Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sanctuary cities in the USA....yes or no?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sanctuary cities in the USA....yes or no?


    There is a debate in the USA right now about so called "Sanctuary Cities" which is a term applied to those cities whose local government has decided to not use local tax money to help enforce National law on illegal immigrants. That is my simple explanation, a more detailed/ better explanation is here on wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctuary_city

    A sanctuary city is a city in the United States or Canada that has adopted a policy of protecting undocumented immigrants by not prosecuting them solely for violating federal immigration laws in the country in which they are now living illegally. Such a policy can be set out expressly in a law (de jure) or observed only in practice (de facto). The term applies generally to cities that do not use municipal funds or resources to enforce national immigration laws, and usually forbid police or municipal employees to inquire about a person's immigration status. The designation has no precise legal meaning
    therefore I thought it would be interesting to discuss the issue of the S.C. (sanctuary cities) here. Keep in mind these cities all "want" federal tax dollars to help with various projects, so the Federal government has that tool to encourage the cities to comply with federal law.

  • #2
    H.E.L.L no. Cutoff federal funding asap.

    Comment


    • #3
      Depends, if I am going to crash at commanding's place and he kicks me out after two days but a pretty latina is offering me bed and... breakfast in El Paso, yes!

      on a more serious note, if the law says being in the country illegally is illegal then I don't see why cities should be allowed to ignore this. Isn't there a potential security issue if they refuse to allocate funds to dealing with illegal immigration?

      I believe people who are in a country illegally should be deported asap. However, the documentation process of migrants should be fast and fair without having people in a sort of purgatory forever.

      Comment


      • #4
        Not an easy one.

        Several major US cities and their Mayor -- Chicago, NY, Washington have made it clear they wanted to 'protect' their undocumented/illegals after Trump's election. Because according to them the melting pot is working in these cities. I'm a bit skeptical (always have been) about Trump, from the early stage of his campaign when he wanted to kick out 11 millions illegals and it is now 3 millions ? (Or if they are convicted of a crime/felony).

        So the question is: Can a city refuse to deport illegals because POTUS has decided so? Federal gov vs Locals.

        Comment


        • #5
          We are, of course, a nation of immigrants. All of my ancestors wanted to get the hell away from you Europeans. We are also a nation of laws, picking and choosing which Federal laws we follow is not gonna work. So either enforce the law or change it, but blatant non- compliance cannot be allowed to continue.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by riderboy View Post
            We are, of course, a nation of immigrants. All of my ancestors wanted to get the hell away from you Europeans. We are also a nation of laws, picking and choosing which Federal laws we follow is not gonna work. So either enforce the law or change it, but blatant non- compliance cannot be allowed to continue.
            Funny thing, mine too!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by GB_FXST View Post
              H.E.L.L no. Cutoff federal funding asap.
              This. And then send in the Feds to enforce the laws. If the local politicians try to interfere, in any way, arrest them for obstruction.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Artengo View Post
                Not an easy one.

                Several major US cities and their Mayor -- Chicago, NY, Washington have made it clear they wanted to 'protect' their undocumented/illegals after Trump's election. Because according to them the melting pot is working in these cities. I'm a bit skeptical (always have been) about Trump, from the early stage of his campaign when he wanted to kick out 11 millions illegals and it is now 3 millions ? (Or if they are convicted of a crime/felony).

                So the question is: Can a city refuse to deport illegals because POTUS has decided so? Federal gov vs Locals.
                The Feds can cut off all funding to that city (or state for that matter). The Feds can send in their own law enforcement.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Saying "fuck you" to Washington over things you care about seems to be a US tradition.

                  I'm of the opinion that this is similar to the actions that some towns took in actively impeding the work of US Marshals trying to recover run-away slaves pre-1865. Or the Oath Keepers and their refusal to carry out "unconstitutional orders", especially in respect of the 2nd Amendment. Or the states that have legalised marijuana not assisting the Federal Government in stopping sales.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
                    Saying "fuck you" to Washington over things you care about seems to be a US tradition.

                    I'm of the opinion that this is similar to the actions that some towns took in actively impeding the work of US Marshals trying to recover run-away slaves pre-1865. Or the Oath Keepers and their refusal to carry out "unconstitutional orders", especially in respect of the 2nd Amendment. Or the states that have legalised marijuana not assisting the Federal Government in stopping sales.
                    I've always wanted an HK416 select fire. Fuck the Feds! Sanctuary City for Class III firearms!!!!!!!!!!!!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Should I add moon-shiners, the people who broke prohibition, those who went ahead and had inter-racial marriages when it was forbidden by their state and people who smuggle lose tobacco into New York?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
                        Should I add moon-shiners, the people who broke prohibition, those who went ahead and had inter-racial marriages when it was forbidden by their state and people who smuggle lose tobacco into New York?
                        If I can get arrested for buying penicillin from Canada I don't have a whole hell of a lot of sympathy for illegal alien parasites.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I'm not suggesting you should. But I think you all should recognise the phenomena as a part of US political culture.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
                            I'm not suggesting you should. But I think you all should recognise the phenomena as a part of US political culture.
                            Oh, I do. The Democrats want to make them voters, no matter the cost to the taxpayer.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Hanse View Post

                              Oh, I do. The Democrats want to make them voters, no matter the cost to the taxpayer.
                              Yes, if they start voting Republican the Dems will come on board. The Dems will volunteer to start on the wall.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X