Originally posted by Saxman
Where the HELL do you get the idea I'm talking about appeasment?
The system being used now DOES...NOT...WORK. It does NOT slow or reduce the numbers of illegal immigration. It does NOT in any effective manner send the ones already here BACK. You put up a fence they'll just come with wirecutters. Send out armed and trigger-happy patrols then you're just escalating it even further. The "Solutions" being introduced ARE NOT FIXING THE PROBLEM. They're only adding TO it.
If something doesn't work, you FIX it. The system needs to be CHANGED, and one needs to be found that WILL solve these problems.
Instead of controlling WHO can get in, the government should instead focus more attention on monitoring WHAT THEY DO ONCE THEY'RE IN. NOWHERE HAVE I *EVER* said "Let them in and @$#& the consequences." Read me a little more carefully and you'll see that EVERY TIME I've said "Easier to get in, but closer regulation once they do." I do NOT see what's so threatening about easing entry requirements if the government instead concentrates on regulating their activities IN the country.
If it's easier for someone to enter the country legally, they will be MORE LIKELY to declare themselves to the authorities, which will then make it EASIER for the government to keep tabs on their activities and if there ARE problems easier for them to be dealt with. It's NOT a perfect system but the one we've got isn't doing any better a job.
I'm not saying make the Dept. of Immigration back into some guy sitting at the gates with a logbook taking down names, but with all of their resources focused on keeping people OUT it's only making their jobs harder.
Okay, I know that It's hot enough to BBQ a side o'beef in here, but this was something that you said that caught my eye, sax.
One of the things' in this country that is jealously gaurded(and fought over, every day) are our freedoms and privacy. Introducing any kind of legislation that specially controls' and 'regulates' activity, gives the current government powers that the founding fathers did not intend for them to have.(Do you think that Ben Franklin would have voted for the 'Patriot' act?)
The other thing is, At some point the U.S. Justice system has to be kept from more compromise than it's already suffered. Simply put: If a citizen or national of a foreign country enters the borders of the U.S., and willingly avoids the normal diplomatic avenues of either achieving U.S. Citizenship, or a residence Visa, then those people should be expelled, as stated in our laws. If we only selectively enforce these laws, as many say we should in Jesus's case, we set forth a precedent which could well nigh be the undoing of our country. And, as some other posters' have pointed out with quite a few numbers thrown up on the BBS here, Due to a lack of enforcement of our current laws, we are starting to feel a negative economic and social impact, in fact, for some time now.
Jesus did do a good deed. It showed some personal sacrifice. Maybe alot more than most were willing to show. But what would people have thought of Jesus, had he not chanced upon the wreck? He would be another factor in our economic decline. Please consider, He might be taking a job from someone who grew up here, payed taxes here, spoke english, and had legal citizenship...but because of that, that someone's employer thinks that he can dramatically cut labor costs' by using an illegal immigrant like Jesus, whom he can pay under the table, not worry about taxes or healthcare, and he can pay less than minimum wage(Because on the books, Jesus, and millions of other illegal aliens' do not exist, anyway.)
A line has to be drawn, cold and cruel, I know, but we've reached the point in our country's history where a factor like Illegal immigration can undue everything we've striven to achieve. We must end it soon, or our end will be on the horizon.
