Why do illegal immigrants believe they have the same rights as US citzens?

[dmancornell]

Awsome idea.
Cant wait to see the folks lined up to do your job for $2.95 an hour.

Because people with a master's degree in electrical engineering work at $2.95 an hour jobs.

Also implying America doesn't have a capital intensive economy that has largely eschewed minimum wage, no-skill manual labor.

Another "they're taking our jobs!" myth busted.

 

[westcoastal]

thank you macruls, its good to hear this from someone that actually jumped thru the hoops and came here legally

 

[Norm0931]

The big there here is that the illegal immigrant would be possessing, buying, selling, etc... the firearm in commission of a federal crime, Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien." I fairly confident this violates Oregon's gun statutes. I would imagine it violates nearly every state and probably federal law as well.

 

[RB87]

I find it amusing that so many people actually believe that immigration laws are anything more than politicians pandering to nativists, xenophobes and trade-protectionists.

You figure in a forum where so many people treat gun control laws with contempt, they'd be applying the same standard of critical thinking to *all* laws.

You can't have open borders and a welfare state at the same time, thats utopian sillyness and too many people buy into it. If we lived in a majority libertarian nation/continent with no welfare state I could buy into that but we don't.

You cannot allow millions of immigrants into your nation/country/whatever over a short period of time (30-50 years isn't long) and expect nothing to change in the native culture, especially when any serious notions of assimilation in the new homeland for the immigrants are viewed as evil. Post 1965 immigration laws have been nothing but a migration and creating a culture clash. Expecting people from a feudal culture to immediately or even in 1-2 generations become good citizens of the republic/democracy is idiocy. Some no doubt will, a majority will not. Look at the migration changes to the NW, Colorado and Texas as many fled California or the east coast. Some bring good ideas, others just end up recreating what they left and that attracts what they were fleeing from in a few years/decades.

Anyway, as long as I have to go through a background check to buy "new" guns to be legal or get a prescription and entered into a gov database for cold medicine (where is most meth coming from now?), anyone here illegally damn well shouldn't have a right to a gun. When the fed/state governments actually follow the 2nd ammendment, get back to me. Currently, if an illegal defends themselves with a gun and its truly self defense (no other felony charges), all I'd get them for is being a "prohibited possessor" and deport them.

 

[dmancornell]

You can't have open borders and a welfare state at the same time, thats utopian sillyness and too many people buy into it. If we lived in a majority libertarian nation/continent with no welfare state I could buy into that but we don't.

You cannot allow millions of immigrants into your nation/country/whatever over a short period of time (30-50 years isn't long) and expect nothing to change in the native culture, especially when any serious notions of assimilation in the new homeland for the immigrants are viewed as evil. Post 1965 immigration laws have been nothing but a migration and creating a culture clash. Expecting people from a feudal culture to immediately or even in 1-2 generations become good citizens of the republic/democracy is idiocy. Some no doubt will, a majority will not. Look at the migration changes to the NW, Colorado and Texas as many fled California or the east coast. Some bring good ideas, others just end up recreating what they left and that attracts what they were fleeing from in a few years/decades.

Anyway, as long as I have to go through a background check to buy "new" guns to be legal or get a prescription and entered into a gov database for cold medicine (where is most meth coming from now?), anyone here illegally damn well shouldn't have a right to a gun. When the fed/state governments actually follow the 2nd ammendment, get back to me. Currently, if an illegal defends themselves with a gun and its truly self defense (no other felony charges), all I'd get them for is being a "prohibited possessor" and deport them.

So basically your solution to a failed government policy (corrupt welfare state) is to prop up another failed government policy (economy-destroying immigration laws). Sounds good.

Of course the original issue of whether they should be allowed to own firearms is entirely different and has nothing to do with whether they are all here to rip off the system (hint: they're not). The notion that their breaking of a pointless bureaucratic immigration law should deprive them of their natural right to self-defense is simply cruel, especially since those immigrants tend to live in dangerous neighborhoods and cannot depend on the police to help them (not like the police can be counted on to help anyone anyways).

 

[jake2far]

Maybe because the Constitution (you might want to read it sometime) makes no mention of the immigration status of the People that have rights?

Perhaps you should take your own advice.


Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as president of the United States:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The Twelfth Amendment states that, "No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." The Fourteenth Amendment does not use the phrase natural-born citizen. It does provide that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

Under Article One of the United States Constitution, representatives and senators are only required to be U.S. citizens.[2][3]

The first several presidents prior to Martin van Buren, as well as potential presidential candidates, were born as British subjects in British America before the American Revolution

Our Government had immigration in mind for years, a legal method was provided, try Ellis Island, perhaps you've heard of it? I suggest you research "WOP" a term used mostly against Italians, but it really meant........ With Out Papers, it was marked in chalk on the sack put over them during processing at Ellis Island, so many Italians came thru With Out Papars that the name stuck.
Ellis Island - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

People like you belittle others with false statements, than expect others to support you because you feel good about your point of view.
The LAW says it is a felony to come to this country without permission, visas, seems to me we have had and do have a pathway to citizenship, if you don't like the law change it, don't mislead others with your beliefs.
Visas

I suggest you study history before telling others how it is, ya got it wrong.


Jim