doublegunshop.com - home Forums DIALOG RE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

His mom and dad can decide that.

Of course, after he turns 16 or 18 he can decide for himself.

It is time for our side to quit obstructing the destruction of our Country and begin governing it! I see a chance this election season. It may be the last chance...Geo

Hey Geo, do you have a thought on this?

Does the Constitution, or any of its Amendments, or any law actually grant citizenship to the US born offspring of an Illegal alien, or legal alien for that matter? Is it fact or accepted interpreted opinion? Just wondering is all, no big deal if you don't.

That's hard to say Ed. I mean, look at you... you're how old? And you don't have the brains of a small child.

We do not have a broken immigration system. The one we have worked fine until it was decided by both Republicans and Democrats that we should ignore the system that was in place. What good will it do to institute a new system unless there are penalties for not enforcing the law?

I like Mike's ideas about deporting the illegals and building a wall, but first the illegal lawbreakers should be penalized by being sentenced to performing labor on the wall equal to the time they were here illegally. That might be a deterrent to them just sneaking back in.

Now there's a plan...

A farmer buddy of mine said one of his illegals was going home for a year. Said it cost him $400.00 for the bus ride home and $4000.00 to sneak back in.

I have a thought but not an answer. My thought is that breaking up familys is wrong. As to the constitutional question, I'm no more help.

The question turns on the words "under the jurisdition of" or something like that. Seems likely that the Court could hold that someone here illegally is not within our jurisdiction, hell we don't even officially know they're here.

On the other hand its always been accepted that if you can tag base by being born on US soil, you are automatically a citizen. Are foreign embassy staff who are here legally and who give birth here having American babies?...Geo

The way I see it keith, because we have allowed the invasion of illegal workers, we've created the problem and we need a 'fix' to solve it. I favor a wall with a door and a doorman charged with specific guidelines about who goes either way. i also believe that immigration is the issue that can win the 2016 elections ( or lose them)...Geo

Anne Coulter said something like "I am disappointed that my party is considering giving citizenship to three million Democratic voters."

As far as character, work ethic, ambition and general demeanor my experience with the Latino illegal aliens is that they possess all three. They are fine people. I have owned a construction and service company 35 years. If there were no employer sanctions I would much rather hire an illegal alien than an eighteen year-old citizen. I would have to baby the citizen. He is probably going to have to be fired from several jobs before he can show up on time on a regular basis. The illegal has that skill along with many others because he has worked full time since he twelve.

In general the illegal-aliens are religious, moral, and have strong families.

Most of my experience has been with the Mexican illegals, a little with the Central American illegals.

But citizenship has its privileges. When our unemployment rate is low and our employment rate is high then it is time for immigrants. That is not the current situation. And we abuse our young and minority citizens by not enforcing the laws that are on the books.

The Democrats are currently playing three-card-monty with their loyal Black constituency. They talk incessantly of inequality, "Black lives matter", and "immigration reform". Currently illegal aliens drive down Black employmentand Blacks' wages, They increase Black poverty rates and inequality. If the Republican nominee actively campaigns against amnesty and then does an ad campaign aimed at Blacks to explain what the Dems are doing to them I think he could convince enough of them to vote Republican (or to jus tstay home on election day) that he could win.

Bill Clinton was and is a sleaze ball. But he was a masterful politician. He would use focus groups to try out a possible campaign message. Then he would adjust that message and try it out on a new focus group. They called the process triangulation. I wonder if the Republicans have triangulated on opposing amnesty or if they are just going with what their United States Chamber of Commerce constituents tell them to do?

Sure Geo, that's the way it is... or at least the way it was until politicians on both sides for differing reasons lost the will to enforce Federal law. Some wealthy Republicans saw a source of cheaper labor, and Democrats saw a potential huge voting bloc. And that's why the top three Republican candidates are non-politicians. People are fed up with being invaded and being told that nothing can be done about it.

The wall was not so much physical as it was enforcement and regulation of who got to come in, and how many got to come in. The doors were U.S. ports of entry like Ellis Island where millions of immigrants came in with some semblance of order and control. The open borders people like Ed Good are totally out of their minds and obviously have given no thought to the ramifications of such a policy... even though we are getting a little preview.

I always get a kick out of the Liberals here when they hold up Reagan's amnesty as proof that Republicans are at the heart of the current problems. What they don't tell you is that Reagan's amnesty was part of an agreement to fix the problem of the porous border and to improve border security, enforcement, and stem the tide. The Democrats reneged on that part of the agreement which ought to provide the lesson that you would be wise to not compromise with cheaters and liars.