I dont think anyone thinks illegal immigration is fine. Anyone with half a brain realizes that you cant run a country and have open borders.

I do have empathy for alot of those trying to enter the US illegally.

The fact that innocents die on the regular because of a religious ideology is disgusting. The fact that you appologist continually ignore it to advance an agenda of righteousness is also disgusting

2017.03.08 Kabul Afghanistan: 30 killed, 70 injured. At least thirty people at a hospital are massacred by Islamists disguised as doctors following a suicide blast.

Thats just one of the 14 attacks since the first of this month....103 total killed so far in March

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/w...tack.html?_r=0


But like 13ball says, whats it matter , they just killing themselves, dont affect us no way...

I didn't answer the question, so how could you have seen a position I am appearing to take which is determined from an answer to the question.

Look, if you can't justify the proportion of emphasis on criminality in the topic, maybe that is an area to ask yourself questions about.

That's a good argument for allowing people to immigrate to escape much more dangerous places.

Spank, feel free to talk about other aspects of immigration. I was actually planning on shifting my focus to the economic aspect of immigration since I have already made my point about the criminal consequences of a generous immigration policy for asylum seekers from third world countries.

To make one thing clear. I am also pro immigration . If we had a system similar to your Green card immigration, I would be all for it.

Asylum seekers are more efficiently helped in their own countries with the means we have available.

I'm against people killing each other. You want to blame innocent people for the actions of people that look like them.

So we should never let in a Muslim person? Your logic does not follow unless you think all Muslims are terrorists, which would be a stupid and bigoted thing to believe.

You are either lying about what I said or you didn't read it properly. Try again to be honest and/or smart.

By the way, I would snap accept a random Muslim for sovereign citizen trade. I'd go 10 to 1. Hell, 100 to 1. We take 100 random Muslims and kick out one sovcit. That would be a sweet, sweet deal.

Oh, man I am free. There are lots of testimonials from immigrants and refugees about their experiences as well as testimonials from hosts and helpers. The unanswered questions surrounding criminality are just bound to pop up when the narrative about immigrants and refugees warrants it- and while people are paying attention.

Agreed, badwookie, that you did not answer the question. That is one thing. Another thing, while related, is what to make of your statement above.

As I have said, it appears that you are stating that no matter how high the rape number is in the existing population, you would never support a negative immigration policy imposed on those seeking to immigrate from the origin country. Am I understanding your statement?

Regarding justifying a focus on criminality in this immigration discussion, I believe preventing future crimes is the governments primary job. Immigration policy should be based on an attempt to prevent future crimes.

Really?

A lot of liberals seem to think illegal immigration is fine, or not a problem.

I have empathy as well, but having loose borders results in bad dudes (see the link I quoted) coming in as well as "deserving" ones.

Yes really. I Have seen people be supportive of illegals but iv not seen anyone say we should have an open border policy.

I dont begrudge an illegal from entering the US and trying to find work. Whilst I dont begrudge him or her coming here I am realistic enough to realize that an open border policy doesn't work and you cant just let them in. Strict Border controls are necessary.

The gap between the elite and the poor is much more concerning than illegal immigrants to me. Wages havent risen with inflation and more and more people are struggling. I dont think someone who works a full time job should be living on or just above the breadline.

Your free to say that appears. What appeared is the description of the existence of real people and their innocence.

Your justification sounds like the minority report, no wonder the innocent people who maybe or know of minorities, refugees, and immigrants have questions about that approach.

I get it is a future social wellness type position. That 'if we can stop the criminals before, society will be better'. I've done prevention before.

But, that's an awkward position of withholding protection to innocent people with a motive to preventing speculative future harm of innocent people.

And determined criminals are going to try show anyway right? Withholding protection of innocent people does nothing to stop anybody from doing anything to get anywhere.

BTW Is it the host country that is going to "make" new-coming innocent people violent criminals, in the future?

How much does suspicion of immigrants and refugees contribute to the host nation's present and future social wellness? Have you seen what bigotry and prejudice can do to a people?

Sure, it sounds like the minority report, but it's also different from the minority report in many ways. Key ways.

As I said before, we are talking about prohibiting entry into a country, not criminal punishment.

Illegal immigration is just one instance of the problem of poverty. Imagine a person so desperate that they would choose to live in a country where they'd work all the time, for illegally low pay, well below the poverty line and possibly get deported while dropping off your kid at school. This applies to all people, citizens and immigrants alike, living under that line, and the problem is that they are stuck there for generations, rather than there are some immigrants living among them. If you remove impoverished aliens from that population, you are not really improving the problem of poverty. Immigrants pay taxes too, so funding for healthcare and education is not the issue. It's clearly a resource allocation issue at that point.

It's withholding something available from people who have asked for it or are seeking it with questionable reasons why.

Can y'all use immigrant future crime math to predict upcoming winning lottery numbers? Asking for an out-of-town friend.

Agreed.

Now I think we may have found our point of disagreement (a point to agree to disagree). I think it is ok to withhold immigration from someone to protect the country, even if on a statistical basis.

Edit:
meant to be a response to:

"It's withholding something available from people who have asked for it or are seeking it with questionable reasons why."

What if the stats say you are wrong?

Then I would change my position. What are you saying the stats show?

Well, it doesn't matter while the justification for an action on innocent people is other criminal people. The stats could model ideal approximate reality of future crime and the innocent folks still have no reason to participate in being handed any justifications based on criminality. It's simply the nature of being innocent.

The beauty of preventing speculative future crime is you never can prove you actually prevented any particular single crime. Since crime that actually happens is not a speculation. And, because it's not technically criminal, because it's the borders, none of that criminal stuff matters anyway, except the criminality the stats suggest.

What a bunch of **** just to flee a war zone huh?

I don't know the stats on ethnicity of rape victims, I do however know that most victims of rape are unknown to the rapist in Sweden.

I have seen a list of names convicted for participating in a group-rape from the last 20 years or so. The over-representation of foreign sounding names in that list dwarfs the Danish chart I posted. There has only been a handful of recorded cases of group-rape with native Swedish perpetrators and an unknown victim. The crime is so unusual among natives that it can be without exaggerating be called an imported category of crime.

Doesn't really address my point though.

That point is, "how do you stop the bad dudes coming in?"

Aside from the fact that Ronald Reagan's illegal wars in Central America, the drug war, mass incarceration and the streets of Los Angeles created MS-13 which emigrated from the US to El Salvador, it's better that they are here where we have awesome police than there where they would kill more innocent people.

Yes, it's tragic that anyone got killed, but shocking as this may sound, a Salvadoran's life is worth as much as an American's.

According to this article (http://www.news.com.au/national/crim...ea22c8ef6f018b) the gang originated in El Salvador and came to the US, not the other way around.

So you think they are not killing people in El Salvador as well? Read the article. You would rather have them killing people in both countries? Using your logic we may as well let ISIS come in too, because the US has better police. LOL

By the way, what makes you think I value an American's life higher than a Salvadorans? That's a false and insulting accusation.

If you don't value Salvadoran lives less, why do you want these killers in El Salvador?

Try different sources. MS-13 originated in Los Angeles.