• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

U.S. Border and Immigration

Thermal said:
A visa overstayed is not illegal when they go through the airport. They become illegal later. A border jumper is illegal from the jump of the border.
Click to expand...
I can't understand how folks don't understand that, I suspect it must motivated reasoning. Why does the southern border get so much attention?
a. Racism
b. Video of thousands of people crossing illegally, footage of thousands of folks in shelters.......

Side note, according to politfact, Visa overstays were probably never the majority, at least not since the 90s.

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...says-40-percent-illegal-immigrants-are-overs/

In 2004, the GAO estimated between 21 and 57% of illegal aliens in the US were visa overstays. So, on the absolute high end of that, sure.
 
Thermal said:
A visa overstayed is not illegal when they go through the airport. They become illegal later. A border jumper is illegal from the jump of the border.
Click to expand...

Until they ask for assylum, which of course no right minded nation would ever give anyone. Why we sent the jews back to hitler in WWII.
 
Norman Alexander said:
Most border jumpers turn themselves in for review. Apply for asylum. Hence the big camps of people awaiting the outcomes of those determinations.
Click to expand...

Really? All those (90%) fit, young men of military age? What war are they fleeing, exactly? And why are they leaving their women and children behind?

I spend my winters in Arizona near the border. What I see there doesn't look like asylum seekers to me.
 
Ron Obvious said:
Really? All those (90%) fit, young men of military age? What war are they fleeing, exactly? And why are they leaving their women and children behind?

I spend my winters in Arizona near the border. What I see there doesn't look like asylum seekers to me.
Click to expand...

Where exactly in Arizona do you spend your winters?
 
Norman Alexander said:
Do they apply for asylum? Yes?
Click to expand...

How could be possibly know? Also, no not the same. Get a visa before you get here and check in at an immigration line when you do vs show up and get an appointment for a court date at some intermediate point in the future.

I'm not even anti immigration or anti asylum but the silly notion that someone overstaying their visa is basically the same as someone just crossing the border unannounced is solipsism. Especially when there are millions of folks showing up announced.

Turns out a lot of visa overstays are folks with 10 year visa that just require they spend more time out of the US than in, how is that anything like some rando showing up on this side of the border with the right words to be considered for asylum?

And as I've asked, show even one video of even 10s, even ones of people of people rushing a custom kiosk at an airport.

Again, whats the difference between a friend sleeping hungover on your couch and a stranger you've never met showing up in your garden? Nothing, basically the same thing.
 
ahhell said:
How could be possibly know?
Click to expand...
Seriously, you are trying to tell me the US State Dept doesn't know if people have applied for asylum?? I'm willing to bet that someone somewhere at least has a list of names. :rolleyes:

Also, no not the same. Get a visa before you get here and check in at an immigration line when you do vs show up and get an appointment for a court date at some intermediate point in the future.
Click to expand...
How do you do that if there is no means to do that? How about this: If they show up and claim asylum, give them a temporary visa, put them somewhere safe, and then "get an appointment for a court date at some intermediate point in the future." Which is what is happening right now. Problem is, those court dates may be years away due to lack of resources for processing. Maybe if they spent "wall money" on that instead, things might speed up.

I'm not even anti immigration or anti asylum but the silly notion that someone overstaying their visa is basically the same as someone just crossing the border unannounced is solipsism. Especially when there are millions of folks showing up announced.
Click to expand...
But they are the same; it's not solipsism. They both have no visa or citizenship or any other legal resort to claim a legal right to be in the USA. If I overstayed my 90-day tourist visa (or violated any of the other visa conditions), I would be deported. And I'm a citizen of a US ally!

Turns out a lot of visa overstays are folks with 10 year visa that just require they spend more time out of the US than in, how is that anything like some rando showing up on this side of the border with the right words to be considered for asylum?
Click to expand...
Every situation is different. It still boils down to the US needing to decide if they will continue to allow these non-citizen non-residents to stay or not, and under what conditions.

And as I've asked, show even one video of even 10s, even ones of people of people rushing a custom kiosk at an airport.
Click to expand...
No problem.

US Embassy, Saigon, 1975
[IMGw=600]https://wordpress.wbur.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ap-embassy-wall-1000x668.jpg[/IMGw]

Again, whats the difference between a friend sleeping hungover on your couch and a stranger you've never met showing up in your garden? Nothing, basically the same thing.
Click to expand...
...showing up in your garden requesting to be saved from an abusive husband who is coming after her with a gun. You should just toss her out, I guess... ;)


Let me be clear: The US can set its own border laws how it likes, no argument about that. And it can enforce them as harshly as preferred. But if you are going to turn it into Fortress Amerika, at least take in the welcome mat.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
 
Last edited:
Norman Alexander said:
S
But they are the same; it's not solipsism. They both have no visa or citizenship or any other legal resort to claim a legal right to be in the USA. If I overstayed my 90-day tourist visa (or violated any of the other visa conditions), I would be deported. And I'm a citizen of a US ally!
Click to expand...

You keep saying they are the same, and supporting that claim by noting the things that they share. Others say they aren't the same and support that by pointing out the ways in which they differ. You don't contend that there are no ways in which they differ. So, the real question is what point is being made here and do those differences matter with respect to that point?

I think the point that ahell is making is that both the costs and benefits that these people offer to the country are different for these two populations, so it can make sense to be more concerns about one than the other. Even though I pretty much favor open borders, I think that view makes sense. My view is that even low skilled migrants who come illegally across the southern border are a net positive for the country, but that doesn't suggest that they are as positive as the person who gets a visa to study computer science at MIT but can't get a visa and has to leave after finishing her PhD.

You are right that both groups are illegals, at least once the visa has expired. No one has said you are wrong about this. But in the context of the conversation there's more to be said than whether or not they are in the US illegally.
 
Roboramma said:
You keep saying they are the same, and supporting that claim by noting the things that they share. Others say they aren't the same and support that by pointing out the ways in which they differ. You don't contend that there are no ways in which they differ. So, the real question is what point is being made here and do those differences matter with respect to that point?

I think the point that ahell is making is that both the costs and benefits that these people offer to the country are different for these two populations, so it can make sense to be more concerns about one than the other. Even though I pretty much favor open borders, I think that view makes sense. My view is that even low skilled migrants who come illegally across the southern border are a net positive for the country, but that doesn't suggest that they are as positive as the person who gets a visa to study computer science at MIT but can't get a visa and has to leave after finishing her PhD.

You are right that both groups are illegals, at least once the visa has expired. No one has said you are wrong about this. But in the context of the conversation there's more to be said than whether or not they are in the US illegally.
Click to expand...
That was my point - the circumstances can differ hugely in each case.

Note that I'm not making value judgements, or suggesting there should be any, on the worth of any immigrant to the USA, regardless of how they arrived. Just that some educated refugee potentially capable of contribution may arrive as a wetback on the Rio Grande and beg for asylum, while some utterly worthless drug cartel criminal may fly in on a tourist visa. You just can't tell...

Also, the USA is hardly alone in this situation. All of Europe and the UK, and Australia, all have border control issues to deal with, many similar to the USA.
 
Last edited:
Stacyhs said:
If we had these alleged "open borders" then why do they need to sneak in? Why do they need to chance drowning in the Rio Grande? Or hiring coyotes to bring them across the border secreted under false bottoms in vans and trucks?

Critical thinking skills are sorely lacking in some of our members.

Maybe we need to stop ALL immigration because we just can't know which immigrants will commit a crime in the future!:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Oh come on. Yes, critical thinking is needed, such as understanding when people are using literal language versus figurative language. Or when people are engaging in fallacious argumentation by substituting a literal meaning for a figurative one.

The US does not have literal open borders. Literal open borders would mean that anyone from anywhere may enter the US at any time with no need to pass through verification of any sort. That's clearly not the case.

What we do have is a combination of porous borders and policies that do not effectively enforce immigration requirements.

We also have extremely different dynamics and patterns at our various borders. We have relatively few illegal crossings from our northern land border, though it can certainly happen. We have minimal illegal crossings from our eastern and western water borders, although we have historically had a moderately high concentration of crossings into Florida via water. We have an extremely high volume of people attempting to cross - both legally and illegally - at our southern land border.

Pretending that all types of entries from all borders are the same is a wonderful example of uncritical rhetoric.
 
Thermal said:
Maybe we could compare how many American citizens commit violent crimes against other American citizens before relying on individual anecdotes about violent illegals to make a point? Data and all that.
Click to expand...

In your opinion, is theft of company goods by an employee totally the same as theft from a non-employee that breaks into the company? Is domestic violence indistinguishable from a home invasion battery?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom