If the state enforced immigration laws...

[liberty08]

Hello. Something I think about often is the state's enforcement of immigration laws. I know they don't seem to really do anything about it and they are supposed to be enforced at the federal level but we know that isn't really happening. I wonder that if the state can make such strong restrictions on firearms ownership and are doing so for our safety, then why can't they do something about illegal immigration which is an even bigger threat to our safety?
Since so little is done about the border it gives me piece of mind owning a gun. Does the state not care about anything except power over the people? How does everyone on this board feel about this?

[!@#$]

[QUOTE=liberty08;1233495] Does the state not care about anything except power over the people? QUOTE]

they like money too...

[drclark]

Despite the "will of the people" the federal and state governments have shown no real desire to enforce immigration laws. Local and/or voter initiated attempts are often struck down in court. The reason as to why has spawned many debates (and many conspiracy theories).

drc

[MisterDudeManGuy]

It's the new slavery, really. But it is worse, philosophically.

The first slavery was put into place by strong or wealthy people abducting proud, honorable people and turning them into slaves by breaking their will. This has been done in humankind since one man could express his will over another.

This new slavery is being put into place by people willingly selling themselves into bondage for a color TV. This is a new thing, unskilled workers coming to sell themselves to unscrupulous business people for the lowest bid.

And our government loves it.

[ViPER395]

Just think if all of the manpower used to fight speeding vehicles in this state was used to fight illegal immigration.

CHP are 'state police', right?

Oh wait, There'd be no money in it.

[Fate]

The first slavery was put into place by strong or wealthy people abducting proud, honorable people and turning them into slaves by breaking their will.
While I won't argue with your description of illegals in the US as "selling themselves into modern slavery" of sorts, your description of the African slave trade from the 1700s is incorrect. Warring African tribes had been making slaves of conquered tribes for generations if not millennia. European traders began to view this commodity as a resource that could be exploited in developing the New World. To claim that "African slaves were honorable" is noble, but inaccurate as well: the power struggle shifted repeatedly and those Africans who had ancestors sold into slavery did the same to other tribes when they could. African slavery began with Africans. White Europeans just figured out how to make a buck off of the practice.

[MisterDudeManGuy]

Oh, BTW, I forgot to answer the question: Yes, the state (CA) is about power over the people. It shouldn't be, because a state in a democratic republic is supposed to serve the people (by the people and for the people), but that changed as soon as California adopted a socialist agenda.

In a socialist state, the people serve the state, and the state decides what you do and don't need. Since the state provides the protection you need, the only thing a weapon can represent to the state is a threat.

...and they can't have that. How else can they keep you serving them but by suppressing your ability to resist?

[Cato]

It's the new slavery, really. But it is worse, philosophically.

The first slavery was put into place by strong or wealthy people abducting proud, honorable people and turning them into slaves by breaking their will. This has been done in humankind since one man could express his will over another.

This new slavery is being put into place by people willingly selling themselves into bondage for a color TV. This is a new thing, unskilled workers coming to sell themselves to unscrupulous business people for the lowest bid.

And our government loves it.

__________________________________________________ __

I have to agree. I first thought of this when I went to USC.

All the students were white or asian.
All the professors were white.
All the office workers were black. AND
All the folks pushing buckets, doing heavy lifting, or holding a rake were hispanic.

It was as though we had become a caste society.


Another story...

I'm a teacher and at a faculty meeting our Dean (who is hispanic) showed up wearing a Dogers cap and jeans. From afar everyone thought he was a gardener! It wasnt until he was directly in front of us that we recognized him.


We are in a difficult time. The gov't won't enforce immigration laws so what we are creating is a "no class of citizenship." Brown folks who you can pay below minimum wage after picking them up at Hombre Depot or having them clean your toilets. It's like that movie "Omega Man" where we drive around in our cars surrounded by hoards of zombies. Many places of California are third world nations.

[DrunkSkunk]

bah - if you want to see modern slavery spend some time in the middle east and see how they treat their tcn's. some it's pretty ****ed up.

have a gun carrying kempo day

[Shotgun Man]

I don't want to pay for it.

Imagine all the bucks it would cost to afford due process to these people. You'd have to house them, give them a lawyer, a judge, a prosecutor, a bunch of jailors, some court clerks.

We're better off just leaving them alone.

What was that movie where some girl lived in an apartment in New York City? She had cockroaches and decided to fumigate her apartment. She caused the cockroaches to stream en masse to the other apartments in broad daylight. It sure pissed off the other residents.

Just leave 'em alone. It ain't worth the aggravation.

ETA: Really, I'm asking-- what was that movie?

[ViPER395]

They shouldn't be afforded due process.

[Shotgun Man]

They shouldn't be afforded due process.

Yes, I believe Stalin shared that view as well.

[ViPER395]

Yes, I believe Stalin shared that view as well.

Oh I thought we were trying to fix the illigal immigration problem, not play paddycake with foriegn criminals.

[Shotgun Man]

Oh I thought we were trying to fix the illigal immigration problem, not play paddycake with foriegn criminals.

I believe it is black letter law: any person being prosecuted under laws of the United States shall be afforded due process.

See, e.g., US Constitution, 5th amendment:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[Synergy]

This is just a drop in the bucket and to make the people think the govt is actually doing something about the problem. I like how all 905 are criminals, but 226 of those have non-immigration criminal records.

http://cbs2.com/local/Immigrants.Arrested.Illegal.2.731443.html

Police departments across the state are not supposed to ask a criminals immigration status.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/back704.html

LAPD Special Order 40 (http://www.judicialwatch.org/lapd-special-order-40)

Lets also not mention the burden Illegals place on our failing medical and school system.

[PatriotnMore]

" Brown folks who you can pay below minimum wage after picking them up at Hombre Depot or having them clean your toilets.

That is not exactly true. If you have tried to hire one of these day laborers, they will not take a job for less than $10.00, and they usually try to negotiate for a free lunch as well. I was told that they are holding the line as a group on how much they will work for, and more than a few fist fights have happened over a worker who will work for less.

[ViPER395]

I see the problem. They should fix it so it says citizen instead of person.

I believe it is black letter law: any person being prosecuted under laws of the United States shall be afforded due process.

See, e.g., US Constitution, 5th amendment:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[PatriotnMore]

http://patriotwebsites.net/mountainmm/site/index.php

We should all be concerned about Illegal Immigration. In addition, we should not just rely on the Government, (who is unwilling), or border patrol (who are under manned). We can all be active and help, working closely with Border Patrol. I put my money, and time, where my mouth is. If you feel so inclined, you to can do something about the problem and donate time, money, or both to help stop the flow of Illegals, and equally important, drugs.

[Shotgun Man]

What is that you do exactly?

Do you stand watch on the border?

[PatriotnMore]

The web site explaines it better than I can, but yes, we watch the border and contact Border Patrol via radio for them to interdict Illegals, or drug traffic.

I want to add, this is not for everyone. There is some level of personal risk, and we do exercises our 2nd amendment right while on watch. Shots have been fired from across the border at the group. It does not happen often but, it has happened. If you are not ready and willing to stand the watch, knowing there is a certain amount of personal risk, don't volunteer. If you still want to help, you can donate money, or time in other areas.

There is also a forum you can join, if you have more direct questions you want answered by those in charge. http://patriotwebsites.net/mountainmm/vforums/index.php

"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life".
-John F. Kennedy

[bulgron]

I have heard it said that California State residents have the same power of arrest as the police. Therefore, just out of curiosity, suppose I encountered a fellow who I had good reason to believe was not in this country legally. What would happen if I placed that fellow under citizen's arrest for violating our immigration laws?

Would it fly in court?

As I said, simple idle curiosity has me thinking about this.

[MisterDudeManGuy]

I am sure that if you were able to pull it off physically without getting killed in the process (just because they're noncitizens does not mean they're unarmed), and you were able to pull it off legally (by avoiding the legal traps the pro-bono pro-illegal lawyers would try to hit you with), the courts would simply let them walk.

However, if you committed one single misstep in the apprehension process, you might not be so lucky. Are you willing to face a civil rights conviction (or even, God forbid, some over-the-top hate crime conviction) over something the courts aren't willing to prosecute?

Quite simply, there are two codes of law. One for citizens, who are held to a higher standard, and another code of law for illegals, who are held to no standard. If there were a standard for illegals, they wouldn't be here - would they?

[Shotgun Man]

I see the problem. They should fix it so it says citizen instead of person.


Great-- let's amend the constitution! Yay!

[cbn620]

I'd be careful what you all wish for. Ask yourselves what kind of danger we're currently in with the border policy as it is. Do you really feel that threatened, that you would give up essential liberties and freedoms that the government may step in and babysit our borders?

I consider it dangerous nationalism and fascism when any federal authority begins to run borders, border checkpoints and arbitrary check points in high intensity immigration zones. I don't want to be pulled over and asked questions all in some ruse to keep illegal immigrants out of the country.

If we really want to solve the problems, we could do any number of things. We could close current welfare program loopholes so that illegal immigrants aren't getting money that should be going to genuine American citizens. We could open worker's contracts with path-to-citizenship programs so that more immigrants can come here to work. Again, we could do any number of things. The above may not be the best options but I would see them as far better options than allowing anymore patriot act type BS to rape our constitution.

[Linh]

I have heard it said that California State residents have the same power of arrest as the police. Therefore, just out of curiosity, suppose I encountered a fellow who I had good reason to believe was not in this country legally. What would happen if I placed that fellow under citizen's arrest for violating our immigration laws?

Would it fly in court?

As I said, simple idle curiosity has me thinking about this.

No you'll get in trouble. Plus you won't want someone to detain you just because they had good reason to believe you were here illegally.

It's sad that BP agent can't even arrest those chilling at Home Depot. But then again it's not their "main mission". Check their websites it's to prevent terrorist entering the us etc....nothing about stopping illegal immigrants.

[dustoff31]

I consider it dangerous nationalism and fascism when any federal authority begins to run borders, border checkpoints and arbitrary check points in high intensity immigration zones.


Interesting. Protecting the borders is one the very few powers specifically allotted to the federal government by the constitution.

[RT13]

Have you forgotten that we live in a Liberal controlled/dominated state. They don't like guns, but they love illegals.

[cbn620]

Interesting. Protecting the borders is one the very few powers specifically allotted to the federal government by the constitution.

Protecting the borders is certainly one thing. Setting up checkpoints throughout California to crack down on illegals is another. I should have worded that better. Original poster says he wonders why we don't crack down on illegals, and I wonder the ramifications and extenuating circumstances of such a policy. We do currently have checkpoints at the borders and our policies do not invite illegal immigration. The only foreseeable future policy I could imagine would be raiding private property, setting up checkpoints, etc. All in hopes of rounding up illegals to deport them.

I feel this is in the direction of "Vere are your papers? Vere are zee papers?!!?!?" The more power the government has to protect you, the more power they have to harm you. Totalitarian police states and fascist dictatorships are often conceived upon fear, more specifically fear of some perceived threat.

[Piper]

While I won't argue with your description of illegals in the US as "selling themselves into modern slavery" of sorts, your description of the African slave trade from the 1700s is incorrect. Warring African tribes had been making slaves of conquered tribes for generations if not millennia. European traders began to view this commodity as a resource that could be exploited in developing the New World. To claim that "African slaves were honorable" is noble, but inaccurate as well: the power struggle shifted repeatedly and those Africans who had ancestors sold into slavery did the same to other tribes when they could. African slavery began with Africans. White Europeans just figured out how to make a buck off of the practice.

History also shows that arabs were heavily in the slave trade and africans that were accused of crimes were also placed into slavery.

[Piper]

I have heard it said that California State residents have the same power of arrest as the police. Therefore, just out of curiosity, suppose I encountered a fellow who I had good reason to believe was not in this country legally. What would happen if I placed that fellow under citizen's arrest for violating our immigration laws?

Would it fly in court?

As I said, simple idle curiosity has me thinking about this.

Cops powers of arrest come from 836 PC and private persons arrest comes from 837 PC. As for making arrests, police can arrest a person for a felony whether or not a felony has been committed. A private person can only arrest if they know the person committed a felony. However, a person can only arrest another person for a misdemeanor if the misdemeanor was committed in the arresting persons presence. That includes peace officers.

The way it was explained to me by a deputy D.A., an illegal alien could only be arrested by local LE while the illegal was actually crossing the border, because it's a misdemeanor.

[Piper]

I'd be careful what you all wish for. Ask yourselves what kind of danger we're currently in with the border policy as it is. Do you really feel that threatened, that you would give up essential liberties and freedoms that the government may step in and babysit our borders?

I consider it dangerous nationalism and fascism when any federal authority begins to run borders, border checkpoints and arbitrary check points in high intensity immigration zones. I don't want to be pulled over and asked questions all in some ruse to keep illegal immigrants out of the country.

If we really want to solve the problems, we could do any number of things. We could close current welfare program loopholes so that illegal immigrants aren't getting money that should be going to genuine American citizens. We could open worker's contracts with path-to-citizenship programs so that more immigrants can come here to work. Again, we could do any number of things. The above may not be the best options but I would see them as far better options than allowing anymore patriot act type BS to rape our constitution.

I'm wondering how many times you've been to the San Diego area. Actually, there are Border Patrol Checkpoints at major points several miles north of the border. Three that I can think of are the I-5 checkpoint near Camp Pendleton, I-15 checkpoint Temecula and Highway 86 checkpoint near Salton City. Checkpoints are important, but equally important are the other things that you mentioned. I might also add that checkpoints have been operating long before 9-11 and the Patriot Act.

[MisterDudeManGuy]

While I won't argue with your description of illegals in the US as "selling themselves into modern slavery" of sorts, your description of the African slave trade from the 1700s is incorrect. Warring African tribes had been making slaves of conquered tribes for generations if not millennia. European traders began to view this commodity as a resource that could be exploited in developing the New World. To claim that "African slaves were honorable" is noble, but inaccurate as well: the power struggle shifted repeatedly and those Africans who had ancestors sold into slavery did the same to other tribes when they could. African slavery began with Africans. White Europeans just figured out how to make a buck off of the practice.

I wasn't describing any particular era of slavery - certainly not the slavery of the 1700's. You cite African slavery, but you must have read that into what I wrote - because I never cited African slavery.

I was describing, perhaps awkwardly, the fact that the enslavement of people has been around for a very, very long time, and that it has its origins in the ability of one person or group of people to project their will over others. Most often, this was a result of warfare.

The new slavery is based upon the migration of human misery. People who can not make it in their home are displacing so as to gain advantages from a nation that has no problems with just throwing money away. Our nation is spending our tax money to support a subclass of people that cannot afford to live otherwise - since they work for a non-livable wage. The exact opposite of what you'd want to do if you didn't want these people around.

[MisterDudeManGuy]

I have heard that there is finally a migration out of other states that have taken up where the Federal government has abdicated their responsibility to defend the nation's borders. Areas where - gasp - people are now required by state and local ordinance to prove citizenship before getting services, drivers licenses, etc, the undocumented non-citizens are simply migrating to those places where citizenship means nothing. Whoops, sorry, I meant to say "where citizenship means you are a slave to the support of unwelcome visitors, and you are held to a code of law while they are not".

So, look for a population explosion in sanctuary cities like LA. Tighten your belts so you can pay Arnold's new taxes to make up for the $15 BILLION budget shortfall (last I heard). Notice that the thrust of all political action in California is to increase spending (and lots of it for the dole), increase taxation, but to not enforce immigration law or care who gets the dole. Follow the money. By doing what they are doing you will pay the tab, big business will get their cheap labor (with your tax subsidy), and the politicos that give out the dole will get a new voting blok - paid for with your tax money. How nice for them. Pretty soon you won't matter, except as an income source. In LA, you may not matter already.

Follow this to its conclusion. Now you know why I moved.