Poll: 63% of Americans favor letting illegal immigrants become citizens if they pass a background check and learn English

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And once they are within the system ... given proper documentation ... why would they stay at these "excessively low paying jobs" ? In their place, once legal ... i'd be aggressively looking for the same wages as a USC. Screw the low paying stuff.

So ... now who will do these low paying jobs?

The same people who do them now - people who didn't graduate high-school, or who are in a cycle of poverty inherited from their parents and grand-parents.

[natty bumppo 293]

And once they are within the system ... given proper documentation ... why would they stay at these "excessively low paying jobs" ? In their place, once legal ... i'd be aggressively looking for the same wages as a USC. Screw the low paying stuff.

So ... now who will do these low paying jobs?

The same people who do them now - people who didn't graduate high-school, or who are in a cycle of poverty inherited from their parents and grand-parents.

Oh ... so we don't need the illegals then? because we have others (USC's) capable of filling the positions?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Actually, Javier is already back here. We went through the waiver process and thankfully he was approved. But, to be perfectly honest with you, it pisses me off to think someone is just going to be handed their visa after all we went through. That's the thing, I've never said I agree with them getting handed things. I don't agree with no penalty for their actions. Javier paid his penalty and so did I by marrying him. But, I understand the other side of things and how difficult it would be on the family members still here if they were deported, indefinitely. By going through 6 months of being without Javier's income and support after I had gotten used to that, I understand the hardship it would be for the woman and children left behind. That's why it's so hard for me to read the "deport them all and never let them come back" opinions. Because if that were the case, I'd be sitting here without my husband or I'd be sitting in Mexico typing this. The only thing I've ever wanted to get across to people is that we are all humans and we all deserve a second chance. We've all made bad decisions and I don't know about you, but I continue making them from time to time. I think it's just natural. I just wish people would realize they (illegals) made bad choices and it's not fair to punish them and the people that love them forever. Which is the idea I get from some people on this board.

I am glad to hear things worked out for you. I am not among the crowd that says they should never be allowed back. I am only asking that they be treated the same as any other intended immigrant. But I think it is unfair to those that are doing things right to just allow them to stay without going back and working through the process.

As far as Ecekose's point of not wanting to disrupt peoples lives by making them go back, sometimes you must pay the price for your actions. They knew that they were breaking the law when they came and the fact they got away with it for a long time does not lessen that crime. I will stand by my position that anyone that is here illegally should go home and apply for the proper visa before being let back in. I would even entertain the idea of waving the ban for those that have been here for X number of years and only want a work visa. But they must be documented and inspected. They must have a proper visa and permission to work. The must work within the system rather than be given a pass.

Exactly. People are sent to jail and prison for breaking the law day in and day out. That disrupts their lives and that of their families, doesn't it? We have no problems disrupting the lives of millions of Americans and lawful residents but God forbid, we inconvenience the illegals or those that harbor them. I don't get that logic.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Actually, Javier is already back here. We went through the waiver process and thankfully he was approved. But, to be perfectly honest with you, it pisses me off to think someone is just going to be handed their visa after all we went through. That's the thing, I've never said I agree with them getting handed things. I don't agree with no penalty for their actions. Javier paid his penalty and so did I by marrying him. But, I understand the other side of things and how difficult it would be on the family members still here if they were deported, indefinitely. By going through 6 months of being without Javier's income and support after I had gotten used to that, I understand the hardship it would be for the woman and children left behind. That's why it's so hard for me to read the "deport them all and never let them come back" opinions. Because if that were the case, I'd be sitting here without my husband or I'd be sitting in Mexico typing this. The only thing I've ever wanted to get across to people is that we are all humans and we all deserve a second chance. We've all made bad decisions and I don't know about you, but I continue making them from time to time. I think it's just natural. I just wish people would realize they (illegals) made bad choices and it's not fair to punish them and the people that love them forever. Which is the idea I get from some people on this board.

I am glad to hear things worked out for you. I am not among the crowd that says they should never be allowed back. I am only asking that they be treated the same as any other intended immigrant. But I think it is unfair to those that are doing things right to just allow them to stay without going back and working through the process.

As far as Ecekose's point of not wanting to disrupt peoples lives by making them go back, sometimes you must pay the price for your actions. They knew that they were breaking the law when they came and the fact they got away with it for a long time does not lessen that crime. I will stand by my position that anyone that is here illegally should go home and apply for the proper visa before being let back in. I would even entertain the idea of waving the ban for those that have been here for X number of years and only want a work visa. But they must be documented and inspected. They must have a proper visa and permission to work. The must work within the system rather than be given a pass.

Exactly. People are sent to jail and prison for breaking the law day in and day out. That disrupts their lives and that of their families, doesn't it? We have no problems disrupting the lives of millions of Americans and lawful residents but God forbid, we inconvenience the illegals or those that harbor them. I don't get that logic.

I think that however unfair that seems some sort of compromise (yes, amnesty) will have to be made regarding 20 million resident illegals. I agree with securing the border and enforcing labour laws, though there's a question in my mind as to how enforceable the latter part really is.

For people who've been here a (really) long time (20+ years) I think the issue becomes one of squatters rights. Granted they shouldn't have done what they did (which is easy to say at the end of the day) but the fact that successive governments have chosen to largely ignore this issue makes the US Government (in a general sense) complicit in that crime. I very much doubt we'll see a measure being passed that effectively deports the "illegal" relatives of "legal" USCs and residents that condemns those people to complete destitution in their home country. Not something I would support anyway.

And once they are within the system ... given proper documentation ... why would they stay at these "excessively low paying jobs" ? In their place, once legal ... i'd be aggressively looking for the same wages as a USC. Screw the low paying stuff.

So ... now who will do these low paying jobs?

The same people who do them now - people who didn't graduate high-school, or who are in a cycle of poverty inherited from their parents and grand-parents.

Oh ... so we don't need the illegals then? because we have others (USC's) capable of filling the positions?

There's a pretty established underclass in the US, of which the illegals form a part.

[GaryC 7]

I think that however unfair that seems some sort of compromise (yes, amnesty) will have to be made regarding 20 million resident illegals. I agree with securing the border and enforcing labour laws, though there's a question in my mind as to how enforceable the latter part really is.

For people who've been here a (really) long time (20+ years) I think the issue becomes one of squatters rights. Granted they shouldn't have done what they did (which is easy to say at the end of the day) but the fact that successive governments have chosen to largely ignore this issue makes the US Government (in a general sense) complicit in that crime. I very much doubt we'll see a measure being passed that effectively deports the "illegal" relatives of "legal" USCs and residents that condemns those people to complete destitution in their home country. Not something I would support anyway.

They were destitute when they got here. If they have been here 20+ years then they should have something saved up. If they are still destitute when we ship them back to where they belong then it's their own fault. And squatters rights don't apply to immigration regardless of how PC it sounds.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

People are sent to jail and prison for breaking the law day in and day out. That disrupts their lives and that of their families, doesn't it? We have no problems disrupting the lives of millions of Americans and lawful residents but God forbid, we inconvenience the illegals or those that harbor them. I don't get that logic.

I think that however unfair that seems some sort of compromise (yes, amnesty) will have to be made regarding 20 million resident illegals. I agree with securing the border and enforcing labour laws, though there's a question in my mind as to how enforceable the latter part really is.

For people who've been here a (really) long time (20+ years) I think the issue becomes one of squatters rights. Granted they shouldn't have done what they did (which is easy to say at the end of the day) but the fact that successive governments have chosen to largely ignore this issue makes the US Government (in a general sense) complicit in that crime.

The US government is not complicit in this crime. There's just too much of this crime being committed for the government to effectively get a handle on it. Illegals are arrested, arraigned, deported each and every day. The government just cannot keep up with the masses of criminals. Saying that the government is complicit in this crime is like suggesting that the government is complicit in people committing DUI's. There are far more of those occuring each day than the government will ever be able to address. That, though, doesn't lead anyone to suggest that it's the government's fault that people drive drunk.

[mawilson 2,133]

As far as Ecekose's point of not wanting to disrupt peoples lives by making them go back, sometimes you must pay the price for your actions. They knew that they were breaking the law when they came and the fact they got away with it for a long time does not lessen that crime.

Yes, it does. There's something called the statute of limitations for a crime.

Most crimes (except murder) have a statute of limitations which limits the time

for prosecution to N years after the offense occurred. After N years you can

no longer be charged with the crime.

Japan even has a statute of limitations for murder -- if a murderer can evade

the law for 25 years, he/she will be free to go public with it.

[doc_cute 0]

it shouldnt be done tht way

illegals shouldnt be given czship

we are all fools here waiting for months to get along with our beloved ones

no way i m against it

[GaryC 7]

As far as Ecekose's point of not wanting to disrupt peoples lives by making them go back, sometimes you must pay the price for your actions. They knew that they were breaking the law when they came and the fact they got away with it for a long time does not lessen that crime.

Yes, it does. There's something called the statute of limitations for a crime.

Most crimes (except murder) have a statute of limitations which limits the time

for prosecution to N years after the offense occurred. After N years you can

no longer be charged with the crime.

Japan even has a statute of limitations for murder -- if a murderer can evade

the law for 25 years, he/she will be free to go public with it.

The statute of limitations does not apply to immigration rules. And besides, the time starts AFTER the crime is committed. Those that are here illegally are still committing the crime every day they wake up in America without permission.

[mawilson 2,133]

The statute of limitations does not apply to immigration rules. And besides, the time starts AFTER the crime is committed. Those that are here illegally are still committing the crime every day they wake up in America without permission.

If you want to get technical, immigration violations are not even a crime. You're right,

however, that the statute does not apply to ongoing crimes (such a kidnapping that is

still in progress after 10 years.)

Their only crime was crossing the border without inspection -- "waking up in America

without permission" is not a crime.

[GaryC 7]

The statute of limitations does not apply to immigration rules. And besides, the time starts AFTER the crime is committed. Those that are here illegally are still committing the crime every day they wake up in America without permission.

If you want to get technical, immigration violations are not even a crime. You're right,

however, that the statute does not apply to ongoing crimes (such a kidnapping that is

still in progress after 10 years.)

Their only crime was crossing the border without inspection -- "waking up in America

without permission" is not a crime.

Illegal presence is a crime. It may not be a felony but it is a crime.

[mawilson 2,133]

Illegal presence is a crime. It may not be a felony but it is a crime.

At the moment, it's a civil infraction at best.

[GaryC 7]

Sounds like a crime to me. What do you think?

§ 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts

Any alien who

(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or

(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or

(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/usc...25----000-.html

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The statute of limitations does not apply to immigration rules. And besides, the time starts AFTER the crime is committed. Those that are here illegally are still committing the crime every day they wake up in America without permission.

If you want to get technical, immigration violations are not even a crime. You're right, however, that the statute does not apply to ongoing crimes (such a kidnapping that is still in progress after 10 years.)

Their only crime was crossing the border without inspection -- "waking up in America without permission" is not a crime.

Tax evasion, ID theft and falsification of government records still qualify as felonies. More often than not, those felonies are committed daily following the waking up in America. Let's not forget that. That is unless the illegal is one of the independently wealthy in which case he probably wouldn't be here.

[mawilson 2,133]

Sounds like a crime to me. What do you think?

Hmm, you're probably right.

Tax evasion, ID theft and falsification of government records still qualify as felonies. More often than not, those felonies are committed daily following the waking up in America. Let's not forget that. That is unless the illegal is one of the independently wealthy in which case he probably wouldn't be here.

Or be here legally - wealthy people can usually qualify for one of the E visas (for investors.)