The hunt for illegals is on.

[Jhhnn]

How long has this law been on the books? I bet it served democrats in the same fashion. Did Obama attempt to change it?

Repubs killed reform in 2014-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borde...ty,_and_Immigration_Modernization_Act_of_2013

 

[Jhhnn]

Austria and EU are changing immigration policies. Funny how ILLEGALS supporters would not dare to say a word. Nothing about how we should follow other sovereign nations to control the border and limit the number of immigrants. Them EU folks must be soooo rrrrrrraaaaaaaaccccccciiiiiissssssstttt/xenophobic/<insert nasty labels>, right?<sarcastic>

Europe's trend: Austria, once open, now shows migrants door - https://www.yahoo.com/news/europes-trend-austria-once-open-now-shows-migrants-145019804.html

So what? The situations are entirely different.

 

[Svnla]

So what? The situations are entirely different.

Obviously, you did not read the link because if you did, you would be able to see these points that are very familiar in the US:

No authorization to stay in the country..ie..ILLEGALS will be cut off from benefits-

Parliament is set to pass a law stripping pocket money, food and shelter from those denied asylum, potentially leaving them on the street. The interior minister proudly touts figures showing Austria as the European Union's per-capita leader in expelling those rejected.

No mercy for criminals, no "misunderstanding" excuse -

Austrian courts are toughening up too. On Thursday, eight Iraqi men were sent to prison for up to 13 years for the gang rape of a German woman on New Year's Eve more than a year ago.

Lawyer Andreas Reichenbach, who defended one of the men, said the stiff sentences were a signal to migrants that "when they come to Austria, that such behavior won't be tolerated."

More people (majority, just as my link above about the US) want to crack down -

A survey of 10 EU member countries last month showed 65 percent of the 1,000 Austrian respondents favored stopping all immigration from Muslim nations

If they don't leave, they will be forcible deported -

The Austrian government plans to stop all support for those whose asylum requests have been rejected — including meals, shelter and a monthly allowance of 40 euros (about $40). If Interior Minister Wolfgang Sobotka has his way, those refusing to leave will also pay high fines and end up in compounds until they are forcibly deported.

Enforce the current law because it is the responsible thing to do -

Sobotka shrugs, reflecting Austria's sharp about-turn on migrants.

"Who is contravening the law — me or those who do not leave the country?" he asked reporters. "My responsibility is enforcing the law."

Still no reply to my post above? https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/the-hunt-for-illegals-is-on.2499736/page-26#post-38775639

 

[Jhhnn]

Obviously, you did not read the link because if you did, you would be able to see these points that are very familiar in the US:

No authorization to stay in the country..ie..ILLEGALS will be cut off from benefits-



No mercy for criminals, no "misunderstanding" excuse -



More people (majority, just as my link above about the US) want to crack down -



If they don't leave, they will be forcible deported -



Enforce the current law because it is the responsible thing to do -



Still no reply to my post above? https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/the-hunt-for-illegals-is-on.2499736/page-26#post-38775639

They're being inundated by refugees. We're not. They don't have Jus Soli citizenship, either. We do.

 

[Svnla]

They're being inundated by refugees. We're not. They don't have Jus Soli citizenship, either. We do.

You should run for the Excuses-In-Chief office.

At least 11 million ILLEGALS (some say there are more than that) is no small number, even for a large nation as the US.

See my question above about 14A.

Do you have anything new to debate beause I am getting tired from more excuses. Bring me facts and logic.

 

[agent00f]

You should run for the Excuses-In-Chief office.

At least 11 million ILLEGALS (some say there are more than that) is no small number, even for a large nation as the US.

See my question above about 14A.

Do you have anything new to debate beause I am getting tired from more excuses. Bring me facts and logic.

Absolutely hilarious when people obviously too dumb to understand anything believe they can understand constitutional law. The logical fallacy at play here is begging the question, which is a few grades above the conservative brain nevermind a particularly stupid instance.

I don't know but I can say that liberals moral ethics have led to the death of millions of unborn babies. Point being, no one has a clean record on ethics

Similar comedy resulting from conflating the death of a person with "death" of an embryo. Makes perfect why they're basically extinct from much of any learned institution.

 

[MongGrel]

I'm still waiting for you to debate some issues. All you're interested in doing is slamming me personally. I could blow you away in that game but honestly, I'm just not interested. I've got better things to do. If you want to discuss the issues and not talk about 10 yr olds and use masked profanity, I'll respond. Otherwise, go bark at the moon.

Migrant farmers from Mexico have been in the US for many decades.

If you say something that makes sense I'll attempt to have a conversation with you, but I doubt that is likely.

 

[Paratus]

Green card holder faces deportation for nonviolent drug charge.

Oh he also served two tours in Afghanistan and suffered brain damage and PTSD

Thank you for your service. Now GTFO.

http://abc7chicago.com/news/veteran-fighting-deportation-after-2-tours-in-afghanistan/1739129/

Army Private 1st class Miguel Perez, Jr., was born in Mexico and grew up in Chicago. On Monday, Perez faces a deportation hearing because he committed a non-violent...

...He served two tours of duty in Afghanistan and was injured in an explosion. He sustained a brain injury and suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder, his family said.

Well this sends the message don't enlist in the military in the hopes of citizenship. Hope that's what they were going for.

 

[Sea Ray]

Migrant farmers from Mexico have been in the US for many decades.

What's your point? Are they here illegally? Does the law give an exemption if they're here for a certain amount of time? I have no idea what point you're trying to make

 

[1prophet]

Green card holder faces deportation for nonviolent drug charge.

Oh he also served two tours in Afghanistan and suffered brain damage and PTSD

Thank you for your service. Now GTFO.

http://abc7chicago.com/news/veteran-fighting-deportation-after-2-tours-in-afghanistan/1739129/



Well this sends the message don't enlist in the military in the hopes of citizenship. Hope that's what they were going for.

How about the rest of the missing information

Pfc. Miguel Perez Jr. remembers seeing the sun rise in Afghanistan on July 4, 2003. As his U.S. Special Forces unit rounded a bend toward Kandahar, he saw an American flag flying high above base camp, a beacon that he had survived the mission.

"There was a lot of action at that time," said Perez, 38, a Mexican-born legal permanent resident of the U.S. and a decorated Army veteran who served two tours in Afghanistan. "I didn't think I was coming back. Just seeing the 50 stars and stripes did something to my skin. It was incredible, ecstasy, nirvana."

Now, after returning to the country he's called home for 30 years, Perez faces possible deportation to Mexico following a felony drug conviction.

Perez is one of many veterans, some of whom sustained injuries and emotional trauma during combat, who have been decorated for service, then confronted with the possibility of deportation after committing a crime. As with many others, Perez mistakenly thought he became a U.S. citizen when he took an oath to protect the nation. He discovered that was not the case when he was summoned to immigration court shortly before his release from a state penitentiary, where he had served seven years for handing over a bag of cocaine to an undercover police officer.

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/201...rmy-veteran-deportation-obama-trump-drug-case
Where was the outrage against Obama since this happened under his administration, he could have pardoned him for that 7 year jail sentence and used this as an example to reform the drug war laws.

 

[Sea Ray]

Absolutely hilarious when people obviously too dumb to understand anything believe they can understand constitutional law. The logical fallacy at play here is begging the question, which is a few grades above the conservative brain nevermind a particularly stupid instance.



Similar comedy resulting from conflating the death of a person with "death" of an embryo. Makes perfect why they're basically extinct from much of any learned institution.

Abortion is legal most everywhere up to 25 weeks. That's well beyond the embryo stage.

 

[Paratus]

Abortion is legal most everywhere up to 25 weeks. That's well beyond the embryo stage.

You one of those person at conception folks?

 

[Sea Ray]

In reading up on Miguel Perez Jr let's make a few points clear:

1) He was arrested under the Obama administration. This was not a result of any new crackdown by Trump
2) He was arrested for drug dealing. That's a far more serious crime than drug use and is considered a violent offense by many.
3) He gets his day in court. His fate will be decided not a member of the Trump administration but by a judge. He will sink or swim based upon the law

 

[Sea Ray]

You one of those person at conception folks?

Actually it's complicated issue but if I was forced to choose between pro life or pro choice I'd say Pro Choice based upon libertarian ideals but I do think at some point in the pregnancy gov't does have a right to say no go. But if we're talking morals, the conservatives have the high ground on this one.

 

[Paratus]

In reading up on Miguel Perez Jr let's make a few points clear:

1) He was arrested under the Obama administration. This was not a result of any new crackdown by Trump
2) He was arrested for drug dealing. That's a far more serious crime than drug use and is considered a violent offense by many.
3) He gets his day in court. His fate will be decided not a member of the Trump administration but by a judge. He will sink or swim based upon the law

1) So what. Comprehensive and rational immigration reform was blocked during Obamas term. Veterans shouldn't be deported period

2)Not even if they commit a felony later. That's not a punishment available to the state for full citizens. It shouldn't be for veterans either.

3)Immigration law needs a rational makeover. One that supports following the rules towards citizenship but also deals with the reality that while people have been coming here illegally many have been living here as productive members of society for decades.

 

[Jhhnn]

How about the rest of the missing information


https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/201...rmy-veteran-deportation-obama-trump-drug-case
Where was the outrage against Obama since this happened under his administration, he could have pardoned him for that 7 year jail sentence and used this as an example to reform the drug war laws.

That's bullshit. No president can pardon a state conviction. No president can pardon a deportation order, either, because it's defined as a civil action.

Beyond that, the notion that any president should personally oversee the process is absurd.

 

[Sea Ray]

1) So what. Comprehensive and rational immigration reform was blocked during Obamas term. Veterans shouldn't be deported period

2)Not even if they commit a felony later. That's not a punishment available to the state for full citizens. It shouldn't be for veterans either.

3)Immigration law needs a rational makeover. One that supports following the rules towards citizenship but also deals with the reality that while people have been coming here illegally many have been living here as productive members of society for decades.

Guess what? You've not been appointed dictator and able to declare that veterans are immune from deportation. Until that happens we have to follow the laws that have gone through the process spelled out in our Constitution.

You don't get to change things to what you think it ought to be. You and I don't agree on what it ought to be.

 

[Sea Ray]

That's bullshit. No president can pardon a state conviction. No president can pardon a deportation order, either, because it's defined as a civil action.

Beyond that, the notion that any president should personally oversee the process is absurd.

Give Pres Trump the same consideration. He has no control over what happens to this guy either

 

[BurnItDwn]

is considered a violent offense by many.

Not according to dictionaries.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence
Definition of violence
1a : the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroyb : an instance of violent treatment or procedure

2: injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage

3a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force the violence of the stormb : vehement feeling or expression : fervor; also : an instance of such action or feelingc : a clashing or jarring quality : discordance

4: undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)

 

[Paratus]

Actually it's complicated issue but if I was forced to choose between pro life or pro choice I'd say Pro Choice based upon libertarian ideals but I do think at some point in the pregnancy gov't does have a right to say no go. But if we're talking morals, the conservatives have the high ground on this one.

Going to have to disagree with you there. Most late term abortions are done for complicated reasons. Generally involving the health of the mother and the lack of health of the fetus.

Lower middle class family of 4, parents in their mid 40's, one special needs child already, contraception fails, 22 week ultrasound shows abnormalities, DNA assay at 25 weeks shows genetic birth defect likely causing death shortly after birth. Mother will have to be put on bed rest in the hospital, cost $500,000 - 1.5M.

So what should the law say. No abortion? Family goes bankrupt, special needs child loses support because family can't pay, parents go though traumatic birth and death of third child. Hospital recovers penny's on the dollar and raises rates to help compensate.

This would be the "moral" choice?

When the govt or outside groups try to enforce morality on a complex activity like reproduction you end up with

• A brain dead Texas woman kept alive against her and her family's medical wishes to incubate her dying fetus. Medical costs were to be paid by her husband.
• A woman forced to wait over a week for an abortion while bleeding and in significant pain from a failed IUD still lodged in her Uterus due to a combination of mandatory waiting times and bad weather. (ER would not end the pregnancy until the bleeding became obviously lethal due to state law)
• In South America the Catholic Church tried to prevent doctors from aborting twins of a 9 year old who's life was in danger after being raped by her step-father

Far more moral to let women, their families and doctors decide what's the correct course of action.

If the my truly had the high ground conservatives would not need to coerce doctors to lie or withhold information to their patients.

If they truly had the high ground they wouldn't fight tooth and nail against options scientifically shown to reduce abortions, (health care, safety net, contraceptives, etc)

 

[Sea Ray]

Going to have to disagree with you there. Most late term abortions are done for complicated reasons. Generally involving the health of the mother and the lack of health of the fetus.

Lower middle class family of 4, parents in their mid 40's, one special needs child already, contraception fails, 22 week ultrasound shows abnormalities, DNA assay at 25 weeks shows genetic birth defect likely causing death shortly after birth. Mother will have to be put on bed rest in the hospital, cost $500,000 - 1.5M.

So what should the law say. No abortion? Family goes bankrupt, special needs child loses support because family can't pay, parents go though traumatic birth and death of third child. Hospital recovers penny's on the dollar and raises rates to help compensate.

This would be the "moral" choice?

When the govt or outside groups try to enforce morality on a complex activity like reproduction you end up with

• A brain dead Texas woman kept alive against her and her family's medical wishes to incubate her dying fetus. Medical costs were to be paid by her husband.
• A woman forced to wait over a week for an abortion while bleeding and in significant pain from a failed IUD still lodged in her Uterus due to a combination of mandatory waiting times and bad weather. (ER would not end the pregnancy until the bleeding became obviously lethal due to state law)
• In South America the Catholic Church tried to prevent doctors from aborting twins of a 9 year old who's life was in danger after being raped by her step-father

Far more moral to let women, their families and doctors decide what's the correct course of action.

If the my truly had the high ground conservatives would not need to coerce doctors to lie or withhold information to their patients.

If they truly had the high ground they wouldn't fight tooth and nail against options scientifically shown to reduce abortions, (health care, safety net, contraceptives, etc)

I'm talking about the mothers who use abortion as a form of birth control or in some cases gender selection. Both of those scenarios are acceptable to left wing groups like NARAL. That's immoral

 

[Jhhnn]

Give Pres Trump the same consideration. He has no control over what happens to this guy either

He has a great deal of say as to how we'll shape immigration law going forward. Obama & Dems fought for reform for at least a decade & still are.

Trump's basic campaign message was "Fuck 'Em All!" so it seems unlikely that he'll act to the contrary.

You know it's true. Don't pretend.

 

[Vic]

I'm talking about the mothers who use abortion as a form of birth control or in some cases gender selection. Both of those scenarios are acceptable to left wing groups like NARAL. That's immoral

And government seizure of private property without due process is somehow moral?
You might want to consider more than just one side of an issue before calling people names.

 

[Sea Ray]

He has a great deal of say as to how we'll shape immigration law going forward. Obama & Dems fought for reform for at least a decade & still are.

Trump's basic campaign message was "Fuck 'Em All!" so it seems unlikely that he'll act to the contrary.

You know it's true. Don't pretend.

Going forward is a completely different question. I agree with you on Trump's rhetoric. Personally I hope immigration reform does happen on his watch. I would think you'd hope differently 'cause if that happens, you'll likely be looking at another 4 yrs of him

 

[Sea Ray]

And government seizure of private property without due process is somehow moral?
You might want to consider more than just one side of an issue before calling people names.

I'm not aware of any names I called anyone. To what are you referring re: gov't seizure?