TOS Violations and Moderator Responses

[BaronB 42]

I thank you for your detailed reply to my question.

I am having problems getting my mind around "Ignoring people that have had transgressions in the past that are seeking to right it HELPS NO ONE. "

Illegal activities are not all the same, I know this much. Making an innocent mistake is not the same as plotting an illegal activitiy.

Otherwise there would be no concept of "pre-meditation" in law and all guilty parties would be subject to the same punishment under law.

There seems to be extensive pre-meditation in this case. Evidenced by the knowledge of a working visa together with the length of time of illegal overstay.

VJ can change their TOS which ever way they like. I have no problem with that. Most people here are here to get information about doing things legally.

What I have/had a problem with is assisting someone with pre-meditated intentions to disobey immigration laws and THEN find a way to stay. That to me, as a legal professional, flies in the face of everything that makes laws worthwhile and meaningful.

This is my opinion, I don't expect anyone to agree with me.

[Teddy B 17,251]

I thank you for your detailed reply to my question.

I am having problems getting my mind around "Ignoring people that have had transgressions in the past that are seeking to right it HELPS NO ONE. "

Illegal activities are not all the same, I know this much. Making an innocent mistake is not the same as plotting an illegal activitiy.

Otherwise there would be no concept of "pre-meditation" in law and all guilty parties would be subject to the same punishment under law.

There seems to be extensive pre-meditation in this case. Evidenced by the knowledge of a working visa together with the length of time of illegal overstay.

VJ can change their TOS which ever way they like. I have no problem with that. Most people here are here to get information about doing things legally.

What I have/had a problem with is assisting someone with pre-meditated intentions to disobey immigration laws and THEN find a way to stay. That to me, as a legal professional, flies in the face of everything that makes laws worthwhile and meaningful.

This is my opinion, I don't expect anyone to agree with me.

There are legal avenues available to people who have broken immigration laws that will give them the opportunity to right their wrongs. Informing those people of what the legal avenues are is not helping anyone to do anything illegal. You may find their past transgressions to be morally unacceptable and that's fine, sometimes I do as well, but the advice being given is to help people become legal and hopefully start doing things within the boundaries of the law. I suggest that if you find a particular subject to be morally objectionable that you simply do not offer to help and don't post in that thread, that's what most of the folks do here. If something is posted that you thank might be against the TOS, then by all means report it. No guarantees you will like the outcome, but at least you did your part.

Sometimes I can't keep my opinions to myself and I have had many posts removed and been thread banned for voicing my opinions about something I find morally objectionable, it's just the way it goes.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Teddy B

[BaronB 42]

Let's be frank, I don't find legal transgressions to be "morally unacceptable", I find them to be legally unacceptable. If morals had anything to do with US immigration this site would not exist. Morals are subjective not objective.

Having said that, I understand what you are saying and I take it into consideration.

[blahblahblog 36]

Let's be frank, I don't find legal transgressions to be "morally unacceptable", I find them to be legally unacceptable. If morals had anything to do with US immigration this site would not exist. Morals are subjective not objective.

Having said that, I understand what you are saying and I take it into consideration.

The way I see it, your beef is with the fact that the existing remedies that offer incentives for people to take "shortcuts". The government could easily do away with all the waivers for the 3/10 year bans, AOS from tourist visas or B visas and pardons for IR of USCs. Providing this information to an illegal alien, no matter how horrible the violations were isn't different from giving advice on "petitions to the Supreme Court" to someone in the death row, no matter how heinous their crime is.

The only way to adjust VJ TOS to fix the problem you have is to delete threads where person had knowingly violated immigration law.

[BaronB 42]

The only way to adjust VJ TOS to fix the problem you have is to delete threads where person had knowingly violated immigration law.

And is that a problem? Shouldn't this site exist for people doing things the legally acceptable way ? Anyone else is free to seek legal advice from a lawyer.

Edited April 24, 2015 by BaronB

[Teddy B 17,251]

And is that a problem? Shouldn't this site exist for people doing things the legally acceptable way ? Anyone else is free to seek legal advice from a lawyer.

I'd be interested to see some open threads here that are giving advice on how to do things illegally. Could you link to a few? From what I've ever seen on VJ all threads or posts advocating illegal activity are either closed, deleted or both, and there is usually some type of warning by the mods against making any more posts of an illegal nature.

[Boiler 45,311]

I'd be interested to see some open threads here that are giving advice on how to do things illegally. Could you link to a few? From what I've ever seen on VJ all threads or posts advocating illegal activity are either closed, deleted or both, and there is usually some type of warning by the mods against making any more posts of an illegal nature.

Exactly

[BaronB 42]

Does anyone here understand ENGLISH?

"The only way to adjust VJ TOS to fix the problem you have is to delete threads where person had knowingly violated immigration law."

What is wrong with deleting threads where someone has knowingly violated immigration law? A person who comes on a working visa and overstays by many years falls into this category.

This was EXACTLY the case I had a problem with. So you mods can come here and tell me it is no so. The fact remains that someone came here, someone who overstayed illegally, then asked for advice.

If you deny this took place, that is ignorance. I know. I read it. I saw it.

[Teddy B 17,251]

Does anyone here understand ENGLISH?

"The only way to adjust VJ TOS to fix the problem you have is to delete threads where person had knowingly violated immigration law."

What is wrong with deleting threads where someone has knowingly violated immigration law? A person who comes on a working visa and overstays by many years falls into this category.

This was EXACTLY the case I had a problem with. So you mods can come here and tell me it is no so. The fact remains that someone came here, someone who overstayed illegally, then asked for advice.

If you deny this took place, that is ignorance. I know. I read it. I saw it.

So you have a problem with someone who has previously broken the law but is now trying to do things legally? Why would you want to withold perfectly legal advice from someone that is seeking it? Wouldn't denying that person advice on how to do things legally be more of a cause for them to continue their illegal ways?

I'm not sure I understand your reasoning.

[BaronB 42]

So you have a problem with someone who has previously broken the law but is now trying to do things legally? Why would you want to withold perfectly legal advice from someone that is seeking it? Wouldn't denying that person advice on how to do things legally be more of a cause for them to continue their illegal ways?

I'm not sure I understand your reasoning.

Someone who has broken the law is not entitled to advice here, definitelty not someone who has done so for close to a decade. That falls into the same category as advising newbies how to cheat the system by coming in with false intentions.

If you were a lawyer you would know this. If you are going to advise long term criminals, you should advise new criminals. There should be no discrimination between those classes of illegal people. Both are criminals in the eyes of the law. One is not more deserving than the other.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Someone who has broken the law is not entitled to advice here, definitelty not someone who has done so for close to a decade. That falls into the same category as advising newbies how to cheat the system by coming in with false intentions.

If you were a lawyer you would know this. If you are going to advise long term criminals, you should advise new criminals. There should be no discrimination between those classes of illegal people. Both are criminals in the eyes of the law. One is not more deserving than the other.

I take it you are not an immigration attorney then (nor am I). Your analogy does not follow. It is perfectly legal for a person who has unlawful presence in the United States due to overstay or having entered without inspection to seek to make their presence lawful if they are entitled to do so. VWP overstays that get married to a USC are entitled to file AOS. People who are EWI and marry a USC can apply for a waiver. These are perfectly legal processes. I would argue that VJ would be remiss in not discussing these methods. If USCIS and DHS have set out these processes, do you have some magicky trump card that makes your opinion worth more than theirs?

Sometimes morality and legality don't overlap perfectly. Your opinion about what the law should be as opposed to what it actually is makes no difference in terms of the law's application and enforcement, which you should know if you were a lawyer.

Edit: typo correction.

Edited April 24, 2015 by Killary

[cdneh 3,112]

Someone who has broken the law is not entitled to advice here

I think you are wrong there. I think anyone who has a question can ask it here. You are arguing purely from a standpoint based on moral outrage.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

The more I think on what BaronB said, the more bogus it appears to me. By his reasoning, no "criminal" (are we talking about alleged or proven criminals?) would ever be able to avail himself of the protections of law. This would include constitutional protections during the charging and trial process. Why not chuck the Constitution? Sounds fair -- these are bad guys, after all. Only the good guys should be able to rely on the law.

[KayDeeCee 4,893]

Someone who has broken the law is not entitled to advice here, definitelty not someone who has done so for close to a decade. That falls into the same category as advising newbies how to cheat the system by coming in with false intentions.

If you were a lawyer you would know this. If you are going to advise long term criminals, you should advise new criminals. There should be no discrimination between those classes of illegal people. Both are criminals in the eyes of the law. One is not more deserving than the other.

Advising someone that previously overstayed on their legal avenues for immigration is not equivalent to advising someone on how to enter the US under false pretenses. One is giving advice on perfectly legal options, and the other is about giving advice on how to possibly rack up misrepresentation charges. One is against the VJ TOS and one is not.

Why should someone that previously overstayed, no matter for how long, not be advised on the legal channels available to them? Why are they not allowed to learn about the immigration laws the same as anyone else? Just because you don't want them to be?

[Boiler 45,311]

I guess that would involve deleting the waiver forum.

Anybody with a history that makes them inadmissible but has a waiver available to them is not welcome on VJ?

If you wanted to be pedantic entering sans inspection is not a criminal offence.