U.S. Immigration is so effed

T

thrustbucket

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
I just need an outlet to vent. My family has had two horrifying experiences with U.S. immigration/border control in less than two months. I just want to share what happened to help any of you that don't already realize how effed up our immigration system is come to your senses.

Incident 1)
My wife helped drive my sister and her new van back to Houston. They never even came close to the Mexican border. There is a "border patrol checkpoint" INSIDE the border on the highway. They ask if everyone in the vehicle is a citizen and my sister tells them that my wife is not (first mistake). They make everyone get out of the car. Start yelling and screaming at my wife for not having her green card on her (which is only ever needed to enter the country) - threatening to deport her for not carrying it. After several threats to arrest her and telling her she has a "bad mark" on her record now, they let them go.

WTF is a border patrol checkpoint doing INSIDE THE COUNTRY anyway?

Incidentally, all the border patrol agents were all latino. It's not a stretch to believe they were getting quite a kick out of harassing a blonde european female that isn't unattractive.

Incident 2)
Last night my 18-year old sister-in-law is in transit to visit us from her country. She has a 10-year visitor visa given to her by the embassy in her country (which was a pain to get).
She flies into Minneapolis from Amsterdam and goes through immigration there.
-They detain her, without reason given, making her sit for over an hour before anyone even talks to her.
-She misses her connecting flight.
-They go through every piece of her luggage, even confiscating a letter her friend gave her for her birthday.
-They force her to give them her email logins and passwords and search through her email.
-They call my wife and ask her why she's coming into this country and why she isn't in school instead.
-They then lie to her and tell her that my wife said she was suppose to be in school and is coming here to try and go to school, obviously trying to get her to change her story.

They eventually let her go, without ever telling her she did anything wrong. It was just a "routine check". They extended her trip 9 hours.


WTF is wrong with these people? Who hires them? What good are they doing by behaving this way? What is suspicious about an 18 year old girl with a valid visa that she already had to go through several background checks to get?

/rant
 
They are Texans. Nuff said. I was born in Texas and I thank bob every day that my parents moved out of that shit hole before I turned 1. I agree that all that is screwed up....but its par for course in Texas.
 
[quote name='camoor']Keep voting Republican! You get the government you deserve![/QUOTE]

/nod WTF do you think happens when you give hand outs to corporations to create jobs but then have to cut every other form of government. You get incompetent workers. Government isnt the problem, corruption and not enough funding are.
 
Aren't you the one always wanting them to take a tougher stance against illegal immigration? You think shit like this would get better if we did? No of course it wouldn't, they'd just even more strict and draconian. What you're complaining about and what you usually claim you want are in conflict with one another.
 
[quote name='camoor']Keep voting Republican! You get the government you deserve![/QUOTE]

I don't vote for anyone that isn't for uprooting the immigration system and redesigning it.

Republicans tend to just talk about fences and deportation. That's not even half the solution. The entire system is so ineffective it's more like a very expensive comedy routine that isn't funny.

Because of the half decade of personal issues with immigration, it's in my top three issues I vote for.

It does little good to brick up the back doors to this country when we still don't have a front door.
 
[quote name='Clak']Aren't you the one always wanting them to take a tougher stance against illegal immigration? You think shit like this would get better if we did? No of course it wouldn't, they'd just even more strict and draconian. What you're complaining about and what you usually claim you want are in conflict with one another.[/QUOTE]

I am all for draconian measures against blatant criminal activity by illegals, yes.

The entire system needs reformation. You must not have read my past posts on the matter or you wouldn't so easily pigeon-hole me into your standard neo-con category.

Immigration is a fantastic microcosm of the entire government and it's effectiveness at pretty much anything.
 
This is just a small portion of what is wrong in the United States right now. I mean look at how so many even questioned the President's citizenship. It sucks that you had some family members experience this, I am sure this happens everyday to somebody.
 
I'm not saying it was right, I'm not saying there doesn't need to be reform, but to catch the illegals they're going to be tougher on everyone. Just like security at airports, they don't just body scan the terrorists.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Immigration is a fantastic microcosm of the entire government and it's effectiveness at pretty much anything.[/QUOTE]

This kind of leap in logic is deeply disconcerting.
 
is the 18yo hot? Not many hot foreigners coming through MSP so it was probably just a panty check.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I am all for draconian measures against blatant criminal activity by illegals, yes.[/QUOTE]

After reading the OP, it turns out that you aren't all for them.

Or, alternately, you are all for something in an overly ideal sense, and refuse to accept their unintended consequences and side effects.
 
This is why I'm against any kind of immigration law that requires a check of papers if they "suspect" that you're an illegal. It's ridiculous to treat U.S. citizens like that.
 
First : I'm sorry to hear that loved ones are being harassed and mistreated. But , as someone else pointed out: All of this happens on a regular basis, everyday. And believe it or not , this has almost nothing to do with Immigration.
What your family members experienced here was a healthy dose of ego trip that comes all to easy to those in authority across all branches of law enforcement.

Dont misunderstand me, By no means am I excusing their behavior. Power corrupts , plain and simple. You give someone the authority to detain and question people and they'll abuse it.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']After reading the OP, it turns out that you aren't all for them.

Or, alternately, you are all for something in an overly ideal sense, and refuse to accept their unintended consequences and side effects.[/QUOTE]

Yeah thrust, it sounds like what your wife experienced was blatantly draconian. The problem, of course, is that the draconian actions happened to your wife, and not some illegal, right?

How are they supposed to know your wife isn't illegal in the first place? Maybe there should be some measured reaction by border patrol, until they find out if you're legal or not? And if you're not, THEN you'd be in favor of draconian measures?

How would thrust feel if incident #2 happened to someone named, say, Ahmed Hassani?
 
For someone less pathological this could have been one of them epiphany moments.

Some cons start to really question their core beliefs after a relative gets sick and shafted by our system or they do a stint on the dole.

thrust sees it as a chance to bitch about brown people bothering his white women.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Yeah thrust, it sounds like what your wife experienced was blatantly draconian. The problem, of course, is that the draconian actions happened to your wife, and not some illegal, right?

How are they supposed to know your wife isn't illegal in the first place? Maybe there should be some measured reaction by border patrol, until they find out if you're legal or not? And if you're not, THEN you'd be in favor of draconian measures?

How would thrust feel if incident #2 happened to someone named, say, Ahmed Hassani?[/QUOTE]


That's it in a nutshell.

It's a social contract issue really. If we want to keep our borders secure, and do all we can to keep terrorist out etc., the question is how much of our freedoms are we willing to give up in exchange for that?

These types of questioning and searches can't be targeted just at certain racial groups etc. If we think they're necessary then we have to be willing to accept that ourselves and/or our loved ones can be subjected to them sometimes.

If we're not willing to accept that it could happen to us and our loved ones, then we need to re-evaluate the system and decide we'd rather give up some safety to get some freedoms back.
 
Bingo. We can be safe or we can be free, we can't be both.

It was the Republicans that gift-wrapped fascism for us from 2001-2009. SB 1070 is the result of that.
 
The checkpoints are the equivalent of "how old are you?" checks for porn sites.

And just so everyone knows - because a lot of you don't - they've been around....forever. Long before even Doubledumb was in the White House.
 
Sure, they just got more invasive after 9/11. Have to take your shoes off after the shoe bomber incident. Body scanners. Higher frequency of searches and pat downs etc.

Checkpoints are nothing new, but 9/11 tipped the social contract scales more toward safety than freedom than before, and hence these types of things have gotten more invasive.

And we're probably stuck with them now even if they don't catch anything more than the old system and people decide it's not worth it (see the ire of bodyscanning and pat downs).
 
[quote name='Msut77']For someone less pathological this could have been one of them epiphany moments.

Some cons start to really question their core beliefs after a relative gets sick and shafted by our system or they do a stint on the dole.

thrust sees it as a chance to bitch about brown people bothering his white women.[/QUOTE]
LOLOLOLOLZ.

If I didn't lulz, I would cry about how pathetic a person would have to be to not have this open their eyes.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']After reading the OP, it turns out that you aren't all for them.

Or, alternately, you are all for something in an overly ideal sense, and refuse to accept their unintended consequences and side effects.[/QUOTE]

Uh, that's like saying if you aren't for stopping every car on the highway to do breathalizer tests you obviously don't care about drunk driving.

In cases where a crime is committed or the reason for suspicion is at least stated, I am much less bothered by this sort of thing.


[quote name='IRHari']Yeah thrust, it sounds like what your wife experienced was blatantly draconian. The problem, of course, is that the draconian actions happened to your wife, and not some illegal, right?

How are they supposed to know your wife isn't illegal in the first place? Maybe there should be some measured reaction by border patrol, until they find out if you're legal or not? And if you're not, THEN you'd be in favor of draconian measures?

How would thrust feel if incident #2 happened to someone named, say, Ahmed Hassani?[/QUOTE]

Without a reason I am going to be against it in number 2 for anyone. I found out she was actually detained for 3 hours without reason. If they had said "yeah this was a red flag so we have to hold you" that would have been different. Just doing it for no reason other than they can is wrong.

If Ahmed is on a watch list of some kind, that's a reason. If Ahmed is carrying a bunch of suspicious looking materials that set off the x-ray machines, that's a reason they can give him and it's understandable. If Ahmed is asked to sit in a chair for 3 hours before just doing a "routing check", that's not ok.

[quote name='mykevermin']Bingo. We can be safe or we can be free, we can't be both.

It was the Republicans that gift-wrapped fascism for us from 2001-2009. SB 1070 is the result of that.[/QUOTE]

I know it was. I totally agree. But you also have to agree that Obama carries the torch.

[quote name='Msut77']For someone less pathological this could have been one of them epiphany moments.

Some cons start to really question their core beliefs after a relative gets sick and shafted by our system or they do a stint on the dole.

thrust sees it as a chance to bitch about brown people bothering his white women.[/QUOTE]

Coming from someone that's been programmed to see racism in his bowl of Count Chocula after pouring the milk, it doesn't mean much.

[quote name='dohdough']LOLOLOLOLZ.

If I didn't lulz, I would cry about how pathetic a person would have to be to not have this open their eyes.[/QUOTE]

Please explain exactly what my eyes should be opened to? Open borders? Amnesty?
 
I give TB more credit. On this board, he might be the only guy on the right side of the spectrum that questions stuff rather then regurgitating what his church, local teaparty organizer or favorite blog tells him. I'll be honest - I'd rather see more facts and less anecdotes - but I can tell he thinks about issues. If more conservatives were like TB then America would be a much better place.
 
I do agree with that assessment of TB. It's also why I take issue with him saying college was a waste and thus he quit, and learned as much by reading on his own.

A bit part of the value of college isn't the knowledge in the books, it's learning how to think critically about it and seek out all the facts,look at things from all angles etc. before forming an opinion. And it's also being subjected to different ideals and ways of thinking etc.

There's few places you can get that outside of college as people tend to surround themselves mostly with like minded people, choose to read things that interest them (and fit their world view) etc.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Uh, that's like saying if you aren't for stopping every car on the highway to do breathalizer tests you obviously don't care about drunk driving.

In cases where a crime is committed or the reason for suspicion is at least stated, I am much less bothered by this sort of thing.[/quote]

But that's not really getting behind a staunch, draconian (in your words) anti-immigration policy. That's getting behind a staunch anti-immigration policy that has the ability to bat 1.000 in terms of identifying and isolating those who are in the country in violation of the law (as well as bat 1.000 in not detaining those who are not violating the law). You know full well that such is an impossible, unattainable goal. I do believe that you support a strong anti-immigration policy. And please understand that I'm not delighted that your family dealt with this. I'm not giddy with schadenfreude delight, in case you might suspect I am. I think these policies, which ignore concepts of probable cause, are antithetical to concepts of justice rooted in the history of the United States.

But I simply point out that there is no policy that does not, unfortunately, snag a few dolphins with the tuna fish, so to speak. So I'm not sure you're as hardline as you claim to be regarding anti-immigration policies.


But you also have to agree that Obama carries the torch.
Click to expand...

Obama is indeed a moderate Republican-leaning Democrat, and nowhere near as liberal as I want or expected him to be. You are absolutely right about that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='mykevermin']But that's not really getting behind a staunch, draconian (in your words) anti-immigration policy. That's getting behind a staunch anti-immigration policy that has the ability to bat 1.000 in terms of identifying and isolating those who are in the country in violation of the law (as well as bat 1.000 in not detaining those who are not violating the law). You know full well that such is an impossible, unattainable goal.
[/QUOTE]

Yep.

They key with any policy like this is what batting average we're willing to accept.

How high does it have to be to be acceptable? How low does it have to get before we decide in social contract terms that it's more infringement on our collective liberty that we're willing to accept for the marginal improvements in safety?

Beyond that, perhaps even more important than the batting average, is that such searches and detainments are are being done with clear reasonable suspicion. A strike out in this case is easier to swallow if their was some clear cause for suspicion.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Bingo. We can be safe or we can be free, we can't be both.

It was the Republicans that gift-wrapped fascism for us from 2001-2009. SB 1070 is the result of that.[/QUOTE]
I'd say that SB 1070 is more coporatist than fascist, I know, splitting hairs and all that. But it was the private prison lobby that drafted legislation. They even had plans to incarcerate children. Real shit bags.

[quote name='thrustbucket']Uh, that's like saying if you aren't for stopping every car on the highway to do breathalizer tests you obviously don't care about drunk driving.

In cases where a crime is committed or the reason for suspicion is at least stated, I am much less bothered by this sort of thing.

Without a reason I am going to be against it in number 2 for anyone. I found out she was actually detained for 3 hours without reason. If they had said "yeah this was a red flag so we have to hold you" that would have been different. Just doing it for no reason other than they can is wrong.

If Ahmed is on a watch list of some kind, that's a reason. If Ahmed is carrying a bunch of suspicious looking materials that set off the x-ray machines, that's a reason they can give him and it's understandable. If Ahmed is asked to sit in a chair for 3 hours before just doing a "routing check", that's not ok.

I know it was. I totally agree. But you also have to agree that Obama carries the torch.

Coming from someone that's been programmed to see racism in his bowl of Count Chocula after pouring the milk, it doesn't mean much.

Please explain exactly what my eyes should be opened to? Open borders? Amnesty?[/QUOTE]
Your entire post is the opposite of what an epiphany is. An epiphhany would lead you not to support Ron Paul. You didn't really learn anything from this or maybe it just takes time to sink in. I sincerely hope I'm wrong, but I'm not optimistic.

[quote name='camoor']I give TB more credit. On this board, he might be the only guy on the right side of the spectrum that questions stuff rather then regurgitating what his church, local teaparty organizer or favorite blog tells him. I'll be honest - I'd rather see more facts and less anecdotes - but I can tell he thinks about issues. If more conservatives were like TB then America would be a much better place.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='dmaul1114']I do agree with that assessment of TB. It's also why I take issue with him saying college was a waste and thus he quit, and learned as much by reading on his own.

A bit part of the value of college isn't the knowledge in the books, it's learning how to think critically about it and seek out all the facts,look at things from all angles etc. before forming an opinion. And it's also being subjected to different ideals and ways of thinking etc.

There's few places you can get that outside of college as people tend to surround themselves mostly with like minded people, choose to read things that interest them (and fit their world view) etc.[/QUOTE]
You guys can give him credit if you want, but frankly, I'm not impressed.

edit: Allow me to elaborate, just because someone sounds reasonable, like Ron Paul's foreign policy stance, doesn't mean that the reasoning behind it is sound or that their actual solution isn't worse than what we currently have. For thrust, this isn't about how immigration policy is flawed, but about how it fits into broader ideology of how the federal government is so flawed and bloated that it needs to just be shrunk or eliminated. And not that it should be made to be more effective.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh I'm not impressed. Just saying he is better than most of the other conservatives here who seldom give any indication of doing any level of thinking and just regurgitate whatever they heard on Fox News or red on a right wing blog site.

But as you note, he still pretty much just thinks about things in the window of his world view and forms opinions based mostly on his own anecdotal experiences rather than making any effort at getting informed and truly thinking objectively and critically about issues. But at least there is some thought involved and not just a pure regurgitation of other's talking points.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I do agree with that assessment of TB. It's also why I take issue with him saying college was a waste and thus he quit, and learned as much by reading on his own.

A bit part of the value of college isn't the knowledge in the books, it's learning how to think critically about it and seek out all the facts,look at things from all angles etc. before forming an opinion. And it's also being subjected to different ideals and ways of thinking etc.

There's few places you can get that outside of college as people tend to surround themselves mostly with like minded people, choose to read things that interest them (and fit their world view) etc.[/QUOTE]

I can appreciate that outlook. I'm not ashamed to admit that I was just always making a lot more money in my early 20's than my freshly graduated colleagues. It never occurred to me (or anyone I know) to pay through the nose to go to a school for any other reason than to make more money. That is just the game you had to play and I had felt I beat the game.

*I don't deny there are other good reasons to go to school or be involved in the educational system that are more altruistic. I've learned from you and myke that there are people like that and I respect it. I only get bothered when the "educated folk" look down their elitist noses at everyone else as if only they are capable of grasping concepts and processing facts objectively.

[quote name='camoor']I give TB more credit. On this board, he might be the only guy on the right side of the spectrum that questions stuff rather then regurgitating what his church, local teaparty organizer or favorite blog tells him. I'll be honest - I'd rather see more facts and less anecdotes - but I can tell he thinks about issues. If more conservatives were like TB then America would be a much better place.[/QUOTE]
Thanks camoor.
However, I think my political cheese slid off the conservative cracker a long time ago. If I were to really list all my current political beliefs I think I'd come off to most of y'all as more of an anarchist than a conservative.

[quote name='dohdough']
Your entire post is the opposite of what an epiphany is. An epiphhany would lead you not to support Ron Paul. You didn't really learn anything from this or maybe it just takes time to sink in. I sincerely hope I'm wrong, but I'm not optimistic.[/quote]

You still haven't answered my question. What should I have learned? What policies should I now embrace from this experience? What about other policies should I now shun from this experience?

You have to spell out exactly why you think this experience should lead me from point A to point B or you're just another condescending prick on the internet.


You guys can give him credit if you want, but frankly, I'm not impressed.

edit: Allow me to elaborate, just because someone sounds reasonable, like Ron Paul's foreign policy stance, doesn't mean that the reasoning behind it is sound or that their actual solution isn't worse than what we currently have. For thrust, this isn't about how immigration policy is flawed, but about how it fits into broader ideology of how the federal government is so flawed and bloated that it needs to just be shrunk or eliminated. And not that it should be made to be more effective.
Click to expand...

I didn't really provide much of a solution, but since you are going to pretend I did and criticize me for it, I'll elaborate.

I see the immigration issue as double sided. As I alluded earlier, we have a back door that nobody cares about and everyone ignores while we put all our resources into making sure the front door is impossible to pass. This isn't working, and hasn't worked for decades.

The real solution is two-fold and must be enacted at the same time. Immigration is not a part of the government I would dismantle - but it does need a grounds up reorganization.
1) Make sure that ANYONE that wants to immigrate to this country that can pass background checks and prove they can sustain themselves can get in with relative ease. I WANT more immigrants to come here legally. It shouldn't take years and thousands of dollars. It should be easy.
2) Make sure that those that support or employ those that are not here legally suffer consequences to the degree that they will stop hiring them.

Please see this chart. Coming to this country legally is a huge joke. It's nearly impossible outside of a very specific set of circumstances that are largely out of most people's control.

Also - Nobody should ever be asked to prove they are here legally unless they are applying for a job, government assistance, suspected of crime, or crossing the border. My wife was doing none of the above when she was stopped and asked to provide proof. That's wrong. That's fascist germany.

[quote name='dmaul1114']Oh I'm not impressed. Just saying he is better than most of the other conservatives here who seldom give any indication of doing any level of thinking and just regurgitate whatever they heard on Fox News or red on a right wing blog site.[/quote]
I don't think of myself as a conservative, but being for much less government than all of you automatically makes me one, I guess.

The sad part is that simply being for less government also gets me pigeonhold as some Sean Hannity listening "great american" that hates minorities, staples flags to my vehicle, and loves wars because they are against brown people - by many in these forums.

But as you note, he still pretty much just thinks about things in the window of his world view and forms opinions based mostly on his own anecdotal experiences rather than making any effort at getting informed and truly thinking objectively and critically about issues. But at least there is some thought involved and not just a pure regurgitation of other's talking points.
Click to expand...

*This is what I alluded to above, unfortunately.

Look, I learned long ago that this whole concept of others not coming to the same political conclusions as you because they just can't or won't "think objectively and critically" or analyze facts like you educated-types do, is largely bunk.

Some people, like myself, just don't even have the same world view that you guys do. We likely disagree with you and your ilk on the very purpose of life (which is why you chose to go to so much school to begin with); and when there is such a fundamental difference at such a low level - we aren't going to come to many of the same political conclusions.

I'm ok with this though. I understand that other people come to different political viewpoints based largely on their world view and their views on life itself. Views of social responsibility stem from all that and that forms their political views. To me, that means that nobody is "wrong" because that would indicate that someone's core belief system is somehow invalid - which is a horrible conclusion, imo.

When we, as society, start categorizing, shunning, and promoting people based on their core belief systems - then society has failed.

Some of you seem to come from this angle of "If only people were as educated as I am, then they'd capable of understanding what I understand and more would be on the same page." To me that's as silly as someone telling you that you are "deceived" in all your beliefs because you don't believe in God.

I have a feeling that you believe a world view can and should only be shaped after some form of higher education before it can be considered "valid." To me, however, having such a fundamentally diametrically opposite view on just this alone is where our political arguments already start and end. It's also this realization that's lead to my growing inactivity in the Vs forum.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='mykevermin']But that's not really getting behind a staunch, draconian (in your words) anti-immigration policy. That's getting behind a staunch anti-immigration policy that has the ability to bat 1.000 in terms of identifying and isolating those who are in the country in violation of the law (as well as bat 1.000 in not detaining those who are not violating the law). You know full well that such is an impossible, unattainable goal. I do believe that you support a strong anti-immigration policy. And please understand that I'm not delighted that your family dealt with this. I'm not giddy with schadenfreude delight, in case you might suspect I am. I think these policies, which ignore concepts of probable cause, are antithetical to concepts of justice rooted in the history of the United States.

But I simply point out that there is no policy that does not, unfortunately, snag a few dolphins with the tuna fish, so to speak. So I'm not sure you're as hardline as you claim to be regarding anti-immigration policies.




Obama is indeed a moderate Republican-leaning Democrat, and nowhere near as liberal as I want or expected him to be. You are absolutely right about that.[/QUOTE]Exactly, it's not like the illegals are wearing signs to let us know they're illegal. Any measure, no matter how loose or strict, is going to cause some trouble for completely innocent people. It sucks when it happens, and I'd be pissed too if it happened to me or family, but it happens. If we stepped it up to catch more people it's only going to make it more difficult for everyone, even the innocent. No different than airport security is now.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']The sad part is that simply being for less government also gets me pigeonhold as some Sean Hannity listening "great american" that hates minorities, staples flags to my vehicle, and loves wars because they are against brown people - by many in these forums.[/QUOTE]

I don't know - I think alot more people are for small govt then you think. The social programs that are generally advocated for wouldn't cost much at all. Let's put aside healthcare for the other thread.

Whatever your beliefs on govt size, even with a small govt we are going to need a competent military and that comes with a sizable price tag. So it's all about who should pay what.

For me, that's where the disconnect occurs. I think the rich should pay in more because they have benefited more from the services provided by govt and frankly because they can afford to. I also think the legalized yet fraudulent actions of Wall Street and the executive class, including their corporatist collusion with key politicians, will eventually send this country into decline.

I also agree with that guy who said the debt isn't such a big deal as it's being made out to be - IE when your patient is dying on the table you don't lecture him about eating healthy.
 
TBH OP, it sounds like the immigration control you really want is "Check on the brown people, they may be up to something".

You might want to check on that green-card thing as well, I think non-citizens (like myself) are supposed to carry ID at all times, I don't know if we're supposed to carry our green-cards at all times.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']
I have a feeling that you believe a world view can and should only be shaped after some form of higher education before it can be considered "valid." To me, however, having such a fundamentally diametrically opposite view on just this alone is where our political arguments already start and end. It's also this realization that's lead to my growing inactivity in the Vs forum.[/QUOTE]


I don't think higher education is required. What is required is critically thinking about every issue, and basing one's world view on facts as much as possible. I just think few people who lack higher education do that as they surround themselves with like minded people, only read things that fit their world view (if they read at all) etc.

And to be fair, higher education is no panacea on that front. The majority of people are just doing the minimum and graduating with C to low B averages and not really gaining much from the experience intellectually anyway. One has to fully engage in the experience to gain that.

But yes, we have very different world views etc. I don't have much regard for people who's world view is based solely on values, beliefs, religion etc. Those types of things don't lend themselves to working to bring about the greatest good for the greatest number of people in the world. Those things lend themselves to wanting to shape the world to fit one's own belief system with little regard for what is best for the greatest number of people.

Looking at things more critically and looking at the facts of the impact of policies etc. is much more conducive to figuring out what things work to lead to a a more utilitarian society as people can support policies that they dislike based on their values because they can objectively see that society is better of with it than without it and so on.
 
[quote name='benjamouth']TBH OP, it sounds like the immigration control you really want is "Check on the brown people, they may be up to something".[/quote]

I am not sure how you draw that conclusion. I already stated that nobody should be "carded" outside the border or a job application without suspicion of a crime. Being brown isn't a crime.

You might want to check on that green-card thing as well, I think non-citizens (like myself) are supposed to carry ID at all times, I don't know if we're supposed to carry our green-cards at all times.
Click to expand...

You are correct. After it happened I did the research. The law specifically says you must carry your green card with you at all times. What makes this funny is that the immigration officer that granted my wife her green card specifically warned her to not carry it with her and to keep it in a safe place.

If you take the law literally though, all those sports stars in the NBA etc are always in violation in the law while on the court, unless their green cards are up their rectums.

It's another thing that needs to be changed with immigration. Nobody wants to carry around something every day that costs $400 and 3-4 months to replace if lost or stolen. My wife already lost her green card and had it replaced earlier this year.... Yeah, we'll continue violating that law.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']If you take the law literally though, all those sports stars in the NBA etc are always in violation in the law while on the court, unless their green cards are up their rectums.[/quote]

Really stretching here, in more than one figurative manner.

It's another thing that needs to be changed with immigration. Nobody wants to carry around something every day that costs $400 and 3-4 months to replace if lost or stolen. My wife already lost her green card and had it replaced earlier this year.... Yeah, we'll continue violating that law.
Click to expand...

How large are these green cards? I hate having to carry about my driver's license all the time, and can go to jail if I get stopped without it, or not be able to order a martini at the Pimento Grove. I'm not saying they are similar, since I have no clue how laborious it must be to keep this sort of thing on you.

Aside: I've found women especially have a big problem with keeping these kinds of things on them, EVEN the more innocuous stuff like a license.
 
op-
you make a strong argument why there should be no border control for immigration. There should be no quota laws, no barriers of human capital, no harassment and a clearer interpretation of the 14th amendment.
The very idea of illegal immigration makes a mockery of our nation's origins, our citizenships origins, and one of our greatest national monuments, the Statue of Liberty. It further highlights the sad irony with which our nation has treated native americans, breeds anger and malice, perpetuates false prejudices and destroys billions of dollars that have a myriad better uses.
Even if criminalizing immigration did not misconstrue basic economic theory, such policy is a sad reminder of our country's dubious relationship with freedom.
 
[quote name='Strell']
How large are these green cards? I hate having to carry about my driver's license all the time, and can go to jail if I get stopped without it, or not be able to order a martini at the Pimento Grove. I'm not saying they are similar, since I have no clue how laborious it must be to keep this sort of thing on you.
[/QUOTE]

Pretty sure it's just a wallet sized card.

The issue isn't "lugging it around" it's that it's costly to replace and takes more time to get a new one. Where as a drivers license you can just go to the DMV and get a new one that visit for $15-20 or whatever.

There's really no reason to require those to be carried around. A driver's licenses/state photo ID should be sufficient. The green card should be like the SS card--only need to bring it with you when filling out employment paperwork etc. where residency status legally matters.
 
I guess I relegate it down to "this isn't your country, you play by the country's rules," and when you've got some sizable portion of the general populace calling for legally-backed-flair, I can't figure out how I'm supposed to really argue against it. I'm not disagreeing that - given the cost - that there's a good strong reason to NOT carry it on you, because that's definitely valid, for the same reason I don't haul my SS card around.

This just sounds like one of those problems that doesn't have a solution until everyone actually gets more intelligent as a whole, and we don't have idiots running our checkpoints and a political platform that drums up "THEM FURRINERS" rhetoric.
 
Well it's also redundant. You have to be here legally (or have good fake documents!) to get a driver's license or state photo ID.

So why also make them carry their green card or passport with working visa etc?
 
How long does it take to get a license or a photo ID after you get here with your green card? Do either of those label you as a non-citizen? I'm obviously oblivious to this.
 
As long as you have legal documentation--be it a green card, student visa, working visa etc. you should be able to go get a driver's license as far as I know.

I'm sure things vary by state, but I don't recall my girlfriend's license in either of the two states we lived in saying anything about being a non-citizen (she was on a student visa, then a working visa before she moved back). But it doesn't really need to. Just having one shows you're here legally (or had good fake papers) and residency status is otherwise not relevant for anything other than employment and leaving/re-entering the country when traveling.
 
Yeah it's the same size as a drivers license. But as Strell points out, women lose their purses/wallets all the time. If you lose your green card you have to:

1) File a police report
2) Fill out a mountain of paperwork
3) Pay $370
4) Drive long distances to your closest office for an interview
5) Wait at least 3 months

And while you wait for it to be replaced, you can't leave the country.

It really is silly when any law enforcement can look up on their computer if you are legal or not with a fingerprint.

Fortunately, from my research, nobody really gets arrested or deported for not having a green card on them. Bored border patrol employees just love to use it as a point of harassment.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']You are correct. After it happened I did the research. The law specifically says you must carry your green card with you at all times.[/QUOTE]

Which, like it or hate it, the fact that the Arizona bill also required individuals to carry their green card at all times was a major point of contention against the bill. This objection, of course, makes little sense, as they're already legally required to carry the card.

Question, though - if the /system/ was fixed in such a way that getting a replacement green card wasn't so expensive/time consuming, would you then be for some law that would require non-citizens to carry the green card (or some similar form of ID showing they are here legally?)
 
[quote name='UncleBob']
Question, though - if the /system/ was fixed in such a way that getting a replacement green card wasn't so expensive/time consuming, would you then be for some law that would require non-citizens to carry the green card (or some similar form of ID showing they are here legally?)[/QUOTE]

I don't really see how that would help. All someone has to do is claim to be a citizen and they have to be left alone - so the system is beyond broken anyway.

Unless you card EVERYONE, I don't really see the point. It's like the police randomly stopping people and asking if they are criminals - it's pointless.

It's also a slippery slope. If we get addicted to forcing immigrants to carry green cards, it's a forgone conclusion that we'll all eventually have to carry proof of our legal status to be here.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I don't really see how that would help. All someone has to do is claim to be a citizen and they have to be left alone - so the system is beyond broken anyway.

Unless you card EVERYONE, I don't really see the point. It's like the police randomly stopping people and asking if they are criminals - it's pointless.

It's also a slippery slope. If we get addicted to forcing immigrants to carry green cards, it's a forgone conclusion that we'll all eventually have to carry proof of our legal status to be here.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. Far too close to a "papers, please" law for my tastes (does that make me sound like a conspiracy nut?). Just curious, as your main objection seemed to be the cost/time involved in replacing it.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Agreed. Far too close to a "papers, please" law for my tastes (does that make me sound like a conspiracy nut?). Just curious, as your main objection seemed to be the cost/time involved in replacing it.[/QUOTE]

That's part of my concern, yes. But really a green card should be (and for all intents and purposes IS) just for reentry into the country and getting a job.
 
Agree with that. Getting a job and leaving/re-entering the country are the main times legality of residence should be questioned. No reason to need papers on you other than at times you have to show them for those kinds of reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top