Border Security - What would YOU do?

[Fletch]

Um yes...I know! I am betting Rambone doesn't know what Godwin's Law is (yet)....but, I figured you DID since YOU were the one who brought it to my attention earlier....................

Ah, OK.

I like Godwin's Law, and believe it should be applied, but in Rambone's defense:

Hands Off Hitler! - Reason Magazine

I still cringe at Rambone's comparison, and think the argument can be made without Hitler, but I understand what he's trying to say.

 

[SavageEagle]

Ah, OK.

I like Godwin's Law, and believe it should be applied, but in Rambone's defense:

Hands Off Hitler! - Reason Magazine

I still cringe at Rambone's comparison, and think the argument can be made without Hitler, but I understand what he's trying to say.

I understand what he's saying too, but in reality, I don't think one person on this board would ACTUALLY shoot every man woman and child crossing the border. Unless that man, woman, or child picked up a gun and started shooting.

 

[Stickfight]

Mines are indiscriminate.

 

[Jack Ryan]

So, there seems to be many different ideas floating around about how we should secure our borders...

For this, let's focus on the 2,000 miles of US - Mexico border because this is obviously our biggest concern right now.

2000 mile wide target range sounds pretty cool.

Prarrie dogs, coyotes, and ground hogs all agree but they don't get a vote unlike illegal aliens.

 

[Jack Ryan]

i agree and have also said this. but its not in the govts best intrest. they have to keep the bottom feeders happy so they dont revolt.

im all for ending all forms of welfare immediately. then maybe we could dump some of our trash in mexico.

By bottom feeders would you mean the people who are hiring them?

 

[E5RANGER375]

By bottom feeders would you mean the people who are hiring them?

well my original meaning of bottom feeders was directed at american citizens who are lazy and dont do anything but drink or use drugs and refuse to get a job because they can just milk the system.

but now i will expand my use of bottom feeders to include illegal aliens or documented foreign workers who come here and require ANY social services. If you wanna come here and be an american or work here legaly, then you need to be totaly self sustaining. save up enough money till you can be, then come here and get a job. its like people who buy guns but cant afford a simple gun safe for them or pay their electric bill. idiots.

employers who knowingly hire illegal workers or who dont properly check and verify the ID of new hires. (HINT: if they speak ZERO effing english then odds are you have an illegal, check them out)
businesses who hire illegals and get caught should IMMEDIATELY have their business lisence put on probation, and also fined. if they are caught again then they should lose their business license and be put into jail, PERIOD.
employers who hire illegals "off the books" should go to jail and lose their license on the first offense.

is that what you were looking for Jack?

 

[Fletch]

businesses who hire illegals and get caught should IMMEDIATELY have their business lisence put on probation, and also fined. if they are caught again then they should lose their business license and be put into jail, PERIOD.
employers who hire illegals "off the books" should go to jail and lose their license on the first offense.

I don't think there should be any such thing as a business license.

 

[henktermaat]

WWJRD - What would Jack Ryan do?

Spread black cinder blocks and fishhooks all across the desert.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I don't think there should be any such thing as a business license.

I don't think there should be, either, but how about we start dealing with "what is" rather than "what should be".

 

[Fletch]

I don't think there should be, either, but how about we start dealing with "what is" rather than "what should be".

But this is the problem inherent in some of the proposed solutions, like the one to which I responded: they increase dependency on anti-freedom. The more we entrench anti-freedom into our culture and society, the worse off we'll be in the long run.

Say we implement the suggested change, and then a few years down the road we get to the point of "hey, let's get rid of these stupid business licenses". Now you've got all the folks paranoid about border security coming out of the woodwork, screaming holy hell about how we need the licensing system because it helps us manage the illegal immigrant "problem".

Every solution to every problem at the societal level should be examined with a critical eye toward what it reinforces and the long term effects on freedom in general. It does us, and the cause of individual liberty, absolutely no good to turn the country into a maximum-security prison. This is why I rail against suggestions that we all be tagged and ID'd like we're damned livestock. I don't care what enemy one is fighting, when one destroys freedom to fight said enemy, one can no longer be said to be "protecting our freedoms". Might as well rape your daughter to keep the high school boys from stealing her virginity.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

But this is the problem inherent in some of the proposed solutions, like the one to which I responded: they increase dependency on anti-freedom. The more we entrench anti-freedom into our culture and society, the worse off we'll be in the long run.

Say we implement the suggested change, and then a few years down the road we get to the point of "hey, let's get rid of these stupid business licenses". Now you've got all the folks paranoid about border security coming out of the woodwork, screaming holy hell about how we need the licensing system because it helps us manage the illegal immigrant "problem".

Every solution to every problem at the societal level should be examined with a critical eye toward what it reinforces and the long term effects on freedom in general. It does us, and the cause of individual liberty, absolutely no good to turn the country into a maximum-security prison. This is why I rail against suggestions that we all be tagged and ID'd like we're damned livestock. I don't care what enemy one is fighting, when one destroys freedom to fight said enemy, one can no longer be said to be "protecting our freedoms". Might as well rape your daughter to keep the high school boys from stealing her virginity.

So do you have a solution or a path to a solution that can be implemented?

 

[rambone]

Hey Fletch...Godwin's Law applies....

Um yes...I know! I am betting Rambone doesn't know what Godwin's Law is (yet)

Godwin's Law will rear its head in every single thread where we talk about killing people for sport and setting up a 21st Century Berlin Wall.

Rambone's Law says that Godwin's Law will apply every single day on INGO.

I like Godwin's Law, and believe it should be applied, but in Rambone's defense:

Hands Off Hitler! - Reason Magazine

Thanks Fletch. That was a good article. I've thought about that for a while. In these times there are no shortages of similarities to the past. Sometimes you gotta make them known. Hence, Rambone's Law.

I have done far worse for God, and Country for a lesser reason...

Humane and Soldier should not be used in the same thought pattern lest one start thinking War is an all right then to do...

Look, I'm not criticizing what you've done, but seriously, why do we want that on American soil again? Collateral damage and all that? I can't wait.

You really need to adjust the tension on your tinfoil I think it is getting a little bit tight there...

We talk about it daily on this board. The threat of martial law. It would sure suit someone's agenda if it could be implemented with soldiers who have proven their "just followin orders" attitude and a couple dozen notches in their rifle stock.

Your history is just a little skewed if that is the way you perceive the facts of the regarding the History of Both Germany and the German Military...

I've argued several times that the Bill of Rights are explicit limitations on what the Government do. Yet you ask this board if the Constitution applies to "illegals" and you will get a resounding no. Even though that is an oxymoron because the Constitution is something the Government is supposed to follow always.

So lets break it down. Do Jews/Mexicans deserve the right to free speech? Bear arms? Receive a trial? Illegal searches? Produce their papers? Shot on sight?

People advocate total Government tyranny when it is a class of people you perceive as your "enemy." The parallels are there.

You saying if our troops are fired on, they should lay down their guns and let the women and children pass while they try to tackle the men shooting at them NFL style?

Well I was responding to the "Kill em all" solution expressed routinely throughout the thread. If there is going to be some non-drones on the border who only retaliate violently to violence, then we can have a better debate.

You act as though you don't want to secure the border. Just open them up and come one come all...

You act as though this is the first time ever the Feds are going to do something right. We are decades into the "War on Drugs," "War on Poverty," "War on Terror," etc... and their only results are Bigger Government and increased existence of those problems.

Lets see what kind of totally unrelated crap gets put into the Congress's bill, as they arrive as our savior and try to answer our prayers, solving the crisis that they have created.

I'm being realistic when I criticize these things.

The wall is silly. Bring a ladder. Dig a hole. Use a rope. Why would I commit billions of dollars to that?

Kill em all, mines, drone-machine guns, indiscriminate killing, etc... already addressed that. Sounds like a sick thing to do on American soil. Where does the Constitution say that the Feds can take a "Weapons free!" attitude toward immigrants? Any thoughts to collateral damage whatsoever?

Changing social programs in America and alleviating taxes... now there is an idea.

I understand what he's saying too, but in reality, I don't think one person on this board would ACTUALLY shoot every man woman and child crossing the border. Unless that man, woman, or child picked up a gun and started shooting.

HA!! This thread and others are littered with those comments. They've been so convinced that those people walking up here are the enemy, that they would volunteer to go snipe them off.

They should realize who caused this problem. Washington.

Mines are indiscriminate.

I can't wait to make the border a warzone, and have little Texan kids getting their legs blown off because they played in the wrong spot. Perhaps decades down the road. Those mines have longevity.

 

[E5RANGER375]

I don't think there should be any such thing as a business license.

agreed. but we have allowed this country to go so far down the path of oppression that everytime we try to fix one freedom that had been "regulated" we run into many other problems that needs fixed. the whole system needs an overhaul to return it to its original state that worked.

 

[mrjarrell]

I understand what he's saying too, but in reality, I don't think one person on this board would ACTUALLY shoot every man woman and child crossing the border. Unless that man, woman, or child picked up a gun and started shooting.

So, all these guys that are calling for the murder of people crossing the border without government permission are just full of hot air? They are the type of people who don't mean what they say? They're actually lying? Hmmm....and here I thought they were just a bunch of psychopaths.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Godwin's Law will rear its head in every single thread where we talk about killing people for sport and setting up a 21st Century Berlin Wall.

Rambone's Law says that Godwin's Law will apply every single day on INGO.



Thanks Fletch. That was a good article. I've thought about that for a while. In these times there are no shortages of similarities to the past. Sometimes you gotta make them known. Hence, Rambone's Law.



Look, I'm not criticizing what you've done, but seriously, why do we want that on American soil again? Collateral damage and all that? I can't wait.



We talk about it daily on this board. The threat of martial law. It would sure suit someone's agenda if it could be implemented with soldiers who have proven their "just followin orders" attitude and a couple dozen notches in their rifle stock.



I've argued several times that the Bill of Rights are explicit limitations on what the Government do. Yet you ask this board if the Constitution applies to "illegals" and you will get a resounding no. Even though that is an oxymoron because the Constitution is something the Government is supposed to follow always.

So lets break it down. Do Jews/Mexicans deserve the right to free speech? Bear arms? Receive a trial? Illegal searches? Produce their papers? Shot on sight?

People advocate total Government tyranny when it is a class of people you perceive as your "enemy." The parallels are there.



Well I was responding to the "Kill em all" solution expressed routinely throughout the thread. If there is going to be some non-drones on the border who only retaliate violently to violence, then we can have a better debate.



You act as though this is the first time ever the Feds are going to do something right. We are decades into the "War on Drugs," "War on Poverty," "War on Terror," etc... and their only results are Bigger Government and increased existence of those problems.

Lets see what kind of totally unrelated crap gets put into the Congress's bill, as they arrive as our savior and try to answer our prayers, solving the crisis that they have created.

I'm being realistic when I criticize these things.

The wall is silly. Bring a ladder. Dig a hole. Use a rope. Why would I commit billions of dollars to that?

Kill em all, mines, drone-machine guns, indiscriminate killing, etc... already addressed that. Sounds like a sick thing to do on American soil. Where does the Constitution say that the Feds can take a "Weapons free!" attitude toward immigrants? Any thoughts to collateral damage whatsoever?

Changing social programs in America and alleviating taxes... now there is an idea.




HA!! This thread and others are littered with those comments. They've been so convinced that those people walking up here are the enemy, that they would volunteer to go snipe them off.

They should realize who caused this problem. Washington.



I can't wait to make the border a warzone, and have little Texan kids getting their legs blown off because they played in the wrong spot. Perhaps decades down the road. Those mines have longevity.

OK, so now that you've picked apart everyone else's solution to the problem, what solution can you put forward? Is it being a troll if you just disagree with other people and don't put forward a plan of your own?

 

[Fletch]

So do you have a solution or a path to a solution that can be implemented?

Well, my attitude generally is that illegal immigration and so forth are merely symptoms. The disease, the true enemy, is overreaching government. And the reason it gets away with so much is that every subculture in America is focused on a different symptom of the disease, but has enough trouble getting together the critical mass necessary to overcome their pet symptom that they lack the energy to help anyone else with their pet symptoms.

Add to this the fact that government can generally count on some opposing subculture to get their panties in a wad and drag out the fight, wishing to use government as the hammer to beat down their opponents or those they consider "less than worthy" of the blessings of liberty. Witness the gays vs. the fundies, the gun owners vs. the gun banners, natives vs. immigrants, and so on.

If you're asking specifically whether I have a solution for the symptom of illegal immigration, my solution has been stated many times: attack the welfare state. The number 1 complaint I see around here is the social services for illegals complaint, but the problem isn't the illegals, it's the social services. They need to be eliminated.

Granted, there will still be illegals after you get rid of social services, but those will be the illegals who came here looking for work, and I really don't have a problem with them and don't know why anyone would. Again, I understand the arguments about income tax and all that, but my position is that nobody should be paying income tax, so I don't see the value in forcing more people into the system. It doesn't make me feel better about getting robbed just because my neighbor is robbed as well -- I'd rather work out a system where nobody gets robbed.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Well, my attitude generally is that illegal immigration and so forth are merely symptoms. The disease, the true enemy, is overreaching government. And the reason it gets away with so much is that every subculture in America is focused on a different symptom of the disease, but has enough trouble getting together the critical mass necessary to overcome their pet symptom that they lack the energy to help anyone else with their pet symptoms.

Add to this the fact that government can generally count on some opposing subculture to get their panties in a wad and drag out the fight, wishing to use government as the hammer to beat down their opponents or those they consider "less than worthy" of the blessings of liberty. Witness the gays vs. the fundies, the gun owners vs. the gun banners, natives vs. immigrants, and so on.

If you're asking specifically whether I have a solution for the symptom of illegal immigration, my solution has been stated many times: attack the welfare state. The number 1 complaint I see around here is the social services for illegals complaint, but the problem isn't the illegals, it's the social services. They need to be eliminated.

Granted, there will still be illegals after you get rid of social services, but those will be the illegals who came here looking for work, and I really don't have a problem with them and don't know why anyone would. Again, I understand the arguments about income tax and all that, but my position is that nobody should be paying income tax, so I don't see the value in forcing more people into the system. It doesn't make me feel better about getting robbed just because my neighbor is robbed as well -- I'd rather work out a system where nobody gets robbed.

Fair enough. How does that get done, in the face of societal inertia?

 

[SavageEagle]

So, all these guys that are calling for the murder of people crossing the border without government permission are just full of hot air? They are the type of people who don't mean what they say? They're actually lying? Hmmm....and here I thought they were just a bunch of psychopaths.

Yep. Pretty much. Most of us know that once they see a fellow would-be illegal cross the border and get blown up by a mine, or see then get arrested by the many soldiers lining/patrolling the border, they just wouldn't do it.


Who here is advocating killing women and children? Anyone?

I know I'm not. I'm advocating meeting force with force. Those that don't use force can turn around and go back or be arrested and face hard labor at their OWN expense, not the tax payers.

 

[Fletch]

Fair enough. How does that get done, in the face of societal inertia?

The same way we got right-to-carry laws passed in almost every state over the last 20 years. We're currently at the point with the welfare state that we were at with gun laws before Florida passed their right-to-carry law back in the 80's, that got the ball rolling.

It's not a simple or slow process. You have to be in it for the long haul, and you have to be willing to make the same arguments over and over and over and over again, sometimes to the same audiences. You have to be willing to educate yourself as well as the public, and you have to be absolutely uncompromising in your pursuit of freedom. You don't trade with the Devil, you beat him back -- sometimes a half-step at a time, sometimes all the way.

And you have to recognize that you may die before the fight is finished, and do all you can to prepare the next generation to continue fighting in your place.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

The same way we got right-to-carry laws passed in almost every state over the last 20 years. We're currently at the point with the welfare state that we were at with gun laws before Florida passed their right-to-carry law back in the 80's, that got the ball rolling.

It's not a simple or slow process. You have to be in it for the long haul, and you have to be willing to make the same arguments over and over and over and over again, sometimes to the same audiences. You have to be willing to educate yourself as well as the public, and you have to be absolutely uncompromising in your pursuit of freedom. You don't trade with the Devil, you beat him back -- sometimes a half-step at a time, sometimes all the way.

And you have to recognize that you may die before the fight is finished, and do all you can to prepare the next generation to continue fighting in your place.

Thanks, Well said.