Hey, you know - you're right. A forced emigration or deportation of 20 million people would be a piece of cake. Just think of how many times it's been done before! And we can do it, too - just get a dozen of your friends and wait at the 7-11. I'm sure it will only take us about 500 years to pull it off.Homesick said:Sam, Sam, Sam...you're just being difficult. It would be very easy to find them..I help ya, most of America will help ya. If anyone cared I could lead you to most of them right now...ha, even better I could send them flocking to you with one announcement..think man, think.
Eh? hard time counting Americans and we are required to cooperate. So, I think you must be doing a bad job. That is the way it came across.SamSpade said:...
We have a hard enough time just counting Americans, and I know, because I did a few weeks of field research in deep rural South. ....
Isn't that the premise behind legalizing drugs? The War on Drugs is unwinnable?Toxick said:Personally, I'd like to see every law-enforcement agency from the DEA to the FBI, to Border Patrol to County-Mounties simply stop enforcing laws that are inconvenient or difficult to enforce.
All that time and energy wasted on trying to enforce laws that simply require too much effort.
Don't be an azz. What I'm saying is that deportation is not the solution. And it's not going to be.2ndAmendment said:Eh? hard time counting Americans and we are required to cooperate. So, I think you must be doing a bad job. That is the way it came across.
Yep. Let's just not enforce any laws. Heck. It is a lot easier for the police, Border Patrol, and the like to sit in the local diner and drink coffee and eat donuts.
Here's your sign.
As to clues, I don't think you could even buy one. I certainly won't put up with your load of crap.SamSpade said:Don't be an azz. What I'm saying is that deportation is not the solution. And it's not going to be.
And yeah, we're doing an awful job with the Census as far as counting people. Ever been to some parts of Appalachia? Ever try to get data from a guy with dogs and a shotgun? Ever drive down miles of dirt road to find some cabin in the woods surrounded by swamp where Bubba and his 30 kin are out and about?
You don't have a damned clue, do you? You continually live up to your rep as one of the rudest people on this forum - and I know cuz I've been here since it started.
Is this some kind of *threat*?2ndAmendment said:Oh Sam. Ask me if I care what you think. Do it in person. I'll be glad to give you an answer.
Of course not. I just thought that since we have met in real life, you would like a real life answer.SamSpade said:Is this some kind of *threat*?
2ndAmendment said:As to clues, I don't think you could even buy one. I certainly won't put up with your load of crap.
No deportation? Then what are we going to do with them? Slap them on the back and say, "Welcome to the U.S. Here's your naturalization papers and Social Security card."?
You'd get your hand wet!You can say it here. Hell, you've insulted me now repeatedly. Insulted my work, and my agency. Insulted my opinion. And that's because I *disagreed* with you.2ndAmendment said:Of course not. I just thought that since we have met in real life, you would like a real life answer.
Ok that was funny.MMDad said:You'd get your hand wet!
Not to my knowledge.SamSpade said:Isn't that the premise behind legalizing drugs? The War on Drugs is unwinnable?
I don't know WTF those people are thinking. Either way - I don't agree with that either.SamSpade said:The same premise behind opposition to our presence in Iraq? The peace is unattainable?
Bullseye.SamSpade said:I don't know HOW they're going to resolve this, except possibly to enforce the laws regarding employment - no job, no incentive.
That's another part of Bush's little speech I wasn't impressed with. I thought I heard him say he was going to be tougher on businesses that employ illegals, but I read the transcript and it wasn't all that.Toxick said:First you nail business that hire illegals.
The Libertarian view. I get it. I don't agree with this, but I understand the philosophy - it shouldn't be illegal to possess something. Or to harm yourself. I only partly agree with it. The problem I have with most of these narcotics is that they hinder your ability to make an informed decision about them. It's not that I don't think you shouldn't be able to destroy yourself - it's just that people addicted to drugs can't be clear-headed enough not to be a danger to others. If you do drugs quietly and alone, by yourself, fine. But the moment you do ANYTHING that endangers others because your brain isn't firing on all cylinders, that's the problem. And the way it's already destroyed the lives of so many loved ones - I'm not for unleashing them freely on everyone.Toxick said:Not to my knowledge.
I am for the legalization of drugs, not because it's too hard to quell drug use, but because I don't think they should be illegal at all. If I wanna sit in my basement and smoke crack until my lungs cave in, why shouldn't I?
I need to read the transcript. From Bush's statements in the past, the ONLY thing I liked was the statement that he was against amnesty.vraiblonde said:That's another part of Bush's little speech I wasn't impressed with. I thought I heard him say he was going to be tougher on businesses that employ illegals, but I read the transcript and it wasn't all that.
That actually wouldn't be too difficult to pull off. You do random spot-checks in cities where there are more illegals and they'll pretty much all fall in line to avoid the BIG FAT FINE they should get for breaking the law.
But no politician, especially a Republican, is going to alienate business like that.
Well there are a few things that it should be illegal to possess. There are certain brands of pr0n that feature minors that spring immediately to mind.SamSpade said:it shouldn't be illegal to possess something.
You make the decision to use them with a clear mind. The hindered ability to process decisions comes laterSamSpade said:The problem I have with most of these narcotics is that they hinder your ability to make an informed decision about them.
Such is the reason drunk-driving laws are in place. Such is the reason limitations should also be placed on drug use as well. Because I support drug legalization doesn't mean that I support a completely drug-crazed anarchy.SamSpade said:it's just that people addicted to drugs can't be clear-headed enough not to be a danger to others.
The same could be said about alcohol.SamSpade said:If you do drugs quietly and alone, by yourself, fine. But the moment you do ANYTHING that endangers others because your brain isn't firing on all cylinders, that's the problem. And the way it's already destroyed the lives of so many loved ones - I'm not for unleashing them freely on everyone.
Ok. Drugs are personal, for me. I have family members who got their KIDS into drugs and nearly killed them - because they were so desperate for another fix. I hate drugs like heroin. I've seen what it does.Toxick said:Not to turn this into a drug legalization debate...