- Joined
- Jun 22, 2015
- Messages
- 15,282
- Age
- 75
- Location
- Pa
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Charismatic
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
Noone should be surprised by him, he has always been flambouyant
Illegal immigrants are criminals by definition, hence the word "illegal" in their name - they've broken the immigration laws by either overstaying a visa or not having a visa in the first place.
Whether they are criminals in ways other than breaking immigration laws isn't something that can usefully be determined to an unknown number of people. We might argue that those who disregard immigration laws are unlikely to care much about other laws, but then we could say the same about people who fiddle their expenses or speed on the interstate. Arguably one might expect an illegal immigrant to lay as low as possible and avoid breaking laws, knowing that the slightest brush with the law will most likely result in deportation.
Do you believe most of the illegals in this country are criminals or can they be okay? Trump says the Mexicans are rapists and killers.
Being in the country illegally is not actually a crime, it is a civil offense. So illegal immigrants aren't criminals on the sole basis of being here illegally.
OK, would it work any better to say they are lawbreakers?
To be honest I think it's little more than semantic nitpicking (especially in this context) because a broad brush comment that assumes every single resident of a country is a criminal is a stupid thing to say.
If Mr Trump truly did say that all Mexicans are rapists and killers it's hard to see how anyone can take him seriously.
There is more to what he said, but here is some of it.
During his campaign kickoff speech on June 16, The Celebrity Apprentice host said, “the U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best.” He added, “They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
So something of an assumption that an inert lump of rock slightly south of another inert lump of rock is somehow sending undesirables?
Of course part of the reason for having immigration rules is that you can decide whether someone wanting to come and live in your country is an undesirable or not, however your laws define "undesirable". But presumably the inert lump of rock to the east of the water east of Trump's lump of rock only sends good people, because presumably Europeans aren't murderers and rapists. Only some of them.
So something of an assumption that an inert lump of rock slightly south of another inert lump of rock is somehow sending undesirables?
Of course part of the reason for having immigration rules is that you can decide whether someone wanting to come and live in your country is an undesirable or not, however your laws define "undesirable". But presumably the inert lump of rock to the east of the water east of Trump's lump of rock only sends good people, because presumably Europeans aren't murderers and rapists. Only some of them.
Truw but we should not refer to all of them in thta wayActually, that "lump of rock to the east of the water" sends its immigrants through the USA's FRONT DOOR. A.K.A. The legal way.
They do not sneak in like the lump of rock to the south. A.K.A. The ILLEGAL way -- and they do have hardened criminals and drug dealers mixed in with the good people who also arrive.
Truw but we should not refer to all of them in thta way
Actually, that "lump of rock to the east of the water" sends its immigrants through the USA's FRONT DOOR. A.K.A. The legal way.
They do not sneak in like the lump of rock to the south. A.K.A. The ILLEGAL way -- and they do have hardened criminals and drug dealers mixed in with the good people who also arrive.
I'm sure that when most people, in normal conversation, refer to a country they are not referring to actual dirt that the country sits on. In most cases (and especially in political speeches) they are referring to the government of the country.
Sent from my iPhone using my right thumb.
The big companies wanted the EU to expand so that they could hire ppl and pay them less, if they built their factories in Eastern Europe.Maybe they do, but to imply that the government is merely dumping its unwanted citizens on another country ignores many other reasons why people would try and live somewhere else, legally or otherwise.
Personally I've never felt the need to flee my home land with nothing aside from the clothes I happen to be wearing at the time. I've never felt the need to hide inside a diesel tanker, or cling to the underside of a truck, or climb inside the landing gear of an aircraft, in a desperate bid to escape whatever was wrong with my homeland.
If I were desperately hard up and my government offered me money to wriggle through a hole in a fence to live in another country I'd be tempted. If the government offered me money to do something that put my well-being (maybe even my life) in danger, I'd have to be seriously desperate to consider that one.
In the UK (London in particular) there are a huge number of Polish people. They arrived from Poland, many own businesses, most of them work very hard. It's frankly embarrassing to see the differences between a lot of English business and a lot of Polish businesses. When I needed some decorating work done I invited three companies to quote. The Polish guy showed up, looked over the job, talked through how he proposed to tackle it, and gave me a price. The English guy showed up, sucked air through his teeth, didn't want to commit to part of the work (but said he'd be willing to charge on a per-hour basis to do it), then didn't even bother to submit a quote/estimate. A third guy (an Oriental guy) responded much the same as the Polish guy but quoted a higher price. So the Polish guy got the job, he sent two Polish workers to paint my house, and you'd struggle to fault anything about the job they did.
NAFTA was a complete disaster for the american workerThe big companies wanted the EU to expand so that they could hire ppl and pay them less, if they built their factories in Eastern Europe.
Part of this is that competitive workers can move to Western Europe.
NAFTA and relations with Mexico are similar, in some ways.