SB 1070 injunction 'ridiculous' – Babeu says it best

While I am somewhat loath to even bring up a SB 1070 discussion, a statement on the injunction from Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu is too good not to share. And I may as well add my two pesos while I’m at it.

Thinkstock image

Unlike many who automatically jumped to one side of the issue or the other when SB 1070 was first introduced, I sat idle on the fence.

Then a number of factors began to change my mind and push me off the fence and onto one side.

One was reports of illegals fleeing Arizona, even before the measure became law.

Another was watching folks suddenly start obeying other laws. A case in point was a car with a Mexico license plate that was about to blast out of the left turn lane to cut off all traffic at an intersection of Miracle Mile – until he saw a cop car pulling into the intersection across from him.

The driver then instead stayed in the lane and turned left. Sure, he may have just made an illegal turn farther down the road and sure, it was only a minor traffic violation, but at least he didn’t break the law for a moment or two.

A third were the sob stories. My mom mentioned one that aired in Michigan about the sad fate of one illegal alien and his family who had been living in Arizona for years. The brood had to sadly uproot – to move to a different state. Never mind leaving the country or trying to get legal status to stay here – he just went on to live illegally somewhere else. Oh, the inhumanity.

The fourth, and perhaps most decisive factor, was the uproar against the measure. I’ll agree SB 1070 first struck me has having some murky issues, but after attending the AzPOST training session with Pima County Sheriff Department deputies, rereading the text 62 times to make sure I didn’t miss any hidden clauses that said racial profiling was OK, and hearing how the law would be enforced, I had confidence all hell would not break loose.

Besides, receiving gads of press releases against the measure crying, “NO ONE IS ILLEGAL,” and seeing all those protests planned, was more than enough to push anyone off the fence.

It’s best to be on the opposite side of such anger, faulty arguments, ridiculous statements and misplaced sympathy.

If people really wanted to support illegal aliens, as folks like reader AZMouse have pointed out, why don’t they help them obtain legal status rather than yell and scream in the streets?

Then I read Babeu’s statement and I had to chime in, even though the headache from my stolen debit card has barely subsided and I suspect such a post will bring a new one.

Statement Regarding SB1070 Decision from Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu

Incredibly, even though there is not one person who can legitimately claim to be harmed by a law that has not even taken effect, the result of an injunction is de facto amnesty through non-enforcement of laws against illegal immigration.

The federal government refuses to secure the border and leaves it to states like Arizona to bear the costs of its inaction. Yet, when we try to do the job they won’t do, in a manner consistent with federal law, they stop us. You couldn’t make up something this ridiculous.

It’s a sad day in America when our own president has directed his attorney general to provide terrorist Miranda rights, yet fights to deny law enforcement the very tools needed to determine if an illegal is in America legally. Why has the President not come to Arizona to personally inspect the threat that our citizens face?

This is our most serious public safety issue and a national security threat to America. President Obama seems to have won the initial legal battle on the basis of the supremacy clause, saying it is inherently his job to enforce immigration law. We in Arizona could not agree more that is it his job and we demand that he do his job and protect our state, rather that continuing to fight us in court.

Go, Babeu, go!


What do you think?

Are you still on the fence about SB 1070 or have you jumped to one side or the other?

Do you agree with Babeu’s statement? Why or why not?

Advertisements

About Rynski

Writer, artist, performer who specializes in the weird, wacky and sometimes creepy. Learn more at ryngargulinski.com.
This entry was posted in Crime, danger, immigrants, life, Police/fire/law, politics, Stupidity and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

63 Responses to SB 1070 injunction 'ridiculous' – Babeu says it best

  1. HadEnough says:

    Great statement Sheriff Babeu, crossing the boarder illegally makes one a criminal.  While many of these criminals are not harmful to society, many are.  While a few of these criminals don’t use social services (education, health care, welfare….) without paying for it, most do use some of these services.  As a result, we the tax payers are being burdened with paying for these services, paying for the clean up of the border area, paying for the addition law enforcement required and living in a less secure environment (remember roughly 1% of the illegals are from the middle east).  If the federal government will not do it’s job and secure our border, and Mexico continues to undermine our safety and economy, then maybe it is time for Arizona to declare war on Mexico and secure our border with force.

  2. john kennedy says:

    I’ve been in favor of SB1070 since day 1. It’s NOT racist – being an illegal isn’t a race, it’s a criminal definition.
    Try sneaking into Mexico to live – see how far you get and how you’re treated.
    When I travel, I’m asked for papers. Thats only fair.
    If I were to get injured in Mexico, would I get faster and better treatment than a local? They do here. Illegals here get treated locally, and if Trauma is full, the insured American gets Medivac ride to Phoenix. Hardly fair.

    Come here, welcome, learn OUR American culture, laws, and language. ASSIMILATE or go home.

    Signed,
    A legal immigrant, John Kennedy.

    • leftfield says:

      Culture, like everything else, changes with time.  Change is the essential nature of life.  Will you assimilate or go home if you cannot go with the changes?

    • medicareblogger says:

      Being in the US illegally is a misdemeanor.  Why does Gov. Brewer say all illegals are gang bangers and drug smugglers? The judge (appointed by Clinton at the recommendation of Senator Kyl) said the problem with SB 1070 is not about what it does to illegals but what it could do to the rights of legal visitors and citizens.

      • heymanj says:

        You are correct that entry illegally into the US is a misdemeanor.  If you’ve been deported AND cross again illegally it becomes a felony…
        The judge ruled on hypotheticals, I was under the impression that you needed a test case to prove the hypotheticals.

      • AZ_Native says:

        @Medicareworker….. she doesn’t say all, exaggerating doesn’t help your point at all.  She says many….. and she is RIGHT!  Do you live here?  Have you met the Sheriff?  Are you aware of what is really going on here?  Are you aware that Phoenix is the acknowledged kidnap capital of the WORLD?  At least, it was not very long ago.  Getting the point?  Not yet?  How about answering this…. where do 50 percent, yes HALF OF ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS cross a border into this country?  How do they get here?  Who is bringing them in?
        How about fidning the answers to those questions before you determine that AZ “doesn’t have a real problem with illegal immigrants.”  Yeah, crossing the line is just a misdemeanor, but NONE of what they bring with them is.  Think about it.
        More to the point, you seem to have something to do with Medicare….. ok, how about this…… Any idea how much communicable disease, like the resistant forms of TB are coming up here from down south?  If they “apply” to come here legfally, they won’t be let in.  So…… they decide to hazard the lives of OUR children by coming across ILLEGALLY.  Sound like a simple misdemeanor to you?  I think it should be a FELONY!  THAT is what needs to change.
        Better yet, buy a ranch within 90 miles of our southern border and tell me what you think after a year (assuming you survive that year).

      • jacqueline says:

        umm!well guess wat not all illegal mexicans do that ok!get that straight!

    • Rynski says:

      hey john kennedy,
      thanks for bringing up example of trying to sneak into other countries to live, something that just doesn’t happen.
      even moving somewhere legally is a whole rigmarole – lordy knows i’ve researched what is needed just to move legally to france.
      also agree that america is way too lax and welcoming to unscrupulous folks whom other nations would have no qualms about booting out faster than you can say ‘au revoir.’
      thanks for comment!

  3. radmax says:

    Mornin’ Rynski! So glad to see that the sheriff has finally coaxed you down offa that fence…how long were you up there? Guinness world record maybe? 🙂
    Babeu states clearly what all the hysteria and hubbub is about, absolutely nothing but a state gov’t’s attempt to enforce laws already on the books-heaven forbid!
    I say get the damn thing rollin’ and live with the discrimination lawsuits as they come, same as any other claim of police civil rights infringement.
    I don’t understand the fracas this has caused…unless I were an illegal. 😉

    • leftfield says:

      I don’t understand the fracas this has caused…unless I were an illegal.

      Well, Rad, I think a lot of people are in the same position of not understanding the fracs this has caused.  Rest assured that the people who might be confused or suspected of being “illegal” (which no human being is), as well as the people who fear that this is simply a gateway to further acceptance of demonizing the Latino and “foreign-looking” communities regardless of immigration status, do understand what is at stake.  It’s much harder to understand the implications of a law if you are not directly effected by the law. 

      • radmax says:

        Yeah, and I shouldn’t have to produce an ID when a cop pulls me over. (ah gots muh rauts) 😉 Since ‘no one is illegal’ perhaps I’ll just wander on into any other country on the earth and lay your altruistic but naive platitude on them…should be good for a laugh, or a rifle butt in the jaw.
        I have heard your ‘global capital’ mantra before, so spare me.
        Right now, with the economy tanking in some sectors dramatically, I’m not in a very giving or forgiving mood.

      • leftfield says:

        I have heard your ‘global capital’ mantra before, so spare me.

        You’re a regular working guy, Rad, so I’d like to be able to grant your wish.  But I could no sooner hold back the truth than I could the sunshine. 

    • Rynski says:

      hahahha! hiya radmax,
      thanks for input – and laugh.
      yes, i was going for world record for fence sitting – but realized it was such a boring world’s record when i could instead go for something much more exciting like growing the longest eyelashes or biggest pumpkin.
      agree the country needs SOMETHING to ‘get the damn thing rollin,” as you stated so eloquently.
      the stagnancy on the issue has long been producing quite a fetid stench.
      ps ‘fracas’ is an awesome word!

  4. leftfield says:

    I appreciate that you spent some time before coming down on one side or the other of what is a very pivotal issue in AZ and the country as a whole. 

    At the same time, I would have been surprised, Ryn, had you decided you opposed SB1070.  I don’t know how you self-identify, but in reading your posts over time it is clear that your are essentially quite conservative in nature.  Much of your writing is non-political, but much of it is political and you are consistently conservative in outlook in this area.  Not that this is a crime, Ryn, but I wonder if you are aware of this and how you self-identify politically?  Most, if not all of us prefer to think that the conclusions we come to regarding social issues are arrived at after thoughtful and reasoned consideration.  We prefer to consider ourselves as “independents”.  But there is no escaping our adult and fully-formed world view when we make these decisions.   Some of this is inherent in our basic personality type, which is then modified by environmental conditions as we grow.  As adults, we further reinforce our outlook by carefully selecting input (books, news sources, etc).  We have to, becuase if we were forced to do otherwise, nay, if we even could do otherwise, we would face a very threatening form of cognitive dissonance.

    So, I wonder if you are coming out of the closet as a conservative and I wanted to point out that I think your writing this article in the first place points out just how divisive and explosive this issue has become.     

    • Rynski says:

      hey leftfield,
      thanks for thought-out and interesting input.
      also thanks for laugh regarding coming out of the closet as a conservative.
      i laugh because more than once people have tried to pigeonhole me, and others, into little political cubicles. it seems some are not comfortable unless they put folks into these categories.
      the other day i was liberal (see desert vigilante post), now i’m conservative. once in awhile i get other choice categories and descriptions (hahahahah) that i am not going to repeat.
      the only time i was forced to PICK a political party with which to affiliate myself is when i registered to vote – and i STILL get literature from other parties thanking me for being on their side.
      otherwise i say my stance is not consistent with one cubicle – it rather depends on the issue and sometimes even my mood of the day (hahaha).
      p.s. i also voted for grandpa munster when he ran for whatever office some years back in new york.

      • leftfield says:

        So, you’re sticking with “independent”, huh?  OK, but Babeau is hardly a moderate.   Moderates don’t generally end up be praised on a White Supremacist radio show.  He’s more like Sheriff Joe lite. 

        Your subconscious mind is at work at the time, not just when you’re creating art.

  5. leftfield says:

    I won’t bother to argue the points in Babeau’s statement, but I will say that it seems that the lines have been clearly drawn with scant few sitting in the middle.  We will fight as long as we have to and as long as we can, because the present situation in this country is so dire and the future looks even worse if the other side is given any room.  

    Before you ask why I am here today and not up in Phoenix getting arrested, I will say this is a legitimate question.  I am here because I was given the opportunity to make some money today; money that my family needs right now.  When I am done, if time allows, I will see you downtown, on one side of the street or the other.  

  6. fraser007 says:

    Rynski:

    Thank for taking a stand. I’m surprised Leftfield didn’t call you a fascist. He does that a lot.

    • leftfield says:

      The difference is that I actually like Ryn.  I have a soft spot for artists and often fantasize about being one.  Besides, my opinion is that she is a conservative at heart, not a fascist.  Fascism has many elements and among them are: capitalism, scapegoating, extreme nationalism, authoritarianism and militarism.  

      Bear in mind that anyone to the right of Teddy Kennedy is conservative; this includes our current president. 

      • Debra Sams says:

        you are very wrong about the president being conservative as well as teddy. they are as far left as they can get and they don’t care what we think or want for our country. they could never feel the pain that we the middle and lower class feel because they have everything handed to them with sugar coating and use our hard earned money to pay for their pleasures. They should be brought up on charges of treason and expelled for office. I know teddy can’t be as he is dead but the money stole from us daily by these that claim to have our best interest at heart should have to be paid back by these said people, not excluding nancy pelosi, harry reid, franks and dodd as well as all the other left wing crew. GOD BLESS THIS COUNTRY!!!!!

    • Rynski says:

      thanks, fraser007.
      hey! don’t think i’ve yet been called a fascist – although i’ve had my share of other monikers (hahah).
      p.s. i like leftfield, too – thanks, lefty, for being a fan of artists!

  7. Debra Sams says:

    There is absolutely no reasoning  that says we should stand back while illegals swarm our state and country. I have no clue as to why we have become a nation that turns a blind eye to other countries stealing from us. We have every right to plant our feet and send these illegals home. Many have had years to become legal and have refused to do so, they fly flags of different countries, they speak of how great their country is yet they continue to come to our country and send an influx of debt on our shoulders. What part of this do most of you consider ok? The whole situation stands to the fact that these people are illegal they are taking things from us and our government and abusing the system and the president is turning away from the people of this country and turning a blind eye to the devastation this is causing. If the state can’t take care of their own then why isn’t the government doing something to solve this issue? There are at least 3 that was arrested last evening for their display of hatred at a rally that was suppose to be peaceful. How long before we are in a full blown war with these radicals, J say its time for true Americans to stand up and say enough of the government bull and take our country back. Do what is necessary to protect our own and ship the illegals back to what ever country they are from, we need to rebuild our country and stop the influx of these people now!!!!! send them back in herds and save the country our forefathers fought and died for. Then and only then offer them the chance to come back through legal channels. If they are arrested during the process they will not be able to become citizens, It is quite simple and straight forward. be here legally or leave and don’t come back.

    • Rynski says:

      hi debra sams,
      love your strong views – and courage to post them. thanks!

      • jacqueline says:

        Well i respect your side of the view,but also understand not all come to this country to commit crimes.If you haven’t noticed most legal people are being maintained by mexicans.For example:we are the ones out cleaning and watering your gardens,we are the ones at resturants cooking your food,we are the ones cleaning your houses.Yes i agree some mexicans cause probleams,but not all.Some also come to give their families a better life and education.

  8. Jeramie says:

    Perhaps if Gov. Brewer built a golf course on the border with Mexico, President Obamboozle might suddenly take an interest.

    • Rynski says:

      hey jeremaie,
      thanks for chuckle.
      not sure if a golf course on the border would work – where would we get the water for the water traps (although there would be plenty of sand traps).
       

  9. Juno says:

    Local cops already help enforce all other federal laws when they arrest bank robbers, or do drug busts, etc.  Sheriff Joe Arpaio made the point that only immigraton laws are local officers not allowed to enforce on behalf of the feds.
    Oklahoma Bomber Timothy McVeigh was pulled over for speeding by a local cop and then arrested for a Federal crime.  Otherwise he would have just had to hand him a speeding ticket and let him go.  C’mon, we all know this immigration response by the DOJ is a scam against American law and law abiding citizens.

  10. mean says:

    did he say this on a white supremacist radio show?
    It’s so believable when they all wear cowboy hats.
    Next time they can wave the confederate flag.

    • AZ_Native says:

      @mean…… “Mexican” is NOT a race, it is the resident of a particular country.  Mexico is a country and it has a specific set of geographical coordinates that don’t happen to include ARIZONA!
      Making idiotic comments about the UNIFORM the Sheriff MUST WEAR doesn’t help your point.  As to the “confederate flag” comment, try again.  We, in this state, are REAL Americans.
      Oh, and might I add…. this whole “racial profiling” thing is a real insult to the police and deputies here.  Like they are more likely to profile than the FEDS are, like ICE.  Are you really that ignorant?  What Obama did was make it possible for our local law enforcement personnel to sue for libel and slander. Not to mention…… have you ever considered how many of our local law enforcement people are of Hispanic origin?  The percentage of same?  NO, you didn’t, nor did Obama.  Which says exactly what about our president?
      I pray that our local law enforcement personnel file suit for defamation, libel and slander.  I pray Obama is the main defendant named.  It would be HILARIOUS!
       

  11. tiponeill says:

    I’m with ya Rinski – I can’t remember the name of those traitors who hid that illegal Anne Frank, but we all need to come down on one side or another of the question of treating our neighbors as ourselves.
    Enough of these whining apologists for compassion and charity.

    • radmax says:

      Hi Tip. I’m not sure about the Anne Frank correlation, unless you are comparing a legal German resident hiding from a despotic regime of blind hatred for her religion to a person here illegally (criminal by definition) who just may, may mind you, be deported for their actions. ?  So support of immigration law makes one a nazi? At least illegals have a fighting chance.

      • leftfield says:

        I’m not sure that by that time she was “legal” according to the laws in place at the time.  Probably some Nazi in jackboots wanted to know why she hadn’t turned herself in as required by law and I’ll bet he asked her, “What part of illegal don’t you understand”? 

        We who oppose this law and the current atmosphere in Az want you all to know that this is how it starts and the Anne Frank story is where it leads. 

      • radmax says:

        “Probably some Nazi in jackboots wanted to know why she hadn’t turned herself in as required by law and I’ll bet he asked her, “What part of illegal don’t you understand”? ”
        Hey Lefty. I have a tendency to believe there was very little ‘law’ discussion before she was tortured, probably raped and then killed. Nice jump though…

      • tiponeill says:

        I have a tendency to believe there was very little ‘law’ discussion before she was tortured, probably raped and then killed.
        I admire the consistent way you are able to believe things which are untrue.
        Actually she was treated perfectly legally and sent to a concentration camp, where she eventually died during a typhoid epidemic in the camp.
        All nice and legal – after all, she showed very poor judgement in choosing her parents, unlike Arizona’s white majority.

      • radmax says:

        So she died a merciful death in the hands of her benevolent captors, see any comparisons between reality and hypothetical hand wringing here?
        Your tendency to believe things which have yet to come to pass seems to me to be paranoia or tailoring this law to suit your ever present kumbaya agenda.

      • lndcrz47 says:

        just clearing up a point
        Annelies MarieAnneFrank ( pronunciation (help·info); 12 June 1929 in Frankfurt am Main – early March 1945 in Bergen Belsen) is one of the most renowned and most discussed Jewish victims of the Holocaust. Acknowledged for the quality of her writing, her diary has become one of the world’s most widely read books, and has been the basis for several plays and films.
        Born in the city of Frankfurt am Main in Weimar Germany, she lived most of her life in or near Amsterdam, in the Netherlands. By nationality, she was officially considered a German until 1941, when she lost her nationality owing to the anti-Semitic policies of Nazi Germany. She gained international fame posthumously following the publication of her diary which documents her experiences hiding during the German occupation of the Netherlands in World War II.
        The Frank family moved from Germany to Amsterdam in 1933, the same year as the Nazis gained power in Germany. By the beginning of 1940 they were trapped in Amsterdam due to the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands. As persecutions of the Jewish population increased in July 1942, the family went into hiding in the hidden rooms of her father Otto Frank‘s office building. After two years, the group was betrayed and transported to concentration camps. Anne Frank and her sister, Margot, were eventually transferred to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp where they both died of typhus in March 1945.
        Otto Frank, the only survivor of the family, returned to Amsterdam after the war to find that her diary had been saved, and his efforts led to its publication in 1947. It was translated from its original Dutch and first published in English in 1952 as The Diary of a Young Girl. It has since been translated into many languages. The diary, which was given to Anne on her 13th birthday, chronicles her life from 12 June 1942 until 1 August 1944.

      • tiponeill says:

        Hi Tip. I’m not sure about the Anne Frank correlation, unless you are comparing alegal German resident
        Actually she was illegal because her parents were Jewish, so the law didn’t allow her to be there.
        And this is not about “support of immigration law” – it is about targeting a minority and scapegoating and persecuting them, for the political advantage of politicians.
        So yes, I think it is a fair comparison – as for being a “nazi”, most of the people who hated and turned in the illegal Jews weren’t really nazi’s themselves. The Nazi’s just pulled their strings and told them who to hate.

      • radmax says:

        No, it is not about profiling or singling out a segment of our population, although you guys seem to be hellbent on painting it that way.
        Your parallel between Anne Frank and a criminal could be construed as antisemitism…were one to be so inclined to distort the truth…

      • tiponeill says:

        No, it is not about profiling or singling out a segment of our population
        Really ? So I’m not an “illegal lover” ? Seems to me it is very clearly singling out a segment of the population – they are even giving classes on how to spot them 🙂

    • dana123 says:

      You said it buddy, but I don’t think that Rinksi got your sarcasm.. .. One needs to have brains for that…. which is obviously lacking here.. as seem by the comments. They don’t understand that however big the problem maybe.. of illegal immigrants doing this.. doing that. You can’t take it out on the legal immigrants. I am a naturalized citizen, so is my husband, we are asian not hispanic.. but how can anyone tell whether we are legal or illegal? Is there any way of knowing unless they do some sort of racial profiling?  And its is unconstitutional to ask for papers from a citizen isn’t it? So if anyone can suggest a foolproof way of asking for “papers” only from illegals then I’m all for it.

      • Rynski says:

        dearest dano123,
        as outlined in the SB 1070 training session, which you MUST have attended, yes? – you would have recalled the long list of ‘reasonable suspicion’ factors used by the feds to help determine if someone is an illegal alien.
        race, ethnicity, color or even inability to speak english is not on that list.
         

      • dana123 says:

        Actually I did watch clips from the training video.. and no I couldn’t quite get how just by saying that “race, ethnicity, color or even inability to speak english is not on the list of reasonably suspicious behavior” (obviously you understood more in your training session) What is “reasonable suspicion” then? Pray enlighen me?

      • Rynski says:

        hi again,
        below is a list of factors, which i noted on my post last week immediately following the training session.
        (OH! and i spoke too soon about the not speaking english – it can be a SMALL factor of reasonable suspicion, as long as it is only one of SEVERAL FACTORS that make up the ‘totality’ of the situation.).
        OK – now the list:

        Singular factors that can work together “in totality” to form reasonable suspicion that someone is in the country unlawfully:
        No ID, especially in situations, like driving, where ID is needed
        A foreign ID or foreign registered vehicle
        A heavy vehicle packed with people trying to hide
        Fleeing
        Not being able to give a home address or answer how long they’ve lived there
        An evasive manner, nervousness, no eye contact
        Being around other illegal aliens or in location illegal aliens are known to frequent (i.e. places they hang around and wait for work)
        Pretending not to know all the other illegal aliens around them or in the vehicle with them
        Looking out of place, lost or uncomfortable
        Not being able to explain where or how they got their Visa
        Dress – if wearing layers, long sleeves or other clothes not consistent with climate or having bags of clothing and other articles that appears they have been carrying

        And as wacky as it sounds, the video also noted that some people will actually come out and readily admit to law enforcement they are in the country illegally.
        xxxx
        end of excerpt
         
         
         
         

    • Rynski says:

      hahahha! sarcasm suits you well, taponeill –
      and don’t worry, i treat all neighbors equally – with suspicion until proven otherwise – hahahahah

  12. Alan in Kent WA says:

    Don’t Ask, don’t tell, is what the judge is saying.   

  13. Tish says:

    I have never seen an article quoting illegal aliens in which so much as a single one of them even claimed to be in the naturalization process.  They all want to come to the head of the line in front of the people who have patiently followed the rules and waited years for the privilege of U.S. residency.
    One of my great-grandmothers came through Ellis Island, not speaking a word of English, and she wasn’t a young woman at the time.  Instead of complaining that the government wasn’t either teaching her English or making shops supply a translator, she relied on family and friends to help her learn.  She understood English perfectly by the time she died, but never thought her English was good enough for company.
    I welcome those who come here legally, but I have scant sympathy for those who bust the border.  I have friends whose land extends to the Mexican border and none of them leaves the house without a pistol and a rifle or shotgun, even the 10 year old, and no one goes anywhere on the land alone.  Twenty years ago they might see the occasional migrant, but they weren’t armed and ready to shoot any gringo they saw.

    • Rynski says:

      wow, tish.
      thanks for input – i, too, wonder why the legal process of coming into the u.s. seems to be largely ignored as an option.
      also some  harrowing conditions you note.

      • leftfield says:

        i, too, wonder why the legal process of coming into the u.s. seems to be largely ignored as an option.

        Because it is not really a practical or timely option for migrants from Mexico.  On the other hand, 12 million campesinos were displaced from their livelihoods by NAFTA.  I wonder why the legal process of repealing NAFTA is largely ignored as an option.

      • Rynski says:

        oh, it’s inconvenient? ok, then, well…that’s just rude to expect they should go through the proper legal procedure if it’s inconvenient (hahahha)

      • tiponeill says:

        oh, it’s inconvenient? ok, then, well…that’s just rude to expect they should go through the proper legal procedure if it’s inconvenient (hahahha)
        “Inconvenient” may not be the right word. It depends who you are, and who your parents are.
        For instance for those of us wise enough to have selected parents born in the USA, it’s pretty much a snap.
        If your parents were born elsewhere and you arrived here at age 3 though, it’s more “impossible” than” inconvenient” however.
        As I mentioned Anne Frank made a terrible choice in choosing her parents, and the law is the law.

      • leftfield says:

        Not inconvenient, basically impossible.  You see, the system is set up so that it is very easy for capital to move back and forth across the border (see comment about NAFTA), but if people were allowed to migrate back and forth with the same freedom as capital, well, that would level the playing field, and capital cannot allow that to happen.  Better people should starve or be faced with a life-threatening trek across the desert than that capital not be allowed to dump grain subsidized by the American taxpayer onto the Mexican market at prices less than it costs to produce in Mexico.  So long as profit is made, who cares if millions of people are left destitute and turned into refugees?  But now, it does affect you and I as the refugees flood across the border.  So, instead of looking at the causes of the migration, we blame the victims.  Instead of wondering why America has a monumental drug problem, we declare all Mexicans as drug-runners and blame them for forcing Americans to take drugs.  Instead of wondering why your job has gone overseas, we blame the nearest guy who is essentially defenseless for taking our job.  Never mind your job left because someone in a country with even less protection for workers is being paid half what you made.

  14. myomy says:

    If the criminal element crossing the border armed with ( ILLEGAL WEAPONS ) knew they automatically had a bulls eye painted on their chest and that it was open season I’ll bet the drug and human trafficking would come to a complete halt rally quick.

  15. tiponeill says:

    If the criminal element crossing the border armed with ( ILLEGAL WEAPONS ) knew they automatically had a bulls eye painted on their chest and that it was open season
    Ahh – a conservative’s dream 🙂

    • myomy says:

      Really wrong, most certainly not a conservative, but then I will bet you have never been out in the desert and had drug smugglers stick a gun in your face while you were hiking like happened to me. Go where I go and walk in my shoes before making inane comments.

      • leftfield says:

        You’re lucky to be alive.  Still, there are already laws against smuggling drugs and you of all people can see how much good they do and how much harm they do.  Perhaps you should direct your efforts towards legalization.  The cartels are going to bring drugs in no matter what laws are passed or how many laws are passed.  With Americans consuming most of the world’s drugs, the market is just too big to be ignored.

      • myomy says:

        I really belive that the corrupt cartel money goes so far up the political chain in the US that some legalization may happen but they are not going to let go of their pocket money. Thank you for your concern, also I still go to the desert alot but now I am on an equal footing with the smugglers. Self preservation over rides all other issue’s out there. Shoot 1st talk later.

      • lndcrz47 says:

        ” The cartels are going to bring drugs in no matter what laws are passed or how many laws are passed.” 

          the same seems to hold true for the so called “illegals”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s