The place where I live, Prince William County in Virginia, just passed a very tough set of laws against illegal immigration. The county is being watched by other areas in the metropolitan Washington region, and probably cities and states across the country.

Pr. William Enacts Resolution Aimed at Illegal Immigrants, Washington Post, Oct. 17, 2007:

Personally, I would prefer something from the federal government, rather than a variety of different measures from states, cities, and counties. I also think that Prince William may have gone too far, and it will come back to bite them.

__________________
Curly

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.

- Hermann Goering

In my opinion, there can't be enough legislation, at the State and Federal levels, for illegal immigration. There's no such thing as going "too far"...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":






Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

So, lynching illegal immigrants would be OK?

What we really need is a comprehensive national policy that effectively closes the borders to all but legal, well-documented immigrants. But the powers-that-be would rather fight over the people already here than to stop the flow. Let's stop the flow, and then deal with what is already here.

It's been 6 years since 9/11, and still our borders are like Swiss cheese.

__________________
Curly

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.

- Hermann Goering

Absolutely!

Arguing about immigration "reform" when we have absolutely no control over who enters the country is like debating the orchestral program on the Titanic.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

Comments as tremendously retarded as that one warrant zero comment.

Lynching them would suggest that they're here, and they've been caught. At that point, ship their sorry asses home.

But, to put this into perspective for you, I would support armed troops along our borders...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":






Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

And yet, you commented.

To refresh your memory, you said "There's no such thing as going "too far"..." I would guess that, from your most recent statement, that your earlier statement was an exaggeration - would that be fair?

Yes, depending on what set of numbers you believe, 12 million or more illegal immigrants are here in the U.S. And the article I referenced stated that the Prince William police would "... check the immigration status of anyone accused of breaking the law if the officer suspects that person is an illegal immigrant." So yes, they would be caught. But at least we know that lynching is going too far.

Agreed - I see no point in unarmed border guards.

__________________
Curly

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.

- Hermann Goering

I'm not talking about arming border guards. I'm talking about stationing the military along the border to agressively defend it...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":






Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Unless the employers of illegals are the target of substantial fines, any anti-illegal immigrant policy is just useless political pandering or posturing.

I agree that employers should be fined, if not shut down. But we shouldn't wait for that to happen in order to take more severe measures at the border...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":






Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

All the "severe" measures at the border aren't worth squat. The border is the not the 'cause' of the problem - it is symptiomatic of the problem. Treating symtoms is just political posturing.

If you actually address the employer issue, you can ignore the massive cost of the various 'border solutions'.

In other words, shut down one border and they will just come in another way because the demand and the job reward for them is still there.

US experience dealing with the importation of illegal drugs is quite illustrative here. Militarizing the border as a policy solution just doesn't work.

Militarizing the border is but one step...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":






Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

That's right - we need to Invade Mexico!

Exactly!


It's illustrative that proper border control is not the simple feat many protray it as, but there are also a number of differences - It's hard to smuggle of balloon of Mexicans in in your bowels; you can't hide an immigrant in the bumper of a car; you can't generally reduce risk of discovery by hiding your wetbacks in some sort of hermetically sealed container. Once here, illegal immigrants don't usually disappear up somebody's nose; Mexicans aren't usually flushed down the toilet if the authorities are seen approaching; and undocumented workers aren't usually burnt as completely as possible before the ash is tossed in the trash or out the window. All these factors make control comparatively easier.

On the flip side, you're correct that the only way to Really stop the inflow is to reduce the differential in living and working conditions, preferably by improving Mexico. I won't pretend to know how to clean up such ingrained corruption, but ending our war on people's rights and on drugs would certainly help! I doubt that would be sufficient, tho.


And jumping back to the OP, I support all the tactics mentioned.

__________________
Today's forecast: Government corruption.

Tomorrow's forecast: 100% chance of more 'politics as usual'

Maybe it's finally time to vote Libertarian

To liberals, "getting tough on immigration" means making them wait in line to get their welfare/food stamps/free health care and discounted college tuition.

__________________

Why does it go to far?

__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt

The really big problem is with the "sanctuary cities" but there are too many people in the system (I mean directly in the government) that are silently pro-illegals. People that are in the system and helping illegals with the system to get social services. In the sanctuary cities there's a lot of people helping them.


Sanctuary city - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Washington, D.C
New York City
Los Angeles
Chicago
San Francisco
San Diego
Salt Lake City
Phoenix
Dallas
Houston
Austin
Detroit
Jersey City
Minneapolis
Miami
Denver
Baltimore
Seattle
Portland
Oregon
New Haven
Connecticut
Portland
Maine

All these cities have people working within the system that are very pro-mexicano to help illegals get on social services which you have to unfairly pay for in taxes. Clearly the government and the INS is not doing their job. They have to filter out those who are helping them. The INS has to crack down on businesses in these cities. Follow the trail of the illegal. They go from the Indian Reservations (state reserved land) to the safe houses and then to the Sanctuary Cities. From there they start sucking the system.