Illegals commit 1,000,000 sex crimes in US

Parent Cafe
141

<p>The reason the topic has shifted, is because just about everyone posting here has agreed that the original article is probably more B.S. than it is fact. We pretty much all agree on that. The conversation has evolved into illegal immigration in general. There are some here that believe that we should all be one happy world with no borders. That immigration shouldn’t even be an issue. There’s also those that believe that as a country gets to a certain size with a certain amount of economic and social resources, that immigration must be monitored and controlled. If not, then the economic and social resources are depleted. Of course, some of the first group has no problem with raising more taxes to pay for even more of these social and economic resources.</p>

<p>What I find interesting is that some people are willing to spend money and resources on allowing illegal immigrants to be here, yet they aren’t championing the other economic and social issues our country has with their legal residence; such as the inner city poor, the rural poor and uneducated, those on welfare, 14 year olds getting pregnant, etc…</p>

<p>We may not ever be able to fix all our problems with legal citizens, but they should have priority over illegals. Prior to the 1950’s, just about every immigrant had something to offer the USA. There was a lot of workers needed and immigration wasn’t a problem. That is no longer the case. Countries like Australia require new immigrants to show that they can offer something to the country. Skills, trade, other contributions. They don’t want immigrants to be a burdon on the country’s social and economic resources. Obviously they don’t have too many illegals. They’re a giant island. Hard to swim that far.</p>

<p>That form of legal immigration is the common method among most countries. Including ours. Ensuring that the new immigrant isn’t going to be an immediate burdon on the country. In the USA, even if some people want to rationalize illegal immigrants as providing a major contribution to our economy, they are more of an economic and social burdon. I am all for different versions of allowing work visa’s for many of the migrant type workers. That will still make prices go up because once they are “legal”, there will be some stupid government regulation controlling how much is paid to these workers. Social Security tax, federal. medicaid, etc… shouldn’t be deducted from their paychecks because they SHOULDN’T be receiving any of these services or benefits. And no, I don’t believe in the minimum wage. But legal work visas is one way to get some handle on illegal immigration. I don’t believe in them bringing their families with them. Just liike we have migrant workers in the fishing industry and other areas where many citizens go to Alaska and such for a few months and then go back home. Same with the migrant workers on visas. Let them come up for the “Season” and then force them to go back to Mexico or wherever they came from.</p>

<p>And we might as well just admit now that the majority of all illegal immigrants come from mexico. Some from Central America. But we don’t get a lot of illegal immigrants from Germany. Not because of their economics, but because it’s a little hard to get on a plane or ship illegally. Walking and swimming just isn’t practical.</p>

<p>Any other way of handling the illegal immigrants needs to be swift prosecution and deportation. If the majority of illegals come over for economic reasons, then we can provide legal income, do it controlled, help stimulate Mexico’s economy, and not have to take care of their social issues. The other illegal immigrants get not compassion for illegally coming here. I’m not going to deal with the “Political” refugees and those afraid for their lives. They make up too small of a percentage.</p>

<p>But of course, there are still some out here that believe that our borders should be open to all. That if we are against illegal immigrants, then we are racist. (We aren’t; I’d feel the same way if we bordered any country and they illegally came across. Just that Mexico and Canada are the ones connected to us). For those out there who believe that somehow we owe it to the illegals to allow them in with open arms; I challenge you to take care of the socio-economic problems of our current citizens first and then the illegals can be taken care of.</p>

142

<p>"That will still make prices go up because once they are “legal”, there will be some stupid government regulation controlling how much is paid to these workers. "</p>

<p>I’ve always wondered what will happen with regard to jobs when illegals are amnestied and require minimum wage and benefits, because employers apparently don’t want to pay minimum wage and benefits. Who will then have the jobs and what will happen with the surplus of minimum wage workers that no one will hire. This is not facetious, by the way, I really do wonder and have never received an answer.</p>

143

<p>“As for whether we have to prosecute U.S. citizens who rape and sexually assault illegal immigrants or their children…well, that’s a trickier, more controversial question, I suppose.”</p>

<p>:O Can you help me see what’s tricky or controversial about the idea that you should go to jail for raping a child, no matter who the child may be?</p>

144

<p>

And you could ask the same question about what would happen if we rounded them all up and shipped them out. Having millions of cheap and compliant unauthorized immigrants working in a not-so-underground economy is sort of like being addicted to heroin - any change from the status quo will hurt. So we just keep shooting up and tut-tutting about how horrible it is, and do nothing.</p>

145

<p>any change from the status quo will hurt. So we just keep shooting up and tut-tutting about how horrible it is, and do nothing.</p>

<p>I don’t think we are doing “nothing”.
Children from undocumented parents can attend school even college.</p>

<p>In some areas like new New Orleans, immigrants are the strongest part of the communities
<a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071030/ap_on_re_us/katrina_vietnamese[/url]”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071030/ap_on_re_us/katrina_vietnamese&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

146

<p>“And you could ask the same question about what would happen if we rounded them all up and shipped them out. Having millions of cheap and compliant unauthorized immigrants working in a not-so-underground economy is sort of like being addicted to heroin - any change from the status quo will hurt. So we just keep shooting up and tut-tutting about how horrible it is, and do nothing.”</p>

<p>Kluge, I was asking a question in hope that people smarter than I would have an answer. As I said, it wasn’t facetious and I still would like to know what others think. I’ve never been for rounding people up and deporting them (as I’ve said before), but that doesn’t mean that we can’t wonder what will happen the day after amnesty.</p>

147

<p>re the OP. The scholarship of the cited study may be sketchy but crimes are committed by illegal aliens every day. If they are misdemeanors they should be immediately deported. If felonies, jailed and then deported upon release. Illegal family members should likewise be deported.</p>

<p>Some consideration should be given to illegal mothers who have children born in the USA and who are therefore US citizens.</p>

148

<p>Something very important needs to be realized. Even though illegals are CHEAP labor; most in the produce areas AREN’T being paid below minimum wage. Most are being paid in the $8-$12 an hour range. Just so you know. Granted, there’s probably some areas that have a lot of illegals that are working for below minimum wage, but most in the produce type jobs are making quite a bit more.</p>

149

<p>@ Hanna: I can’t help you. I just know that there are some people who take the position that illegal aliens have no rights. I’m just assuming that if it’s so easy and obvious to draw a bright line and not acknowledge any nuance than it would bumfuzzle them to allow for any shades of gray into their paradigm. The fact is that we already recognize that illegal aliens in our country have rights. The question is not whether they have rights here but where we draw our lines…and it’s just not as clearcut as some people imagine.</p>

150

<p>Totally agree. I am the first to admit that illegals have rights. Plenty of rights. I don’t think they should; other than basic life where they can’t be killed or left for dead. The rights I’m talking about are LEGAL rights and not HUMAN rights. I don’t think they should have LEGAL rights. Human rights is a totally different topic.</p>

151

<p>I agree with you Zoosermom; I’m just pointing out that once you get strung out on having a large, cheap, rights-less labor pool the process of getting from there to a different status is going to be painful - whether you do that through some form of retroactive legalization of their presence or by shipping them back to wherever they came from. Either way there’s disruption. </p>

<p>In the meantime, the enablers of the status quo such as Christcorp and similar voters continue to make the presence of a large pool of unauthorized laborers profitable for the people who are actually causing the situation to persist – and thus preventing the implementation of a situation. I simply find it remarkable that people can be so blind to the real world consequences of the positions they’ve been led to hold with such fervor - even when they are actually encouraging the existence of the thing they think they’re striking out against. Amazing.</p>

152

<p>Christcorp,</p>

<p>How do you define “HUMAN” rights? Here’s how the international community of nations define them:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html[/url]”>http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>If your position is that illegal aliens should be limited to the human rights that are internationally recognized (plus the legal right to defend them) then maybe I can understand your position.</p>

<p>In other words, what are these “LEGAL” rights that you think illegal aliens have that they shouldn’t?</p>

153

<p>I have had the same unanswered question as zmom. Also, it seems to be a circular problem: the more illegal immigrants we have, the more roads/housing/infrastracture/food prep we need, so the more cheap labor we need. When SoCal had the illegal immigrant “walk out” day a while ago, I noticed that not only did our local McDonalds have only two employees left working, there were also no customers around. (Also, the freeways were a breeze!)</p>

154

<p>I don’t think that definition precludes countries from controlling their borders and not providing the full benefits of citizens to non citizens. I cannot show up in Canada and demand free treatment in their free health system.</p>

155

<p>" agree with you Zoosermom; I’m just pointing out that once you get strung out on having a large, cheap, rights-less labor pool the process of getting from there to a different status is going to be painful - whether you do that through some form of retroactive legalization of their presence or by shipping them back to wherever they came from. Either way there’s disruption"</p>

<p>Thanks Kluge. I think amnesty is coming in some form or another and am interested in how other people view the adjustment period. I’m not, obviously, an economist and often wonder if I’m missing something.</p>

156

<p>Sam; the problem with the UN version of “Human Rights” that you are looking at, is that a large portion of it makes reference to “THE LAW”. In that reference, being there are no “International Laws”, it is referring to a person in THEIR country and the laws that apply to THEM. </p>

<p>Illegal immigrants are not in THEIR country and THEIR LAWS do not apply. That’s where the “Legal Rights” come in that I don’t believe they should be entitled to.</p>

<p>Remember, they can not and will not state rights, laws, etc… that apply to “CRIMINALS”. That which is written is done so with legal and law abiding citizens in mind. The international human rights is based on a population being treated equal by and within their established government. An illegal immigrant/alien should not be treated equally in the eye of our nation’s laws that you or I are.</p>

<p>Illegal immigrants can SUE in civil disputes, criminal, and personal cases. They are allowed to access benefits and services WITHOUT being identified as Illegal immigrants; thus self incriminating themselves. These type of legal rights they should not be allowed. They can have them in THEIR COUNTRY, but not here. The only legal right they should have is to be administratively deported should their status become known. You can’t injure them, kill them, deny medical treatment, deny food/water (While in custody), humiliate, etc… these are basic “Human Rights”. They should have NO NEED for a lawyer or access to our judicial system for ANYTHING. If they are an illegal, and found out, they get deported. If they were mugged, robbed, hit and run, swindled, etc… they have no business looking for restitution. If they need to go to the hospital, they should be given medical attention. And if found our they are an illegal immigrant, then turned over to the INS for deportation. They shouldn’t be able to use are judicial system for any gain whatsoever.</p>

157

<p>Kluge, I believe the far right and the far left both opposed the compromise bill as did the majority of voters. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2007/cyb20070611.asp#1[/url]”>http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2007/cyb20070611.asp#1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

158

<p>“CRIMINALS” have rights too, above and beyond not getting killed.</p>

159

<p>Christcorp,</p>

<p>I invite you to re-read the Declaration of Human Rights, starting with the following articles:</p>

<p>Article 2: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.”</p>

<p>I think that being an illegal immigrant falls under “national or social origin, birth or other status” (most likely birth.)</p>

<p>“Article 6: Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.”</p>

<p>Illegal immigrants are persons before the law.</p>

<p>“Article 7: All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.”</p>

<p>Illegal imigrants are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.</p>

<p>Now, I recognize that the DHR is a declaration of principles, not the law of the land (or any other land.) I also recognize that a few paragraphs will never explain all the nuances of centuries of legislative exercise. For example, criminals are deprived of their liberty as a direct consequence of their crime, and that is still compatible with human rights. On the other hand, the DHR is a good first approximation to what constitutes HUMAN rights.</p>

<p>You seem to think most of these are not human rights. That the only human right is to come out alive and physically unharmed. That once you break the law, all bets are off. In essence, you only recognize article 3 (with reservations.)</p>

<p>Other people on this board have presented counter-examples such as rape and robery that we believe all people should be protected from by the law, regardless of their status, but you seem to think otherwise. I am hoping that is not your position, and that we can reason out a compromise. otherwise, at least I understand where you’re coming from.</p>

160

<p>Barrons, I honestly don’t know enough about the “compromise” bill to have an opinion one way or the other. I do think, as a general matter, that there should be no provision for legalizing “cheap” labor in America - particularly by people with no effective ability to protest or seek redress for violations of their employment rights. The bill you mention had a “guest worker” provision, so I might object to it on that basis, if I knew more about it.</p>

<p>To be a broken record: The problem isn’t the unauthorized foreign workers: it’s the employers who create a magnet for them. Ambitious and hardworking people willing to take risks to better their place in life will ignore immigration laws, and I for one will not despise them for their initiative. For a person who has little or nothing to undertake an arduous journey, relocate in a strange land where the dominant culture and language are foreign to them, instead of sitting at home and complaining about life, is admirable. These are the kind of people who built this nation - not the whining nativists.</p>

<p>But the presence of these legally powerless people who are willing to work for substandard (by American standards) wages depresses economic opportunity for everyone here - immigrant or not - particularly in the lower economic levels. And that’s a bad thing. But it’s entirely curable, by legally and socially enforcing the laws against employing anyone who isn’t in a position to get the Labor Commissioner or courts to enforce American labor laws. Throw some maintenance company executives in jail. Put some spoiled suburban moms and dads with their central American nannies behind bars. Leave the workers alone - target the employers. Dry up the source of jobs for unauthorized immigrants. That will solve the problem. Harassing the workers won’t.</p>

<p>But it won’t happen, for the same reason that GWB proposed his “compromise” - there are some very rich people who don’t want it. They’re making too much money off the status quo, and they’re getting away with it because their propaganda attack dogs have convinced the right wing “base” that they should focus their rage on the poor and powerless workers, thereby effectively diverting attention from the actual source of the problem.</p>