After being deported 3 times in 3 months, he came back with $400,000 of meth for sale

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

look, if you can't read what i wrote and the conversation that follows - i'm not going to hold your hand. where do you even get that question in context with my comments in this thread? 

I read your comment.  And as many of them, due to poor sentence structure and grammar, it is difficult to ascertain what you are saying.  When I posted what I thought you were trying to say, you answered with a smart-aleck reply.  So I asked you directly to clarify your point for ease of reading for all who happen across this thread.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

23 hours ago, smilesammich said:

whenever there's a mass shooting and the mdl starts talking about ...'how many times does this have to happen before we up our gun control' the response from the right is 'enforce the existing gun control'. but when it comes to illegal immigrants and crime, the fact that we deport criminals and don't offer any sort of amnesty for criminals is completely ignored. the right can't entertain even a convo about strengthening gun control laws but we can flush 20 billion on a wall no questions asked..and never mind mexico paying for it. 

 

4 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

look, if you can't read what i wrote and the conversation that follows - i'm not going to hold your hand. where do you even get that question  in context with my comments in this thread? 

Where do I get my question?  From your post, from the words you typed.  

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

5 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

look, if you can't read what i wrote and the conversation that follows - i'm not going to hold your hand. where do you even get that question in context with my comments in this thread? 

why are you wanting to hold his hand 

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, IDWAF said:

I read your comment.  And as many of them, due to poor sentence structure and grammar, it is difficult to ascertain what you are saying.  When I posted what I thought you were trying to say, you answered with a smart-aleck reply.  So I asked you directly to clarify your point for ease of reading for all who happen across this thread.

ask rhetorical questions, get a smart aleck reply. you sure don't catch on quick. 

also, if you can't understand 'many' of my comments due to 'poor sentence structure and grammar' please feel free not to reply to them. 

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

 

Where do I get my question?  From your post, from the words you typed.  

no where in that post do i say we need amnesty for criminals. but i'm done with you, you'll have to figure it out on your own or move on.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

3 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

no where in that post do i say we need amnesty for criminals. but i'm done with you, you'll have to figure it out on your own or move on.

How about you post what you mean in a clear and concise manner, so that we can all get what you are saying.  Since everyone who has commented on your post in this thread has “seemed to misunderstand you”, perhaps the problem is closer to home.  Have you considered that?

 

It’s obvious YOU know what you mean.  Now feel free to make it easier for the rest of us so we can discuss your POV, instead of running in circles.

 

There are existing gun control laws, and they are often circumvented.  There are existing immigration and deportation laws, and they are often circumvented.  So what do you think should be done differently?  What could have been done better in the OP?

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, IDWAF said:

How about you post what you mean in a clear and concise manner, so that we can all get what you are saying.  Since everyone who has commented on your post in this thread has “seemed to misunderstand you”, perhaps the problem is closer to home.  Have you considered that?

 

It’s obvious YOU know what you mean.  Now feel free to make it easier for the rest of us so we can discuss your POV, instead of running in circles.

 

There are existing gun control laws, and they are often circumvented.  There are existing immigration and deportation laws, and they are often circumvented.  So what do you think should be done differently?  What could have been done better in the OP?

whenever there's a mass shooting and the mdl starts talking about ...'how many times does this have to happen before we up our gun control' the response from the right is 'enforce the existing gun control'. 

 

but when it comes to illegal immigrants and crime, the fact that we deport criminals and don't offer any sort of amnesty for criminals is completely ignored.

 

the right can't entertain even a convo about strengthening gun control laws but we can flush 20 billion on a wall no questions asked..and never mind mexico paying for it. 

 

 

 

[Dashinka 24,870]

3 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

whenever there's a mass shooting and the mdl starts talking about ...'how many times does this have to happen before we up our gun control' the response from the right is 'enforce the existing gun control'. 

 

but when it comes to illegal immigrants and crime, the fact that we deport criminals and don't offer any sort of amnesty for criminals is completely ignored.

 

the right can't entertain even a convo about strengthening gun control laws but we can flush 20 billion on a wall no questions asked..and never mind mexico paying for it. 

 

 

 

•  

It still seems unclear to me.  When there is a school shooting or other gun violence issue, the MOR and MDR response is usually to enforce the existing gun laws.  When there is an illegal immigration issue being discussed, the MOR and MDR usually say enforce the immigration laws.  It seems to be the MDL that wants more gun laws that most likely will not be enforced, but have no desire at all to tighten the enforcement of the immigration laws.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

It still seems unclear to me.  When there is a school shooting or other gun violence issue, the MOR and MDR response is usually to enforce the existing gun laws.  When there is an illegal immigration issue being discussed, the MOR and MDR usually say enforce the immigration laws.  It seems to be the MDL that wants more gun laws that most likely will not be enforced, but have no desire at all to tighten the enforcement of the immigration laws.

now the mor and mdr is calling for a wall. they do not want to simply enforce the existing laws.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

4 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

whenever there's a mass shooting and the mdl starts talking about ...'how many times does this have to happen before we up our gun control' the response from the right is 'enforce the existing gun control'. 

 

but when it comes to illegal immigrants and crime, the fact that we deport criminals and don't offer any sort of amnesty for criminals is completely ignored.

 

the right can't entertain even a convo about strengthening gun control laws but we can flush 20 billion on a wall no questions asked..and never mind mexico paying for it. 

 

 

 

•  

I know I am not a true member of the MDR to which you refer, but how could we strengthen gun control laws to help?  We have discussed psychological screenings, which I am on board with at least trying (though I am sure those could be faked), and certainly having more visibility on diagnoses of mental health issues.   In order to buy a handgun, one must submit to and pass a background check that entails checking state and federal databases of known law breakers.  Of course, this does little to deter a criminal, since said criminal can buy a gun most anywhere and skip this process (it’s actually required even for private sales, but who will enforce that?)

 

No one ignores the fact that people come over illegally and commit crimes.  It happens ever day.  And often, those who come here illegally will repeat that process (especially considering how easy it is to walk across our border with Mexico on SO MANY areas), especially because they got away with it before. But what can be done about it?  Arrest them?  Deport them?  What would YOU suggest to be a solution to the problem to criminals returning to the US to break the law?

 

But I really don’t see the parallel that you seem to be drawing between the two arguments.  No one wants mass murders or criminals owning guns, no one wants repeat illegal immigrants over here breaking the law, but defeating either one is particularly tough, wouldn’t you agree?

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, IDWAF said:

I know I am not a true member of the MDR to which you refer, but how could we strengthen gun control laws to help?  We have discussed psychological screenings, which I am on board with at least trying (though I am sure those could be faked), and certainly having more visibility on diagnoses of mental health issues.   In order to buy a handgun, one must submit to and pass a background check that entails checking state and federal databases of known law breakers.  Of course, this does little to deter a criminal, since said criminal can buy a gun most anywhere and skip this process (it’s actually required even for private sales, but who will enforce that?)

 

No one ignores the fact that people come over illegally and commit crimes.  It happens ever day.  And often, those who come here illegally will repeat that process (especially considering how easy it is to walk across our border with Mexico on SO MANY areas), especially because they got away with it before. But what can be done about it?  Arrest them?  Deport them?  What would YOU suggest to be a solution to the problem to criminals returning to the US to break the law?

 

But I really don’t see the parallel that you seem to be drawing between the two arguments.  No one wants mass murders or criminals owning guns, no one wants repeat illegal immigrants over here breaking the law, but defeating either one is particularly tough, wouldn’t you agree?

i would agree. you're getting there..keep going...

hint: will billions of dollars going into a wall solve the problem any more than putting billions of dollars into knee jerk gun control?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

5 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

now the mor and mdr is calling for a wall. they do not want to simply enforce the existing laws.

Not sure to whom you refer, but I cannot think of a single person who is “righter” than you on this forum who hasn’t called for enforcing current laws.  It’s said nearly every week.  Enforce current laws (and not the end-run that Obama did), and we wouldn’t have illegals nor DACAs in America today.  By ALL MEANS, enforce current laws!  Deport ANY illegal, regardless of how they are caught.  Strike down the memo that was enacted under Obama which limits the number of deportations unless several conditions are met.  

 

Enforce current laws, get rid of the millions of illegals, and everything will be great, eh?

 

Except that the border between here and Mexico, where something like 75% of all illegals enter, is about as open as anyone (except perhaps you) could hope for.  So the tide will never diminish.  They will get sent back, at a significant cost to US taxpayers, and a month or three later, they will be back, doing exactly what they were arrested and deported for in the first place.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

i would agree. you're getting there..keep going...

hint: will billions of dollars going into a wall solve the problem any more than putting billions of dollars into knee jerk gun control?

It can’t hurt.  As I have said before (perhaps you missed it?) building a wall that actually works will be tough.  (See: N. Korea)

 

But having a complete wall will be better than what we have now.  Putting more people on the border, risking more human lives, will cost money too.  Annual salaries.  Outposts.  Screening and hiring people who won’t sell their souls to accept bribes to allow people to cross.

 

The dilemma of the wall is parallel with changing gun laws in that no matter WHAT is done, those who choose to break the law will get over on the system.  Period.  Criminals will cross the border.  Heck, non-criminals will cross (I mean people who wouldn’t commit any crime other than illegally entering the US).  Criminals will buy guns on the black market.  They will rob & steal with those guns.

 

As long as people have criminal intent, it will always and forever be very difficult to stop them.  Unless you advocate killing them.  Countries where thieves get their hands cut off, and rapists and murderers are put to death seem to have a much lower rate of crime than we do.  

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, IDWAF said:

Not sure to whom you refer, but I cannot think of a single person who is “righter” than you on this forum who hasn’t called for enforcing current laws.  It’s said nearly every week.  Enforce current laws (and not the end-run that Obama did), and we wouldn’t have illegals nor DACAs in America today.  By ALL MEANS, enforce current laws!  Deport ANY illegal, regardless of how they are caught.  Strike down the memo that was enacted under Obama which limits the number of deportations unless several conditions are met.  

 

Enforce current laws, get rid of the millions of illegals, and everything will be great, eh?

 

Except that the border between here and Mexico, where something like 75% of all illegals enter, is about as open as anyone (except perhaps you) could hope for.  So the tide will never diminish.  They will get sent back, at a significant cost to US taxpayers, and a month or three later, they will be back, doing exactly what they were arrested and deported for in the first place.

my bad, the right wants to enforce the current laws, erase the eight years obama was president, and build a multibillion dollar wall that will not solve the problem. mexicans aren't the only illegals, yet they're the only group discussed here.

i do not agree with you concerning daca in the slightest. 

and your inability to understand the concept of free movement could not be more apparent to me. do you really think that i want open borders so people without proper documentation can live here under the radar as second (more like third or fourth) class citizens? i'm way too humanitarian to want such a life for anyone.

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

It can’t hurt.  As I have said before (perhaps you missed it?) building a wall that actually works will be tough.  (See: N. Korea)

 

But having a complete wall will be better than what we have now.  Putting more people on the border, risking more human lives, will cost money too.  Annual salaries.  Outposts.  Screening and hiring people who won’t sell their souls to accept bribes to allow people to cross.

 

The dilemma of the wall is parallel with changing gun laws in that no matter WHAT is done, those who choose to break the law will get over on the system.  Period.  Criminals will cross the border.  Heck, non-criminals will cross (I mean people who wouldn’t commit any crime other than illegally entering the US).  Criminals will buy guns on the black market.  They will rob & steal with those guns.

 

As long as people have criminal intent, it will always and forever be very difficult to stop them.  Unless you advocate killing them.  Countries where thieves get their hands cut off, and rapists and murderers are put to death seem to have a much lower rate of crime than we do.  

it can hurt. what we spend money on is sort of important. and your argument for the wall goes right back to my point regarding the right's reaction to gun control and their reaction to illegal immigration. but i'm sure you can't see that.