Illegal Immigration

[Lek]

I've heard all the criticism and condemnation of those who favor enforcing immigration law in the US.  I believe if we must have restrictions on immigration and we must enforce these laws the same as any laws.  If the laws are bad, then we need to come up with laws that are appropriate for the situation.  There's been plenty of Republican bashing here over the desire of many of them for stricter enforcement of immigration laws.  Like most of you I realize the humanitarian issues involved and have to desire to help those who are in need.  Frankly, I don't know how we can serve everyone's needs through immigration.  

I haven't been able to get a clear picture of Obama's immigration policy or also what Clinton was planning to do in that regard.  I don't know of any specific plan that Clinton put out in this regard; just a bunch of lip service as far as I can tell.

My question is, if strict enforcement of immigration laws is a terrible, what is the answer?  Should we open up our borders for everybody?  Should we just keep turning our heads?  How about sanctuary cities?  I see American citizens living in danger from their own neighbors while the mayor spends his time protecting illegal immigrant criminals.  What are your ideas for an immigration policy that is fair to needy prospective immigrants and current American citizens alike?

[abaris]

 

I haven't been able to get a clear picture of Obama's immigration policy or also what Clinton was planning to do in that regard.  I don't know of any specific plan that Clinton put out in this regard; just a bunch of lip service as far as I can tell.

Obama deported about 2,5 million illegals. Of course he doesn't get credit for that by the right. Btw, it's the same number Trump uses to brag about.

Also Immigrant doesn't equal refugee. You didn't say anything about refugees in your post, but many people tend to throw both groups together to create some moot talking point.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The conflation of illegal immigrants and criminals doesn't comport with my extensive experience with the former group and limited experience with the latter.

The vast majority of illegal aliens I've know have been hard-working and law-abiding. The vast majority of criminals I've known have been native-born Americans, by definition citizens.

[Jesster]

While I am against people being here illegally, just throwing them out doesn't address the problem. Pointing fingers at them for being such terrible people (which is statistically false, as Thump pointed out) also avoids actually sorting things out properly.

Personally, I am not against them being here at all. While I could join in and tell them to "just do things legally", I'm also aware of the complications that usually involves for anyone not wealthy and/or connected. I think a lot of problems could be solved if we made the safe, legal method simpler and more accessible.

Also, as abaris pointed out, immigrants and refugees are not the same and should not be handled the same.

[c172]

I'm against breaking the law, in general, but I admit, I find U.S. immigration kind of confusing. If immigration were more straightforward, I'd have a better idea of how I want the U.S. to move forward.

[Minimalist]

The Democrats have favored a plan which calls for a pathway to citizenship.

The republicunts are enormously two-faced on the issue.

On the one hand you have the business interests who profit from cheap labor and, in spite of all the bullshit that emanates from party headquarters want to continue to do so.

Then you have the racist wing of the party which thinks that any non-white xtian should be kept out or thrown out if here.  

Bush learned all about this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-...-and-over/

* 2004-2007: You could say that talk radio killed President Bush's attempts at immigration reform. He hoped to appeal to both business owners and Hispanic voters with a comprehensive overhaul, but he was stymied by his own party.
Bush began pushing for a guest worker program in 2004. An early attempt by Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) died a quick death, in part because of election year politics. But even the prospect of reform stirred up a backlash from conservatives, in particular Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.). Tancredo appeared on talk radio constantly warning of the dangers posed by illegal immigration.
Bush allies attempted to fight back with a corporate-funded PR campaign, but business leaders wouldn't donate, concerned that conservatives would pressure Bush into signing something that actually made it harder to hire from overseas. In fact, then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) pushed for an enforcement-only approach. The comprehensive bill introduced by Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) in 2005 could not be reconciled with a tough enforcement-only House version that sparked protests.
Bush tried again in 2007, crafting a compromise that allowed a path to legal status for current immigrants and a new temporary worker program, contingent on stricter border security and employer crackdowns. The legislation resembled a conservative approach offered by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) in 2005.
"We misread" the situation, said Frank Sharry of America's Voice. Advocates thought that with Democrats in control of Congress, Bush would try a moderate approach again and succeed. Instead, "Republicans were beginning what we might call the advent of the tea party -- they started to lurch to the right, they wanted to give Bush a bloody nose, the conservative media mobilized."

Now along comes the Orange Turd with his absurd "wall" and racists everywhere cheer madly.

[The Grand Nudger]

I've heard all the criticism and condemnation of those who favor enforcing immigration law in the US.  I believe if we must have restrictions on immigration and we must enforce these laws the same as any laws.  If the laws are bad, then we need to come up with laws that are appropriate for the situation.  There's been plenty of Republican bashing here over the desire of many of them for stricter enforcement of immigration laws.  Like most of you I realize the humanitarian issues involved and have to desire to help those who are in need.  Frankly, I don't know how we can serve everyone's needs through immigration.  

We're the ones in need.  We need people to do those jobs...that's the entire impetus for emigration to the us, legal or illegal.  We serve our own needs through immigration, not everyone's, we don't give a shit about everyone, we don't even give a shit about all of "us".  

I haven't been able to get a clear picture of Obama's immigration policy or also what Clinton was planning to do in that regard.  I don't know of any specific plan that Clinton put out in this regard; just a bunch of lip service as far as I can tell.

Doesn't matter now, does it?  

My question is, if strict enforcement of immigration laws is a terrible, what is the answer?  Should we open up our borders for everybody?  Should we just keep turning our heads?  How about sanctuary cities?  I see American citizens living in danger from their own neighbors while the mayor spends his time protecting illegal immigrant criminals.  What are your ideas for an immigration policy that is fair to needy prospective immigrants and current American citizens alike?

You see american citizens living in danger from other americans.  What's that got to do with immigrants?

[paulpablo]

I've heard all the criticism and condemnation of those who favor enforcing immigration law in the US.  I believe if we must have restrictions on immigration and we must enforce these laws the same as any laws.  If the laws are bad, then we need to come up with laws that are appropriate for the situation.  There's been plenty of Republican bashing here over the desire of many of them for stricter enforcement of immigration laws.  Like most of you I realize the humanitarian issues involved and have to desire to help those who are in need.  Frankly, I don't know how we can serve everyone's needs through immigration.  

I haven't been able to get a clear picture of Obama's immigration policy or also what Clinton was planning to do in that regard.  I don't know of any specific plan that Clinton put out in this regard; just a bunch of lip service as far as I can tell.

My question is, if strict enforcement of immigration laws is a terrible, what is the answer?  Should we open up our borders for everybody?  Should we just keep turning our heads?  How about sanctuary cities?  I see American citizens living in danger from their own neighbors while the mayor spends his time protecting illegal immigrant criminals.  What are your ideas for an immigration policy that is fair to needy prospective immigrants and current American citizens alike?

In relation to enforcing the immigration law the same as any other law, that statement is slightly meaningless because there are plenty of laws you can probably break right in front of police officers and get away with.  Speed limits for example or literring. 

But I understand what you're trying to say and yes I think it's reasonable to enforce the laws of immigration more so than the police might when dealing with speeding a few miles per hour over the limit, minor literring or marijuana posession.  At least in the UK from my experience those crimes are dealt with either not at all or very leniantly.

[The Grand Nudger]

Trouble, ofc, is that enforcing immigration laws invariably means pulling over all the brown people and asking for their papers.