"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
Pitch in with the Prince William Young Republicans and help defeat Obama in 2012!
New Amnesty Plan In Congress!
By Greg L | 16 May 2008 | Illegal Aliens, US Senate | 62 Comments
The Senate is considering an amnesty for illegal alien agricultural workers proposed by Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) that will grant 1.2 million illegal aliens and all their family members unconditional legal status. It’s time, once again, to make our voices heard and burn up the Senate switchboard. Amnesty for illegal aliens only encourages additional unlawful behavior and more illegal aliens.
From NumbersUSA:
DEAR FRIENDS,
On a 17-12 vote this afternoon, the Senate Appropriations Committee added Sen. Feinstein’s ag amnesty to the Iraq supplemental spending bill.
This bill could come up for a vote before the full Senate tomorrow.
Every phone of every Senator should be ringing off the hook as soon as I click SEND on this alert.
Please pick up your phone the minute you read this and call: 202-224-3121
Call the offices of both of your state’s U.S. Senators and tell them:
- The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday afternoon committed an outrageous act of disrespect for our men and women in uniform and to the citizens of this country by attaching an illegal-alien amnesty to the Iraq spending bill.
- Urge the Senator to vote and work to strip the amnesty from the Iraq spending bill on the floor.
- You - or the Senator - may already oppose this spending bill. But if the Senator is inclined to vote YES on the Iraq bill, ask the Senator to definitely vote NO and send it back to committee if the amnesty is NOT stripped.
- There is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers. There already is an H-2A foreign ag worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season. Feinstein is just trying to protect the abysmally low wages and bad working conditions that farmworkers labor under.
Here are additional talking points (and the names of your two Senators, plus additional phone numbers): http://www.numbersusa.com/phones?ID=10121
Expect that many staffers will either have no idea what is going on or will be lying to you. Some of you were reporting to us that Sen. Feinstein’s staffers were telling you that she had no intention of attaching an amnesty this afternoon at the precise time that the committee was voting on her proposal to attach!!!!!
Unless Senators see an outpouring of disgust and outrage similar to what you waged a year ago, they will interpret it to be safe to vote an amnesty this year.
Besides an estimated 1.2 million illegal alien ag workers, all the millions of illegal aliens in their families would apparently get an amnesty, also.
Good luck. You are the only force that stands between some semblance of the rule of law and massive rewards for illegal immigration.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
62 Comments
Views: 1660
Loading ...
The bill does not say “unconditional legal status” as Greg reports in his post. It says 5 years which could be renewed after that time.
20 years ago a migrant worker could work 3 months in the fields and could apply for and receive a green card.
how do you define unconditional legal status and amnesty?
From what I can find, the bill is this:
“Her addition to the Iraq spending bill would give temporary legal status to 1.3 million farmworkers over the next five years, but it would provide no path to citizenship or permanent residency.” and there are conditions to getting the temporary status.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/15/MNMG10N3V6.DTL
I am more concerned with the H1-B program, which allows hi tech employers to bring talent in - thus taking away our high paying jobs. I know of several people in the tech industry who are finding it hard to find opportunities.
“On the other side of the Capitol, Lofgren is teaming with conservative Republicans to try to push similar discretely targeted measures for Silicon Valley. She has dropped efforts for now to expand the controversial H-1B program for temporary high-skilled workers, which again this year ran out of its 85,000 visas on the first day they were released.”
Or the DREAM Act - which was first sponsored by Orin Hatch a few years ago.
Pat,
Try thinking past today. If this liberal POS bill passes, do you really think it would stop at this? The pro criminal crowd was unable to push through a full amnesty for all, so they are now trying it piece meal. If this passes, you can bet in short time there will be another bill that will attempt to expand amnesty to other crimanals(and yes they are criminals at this point, because they are also working illegally in the United States and most likely have used fake or stolen Ids in order to appear legal).
In my opinion he only way this country will honestly face the immigration abuses which have been allowed to fester since the 1968 immigration reform was enacted, is to wean industry of its reliance on an illegal alien workforce. Senator Feinstein’s effort only allows the status quo to continue without any offering any real solution to the problems facing this nation. I have faith that this country can and will be able to adopt more efferent methods of production or adopt new technologies . After all that is what made this country what it is today. It is time that our representatives in congress quit playing games with the electorate while at the same time lining the pockets of the produces with subsidies. It is time to wean this baby. Some folks will cry for a while. Let them. They will adapt and we will be a stronger country for it.
Spelling correction produces = producers
Pat.Herve said on 16 May 2008 at 7:30 am:
I am more concerned with the H1-B program, which allows hi tech employers to bring talent in - thus taking away our high paying jobs.
Check the facts. Most of the H1-B visas are NOT issued to to hi tech employees with talent. Most (majority) are given out to low skilled workers.
Vigilant1 said on 16 May 2008 at 8:23 am:
Pat.Herve said on 16 May 2008 at 7:30 am:
I am more concerned with the H1-B program, which allows hi tech employers to bring talent in - thus taking away our high paying jobs.
Yeah, think about the people that make a lot of money and screw everyone else.
What’s Sr. Frank Wolf had to say about this? Anything?
Same ol’ song and dance. Dem or Rep, regardless of the original issue will sneak in any pork spending they want at any time they want. They couldn’t pass a clean bill if their life depended on it. Disgusting.
My confidence in any government beauracracy fixing our illegal alien issue has been waning and continues to. Govt stopping the flood has about as much effect as man-made dunes have at stopping a tidal wave.
Becuase the overheated construction industry drew the vast majority of illegals to our area and now that it has cooled off the illegals are moving on. I think what we witnessed was a perfect storm. A hyper-active construction industry, a mortgage industry ripe to take advantage, and a vast supply of cheap illegal labor. Businesses reaped the economic rewards and citizens got crushed with the social costs.
I can’t help but feel there’s little we could’ve done to stop it and little we can do to prevent it in the future.
Now what? If certain sectors of industry that require cheap labor overheat supply will meet demand. Some sectors remain on simmer which is why we still have stragglers.
Amnesty 2009 is on the way…
…you guys are finished…
Buy guns and ammo during the hiatus Mando. They scare the $hit out of liberal politicians, fat broads, and illegal invaders.
I agree. I have asked many of my latino friends and family to arm themselves if they have the proper documentation to do so. I’ve asked the same of persons other than latino. A county where the police force has the power to stop and identify people is one step closer to a tyrannical government and it is our duty as citizens to stop that from happening.
A most useful piece of advice, Advocator. What about skinny broads and fat politicians?
Speaking of “amnesty “- noticed in the legal ad section
of today’s MJM that the Republican Party of Manassas
Park has issued a meeting call for June 1 to nominate
folks for the mayor and council in their November
municipal elections. This would be a good place for
MP residents to express their thoughts about the city.
and/or even run for one of the seats.
“In my opinion he only way this country will honestly face the immigration abuses which have been allowed to fester since the 1968 immigration reform was enacted, is to wean industry of its reliance on an illegal alien workforce.”
Hell. Make them cover the costs of using an illegal workforce. Build dormitories to house them or pay remittances to local govt. to cover the costs citizens are forced to pay. As it is, we are subsidizing their workforce.
Send in those Faxws. Numbers has them all. I just sent mine from the Alert I got.
This is just the beginning. Hiding it in an Iraq registration is the worse of all.
All reps should be ashamed of this.
Lets flood them with NO
Mando-
We need to keep the pressure on every level of our government to get the illegal aliens out and truly secure our borders. Industry will have to adjust and pay a living wage to legal residents and citizens.
Mando said on 16 May 2008 at 10:01 am:
Now what? If certain sectors of industry that require cheap labor overheat supply will meet demand. Some sectors remain on simmer which is why we still have stragglers.
The food serice and hotel industry are prime examples of this. The unions for these two are openly supporting illegal aliens…….more union members…..more money in the union coffers.
Advocator said on 16 May 2008 at 10:18 am:
Buy guns and ammo during the hiatus Mando. They scare the $hit out of liberal politicians, fat broads, and illegal invaders.
A gun in every house and a carry permit for every American!
The Truth said on 16 May 2008 at 10:05 am:
Amnesty 2009 is on the way…
…you guys are finished…
REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anchor Baby said on 16 May 2008 at 10:55 am:
I agree. I have asked many of my latino friends and family to arm themselves if they have the proper documentation to do so.
And a good number of them that don’t have the proper documentation also fit your category!
Anchor Baby said on 16 May 2008 at 10:55 am:
I agree. I have asked many of my latino friends and family to arm themselves if they have the proper documentation to do so. I’ve asked the same of persons other than latino. A county where the police force has the power to stop and identify people is one step closer to a tyrannical government and it is our duty as citizens to stop that from happening.
Anchor, your duty and the duty of others as a citizen is to comply with the law. To twist the facts of what is occuring with the emforcment procedures of existing law will not result in any credibility to your posistion if and when you have a truthfull complaint.
I hear south of the border their police have the power to stop, rob and shoot. Now that may be something to complain about. What is holding back so many from going home to arm themselves against THAT tyrannical governemnt?
Vigilant said:
Everyone at the Alamo was wiped out.
Anon,
I’m a US citizen. And for awhile, a holder of a CHP.
My dad is a green card holder (I’m too lazy to apply for his citizenship once I found out I could) but with that, a utility bill and his drivers license he was able to get his first Glock.
For most of the people I know I’ve told them to use whatever legal documentation they have to purchase their firearms legally. If their status prevents them from owning a firearm then obviously fixed blade weapons are the way to go.
Regardless, it’s our duty to rein in a government that’s gone amok. I support stopping illegal immigration at the border. I do not however support the police being able to question any person for thier papers. This is the USA not the USSR.
So is it your position, AB, that if a person is stopped and asked for identification, he/she should resist using violence?
Slow down. Obey the law. Carry valid I.D. Don’t instigate trouble with the authorities. They know what your rights are. Act like the mature, responsible adult that all of us should strive to be. Hold your elected officials accountable for their actions and words. VOTE!
Advocator, it’s not my position but entrenched in common law.
The Virginia Supreme Court has on many occasions sided with a persons right to self defense upto and including lethal force when resisting an illegal arrest. A detention, such as a terry stop, could be seen as an ‘arrest’ and a person is able to use force to resist.
I’m not saying that they ’should’ use violence as I can’t account for every possible scenerio but you have the right to defend yourself against an unlawful arrest.
When I drive, I carry my ID and I will surrender it when asked by a law enforcement officer as that’s the law and driving is a privledge. But, if I’m at the 7-11 minding my own business and asked for an ID I respond back with “No. And I don’t consent to a search or seizure.” and I would walk away.
Quote: It has long been held in Virginia that where an officer
attempts an unlawful arrest, the officer is an aggressor which
gives the arrestee the right to use self-defense to resist so
long as the force used is reasonable. See id. at 69, 396 S.E.2d
at 856; see also Annotation, Modern Status of Rules as to Right
to Forcefully Resist Illegal Arrest, 44 A.L.R. 3d 1078 (1972).
“[T]he amount of force used [always] must be reasonable in
relation to the harm threatened.” Diffendal v. Commonwealth, 8
Va. App. 417, 421, 382 S.E.2d 24, 26 (1989).
A google for resist unlawful arrest should bring up some hits I would think.
‘But, if I’m at the 7-11 minding my own business and asked for an ID I respond back with “No. And I don’t consent to a search or seizure.” and I would walk away.’
The more likely scenario I would think is if you were at the 7-11 minding your own business and someone, perhaps the manager, thought you were loitering the cop would simply ask you to move on. They probably aren’t going to ask you for ID unless you decide to escalate the situation.
In a perfect world, I would agree with you MPR. However, with so many people here asking for the police to investigate the legal status of persons ‘hanging out’ at the local 7-11 it is beneficial to never cooperate with the police and just walk away.
There is nothing to be gained by talking to the police.
I don’t care about the legal status of persons ‘hanging out’ at the 7-11. When the “hanging out” crosses the line into public intoxication or public urination (indecent exposure), then their legal status should rightfully come into question.
In other words..if they’re really minding their own business and not bothering anyone…who cares?
On the other hand, if I piss on the side of a 7-11 in full view of everyone there with a half-empty 6-pack of beer at my side…yea, I expect to get asked some questions.
I am not a legal expert, but….you may think you were just minding your own business but Anchor, your argument goes right in the trash if the officer has cause to suspect that you were involved in breaking the law. At that point you are required to identify yourself even though you have not been arrested. The Supreme Court ruling in Hiibel vs. Nevada has, according to some, actually expanded the Terry stop ruling. Some may not see much of an issue, others will. I do suspect most would see armed reaction against such a situation an extreme overreaction.
Unless those crimes (indecent exposure, public intoxication or public urination) happen in the view of a police officer the suspect (person presumed innocent) has the right to walk away without answering any questions.
You might expect to be asked questions and you may even answer them. That’s fine. However, you have a right to not say anything and just walk away.
Me? Personally, when I’ve been stopped by the PWCPD I’ve walked away. There is nothing wrong with exerting your rights and not giving in to the Gestapo.
Remember, anything you say can and will be used against you. Miranda never says what you say can be used to defend you, just to prosecute you.
We are in agreement on many issues, AB. However, I would answer a policeman’s questions regardless of the legality of the stop, unless, of course, the answers would incriminate me, in which case I would just say I prefer not to answer.
At any rate, it’s good to know that you also advocate ownership of arms. An armed society is a polite society. The converse may explain the lack of civility among liberals.
Citizen 12,
Good cite. =)
Hiibel requires (by state law) that a person identify themselves with as little as there name. There is no requirement to show your papers (i.e. drivers license, green card, etc). The SCOTUS ruled that a name by itself does not violate a persons 5A protections against self incrimination.
Now, where things get interesting is that the Hiibel case was about an Indiana state law. Virginia has for the last few years tried to pass a ’stop and ID’ law and that bill has always failed. In Virginia, the many conservatives in this state rightfully believe that such a law is counter to a free state. Obviously this is different than what occurs during a traffic stop as driving is a privledge (not a right) granted by the (powers) [of the] State.
So yes sir. You are right in as much as it expands Terry v. Ohio (terry stops) but here in Virginia you can just walk away unless the officer has probable cause (Terry requires reasonable suspicion). God Bless Virginia.
BTW- I called to encourage our Senators to vote against Feinstein’s amnesty sham. I encourage all to do so.
Sen. Warner (202) 224-2023
Sen. Webb (202) 224-4024 Mailbox full, staffer available
Advocator,
Check out
http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=398
http://www.regent.edu/admin/media/schlaw/LawPreview/
Prof. Duane goes into an awesome lecture on how providing any little piece of information to the police can still be harmful to you [and your defense] later on even if you are innocent.
And, your welcome. I preach the safe ownership and use of firearms to anyone that will hear me out. I’ve talked a few people into openly carrying their firearms [as I do] do going out and getting their CHPs.
VCDL is also a great organization for fighting for our rights as both Virginians and as Americans.
Anchor Baby-
I hardly think that the PWCPD qualifies as the Gestapo. I have been a law enforcement officer (local and federal) in Virginia since 1986.
Enjoy your freedoms as a citizen and treat everone with courtesy.
I would open carry also last year while walking my dog. Since the ROLR, I haven’t felt the need to do so.
One has to admire the Sisyphean tenacity of the Congress as it starts to roll another boulder up the mountain of public opposition to the federal encouragement of illegal immigration. The latest attempt, HR 5515, masquerading under the euphemistic label New Employee Verification Act (NEVA) is another unworthy successor to the recently demised Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act and Dream Act in its insolent attempt to procure cheap labor and voting constituencies for the political ruling classes, Democrat and Republican alike.
Pushed as replacement for the current E-Verify system (formerly Basic Pilot) by which employers can use the Internet to verify the legal work status of workers, this bill would create yet another massive computer database requiring seven million US employers to query for all newly-hired employees. E-Verify has been successful for its relatively few users, but it does suffer from faults due to poor and incomplete data. The new NEVA system would presumably, but not convincingly, fix some of these faults, so at first glance it sounds like a good deal. But then one must consider the recent experience with government computer projects like the new, and now abandoned, virtual fence on the Arizona border, which sucked up $20 million only to provide high-tech nesting towers for Arizona vultures.
As always when dealing with the political class growing ever more distant from the populace it rules, the NEVA devil is in the details. For all of its noble goals, hidden in the voluminous wording of this legislation is the true agenda of its sponsors, to wit, the section on preemption, Section 101(b)(2)(A), which reduced to simple language* would preempt and ban any and all state or local law for immigration-related issues enacted to impose employer fines or sanctions, or would forbid any laws requiring employers to verify work status or identity for work authorization. It would also prevent any unit of government from verifying status of renters, determining eligibility for receipt of benefits, enrollment in school, obtaining a business or other license, or conducting a background check.
This preemption, buried deep in the text of the bill, would kill all the laws recently enacted by long-suffering states and localities in response to the federal governments unwillingness to enforce its own federal laws on immigration. Gone would be the recent highly effective and highly successful enforcement legislation of Arizona and Oklahoma, the local laws and ordinances of towns like Hazleton, PA, Costa Mesa, CA, Herndon and Prince William, Virginia, and over a hundred other localities, and of hundreds more in process of enactment.
For one example, the control of business licenses is now one of the few areas not preempted. It is one of the few tools still left to states and local governments to fight the presence and hiring of illegal workers, and the award of benefits and welfare. NEVA would take even those tools away. Having abdicated its own responsibilities on immigration enforcement, the Congress is apparently on a search-and-destroy mission for any lower elected body that might actually want to follow the rule of law and provide the protection for its citizens that the federal government seems incapable and unwilling to provide.
The oxen now being gored by these successful local initiatives have been given a considerable role in crafting this debilitating legislation. The whining exploiters and profiteers of illegal labor in Arizona would love to see that states tough yet effective laws removed, and the Chamber of Commerce, a leading advocate for open borders and unlimited cheap labor, has contributed via testimony and a revolving door for some of its alumni in Congressional staff positions. They have not been hesitant to push for total preemption of all state actions in their Congressional testimony and policy papers.
While the preemption clause is the most fatal of the flaws in this legislation, there are others embodied within. For example, it only applies to new workers applying for positions after the date of enactment. It ignores the tens of millions of illegal workers already in the country. There is no requirement to re-verify workers already employed, even if they are not entitled to work, or even to be, in the United States. Once enacted, no further inquiry would be made of those here illegally unless they apply for a new job.
As long as a currently-positioned illegal does not apply for a new job, he is home free from further inspection. You can bet there will be a massive surge of hiring to get workers on the roles before the legislation takes effect, even if they dont do much work for a while. This intentional omission guarantees a continuing cheap labor pool of millions which should satisfy the exploiters needs for quite some time, say until amnesty and a path to undeserved citizenship make them permanent.
Also lurking in the text is a safe harbor position that holds employers accountable only for the hiring decisions related to their own employees, not those of their subcontractors. Many if not most current illegal workers are employed through subcontractors, many of whom are unlicensed and working off the books. In the mid-Atlantic area its called the Verizon Exemption, based on that companys penchant for hiring numerous subcontractors for its billion dollar cable-laying operations who almost exclusively employ illegal workers. Of course, the practice allows Verizon to say, probably with great accuracy and greater duplicity, that it does not hire illegals. But it sure pays for a lot of them, if indirectly and at a rate that is far below union wage scales and benefits it used to pay its now laid-off American employees.
It should be said that there are some good components to the NEVA Act. Theoretically, it could improve on the E-Verify system, assuming that a government program which spans three massive bureaucracies (Social Security, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services) can create and administer a massive new and secure data system. It could also eliminate some of the paper record-keeping requirements of the current system, like I-9 Forms. Another positive provision would be the use of the data as a tool for denying benefits (Social Security entitlements, welfare and education benefits) to those not legally entitled to them.
But beside the legal issues, there are other deficiencies in the proposed NEVA system of an administrative or technical nature. The proposed database is not a new creation, but an expansion of the system now used to track deadbeat dads (a rather sexist statement itself). NEVA is assumed by its proponents to be an improvement over what it claims is the error-prone E-Verify system, a statement not backed up by the statistics. But the deadbeat dad system has its own catalogue of errors and wrong identities, so it is debatable that in its expanded design it will be any better. NEVA also relies on source documents which themselves may be as compromised as the current false document plague inflicting other systems. For example, a drivers license would be adequate for anyone who claims they are a US national (and who wont). For the uninformed, drivers licenses are those little cards you get down at the DMV, or from the guy at the day labor site, or some basement print shop which can also get you a matching Social Security card.
Why spend large sums to modify the deadbeat dad system with its own deficiencies rather than improve the E-Verify system specifically designed for the work eligibility task? Perhaps we should follow the money and see which government contractor has a vested interest in this new procurement.
The Act also requires that an employer actually hire the worker before he checks the NEVA system on eligibility. Trial lawyers and the ACLU will love this provision, as it will open the door for subsequent legal mischief if the employer finds out things that would have prevented that individual from being hired in the first place. It also provides for private entities to set up a parallel Secure Employment Eligibility Verification System (SEEVS) which can be used in lieu of the federal government system. There are no specified constraints on who can set up these external systems. It could be IBM, but it could also be La Raza or the ACLU. They would have access to normally secure and privacy restricted personal information in immigration and Social Security databases and a lot of opportunity for mischief. But to be fair, La Raza opposes NEVA because it does not also include amnesty and a path to citizenship.
Although labeled bipartisan, this bill submitted by Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Tex.) is overwhelmingly Republican in its sponsorship (28 out of 31). It appears to be a counter to Democrat Heath Shulers SAVE Act legislation, a much better, if not perfect, alternative now blocked by fellow Democrat Speaker Pelosis pro-illegal obstinacy.
Apparently the Republican leadership in Congress, not having been slapped around enough by the voters in the disastrous 2006 elections for its disconnect with those voters, is hell-bent on continuing to fight the overwhelming majority of Americans who want the illegal immigration problem fixed, not facilitated. Rather than listen to the people, they seem to be more attuned to the special interests whose siren call on Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2006 led Republicans into the minority.
It would also be informative to hear what the Presidential candidates think about this legislation. Has John McCain still gotten the message — secure the borders first — or would he support this usurpation of local and state governments, including his own Arizona, by a federal authority with a history of apathy and indifference?
Candidates for the coming election are now a monotone chorus chanting change. Well, a welcome change for them and the rest of the inside-the-Beltway crowd would be to start enforcing the ample and adequate immigration laws we already have. A welcome change would also be to get off the open-border cheap-labor bandwagon and start paying attention to what the people want. If not, then lets kick that boulder back down the mountain, and see if they want to try it again.
Those that control the money also stuff the puppets. By Americanrefugeez
The Politicians like McCain, Obama & Hillary indeed most of the Democrats alone with the rest of the open Border pro-illegal Aliens supporters & the media false compassion for Illegal Aliens is sicking. This Nation has 47 millions citizens without medical insurance, Million of our elderly decide between food and medicine every day. Millions of American children live in poverty with no chance at the American dream. Our vets. return from the war that came about by lies from Politicians without proper medical care or treatment. Yet they shower rewards on the Illegal Aliens, free medical, free schooling for their many children, no reward is too great for the ones that break our laws, invaded this country and demand their rights.
The Politicians try to get the public to believe it is their great Compassion. Bull, it is the money they get from business from supplying them cheap labor paid for by the tax payers on the Republican side and the welfare votes on the Democrat side. If they really are Compassion and Caring there are Millions of American Citizens that have played by the rules, payed their taxes, obeyed the laws, fought the wars and built this Nation in great need, that the Politicians could use to show their Compassion but compassion for American citizens does not get either Money or Votes for our Corrupt/Lying Politicians.
Rebelreggie,
You now officially have the longest post on record. I’ll wait for the cliff notes ; )
The Truth said on 16 May 2008 at 11:48 am:
“Everyone at the Alamo was wiped out.”
Take a look at what happened at the Battle of San Jacinto. Then look what happened the next day.
Sen. Frankenstein and ilk really cared for the American people they would close the border. Which would force “big agriculture” to pay decent wages and hire Americans. We have about 5% unemployment in this country, seems to me we could lower that number if when you went to collect benefits and they told you okay “but after a few months if you don’t find work we ship you to a farm in California and you have to pick berries.” (still collecting unemployment of course) I bet you would see the unemployment numbers drop significantly more. Think of all the entrepreneurs the government would create by doing that. It would also encourage people to save for a rainy day. My gosh government not baby sitting the people what a novel idea.
A few comments on all of above:
1. I have picked up a rifle once in my life — when my Marine husband thought it would be “fun” to go to a rifle range as a date. Took one shot and handed it back to him.
2. Marine husband returns home from Iraq, I want to buy a Czech SKS for him from local gun store, has original factory testing book and a cool grenade launcher attachment.
2. Gun store owner informs me that my Marine husband, (who is a FL resident for military home of record and carries a FL DL) is prohibited from buying or owning guns in VA. However, moi, non-citizen, green card holder, can buy up to 3! The fact that I don’t have a clue and would be extremely dangerous with ANYTHING in the store doesn’t matter.
Our gun laws here are seriously messed up. We’ll deny a real professional the right to buy arms but allow an untrained neophyte as many cookies from the jar as she wants.
Oh, and regarding the Feinstein attachment –
dear Husband is currently stationed in the Salinas valley area and I can assure all of you that there are NO crops wasting on the vine and NO shortage of labor.
But Salinas did have 4 drive by shootings (in broad daylight) in one day, and two murders two days apart, bringing the total for this year to 12.
(Pretty impressive for a city with a population of only 38,000!!) and an out of control gang problem.
But they are in NO WAY CONNECTED to the unlimited number of undocumented field hands in the “salad bowl of the world”. No! No! No!
To make that connection would be “bigoted” and “unfair”.
So made some calls to Feinstein and Boxer, as well as our VA senators. I will call again next week and hope that there are enough sane people who will ensure that it is stripped from the bill on the vote on Wed.
But, based on the antics on the House side of Congress, who knows what’s going to happen?
USMC wife: Who gets the other two? I also own an SKS and use Rusky Wolf brand ammo. Shoots right thru 1/4″ homogeneous steel plates. I highly recommend it for home defense.
Lefty,
Same same here for the SKS. “I” have about 500 rounds of Wolf 123 grain jacketed hollow point, so “I” think I’m good on that front for “emergencies”.
The other two? Apparently I will soon be the proud owner of a 12 gauge short barrel and a HK, which is on back order.
It’s pretty silly, tho. One would think that if there are going to be “rules” about who gets to buy guns, the rules should at least make sense and be practical.
So I can buy and own guns without having to take any training/safety/proficiency course, but my 250 cc Piaggio scooter, I have to take a week long motorcycle safety/proficiency course before they will let me drive it on base from my house to the commissary and back.
Yep, makes perfect sense to me.
The law is fine. Since your hubby has an out of state license the system worked and blocked the sale to an out of state resident. Since you are a legal alien and you proved that you have residency in Virginia you were allowed to purchase. I’m assuming you either kept your FL ID and didn’t show it or you just obtained a VADL and only had to show a utility bill or something akin to that.
My guess is that your husband wants to keep his FL ID for tax purposes or because he hasn’t been able to get a VA DL? Once he gets the VADL he’ll be fine. Even if not, he can still purchase legally (for example a FFL transfer). Since you’re husband and wife if you share the weapons you can purchase them and both of ya can use them. In Virginia, weapons are not registered so it won’t be a ’straw-man purchase’. And, even then you can just buy it and gift it to him since you know he’s not a felon.
As for driving the scooter, thats a base req. So, that comparison isn’t fair. Because if you lived on your own property you could drive that scooter on your own roads/driveways without an operators license or insurance - and yes without training.
rebelreggie said on 16 May 2008 at 5:43 pm:
Thanks for the info reb.
This brings up a question. With the forthcoming REAL I.D. program, will these new systems be replaced? From what I have read the billions spent on compliance with this adventure would duplicate the efforts of these other programs. Has anyone from the non compliant states been denied access to air travel yet? I understand the enforcement date started May 15.
I could remember somewhere reading that they’re pushing for partial implementation by 2011 and full by 2017.
I hope that Virginia fights it but I think it’s down to a few states that are fighting it. Virginia DMV is still trying to examine the costs for implementation to the taxpayer.
The idea of a national ID card with information shared with Mexico is idiotic to the extreme and will not fight terrorism one bit.
The national ID is right out of 1984. Not to mention going through each state DMV instead of a federally run facility, they have managed to 1. Violate the constitution i.e. states rights among other things 2. Pass a huge percentage of cost to each state. 3. penalize the people and state governments who oppose it by restricting access to many things such as entrance to any federal building, use the air port, collect your S.S. benefits, fire arms purchase….the list goes on. Did anyone say, New World Order?
Anchor Baby said on 16 May 2008 at 11:57 am:
I support stopping illegal immigration at the border. I do not however support the police being able to question any person for thier papers. This is the USA not the USSR.
It’s called INTERIOR ENFORCEMENT.
The Truth said on 16 May 2008 at 11:48 am:
Vigilant said:
REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Everyone at the Alamo was wiped out.
You are correct and that is why we now own the western half of the United States and not Mexico. You won the Alamo but lost the war!
Vigilant,
I think you’ve got some kind of an Alamo fetish…you keep posting about it…
The Truth said on 17 May 2008 at 8:31 pm:
Vigilant,
I think you’ve got some kind of an Alamo fetish…you keep posting about it…
Gee, that’s twice you have been correct. Those were honorable men that died at the Alamo and NEVER should be forgotten.
Vigilant,
Normally, I would agree with you….but we clearly do not own the western “half” of the United States anymore. I don’t even consider Mexifornia a state anymore. I would advocate for its establishment as a separate country and not allow one more taxpayer dime to enter that area.
Judging from Kalifornia’s latest decision, I’d suggest giving the entire state back to Mexico. The only useful place we’d lose is the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach. The population is working poor 95%/Upper middle class 5%. It’s already demographically Mexican/third world. No great loss.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356532,00.html
Just a hop, skip and a jump away, folks. This is the culture that the apologists want us to encourage.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356532,00.html
Comments?
Johnson,
I for one think we need to build the fence and guard it with armed soldiers and build a moat fill it with alligators and then put up barbed wire fence and after that land mines. (I am being a little sarcastic but my gosh didn’t we send a man to the moon and build the hoover dam) Our country is bad enough with the gangs and street violence. We don’t need anymore of it.
The Mexican government seems to be the problem. I don’t know a lot about Mexico (I have never been there and don’t ever plan on going) but it seems that with all of there oil and agriculture and resorts that they should have more than enough work for their people. The same goes for most of the southern hemisphere. We worry about liberating Iraq and Afghanistan and when it comes to our neighbors our solution is NAFTA. Maybe we should liberate the Mexicans, give them some hope. I know we never will but my gosh it would be the right thing to do. Then they would stay home because they would have a future there.
On the other hand they need to stand up for themselves like our country did during the revolutionary war.
That is how it’s done in the 3rd world. I recall reading about a big Mexico to America dope running investigation in Cali. back in the early 80’s. After many months the investigation kept getting bigger and bigger with an incredible scope of operation never conceived before. Eventually the feds shut it down and went with what they had. The reason? It was due to the fact that if the investigation continued it would go all the way the top, the very top, of the Mexican government. They feared a full collapse of the government and total kayos down there. Looks like their decision only delayed it 20 years or so.
Johnson said on 19 May 2008 at 11:18 am:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356532,00.html
“Comments?”
It’s really quite simple, in my opinion, and I’ve said it before…it’s time to annex Mexico, clean up the mess, giving them the option of becoming a territory (like Puerto Rico) or a part of the United States. Far too many of their citizens are here illegally already anyway, and the rest want open borders…so lets give it to them. The difference being, of course, that ALL of them would now have to live under our laws, our taxes, and our culture, including rights of women and children. Moving our war against drugs to its primary source, or at least path (Mexico), would also be a plus. I doubt that the greatest majority of Mexican citizens would object, especially the honest members of the police and military. It would be a MUCH more logical use of our troops for both military action and occupation than Iraq.