So, using the breaking into a house analogy again, what you are saying is if someone brought their kids with them and broke into your house, they should be allowed to stay and not have any consequences since they were just brought along for the ride?

BoatShoes

tk421;595594 wrote:So, using the breaking into a house analogy again, what you are saying is if someone brought their kids with them and broke into your house, they should be allowed to stay and not have any consequences since they were just brought along for the ride?

If you let the kid grow up in your house for 18 years and the kids acted in every way as if they were a part of your family I think it would be unreasonable to toss him in the street after that. Also, as a matter of law, in your example, no child would be prosecuted for breaking and entering in your scenario wherein they had no requisite mens rea and were brought along by their parents.

tk421

BoatShoes;595625 wrote:If you let the kid grow up in your house for 18 years and the kids acted in every way as if they were a part of your family I think it would be unreasonable to toss him in the street after that. Also, as a matter of law, in your example, no child would be prosecuted for breaking and entering in your scenario wherein they had no requisite mens rea and were brought along by their parents.

They wouldn't be prosecuted but no one in this country would let them stay in their house for 18 years. They'd be returned to whatever family they have in their country.

BoatShoes

tk421;595642 wrote:They wouldn't be prosecuted but no one in this country would let them stay in their house for 18 years. They'd be returned to whatever family they have in their country.

Well if we're going to roll with the analogy you have provided, we have indeed allowed these people to stay by not enforcing our immigration laws. You say you want the laws enforced better well yes I agree and the same goes with all laws but it seems to me that ship has sailed on immigrants in this particular situation and a more reasonable solution besides "throw em out" needs to be offered when they never had a culpable state of mind. And, at a lower level, many many businesses and families do indeed allow illegal immigrants and their children to partake in the U.S. economy completely willfully.

Writerbuckeye

BoatShoes;595643 wrote:Well if we're going to roll with the analogy you have provided, we have indeed allowed these people to stay by not enforcing our immigration laws. You say you want the laws enforced better well yes I agree and the same goes with all laws but it seems to me that ship has sailed on immigrants in this particular situation and a more reasonable solution besides "throw em out" needs to be offered when they never had a culpable state of mind. And, at a lower level, many many businesses and families do indeed allow illegal immigrants and their children to partake in the U.S. economy completely willfully.

They aren't here legally, regardless of how they got here in the first place. They should be booted out and made to enter lawfully.

Just because we didn't do the right thing with our laws the first time doesn't mean we can't start enforcing them -- and doing the right thing -- now.

As for having allowed them to participate in the economy willfully...again, I don't care. It was wrong then and it's wrong now.

No pass.

Go home and start over.

I want LEGAL immigrants and not people who have pushed their way to the head of the line and now, for whatever reasons you or they want to come up with, expect to be rewarded with citizenship.

believer

Writerbuckeye;595672 wrote:I want LEGAL immigrants and not people who have pushed their way to the head of the line and now, for whatever reasons you or they want to come up with, expect to be rewarded with citizenship.

It's all about millions of new Democrat votes. Who gives a crap about legalities?

BoatShoes

Writerbuckeye;595672 wrote:They aren't here legally, regardless of how they got here in the first place. They should be booted out and made to enter lawfully.

Just because we didn't do the right thing with our laws the first time doesn't mean we can't start enforcing them -- and doing the right thing -- now.

As for having allowed them to participate in the economy willfully...again, I don't care. It was wrong then and it's wrong now.

No pass.

Go home and start over.

I want LEGAL immigrants and not people who have pushed their way to the head of the line and now, for whatever reasons you or they want to come up with, expect to be rewarded with citizenship.

Well technically, in order to be guilty of a crime these children immigrants need to have a culpable state of mind as with any other crime. As noted, this really is not the case. I think it's fair to say that although they are certainly aliens, the U.S. Code uses the term "unauthorized alien" in addition to "illegal alien" and since they do not have any kind of mental state necessary to commit a crime so as to become an a "illegal alien" as we understand what it means for an action to be a crime, it seems to me that the legal status of this non-culpable child aliens is in question as opposed to, say, a drug lord willfully crossing the U.S. Border with an intent to evade U.S. law enforcement etc.

BoatShoes

believer;595694 wrote:It's all about millions of new Democrat votes. Who gives a crap about legalities?

The only ones not giving a crap about legalities here are the ones completely disregarding the lack of culpable state of mind had by these child aliens which is a foundational principle in our U.S. criminal justice system.

believer

BoatShoes;595696 wrote:The only ones not giving a crap about legalities here are the ones completely disregarding the lack of culpable state of mind had by these child aliens which is a foundational principle in our U.S. criminal justice system.

The only ones not giving a crap about legalities here are the ones completely disregarding the fact that the children of illegal aliens are - well - the children of illegal aliens. The children might be victims of their parents' disregard for the laws of the United States, but they're here illegally nonetheless.

After all conservatives want to starve our own legal poor children so why would we give a rat's ass about Mexican children here illegally....right?

Writerbuckeye

State of mind has NOTHING to do with committing a crime.

If you have no intent to kill a guy but hit him in the mouth, and he falls, hits his head and dies -- you are guilty of manslaughter. Your state of mind doesn't enter into the equation.

If you don't intend to kill someone when you drive drunk, you are still guilty of vehicular homicide in some form.

If you are playing with a gun and point it at someone, pull the trigger but don't know the gun is loaded and someone dies, you are still guilty of a crime.

Ignorance is not a defense for breaking the law. Or haven't you ever heard that before?

Archive

The Dream Act - Buying Votes The Democratic Way.