Anti-Anchor Baby Law

[tk149]

I just want to point out that the US/Mexican border is almost 2000 miles long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico_%E2%80%93_United_States_border

One way to effective shut down the border is to authorize the use of lethal force (e.g. minefields, automatic gun turrets, whatever). An unmonitored wall is not going to work.

Do you really believe that people are going to support the killing of some mother and her kid?

Otherwise, I'd like to see some real estimates of how many personnel you'd need to effectively patrol the border. I'd bet it's darned expensive, and you'd have to authorize the use of lethal force.

 

[Exterous]

While I don't agree with all the actions from Arizona as of late, I think it's great that they're exercising some initiative. This is precisely what this country lacks; everyone is too scared to do anything, be it healthcare reform or immigration control.

What we've lost as Americans is the ability to fail fast. To make mistakes. To create a hypothesis and have the guts to try. Any effort is completely lambasted by partisans ad the media, effectively making any agility in governance almost impossible. The stance taken by Arizona may prove disastrous, or it could have the positive consequences many wish it could. But we won't know until we try something.

So, keep on keepin' on, Arizona.

Indeed. If nothing else they are forcing the issue and making the Nation deal with it.

Hopefully that is the point as I don't really see the Supreme Court upholding this

 

[SphinxnihpS]

You can be president, but you gotta go back to Mexico. LOL!

 

[Craig234]

:thumbsup:

Now if only states had rights. These measures will be fully crushed by Washington.

Darn the federal government trampling on state powers, sticking its nose in to who is a citizen of the nation and what the federal constitution say about it.

People like you discredit any actual states' rights issues the way Tawana Brawley discredit racism issues.

 

[Craig234]

10%? 5%?

I'm trying to figure out how low of a percentage of the Latino vote the GOP will get in the next few election cycles.

More. The voting Latino population is mixed on the issue and largely anti-illegal immigrant.

They might support some anti-illegal immigrant measures, but I suspect ones they view as based more on racism, ones that are cruel or harm them too, will get them upset.

The anti-illegal immigrant camp is mixed, from some racism, to some tribalism, to some law and order mentality, all with little concern about the people of Mexico.

 

[taisingera]

Absolutely agree with this law. At least one parent should be a citizen. STOP the infiltration of babies of illegals in this country.

 

[werepossum]

The 14th Amendment says all persons born in the USA and subject to its jurisdiction, NOT whose parents are subject to its jurisdiction. This law is almost certainly going to fail a Constitutional test, and it should, if you believe in the doctrine of original intent rather than a "Living Constitution" that means anything you want it to mean. I'm all for solving this problem, but I think it takes a Constitutional Amendment as Piasabird says.

Also, this law is poorly designed. Requiring one parent to be a citizen disregards those legal aliens who are in the process of legally acquiring citizenship and would make them repeat the process for any children born during legal residency but prior to gaining citizenship, a needless repetition of paperwork sure to produce the bizarre result of some parents' achieving citizenship but their children being rejected - literally without a country. The Amendment needs to say any legal resident subject to the jurisdiction of the USA, not just citizens, or at least have some other mechanism to naturalize children born to legal aliens seeking citizenship. (And the difference isn't just academic if the American-born child of legal aliens wants to run for president.)

 

[peonyu]

Getting automatic US citizenship just for being born here is archaic and it should have been done away with in the early 1900's, we could somewhat track immigrants at that time since nearly all were coming on ships from Europe. Nowadays if someone wants to move here they can simply fly to Mexico city [from Iran if they wanted] hop the border since our government refuses to guard it, pop out a kid and there you go, ethically its a bitch to deport the parents now since the kid is a citizen.

The fact that anchor babies are still allowed just highlights that the government really wants more people in the country than we legally allow in each year...more people = more competition for jobs = more peasants to make the bosses/presidentshandjobbuddy rich.

 

[peonyu]

I just want to point out that the US/Mexican border is almost 2000 miles long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico_%E2%80%93_United_States_border

One way to effective shut down the border is to authorize the use of lethal force (e.g. minefields, automatic gun turrets, whatever). An unmonitored wall is not going to work.

Do you really believe that people are going to support the killing of some mother and her kid?

Otherwise, I'd like to see some real estimates of how many personnel you'd need to effectively patrol the border. I'd bet it's darned expensive, and you'd have to authorize the use of lethal force.

We have a rusty 3 foot wire fence on 90%+ of the border. There are around 10 cameras monitoring that 2000 mile long border. The government is doing its best job at trying NOT to guard the border.

And we wouldnt need turrets to defend it. We would need a real wall, made with concrete and 10 foot high, more cameras monitoring the border, and 50,000 border patrol along it. Sounds like a large number of men but is it really ? We have more troops in foreighn soil right now who are there for shady reasons [we were lied to about WMDs to invade Iraq remember]. So we could recall troops back home and put them on the border...Or hire American citizens to guard the border, with 10% of the population being out of work im sure a job guarding the border [if payed well] we could get 100,000 americans sighned up for it quickly.

But of course it takes a willing government to do that and actions speak louder than words as they say...The government does not want to do that. Period. Instead they want to make us all believe theres 0 they can do about people hopping the border.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

The 14th Amendment says all persons born in the USA and subject to its jurisdiction, NOT whose parents are subject to its jurisdiction. This law is almost certainly going to fail a Constitutional test, and it should, if you believe in the doctrine of original intent rather than a "Living Constitution" that means anything you want it to mean. I'm all for solving this problem, but I think it takes a Constitutional Amendment as Piasabird says.

Also, this law is poorly designed. Requiring one parent to be a citizen disregards those legal aliens who are in the process of legally acquiring citizenship and would make them repeat the process for any children born during legal residency but prior to gaining citizenship, a needless repetition of paperwork sure to produce the bizarre result of some parents' achieving citizenship but their children being rejected - literally without a country. The Amendment needs to say any legal resident subject to the jurisdiction of the USA, not just citizens, or at least have some other mechanism to naturalize children born to legal aliens seeking citizenship. (And the difference isn't just academic if the American-born child of legal aliens wants to run for president.)

I said exactly this a mere four posts up and using 1/50th the words.

 

[Jiggz]

But yes, illegals are largely doing the job US ciitizens dont want to do.

Trying to make this "legal issue" as an "economic issue" is obviously based on a wrong premise that illegals will continue to receive sub-par wage after gaining legal residency or US citizenship! Everybody knows that as soon as they become legal they'll also demand higher wages. And if no one hires them then they'll just fall in line for welfare. So peaaaliiisssshhhh, no more economic issue argument. IT'S A LEGAL ISSUE, PERIOD!

 

[Jiggz]

I just want to point out that the US/Mexican border is almost 2000 miles long.



At almost 240,000 miles, they say man can never reach the moon! But he did! Let alone 2000 miles of fencing and monitoring!

 

[Carmen813]

I can't believe the best defense against illegal immigration some people can come up with is a technology so advanced that China thought of it over 2 millennium ago.

 

[shortylickens]

I can't believe the best defense against illegal immigration some people can come up with is a technology so advanced that China thought of it over 2 millennium ago.

Hi-tech gadgetry is not the solution for EVERY problem.
In fact, since it costs so much it can often be the worst solution to a particular problem. Especially on a massive government scale when they tend to be slow and inefficient anyway.

 

[her209]

I can't believe the best defense against illegal immigration some people can come up with is a technology so advanced that China thought of it over 2 millennium ago.

That can be easily defeated with a shovel.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

That can be easily defeated with a shovel.

Truck + boat anchor + synthetic rope.

Some Mexicans can even read.