Are you for open borders?

[Dunedain]

I have a question for you.

How do we secure our borders? (All 10,000+ miles)

Securing our borders is simple...We recall all troops and station then along the Mexican border (land and costal). That's it! The other borders haven't been a problem.

 

[Dunedain]

How about we solve the issue through competition?

I propose that states (or rather, the residents/property-owners themselves) should decide whether or not if they should be sanctuaries for immigrants.

On one side, you have what I'll call the "immigration-conservative" states which believe that it is necessary to know who is crossing the border and why they want to live in their state.

On the other, "immigration-liberal" states which take a more hands-off approach to immigration control and allow pretty much anyone to enter onto the private property of owners as the owners themselves see fit, and remain there as long as the property owners allow.

Naturally, the more immigration-conservative states will continue to require substantial background checks in order to enter into their jurisdictions.

Just look at the results of 3rd world immigration today. Nothing short of a disaster.

The states/cities with the most immigration from the 3rd world have the worst living conditions. 3rd world immigration causes economic ruin whever it runs amok. You can abosb some 3rd worlders, even thousands but once the uneducated hordes number in the millions they ruin a modern civilization like locusts in a corn field. You don't have to like the truth. I don't like the truth sometimes, but it is rediculous to try and deny it.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I think he was just suggesting that in a perfect world, it be left up to the states. However, before that could happen, all handouts from the federal level would have to be stopped.

 

[Dunedain]

I think he was just suggesting that in a perfect world, it be left up to the states. However, before that could happen, all handouts from the federal level would have to be stopped.

Also, all the invidiual states would have to start policing their borders too to prevent illegal crosses (from Cali for example). Very inefficient.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Securing our borders is simple...We recall all troops and station then along the Mexican border (land and costal). That's it! The other borders haven't been a problem.

What happens when they start to fly to Canada, then cross into here from the Northern border? Secondly, are you aware how many miles there are on our Southern Border? There is over 3,500 miles, especially counting coastline in the Gulf of Mexico. What about the private property of the persons along the border? What about Posse Comitatus? What about Quartering of Soldiers? Are you aware how desolate much of the southern border is?

What about those immigrants who get through the border? What will you do about them, and how will you identify them? What will you do once you find them? What will make them stop coming, even though the incentive to come is still there? How much money is this going to cost? Do you believe it's smart to militarize the border, when we are rapidly approaching a total police state?

 

[nobody's_hero]

I think he was just suggesting that in a perfect world, it be left up to the states. However, before that could happen, all handouts from the federal level would have to be stopped.

Well, sort of. It wasn't so much a solution that I was suggesting as it was a way to determine once and for all which argument wins out in the end. But, like I said, it would never happen because there are a number of issues that would have to be dealt with (like citizenship, voting, etc.) before they could send it to the states.

 

[constituent]

Securing our borders is simple...We recall all troops and station then along the Mexican border (land and costal). That's it! The other borders haven't been a problem.

How do you feel about e-verify? Should employer participation in programs like e-verify be mandatory?

 

[nobody's_hero]

What happens when they start to fly to Canada, then cross into here from the Northern border? Secondly, are you aware how many miles there are on our Southern Border? There is over 3,500 miles, especially counting coastline in the Gulf of Mexico. What about the private property of the persons along the border? What about Posse Comitatus? What about Quartering of Soldiers? Are you aware how desolate much of the southern border is?

What about those immigrants who get through the border? What will you do about them, and how will you identify them? What will you do once you find them? What will make them stop coming, even though the incentive to come is still there? How much money is this going to cost? Do you believe it's smart to militarize the border, when we are rapidly approaching a total police state?

Volunteer border patrols? They exist, and don't rely on immoral taxation.

Of course, if they do a good job, they usually end up getting sued or arrested.

 

[constituent]

Of course, if they do a good job, they usually end up getting sued or arrested.

Could you define for me "good job" as used in the above statement? Many thanks.

 

[nobody's_hero]

Could you define for me "good job" as used in the above statement? Many thanks.

Basically, you prevent people from taking shortcuts to enter into the U.S., and the next thing you know, someone with a strong sense of entitlement and some opportunistic lawyers are screaming for "harassment" compensation. The ultimate goal is not necessarily to win their case, but to intimidate folks from taking any meaningful action to defend the border—aside from asking someone to please stop where they are until the authorities arrive, which is what happened to an Arizona rancher earlier this year when he soon after found himself at the mercy of the courts (luckily, the courts had the good sense to throw the lawsuit out).

But really, I was just trying to figure out a compromise that doesn't involve forceful and immoral taxation to fund the defense of a border.

The Minutemen came to mind.

 

[constituent]

Basically, you prevent people from taking shortcuts to enter into the U.S., and the next thing you know, someone with a strong sense of entitlement and some opportunistic lawyers are screaming for "harassment" compensation.

I have to admit to ignorance of the case you're referencing.

But really, I was just trying to figure out a compromise that doesn't involve forceful and immoral taxation to fund the defense of a border.

Militia, that's what it sounds like you're talking about. I'd call it a vigilante militia in the case of the Minutemen, unless they stick to private property and make no attempts to forcibly detain anyone.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Securing our borders is simple...We recall all troops and station then along the Mexican border (land and costal). That's it! The other borders haven't been a problem.

Woa there. Posse Comitatus Act. We really don't want Federal Troops doing anything on US soil unless it's fighting an (armed and organized) invading army.

How about this instead:

- Bring home the troops and save a lot of money (among others things).
- Amend the US Constitution Art. 1 Sec. 8 for clarification: To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, immigration and border control.
- Amend the Fourteenth Amendment to remove Jus Soli birthright citizenship. (removes an incentive for illegal immigration).
- At that point, Border Patrol budgets and personnel can be reviewed. Anyone serving in the Border Patrol would get specific training.

 

[JustinTime]

Don't have a system where people can vote for handouts. As we've seen democracies/republics don't work, either. Tyranny of the majority is okay, unless Mexicans become the majority?

I dont think its tyranny of the majority to have a border, they separate people and allow different groups to live accoridng to their own ideas.

AMERICANS are unjustly voting for handouts they don’t deserve, either. This problem is bigger than immigrants, unfortunately. It’s a smoke screen. It’s blaming the effect, not the cause.

Immigration is cause and effect, its a vicious cycle. Americans have set up a welfare state, and that draws impoverished immigrants, and that in turn bolsters numbers of those voting for a welfare state.

Good God, why cant you see that?

 

[Dunedain]

Woa there. Posse Comitatus Act. We really don't want Federal Troops doing anything on US soil unless it's fighting an (armed and organized) invading army.

How about this instead:

- Bring home the troops and save a lot of money (among others things).
- Amend the US Constitution Art. 1 Sec. 8 for clarification: To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, immigration and border control.
- Amend the Fourteenth Amendment to remove Jus Soli birthright citizenship. (removes an incentive for illegal immigration).
- At that point, Border Patrol budgets and personnel can be reviewed. Anyone serving in the Border Patrol would get specific training.

There are more illegal immigrants "invading" the country than Germans troops invading allied countries in WWII. If that isn't a job for the millitary I don't know what is.

I will come halfway. If we could do it by border patrols alone I would go with that.

 

[Dunedain]

What happens when they start to fly to Canada, then cross into here from the Northern border?

The Mexicans that are enterprising enough to get a passport, get a plane ticket, get a Canadian visa and fly to Canada eliminates 99% of them right there. If they are that enterprising they probably should be let into the country assuming their government doesn't start financing a large scale invasion.

However, Canada has much better welfare, unemployment, free healthcare and all sorts of goodies available than we do. 10s of thousands of mexicans came to Detroit after being "persecuted" for being illegal immigrants in florida. Did they stay in Detroit? Heck no, they went across the border to Canada to take advantage of our northern neighbors.

Secondly, are you aware how many miles there are on our Southern Border? There is over 3,500 miles, especially counting coastline in the Gulf of Mexico. What about the private property of the persons along the border? What about Posse Comitatus? What about Quartering of Soldiers? Are you aware how desolate much of the southern border is?

3500 miles and 200,000 troops. Sounds quite doable, especially with radar, F16s, and tracking equipment. We station hundreds of thousands of American troops in sandy middle eastern countries on the other side of the world no problem. This should be easier. Bring the troops home and put them on the border. Kill 2 birds with one stone.

What about those immigrants who get through the border? What will you do about them, and how will you identify them? What will you do once you find them? What will make them stop coming, even though the incentive to come is still there? How much money is this going to cost? Do you believe it's smart to militarize the border, when we are rapidly approaching a total police state?

Anyone who uses any government service at any time is checked for citizenship. If a non-citizen is suspected of taking advantage of a government service the INS are called and they are sent back into Mexico on large prison buses.

 

[Met Income]

I dont think its tyranny of the majority to have a border, they separate people and allow different groups to live accoridng to their own ideas.

What are separate people? Do they drink from different water fountains?

Immigration is cause and effect, its a vicious cycle. Americans have set up a welfare state, and that draws impoverished immigrants, and that in turn bolsters numbers of those voting for a welfare state.

Good God, why cant you see that?

No, immigration is the effect of someplace being attractive to live in. Get rid of the welfare state, and then immigrants (and Americans) won't be able to steal from you through the government. More people immigrate because of these goodies.

If the welfare state went away, clearly people would still immigrate here. Morally, you can't have a problem with that -- since they are doing nothing wrong. They are agreeing to work voluntarily with another entity. There's nothing wrong with that.

Free riding is the problem, not freedom to travel. Worrying about immigration while we still have the welfare state is like being on the Titanic and being angry at a few people who didn't pay for their ticket. We have much bigger problems to worry about.

 

[Met Income]

There are more illegal immigrants "invading" the country than Germans troops invading allied countries in WWII. If that isn't a job for the millitary I don't know what is.

I will come halfway. If we could do it by border patrols alone I would go with that.

If I hire someone to work for me, no one is invading anyone. These are voluntary transactions. The State is invading my pockets to pay for his healthcare, but that's a State issue, not an immigration issue. And the State would be invading my pockets to pay for your border control. If you want to protect your property, that's fine - but pay for it yourself. You're free riding too, so you can't logically argue against immigrants doing the same thing.

 

[Joseph de Maistre]

If I hire someone to work for me, no one is invading anyone. These are voluntary transactions.

The illegal immigrant creates negative externalities in the form of predispositions toward crime, drugs pervasive in that community, and anti-American/pro-South American leanings.

You might be fine with that, but the Republic cannot sustain it.

And the State would be invading my pockets to pay for your border control.

What you are implying is that the state need not exist. If there is no border, then there is no country. And if there is no country, then how could a state enforce laws? It couldn't.

So, before you begin to discuss border control, you might need to defend your support of anarchy.

If you want to protect your property, that's fine - but pay for it yourself. You're free riding too, so you can't logically argue against immigrants doing the same thing.

Organized protection of property among citizens encompasses the mission of the state.

Border protection is no different than neighborhood watch - citizens pay money for it. It provides for the common defense. End of story.

 

[Met Income]

The illegal immigrant creates negative externalities in the form of predispositions toward crime, drugs pervasive in that community, and anti-American/pro-South American leanings.

You might be fine with that, but the Republic cannot sustain it.

Freedom tends to have externalities. If we lived in a complete police state, crime would go down. That doesn't mean it's a preferable nor a moral way to live.
This isn't and shouldn't be Minority Report.

What you are implying is that the state need not exist. If there is no border, then there is no country. And if there is no country, then how could a state enforce laws? It couldn't.

So, before you begin to discuss border control, you might need to defend your support of anarchy.

The State uses a monopoly of violence to enforce it's agenda. Therefore, it's immoral.

Organized protection of property among citizens encompasses the mission of the state.

Border protection is no different than neighborhood watch - citizens pay money for it. It provides for the common defense. End of story.

Anything done by the State can absolutely be done better through voluntary action. You have a right to defend your property. You do not have a right to force me to pay for your State programs, nor the right to deny me to travel where I want to go nor to bring a foreigner onto my property. It's not your property to govern.

 

[Joseph de Maistre]

The State uses a monopoly of violence to enforce it's agenda. Therefore, it's immoral.

I do believe that the American government is immoral in many respects, but not because it has a monopoly on violence.

Monopoly of violence has always been, and always will be, a necessity. George Washington had deserters executed in the Revolutionary War because he had to prove that he had the power of life and death - otherwise, soldiers would have had no incentive to stay in battle. They could choose between possibly living at the end of the battle or assuredly dying if they desert.

Similarly, our government must be able to enforce its laws if there is to be order. Otherwise there is no order, and innumeral externalities occur.

Anything done by the State can absolutely be done better through voluntary action.

Assuming every man is an angel.