yes I am, it's slighted that uses "crazy" to describe people who want to "change history".

ius soli made sense when there was a lot of unused land in an agricultural society, and no welfare state.

which is why most new world countries have it, and almost no old world countries have it

once you become industrial, then post industrial, most people live in urban settings and housing is very scarce, and you have a multitude of forma of welfare, basically all the rationales for ius soli disappeared and other ways to grant citizenship make more sense.

In europe recently there is some talk about "ius cultura", some approach that would take into account school years in the country for naturalization, including higher education. some European countries have a version of that (as part of naturalization laws, not in the constitution though).

in makes much more sense to give citizenship to a foreign born who does 4 or 6 years of college in your country than to the son of illegals who entered the country when the mother was pregnant , that for sure

Huh? I didn't say anything about citizenship. I was responding to your post about the second amendment and how former SC justice Stevens suggested repealing it.

Try read why we were talking about 2a repeal

Whatever, it still has nothing to do with my comment.

Particularly bad that you cited Republican justice Stevens as an example of a Democrat doing something you didn't like.

read again, it wasn't an example of something I don't like. and Stevens was a democrat hero, it doesn't matter if you start republican, at that point he was 100% on the left

Before the 1980s (and to a lesser extent for the 20 years after that) there were conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans. It still makes no sense to take someone who was a registered Republican and call him a Democrat.

How is this relevant? Why are you separating the native-born crime rate by race? It seems to imply that white Americans are the real Americans, and we should use their crime rate for comparison. But that would be an absurdly racist thing to say, so please help explain what I'm not understanding properly.

I think the GOP should have taken the border deal and Trump should have run on the Ill make it tougher as well.

So I would acknowledge the GOP is playing political games as is the Democrats with the border issue

All natives are natives.

But if natives in aggregate are terrible beyond belief at something (like native americans are for violent crime rates compared to most other countries in the first world), being a bit better than them at it doesn't automatically qualify as good immigration, especially if the people claiming they don't want them in the country live in areas where the crime rate is dramatically lower than the american average.

Remember the claim by slighted and other is that it is a lie that illegals create crime problems in the USA. The ratio being their crime rate is allegedly lower than native crime rates.

Even if we take that as true (and it's very hard to estimate illegal crime rates because to begin with you don't know how many there are), think of the very basic example: illegals coming and working in fields and living in rural/semirural/towns will INCREASE the local crime rate , because how much downtown crime happens in minority neighboorhoods in major urban areas (where it is concentrated) doesn't matter at all, for the residents of those locations.

Morevoer the exceptional black crime rate is mostly because of black on black crimes. So if you aren't black, and/or you don't live in black majority areas, it isn't a significant personal cost.

If illegals are more spread out than blacks, their arrival will decrease crime rates significantly (as defined per 100k ppl) in black majority areas, but will increase crime rates everywhere else they go and live, validating the perception of people living in low crime areas, that illegals increase crime rates.

I don't understand why imply there is any racism in this. "only white americans are real americans" as an implication of what i wrote i would consider a personal insult to report if you weren't a mod tbh. Especially because i specifically wrote asian crime rates are low as well (and as we all know, asian crime rates are lower than white crime rates in the USA). I write asian as well and you only read white, why?

And btw it applies to latinos and poor, uneducated whites as well to a lesser extent.

The people decrying illegal immigration as a crime problem don't live in the areas with high native crime rates usually.

EDIT: to avoid misunderstanding, native american above is "people born in the USA" not tribal natives