Why is illegal immigration bad?

[OfTheDamned]

For some really strange reason people seem to ignore the first word in illegal immigration. It is a crime to cross into this country without our consent. Those that do are criminals, pure and simple. I understand that some people don't want to wait 1+ years to come here legally and I wouldn't either. That doesn't change the facts though. If I break my phone and don't want to wait another year to get a new one, is it illegal for me to break into a Verizon store and take another one? I really need it and I can't wait a year, so it must be ok. Right?

Unemployment is over 9% in most parts of the country right now. Do you think any US citizens would like to have the jobs that these illegal immigrants have?

The amount of money spent on illegal immigrants to go to school and have their medical needs met is a ridiculous drain on a already strained economy. Considering that we, as a country, are already spending over 330 billion a year on people that are not contributing back to state and federal income taxes.

I agree that anyone should have the opportunities that so many take for granted in this country. I just think that they should do it legally.

 

[Ninja Monkey]

For some really strange reason people seem to ignore the first word in illegal immigration. It is a crime to cross into this country without our consent. Those that do are criminals, pure and simple. I understand that some people don't want to wait 1+ years to come here legally and I wouldn't either. That doesn't change the facts though. If I break my phone and don't want to wait another year to get a new one, is it illegal for me to break into a Verizon store and take another one? I really need it and I can't wait a year, so it must be ok. Right?

Unemployment is over 9% in most parts of the country right now. Do you think any US citizens would like to have the jobs that these illegal immigrants have?

The amount of money spent on illegal immigrants to go to school and have their medical needs met is a ridiculous drain on a already strained economy. Considering that we, as a country, are already spending over 330 billion a year on people that are not contributing back to state and federal income taxes.

I agree that anyone should have the opportunities that so many take for granted in this country. I just think that they should do it legally.

+1.....IT'S ILLEGAL!!!! I'm so tired of people trying to steer it back to a racial hatred of Mexicans. That's just a way to avoid talking about the real problem.

How do illegal immigrants think it makes someone feel that went through all the effort to enter the country legally? It took my friend from Panama three years. He never once thought of sneaking into the US. That's because he has a moral compass. He's also not here sucking off of our collective tit like so many illegals and their children are.

It makes me so mad when I see a bunch of illegals protesting in public. The cops should throw out a big net and deport as many of them as they can.

 

[smacky]

Why don't we fight fire with fire? Let's go to their countries and take their jobs. Mexico is nice if you know the mayor and he isn't shot at a rally.

 

[CXXV]

No reform is needed. What is needed are officials with the stones to uphold the laws and the regulations.

Try entering another country illegally and see what happens to you.

 

[it.]

Wouldn't the key be to help Mexico? With all the drug wars and poverty in Mexico, who can blame them for coming here? Everyone is saying throw them back into Mexico but wouldn't they just come back because of the horrible conditions there.

 

[Filipino.Cowboy]

Partly true. However, its not JUST the drug wars and poverty, its the Mexican government. As far as resources goes, Mexico is the 5th richest country in the world as far as I know. It's not the Mexico is poor, its that the government is horribly corrupt and are in bed with the drug cartels. Also, there is a race issue here. The Mexican gov't is all about calling the Arizona law racist, yet look at who is coming over. If you notice, the majority of the illegal immigrants have more Indian blood, while the Mexican elite have more Spanish blood in them.

 

[n0ct3m]

Leave it up to us to take over somebody elses land then make laws to prevent people from doing the exact same thing.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

Leave it up to us to take over somebody elses land then make laws to prevent people from doing the exact same thing.

What land did we take? And what laws are you speaking of?

 

[Isthmus]

What land did we take? And what laws are you speaking of?

I think he is referring to Mexico. We did take about a third of the country - More if you include Texas. Much of what is today the southwester and western US, including much of the west coast (you know, all those states that have names in spanish), used to be part of mexico.

I think he means that we took the land from mexico and are now writing laws to keep mexicans from occupying that very land. I'm not sure I understand the logic in the statement (assuming that's what he meant), but That's what I got from reading it.

I do have to agree with the comment that says that Mexico is horribly corrupt. It is definitely the case at pretty much every level. The Mexican government is also almost completely dependent in only one industry - OIL - for most of its operating revenue, and that industry is inefficient, corrupt, mismanaged, and in a downward production spiral (meaning most of mexico's readily accessible oil has already been tapped).

There is a lot of wishful thinking about reforming mexico, but what is truly lacking are viable local alternatives for large swaths of the population.

A funny tidbit that you don't often see in the history books are some of the discussions the US congress had when we appropriated much of northern mexico. there were very serious discussions at the time about whether it wasn't simply best to annex the entire country. Ultimately congress decided that the bulk of the population was south of the lands we annexed spoke the wrong language, had the wrong religion and were the wrong color - all things we didn't want to actively bring in to the US at the time we were expanding and forcibly molding the west.

I'm not saying that I agree with the reasons for the choice, but to use history as an example, when the US has annexed other regions with very different cultures (say for example, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Cuba, Dominican republic, panama, Guam, Philippines, etc.), we have either released them and let them go their own way (Panama, Cuba, and DR), Left them as part of the US without full state status and never fully integrated the local population (Puerto Rico and Guam), or given them full statehood while basically eradicating the local culture as viable competition against the english speaking East coast culture that essentially colonized the country (Hawaii and much of the south western US being a good example of this). Mexico was and is much larger and populous than any of these countries. I honestly can't imagine that it would have been fully integrated into the US in such a short period of time, had the US decided to occupy it all.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

The reason I asked was due to the fact that we went to war with them, and paid them for that land. It wasn't simply just taken.

With respect to the laws that he speaks of I'll wait for a response.

I am in agreement on the corruption. It does not help when you basically have one guy running the oil and telco industries.

 

[Isthmus]

The reason I asked was due to the fact that we went to war with them, and paid them for that land. It wasn't simply just taken.

In all fairness, it's not like we bought the land or like the price was negotiated. We took it first and then we paid what we decided we should pay. Disagreement with the payment was discouraged by military threat. I don't recall, did we do that both times we took a chunk of mexico, or was it only the second time?

 

[OrderFromChaos]

In all fairness, it's not like we bought the land or like the price was negotiated. We took it first and then we paid what we decided we should pay. Disagreement with the payment was discouraged by military threat. I don't recall, did we do that both times we took a chunk of mexico, or was it only the second time?

I am not so sure about that part where we first took then paid. I don't like to use Wikipedia as a source, but then again this is not an academic paper. The part is bold was my emphasis.

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed on February 2, 1848, by American diplomat Nicholas Trist and Mexican plenipotentiary representatives Luis G. Cuevas, Bernardo Couto, and Miguel Atristain, ended the war and gave the U.S. undisputed control of Texas, established the U.S.-Mexican border of the Rio Grande River, and ceded to the United States the present-day states of California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming. In return Mexico received US $18,250,000[43][44]

 

[Isthmus]

Thanks for the quote. That clarifies things. So we paid both times. Yes we did occupy first and dictate terms. Click on the link for the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo from your quote and you'll see what I mean.

Yes. I know Texas was a separate country not recognized by Mexico. I acknowledged as much above were I mentioned that we took a larger portion of Mexico, if you included Texas.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

Thanks for the quote. That clarifies things. So we paid both times. Yes we did occupy first and dictate terms. Click on the link for the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo from your quote and you'll see what I mean.

Yes. I know Texas was a separate country not recognized by Mexico. I acknowledged as much above were I mentioned that we took a larger portion of Mexico, if you included Texas.

Not to nitpick, but where in the link for the treaty does it say or imply we occupied first. War was declared July 1, 1845. We occupied Mexico in 1846. Perhaps it is just semantics, but during war you occupy or destroy then set terms, so why is this an issue?
The U.S.-Mexican War . War (1846-1848) . Occupation of Mexico | PBS

Sorry, I know you mentioned Texas being separate I just wanted to point out (not specifically to you) that Texas wanted to be part of the U.S., and tried to break away from Mexico without any nudging by the U.S.

 

[Isthmus]

Not to nitpick, but where in the link for the treaty does it say or imply we occupied first. War was declared July 1, 1845. We occupied Mexico in 1846. Perhaps it is just semantics, but during war you occupy or destroy then set terms, so why is this an issue?
The U.S.-Mexican War . War (1846-1848) . Occupation of Mexico | PBS.

I'm not sure I'm following. We might both be arguing the same thing it seems. All I was trying to say Was that we fought the war with mexico, won, occupied the country, and then annexed the parts we wanted by a treaty that was largely drafted by us and to our favor. Mexico signed it under US military occupation, so its not like they had much room for debate even if they could. IIRC this is still a sore point in mexico.

The only reason I brought it up was to clarify n0ct3m's post above when he referred to the US taking someone else's land, which we did.

 

[byteware]

But that is a problem. If there were fewer illegals, the wage for this backbreaking labor would have to rise to get people to do it. By hiring illegals, your boss is competing illegally against companies that play by the rules. In short, your boss belongs in jail, not the illegals. No jobs, no illegals.




So please explain why the previous administration got squat done on illegal immigration.

You really think that, in this economy, there aren't enough people to do those jobs at minimum wage? Honestly?

If you believe that there aren't, then you are deceiving yourself.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

I'm not sure I'm following. We might both be arguing the same thing it seems. All I was trying to say Was that we fought the war with mexico, won, occupied the country, and then annexed the parts we wanted by a treaty that was largely drafted by us and to our favor. Mexico signed it under US military occupation, so its not like they had much room for debate even if they could. IIRC this is still a sore point in mexico.

The only reason I brought it up was to clarify n0ct3m's post above when he referred to the US taking someone else's land, which we did.

It seems we're both stating the same thing. I think I misinterpreted one of the earlier posts and thought it stated/implied we occupied first (before any war and such).

It still is a sore point for a lot of Mexicans and people of Mexican descent. Many, though not all, believe we stole the land. Which n0ct3m seemed to implied, and both of us responded to.

 

[byteware]

I'm starting to understand the issue but parts of it I don't get. I agree that we shouldn't allow the illegal criminals in but aren't there a lot of poor hard working people who want a better life for their family? I'm pretty sure legally becoming an immigrant can take years and is a Mexican dad just going to wait and watch his family starve when he knows he could give them a better life? What do you guys think?

The problem is...there are roughly 3 billion people for whom coming to the US would be a huge step up. We cannot absorb every poor person in the world, without destroying our economy, and putting all of us in the same situation.

Wouldn't the key be to help Mexico? With all the drug wars and poverty in Mexico, who can blame them for coming here? Everyone is saying throw them back into Mexico but wouldn't they just come back because of the horrible conditions there.

Three things:

1) We cannot solve Mexico's problems. No outside force can solve Mexico's problems. They have to solve them themselves.

2) If everyone who can't stand the conditions in Mexico continues to come here, there will never be anyone in Mexico willing to solve their problems.

3) We need to secure the borders, both North and South. Otherwise, worse than just illegal immigrants will come through. Seriously, do you want to trust our national security to Mexico?

 

[Isthmus]

We need to secure the borders, both North and South. Otherwise, worse than just illegal immigrants will come through.

Tell me about it, those darn Canadians might try sneaking in some of that strong beer they favor, or worse, force us to drink maple syrup. Scary, EY!?

Blame Canada!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxPRHXgYVlk

 

[Rigmaster]

Many countries don't allow foreigners to just show up and stay permanently or indefinitely, and they especially prohibit staying without being trackable. That's what makes it illegal.

Legal immigration is fine because it allows our country to monitor who's coming in and for what reason.

I don't know how to solve the problem, but I believe the total number of immigrants should never exceed 25-50% of the total number of native births minus native deaths.

 

[byteware]

Tell me about it, those darn Canadians might try sneaking in some of that strong beer they favor, or worse, force us to drink maple syrup. Scary, EY!?

Blame Canada!

YouTube - Blame Canada-Southpark

lol

seriously though. There are more reasons than just immigration to seal our borders (Drug trade, illegal human smuggling, etc...). If we close the Southern border, they will just move to bringing it in via the Northern border.

 

[Martimus]

It truly makes me sad to see how polarized people are to the immigration issue... and how much mis-information is out there.

I am one of many residents of the great state of Arizona on this forum. I've had the unfortunate opportunity to watch too many people telling too many lies about SB1070.

20 years or so ago our southern border with Mexico was much more porous than it is today. Both the states of California and Texas successfully asked the Federal government to increase border security. These increases in border security basically created a funnel (Arizona and New Mexico) where all of the border crossers were forced to converge. In addition to the border crossers this issue has been intensified by the growth of the Mexican drug cartels. These cartels have, in recent years, expanded into the illegal immigration business. They control the coyotes and frequently use the border crossers as pack mules to carry their drugs across the border.

Quite frequently border crossers are blackmailed by the drug cartels. Carry their drugs or never see the light of day again... or worse still, carry their drugs or never see your family again. This, unfortunately, is common place anymore.

There is a commonly used path in Southern Arizona where border crossers frequently travel. These paths are littered with waste (old clothes, back packs, human waste, etc.) that was left by the border crossers and their coyotes. In several places one can see bushes littered with women's underwear. This isn't fanciful decoration, it's an arrogant display by the coyotes of how many women they raped along the way.

Often the border crossers are considered by their handlers as perishable cargo. When the coyotes get spooked or think they see border patrol, they'll dump their cargo and run. The border crossers stranded in the middle of nowhere are now forced to fend for themselves in the Sonoran desert, a very inhospitable place. Hundreds of border crossers die every year from exposure and snake bites.

And here in the metropolitan Phoenix area we see homes purchased by the coyotes and drug cartels solely for use as transfer stations. Local police regularly raid these homes and find evidence of dozens of border crossers being held in small rooms with little food and poor sanitary conditions. Border Crossers are regularly beaten and raped in these homes. In many cases they are held because the families of these borders crossers are being blackmailed back in Mexico by the drug cartels. Pay up or your family member in Arizona will be tortured or murdered.

When Arizona lawmakers passed SB1070 there were many different reasons for the law. Problem is the current administration in D.C., numerous liberal news services, and special interest groups looked at those reasons and chose to make specific light of those reasons that they thought could most easily be exploited. And to make matters worse, the state departments recent report to the U.N. singles out Arizona as a possible source of human rights violations. No mention was made that by refusing to increase border security, the Federal government creates their own human rights problem because less security equals more border crossers wandering into and possibly getting beaten, tortured, raped, or killed in the rather inhospitable Sonoran desert. Instead our Federal government chooses to focus on the concocted theory that by following existing Federal law, the State of Arizona is taking away the human rights of the border crossers.

Should these border crossers be afforded a right to live in the United States? Absolutely! But maybe they should cross the border legally and safely instead of crossing in the dead of night and walking through the most inhospitable desert on this continent. And to go that much farther out on a limb, maybe the U.S. Federal government should consider fixing their broken immigration system to allow potential immigrants to come into this country legally, study to become American citizens, and support our nation with the same vigor that they support their native countries.

The thing that really frosts me, however, with all of this silliness is that as an unexpected result of all of the mis-information, the fight over SB1070 takes away my rights to do simple things. Until recently I proudly flew an Arizona flag in front of my home. Sadly I can't do this anymore! In recent months my house has gotten egged on more than one occasion and my garage door defaced by people who believed that flying an Arizona flag was racist! Since when is it racist to be proud of the state you live in?

I guess it's just another example of our crazy mixed up world...

 

[OfTheDamned]

It truly makes me sad to see how polarized people are to the immigration issue... and how much mis-information is out there.

I am one of many residents of the great state of Arizona on this forum. I've had the unfortunate opportunity to watch too many people telling too many lies about SB1070.

20 years or so ago our southern border with Mexico was much more porous than it is today. Both the states of California and Texas successfully asked the Federal government to increase border security. These increases in border security basically created a funnel (Arizona and New Mexico) where all of the border crossers were forced to converge. In addition to the border crossers this issue has been intensified by the growth of the Mexican drug cartels. These cartels have, in recent years, expanded into the illegal immigration business. They control the coyotes and frequently use the border crossers as pack mules to carry their drugs across the border.

Quite frequently border crossers are blackmailed by the drug cartels. Carry their drugs or never see the light of day again... or worse still, carry their drugs or never see your family again. This, unfortunately, is common place anymore.

There is a commonly used path in Southern Arizona where border crossers frequently travel. These paths are littered with waste (old clothes, back packs, human waste, etc.) that was left by the border crossers and their coyotes. In several places one can see bushes littered with women's underwear. This isn't fanciful decoration, it's an arrogant display by the coyotes of how many women they raped along the way.

Often the border crossers are considered by their handlers as perishable cargo. When the coyotes get spooked or think they see border patrol, they'll dump their cargo and run. The border crossers stranded in the middle of nowhere are now forced to fend for themselves in the Sonoran desert, a very inhospitable place. Hundreds of border crossers die every year from exposure and snake bites.

And here in the metropolitan Phoenix area we see homes purchased by the coyotes and drug cartels solely for use as transfer stations. Local police regularly raid these homes and find evidence of dozens of border crossers being held in small rooms with little food and poor sanitary conditions. Border Crossers are regularly beaten and raped in these homes. In many cases they are held because the families of these borders crossers are being blackmailed back in Mexico by the drug cartels. Pay up or your family member in Arizona will be tortured or murdered.

When Arizona lawmakers passed SB1070 there were many different reasons for the law. Problem is the current administration in D.C., numerous liberal news services, and special interest groups looked at those reasons and chose to make specific light of those reasons that they thought could most easily be exploited. And to make matters worse, the state departments recent report to the U.N. singles out Arizona as a possible source of human rights violations. No mention was made that by refusing to increase border security, the Federal government creates their own human rights problem because less security equals more border crossers wandering into and possibly getting beaten, tortured, raped, or killed in the rather inhospitable Sonoran desert. Instead our Federal government chooses to focus on the concocted theory that by following existing Federal law, the State of Arizona is taking away the human rights of the border crossers.

Should these border crossers be afforded a right to live in the United States? Absolutely! But maybe they should cross the border legally and safely instead of crossing in the dead of night and walking through the most inhospitable desert on this continent. And to go that much farther out on a limb, maybe the U.S. Federal government should consider fixing their broken immigration system to allow potential immigrants to come into this country legally, study to become American citizens, and support our nation with the same vigor that they support their native countries.

The thing that really frosts me, however, with all of this silliness is that as an unexpected result of all of the mis-information, the fight over SB1070 takes away my rights to do simple things. Until recently I proudly flew an Arizona flag in front of my home. Sadly I can't do this anymore! In recent months my house has gotten egged on more than one occasion and my garage door defaced by people who believed that flying an Arizona flag was racist! Since when is it racist to be proud of the state you live in?

I guess it's just another example of our crazy mixed up world...

Martimus, you make some really great points and I appreciate you posting that. I have heard and read many of the things you said, but not to that extent.

The more I read about this issue the more I come to the conclusion that properly securing our borders is the only reasonable and humane thing to do. Knowing that the Mexican government as well as our own doesn't want to do anything to stop these problems makes me sick.

 

[hakr100]

When Arizona lawmakers passed SB1070 there were many different reasons for the law. Problem is the current administration in D.C., numerous liberal news services, and special interest groups looked at those reasons and chose to make specific light of those reasons that they thought could most easily be exploited. And to make matters worse, the state departments recent report to the U.N. singles out Arizona as a possible source of human rights violations. No mention was made that by refusing to increase border security, the Federal government creates their own human rights problem because less security equals more border crossers wandering into and possibly getting beaten, tortured, raped, or killed in the rather inhospitable Sonoran desert. Instead our Federal government chooses to focus on the concocted theory that by following existing Federal law, the State of Arizona is taking away the human rights of the border crossers.

My understanding is that the U.S. government believes the Arizona law usurps and intrudes into the legal turf of the federal government.

I do like the line in your post about numerous liberal news services, and special interest groups. It's the job of the media to call attention, and it is the job of special interest groups to protest or promote within reason. I dislike the propensity of the conservative media to drive wedges between Americans, and to promote hate, fear, and outright lies. But there's nothing I can do about it.

The thing that really frosts me, however, with all of this silliness is that as an unexpected result of all of the mis-information, the fight over SB1070 takes away my rights to do simple things. Until recently I proudly flew an Arizona flag in front of my home. Sadly I can't do this anymore! In recent months my house has gotten egged on more than one occasion and my garage door defaced by people who believed that flying an Arizona flag was racist! Since when is it racist to be proud of the state you live in?

I guess it's just another example of our crazy mixed up world...

Perhaps your state flag has become the equivalent of the old Confederate States battle flag, a symbol of bigotry and hatred to many, many Americans, including me.

 

[Roxors]

One major thing that a lot of people are getting wrong here is, though AZ was one of the states to go VERY public to implement harsher laws concerning immigrants they aren't the sole government to start these. It is more of a US government thing.

Though as hakr100 stated there are those who are against harsher laws in the government. Which is why we have our system of checks and balances so that not one party can just do what THEY believe is right for them and not the country.

Though those who say we are intruding on their American rights are WRONG they aren't Americans they are people who a lot of times won't even try to get legal here until they are just given citizenship.

Now if they actually want to try to fit into our Country then they can go for it, just do it the right way. My taxes and money should stay with my counrty not be given away as a check to any group of people who just want to sneak into our country.