Illegal Immigrants?

[The Nihilist]

Illegal, by it's definition, is crime. Therefore, illegal aliens are criminals. I live in a city in California full of illegals; it's sick. And they all look at you like they want to kill you. It's the U.S. Army and National Guards job to arrest/shoot them. It's a major failure by the U.S. Government that they are losing California by doing nothing.

Well, next time I'm looking for a simplistic, myopic understanding of something, I know who to call

 

[AmericanChristian91]

I think they are criminals.

Lets create a scenario. Say the USA had another Great Depression. Now there are alot of poor people who dont have jobs. Now does that make it ok for those poor jobless people to go into Canada (ignoring there border) and causing havoic there? I dont think so. Just because your poor and need a better life does not make it ok to disobey the laws of the country you are trying to go in (this is for all countries). When those poor Americans go into Canada, without permission they are breaking Canadian law becoming crimminals, they are also attacking Canadian sovernty. You have to respect other's country borders and law and there land. Mexicans (and other Nationalities) have no right to come into the country without permission, since it is not there land, if they want it as there land there going to have to have a war to try and take it.

Think of it this way. Is it ok for a poor person to sneak into a Rich Man's house and steal?

Or is it ok to Rob a Bank and break laws just because your poor and need a better life?

 

[AmericanChristian91]

We cant just allow anybody in the world who is poor and needs a better life. That would destroy America. We need a limit on our Immigration and that you obey the law to become an Legal Immigrant. There is a reason why we dont have a open Border.

 

[The Nihilist]

If not paying attention and ignoring the relevant discussion were an olympic event, you'd have just won silver. Sorry, gold belongs to someone in creation/evolution

 

[AmericanChristian91]

If not paying attention and ignoring the relevant discussion were an olympic event, you'd have just won silver. Sorry, gold belongs to someone in creation/evolution

O, im sorry.

 

[Vigilante]

The question "Are illegal immigrants criminals?" could be rephrased to "Have illegal immigrants been convicted of a crime?" which in turn could be rephrased to "Have illegal immigrants been convicted of illegal immigration?"

The answer cannot be no.

Two questions raise their heads:

1. What is the policy regarding immigration?
2. What should be the policy regarding immigration? (<-- this question must be asked with ends in mind, i.e., "Should we do X if we are seeking Y?" and then becomes a matter of efficacy.)

 

[The Nihilist]

The question "Are illegal immigrants criminals?" could be rephrased to "Have illegal immigrants been convicted of a crime?" which in turn could be rephrased to "Have illegal immigrants been convicted of illegal immigration?"

The answer cannot be no.

Two questions raise their heads:

1. What is the policy regarding immigration?
2. What should be the policy regarding immigration? (<-- this question must be asked with ends in mind, i.e., "Should we do X if we are seeking Y?" and then becomes a matter of efficacy.)

This is not a matter of national policy. You've failed to grasp the matter at hand. Whether because I didn't articulate it clearly, or because the immigration debate draws the attentions of grade A retards across the nation, this is a problem this thread has had for a while.
I don't think illegal immigrants are criminals, and here's why. Immigration rules only apply to the citizenry of other nations, but the United States does not have the authority to issue rules to the citizenry of other nations. Without this authority, the concept of criminality breaks down. It's nonsense. Yeah, they shouldn't be here, and yeah, we can kick them out, but I'm pretty sure they're not criminals.

 

[Vigilante]

I don't think illegal immigrants are criminals, and here's why. Immigration rules only apply to the citizenry of other nations, but the United States does not have the authority to issue rules to the citizenry of other nations. Without this authority, the concept of criminality breaks down. It's nonsense. Yeah, they shouldn't be here, and yeah, we can kick them out, but I'm pretty sure they're not criminals.

I won't fight your terminology. If you can claim, "Illegal immigrants have done nothing illegal" with a straight face, that's fine. Some people would call that a contradiction in terms.

I understand your statement as, "Individuals that many people have called 'illegal immigrants' haven't, in fact, broken U.S. law at all." (And if this is not right, please correct me.)

You said:

Immigration rules only apply to the citizenry of other nations, but the United States does not have the authority to issue rules to the citizenry of other nations.

So the United States' immigration rules only apply to the citizenry of other nations, but the United States does not have the authority to issue those rules to the citizens toward which they apply. So:

1. The United States has rules for M (Mexican)
2. The United States lacks the legal authority to enforce a rule on M
3. U.S. rules regarding M, therefore, are legally mute and should be repealed

But this is not how State Law works. The only definition of government I've ever seen used in my three-year immersion in economics and political philosophy describes a territorial monopoly on the use of initiatory force (I believe this was the definition used by Robert Nozick and Ludwig von Mises, among others). Note that this doesn't describe a "citizen-based" monopoly. The new argument moves as follows:

1. The United States has rules for T (Territory)
2. The United States has the legal authority to enforce rules in T
3. U.S. rules regarding individuals in T, therefore, are legally binding

If a U.S. law describes "the possession of the 'proper' papers," then any individual within the borders T who does not "possess the 'proper' papers" is operating outside the scope of the law that governs T. To plaster that individual with the label "illegal" is at this point no difficult task.

Your thoughts?

 

[The Nihilist]

No where have I argued for the repealing of immigration laws, and I'm not trying to argue that there's some kind of problem with regulating immigration. What I am arguing is that illegal immigrants aren't criminals, because I think they have a status that is at best anomalous. I'm trying to flesh this out.
Anyway, that's an interesting approach. I'll mull this over and get back to you.

 

[The Nihilist]

Ok, I thought about it, and I don't really think anything has changed.
Let me ask this. Is someone who runs a stop sign a criminal?

 

[Vigilante]

Is someone who runs a stop sign a criminal?

That's up to you and what you mean by "criminal."

You must decide, young one:

 

[BAFRIEND]

Illegal immigrants by definition are criminals.

And there are victims:

Victims of identity theft.

Victims because it makes it harder for people who want to come into the country but cannot due to restrictions cause by illegal aliens, supply/demand.

Victims of crime by illegal aliens.

Victims because of resources stolen- such as medical, education, etc. etc.

My nephew was serving in Iraq and had his Identity stolen by an illegal alien in California. This caused a lot of problems for him. A lot of service members did not get their tax rebates because they could not file their returns or the returns were not accepted due to identity theft.

How are these people getting jobs and driving- identity theft.

 

[The Nihilist]

bafriend, please see post #21

 

[BAFRIEND]

bafriend, please see post #21

I answered your OP, next time I see one of your threads, I will not be so generous. Sorry I did not give you the answer that jives with you.

 

[billwald]

A criminal is a person who has been convicted of a crime in a court of law. In the US we still have a presumption of innocence. Maybe no longer Mrs Palin is elected.

 

[Shabby]

I don't think illegal immigrants are criminals, and here's why. Immigration rules only apply to the citizenry of other nations, but the United States does not have the authority to issue rules to the citizenry of other nations.

For being so pretentious, you have failed to properly examine your own argument. The United States has the authority to issue rules for anyone that resides in the United States. The illegal Mexican immigrant resides in the United States and has failed to comply with the rules that the American government has issued for immigration.

Your argument (taken to its logical extent) is like a German toursist being charged with underage drinking at a club in Chicago saying "But, I'm not American! Your laws don't apply to me!"

Next time, instead of opening your mouth to ridicule the other people around you, you should examine your own ridiculously elementary argument.

 

[The Nihilist]

Oh, Shabby, you and I have so much in common, particularly that I am also a total dbag about 60% of the time. On the other hand, I sometimes bother to understand what my opponent is saying before opening my dumb mouth and looking like an idiot.
Vigilante actually put my biggest concern to bed, but here it is, for those of you who missed it. It is that immigration laws only affect citizens of other countries. For example, a Canadian citizen is affected by US immigration laws, while American citizens aren't. However, prior to breaking such a law, a Canadian citizen is not under US law, and can only come under the jurisdiction of such a law if he breaks it in the first place. This is peculiar and unlike the normal legal system. As I have already said, I think the US has a right to enforce immigration laws, though I don't think that breaking such laws makes one a criminal

 

[Sockroteez]

Are illegal immigrants criminals? I think this is a foggy area, but I want to hear what y'all have to say first

I promise, this is a philosophical discussion. I ask this question with Arendt's ideas about statelessness in mind

Umm... I believe they are. There are legal means to gain entry to the United States. If one chooses to neglect that, and sneak in, they are in violation of our Laws. As such, I do not believe that they should be entitled to any rights held by citizens. They shouldn't be allowed to work, get liscenses, get welfare, have access to State or Federal Court representation, (I would think that is should be a Military court setting). Out of humanitarian reasons, I would not refuse them necessary medical intervention. Essentially, if discovered, they should be detained, and deported. There are multitudes doing it the right way, the illegal crowd should get in line with the respectable persons who show that they respect the Nation and It's Laws of which they want to enter.

I do believe that I would support a plan of some sort to allow current Illegal Immigrants to declare their presence in the Country, and be required to go through a screening, be entered into a publicly accessible database, and required to pay a fine. (perhaps as a garnishment from wages) They could be made eligible for employment, perhaps at a lower minimum wage level. They would be required to file as 'Illegal' for 7 years, at which time they would be re-screened, and having fulflled the requirements, be granted full citizenship.

 

[Sockroteez]

This is not a matter of national policy. You've failed to grasp the matter at hand. Whether because I didn't articulate it clearly, or because the immigration debate draws the attentions of grade A retards across the nation, this is a problem this thread has had for a while.
I don't think illegal immigrants are criminals, and here's why. Immigration rules only apply to the citizenry of other nations, but the United States does not have the authority to issue rules to the citizenry of other nations. Without this authority, the concept of criminality breaks down. It's nonsense. Yeah, they shouldn't be here, and yeah, we can kick them out, but I'm pretty sure they're not criminals.

Perhaps there is substance to what you say.. it is true that one becomes a 'criminal' once guilt has been proven. However, being that the USA distingishes between citizens and non-citizens, those who leave their' country and enter our borders without going through the process have essentially invaded our country. As such, they are entitled to none of the rights given to citizens, and should be detained and deported. In another of my posts I state that I would support a plan to allow present illegals to EARN citiznship through a rigorous process. But, essentially, if they choose to disregard our Laws, they have no right being here... they have no rights to any services of any sort, save for urgent medical care, as I believe the USA to a sovereign, yet humane, Nation.

 

[The Nihilist]

shut up and let the thread die