illegals feel "uncomfortable" in Tucson AZ

[Kal'Stang]

Ya know I want to help out our poor too, as well as the poor people of every other country, I don't discriminate.

But most of you are just whiny, selfish, dogmatic ass-hats how care amore about your laws than you do other people. Hell, it's not like they broke an offensive law or anything, it's sneaking in somewhere to get a better life, it's not like their murdering the innocent. Hell, the fact that they break the laws of "the almighty U.S." just to give thier children a better future is pretty ballsy if ya ask me, which is deserving of some amount of respect.

Have you not read some of the posts in this thread that contradict what you are saying here? Identity theft is NOT victimless crime. People do suffer due to it.

Here's just ONE example

 

[MKULTRABOY]

people should feel uncomfortable when engaging in illegal behavior.

Funny that, what of safeguards against the encroaching state. Just because the government makes it illegal means you should suffer?

actually yes they should. that is, after all, the entire point of having laws.

What you just said is both mad and disgusting. The law is not meant to inflict suffering.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

Who made it our responsibility to help them? They can sort out their own country.

We arguably muck their country up. Cooperation is necessary.

 

[mac]

We arguably muck their country up. Cooperation is necessary.

We muck up Mexico? We give them an unfair trade agreement, and take all their poor off their hands. We give them millions of dollars a year, and subsidize their law enforcement. We muck up Mexico?? Gimme a break.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

We give them an unfair trade agreement

You cannot issue proof that the agreement was unfair or swayed in any particular country's favor.

And take all their poor off their hands.

You making a funny?

We give them millions of dollars a year, and subsidize their law enforcement.

We muck up Mexico?? Gimme a break.

Hrrm... weird funny, I think we took all the nice land called texas, illegalised their pastime marijuana then kicked them out, employed them in labor for years then illegalised their movement into the country, basically imposed neo-liberalism on them for which they were rewarded with a big fat nothing from the global free market, and theres alot of talk about us rigging their elections for them in our interest (who knows). Unless your going to assess the economic impact of the United States on Mexico and prove we don't have an effect on them (which I don't think anyone would do) and prove otherwise the assumption is basically a given in the context of a rich country bordering a poor one.

 

[mac]

Hrrm... weird funny, I think we took all the nice land called texas, illegalised their pastime marijuana then kicked them out, employed them in labor for years then illegalised their movement into the country, basically imposed neo-liberalism on them for which they were rewarded with a big fat nothing from the global free market, and theres alot of talk about us rigging their elections for them in our interest (who knows). Unless your going to assess the economic impact of the United States on Mexico and prove we don't have an effect on them (which I don't think anyone would do) and prove otherwise the assumption is basically a given in the context of a rich country bordering a poor one.

Oh, good grief. We took Texas? You do realize that for a short period of time, Texas was it's own country after gaining independence from Mexico? That it decided to join the United States? How much of Mexico's problems are Mexico's doing? OR for that matter, how much of any country's problems are not the US's fault?

 

[MKULTRABOY]

You're not good at the 'discussing' thing are are a bit touchy atm.

OR for that matter, how much of any country's problems are not the US's fault?

I never said or implied that, you're being angry. But now that you mention it, it may do you well to know that, yes, alot of countries experience significant issues due to US economic policy.

 

[mac]

I never said or implied that, you're being angry. But now that you mention it, it may do you well to know that, yes, alot of countries experience significant issues due to US economic policy.

I just find absurd statements rather well, absurd. The US's economic policies are designed to aid the US. It's not our responsibility to aid other countries.

Have you figured out the history of Texas yet?

 

[MKULTRABOY]

Have you figured out the history of Texas yet?

I dont give a **** about Texas.

Have you figured out your economy affects that of other nations? Like the global recession for example.

The US's economic policies are designed to aid the US. It's not our responsibility to aid other countries.

LALALALA Come back when you understand the implications of your statements.

 

[mac]

I dont give a **** about Texas.

Other than using it as a reason for Mexico haveing a problem with us...incorrectly.

Have you figured out your economy affects that of other nations? Like the global recession for example.

It's not something that needs to be figured out. What you need to figure out is it's not our job to help your country out.

LALALALA Come back when you understand the implications of your statements.

Come back when you have something valid and based in reality to talk about.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

Other than using it as a reason for Mexico haveing a problem with us...incorrectly.

I dunno I remember something about manifest destiny mixed in their and uncontrolled raids of nice settler folk with guns into mexico. I'm sure all the mexicans got up and joined you in seceding from mexico and decided to join the Union and get deported en masse afterwards.

Come back when you have something valid and based in reality to talk about.

You come back when you know what you're saying because I don't think you do. You already seem to be conceding that we affect other nations economies and you seem to support economic nationalism. Do you understand what you're saying? If you do...

What you need to figure out is it's not our job to help your country out.

Are you trying to be a dick on purpose to make your point stronger? Cause that doesn't make it any less ignorant.

 

[mac]

I dunno I remember something about manifest destiny mixed in their and uncontrolled raids of nice settler folk with guns into mexico. I'm sure all the mexicans got up and joined you in seceding from mexico and decided to join the Union and get deported en masse afterwards.

Nice revisionist spin.

You come back when you know what you're saying because I don't think you do. You already seem to be conceding that we affect other nations economies and you seem to support economic nationalism. Do you understand what you're saying? If you do...

What is it that you don't think I get? That it's not America's duty to support every other nation? Or that we are somehow at fault for affecting other nations economies? I get both, and it's Americas responsibility to look after Americans, not Mexicans.

Are you trying to be a dick on purpose to make your point stronger? Cause that doesn't make it any less ignorant.

Did you think you had the patent?

 

[cpgrad08]

First off they should feel uncomfortable since they are here Illegally. Second as a country our job is to help are fellow country men and legal immigrants not people here illegally.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

Nice revisionist spin.

Cute, maybe you read history from one of the new revised edition books from.... texas.

What is it that you don't think I get? That it's not America's duty to support every other nation? Or that we are somehow at fault for affecting other nations economies? I get both, and it's Americas responsibility to look after Americans, not Mexicans.

It's like you don't understand what you say, bizzare. You must think I'm advocating a handout. Yes, when you strong arm other nations into accepting your economic model, imposing neo-libreralism on them and then it fails, what do you say... oopsies? Sorry we ****ed you over? Bad move because they're hopping the fence.

Did you think you had the patent?

Yeah, I'm done with you.

 

[mac]

Cute, maybe you read history from one of the new revised edition books from.... texas.

dumb

It's like you don't understand what you say, bizzare. You must think I'm advocating a handout. Yes, when you strong arm other nations into accepting your economic model, imposing neo-libreralism on them and then it fails, what do you say... oopsies? Sorry we ****ed you over? Bad move because they're hopping the fence.

dumber

Yeah, I'm done with you.

Finally, something I can agree with you on.

 

[cpwill]

Funny that, what of safeguards against the encroaching state.

limited representative government with opposing poles? they were generally destroyed by liberals who found them an impediment to the Welfare State

Just because the government makes it illegal means you should suffer?

if you then do it, then yes.

What you just said is both mad and disgusting. The law is not meant to inflict suffering.

of course it is. "if you do X, we will punish you for it" is pretty much the basic thread of most law.

 

[LookingGlass]

Who cares? I'd probably feel pretty uncomfortable if I'd broken immigration laws to enter a country where the vast majority of citizens don't want me.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

@cp

If you want to live in some sort of demented state where the law is designed to inflict suffering rather than alleviate it then go ahead, man. Because something is designated as illegal by a government (the source of currupting power) doesn't mean people should be made to suffer for it. How about freedom of speech made illegal for example? Should you then suffer for speaking up. I'm merely attempting to portray to you the implications of your statements.

"if you do X, we will punish you for it" is pretty much the basic thread of most law.

Yes, the constitution is an index of various punishments. Pardon my tone, but I'm just trying to call you out to see what you believe because it seems to conflict with, well... liberalism itself.

 

[Kal'Stang]

@cp

If you want to live in some sort of demented state where the law is designed to inflict suffering rather than alleviate it then go ahead, man. Because something is designated as illegal by a government (the source of currupting power) doesn't mean people should be made to suffer for it. How about freedom of speech made illegal for example? Should you then suffer for speaking up. I'm merely attempting to portray to you the implications of your statements.

Free speech is not a law. It is a right. As such it cannot be made illegal....well it can but then the people would just revolt. IE not going to happen.

Basically there is such a thing as making a person suffer too much for something that they shouldn't suffer for. However illegal immigration is NOT one of those exceptions. We have our own problems to deal with, we shouldn't have to deal with foriegners problems also.

Question for ya SE,

Now you've been defending illegal aliens in this thread on the basis of not allowing them to suffer. So I want to see what your general take on illegal immigration is as it is a seperate issue from suffering people. Do you think that they have a right to come here? IE are you pro-illegal immigration?

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Still not a valid reason for their suffering.

Being a voluntary criminal invader of a foreign country is an excellent reason to suffer.

Nothing stops them from going home.

I'm fairly certain that the Statue of Liberty has a quote that basically does.

I'm completely certain that US immigration policy isn't set by a 300 foot tall green woman.

Nor should immigration policy in 2011 be set by a poet whose goal was to hobnob with New York's monied elites in 1880.

So the poor Mexican father who brought his family here to escape the violence of drug cartels should suffer for his noble actions?

Invading Mayor Snorkum's country and breaking the law aren't noble actions.

Mayor Snorkum's country has it's own home grown poor to find jobs for, to teach, and to provide opportunities for. Stealing opportunities isn't noble.

The Mexican mother who works hard to maintain the family should suffer?

Works for Mayor Snorkum. That's much better than making an American mother suffer and her family suffer because some criminal is in this country illegally taking the job she might have been able to have otherwise.

Invading a foreign country isn't a victimless crime.

The kids brought here should suffer as well?

They can go home, too.

The day they turn 18 they're criminals.

What about those who were eligible for the DREAM act, should they suffer?

The Dream Act...you mean the nonsense amnesty bill that wasn't passed? Sure, anyone who's in this country in violation of immigration laws should suffer.

It's much much better that they suffer and leave than have an American be denied a job and therefore suffer because the other continues to break the law.

Well I have sympathy and compassion for all poor people, illegal immigrant or not. And I look past minor social differences such as race or legal status and simply see a person in need, not one who should be made to suffer more.

Being a criminal isn't a minor issue, it's the issue.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Has mayor snorkum ever broke the law?

Irrelevant. Mayor Snorkum is an American. As such, there's no reason for him to be uncomfortable in his own country.

Why is mayor snorkum such a statist when it comes to controlling mexicans?

Why shouldn't we apply Mexican immigration law to those criminals found to have entered the United States illegally, if you're goint to play relativist games?

Those people broke the law invading this country, those people are taking jobs from Americans when America has a real unemployment rate well over 10%, those people are consuming services without paying for them, those people are sending dollars out of the US economy, to the tune of $12 billion dollars or more from California alone, those peolple distort the demographics as determined by the decennial census, and those people are not wanted.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

Funny that, what of safeguards against the encroaching state. Just because the government makes it illegal means you should suffer?

The government made it illegal so THEY could suffer.

Nothing is stopping them from going home.

Not.

One.

Thing.

They chose to stay, in violation of law, and there's no reason they should not only be uncomfortable, but in terror of getting caught and deported every day they're here.

That's what "illegal" means when applied to people in this country illegally.

 

[Mayor Snorkum]

@cp

If you want to live in some sort of demented state where the law is designed to inflict suffering rather than alleviate it then go ahead, man. Because something is designated as illegal by a government (the source of currupting power) doesn't mean people should be made to suffer for it. How about freedom of speech made illegal for example? Should you then suffer for speaking up. I'm merely attempting to portray to you the implications of your statements.



Yes, the constitution is an index of various punishments. Pardon my tone, but I'm just trying to call you out to see what you believe because it seems to conflict with, well... liberalism itself.

US immigration law does not inflict suffering on anyone obeying the law. People who choose to become criminals have chosen to accept suffering, and that's their problem, not the law's. They're perfectly free to end their awful suffering at any time, simply by complying with the law and going home.

 

[LookingGlass]

Apparently they aren't so uncomfortable that they don't come.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

US immigration law does not inflict suffering on anyone obeying the law. People who choose to become criminals have chosen to accept suffering, and that's their problem, not the law's. They're perfectly free to end their awful suffering at any time, simply by complying with the law and going home.

The idea that the government creates laws for the purpose of inflicting suffering is poop-for-brains stupid. Just telling y'all. What of tyrannical laws? It seems the right is statist when it suits them. Very weak arguments and dodging from all of you.