Seattle Attorney doesn't like the way laws punish people

[marshaul]

While I don't agree completely on all points, one of the best overall assessments of the illegal immigrant situation I've read.

"To whatever extent the government is taking my money and giving it to illegals, I blame the government for aggressing against my wallet, not an illegal for taking a buck (who wouldn't take free money?)."

100% on target.

Thanks for saying so.

Since you generally liked my post, I'm hoping you might consider sharing in a PM what you consider to be the points of disagreement.

I'm always looking for ways to enhance my knowledge, understanding, and ability to convincingly argue issues which I consider important.

 

[Gunslinger]

Thanks for saying so.

Since you generally liked my post, I'm hoping you might consider sharing in a PM what you consider to be the points of disagreement.

I'm always looking for ways to enhance my knowledge, understanding, and ability to convincingly argue issues which I consider important.

Look for a PM.

Sent.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Did someone say the constitution says democracy for all?

I must have missed that in there.

Actually, the word "Democracy" is not used anywhere in the Constitution. You didn't miss it.

I know I was trying to be sarcastic. They really should make a sarcasm tag.:lol:

 

[Jim675]

Thanks for saying so.

Since you generally liked my post, I'm hoping you might consider sharing in a PM what you consider to be the points of disagreement.

I'm always looking for ways to enhance my knowledge, understanding, and ability to convincingly argue issues which I consider important.

I also appreciated that excellent post. If Gunslinger succeeds in refining your ideas please post a new reply so we can all benefit.

 

[marshaul]

I also appreciated that excellent post. If Gunslinger succeeds in refining your ideas please post a new reply so we can all benefit.

The disagreements were minor.

I think the main thing that came out of it was we agreed that truly rationalizing our immigration system is probably best accomplished over the course of a few years rather than all at once.

While I tend to by rather un-charitable about government's ability to actually accomplish much, it would be best to bring these changes slowly so as not to give the impression of an opening of the floodgates to those who might imagine one.

 

[END_THE_FED]

If we can eliminate the "Welfare State" then we could let the free-market determine the amount of immigration. I trust the "invisible hand" of the free-market over the forceful hand of the government any day of the week.

This is actually how it use to be, when the demand for "guest labor" was high there was a lot of immigration here, when the demand decreased and started to level off then there was relatively less immigration.

Ruby,
I noticed in your post you mentioned that the citizenship process should be the same for everyone. I do not disagree. When I read your post it prompted me to point out that many of the early immigration laws specifically targeted Chinese people. (well the first immigration law specifically said only whites can imigrate but that was changed)

Even today the immigration policy is far from equal, there are different quotas for different countries, different fees for different countries and so on.

 

[END_THE_FED]

Did someone say the constitution says democracy for all?

I must have missed that in there.

The word immigration is not in there either.

The Constitution did not delegate the power to regulate immigration to the Federal government. It delegates to the Congress the power to "establish a uniform Rule of naturalization".

I would say that immigration and naturalization are two different things. The power to naturalize (make one a U.S. Citizen) belongs to the central government, the power to regulate immigration is retained by the states or the people.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

The word immigration is not in there either.

The Constitution did not delegate the power to regulate immigration to the Federal government. It delegates to the Congress the power to "establish a uniform Rule of naturalization".

I would say that immigration and naturalization are two different things. The power to naturalize (make one a U.S. Citizen) belongs to the central government, the power to regulate immigration is retained by the states or the people.

Oh I agree, I always tell people if we got rid of the Welfare system and "illegal" drugs, there would be no problem the folks who "sneak" in would be doing so to work and better themselves and in doing so better our society.

 

[Gunslinger]

The disagreements were minor.

I think the main thing that came out of it was we agreed that truly rationalizing our immigration system is probably best accomplished over the course of a few years rather than all at once.

While I tend to by rather un-charitable about government's ability to actually accomplish much, it would be best to bring these changes slowly so as not to give the impression of an opening of the floodgates to those who might imagine one.

I would keep the gate more tightly closed than marshaul, but ease the process for those who truly want to become citizens and can demonstrate value add, if you will, to our society or who have true humanitarian grounds for asylum. We both agree that the average illegal is not a criminal, and that those who are should be quickly tossed back. And, as he says, it has to be a process not a revolution in current laws. Neither of us trusts the government to do anything quickly that ends up being done right. Just look at oboobacare. But measured steps in the right direction need to be started. The rhetoric solves nothing--from either side.

 

[marshaul]

I must say, it was really refreshing to discuss this issue in a rational manner, largely devoid of rhetoric and unsupportable accusations.

I am always willing to refine my ideas, even in their core tenets are relatively firmly established.

I won't name names or make an insults, but this issue has a tendency to attract a... certain kind of participant and a certain kind of argument.

I can't tell you how many times my position has been rebuffed on grounds no greater than a geographical appeal to authority (as though living in a "sanctuary city" doesn't give one grounds for a counter-appeal of equal authority -- or lack thereof ).