Of course immigrants should follow the legal process and illegal immigrants are called that rightfully so.
If you want more people to immigrate you should make the legal pathways more accessible, not tolerate the illegal ones.
If you want more people to immigrate you should make the legal pathways more accessible, not tolerate the illegal ones.
How do you do this in a way that preserves the leverage that business owners have over undocumented workers? Those people form a pretty strong coalition with the people who think all immigration is bad for ... other reasons, so this is pretty much a non-starter politically.
Sounds like the Democratic party really wants to exploit those undocumented workers in US
The 8th amendment to the US constitution: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
That is, quite explicitly, the constitution saying that there are limits to what we will do to punish someone.
Fuck off with your unserious nonsense.
I can understand your frustration. It is quite understandable when you are losing an argument.
You are losing the argument because all your responses are about "punishment". I am talking about "stopping an illegal state of affairs from going on". Even my comment that you quote, is about that. You are making the argument about "punishment", because that is something you can outrage on. It would quite pathetic display you are putting, if it was not so amusing for me.
You might even call it a hobby!
The 8th amendment also applies to what we do to stop what you refer to as an illegal state of affairs.
Using the "someone in your house" example you've used a few times, would you be OK with the Air Force dropping a bunker buster bomb on your house, killing the home invader(s), and you, and your family/pets/etc, and destroying your stuff, and the same for several neighboring homes?
Or do you think that might be an excessive enforcement mechanism?
Thanks for confirming it.
>I enjoy telling unserious people like you to fuck off :D
Yes, same here, but I use reason, not bad words. And thus I have sent of dozens of "Fuck off"s to you in the time we were talking...And I don't know what you mean by "unserious people". I just like picking apart shallow reasoning..
>would you be OK with the Air Force dropping a bunker buster bomb on your house, killing the home invader(s), and you, and your family/pets/etc, and destroying your stuff, and the same for several neighboring homes?..
No, but no one is doing that as far as I can see. And only the bare minimum is done to correct illegal status, namely sending those people to their native places. If you have a lesser action to correct it, do share.
P.S. When has anyone ever responded to the the sanctimonious phrase "be better" by actually "being better". You don't want them to "be better", you just want to try and shame them into adopting your ideological views.
How does, e.g., deporting a person who was illegally brought to this country at the age of 2, back to their “home” help their home country? What about the Haitian who came here legally under TPS, then, after Trump ended TPS, is now “illegal”? The Dept of State’s own website currently says of Haiti: “Do not travel to Haiti due to the risk of crime, kidnapping, terrorism, unrest, and limited health care.” How is deporting people back there helpful?
Then say someone is cruel for not allowing more illegal migrants to stay in US (to be exploited I guess???)
IF better immigration laws are not possible because people want to exploit illegal migrants THEN why would it be considered cruel for someone to oppose illegal migration?