Why Do Illegal Immigrants sound like Troublemaking High School Students?

[Cain Highwind]

What? Cain making a topic in ID, I think this is a first!

Anyway, first I want to state a disclaimer that this topic in no way endorses racism of any kind. I'm certainly not racist, but I do have a beef with Mexicans (any any other Nationality, but Mexican's are the worst offender) who think they can just waltz into the US and leech off our government really just piss me off.

I know there are some people that are legit and want to make an honest living, and they work hard for it. I know my Mom moving to New Zealand was no simple task, but she persevered and embraced the culture. Maybe I just respect hard work and have a huge disdain for "line-cutters"

I was reading an article in the paper the other day talking about various "checkpoints" set up throughout Southern California to get people who are unlicensed or intoxicated off the road but "advocates of illegal immigration" have been taking pride in warning people of these checkpoints holding up signs telling people to turn back.

It just made me angry, because reading about the "cheap tricks" to avoid getting in trouble for something THEY SHOULDN'T BE DOING IN THE FIRST PLACE reminds me of what I'd see in High School. And it just infuriates me that whenever we try to do something about it, these "advocates" come in and whine how we're being oh so mean to these POOR LITTLE PEOPLE.

I'm posting here because I'm really curious if I'm the only one that's just completely flabbergasted by this way of thinking. Going back to my High School days. I was in a class for ROP Printing. Teacher was a really great guy, he knew that we were all pretty tired being at the end of the day, he knew a lot of us don't want more textbook grinding, so he had more of a hands-on teaching approach with just a couple pages of reading (about as much reading as an ID topic here) and an easy "fill in the blanks" review worksheet. It was incredibly easy-going for anyone who was in the least bit serious. This was by no means anything like a "major subject" class

But there was a good third of the class who were dropped into the class because they had nothing better to join and wanted to do nothing but socialize and leave class and any sort of work was "unfair" Yeah unfair and some kind of crime against them.

So yeah, that what I think of whenever I hear about these "advocates" who complain whenever we try to crack down on these guys.

Now, I should address my thoughts on the controversial new law in Arizona. For those who don't know, it's a law that allows police and state authorities to make inquiries on someone's citizenship or arrest them.

I admit, that I think this law goes too far. It's no different than if I were to see a teen wearing a hooded sweatshirt going through the store I work at demand he empty his pockets and search him. But reading this article the other day, makes me wonder, I'd love to know what these advocates for illegal immigration would be considered fair.

So yeah, I'm just wondering if there are actually people here that can offer a different viewpoint. Am I just some crazy, closet-racist? Because this issue drives me up the wall.

[Sasquatch]

The United States of America allows more legal immigrants every year than every other nation in the world combined. Think about that.

We have immigrants from all over the world that look to better their life in America. Most of them do it legally -- and hey, more power to 'em, I'd help if I could. But we have some -- mostly from Mexico (and Central America, through Mexico) that don't want to play by the rules.

What do higher crime rates, higher teen pregnancy rates, lower literacy rates, higher drug use rates, and higher poverty rates have in common? They're all shared by illegal immigrants. This isn't because they can't partake of the same government benefits as legal citizens, it is because they are the types of people who don't care to succeed or obey laws. If they did, they wouldn't be in this country illegally.

And now Arizona passes a law that lets police stop suspected illegal immigrants and check them -- and people are bitching about it? Weave between lanes while driving at 2:00 or 2:30 in the morning, and you'll be stopped and checked for sobriety. Is that a problem? Walk into a courthouse with a bulge in your jacket -- or a holster attached to your belt -- and you'll be stopped to check if you actually do have a gun. Is that a problem?

Of course there will be "profiling". There always is. Do you know why? BECAUSE IT WORKS. If there's a mugging in a subway tunnel, the police aren't going to focus much on the 40-year-old woman in the business suit, they're going to look at the 16-year-old in the hooded sweatshirt and baggy jeans. Because ninety-nine times out of one hundred, it's the one in the hooded sweatshirt and baggy jeans. 99/100 times, the terrorist is the Arab Muslim, not the eighty-year-old woman with knitting needles. 99/100 times, the computer hacker is some twenty-year-old kid with a good computer, not a middle-aged guy with a family and full-time job. Do we want the police to look at every suspect equally, or do we want them to focus on the most obvious suspects?

Two simple rules I ask for from immigrants. First, learn English. If you don't want to learn it, at least accept that the rest of the country doesn't have to learn your language. Second, obey the law. That's simple -- pay taxes, work, go to school, don't do stupid things. And illegals have already screwed up one of those rules.

[T.G. Oskar]

Well, for starters...not all "advocates for illegal immigration" actually support illegal immigration. They support an immigration reform, in which some of the current vaults for legal immigration are reduced or eliminated.

This is as follows: to become a legal immigrant, you need to get a visa of some sort. Be it a worker's visa (so that you may legally work in the US), a student's visa (so you may study in the US), and other kinds. Usually, that means hours of effort and going to the embassy in hopes that you gain one of those visas. Naturally, that implies getting a lot of money. Not sure if that also implies getting a lawyer; I wouldn't know, since I haven't applied for a visa to travel to Asia or Europe (as of yet; depending on how things go, I might have to apply for a visa for somewhere rather than the US. No offense.)

Now, people that are poor and at most illiterate/barely literate don't seem to understand how that works, and find the legal methods too much of a hassle. Now, that doesn't automatically mean they're lazy; it means they see it way too complicated, and some even fear that they might get imprisoned. Not to mention, the looming effects of bureaucracy. Mostly, the ones that *can* apply for a visa are usually people that understand the hurdles and work to pass them. But a good deal of people that cross the borders are farmers and people of small towns. It also means that some criminals cross the borders as well, but that thing happens at every point where immigration (and emigration) happens.

So, what's their hopes? Some try to cross the border on their own: a risk, since the desert (for what I've seen on Hispanic television) is a real, real hassle. Others try their way through coyotes, which are really people that take advantage of the people and ask them insane amounts of money for roughly the same chance of striking it on their own, except that they supposedly know the pathways and have methods to hide illegal immigrants. Granted; none of the ways are exactly (or entirely) legal, but for small-town people (and criminals, unfortunately), it's their "only" choice. I place it on quotation marks since there's another choice, but they cannot seem to aspire to that choice.

In the end, those who *do* cross the border have three outcomes: they are deported (the usual choice), they get to work on places like agriculture, clothing or in the rare cases somewhere better (the other usual choice), or die in the desert/by coyotes/etc. (the unfortunate choice). The honest people who cross the border to work and eventually become citizens (which may know very well that they have violated a law, but they refuse to care as their other chance would be far worse) will usually get loads of work in order to make amends. The criminals might not start as criminals, but the influence of Central American "maras" gangs usually lures them into becoming criminals. And then, there's the people who might have an eye to the welfare benefits and seek them.

This brief summary works to indicate the following: those who advocate for an immigration reform do so because they want to stop border incursions (or at least, reduce them as they can allow people a much easier, safer, and specifically legal way to enter the country), not all who advocate for an immigration reform are supportive of people that enter the country's borders for anything else other than seeking work and perhaps education (and seek ways to become legal citizens, to boot), that (even if only a brief mention) this happens with any kind of immigrant (thus, it's not just "Mexicans" or Central Americans to be a bit more precise), and that it's not as easy as it seems to cross the border. Some of the honest people (or the people that seek to be honest despite knowing they're breaking a law out of desperation, not outright criminals) actually get cheated out of their few possessions just to get to the other side. Finally, it also implies that this is something that requires listening to all sides.

Oh, it also implies the people who want to take advantage of the United States usually work together in order to cause confusion. And that racist people also might create some confusion. So don't see this as "immigrants vs. US", but rather as a set of several sides which usually take one position or the other: there are former immigrants and now-legal citizens of the US who actually oppose crossing the border, there are immigrants who wish for an immigration reform but that disapprove of the side of their community which gives them a bad reputation, there's people who hide between the movements to support legal immigration but that only desire welfare benefits, not seeking opportunities to work and the like, and so on.

I have to speak in a different way, mostly from where I live, since it's the best parallel that I can work with (later I'll explain why I oppose the Arizona law). In Puerto Rico, which is a non-incorporated U.S. territory, there's several cases of illegal immigration happening virtually every day. The Coast Guard, along with the Dept. of Homeland Security, patrol a small channel west of the island to seek for Dominican immigrants. The event is an eerie parallel, since it deals with most of the things that happens in the Mexico-US border. First, not all immigrants are actually Dominicans: there are also Haitians, Cubans and even Chinese (no, I kid you not). Instead of a desert, you have a relatively long strip of water. The boats they use are cheaply made, and at any moment people can get stranded in the channel, which is not calm and quiet most of the time; not to mention, these people travel that channel pretty much without any kind of guidance (sometimes, they rely only on their memory).

When those immigrants do cross into island shore (and thus, into U.S. territory), they usually do one of the following. Some are caught, and thus deported back into the Dominican Republic. Others manage to evade the authorities, seek some place to live, and get into menial work to get enough money to start their naturalization processes. The big bulk (and I mean a big bulk) evade the authorities, get in contact with other people that managed to cross, seek their green cards and then seek pretty much every single welfare benefit, not to mention using their houses as refuges for both the people that want to work and the people that don't. And also, getting enough money to start their own business.

Now, the group of people that are undesirable (don't seek to work or study, only seek welfare benefits and actually know the tricks to get them better than a local, and may even engage in criminal activity) usually tend to bully the group of people who actually seek to work and progress in U.S. territory, and displace the local people of most poor locales in the capital city. When there's any attempt to get them under control, they start playing the "we came here to work and study and whatnot!" card, along with the people who actually come here to work and study and whatnot. Eventually, the people who seek to work and study for real get deported, while these people who don't want to usually get out unscathed.

Now, does a law like that in Arizona would work to weed out these people? Nope, and instead it weeds out the honest people, the ones that go to the United States to work for their families. Does that mean that things should remain as-is? Certainly not, since doing nothing is bad; however, doing something wrong is worse than doing nothing. How to solve that situation? Well, I can't give you the answer but one thing is for certain: if you want to weed out the undesirables (and I don't mean everybody, just the criminals and those who don't come here to work and study), you need to be smarter than them. Bait them, perhaps, but beware to prevent getting the honest people to work out. And that's why it doesn't work: because it's dependent on a set of factors working correctly in order to work appropriately, and because the design of the law is done with a specific goal in mind. It depends on the law officers to prevent racial profiling, for once (it won't work appropriately if all of a sudden you find that only Central-American immigrants, specifically immigrants coming from specific regions, are asked for their papers while others who might have no papers but that don't look like Central Americans aren't).

The law that was proposed just simply doesn't weed the undesirable people in the correct way. Think of it as trying to get...vermin out of your house (yes, a terrible analogy, but bear with me, it doesn't sound as bad as it looks since the people who really wish to work and study might be better compared to adopted stray pets). You can ID them, you can try to get them out with poison and traps, but as long as you don't do some cleaning and get what they want out of their hands, they'll hide in your home, keep multiplying and keep pestering. And worse; they'll hide out in places they know you won't be looking (in the case of these people, they'll hide out in-between the honest, hard-working people and bully them into supporting them).

Think about it in your analogy, Cain, as "these people think that work is too hard, but they'll take refuge in the people who actually believe that work is too hard". Those are your "advocates"; they blend in with the honest, legalized people who seek to make a real immigration reform, lull them into believing they are being persecuted, and gain their support even if in the end they aren't being honest about themselves. Not all advocates for an immigration reform *want* to protect those who don't cross the border with the idea of honest progress. I wouldn't say anything about being a "closet racist", but perhaps it's better that you realize there are people that use their wits to take advantage of the honest. On both sides; both on the pro-immigration side and on the anti-immigration side.

[Zargabaath]

I like how hispanics who are protesting the Arizona law and any other law that would possibly be detrimental to illegal immigrants, whom are a vast majority of hispanic origin, complain that the law are supposed action is racist towards hispanics. These people just don't get the idea, that the those in America don't have a problem with hispanics but with illegal immigrants who so happen to be usually of hispanic origin; a stereotype it may be but it is based upon fact. The hispanics who are protesting try to shift the attention from illegal immigrants to racism because they know what they are fighting for - illegal immigrants - is wrong. Once a person has crossed the border, illegaly, they have broken the law of the U.S. and are criminals; these protestors are trying to help out these criminals - accomplises it could be seen as.

Now with their attempt to turn this debate into racism against hispanics, I say if they love their heritage and culture so much, go back to your country. Oh wait, you don't want to because it is a hell hole compared to the US. Mexico departs any illegal they catch coming in from their southern border; other countries if a traveler doesn't have idea will be held in custody till they can be identified. But in America this can't be allowed because it is violating their human rights. In regards to the Arizona law, it is not such a big deal to citizens or legal immigrants of the US. By federal law legal immigrants are required to carry their green-card at all times and for citizens of the US they are almost always required to carry their identification for one or more purposes: driving, credit card, check, purchase of alcohol or cigarettes, etc. If a cop were to stop a hispanic citizen of the US in Arizona for possibly being an illegal immigrant because most illegals in the US are of hispanic origin and most illegals in Arizona are hispanic would it be such a heinous act for them to just simply pull out their id, the cop to look at it, and then say they can go on their way?

The border does not to be sealed or walled with more troops patrolling any who try to get past that via climbing over or tunneling which could be seen as the illegal immigrants invading this country. Second, the federal law needs to be enforced, not reformed; the government should be looking for illegals and be shipping them off back to their country. I don't have a problem with hispanics or legal immigrants, most of my ancestors came to America legally. I do have a problem with illegal immirgrants whom take away resources from Americans. I do have a problem with illegal immigrants comitting crimes in the US and politicians not wanting to tackle the issue because it would make hispanics angry, though it is not a hispanic problem but an illegal immigrant problem.

[Furore]

+1 Sasquatch's post.

While I think ethnic diversity is a good thing, entering a country illegally certainly isn't and it's not just one party who suffers from it. The country they invade might suffer in the ways Sasquatch mentioned and legitimate legal migrants might be effected negatively (especially if their ethnicity becomes associated with society's problems).

The grass might be greener on the other side, but it wouldn't kill them to look into migrating the proper way. If they're disqualified from migrating the proper way there would probably be a reason why and most would have brought it on themselves.

[SOLDIER #819]

In a high school setting the troublemakers are often misunderstood and come from poor or broken families. Then we have majority who look down on them without even attempting to glimpse at their circumstances. Except this isn't high school, and they're probably jumping the border out of necessity lest they starve or whatever horrible circumstance is relevant to their situation. Unless we're assuming that all countries are as well-off as America and that they're just border hopping because they like going on road trips and splitting/uprooting their families for kicks. Ohoho, those silly latinos and their issues of life and death.

Not that they're saints. I myself live in a pretty low-end area populated by mostly latinos, many of which are illegal. Recently our car got rear-ended and the guy didn't have a license, much less insurance. What's more is that people in the surrounding area actually came to his defense, no doubt because my dad is white. They claimed he was at fault and a racist. Great.

But the guy himself wasn't bad and wasn't wishing misfortune on anyone. Life just isn't fair or simple and these are the results of that. Some of those who cross over may be dangerous, no doubt, but I think most are just trying to live the only way they know how. If you want to talk pragmatism and politics, yeah, lock 'em out! It may or may not keep it safer, it may or may not give us more jobs. But most people we do keep out are just desperate.

Oh well, they'd just cause trouble anyway!

[Sasquatch]

In a high school setting the troublemakers are often misunderstood and come from poor or broken families. Then we have majority who look down on them without even attempting to glimpse at their circumstances.

I came from a broken and poor family and I wasn't a troublemaker in high school. Please, don't say that people can't help but be dumbasses because of their bad situations. People "look down" on them not because of their poor circumstances, but because the little bastards can't act like decent human beings.

Except this isn't high school, and they're probably jumping the border out of necessity lest they starve or whatever horrible circumstance is relevant to their situation.

Congratulations to them -- do it legally. There are plenty of ways to get into the country legally. I'm all for legal -- legal -- immigration. There are plenty of poor people in America with enough principles not to sell drugs or prostitute themselves to make money. If you don't support Americans resorting to crime in America to make money, why overlook other people resorting to crime in America?

And yes -- being here illegally is a crime. Hence illegal. And everybody who is here illegally is a criminal.

Some of those who cross over may be dangerous, no doubt, but I think most are just trying to live the only way they know how. If you want to talk pragmatism and politics, yeah, lock 'em out! It may or may not keep it safer, it may or may not give us more jobs.

It will keep us safer. It will let us keep more jobs. This has been proven. With the economy in a slump and unemployment high, why should we not lock down our borders so more criminals don't come in and take jobs that Americans would do? And no, illegals don't do the jobs that Americans won't do. They do jobs for cheaper than Americans do them -- which means that while taxes go up, the costs of some products go down slightly, and jobs are unavailable for Americans, which means more of them end up on welfare, unemployment, etc.

[T.G. Oskar]

Congratulations to them -- do it legally. There are plenty of ways to get into the country legally. I'm all for legal -- legal -- immigration.

Umm...right. There are several ways to enter legally to the US.

Mind explaining that to a person whose amount of scholarship at times reaches only 1st or 2nd grade? Might seem a bit exaggerate, but it's not undeniable.

You, being someone who quite probably has access to the Internet and perhaps with a scholarship well exceeding high school, perhaps even a bachelor's degree, might be aware of those several ways, which is great. For those people, the only way is "cross the border or pay a coyote to get over the border".

And of course, those are the people willing to work, and who knows, even to study...

There are plenty of poor people in America with enough principles not to sell drugs or prostitute themselves to make money. If you don't support Americans resorting to crime in America to make money, why overlook other people resorting to crime in America?

Well...that depends on the degree of desperation they might have. And I don't mean the kind of desperation where you think "darn, maybe I'll have to tighten my wallet to pay my bills" or the kind where you think "hmm, maybe if I delay my payment of water, I can pay my mortgage and my electricity bills, and maybe if I change the kids into a cheaper school...". This is the kind where you think "I haven't eaten for a month and I won't have food tomorrow: it's now or never".

There's also enough people in America with scruples and principles that are scammed daily by people offering them dreams. These are people with enough revenue to make a living, and they get scammed. Imagine when you have someone who got deported, saying "I got caught, but things are better there!" and sell them a dream.

These people are ignoring, or perhaps are ignorant of, that crossing the border is a crime. For all they know, they think it is to keep them away. Those who advocate for an immigration reform know what these people are doing, but they also provide legal assistance to change their migratory status from illegal to legal, through the existing ways to do so (usually, filing a case where they, even already inside, request legal residence or citizenship). Usually, these same people urge them to fix their migratory status, and not fall into the usual traps (marrying a US citizen for the papers and then leaving them, since the US citizen has the right to inform Homeland Security out of fraud), for example.

And yes -- being here illegally is a crime. Hence illegal. And everybody who is here illegally is a criminal.

That depends. Illegal for Chinese since the 1875, illegal to Southern and Eastern Europeans since 1924, barely legal since 1917 for people of low scholarity, illegal since 1934 for Filipinos, illegal since 1950 for anyone suspected to be a Communist and illegal since mostly 1954 to Mexicans and Central Americans. However, anyone who's white Caucasian (although I believe Indian Caucasian as well), mostly of Anglo-Saxon descent, and mostly of Protestant denominations are usually welcome (i.e., usually allowed entry and quick naturalization).

Immigration was not originally illegal. It has turned restricted ever since the last quarter of the 19th Century. That goes without mention that America is a land built from immigration at its core.

It will keep us safer. It will let us keep more jobs. This has been proven. With the economy in a slump and unemployment high, why should we not lock down our borders so more criminals don't come in and take jobs that Americans would do?

I'd go with "fight the outsourcing", but that's just me. It's fine if you wish to keep the jobs American-born people might want to do, but try also to reduce outsourcing and keep the darned jobs in America, instead of having companies send them to cheaper places. That should work wonders for the economy, considering that...

And no, illegals don't do the jobs that Americans won't do. They do jobs for cheaper than Americans do them -- which means that while taxes go up, the costs of some products go down slightly, and jobs are unavailable for Americans, which means more of them end up on welfare, unemployment, etc.

...companies are always looking for people that do stuff for cheap. Just like in this example: Mexican and Central American immigrants don't usually go and say "I'll do it for 70% less than what any American can do it", instead they go for "I'll work for anything, because I'm hungry". And that is the people who wishes to work, not the people who wish to cause troubles.

So think about it: immigration is unfair because it takes jobs from Americans, but outsourcing is fine because it takes jobs from Americans, but you can't do jack because you're not willing to migrate for that job?

Just saying. I'd rather tackle the problem with some finesse rather than just keep everyone away, instead of just the people you really don't want here. Either work things smartly, or plain destroy the illusion of the American Dream (tm) for all these people.

[Victoria]

Here's a line I remember hearing from a comedy routine that I think rains true on 'immigration' jobs and stuff like that.

The types of jobs that illegal immigrants are taking from Americans... are jobs that Americans wouldn't want to do in the first place.

Landscaping duty. Maintenance duty. Hard Labor...etc.

[SOLDIER #819]

I came from a broken and poor family and I wasn't a troublemaker in high school. Please, don't say that people can't help but be dumbasses because of their bad situations. People "look down" on them not because of their poor circumstances, but because the little bastards can't act like decent human beings.

While that may or may not be true, my point was merely that there is a tendency for people to group together others and simplify their situations.

Congratulations to them -- do it legally. There are plenty of ways to get into the country legally. I'm all for legal -- legal -- immigration. There are plenty of poor people in America with enough principles not to sell drugs or prostitute themselves to make money. If you don't support Americans resorting to crime in America to make money, why overlook other people resorting to crime in America?

I am personally neither for nor against this (as of now) since the situation is rather difficult. Many people who cross the border probably don't have the resources or, and perhaps this should be stressed, the time to get in legally before they succumb to their circumstances. So while it is illegal, I can sympathize with the desire to live. Few are so stoic that they would simply resign themselves and their families to miserable living conditions or death.

[Cain Highwind]

I wanted to say, thanks Oskar for giving me a new viewpoint on things. I completely agree with Sasquatch, but it's nice and refreshing to hear another viewpoint that isn't just "Oh but those POOR Illegals, we're so mean"

I don't think that whole justification that Illegal immigrants from Mexico = the various European immigrants of the 18th and 19th centuries works. I could be speaking from bias, but the impression I get is that the settlers of old came here for a fresh new life and they find a way to learn English and to get along with their "neighbors". Even immigrants of other Nationalities that I've met seem to match this I'd love to be told I'm mistaken.

The impression I get from a lot of Mexican immigrants at my work is close to racism, they look away and ignore you whenever you try and greet them. Hell, a couple times, I said hello to someone and they just said "Yah OK!" I mean really? We get people who hold up the lines because they don't understand the English involved behind things like a coupon or the concept of 15 items or less.

[Sasquatch]

Umm...right. There are several ways to enter legally to the US.

Mind explaining that to a person whose amount of scholarship at times reaches only 1st or 2nd grade? Might seem a bit exaggerate, but it's not undeniable.

Embassies and consulates do this. If I would want to move from America to any other country, I would have to actually research how to do it legally -- and if I was too stupid or uneducated to understand it myself, there are people whose sole reason for employment is to explain it to me.

Besides, if these people have nothing more than first- or second-grade education levels, why would we want to import them into our country? We have enough low-educated workers to do the jobs with no higher standards.

You, being someone who quite probably has access to the Internet and perhaps with a scholarship well exceeding high school, perhaps even a bachelor's degree, might be aware of those several ways, which is great. For those people, the only way is "cross the border or pay a coyote to get over the border".

Of course, the Mexican government distributing fliers and brochures teaching people how to sneak over the border doesn't help, either. But since when is ignorance an excuse to break the law?

And of course, those are the people willing to work, and who knows, even to study...

And the majority of those people go through legal measures to ensure their entry and security in the United States. Like I said, I have no problem with immigrants to the U.S. being upstanding, law-abiding, contributing citizens -- but one cannot claim to be an upstanding, law-abiding citizen when their very presence in this country is against the law.

Well...that depends on the degree of desperation they might have. And I don't mean the kind of desperation where you think "darn, maybe I'll have to tighten my wallet to pay my bills" or the kind where you think "hmm, maybe if I delay my payment of water, I can pay my mortgage and my electricity bills, and maybe if I change the kids into a cheaper school...". This is the kind where you think "I haven't eaten for a month and I won't have food tomorrow: it's now or never".

That's the kind of desperation that makes them pay money to a coyote, or wait a few weeks to get paid to send money back to their family?

There's also enough people in America with scruples and principles that are scammed daily by people offering them dreams. These are people with enough revenue to make a living, and they get scammed.

And what do they do when they get scammed? They work harder or longer to make their money back. The vast majority don't say, "Well I got screwed out of my money, so I'm going to start breaking laws until I have money again."

These people are ignoring, or perhaps are ignorant of, that crossing the border is a crime. For all they know, they think it is to keep them away.

Many of them have crossed illegally into Mexico from its southern countries -- they know it's illegal, and they know it's dangerous.

Those who advocate for an immigration reform know what these people are doing, but they also provide legal assistance to change their migratory status from illegal to legal, through the existing ways to do so (usually, filing a case where they, even already inside, request legal residence or citizenship). Usually, these same people urge them to fix their migratory status, and not fall into the usual traps (marrying a US citizen for the papers and then leaving them, since the US citizen has the right to inform Homeland Security out of fraud), for example.

So they came here illegally, and they've lived here for years illegally -- why do they care to make it legal now? Why do these people advocate for the legalization of past criminal activity instead of the prevention of future criminal activity?

That depends. Illegal for Chinese since the 1875, illegal to Southern and Eastern Europeans since 1924, barely legal since 1917 for people of low scholarity, illegal since 1934 for Filipinos, illegal since 1950 for anyone suspected to be a Communist and illegal since mostly 1954 to Mexicans and Central Americans.

It's not illegal for Chinese, Southern and Eastern Europeans, low-educated, Filipinos, Communists, Mexicans, or Central Americans to immigrate to the United States. They just have to apply and fill out some paperwork, then take a test reflecting their knowledge of the country and its history. It's the same process for everybody.

Not to mention, the rest of those groups of people didn't come here and demand that the rest of the country learns, teaches, and observes their culture and language.

However, anyone who's white Caucasian (although I believe Indian Caucasian as well), mostly of Anglo-Saxon descent, and mostly of Protestant denominations are usually welcome (i.e., usually allowed entry and quick naturalization).

After they go through the same process, yes -- but you've also got to remember, most Anglo-Saxons don't come from countries that are complete shit-holes. And their presence here does not inflate rates of crime, teen pregnancy, dropouts, drug use, etc. etc.

Immigration was not originally illegal. It has turned restricted ever since the last quarter of the 19th Century. That goes without mention that America is a land built from immigration at its core.

America is in a much, much different situation -- and obviously much more populated -- now than it was a hundred and fifty years ago. We have our own people to worry about, we don't need to import more problems.

I'd go with "fight the outsourcing", but that's just me. It's fine if you wish to keep the jobs American-born people might want to do, but try also to reduce outsourcing and keep the darned jobs in America, instead of having companies send them to cheaper places. That should work wonders for the economy, considering that...

The way to do that is to stop punishing companies that succeed and profit, so they stop moving overseas for cheaper production costs. But that's a whole separate issue.

...companies are always looking for people that do stuff for cheap. Just like in this example: Mexican and Central American immigrants don't usually go and say "I'll do it for 70% less than what any American can do it", instead they go for "I'll work for anything, because I'm hungry". And that is the people who wishes to work, not the people who wish to cause troubles.

Now you're generalizing that all immigrants are otherwise law-abiding, contributing citizens -- but we know that's not true, don't we? If it was, illegal Hispanics wouldn't have higher rates in prettymuch every bad category and lower rates in prettymuch every good category.

Of course, it's also a generalization to say that all immigrants are bad people -- that's not what I'm saying at all. Most -- hell, even some illegal immigrants -- are good people, with jobs, that obey most laws. But it's just silly to expect that a person can not give a damn about laws when it comes to legal entry into the country, but obey and abide by all other laws.

So think about it: immigration is unfair because it takes jobs from Americans, but outsourcing is fine because it takes jobs from Americans, but you can't do jack because you're not willing to migrate for that job?

If it wasn't for overpowered unions and over-taxation of the achievers in the United States, there would be no need to outsource.

Just saying. I'd rather tackle the problem with some finesse rather than just keep everyone away, instead of just the people you really don't want here. Either work things smartly, or plain destroy the illusion of the American Dream (tm) for all these people.

Telling a group of people, "Come on in -- and stay -- but do it legally," is not the same as telling them, "stay out".

The types of jobs that illegal immigrants are taking from Americans... are jobs that Americans wouldn't want to do in the first place.

Landscaping duty. Maintenance duty. Hard Labor...etc.

Are you trying to tell me that fifteen million unemployed Americans wouldn't earn a paycheck with manual labor? Or that they don't want to? Hell, ninety-something percent of jobs are jobs that people don't want to do, but they do them because they need money and it's their most acceptable solution. But it's ignorant to think that without millions of illegal aliens, none of those jobs would be filled.

[T.G. Oskar]

Embassies and consulates do this. If I would want to move from America to any other country, I would have to actually research how to do it legally -- and if I was too stupid or uneducated to understand it myself, there are people whose sole reason for employment is to explain it to me.

I guess you mean something like this, right?

To be more specific: to enter legally to the United States and to gain the chance of permanent residence, the visa must be an immigrant visa (one that allows the holder to remain indefinitely and that may be used to apply for permanent residence) or a dual-intent visa (one that might be applied for visit or for purposes of permanent residence).

The three types of visa that might apply for purposes of the usual average of individuals pursuing illegal immigration are: the temporary worker visas H-2A/H-2B for seasonal, temporary, peak-load, intermittent or one-time agricultural or non-agricultural workers; employment-based visas EB-3 for skilled, professional or unskilled/other workers (in this case, applying only to skilled or unskilled workers, as professional workers require a bachelor's degree to qualify), or Diversity Immigrant visas DV (the "Green Card" lottery, as most people might refer to).

The first kind, temporary worker visas H-2A and H-2B are non-immigrant visas (hence, incapacitating the holder of such visa to become a permanent resident unless it becomes eligible by alternative means), which are of a temporary nature not exceeding 1 year (or in extraordinary circumstances, up to 3 years). These visas cannot be requested by the individual; the employer seeking foreign workers must apply for it. As stated above, these visas are granted only if the employer can prove that there is not enough qualifying U.S. workers capable of supplying the labor demand, and also that the acquisition of these temporary workers will not affect adversely the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers. For purposes of what you're implying: no, a person cannot apply to this visa through an embassy or consulate; it is granted if the person is contracted through a U.S. company that fulfills the requisites indicated above that requires and proves it needs foreign workers to meet the labor demand.

The second, the employment-based EB-3 visas (Employment Third Preference) is roughly similar to the H-2A/B visas, but are immigrant visas which allow the holder to apply for permanent residence within the U.S. Again, not all of these people apply: professional workers require at least a bachelor's degree, which means they cannot be considered for purposes of the average type of individual who may engage in illegal immigration. Furthermore, there is a specific quota of 28.6% of the worldwide limit on employment-based immigrants (plus any exceeding amount of visas from First and Second Preference employees; the annual quota is 140,000 individuals, so that means something around 40,040 employees per year, around 10,000 for unskilled workers), both types of workers require a labor certification, Schedule A designation (a a schedule of occupations for which it delegates authority to the USCIS to approve labor certifications: Group I includes physical therapists and nurses, Group II includes "includes aliens of exceptional ability in the sciences and arts, except performing arts."), or evidence that they qualify for one of the deficient occupations in the Labor Market Information Pilot Program (a program instituted by the Immigration Act of 1990 that defines up to ten occupational classifications in which there are labor shortages). Again, this kind of visa (which allows the individual to request permanent legal residence) must be issued by an employer within the United States in order to claim this person, which means the individual cannot apply for said visa on its own on an embassy or consulate.

Finally, there's the Diversity Visa. The latter is exactly what you might suggest: an immigrant visa which can be requested by the specific individual. Now, there are a few restrictions with that visa: first, it is limited to 50,000 annual visas; second, individuals of certain countries cannot apply for this kind of visa as they have already sent more than 50,000 immigrants in the past five years (for purposes of the average individual that might incur in illegal immigration, that means people from Mexico, El Salvador and Guatemala; you might include Dominican Republic and Haiti as well if you wish); third, these visas are only registered online (whether that means you can apply on the consulate by having someone fill the application for you or not is unclear, but the requirements imply that only online applications are possible); fourth, you need to provide evidence of high school education or equivalent, or two years' worth of experience in an occupation within the last five years; fifth, the entry period is rather short (between October and November; two months, to be precise); sixth, the entire thing is a lottery, so basically you have only a chance that you fall within that kind of people (now, they don't actually choose only 50,000 people, they choose around 96,000 people and start looking for people that qualify amongst those). The winning chances of an individual of South America, Central America or the Caribbean is of 2% (that roughly means around 1,800 people), which then must present the evidence that they qualify in order to gain the Diversity Immigrant visa.

So: while this may sound cynical, here's the deal: either you get a job (in which case, you aren't so desperate anymore to get a job) and hope your employer gets you to the U.S., or literally win the lottery. And afterwards, you still (at least for the EB-3 visa) need to apply for permanent residence in order to qualify for citizenship.

Applying for permanent residence within the United States is a bit different: you require to live already within the United States, or be reclaimed by an employer or legal permanent resident in order to apply for permanent resident, as far as I can gather: without that kind of support, you need a visa that allows the wielder to become a permanent resident (an immigrant or dual-intent visa) in order to apply for permanent residence. Of the above-mentioned, that means the H-2A/B visas are ineligible unless your employer or a family member claims you, and that people with the EB-3 visa still need to be sponsored by the employer in order to become permanent residents. So, technically, in the case of employers, you're depending on their good faith in order to become a legal permanent resident. Even then, you still require a specific amount of time to become a legal resident (that depends on the type of person that claims you), and once applying for legal permanent residence, you still need to wait for that application to be considered. Just so you know: backlogs may reach up to 9 years of delay, which means in some cases people from the USCIS are actually considering cases from 2001... While that happens, you're pretty much on an existencial limbo: you *may* remain so as long as your visa doesn't expire, if the visa allows you to remain. People may apply for permanent residence from outside the U.S. but they are also limited by the same kind of restrictions as mentioned above. That means: unless you are issued a DV type of visa, you need someone to sponsor you to become a permanent resident, so that means you can't apply for permanent residence with an embassy or consulate (unless, of course, you apply for a DV visa, which is something entirely different and mostly restricted).

There are other methods, of course, for legal entry, which may allow an immigrant to apply for permanent residence: amongst those, one would be to study in the U.S. (F-1 and F-3 type visas, which can only be issued on academic institutions), another to marry an U.S. citizen (IR visas, specifically the IR-1 visa or CR-1 visa if the marriage is no more than 2 years old), another to be transferred from a foreign subsidiary of a U.S. company to a local subsidiary (L-1 visa, which is mostly a non-immigrant visa with capability of allowing the holder to issue permanent residence), be the fiancee of a U.S. citizen (K-1 visa) or spouse of a legal resident (V-visa, which no longer can be applied). Of those: one requires to follow studies within the country and then apply for studies above (we've already stated that the average individual that may incur in illegal immigration might not have that degree of scholarity or the ability to pursue further academic studies), or work within a company and be transferred abroad (that usually happens within businesses or corporations, rarely between farmers and small-town workers), or marry an U.S. citizen (the usually easiest choice, but one that leads to fraud in most occasions) or at least have the intent to marry one.

The final one would be to request political asylum (in the case of Cuba, and quite probably Venezuela in recent years) or a status as refugees. In such cases, they may apply for permanent residence pretty much automatically.

That's...pretty much some of the legal options of entering the U.S. and/or becoming a permanent resident, soliciting outside the U.S. As you can see, the embassy can't help much on that, unless you get sponsored to enter (or win the lottery). So...either you have the grace of having someone let you enter the U.S. (family, specifically immediate relative, or employer) or win the lottery. That's...as simple as you can explain any would-be immigrant. That's...almost a joke, you know; for some people (and I don't mean actual criminals that have been evading the law on their countries, or gang-members; I mean the people willing to work and/or study in the U.S. because they have no such chance in their own countries, which should be a sizeable amount of the people if not a solid majority), their chances of entering the country legally are pretty much close to zero. Why, then, provide them with the illusion of legal entry to the U.S. if the goverment will place so many hurdles on them, some so inaccessible so as to completely deny their entry by legal means, and not blatantly tell them "we don't want no wetbacks in here"?

Besides, if these people have nothing more than first- or second-grade education levels, why would we want to import them into our country? We have enough low-educated workers to do the jobs with no higher standards.

That doesn't seem to be the case, if H-2A and H-2B visas indicate the contrary. Otherwise, they wouldn't exist at all. And even then, they are only for temporary measures. Nor the "Guest Worker" program. Nor the "Braceros" program. Much less the need for "jornaleros" (journal workers).

Of course, the Mexican government distributing fliers and brochures teaching people how to sneak over the border doesn't help, either. But since when is ignorance an excuse to break the law?

Hmm...by that you mean the Mexican federal government, the government of the state of Mexico, or the regional governments of northern Mexico?

Since...the official posture of the Mexican federal government is to prevent the incursion of Mexican nationals and nationals of other Central American countries through the U.S.-Mexico border (in cooperation with the Border Patrol of the U.S.), and to advocate for an immigration reform in the U.S. so that Mexican nationals may enter the U.S. legally as immigrants (specifically those whom the above-mentioned immigrant or dual-intent visas don't apply to).

If what you refer is to the documents provided by the government of Yucatán (and I assume you are; it's the closest thing I could find), consider that it is not specifically an action of the federal government; it is an action of a regional government of Mexico (though not the northern regions; it would be an initiative from the southeastern regions of Mexico, and by no means it should mean the entire federal government is sponsoring that. That would be much like equaling what's happening in Arizona to all of the United States; the actions of a regional (or state) government do not necessarily reflect the views of the country as a whole. And no, that doesn't excuse them from doing something stupid (or giving a flimsy excuse); it's just that generalizing that action to the entire government while you have an official posture of the federal government of Mexico attempting deals with the U.S. on immigration issues that's pretty much the opposite...

And the majority of those people go through legal measures to ensure their entry and security in the United States. Like I said, I have no problem with immigrants to the U.S. being upstanding, law-abiding, contributing citizens -- but one cannot claim to be an upstanding, law-abiding citizen when their very presence in this country is against the law.

Such as realizing that they may only apply for a chance of a specific kind of visa which they might not get in at least 10 years. Since not everyone has a relative that they can rely upon to bring them here, for example. Or the kind of luck to get a Diversity Immigrant Visa through means of lottery.

It's not easy to become a legal immigrant with intentions of becoming a legal resident within a degree of poverty and scholarity well below the average, if existing at all. In fact, it may seem even ridiculously difficult.

That kind of thought, though...it's kinda like saying "well, a convict cannot claim to be an upstanding, law-abiding citizen if it broke a law", but never recognizing that they have paid their debt to society. The way laws exist now, that would be the equivalent of saying "well, since you broke a law, you're now confined to remain in prison indefinitely", which makes crossing the border a crime along the lines of homicide (since once deported, a person may not enter the U.S. by legal means ever again). And as mentioned above, some of these people might not even have a legal chance of becoming permanent residents because of their conditions of life (unless they win the lottery or have the incredible luck of being claimed by a relative or employer, a case which in times it's self-defeating). Or finding true love...

That's the kind of desperation that makes them pay money to a coyote, or wait a few weeks to get paid to send money back to their family?

Um...isn't that desperate enough? I mentioned that kind of desperation because I don't think someone hungry for days would be still capable of thinking rationally; at least, not the average person. Even worse when they get tempted.

And what do they do when they get scammed? They work harder or longer to make their money back. The vast majority don't say, "Well I got screwed out of my money, so I'm going to start breaking laws until I have money again."

Those who fall in pyramid fraud scams are breaking the law, no? Just saying...

Now...how about people who get scammed out of their Social Security check, or receiving pension, for example (meaning, people who cannot work harder or longer, as you say)? Or people who have lost so much, they'll probably incur into debt (by a loan, for example), which may make them lose some of their crucial properties (even a house)? These people earn enough revenue to make a living, but "making a living" doesn't necessarily mean they'll make more than that; they just do barely enough to survive. Working harder or longer might just not be enough; heck, maybe even two works won't be enough.

Now suppose that having two jobs were a crime. Or that working overtime were a crime (it's not a crime per se, but not all employers will allow or support working overtime, and working harder does not necessarily imply getting a sure raise). How would they survive, then? Selling their home; then where they might live? Worse, starting from zero in order to recover from that scam or fraud; you might just pull it, but you might as well never recover from that hit.

So they came here illegally, and they've lived here for years illegally -- why do they care to make it legal now? Why do these people advocate for the legalization of past criminal activity instead of the prevention of future criminal activity?

Because for these advocates, being an immigrant with a desire to progress isn't a crime. Because these advocates know the hurdles that some people have to become legal residents, and they understand the desperation of the people who came illegally to work and/or study (and progress and even repay the society in which they currently live). Because there are already resources for illegal immigrants within the U.S. to change their status from illegal to legal, but they need assistance on the matter. And while there are resources, there are not enough resources.

It's not illegal for Chinese, Southern and Eastern Europeans, low-educated, Filipinos, Communists, Mexicans, or Central Americans to immigrate to the United States. They just have to apply and fill out some paperwork, then take a test reflecting their knowledge of the country and its history. It's the same process for everybody.

Umm...the paperwork, sure. The test of country knowledge and country history is for naturalization, which can't be done specifically outside the States, as far as I can reckon (must be a permanent resident, to be precise...guess what you need to do to become a permanent resident? Yep, see above; if someone cannot get a viable method of legal immigration or someone that might claim you for entry to the U.S., that means no permanent residence and no citizenship.

And no, it's not "just some paperwork". I think above you've seen the kind of hurdles that you need to pass in order to gain a visa. So that's a bit closer to "fill loads of paperwork, look for documents which imply even more paperwork, win the lottery, get an interview to see if they let you enter, get the visa, get the passport, get a ticket to any U.S. port of entry and hope the immigration officer allows you to enter".

That last one is important: having a visa does not mean you're allowed guaranteed entry into the United States.

Not to mention, the rest of those groups of people didn't come here and demand that the rest of the country learns, teaches, and observes their culture and language.

So...apparently Kwanzaa, Hanukkah and Ramadan are clearly 100% American traditions (religious traditions? Bah, humbug; heck, Kwanzaa isn't even a religious tradition...). Apparently stuff like pizza, bratwursts and sauerkraut, lager, crepes, various kinds of pasta such as spaghetti, fettuccine and others, baklava, gyros...well, various kinds of food are pretty much American-exclusive (what if Italy has several kinds of pasta? Durum semolina was invented in America!). And certainly there's no requisition of African-Americans to learn and respect and observe African (not African-American, African) cultural traditions, there's no Chinatown, there's no Jewish or Italian ghettos...

Alright, let's stop with the joke. No, Hispanics don't demand people that they learn their language and observe their culture and language: they are just adding that to the big mixing pot that's America. You aren't forced to learn Spanish, not as much as you're forced to learn the stereotypical slang of African-Americans (not all of them speak that way, actually). As for people requesting services in their language: people from other countries are following suit (otherwise, there wouldn't be a need for translators of different languages, most specifically people fluent in Arab).

Actually, quite the contrary: Hispanic-Americans usually are quite willing to adopt American traditions. The thing is that they aren't willing to ignore their own cultural heritage; same as the Italians, same as the Germans, same as the Jews, same as the Chinese. The main difference is that Hispanics are a larger minority population, so they'll eventually sound a bit more.

After they go through the same process, yes -- but you've also got to remember, most Anglo-Saxons don't come from countries that are complete shit-holes. And their presence here does not inflate rates of crime, teen pregnancy, dropouts, drug use, etc. etc.

According to what? According to studies that show that influence, but that usually have to indicate that the data is not sufficient or clear enough to really point at them as the actual cause? Or that there are studies that show the contrary, along the same guidelines (but hey, since those are by groups that advocate an immigration reform, they are biased and hence unreliable sources in comparison to groups that advocate no immigration, instead of mentioning that they are unreliable sources because any study would equally have insufficient data to prove the other side...)

Certainly, there might be an increase in crime on places whose population usually increases in size; that happens virtually everywhere and doesn't necessarily have to deal with immigration specifically (not to mention a specific sub-set of immigrants). That seems more like generalization than anything else.

America is in a much, much different situation -- and obviously much more populated -- now than it was a hundred and fifty years ago. We have our own people to worry about, we don't need to import more problems.

Well then: stop issuing more visas to people. Or at least, visas that allow legal immigration; visits are OK, since they are that, visits.

But that isn't the case. If an employer has a reasonable need for applying with the Department of Labor and the Department of State for H-2A or H-2B visas for temporary foreign workers, then that means they have done enough worrying to realize it's not enough. And it's not like the Border Patrol is inefficient (or are you insinuating that? I presume not).

Now, when you're referring to "our people", you're referring to...anyone who's a citizen, right? Or just a section of the population that can be identified as "our people"? Would you include on that case people that are legal residents, naturalized citizens of the United States that are of Hispanic descent as well? That term, "our people", is pretty broad; I'd say pretty ambiguous.

Now you're generalizing that all immigrants are otherwise law-abiding, contributing citizens -- but we know that's not true, don't we? If it was, illegal Hispanics wouldn't have higher rates in prettymuch every bad category and lower rates in prettymuch every good category.

"And that is the people who wishes to work, not the people who wish to cause troubles. " Go on; you even quoted it from me. So...no, I'm not generalizing. It was a very specific response: you stated that immigrants do jobs for cheaper than Americans would do, and I stated "companies are looking for people that are willing to work for cheap", then I stated that the immigrants work for any kind of wage, and then I specified "and that's the people who wishes to work".

Two separate things: the people that are willing to work are willing to work for anything (they just wanna work). In no moment I specified that said effect applies to all Mexican or Central-American immigrants; I stated that applied to the amount of immigrants willing to work. Hence, why I had to state "not the people who wishes to cause troubles".

Was it really so hard to understand? No, I wasn't generalizing...

Of course, it's also a generalization to say that all immigrants are bad people -- that's not what I'm saying at all. Most -- hell, even some illegal immigrants -- are good people, with jobs, that obey most laws. But it's just silly to expect that a person can not give a damn about laws when it comes to legal entry into the country, but obey and abide by all other laws.

...but this might be a bit closer. Those people that want to legalize their immigration status within the U.S.? Yep, at least the majority of those people are what you explained: good people, with jobs, that obey most laws (and that also might be willing to learn English and become citizens and that pay most taxes as well). Pretty silly, right?

Telling a group of people, "Come on in -- and stay -- but do it legally," is not the same as telling them, "stay out".

Telling people that they have to wait several years to get in...that's not saying "stay out", that's staying "just wait a while". Maybe in that wait, they might not be wishing to migrate anymore, you know. Worse if what you can tell them is "well, you can stay...on the closet...up until you're living here for 4 years, in which I'll let you into the old unused room I got right there, unless you become part of the family several years later and then I can let you share the rest of the house".

[Heartless Angel]

100% agree with ya Cain. When i first heard some of these morons opposing the Arizona law, I almost went insane. One in particular I recall hearing from a senator...

"This bill would make it against the law to be in the country illegally!"

And he said this like it was an outrage, are you ****ing kidding me?

"This bill would make it against the law to be in the country illegally!"

AGAINST THE LAW . . . ILLEGALLY

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No Shit Sherlock! That tends to be what the word ILLEGAL means.

And all these idiots trying to pin it on racism, nice try. They know damn good and well it has nothing to do with race, they just want you to feel bad for supporting what's right. Much like all the people in the media opposing the Tea parties. Actually confronting the issue doesn't end well when you're on the wrong side, but labelling the entire group on the right side as racists so that nobody wants to admit being a part of it works just fine.

Hey, guess what? My insurance company charges me more because I'm a young male. Does this make them sexist? Ageist? Absolutely not. Statistically speaking, young male drives cause more accidents. It's not discrimination, it's common sense. Statistically speaking, most illegal immigrants are hispanic who don't speak a word of english, am I racist for suspecting that a hispanic who doesn't speak a word of english might be illegal? No, I'm using common sense. And really, if you ARE here legally, you're supposed to be carrying a green card at all times, if someone stops you and asks to see it, assuming you ARE here legally, how hard is it to open your wallet and take the thing out? That's like being offended by someone pulling me over and asking to see my driver's liscence. The only time it's a problem, is when I DON'T have one, in which case, I am in fact breaking the law. The only people here who should really be upset by this, are the people here breaking the law.

This bill isn't to make a new law, it's to give Arizona the power to enforce an existing one, because the Federal govenment refuses to do so.

As for Obama opposing this so fervently, let's think for a moment... statistically most hispanic voters are democrats... he'd want to trun them away because... why exactly? This is also why he's trying to push Peurto Rico into statehood. Next time you see them on the news telling you that people in Arizona and teaparty goers are racists, stop and think for a moment, it should be fairly obvious who the REAL racists are. Apologies to any Obammunists I've offended, but this absolutely infuriates me.

[Sasquatch]

I guess you mean something like this, right?

Yes. There are multiple types of visas, with one being needed to apply for permanent residency and citizenship. Nobody said it's easy -- I just pointed out the obvious fact that it's more than possible, and thousands upon thousands of people do it every year.

If I had to choose who I wanted to join my country, it would be the immigrant who cares about upholding the law.

That's...almost a joke, you know; for some people ... their chances of entering the country legally are pretty much close to zero. Why, then, provide them with the illusion of legal entry to the U.S. if the goverment will place so many hurdles on them, some so inaccessible so as to completely deny their entry by legal means, and not blatantly tell them "we don't want no wetbacks in here"?

Would you prefer if the United States federal government said, "no immigration"? Or would you rather thy provide multiple means of legal immigration and enforce them? Very few people have a problem with immigration in general -- and very few have a problem with Mexicans. (Don't try playing the race card, with "oh you just don't want them in your country because they're hispanic" -- you're better than that.) What we do have a problem with isillegal immigration. From any country.

Hmm...by that you mean the Mexican federal government, the government of the state of Mexico, or the regional governments of northern Mexico?

Yes. Since the state of Mexico prettymuch surrounds the capital, they share many of the same political ambitions. The local governments in the north are overpopulated with Mexicans and Central Americans who have traveled through the country, and the best way to get them out is to help them move north.

Since...the official posture of the Mexican federal government is to prevent the incursion of Mexican nationals and nationals of other Central American countries through the U.S.-Mexico border (in cooperation with the Border Patrol of the U.S.), and to advocate for an immigration reform in the U.S. so that Mexican nationals may enter the U.S. legally as immigrants (specifically those whom the above-mentioned immigrant or dual-intent visas don't apply to).

Yes, that's the official posture of the Mexican federal government. Of course that's the official posture -- we have a problem with something that's happening between their country and ours, and it would be simply moronic for them to openly, publicly, and officially advocate for more of that to happen. Unfortunately, U.S.-Mexico relations are frequently strained when it's discovered that the Mexican government -- mainly their federal government and northern local governments -- are printing brochures and pamphlets to tell people how to sneak over more effectively.

It's not easy to become a legal immigrant with intentions of becoming a legal resident within a degree of poverty and scholarity well below the average, if existing at all. In fact, it may seem even ridiculously difficult.

And again I ask -- why should we import people with low levels of education and job skills, when we have more than enough of our own people who already fall into the same category?

That kind of thought, though...it's kinda like saying "well, a convict cannot claim to be an upstanding, law-abiding citizen if it broke a law", but never recognizing that they have paid their debt to society.

No. No. No.

It's kinda like saying, "well, a convict cannot claim to be an upstanding, law-abiding citizen if they continuously break the law." Being in this country illegally is just that -- illegal. It's not just getting in to the country, it's staying as well.

The way laws exist now, that would be the equivalent of saying "well, since you broke a law, you're now confined to remain in prison indefinitely", which makes crossing the border a crime along the lines of homicide (since once deported, a person may not enter the U.S. by legal means ever again).

No, it wouldn't -- it would be the equivalent of saying, "well, since you broke a law to come in here, you obviously can't be trusted to uphold our laws, so you lost your chance."

Um...isn't that desperate enough? I mentioned that kind of desperation because I don't think someone hungry for days would be still capable of thinking rationally; at least, not the average person. Even worse when they get tempted.

So it's a situation of "I'm so poor I'm willing to do anything for money -- so let me spend a bunch of money to have that chance"? Let me guess, they're all Obama supporters?

Those who fall in pyramid fraud scams are breaking the law, no? Just saying...

And they're their own fault. What's your point?

Now...how about people who get scammed out of their Social Security check, or receiving pension, for example (meaning, people who cannot work harder or longer, as you say)?

Do you see a bunch of grandmas who've been scammed out of their pension prostituting themselves or selling drugs? Or is it just as I pointed out -- most people who need money find legal means of making it?

Now suppose that having two jobs were a crime. Or that working overtime were a crime (it's not a crime per se, but not all employers will allow or support working overtime, and working harder does not necessarily imply getting a sure raise).

Working overtime is a crime? Where are you, France?

Because for these advocates, being an immigrant with a desire to progress isn't a crime.

And maybe to me, smoking marijuana isn't a crime. Or having sex with minors. Or stealing from somebody with more money than I have. Too bad it doesn't matter what I think or what they think -- whether they perceive it as such or not, it's still a crime.

Because these advocates know the hurdles that some people have to become legal residents, and they understand the desperation of the people who came illegally to work and/or study (and progress and even repay the society in which they currently live).

So it's aright to break the law so you can repay society? I should use that argument if I get caught selling drugs or prostituting -- it's alright, Your Honor, I was only doing it to pay my taxes and donate to charity.

Because there are already resources for illegal immigrants within the U.S. to change their status from illegal to legal, but they need assistance on the matter. And while there are resources, there are not enough resources.

From who? Why should my tax dollars go to protecting a criminal?

Again -- why are these advocates supporting criminals and trying to make their crimes legal? And why am I the bad guy for trying to make them not commit the crimes in the first place?

So...apparently Kwanzaa, Hanukkah and Ramadan are clearly 100% American traditions (religious traditions? Bah, humbug; heck, Kwanzaa isn't even a religious tradition...).

We don't have African, Jewish, and Muslim lobbies trying to force America to obey their traditions, do we? (Well, we don't have African and Jewish lobbies trying to force America to obey their traditions, do we?) How many demands have you heard for Jewish holidays to become national holidays? Now think about the demands for September 16 and May 5 to be American national holidays -- I know I've heard quite a few.

Apparently stuff like pizza, bratwursts and sauerkraut, lager, crepes, various kinds of pasta such as spaghetti, fettuccine and others, baklava, gyros...well, various kinds of food are pretty much American-exclusive (what if Italy has several kinds of pasta? Durum semolina was invented in America!).

I've never seen a group of Germans outside a high school demanding that they serve sauerkraut and bratwurst for lunch every day, washed down with a good stout. Have you? However, there are schools in California that have buckled to the pressure of their mostly-immigrant constituents and ended up with an entirely Mexican menu.

And certainly there's no requisition of African-Americans to learn and respect and observe African (not African-American, African) cultural traditions, there's no Chinatown, there's no Jewish or Italian ghettos...

If they want to follow their own traditions, that's fine -- nobody's got a problem with that. The problems come in when they start demanding that everybody else follows their traditions. Blacks, Chinese, Jews, Italians -- they don't expect everybody else to act and sound like they do.

Alright, let's stop with the joke. No, Hispanics don't demand people that they learn their language and observe their culture and language: they are just adding that to the big mixing pot that's America.

Many hispanics have demanded that we learn their language and observe their culture. That's quite the opposite of "they don't demand". There are demonstrations in California quite often -- most with Mexican flags, some with Mexican flags flown above American flags.

You aren't forced to learn Spanish, not as much as you're forced to learn the stereotypical slang of African-Americans (not all of them speak that way, actually). As for people requesting services in their language: people from other countries are following suit (otherwise, there wouldn't be a need for translators of different languages, most specifically people fluent in Arab).

I'm not forced to learn Spanish? Are you sure that I didn't have to have at least two credits of Spanish to graduate high school? Are you sure that local governments haven't been forced to put up road signs in English and Spanish both? Hell, even road signs warning drivers to slow down because they might hit people sneaking over the border? Or to teach their police officers Spanish, to ensure that any hispanic they arrest understands their rights?

According to what? According to studies that show that influence, but that usually have to indicate that the data is not sufficient or clear enough to really point at them as the actual cause? Or that there are studies that show the contrary, along the same guidelines (but hey, since those are by groups that advocate an immigration reform, they are biased and hence unreliable sources in comparison to groups that advocate no immigration, instead of mentioning that they are unreliable sources because any study would equally have insufficient data to prove the other side...)

If that was the case, yes. You sound like you are flat-out denying problems caused by illegal immigrants. I thought you were smarter than that. It's fact: illegal aliens are disproportionate in commissions of crimes, teen pregnancy, poverty, and dropout rates. Hell, about a quarter of our federal inmates are illegal aliens. Do you really not know, or do you just prefer to deny it?

Certainly, there might be an increase in crime on places whose population usually increases in size; that happens virtually everywhere and doesn't necessarily have to deal with immigration specifically (not to mention a specific sub-set of immigrants). That seems more like generalization than anything else.

It's not much of a generalization when places with higher populations of illegals have more crime than places of the same size with less illegals.

Well then: stop issuing more visas to people. Or at least, visas that allow legal immigration; visits are OK, since they are that, visits.

So you'd rather we stop allowing legal immigration, instead of simply cracking down on illegal immigration?

And it's not like the Border Patrol is inefficient (or are you insinuating that? I presume not).

That's true. The Border Patrol has their hands tied with underfunding and politics. When they can't do their job without worrying about investigations and harassment (and, of course, insults and accusations of racism), they simply can't do their job.

Now, when you're referring to "our people", you're referring to...anyone who's a citizen, right? Or just a section of the population that can be identified as "our people"? Would you include on that case people that are legal residents, naturalized citizens of the United States that are of Hispanic descent as well? That term, "our people", is pretty broad; I'd say pretty ambiguous.

There you go, trying to insinuate that I'm a racist again. Nice try. But no, "our people" refers to Americans -- whatever color, sex, religion, or national origin. You really had to dig for that one, didn't you?

...but this might be a bit closer. Those people that want to legalize their immigration status within the U.S.? Yep, at least the majority of those people are what you explained: good people, with jobs, that obey most laws (and that also might be willing to learn English and become citizens and that pay most taxes as well). Pretty silly, right?

So "the majority" of people who want this crime to not be a crime ... their presence here is illegal, but they care about the laws?

Sure -- and the majority of people who want to legalize marijuana have never touched the stuff, right? The majority of people who want to change the legal drinking age to 18 are over 30, right?

Telling people that they have to wait several years to get in...that's not saying "stay out", that's staying "just wait a while". Maybe in that wait, they might not be wishing to migrate anymore, you know. Worse if what you can tell them is "well, you can stay...on the closet...up until you're living here for 4 years, in which I'll let you into the old unused room I got right there, unless you become part of the family several years later and then I can let you share the rest of the house".

Or, more accurately, "we don't have room for all of you, so some of you can come in now and be a part of us, and the rest will have to wait. Unless you just want to sneak in my window, then get upset when I catch you and tell you to leave and not come back."

[Ragnarok]

I'm having trouble putting into words my opinion on this issue because there are so many thoughts flying around my head. My family is split with the new law because we are hispanic and all but myself live in Arizona. I'll try to be as clear as I can with my opinion.

Yes, the new law is allowing racial profiling, but that isn't new. People from the Middle East are stopped all the time in airports and nobody cares, so why is it any different now?

If you are an immigrant here legally, you have nothing to worry about. Pull out your green card or ID and get on with your life. It's only a minor inconvenience.

Businesses in Arizona are having to temporarily close their doors due to reduced staffing. But wait a minute...how many LEGAL Arizonans are unemployed right now? OH YEA!!! Hire those guys and you can open up again. What? You don't want to have to give benefits and periodic raises? TOO BAD!!! THAT'S PART OF HAVING EMPLOYEES!!! (Sorry for yelling.)

Now what upsets ME about the new law is the reaction toward Arizona for passing it. I'm a HUGE fan of the Arizona Diamondbacks (baseball team for those unaware) and I heard a rumor that they may be moving out of Arizona because of the new law. Heck! This year's All-Star game was supposed to be in Phoenix, but because of the law being passed it's been moved to Anaheim. The reaction being generated is only going to hurt Arizona more than the law was supposed to help it.

P.S. This isn't the first time racism has been thrown at Arizona like this. Martin Luther King Day wasn't recognized in Arizona until the NFL informed them that without the holiday Arizona will never hose a Super Bowl. I believe that was Super Bowl XXXIII?

(Sorry if I was rambling or unclear, I just needed to vent my opinion. Thank you for reading.)

[Heartless Angel]

Businesses in Arizona are having to temporarily close their doors due to reduced staffing. But wait a minute...how many LEGAL Arizonans are unemployed right now? OH YEA!!! Hire those guys and you can open up again. What? You don't want to have to give benefits and periodic raises? TOO BAD!!! THAT'S PART OF HAVING EMPLOYEES!!! (Sorry for yelling.)

Though that's a totally different issue, it's a big part of the problem. That's one of the reasons we get so many illegals to begin with, because they know some greedy employer would rather pay them beans than hire an American worker at minimum wage.

[Ragnarok]

I was PMed that the 2010 All-Star wasn't supposed to be in Phoenix, but the 2011 ASG. I'm not ENTIRELY sure about this because I remember a week long period where I found out this year's Wrestlemania was going to be in Phoenix while my ship was underway, and then I found out the ASG was to be in Phoenix during the next one. I was pretty upset that two big events were going to be in Phoenix in the same six month period in which I would be sitting in the middle of the ocean unable to attend.

[Discordius]

Zargabaath, I think hispanics in America are worried about this Arizona Law because they will be constantly stopped by the police to check their IDs, as if they are breaking the law until they prove the contrary.
The police are people as anyone else, and also hold that steriotype in their heads, which will cause them to constantly bother hispanics. The question is: what is a valid reason to suspect someone is an ilegal immigrant? Is it totoally up to the cop's ideas of how one such person would look or act like?

[Zargabaath]

Zargabaath, I think hispanics in America are worried about this Arizona Law because they will be constantly stopped by the police to check their IDs, as if they are breaking the law until they prove the contrary.
The police are people as anyone else, and also hold that steriotype in their heads, which will cause them to constantly bother hispanics. The question is: what is a valid reason to suspect someone is an ilegal immigrant? Is it totoally up to the cop's ideas of how one such person would look or act like?

Well, contrary to what some US media is saying, police officers can not just stop a hispanic looking person and ask for idea. They must have a legal reason as to stopping this person, let's say speeding. Well when pulled over for speeding the driver will need a driver's license and registration. Now I heard that there are a few states that don't require proof of citizenship - this should be rectified that way it makes it harder for illegal immigrants. Now an illegal immigrant shouldn't have a driver's license and a legal immigrant will most likely have to show the green card - which by law they must carry all the time. They also shouldn't be able to get registration for the card being illegal so without a driver's license or a forgery which the officer should pick up and no registration this person is already in deep sh*t. Now if this person w/o a license and registration appears to be an illegal immigrant - which in Arizona an illegal immigrant will overwhelmingly be a hispanic who may not speak english at all or well - then the officer can do whatever the law allows him to do (the federal government's job but they're too lazy to do that, plus the Dems want the illegal votes for them).


And once again, even though they wont' be randomly stopped without just cause, is it so hard to pull out their id which would take just a few seconds?

[Discordius]

Well, contrary to what some US media is saying, police officers can not just stop a hispanic looking person and ask for idea. They must have a legal reason as to stopping this person, let's say speeding. Well when pulled over for speeding the driver will need a driver's license and registration. Now I heard that there are a few states that don't require proof of citizenship - this should be rectified that way it makes it harder for illegal immigrants. Now an illegal immigrant shouldn't have a driver's license and a legal immigrant will most likely have to show the green card - which by law they must carry all the time. They also shouldn't be able to get registration for the card being illegal so without a driver's license or a forgery which the officer should pick up and no registration this person is already in deep sh*t. Now if this person w/o a license and registration appears to be an illegal immigrant - which in Arizona an illegal immigrant will overwhelmingly be a hispanic who may not speak english at all or well - then the officer can do whatever the law allows him to do (the federal government's job but they're too lazy to do that, plus the Dems want the illegal votes for them).


And once again, even though they wont' be randomly stopped without just cause, is it so hard to pull out their id which would take just a few seconds?

I'm saying they must be imagining this sort of situation when they declare themselves against this legislation. They're afraid, not trying to offend the US. By the way, I will try to read this legislation and see what is actually written there.

[Zargabaath]

I'm saying they must be imagining this sort of situation when they declare themselves against this legislation. They're afraid, not trying to offend the US. By the way, I will try to read this legislation and see what is actually written there.

If hispanic citizens of the US and those who are legal immigrants don't want the possibility of something as you mentioned then instead of protesting the law, they should march against the illegal immigrants! To tell the illegal hispanic immigrants to get the hell out that way the new majority of illegal immigrants would be some other ethicity or nationality (like haitians). Now would they ever march against their own people? No, because they have too pride for their or their ancestor's home country and I've said that if they love it so much they should go back - of course they wouldn't because America is better than the mess they came from.

[Leon]

Probably gonna get eaten alive after reviving this thread, but here goes.

I have Mexican heritage. I do agree with some of the things that most of you say. Yeah, I don't side with illegal immigration. Illegal, as in breaking the law? Yup. Maybe they do deserve to be deported. Who knows? I came to this country legally, so I wouldn't know.

But in the end, aren't we all illegal? We're forgetting that our ancestors took this land from the Indians. And they didn't do it by gambling for it or the Indians didn't just give it to us generously, even though they saved the Plymouth colony from starvation. Nope. Didn't our ancestors kill lots of them in cold blood and took their land, while sticking the rest of the survivors in reservations? I'm a Democrat, and even I disagree with Andrew Jackson's (another Democrat) statement of "A good Indian is a dead Indian." Seriously, someone refresh my memory. It's been a while since I took history class.

But let's not dwell in that, since they were probably compensated eventually. But this country is screwed even without illegal immigrants. I mean, we also have these politicians denying a bill that would help 9/11 responders (who won't be compensated for risking their lives during the 9/11 attack), an economic recession that occurred during the Bush Administration, and apparently a lot of money ($700 billion, from what I hear) is being spent to make sure the rich don't have to pay much in taxes.

Illegal immigration is just the tip of the iceberg. There are so many problems occurring in this country. Many Mexicans I've met, illegal or not, have been very kind and just want to live peacefully. Yeah, I may be Mexican which is why most of them are nice to me. But I know they're just too afraid to live in a white neighborhood, in fear of getting deported. Yes, again, it's illegal to live in this country without papers or whatnot. But if you had any idea of what's going on in Mexico, maybe we'd be receiving them in open arms.

People in Latin America are kidnapped often, and violence has been growing so fierce in Mexico that even the local police struggles with those other criminals. Those who can't take it come over here to the other side. Yes, others do it for selfish reasons. But they are the ones causing trouble. If all illegal immigrants came to cause trouble, don't you think we'd be at war with them by now?

And to close this post, well, I'll just give you a link I want to share with you. It's off-topic, but maybe you should be more concerned about this than immigrants. It's like shooting kittens who scratch at your door, seeking only a home to live.

Click here

[Heartless Angel]

I never see a problem with thread revival, but that's for the mods to decide I suppose lol.

But in the end, aren't we all illegal? We're forgetting that our ancestors took this land from the Indians. And they didn't do it by gambling for it or the Indians didn't just give it to us generously, even though they saved the Plymouth colony from starvation. Nope. Didn't our ancestors kill lots of them in cold blood and took their land, while sticking the rest of the survivors in reservations? I'm a Democrat, and even I disagree with Andrew Jackson's (another Democrat) statement of "A good Indian is a dead Indian." Seriously, someone refresh my memory. It's been a while since I took history class.

No, not really. Immigration is illegal now because we'e actually laid claim to the land and made laws. The indians never did that. Not to say we were justified when we came, but there was nothing illegal about it. May have been a **** move, but a perfectly legal **** move. The fact that we screwed people in the past doesn't mean we should bend over for someone else.

But let's not dwell in that, since they were probably compensated eventually. But this country is screwed even without illegal immigrants. I mean, we also have these politicians denying a bill that would help 9/11 responders (who won't be compensated for risking their lives during the 9/11 attack), an economic recession that occurred during the Bush Administration, and apparently a lot of money ($700 billion, from what I hear) is being spent to make sure the rich don't have to pay much in taxes.

Though I'm too lazy to go see if all of this is completely accurate, I will say it's irrelevant. The fact that other problems exist has no impact whatsoever on whether or not this is one, or whether or not something should be done about it.

Illegal immigration is just the tip of the iceberg. There are so many problems occurring in this country. Many Mexicans I've met, illegal or not, have been very kind and just want to live peacefully. Yeah, I may be Mexican which is why most of them are nice to me. But I know they're just too afraid to live in a white neighborhood, in fear of getting deported. Yes, again, it's illegal to live in this country without papers or whatnot. But if you had any idea of what's going on in Mexico, maybe we'd be receiving them in open arms.

Many murderers who managed to outrun police just want to live peacefully and without being caught and punished for their crimes too. Some of them may even be nice people. We call these people fugitives. What someone's reason for breaking the law is doesn't matter. They've still broken the law, and deserve to be punished appropriately. Maybe if we were to fall victim to rhetoric and appeals to emotion, we'd be accepting them with open arms. But as a critical thinker, I am forced to acknowledge that the purely factual premises of what has happened to them can in no way derive the normative conclusion that we should ignore the law for them.

People in Latin America are kidnapped often, and violence has been growing so fierce in Mexico that even the local police struggles with those other criminals. Those who can't take it come over here to the other side. Yes, others do it for selfish reasons. But they are the ones causing trouble. If all illegal immigrants came to cause trouble, don't you think we'd be at war with them by now?

And to close this post, well, I'll just give you a link I want to share with you. It's off-topic, but maybe you should be more concerned about this than immigrants. It's like shooting kittens who scratch at your door, seeking only a home to live.

Click here

No, we wouldn't be at war with mexico because mexican criminals happen to end up in our country. That's like saying we'd be at war with africa if enough black people committed crimes. We can't punish the country for the actions of a few criminals from it. The "problems" aren't nescecssarily just crimes comitted by illegals, but problems their very presence causes to our economy.

Again, the link and any and all other problems in the country is absolutely irrelevant. One can't allow such things to distract from the issue at hand. Yeah, there may well be other problems out there, that doens't mean stop all work on this one and forget about it. This is still a problem that need not be occurring, and one that we are capable of stopping from occuring. One also can't allow and obvious appeal to emotion to trumph solid fact and common sense. No. it's nothing like shooting kittens looking for a home. It's like saying to the stray cat who clawed its way through your screen door when you weren't home, to get the hell out of your house because you have no intention of paying for its food, healthcare and other expenses and letting it sleep in your bed, because it is in no way, shape, or form your problem.

[Leon]

Again, the link and any and all other problems in the country is absolutely irrelevant. One can't allow such things to distract from the issue at hand. Yeah, there may well be other problems out there, that doens't mean stop all work on this one and forget about it. This is still a problem that need not be occurring, and one that we are capable of stopping from occuring. One also can't allow and obvious appeal to emotion to trumph solid fact and common sense. No. it's nothing like shooting kittens looking for a home. It's like saying to the stray cat who clawed its way through your screen door when you weren't home, to get the hell out of your house because you have no intention of paying for its food, healthcare and other expenses and letting it sleep in your bed, because it is in no way, shape, or form your problem.

Well, I'm all out of things to say. I mean, really, what can I say after this? I respect whatever everyone else says because, sadly, this is just a problem that won't go away. You make some good points, too.

It doesn't mean I will oppose the immigrants, but at least it's clear that not everyone is nuts, racist, or consumed by pure hatred when it comes to this subject. We'll just have to wait and see what happens in the future.

Um, I really didn't have to post, huh? I just didn't want to stay quiet.

[Heartless Angel]

I generally respect what other say as well, but I see it almost as my obligation to challenge points I disagree with. Some would call me an asshole for it, and I'd respect that opinion as well lol. Mostly because I agree with it.

I somewhat agree. I don't appose immigrants as people, but rather immigration as an act. In the same way I won't say any thief is a bad person, because they may just be trying to survive, but that doesn't mean I can advocate theft on their behalf either.

That's certainly not a problem by my reckoning. Everyone has an opinion, some are more reasonable than others. But if nobody ever mentions them, we can never really decide which are the more reasonable, and we can't really learn anything from them.

[Sasquatch]

But in the end, aren't we all illegal? We're forgetting that our ancestors took this land from the Indians. And they didn't do it by gambling for it or the Indians didn't just give it to us generously, even though they saved the Plymouth colony from starvation. Nope. Didn't our ancestors kill lots of them in cold blood and took their land, while sticking the rest of the survivors in reservations?

They also bought it from American Indians. They also negotiated for it. And the land that was fought for, fighting was nothing new to the area. You're talking about white people moving in on stone-age people of warring tribes. Some of the tribes hated the newcomers and decided to battle over it -- but since the newcomers were much better at putting together a fighting force, they kind of brought the slaughter on themselves. Many tribes were simply caught up in the mix, but it's not like a group of peace-loving people was confronted with war for the first time when the evil white devil moved in.

I mean, we also have these politicians denying a bill that would help 9/11 responders (who won't be compensated for risking their lives during the 9/11 attack) ...

Wrong. The people who did it as a job will receive compensation anyway, without this bill even being written. They will get compensation for pension and for any disability. The bill you're referring to would have added more compensation for them -- not some, but more. They will receive, have received, or are receiving compensation anyway.

This would be like me saying that I'm already receiving disability compensation for injuries sustained in Iraq, but if I'm not given MORE than I'm already receiving, I'm going to bitch and complain and label people as evil.

... an economic recession that occurred during the Bush Administration ...

Wrong. This recession started during the Clinton administration, was made worse during the Bush administration by 9/11 (which could have been prevented if Clinton hadn't gutted the military and intelligence communities) and the housing bubble bursting (which could have been prevented if Clinton hadn't greatly expanded Carter's already-horrible CRA), and continued and made worse still during the Obama administration, by Obama's policies.

... and apparently a lot of money ($700 billion, from what I hear) is being spent to make sure the rich don't have to pay much in taxes.

Wrong. There's quite a bit going to bail out banks, but those banks need bailouts because they were forced by Carter and Clinton's CRA to pretend bad loans were good loans, and loan money to people who they knew wouldn't pay them back.

This whole "the rich don't pay their fair share in taxes" bullshit has got to stop. People have got to get educated, or this nanny state will continue until this country has pushed out every little smidgen of success.

Illegal immigration is just the tip of the iceberg. There are so many problems occurring in this country.

There are more problems than illegal immigration, but that doesn't mean that illegal immigration isn't a problem -- been around for decades, getting worse, and the continuation and worsening of one problem is leading to the cause or exacerbation of many other problems.

But I know they're just too afraid to live in a white neighborhood, in fear of getting deported.

If they're legal, they have no reason to fear being deported.

But if you had any idea of what's going on in Mexico, maybe we'd be receiving them in open arms.

While I'm not the type to dwell too much on the idea that they should have taken better care of their own country instead of trying to force support from others who have ... we know what's going on in Mexico and Latin and South America. But that doesn't mean that it condones breaking more laws.

You can't honestly say that most illegal immigrants care about obeying the law when their very presence in the country is against the law.

If all illegal immigrants came to cause trouble, don't you think we'd be at war with them by now?

At war with who? We can't "be at war" with illegal immigrants because legal hispanics (i.e. voters) would get upset. And there's no reason to go to war with Mexico -- that would only make that country worse and encourage more refugees.

[Unknown Entity]

What about the illegal immigrants who enter a country and actually work hard? Some end up working in appalling conditions, have ever worse accommodation, and are doing it all for mere peanuts. The place my father works at do get a lot of temporary workers from eastern/central Europe, mainly Polish. There's only ever been one case where one man turned out to be there illegally, and he was apparently one of the best butchers my dad had ever met in his life.

I'm not saying any country in the world should roll out the red carpet and welcome illegal immigrants, but it's annoying when people turn around and say that they're good for nothing lazy ass people, who only want to break laws and impregnate your daughters. I bet 99/100 cases, that's not true.

I put you in a situation where your house is on fire and you're so badly injured, you can't go back to save your kids. They could either die, or an illegal immigrant who's just walking by could decide to run in and play the masked hero. Those are the only two, ****ing options you have. What would you prefer?

To me, it's similar to stealing a loaf of bread to feed your family; is that right or wrong? In the eyes of the law it's bad, but your family need to eat or they'll get sick and die. No one can choose where or when they're born, or what kind of family they'll have or... etc. I could have been born as the son or daughter of a taliban. I could have been born in a village in the middle of Africa where the nearest "clean" water source is miles away and where school doesn't exist. I could have been born to a pair of artists or writers, and toured the world with them or stayed alone most of the time to my own devices. I could have been born to a celebrity couple and not ever having to worry about education because I'd be LOADED BITCHES.

There's a lot of people who take what they have for granted, and don't think about other people and their lives. Sometimes that turns people into racist pigs who don't know better. Sometimes that makes people incredibly naive (probably how I'm sounding at the moment). Just think about why some people feel the need to enter a country illegally in the first place.

On that last note, someone said a few posts back that you need a worthy education to be granted legal immigrant status... how about those students who dropped out of school who were completely legal American citizens? I can imagine America having a lot of drop outs just as any other country. Their only right to living in the good ol' US of A is because legal mummy and daddy conceived them.

If you're not supposed to be somewhere, then you face the consequences if you're caught. I'd recommend doing some legally in the first place. That's just my opinion on the matter.

[sayian]

Of course there will be "profiling". There always is. Do you know why? BECAUSE IT WORKS.

Agreed.. always will be..<---- said the black dude thats who gets stopped by the po pos constantly wrather im walking driving or already parked cleaning out my car.. but whats interesting is that i dont totally 100% disagree with this.. countless number of crimes are solved by profiling... i jus do my part by simply not being suspect if i look like one or not. sometimes (and this may be wierd) i like to show people who i am and see their reaction of how nice, well mannered, and respectful i am...

a few months ago the cops came to my house looking for some1 and i let them in and had to show them my id and pictured and what not jus to prove i was ME.. this was about 2am and they were there for about an hour..... well last week i seen that same cop at the gymn playing basketball(my sport) off duty of course.. but he saw me and i was coaching a good friend of mine's son teaching him fundamentals of basketball... that cop came and introduced himself and shook my hand... i can tell that he was surprised that there were a young black man actually doing something good.
profiling is safe, and easy, and cheap.. and chances are, u jus might be right ... it sux just as much for the person who was proven wrong by doing it than for the person bein profiled though...lol

[che]

Of course there will be "profiling". There always is. Do you know why? BECAUSE IT WORKS.

Agreed.. always will be..<---- said the black dude thats who gets stopped by the po pos constantly wrather im walking driving or already parked cleaning out my car.. but whats interesting is that i dont totally 100% disagree with this.. countless number of crimes are solved by profiling... i jus do my part by simply not being suspect if i look like one or not. sometimes (and this may be wierd) i like to show people who i am and see their reaction of how nice, well mannered, and respectful i am...

a few months ago the cops came to my house looking for some1 and i let them in and had to show them my id and pictured and what not jus to prove i was ME.. this was about 2am and they were there for about an hour..... well last week i seen that same cop at the gymn playing basketball(my sport) off duty of course.. but he saw me and i was coaching a good friend of mine's son teaching him fundamentals of basketball... that cop came and introduced himself and shook my hand... i can tell that he was surprised that there were a young black man actually doing something good.
profiling is safe, and easy, and cheap.. and chances are, u jus might be right ... it sux just as much for the person who was proven wrong by doing it than for the person bein profiled though...lol

No, that's a bunch of ****ing horseshit. The fact that you're so cool about it makes me appalled. Imagine them doing this to white people! There would be a lawsuit, it might be on the news, etc!