Drug Wars tooooo close to home!

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

...When did they start to arrest people for criticizing the government in the US?

According to you, illegal immigrants could be, since they have no constitutional rights. You've lost this one in a big way, moron. I suggest you go back under the rock you came from.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

According to you, illegal immigrants could be, since they have no constitutional rights. You've lost this one in a big way, moron. I suggest you go back under the rock you came from.

...When did they start to arrest people for criticizing the government in the US?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

[TheMercenary]

Bottom line, no one is getting arrested in the US for criticizing the gobberment.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Bottom line, no one is getting arrested in the US for criticizing the gobberment.

Because the constitution gives that right to EVERYBODY, whether they are citizens or not. Case closed, thank you for that proof, I accept your apology.

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Cloud

and meanwhile, I'm just sitting on my porch watching The Most Dangerous City on Earth . . . from a distance (and frowning at thread drift)

I know,

Before I read your post I was thinking maybe they could make their own constitutional issues thread.

It is a very important current event happening and we have to listen to people argue the constitution. I mean one dig or two ok but hogging the whole subject with one upmanship is annoying.

lol @ hogging. Yes I really talk like a tard. :P

[classicman]

Well perhaps this will help to get back on track. . .

The crux of opponents' arguments is that only the federal government has the authority to regulate immigration.

"If every state had its own laws, we wouldn't be one country; we'd be 50 different countries," said Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Wait ... what? Every state has its own laws now.

Kevin Johnson, dean of the law school at the University of California-Davis and an immigration law professor, said such a lawsuit would have a very good chance of success. He said the state law gets into legal trouble by giving local law enforcement officers the authority to enforce immigration laws.

"States can't give them that power," Johnson said. "The federal government could if it wanted to, but it hasn't."

However, Gerald Neuman, a Harvard Law School professor, said Arizona could make a compelling legal argument that it has overlapping authority to protect its residents.

Johnson said opponents could also argue that the law could violate their Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure because it gives police officers broad authority to determine who should be questioned.

Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor who helped write the Arizona legislation, said he anticipated legal challenges and carefully drafted the language. He said the state law is only prohibiting conduct already illegal under federal law.

...or not.
Link

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Because the constitution gives that right to EVERYBODY, whether they are citizens or not. Case closed, thank you for that proof, I accept your apology.

[Cloud]

20 people were gunned down in the streets in Juarez yesterday. Some are calling it "Black Wednesday."

http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_14980973

[kerosene]

That sounds frightful, Cloud. I am sorry you have to be so close to that.

[Griff]

Be safe Cloud.

[Cloud]

well, I don't feel as safe as I used to around here

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Because the constitution gives that right to EVERYBODY, whether they are citizens or not. Case closed, thank you for that proof, I accept your apology.

So you still fail to answer the question.

Why do you support Human Trafficing of people across our borders?

[TheMercenary]

American and European leftists share the conviction that the immigrant, legal or illegal, is always right -- and the native-born citizen's always wrong.

This bigotry toward the law-abiding American, Brit, Frenchman or Italian doesn't help the immigrant in the end. Instead, it's a powerful engine driving divisiveness.

There are deep differences between Europe's experience with legal immigrants intent on importing intolerant lifestyles and our problem with illegals responsible for social friction and violent criminality.

But the left's blame-game is identical: Anyone who doesn't elevate the "rights" of the immigrant over the rights, safety and desires of the citizen is a bigot. No exceptions. Could there be a formula better designed to excite anti-immigrant sentiment?

continues:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...Kmfm5mPSxqBWfL

[classicman]

But the left's blame-game is identical: Anyone who doesn't elevate the "rights" of the immigrant over the rights, safety and desires of the citizen is a bigot. No exceptions.

I disagree with that word - I think "the left" (whoever that is) wants them to be equal to, not over.

Could there be a formula better designed to excite anti-immigrant sentiment?

Yeh keep publishing opinion pieces like this from "the right"