WWTBAM Bored

I realize that this subject has been pushed down a few rungs on the importance ladder recently but I ran across this article that proposed some very good ideas if this should pop up again. Hopefully, once the election is over it will again be brought to the fore and considered. These ideas included the following:

A person must be in the country legally
They must have the means to sustain themselves economically
They must not destined to be burdens on society
They must of economic and social benefit to society
They must be of good character and have no criminal records
They must be contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

Also,
The INS authorities must have a record of each foreign visitor
Foreign visitors do not violate their visa status
Foreign visitors are forbidden from interfering in the country's internal politics
Foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses will be imprisoned or deported
Foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry will be imprisoned or deported
Those who aid in illegal immigration will be deported or sent to prison.

These are some great ideas, if you ask me.

As an oh-by-the-way, these are the immigration laws for Mexico.

sirge:

I realize that this subject has been pushed down a few rungs on the importance ladder recently

Down there in the cellar with privatizing Social Security. Wouldn't this last week have been a hoot? Not...

Sir_Galahad wrote:I realize that this subject has been pushed down a few rungs on the importance ladder recently but I ran across this article that proposed some very good ideas if this should pop up again. Hopefully, once the election is over it will again be brought to the fore and considered. These ideas included the following:

A person must be in the country legally
They must have the means to sustain themselves economically
They must not destined to be burdens on society
They must of economic and social benefit to society
They must be of good character and have no criminal records
They must be contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

Also,
The INS authorities must have a record of each foreign visitor
Foreign visitors do not violate their visa status
Foreign visitors are forbidden from interfering in the country's internal politics
Foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses will be imprisoned or deported
Foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry will be imprisoned or deported
Those who aid in illegal immigration will be deported or sent to prison.

These are some great ideas, if you ask me.

As an oh-by-the-way, these are the immigration laws for Mexico.

Add that geography of birth does not a citizen make. I don't know what Mexico's specific rule is on this, but if both parents are not Mexican citizens and if the mother is in Mexico illegally at the time of birth, the baby is not a Mexican citizen.

Well then, you need to amend the Constitution. It's interesting that the 14th amendment was original conceived as the legal mechanism to grant citizenship to the recently emancipated slaves. The crafters of the 14th amendment didn't foresee the waves of immigration; they just needed a convenient way to grant citizenship to those people who had been born within the US.

BTW, the INS no longer exists. The agency most responsible would be ICE.

Sir_Galahad wrote:I realize that this subject has been pushed down a few rungs on the importance ladder recently but I ran across this article that proposed some very good ideas if this should pop up again. Hopefully, once the election is over it will again be brought to the fore and considered. These ideas included the following:

A person must be in the country legally
They must have the means to sustain themselves economically
They must not destined to be burdens on society
They must of economic and social benefit to society
They must be of good character and have no criminal records
They must be contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

Also,
The INS authorities must have a record of each foreign visitor
Foreign visitors do not violate their visa status
Foreign visitors are forbidden from interfering in the country's internal politics
Foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses will be imprisoned or deported
Foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry will be imprisoned or deported
Those who aid in illegal immigration will be deported or sent to prison.

These are some great ideas, if you ask me.

As an oh-by-the-way, these are the immigration laws for Mexico.

How's that working out for Mexico?

ToLiveIsToFly wrote:

Sir_Galahad wrote:I realize that this subject has been pushed down a few rungs on the importance ladder recently but I ran across this article that proposed some very good ideas if this should pop up again. Hopefully, once the election is over it will again be brought to the fore and considered. These ideas included the following:

A person must be in the country legally
They must have the means to sustain themselves economically
They must not destined to be burdens on society
They must of economic and social benefit to society
They must be of good character and have no criminal records
They must be contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

Also,
The INS authorities must have a record of each foreign visitor
Foreign visitors do not violate their visa status
Foreign visitors are forbidden from interfering in the country's internal politics
Foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses will be imprisoned or deported
Foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry will be imprisoned or deported
Those who aid in illegal immigration will be deported or sent to prison.

These are some great ideas, if you ask me.

As an oh-by-the-way, these are the immigration laws for Mexico.

How's that working out for Mexico?

A helluva lot better than it's working for us.

Sir_Galahad wrote:I realize that this subject has been pushed down a few rungs on the importance ladder recently but I ran across this article that proposed some very good ideas if this should pop up again. Hopefully, once the election is over it will again be brought to the fore and considered. These ideas included the following:

A person must be in the country legally
They must have the means to sustain themselves economically
They must not destined to be burdens on society
They must of economic and social benefit to society
They must be of good character and have no criminal records
They must be contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

Also,
The INS authorities must have a record of each foreign visitor
Foreign visitors do not violate their visa status
Foreign visitors are forbidden from interfering in the country's internal politics
Foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses will be imprisoned or deported
Foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry will be imprisoned or deported
Those who aid in illegal immigration will be deported or sent to prison.

These are some great ideas, if you ask me.

As an oh-by-the-way, these are the immigration laws for Mexico.

Who gets to decide whether potential immigrants are a "social benefit"? Whether their character is "good"? What constitutes the "general well-being of the nation"? Could some homophobic bureaucrat keep a couple out of the country than for no other reason than their sexual orientation?

Are we to say that the First Amendment doesn't apply to foreign visitors? If not, then just what constitutes "interfer[ing]" with internal politics? It's already the case that you need a green card to make a legal contribution to a political campaign.

I believe that most of the rest of this is already U.S. law. Of course, we're spending an awful lot of money on other stuff, so I don't know that the federal government has the resources to vigorously enforce the laws that are on the books. Maybe if we weren't pissing away billions of dollars a month in Iraq . . . . --Bob