Opinion: What to do with Dreamers?

How do you know they are serving in combat arms ?

They might be permanent latrine orderlies or in charge of taco nights in the mess hall.

 

Smart illegal aliens apply for Tax Payers I.D. Number so they can file income tax returns. Anyone can apply and be issued a Tax I.D. number even illegal aliens.
An Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (or ITIN) is nine-digit number issued by the IRS to individuals who must have an identifying number but who are not eligible for a Social Security Number or an Employer ID Number. ITIN's are for tax reporting purposes only; they cannot be used foridentification purposes.
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/taxpayer-identification-numbers-tin

Illegal aliens who want to be some what law abiding register with the Selective Service System (The DRAFT )
Even illegal aliens are required by the law to register for the draft.

NON-CITIZENS
With very few exceptions, all males between ages 18 and 25 must register with the Selective Service System (SSS) within 30 days of arriving in the United States. This includes U.S. born and naturalized citizens, parolees, undocumented immigrants, legal permanent residents, asylum seekers, refugees, and all males with visas of any kind which expired more than 30 days ago. The few individuals who are exempt from this requirement are those on current non-immigrant visas. A complete list of acceptable documentation for exemption may be found here.
https://www.sss.gov/Registration-Info/Who-Registration

I wonder how many illegal alien male dreamers broke the law and didn't register for the draft when they turned 18 years of age ???
I bet almost all of them, add another crime they committed to the list.

 

You mean guys who could just as easily be blown up by an IED?

 

Oh, yeah, but I meant what US service was he transferred to?

 

Yeah I just hadn't heard of it probably because the mainstream media doesn't report positive things that Trump does. Was this action part of some sort of bill? I would've thought that it would be a budget implication.

 

I don't think he was attached to any branch of the U.S. military, he was assigned to General Dynamics.

 

Oh okay. I only ask because I thought that he may have been involved in the F-111 aircraft carrier tests back in the 60's.

 

Yeah, but how does this mean that Democrats are responsible for creating the problem?

 

It was around 88 and 89.

Good video, first time I've seen it.

 

Yeah. The old bird just wasn't quite suitable enough for carrier ops. Its size wouldn't have helped.

 

I don't understand why people who cannot legally work in the USA can apply and be issued with a Tax ID. And what law are aliens breaking by getting one?

 

You are kidding? Our government just spent 8 years promoting illegal immigration. You must have missed it.

 

I don't think your analogy is valid for a number of reasons - reasons which come directly out of my previous post. In addition you need to think of this as more an issue of law rather than personal belief.

In the case of stolen property there is a knowing character of the crime. "mens rea". In this case you have "Actus Rea" - benefiting from the avails of crime (which is a crime) and "mens rea" the action was intended because you knew the property was stolen. You also have the issue of "choice". In your example the person chooses to break the law.

As discussed in my previous post - in the case of the children of the illegal alien you have neither mens rea nor actus rea. The child had no choice. The child did not "Pick and Choose" to come here. It is absurd to suggest that 10-20 years later some child is supposed to right the wrong of their parents by moving back to the place. To expect this would be to punish one person for the action of another which is a violation of the rule of law.

What you failed to address is my primary argument that we are in a very grey area . Since this is the case there is no legitimate authority in place by which to make a decision. In such cases the will of the people is paramount and the majority of "we the people" think the dreamers should be allowed to stay.

In such cases "we the people" are the law. Do you understand that this is how things are supposed to work ? Most don't as through 12 years of school we manage not to educate people in the main principles on which his nation was founded.

 

The illegal aliens are breaking the law if they don't get one and file and pay individual federal income taxes.

 

So, if you illegally take me aboard an around the world luxury cruise without me being aware of it, and therefore having no say in the matter, and I get caught, I get to stay aboard and enjoy the cruise ?

 

Well ya don't get thrown overboard.

 

We should not throw illegal immigrants overboard. We should walk them out.

 

Oh right, so you're saying that they're evading tax and therefore breaking the law?

 

The ship involved, the Coral Sea was sold to be scrapped in 1993 but was held up by Baltimore for years. It took until 2000 for it to finally get totally scrapped. Disturbed the owner of the ship tried to sell it to China but the Clinton admin stopped that. At the time it was the largest shipped scrapped.

 

Interesting. Who the hell was the owner? I would've bet my house that it was Property of The United States Government.

 

@Giftedone was asking, what other alternative is there for someone who is on a ship illegally when the ship is thousands of miles out to sea. Obviously, if they were caught, there would not be any other option other than the person to stay on the ship until they reach their homeland. It seems that your analogy failed.

 

The question at hand is not what to do with illegal immigrants but what to do with the children born in the USA to illegal immigrants.

 

I'm not in the US. How else did they promote it other than DACA? And didn't the immigration problem exist before the Obama administration?

 

The problem is, you can't win with that argument because people will just turn around and say "they ARE illegal immigrants themselves, not just their parents." And technically, they would be correct, they ARE illegal immigrants. The question is, how do they differ to their parents. And I would say that there is a big difference. I know that the word "illegal" has the connotation that they are to blame for being brought to the US, when not even the strongest right wing person would say that.

 

I have covered this earlier but ... in short.. I disagree that they can be claimed to have done something illegal.

One can claim "Well they are not legal" but, this does not make them "Illegal". To claim someone has done something illegal is to claim that they have committed a crime.

Our rules of Justice state that for someone to be guilty of a criminal act 2 things must be proven.

1) Actus Rea - This means the person must have done the action .. committed the crime
2) Mens Rea - This means that the person must have intended it. This is why criminal insanity is a defense for murder. You can prove (1) but, how can you prove an insane person intended something.

Neither is the case for a child that was brought here by their parents.

1) The parents did an illegal act but the children did not. The Rule of Law principle states that one person is not to be punished for the crime of another. To punish a child for the sins of their parents would then be a violation of this principle.

2) Mens Rea --- good luck with that. Obviously the child, or someone born here to illegals, did not intend the crime

It is then a farce to claim that these kids have committed a crime.

At the same time they are not here legally. It is then a legal grey area.

In this case the Gov't has ZERO "legitimate authority" to make law. The Gov't must appeal to the will of the people in order to have any claim of legitimacy.

Since the majority do not want to send the dreamers packing ... that is that. The Gov't has no legitimate authority to over-ride the will of the people.