what is our position on the Caravan

[bluebell]

25 minutes ago, why me said:

On the other hand, there are perhaps millions who would willingly come to the US to better their financial situations or who are poor. How many should be let in? Why have immigration laws at all? Just have open borders where humanity is welcome to live in the prosperous US. Of course, the US has millions of homeless and poor too. Not to mention gang violence and high murder rates in cities. I am sure that some US people would love to migrate to canada if they would be welcome but, sadly most likely the canadians would not want them. So, they are stuck in the US living in tents or in cardboard boxes or are suffering from gang violence. Such is reality.

None of that answers those questions though.

[Danzo]

16 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I'm saying that we can only deal with reality as it is, not with hypotheticals (such as "if this guy had had his status adjusted...").

In reality, the driver was here illegally.  But for his illegal presence in the U.S., he would not have killed Sarah Root.

Says the guy who is asking us to envision an alternative reality and ignore actual reality.

No.  But we could eliminate crimes committed by illegal immigrants by removing them from the U.S. (or preventing their unlawful entry in the first place).

Thanks,

Smac

You just complaining about the guys physical location.  Of course if he wasn't there he wouldn't have caused the accident. That works with any accident.

There are two possiblities when you say "But for his illegal presence in the U.S."

1. his presence in the US caused the accident. (had he not been there it wouldn't have happened)

2. The fact that his presence was illegal caused the accident. (had he been legal there would not have been an accident).

I'll agree with statement number 1. yes, if he had been somewhere else the accident would not have happened but that is the same with anything other accident and we learn nothing from it.

statement number two depends on a complicated set of rules and paperwork.  His legal status can change from one day to the next.  Whether he is here legally or not is a purely administrative status.  What his status was on that particular day just is not relevant.  Its like saying whether his taxes were paid or not contributed to the accident. 

Your objection to him is that he was in the US, not with his immigration status.

Had he not been in the US (even if he were a US citizen) the accident would not have happened (immigration status in this case is irrelevant).

 

Edited October 29, 2018 by Danzo

[halconero]

9 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Is there an argument to be made for Canada having more room for refugee settlements?  The US has 8 times more population than Canada but less square footage.  Canada has 3.7 people per square mile while the US has 92.2 people per square mile.

Not really. Short-term fiscal, housing, and service capacities on a per capita basis as factors far outweigh population density.

Also, a better comparison people per square mile would be between inhabited and inhabitable areas. Places like the Canadian Shield and the Territories render large parts of Canada unihabitable for both refugees and people born in Canada.

When comparing inhabited and habitable areas, it largely equals out, especially when comparing urban vs rural habitation and municipal density.

Having enough space in either small towns or cities has never been a serious issue with regards to immigration policy, especially when the number of refugees is in the five-digit/year range.

Edited October 29, 2018 by halconero

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Do you hold all laws as sacred? 

 

Before I answer you next detour, let me address you last post. 

The comment "marriage vs shacking up", as it relates to immigration, if a couple "shacks up" (an old term) no one knows if one or both parties are in this country legally, unless a law is broken. When someone marries in an attempt to circumvent immigration laws, it then becomes apparent to the Law-Enforcement community, especially when they seek legal status.

Your comment about the "statue of limitations" for Bank Robbery, after half a lifetime is conditional, as in "the felon", in not a repeat felon, and robbing banks. Coming to the U.S. illegally, remains a crime for many reasons. The person is continuing in that crime, and is also committing (usually) more crimes, not filing tax returns yearly, using illegal or other's social security numbers, and identities, etc.

As for viewing all laws "sacred", I don't need too. My duties only require that I "support, defend and enforce all laws", and my "Faith", requires that I honor and obey all laws, in whatever country I live in, or have lived in.  

[smac97]

Just now, Danzo said:

You just complaining about the guys physical location. 

Yes.  His "physical location" was an essential component of his causing the death of Sarah Root.

But for his illegal presence in the U.S., he would not have caused the death of Sarah Root.

Just now, Danzo said:

Of course if he wasn't there he wouldn't have caused the accident. That works with any accident.

Sarah Root's death is one of a large number of costs associated with illegal immigration in the U.S.

It should go without saying, but given that you've opted to play the race card, I guess I'll need to say it: I have no objection to immigration to the U.S. (of any nationality). I just want it down legally and safely.

Just now, Danzo said:

There are two possiblities when you say "But for his illegal presence in the U.S."

1. his presence in the US caused the accident. (had he not been there it wouldn't have happened)

Yes.

Just now, Danzo said:

2. The fact that his presence was illegal caused the accident. (had he been legal there would not have been an accident).

Not so much.

Just now, Danzo said:

Your objection to him is that he was in the US, not with his immigration status.

No.  My objection was that he was in the U.S. illegally.

Just now, Danzo said:

Had he not been in the US (even if he were a US citizen) the accident would not have happened (immigration status in this case is irrelevant).

No.  His unlawful presence in the U.S. was a "but for" element of his causing the death of Sarah Root.

And again, given your previous racebaiting cheapshot, I will again state that I have no objection to immigration to the U.S. (of any nationality). I just want it down legally and safely.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Danzo]

2 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Before I answer you next detour, let me address you last post. 

The comment "marriage vs shacking up", as it relates to immigration, if a couple "shacks up" (an old term) no one knows if one or both parties are in this country legally, unless a law is broken. When someone marries in an attempt to circumvent immigration laws, it then becomes apparent to the Law-Enforcement community, especially when they seek legal status.

Your comment about the "statue of limitations" for Bank Robbery, after half a lifetime is conditional, as in "the felon", in not a repeat felon, and robbing banks. Coming to the U.S. illegally, remains a crime for many reasons. The person is continuing in that crime, and is also committing (usually) more crimes, not filing tax returns yearly, using illegal or other's social security numbers, and identities, etc.

As for viewing all laws "sacred", I don't need too. My duties only require that I "support, defend and enforce all laws", and my "Faith", requires that I honor and obey all laws, in whatever country I live in, or have lived in.  

Your knowledge of the law is lacking here.

Illegal presence is not a crime.

As for marriage, I refer to when someone who has a pending application for residency as a single person if they get married, it destroys their application, hence most immigration attorneys tell them to live together instead of marrying. 

This is especially a problem in the church where we tell people to get married (since they already have a family together) knowing it will disqualify them from ever being legal.

Edited October 29, 2018 by Danzo

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

If you were in their place, what would you honestly want citizens in a country you were trying to seek refuge and a better life in to do?  That's probably the best answer to that question 'what should we do' since Jesus commands us to do unto others as we would have them do unto us and to love other people as we love ourselves.  The answer is probably unique to the individual.  

On a separate note, I do find it kind of interesting that so many members of the church are in this position (to discuss how immigrants or refugees should be treated) given our history of fleeing persecution and looking for safety in areas where the locals were not at all hospitable and where the hostile locals used some very similar reasons to want the 'mormons' out that we hear on the news concerning this subject.   

Can you share with me the persecution these people have experienced? Why wouldn't these people just move elsewhere in their own countries? Better yet, why not just move to an adjacent country? I think these questions are important and helpful to understand the real motivation behind their actions. 

Reading about Honduras, there has been a wide spreading problem with gang violence, murders, rapes, etc. Though it is an extremely beautiful country, it appears the people tend to be lawless. This is a society that is failing - its people are failing. Surely there must be good people among them, but it seems obvious that too many of their citizens choose violence and crime over a civil society. It makes me question if these are the type of people we want to invite into our neighborhoods. How can you tell if an individual is prone to violence?  I don't know.

[bluebell]

12 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Can you share with me the persecution these people have experienced? Why wouldn't these people just move elsewhere in their own countries? Better yet, why not just move to an adjacent country? I think these questions are important and helpful to understand the real motivation behind their actions. 

Reading about Honduras, there has been a wide spreading problem with gang violence, murders, rapes, etc. Though it is an extremely beautiful country, it appears the people tend to be lawless. This is a society that is failing - its people are failing. Surely there must be good people among them, but it seems obvious that too many of their citizens choose violence and crime over a civil society. It makes me question if these are the type of people we want to invite into our neighborhoods. How can you tell if an individual is prone to violence?  I don't know.

It sounds like you already know the persecution that 'these people' are facing and why they don't just move next door since you outlined the problems in Honduras.  I don't know how to answer your 'are Hondurans the kind of people we want to invite in our neighborhoods' question.  Abject poverty, government corruptibility, the 'war on drugs' and no hope for any kind of a future is likely what causes most of the problems in Honduras, rather than the people simply choosing violence over a civil society.  

Are you attempting to make the 'they brought all of this on themselves' argument, or am I misunderstanding what you are saying?  If you are, you might be interested in how US tacit support of the 2009 coup has caused the Honduras crisis.

Edited October 29, 2018 by bluebell

[Danzo]

10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

No.  His unlawful presence in the U.S. was a "but for" element of his causing the death of Sarah Root.

And again, given your previous racebaiting cheapshot, I will again state that I have no objection to immigration to the U.S. (of any nationality). I just want it down legally and safely.

Thanks,

I'll have to disagree with you. Only his presence, not the "unlawful" could be considered by any court of law part of the "but for" element.

The "unlawful" adjective has no relevance.  I would be surprised if the fact would even be allowed into evidence if a trial for this person were held. 

 

[Gray]

This just in. The caravan has grown to a mob of more than a million strong. Most of the group is comprised of gang members, ISIS terrorists, axe murderers, avocado-toast eating millennials, and zombies. We've just received word that 80% of them carrying Ebola, swine flu and the black plague. The women and children are actually cleverly disguised luchadores-turned-car thieves.

We're hearing now from the leader of the mob, Mohammad Garcia-Shapiro, that the army has since swollen to more than a billion members, and is now headed straight for your neighborhood. They're planning on converting your children to a non-protestant religion. They plan to immediately apply for welfare while simultaneously stealing your part-time job down at the factory. We're definitely not exaggerating any of this to rile up our base, who will believe anything we say!

 

https://twitter.com/passantino/status/1057013271859994624

 

Edited October 30, 2018 by Gray

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Your knowledge of the law is lacking here.

Illegal presence is not a crime.

I did not say it was, I was speaking of the crimes surrounding it, of forged documents, taxes, and stolen identies to work. Crimes that continue, with each passing year, tax evasion being the worst, as far as the IRS and the Fed's are concerned. If you are not seeking a dialog, and wish to continue pointing out my lack of understanding of "all laws", and misrepresenting my comments. Then this is where I say, our relationship is not working out, and we can still be friends. To coin a phrase. 

[Danzo]

9 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

I did not say it was, I was speaking of the crimes surrounding it, of forged documents, taxes, and stolen identies to work. Crimes that continue, with each passing year, tax evasion being the worst, as far as the IRS and the Fed's are concerned. If you are not seeking a dialog, and wish to continue pointing out my lack of understanding of "all laws", and misrepresenting my comments. Then this is where I say, our relationship is not working out, and we can still be friends. To coin a phrase. 

Taxation of undocumented individuals is one of my specializations.  I teach seminars on it.

People who are here illegally pay their taxes. 

I know, I help them do it.  Every. Single. Day. 

some of them have six figure tax liabilities.  And they pay it.

They pay Sales tax.  Every time they go to the store.

LDS people often have a harder time paying their taxes.  Can't tell you how many times I have had members of the church ask me how to get out of paying taxes.  We even had a Stake President in our stake  get released due to Criminal Tax evasion that he plead guilty to. 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  His "physical location" was an essential component of his causing the death of Sarah Root.

But for his illegal presence in the U.S., he would not have caused the death of Sarah Root.

Sarah Root's death is one of a large number of costs associated with illegal immigration in the U.S.

It should go without saying, but given that you've opted to play the race card, I guess I'll need to say it: I have no objection to immigration to the U.S. (of any nationality). I just want it down legally and safely.

Yes.

Not so much.

No.  My objection was that he was in the U.S. illegally.

No.  His unlawful presence in the U.S. was a "but for" element of his causing the death of Sarah Root.

And again, given your previous racebaiting cheapshot, I will again state that I have no objection to immigration to the U.S. (of any nationality). I just want it down legally and safely.

Thanks,

-Smac

It is telling that when looking for crimes that show the heinousness of immigrants you pick a DUI manslaughter case, something American citizens cause more of then immigrants....even per capita. Statistically an immigrant behind the wheel is less likely to kill someone while driving impaired then you are.

And you are using it to prove immigrants are particularly dangerous?

Edited October 30, 2018 by The Nehor

[Calm]

Quote

But for his illegal presence in the U.S., he would not have caused the death of Sarah Root.

This argument logically appears parallel to me to "but for her legal presence in the US, she would not have died."

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

This argument logically appears parallel to me to "but for her legal presence in the US, she would not have died."

Indeed, the smart thing for everyone to do is to flee the United States as it makes it impossible for you to die there.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

How can you tell if an individual is prone to violence?  I don't know.

Check to see if they have attended a MAGA rally.

Edited October 30, 2018 by The Nehor

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, halconero said:

No superiority implied. It's just the simple reality that the total number of resettled refugees has dropped below Canada's for the first time in history this year, and is due to maintain its downward trend next year.

Whether or not I think this is good humanitarian policy or foreign policy, or even a matter of comparative morality, has little to due with that fact.

Well said.  In fact, despite some signal differences in our two polities, Canada does in fact have superiority in several areas:  healthcare, immigration law, and just common decency.  The USA could learn a lot from Canadians in those and a number of other areas.

[Danzo]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

This argument logically appears parallel to me to "but for her legal presence in the US, she would not have died."

I think you stated it better than I did.

It the exact same argument, and I am surprised that Smac doesn't see it.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Taxation of undocumented individuals is one of my specializations.  I teach seminars on it.

People who are here illegally pay their taxes. 

I know, I help them do it.  Every. Single. Day. 

some of them have six figure tax liabilities.  And they pay it.

They pay Sales tax.  Every time they go to the store.

LDS people often have a harder time paying their taxes.  Can't tell you how many times I have had members of the church ask me how to get out of paying taxes.  We even had a Stake President in our stake  get released due to Criminal Tax evasion that he plead guilty to. 

You help illegal immigrants, without Social Security Numbers fill out their 1040's, and taxes each year, and teach them how to do it? I know they pay taxes, and anyone who spends just one dollar, be they legal, illegal, or unemployed, all pay sales tax. Or do you speak of legal migrant workers who must pay income tax. Also, "LDS people often have a harder time paying their taxes"! You do know this is a pro-LDS site, and not an anti-LDS site; right? Also, this comment just exalted the illegal immigrant (or to use you benign term) "undocumented worker", and made low the LDS People, in or on mass. Time for some truth, you have attacked the U.S. and it's laws, and the members of the Church; why are you on this site, and why are you here? It is your coal to exalt the illegal, while demeaning the legal?    

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, Vance said:

..........The advocating of obedience to the law is not " the agitation & propaganda efforts of authoritarian and corrupt regimes worldwide".

Obedience is fine as long as it does not supersede righteousness and truth, which seems to get left behind.  Also, if one takes Pravda ("Truth") literally, what can "freedom" possibly mean?  Those who use agitprop in place of truth have already told us what they really believe.

[The Nehor]

8 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

You help illegal immigrants, without Social Security Numbers fill out their 1040's, and taxes each year, and teach them how to do it? I know they pay taxes, and anyone who spends just one dollar, be they legal, illegal, or unemployed, all pay sales tax. Or do you speak of legal migrant workers who must pay income tax. Also, "LDS people often have a harder time paying their taxes"! You do know this is a pro-LDS site, and not an anti-LDS site; right? Also, this comment just exalted the illegal immigrant (or to use you benign term) "undocumented worker", and made low the LDS People, in or on mass. Time for some truth, you have attacked the U.S. and it's laws, and the members of the Church; why are you on this site, and why are you here? It is your coal to exalt the illegal, while demeaning the legal?    

Legality is everything. The Savior deserved to die. The court found him guilty under the law.

Also, I try to get out of paying taxes so that is one more LDS data point for you.

Edited October 30, 2018 by The Nehor

[Calm]

Quote

healthcare

Depends on how you measure it.

I was forced to depend on drugs that made me constantly nauseated and aggravated my disorder because Canada's doctors refused to allow the drugs that worked without side effects as an option.  I was able to get one drug mailed to the border and 'smuggled' by friends (on the advice of custom agents), but unfortunately the more important one I couldn't get until I moved to the States.  My daughter was not allowed to get a pump for her diabetes until age 18 and only then if she exbihibted control.  She had to drop out of school because she was unable to control her sugars and was always sick.  As soon as we moved down to the States she got a pump and her sugars moved into normal range.  

There are some very good things about Canadian healthcare.  Insulin was cheap up there.  But it has its shortcomings in some areas.  It seems less patient driven and more law and doctor imposed, imo (this was 15 years ago).  

I had a doctor take off for a week long ski vacation right after I had surgery and because another doctor was not assigned me, I had to stay in the hospital in bed (they wouldn't let me get up and move as they should have been doing, there were only two patients there because they were shutting down the hospital and two nurses so not like a lot of demand for attention) for an extra 5 days in pain because they would not even give me ibu-profen without his approval and without explaining to me there was likely concerned about bleeding or explaining anything else and wouldn't try to contact him, but instead just kept giving me ineffective pain meds.  The hospital wasn't concerned about costs of the extra days as the government was paying for it, only staff convenience. (Great care at a different hospital, but was also only there overnight).

Edited October 30, 2018 by Calm

[Danzo]

22 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

You help illegal immigrants, without Social Security Numbers fill out their 1040's, and taxes each year, and teach them how to do it? I know they pay taxes, and anyone who spends just one dollar, be they legal, illegal, or unemployed, all pay sales tax. Or do you speak of legal migrant workers who must pay income tax. Also, "LDS people often have a harder time paying their taxes"! You do know this is a pro-LDS site, and not an anti-LDS site; right? Also, this comment just exalted the illegal immigrant (or to use you benign term) "undocumented worker", and made low the LDS People, in or on mass. Time for some truth, you have attacked the U.S. and it's laws, and the members of the Church; why are you on this site, and why are you here? It is your coal to exalt the illegal, while demeaning the legal?    

Yes, I help illegal immigrants without social security numbers fill out their 1040s and teach them how to do it. They pay me to do it. 

I have represented them in tax court as well. They also paid me to do it.

I also help out legal migrant workers

I even help people out who have been in the US for Generations do their taxes. 

I know that this is an LDS themed site (not so sure about the Pro part).  Personally, I am pro LDS, I have many friends here illegally who are pro LDS as well, people who have served missions, as branch presidents and other callings.

I even married a (formerly) illegal immigrant. She is now a citizen and a registered republican. She served a mission here while she was illegal (preached repentance to those heathen in Provo Utah, in fact).  The church knew she was illegal.  The only reason she was able to join the church was that she was here illegally (no LDS presence where she was from). We were married in the temple while she was illegal.  With the full knowledge of her bishop and stake president.

I have just stated the truth. Some member of the church have a problem paying taxes. I often have to remind many them of their duties to pay taxes. (of course most do not have a problem paying taxes). Not paying taxes doesn't seem to be a problem unique to either illegal immigrants or LDS. 

My goal is to exalt the higher laws and to not condemn people for minor offenses when possible.  In my studies of law, I have  learned that some laws are more important than other laws (both secular and spiritual laws).

We all break laws (both secular and spiritual).  The law is not going to save us. We should not feel ourselves superior just because we break different laws than others. 

 

Edited October 30, 2018 by Danzo

[Danzo]

23 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

You help illegal immigrants, without Social Security Numbers fill out their 1040's, and taxes each year, and teach them how to do it? I know they pay taxes, and anyone who spends just one dollar, be they legal, illegal, or unemployed, all pay sales tax. Or do you speak of legal migrant workers who must pay income tax. Also, "LDS people often have a harder time paying their taxes"! You do know this is a pro-LDS site, and not an anti-LDS site; right? Also, this comment just exalted the illegal immigrant (or to use you benign term) "undocumented worker", and made low the LDS People, in or on mass. Time for some truth, you have attacked the U.S. and it's laws, and the members of the Church; why are you on this site, and why are you here? It is your coal to exalt the illegal, while demeaning the legal?    

Most times, when meeting with someone who is illegal, I discuss with them possible ways to become more legal.  Most of the time there is no legal way for them to become legal, but sometimes I can refer them to an immigration attorney and they can become legal.

I often hear them say that they want to pay their fair share of taxes and don't want to freeload.

I often find they are doing their taxes incorrectly, much of the time through ignorance (US citizens have this problem as will with their taxes).  Most of the time they are happy to correct their reporting of their taxes even when it means they pay more taxes as a result.  When they cannot pay their taxes, I often set up payment plans and other arrangements so they can pay their taxes. 

The goal is always to get them as legal as possible under their situation (which is the same goal for everyone, legal or not).

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Legality is everything. The Savior deserved to die. The court found him guilty under the law.

Also, I try to get out of paying taxes so that is one more LDS data point for you.

 

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Legality is everything. The Savior deserved to die. The court found him guilty under the law.

Also, I try to get out of paying taxes so that is one more LDS data point for you.

The Savior had to die, and God our Father knew that the laws under which he was born would insure it, or would you rather he lived and there was no Atonement, and no Resurrection? I also assume that you use every legal (allowable means under the law) process to pay as little taxes as you can; right? That is not the same thing as fraud, the other poster spoke of, for sure. The poster I answered was seeking to imply we all try to evade paying taxes.. I understand, 8 years active Army, 2 years in The National Guard, and 23 years in Law-Enforcement, makes me "The Man" (to use a 60's term), and I a sworn enemy of the young, so does that make me wrong no matter what I post? I understand that more and more, most posters are much younger, and far more liberal, but does that mean those of us who are older are dinosaurs, should leave, or stop posting? Don't worry, my time IS coming to n end, but, I still love you all.