16 illegals sue Arizona rancher

[Heracles 417]

The land is being transferred to satisfy a judgment against Casey Nethercott, a member of a self-styled border-watch group who is serving a five-year prison term for firearms possession.

I thought this was what the second amendment was all about. Protecting one's country.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

if it's so bad, why do so many come here? and if it's so bad, why do so many not see a problem with illegals?

I don't know. Perhaps you can tell me why we think its so much better to be illegal than legal since... *they get so many perks.*

Its so bad... back where they come from.

hey i'm just playing along, maybe someone can tell me why they are so hot to come here if it's for a life of poverty.

because that life of poverty here in the US is better, money wise, than a life of poverty back home?

you get points for asking

that must explain why some are buying houses eh?

Buying houses,driving brand new cars,building homes in their native countries,sending cars and motorcycles back home,etc.Those "poor" people are doing well !

Is that the "average" experience, would be my question.

People get hung up on extreme cases in the media, but I kinda doubt they're typical.

[HAL 9000 96]

Why would anyone immigrate illegally if they had the legal option?

Perhaps if you were coming from somewhere so impoverished that you couldn't afford the filing fees, but that's about it. Surely...

No fees, little taxes and free medical care.

My contention here is that the vast majority of illegal immigrants to do not have a viable legal route to immigration, or otherwise do not have the means to pursue it.

If they did, I very much doubt they would opt for an illegal option. The tradeoffs are obviously not worth risk.

My question is if they can pay a "coyote" 3000 dollars or more,why can 't they just fill out the required paperwork and do it the right way ?

if it's so bad, why do so many come here? and if it's so bad, why do so many not see a problem with illegals?

I don't know. Perhaps you can tell me why we think its so much better to be illegal than legal since... *they get so many perks.*

Its so bad... back where they come from.

hey i'm just playing along, maybe someone can tell me why they are so hot to come here if it's for a life of poverty.

How do they spell releif ? w-e-l-f-a-r-e.

Welfare is sooo hot. Lets all get some and not work.

that must explain why some are buying houses eh?

Yes that's right. Some of them are. Because, ... 'that life of poverty here in the US is better, money wise, than a life of poverty back home' (see above).

Buying houses,driving brand new cars,building homes in their native countries,sending cars and motorcycles back home,etc.Those "poor" people are doing well !

Yep. And they're all doing so as a major population block. Who would've known!

[Ban Hammer 14,280]

Why would anyone immigrate illegally if they had the legal option?

Perhaps if you were coming from somewhere so impoverished that you couldn't afford the filing fees, but that's about it. Surely...

No fees, little taxes and free medical care.

My contention here is that the vast majority of illegal immigrants to do not have a viable legal route to immigration, or otherwise do not have the means to pursue it.

If they did, I very much doubt they would opt for an illegal option. The tradeoffs are obviously not worth risk.

My question is if they can pay a "coyote" 3000 dollars or more,why can 't they just fill out the required paperwork and do it the right way ?

if it's so bad, why do so many come here? and if it's so bad, why do so many not see a problem with illegals?

I don't know. Perhaps you can tell me why we think its so much better to be illegal than legal since... *they get so many perks.*

Its so bad... back where they come from.

hey i'm just playing along, maybe someone can tell me why they are so hot to come here if it's for a life of poverty.

How do they spell releif ? w-e-l-f-a-r-e.

Welfare is sooo hot. Lets all get some and not work.

that must explain why some are buying houses eh?

Yes that's right. Some of them are. Because, ... 'that life of poverty here in the US is better, money wise, than a life of poverty back home' (see above).

Buying houses,driving brand new cars,building homes in their native countries,sending cars and motorcycles back home,etc.Those "poor" people are doing well !

Yep. And they're all doing so as a major population block. Who would've known!

i know i don't have 50k in my pocket like that one guy did.

[HAL 9000 96]

I guess you should do what that guy did then.

[Ban Hammer 14,280]

I guess you should do what that guy did then.

i don't think i'd fit in too well in central america, no matter how much cash i had.

[natty bumppo 297]

I often wonder why anyone chooses to legally immigrate these days. Let's compare the two:

Legal Immigration

1. Spend tons of time apart.

2. Pay tons of money.

3. Provide proof of a relationship (and possibly get told to show more proof later on).

4. Go through the hassle of making trips to see your loved one.

5. Have to deal with Customs, which could turn you away.

6. Once here, you need to still go through a huge roll of red tape.

7. Visas can be difficult to get.

8. Open bank accounts, get credit cards and own property.

9. Get a driver's license.

10. Vote in elections.

Illegal Immigrants

1. Can be together right away.

2. No money necessary.

3. No proof necessary.

4. After crossing the border, no trips are required.

5. No Customs to deal with.

6. No red tape.

7. Visas of all kind are irrelevant.

8. Open bank accounts, get credit cards and own property.

9. Get a driver's license (or drive illegally).

10. Vote in elections (this is due to voter's registration at the DMV).

So what is the benefit to legally immigrating? With illegal immigrants demanding their "constitutional rights" every day, the line between legal and illegal quickly becomes blurred.

That's just silly. If you can do it legally, or course you will! Wait times and costs are as nothing to the benefits. Still, you did the illegal route yourselves because it was more 'convenient'? No, you did it legally because you are upright citizens. Laugh, not a lot.

um no, your crystal ball must be cloudy. it's because i'd lose my job

and those that are lame..are too tired..well, that is waht a good 30-30 is for

do you even know what a 30-30 is?

Sarcasm detector faulty Charles? My point, you did it legally because there are SIGNIFICANT benefits from the legal route and nobody in their right mind would go illegal if they have the legal option. Therefore the 'list' is meaningless rhetoric serving no one any good.

pawn it off on sarcasm when you are way off the mark

you still looking up what a 30-30 Win is?

30-30 is a tie game .... not a win

[Ban Hammer 14,280]

I often wonder why anyone chooses to legally immigrate these days. Let's compare the two:

Legal Immigration

1. Spend tons of time apart.

2. Pay tons of money.

3. Provide proof of a relationship (and possibly get told to show more proof later on).

4. Go through the hassle of making trips to see your loved one.

5. Have to deal with Customs, which could turn you away.

6. Once here, you need to still go through a huge roll of red tape.

7. Visas can be difficult to get.

8. Open bank accounts, get credit cards and own property.

9. Get a driver's license.

10. Vote in elections.

Illegal Immigrants

1. Can be together right away.

2. No money necessary.

3. No proof necessary.

4. After crossing the border, no trips are required.

5. No Customs to deal with.

6. No red tape.

7. Visas of all kind are irrelevant.

8. Open bank accounts, get credit cards and own property.

9. Get a driver's license (or drive illegally).

10. Vote in elections (this is due to voter's registration at the DMV).

So what is the benefit to legally immigrating? With illegal immigrants demanding their "constitutional rights" every day, the line between legal and illegal quickly becomes blurred.

That's just silly. If you can do it legally, or course you will! Wait times and costs are as nothing to the benefits. Still, you did the illegal route yourselves because it was more 'convenient'? No, you did it legally because you are upright citizens. Laugh, not a lot.

um no, your crystal ball must be cloudy. it's because i'd lose my job

and those that are lame..are too tired..well, that is waht a good 30-30 is for

do you even know what a 30-30 is?

Sarcasm detector faulty Charles? My point, you did it legally because there are SIGNIFICANT benefits from the legal route and nobody in their right mind would go illegal if they have the legal option. Therefore the 'list' is meaningless rhetoric serving no one any good.

pawn it off on sarcasm when you are way off the mark

you still looking up what a 30-30 Win is?

30-30 is a tie game .... not a win

it could be a marlin too

[HAL 9000 96]

I guess you should do what that guy did then.

i don't think i'd fit in too well in central america, no matter how much cash i had.

But ain't Kansas in central America?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The land is being transferred to satisfy a judgment against Casey Nethercott, a member of a self-styled border-watch group who is serving a five-year prison term for firearms possession.

I thought this was what the second amendment was all about. Protecting one's country.

Actually, the second ammendment was written to protect the people against a tyranical government, which maybe why the government continously seeks to limit this right.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Here's what I'm getting out of this thread: The legality of one's actions are negated by one's drive to gain what they want or feel they need. I have to disagree with this.

Let's say someone is starving. They need food. So they break into my home in order to take it. Was that legal? Not even close. Whether or not someone may feel they are justified to break in, their reasons are rendered by breaking the law.

Just because someone feels they "need something," that does not entitle them to break the law. I admit that needs can vary from one person to another. However, no matter what someone needs, their reasoning does not circumvent the legal system.

The legal procedures that bind the U.S. are what keeps us in a so-called civilized society. People cannot take from others, regardless of their needs or wants. If such actions were allowed, then anyone could potentially do anything they want and justify it in some way.

No one has to starve -- there are homeless shelters all over the country. If someone is in desperate need of food, clothes or shelter, these are available to them free of charge and without breaking any laws.

I realize the issues I've presented are not an exact match for illegal aliens entering this country. The basis, however, works. Simply because someone feels they are justified in illegally moving to another country -- regardless of their personal reasons -- that does, in no way, make their actions any more legal.

Because they are breaking the law, they should be forced to answer to it. If illegals wish to have all the same rights and privileges American citizens do, then they must remain accountable to U.S. law.

For reference, no one has to subject themselves to U.S. law at all -- provided they don't enter the country. Even visitors are held accountable. A foreigner's own country's law will trump U.S. law so long as they do not step foot onto American soil. Once that occurs, they are within the legal jurisdiction of the United States and not any other country (Mexico or otherwise).

I'm sure certain individuals will attack me for this post. They'll probably call me an idiot or claim I don't understand logic or possibly say "if I can't handle a debate, don't post." That's fine. They can believe that debate involves hurling insulting commentary at those who disagree with them. Doing such solves nothing and proves nothing. All it does is quickly turn a once-polite debate into a heated argument.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think you're getting overly hung up on this issue of "rights". Certainly everyone can agree that illegal immigration is undesirable, unfair, shouldn't be tolerated etc.

But as far as the illegal immigrants themselves - I think the question of legality is more less irrelevant, if their decision was arrived at out of necessity and expediency. If you have few options to begin with, the least least bad one is obviously going to be the most attractive.

If Mexico, for example, didn't have chronic underemployment (esp. in rural agricultural areas), seeking out "greener grass" via the US wouldn't seem such an attractive prospect.

[HAL 9000 96]

I think you're getting overly hung up on this issue of "rights". Certainly everyone can agree that illegal immigration is undesirable, unfair, shouldn't be tolerated etc.

But as far as the illegal immigrants themselves - I think the question of legality is more less irrelevant, if their decision was arrived at out of necessity and expediency. If you have few options to begin with, the least least bad one is obviously going to be the most attractive.

If Mexico, for example, didn't have chronic underemployment (esp. in rural agricultural areas), seeking out "greener grass" via the US wouldn't seem such an attractive prospect.

Seems to be what I've been saying all along.

[DeadPoolX 9]

I think you're getting overly hung up on this issue of "rights". Certainly everyone can agree that illegal immigration is undesirable, unfair, shouldn't be tolerated etc.

But as far as the illegal immigrants themselves - I think the question of legality is more less irrelevant, if their decision was arrived at out of necessity and expediency. If you have few options to begin with, the least least bad one is obviously going to be the most attractive.

If Mexico, for example, didn't have chronic underemployment (esp. in rural agricultural areas), seeking out "greener grass" via the US wouldn't seem such an attractive prospect.

The legality of the situation is very relevant. These individuals could always claim "refugee" status. There are ways the illegals could enter the country through legal means. If someone truly wishes to improve their situation, they wouldn't mind putting a little work into it instead of taking the quick and highly illegal path.

There are a lot of people within the U.S. who require help. Some might say they're even starving or in need otherwise. That does not permit them to break the law. Using the example from my previous post, someone's apparent need does not give them the right to break into my home (or break any other law). There are other legal avenues to pursue and even if there weren't, this person's situation would not negate the illegality of their act.

But let's assume that out of extreme desperation there are illegals running through the border into the United States. If we give them a free pass, how many other illegals will come in? Every individual who illegally enters the U.S. could -- and most likely would -- claim they needed to do so for survival, whether or not that was the case.

Maybe my wife could get a better job in the United States. Maybe she couldn't. The point is that if she could find better work in the U.S., her desire to improve her life would not allow her to trespass illegally into the United States. Her particular situation would be irrelevant. All that would matter is that she had become illegal.

Maybe these individuals do need some sort of help. However, it's not our responsibility to give them such. They are citizens of Mexico. If Mexico is such an undesirable place -- and it must be if they're so eager to leave -- then they should work at improving their home. Fleeing to another country will not solve the problem; in fact, doing so will just make it worse. Their actions may eventually result in their own country's downfall. I couldn't think of a better reason to stay and improve my homeland.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That isn't the same argument though.

I'm not saying anywhere that they are "permitted" to break the law or that this should somehow be excused and given a "free pass" - I am saying that I understand the general reason why people in Central/South American countries immigrate illegally, and that considerations of moral legality probably don't enter into their decision to do it.

Understanding why people migrate from those countries - and why its so attractive to them is surely central to understanding the overall problem. Certainly there are domestic issues of border security and law enforcement to consider - but the problem exists fundamentally because of economic deprivations in those countries that create the desire to move somewhere better.

We can tip-toe around the issues all we want - but that's surely the cold, honest truth.

Edited February 11, 2009 by Paul Daniels