Sorry American liberals but your stance on sanctuary cities is dumb

Jail. Why? What you got?

 

Put republicans and democrats in jail? Ha. When pigs fly. The truth is the republicans don't actually want he illegal problem to go away.

 

Maybe you should ask the republicans on this board what they think on the matter.

 

I'd rather ask Paul Ryan, Pence and Trump.

 

People, particularly blacks, have literally sued because illegals are hired over them. It is false that Americans won't do that kind of work. Rather, they can get away with things with illegals they can't otherwise, such as underpaying them, not having to deal with injuries, avoiding overtime and so forth.

 

lol............ nice sig. This makes a good point, incarceration isn't really a deterrent. But that's a whole 'nother thread.

 

That makes no sense to me. It's just a phone call.
When police arrest somebody they NEED to know who it is they've arrested. In the case of illegals that's not always so easy. They are spending more manpower attempting to find someone's identity where they could simply turn the case over to the Feds and let them do the work.
I'm not buying your arguement a phone call to ice is a budget breaker.

 

I think it's mostly that Democrats don't see a major problem with job quantity as a result of the illegal immigration issue. Unemployment is pretty low right now, even with all these illegals in the country, and there are plenty of jobs to be had. 300,000 in Trump's beloved manufacturing industry, for one.

Democrats compare this cost, the cost of lack of job availability, to the social / emotional / economic cost of making a concerted effort to kick all of the illegals out of the country, and they view the latter as far greater.

From a purely economic, heartless perspective, yes, that's dumb. From a human perspective, it isn't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

No it would not. As long as the playing field is equal, many businesses would applaud it. Years of immigration law being ignored is the culprit. And that's a pox on both parties.

 

We should have buses all along the Southern border. Anyone from Mexico, Central and S. America coming across the border is given a choice:

1. A free one-way bus ride to Canada, but Canada is a wonderful country that welcomes everyone or
2. A free one-way ride to an airport for a free one-way ticket the EU country of their choice to live with those wonderfully enlightened, generous Europeans.

To decent, every illegal imprisoned upon release should be taken to the Canadian border and released. Canada would LOVE to have them.

 

Their stance on a lot of things is dumb!

 

Yes. Besides which California is much too big a state. Those living in the northern portion of the state have very little in common with those living in Orange county, and those in San Francisco have very little in common with a farmer in the central valley. Sorry, but this state should be broken up. It's not gonna happen (the less populated regions are held hostage by the large cities), but it should.

Agreed. Immigration is (and should be) a federal function. It's time to reign in the stupidity.

Well, few things come to mind. First, while Canadians may cross the border, they don't tend to stay in the United States. Second, I don't know this for a fact, but I'd be willing to bet that drugs and guns passing through the Canadian border are a small fraction of what passes across the Mexican border. Finally, there's much better cooperation between American and Canadian security folks, so I don't think we have to worry so much about terrorists making their way to the U.S. by way of Canada, something which remains a concern for our southern border. There may be other factors, but those are the ones that came immediately to mind.

 

Reagan must have been a hell of a liberal to allow sanctuary cities to begin and to give amnesty to illegals...

 

You'll also see me mutter some leftist talking points, what appear to be those. Not everything these people say is necessarily right or wrong.

 

What a poor attempt at apologizing for liberal sanctuary cities.

1) It IS their job to comply with ICE and other agencies in the Federal Government in their efforts to enforce Federal law. By announcing they are not going to comply, they are breaking Federal law. They were allowed to do this with a sympathetic left-wing Democrat like Obama in office, hopefully that changes with Trump.

2) They have the budget to hold illegal immigrants for ICE and other Federal agencies. It is part of their law enforcement budget. But let's not pretend that left-wing Democrats don't do anything about illegal immigration simply because they don't have the money. They want illegal immigration because it benefits their political party and ideology.

 

Just build them a nice ~2,000-mile long tunnel from Mexico to Canada. They can get there through the tunnel any way they please. Might want to charge a toll at the gate to pay for it, though.

 

What does Canada have to do with any of this? I'm glad the trolls are bringing it up though because most of the guns used in crimes in Canada come from the United States. I wouldn't mind a crackdown on that.

 

Yep, they make a conscious effort to impede ICE. This is way different from simply not enforcing the laws themselves due to lack of authority or budget. Anyone doing this should, in fact, face charges.

 

Nor would I. Might I suggest a wall?

 

I would suggest every nation needs strong borders with bordering nations.

I live in a nation need no borders unless count the traitorous Scottish. a land locked Island. But even then. Immigrants manage to get in. Using a variety of ways.

Trump is correct with Mexico. If a Muslim immigrant can walk through the Channel Tunnel, dodging EuoStar trains. How easy can Mexican Illegals enter America?

 

That's not what "sanctuary city" means or how it applies. For example, it means the city jail will not release illegal migrants to the INS, even if the INS had specifically requested this for a specific person in jail.

 

A provision of SB 1070 requires local authorities to "contact federal immigration authorities if they develop reasonable suspicion that a person they've detained or arrested is in the country illegally."

Sanctuary cities refuse to do so. There is no costs involved. It is whether the person is released from jail back into the street or released to federal authorities.

- - - Updated - - -

<Reply to Deleted>

 

Then why ask me?

 

We have a system for allowing in migrant agri workers and have had it since at least ww2 when we needed workers during the war. After the war with industry moving over to produce our goods, americans went into those higher paying jobs and didn't go back to the fields. So we had a system in place so legal migrant workers could come in and do the agri work. Illegals were not needed, but they came anyway as soon as business would break the law and work them, due to they could pay them low wages. Illegals have depressed wages in the middle class construction jobs, in meat processing, even in a factory here in my state that made guitar amps. Under Bush Jr, ICE did a lip service bust on this amp factory and left them without workers. The next day there was a line of americans 1/4 mile long, waiting to apply for their old jobs back. I saw it in person. No national news coverage. For MSM does not want people to think illegals take jobs americans will do.

 

It has to do with foreign liberals and foreign leaders explaining how the USA should have essentially open borders. It then is reasonable to send migrants we don't allow in to their countries.

It is common for many Canadians to accuse the USA of being racist, including those who want mass illegal migration stopped. Yet Canada is a VERY white country for which their immigrant population is largely Asian with FEW Latinos, and there are few blacks in Canada compared to the USA.

No problem with Canada "cracking down" on guns coming across the border. I think we'd agree that illegal immigrants we forwarded on the EU or Canada not have a gun.