Originally Posted by fatherofcaitlyn Actually, that is exactly what people think cops will start doing. Lawful contact would include a beat cop walking within an arm's reach of anybody. http://carlosmiller.com/2010/02/18/a...op-demands-it/ In Texas, the guy got to walk away. In Arizona, the guy would be arrested. As far as logic dictating a course of action, have you done any cost/benefit analysis regarding the cost of locating, detaining and deporting an average illegal alien versus the cost of the services an average illegal alien consumes?

The person was standing with a video camera by himself, video taping cops after a shooting for apparently no reason. There was no commentary, he was just sitting there video taping cops, I would call that suspicious activity. I dont understand why you wouldnt give the cops the benefit of the doubt, I would not like it if some random guy was zooming in on me with the video camera.

So with your logic, if I steal $40,000 dollars from a bank, but then get caught, if the costs of prosecuting me and jailing me outweigh what I stole, I shouldnt be prosecuted?

Until they change the law to be in this country illegally is breaking the law plain and simple, if you want to be a citizen go through proper channels, noone has a problem with legal immigrants.

well, at least now we have the conservative folk dropping the charade that "lawful contact" is a contingency that involves having violated the law or suspicion of violated the law.

That feels better - now that that's out of the way, we can talk about whether it's ethical or constitutional for police to demand proof of citizenship or legal alien status of people who aren't violating the law.

Originally Posted by mykevermin well, at least now we have the conservative folk dropping the charade that "lawful contact" is a contingency that involves having violated the law or suspicion of violated the law. That feels better - now that that's out of the way, we can talk about whether it's ethical or constitutional for police to demand proof of citizenship or legal alien status of people who aren't violating the law.

The guy was standing in front of a government building after a shooting video taping cops, with no commentary or anything, just standing there with a video camera zooming in on cops. How is that not suspicious? It proves that he was indeed suspicious since people were walking around and they werent being hassled.

Originally Posted by Knoell Until they change the law to be in this country illegally is breaking the law plain and simple, if you want to be a citizen go through proper channels, noone has a problem with legal immigrants.

The process of coming here legally can cost thousands of dollars and takes months or even years. If you can barely afford to feed your family you can't do that.

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

I like how people coming to this country to find a better life doesn't fall under a Republican's definition of freedom. That's cute.

"You came from your own shithole country, you say, to my vast glorious nation of Doubledown chuggers and two-for-Tuesday pizza rolls? Weeeeeeeeeeeeelll, your shit!"

Originally Posted by Strell I like how people coming to this country to find a better life doesn't fall under a Republican's definition of freedom. That's cute. "You came from your own shithole country, you say, to my vast glorious nation of Doubledown chuggers and two-for-Tuesday pizza rolls? Weeeeeeeeeeeeelll, your shit!"

Elian Gonzales?

Now Msut. KFC didn't have the Doubledown when Elian was here. You're just being silly.

Originally Posted by Strell I like how people coming to this country to find a better life doesn't fall under a Republican's definition of freedom. That's cute. "You came from your own shithole country, you say, to my vast glorious nation of Doubledown chuggers and two-for-Tuesday pizza rolls? Weeeeeeeeeeeeelll, your shit!"

Illegally is a keyword in this debate. Noone disputes legal immigrants.

Originally Posted by darkslime The process of coming here legally can cost thousands of dollars and takes months or even years. If you can barely afford to feed your family you can't do that.

Then reduce the cost, or make the benefits of coming here legally outweigh the illegality of coming here illegaly. We are giving them the idea that coming here illegally is just fine and in some cases better and cheaper than legally.

Originally Posted by Knoell The person was standing with a video camera by himself, video taping cops after a shooting for apparently no reason. There was no commentary, he was just sitting there video taping cops, I would call that suspicious activity. I dont understand why you wouldnt give the cops the benefit of the doubt, I would not like it if some random guy was zooming in on me with the video camera. So with your logic, if I steal $40,000 dollars from a bank, but then get caught, if the costs of prosecuting me and jailing me outweigh what I stole, I shouldnt be prosecuted? Until they change the law to be in this country illegally is breaking the law plain and simple, if you want to be a citizen go through proper channels, noone has a problem with legal immigrants.

A shooting occurred. The lone shooter was caught. A man with a videocamera was filming B roll hours after the incident. That isn't suspicious. If the man had visible press credentials, it is even less suspicious. Nobody can tell from the video. I googled "gun concealed in video camera" and there aren't a bunch of stories about murderers hiding guns in video cameras.

Regarding cops, they don't get the benefit of the doubt. Sorry. It's just a personal preference.

Regarding cost/benefit, you are following my logic. If your illegal immigrant is going to take $1 million to permanently deport him versus $999,999 to allow him to stay, it makes sense to take no action unless there is some other factor involved. <here's where you can talk about the principle of the thing > If you could phase like Shadowcat into a bank vault and steal a certain amount of money without causing any physical or psychological damage to anybody or anything, you wouldn't be pursued as actively as a bank robber who pistol whipped a guard, shoot somebody trying to be a hero and ran over a bunch of people during a high speed chase.

So, let's go back to an earlier post.
Example 1: An illegal immigrant has a child in our schools who wasn't born in this country. Kick the kid out. Then, the kid has to be homeschooled or neglected.
Example 2: The illegal is receiving food stamps or public housing. Kick them out and cut off the aid. Then, more of the illegal's pay is spent maintaining their existence. The advantage for them to stay here is lessened.
Example 3: The illegal is sitting in an ER. Demand proof of insurance and citizenship at check in. Insurance and citizenship? Front of the line. Just citizenship? Near the front of the line. Just insurance? Near the back of the line. Neither? Last of the line.
Example 4: The illegal is somehow injured due to neglect such as hot coffee or wet floors at a McD's, obvious workplace dangers or bleeding in an ER. No ability to sue since the action occurred during the commission of the crime of being in the country illegally. Obviously, waivers for tourists would need to be in place.

Rather than creating a fascist state, let's reduce the benefit for the illegal to stay in our country.

Originally Posted by Strell I like how people coming to this country to find a better life doesn't fall under a Republican's definition of freedom. That's cute.

As usual you're too blinded to see the reality here (no surprise). No one is against immigration. People are against illegal immigration. There is a key difference. Instead you spew your typical liberal lies to make yourself feel better.

Originally Posted by Nogib As usual you're too blinded to see the reality here (no surprise). No one is against immigration. People are against illegal immigration. There is a key difference. Instead you spew your typical liberal lies to make yourself feel better.

What are your thoughts on political asylum?

No one is against immigration, yeah sure.

Originally Posted by Knoell The guy was standing in front of a government building after a shooting video taping cops, with no commentary or anything, just standing there with a video camera zooming in on cops. How is that not suspicious? It proves that he was indeed suspicious since people were walking around and they werent being hassled.

How is this suspicious, or even remotely illegal? This line of thought is exactly why I don't want cops profiling.

Originally Posted by Knoell The person was standing with a video camera by himself, video taping cops after a shooting for apparently no reason. There was no commentary, he was just sitting there video taping cops, I would call that suspicious activity. I dont understand why you wouldnt give the cops the benefit of the doubt, I would not like it if some random guy was zooming in on me with the video camera.

Because this exact situation has been litigated OVER AND OVER AND OVER and the cops lose OVER AND OVER AND OVER. Not only that, but it's happened so damn often than police training has specifically covered this instance for years if not decades, which means it is done solely to intimidate.

The person filming must materially interfere. Intentionally positioning themselves between the officers and suspects is enough to warrant arrest. Yea, the rules are broken down that low.

But yea, I could see how you would support the government's ability to arrest on suspicion of what again..? Citizen standing on a corner with a camera?

Originally Posted by Nogib No one is against immigration.

How adoooooooooooooorable!

If no one is against immigration, why are we only worried about one of our borders? I never see any push to build a huge fence along our border in the Great White North.

Also, do you think immigrants from Eastern Europe have it easier or worse than their brethren from the Americas?

Originally Posted by depascal22 If no one is against immigration, why are we only worried about one of our borders? I never see any push to build a huge fence along our border in the Great White North.

Impracticality? Numbers?

Originally Posted by The Crotch Impracticality? Numbers?

Exactly. That point was flawed because most people don't want to immigrate from Canada to here because Canada is a pretty good country, whereas a lot of parts of Mexico are a third world country and there are lots of corrupt police, drug wars, and not many jobs.

...

Darkslime just agreed with me...

Ah, horse cocks...