- Joined
- Sep 9, 2007
- Messages
- 15,254
- Reaction score
- 3,208
- Location
- Beirut
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Communist
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment for treason. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
LOLI posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
You mean like Don the cons brothel owning illegal grandad?
I think it is best to actually look up the definitions of words (subversion, treason, etc.) instead of using tortured logic to make connections that justify your contention.
If you look at what the writer is saying and then look at Trump's behaviors and statements, it very is likely that his behaviors could merit the death penalty. Think about that.
If you look at what the writer is saying and then look at Trump's behaviors and statements, it very is likely that his behaviors could merit the death penalty. Think about that.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
"sow discord"Would you say that an American sharing a Russian produced meme on social media meant to sow discord and undermine a fair election process is also a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social and therefore political change?
"sow discord"
as chaotic as it may look, it should not be considered discord if people are using their constitutional rights to free speech, to voluntarily endorse the speech of another person/corporation/government/entity of any kind.
Now money COULD be regulated. if a government bribes another citizen to endorse said speech, than the transaction itself could be regulated/banned. but not the content of the speech itself.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
If someone were to accept payment for doing this, would the death penalty be on the table for you?
It would depend on many factors for that. If they're a hostile nation, and if we're at war, and if it affects military/lives etc. etc. If it's just some country like Taiwan, or Israel, or Canada, supporting or advocating for their trade interests, then definitly not, although the bribe itself would still be illegal.
I posit that illegally entering a country from the border is to be considered a form of subversion, as it contributes directly to social, and therefore political change, by which laws were broken to achieve. Logically then, it can be considered like treason, for which the penalty was death until the criminal justice act of 1990 made life in prison as the punishment. I think we should review this act, and eventually repeal it, to make it easier for the government to distribute justice for illegal entry, and all the heinous crimes that come with it.
So then probably no death penalty for civilians of other countries coming into the country illegally and finding menial work in order to support their families back home, right?
And then anyone that hires them as well, death penalty, right?
No. The only time lethal force should be used is if there is a clear and present danger presented by illegal immigrants to the border guard or to the citizenry at large, i.e., an actual armed invasion or demonstration that illegal immigrants are engaging in terrorist activity. Short of that, nonlethal crimes should not be punished with lethal force nor by execution.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?