RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities?

RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Termyn8or -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/30/2017 8:22:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: InfoMan idealistically - it would also include aiding and abetting because it allows the city to provide illegals medical and financial support through healthcare and welfare, and theoretically it could also cover accessory and obstruction of justice because they are willingly not enforcing Federal Law, making them partially responsible for anything illegal that is done by those illegals. Do you have a cite for this ignorant shit or do you just make it up as you go along? Shit like that is common knowledge, where they fuck have you been ? T^T

Termyn8or -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/30/2017 8:27:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: InfoMan 8 U.S. Code § 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1324 do you just spout 'cite' and baseless insults as your go along? seriously you haven't really contributed anything to the discussion. My insultrs are not baseless. You have a history of posting bullshit. You have no clue what you are talking about. Thus far in this discussion I have pointed out your ignorance. There are federal felonies and federal misdomeanors. You do not seem to know the difference. The federal government requiring local law enforcement to work without compensation is unconstitutional. You have stated other wise and I have asked you to provide validation. Thus far you have failed to do so. There have been many unfunded mandates, where have you been for the last couple of decades. This is common knowledge. T^T

Termyn8or -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/30/2017 8:54:20 PM)
quote: In the 70's, when they dropped the speed limit to 55 Federal funding was withheld from states that didn't comply. Any public program that knowingly supports illegal alien could lose its funding. There is know comparison between no going along with a program which openly promotes violating the law. Yup, and Nevada told them to stick it up their ass, kinda. Going over 55 you got a ticket for "wasting energy" and it was like ten bucks and not s moving violation. But anyway, if they want to be sanctuary cities, let them. Send all the immigrants and refugees and whatever else other countries empty out of their prisons. Then they will learn and there might be some real conservatives again. Ever hear the phrase "If it ain't broke don't fix it" ? Then liberals come along and want to fix everything, they say they can do better. Yup some thirty year old yuppie straight out of college which is a liberal indoctrination center, knows better than the people who really built this country, and world in fact. So these liberals, for some stupid reason that I am NEVER going to understand, just want to let people in the country. What the fuck ? You almost can't go anywhere in this world without some money, or maybe a job sponsor like on an H1B visa, or their equivalent. I was pretty sure congress was given the power to control immigrtion but now I am not so sure. But if states have control, then Texas and Arizona have ever right to shoot anyone who crosses that lie. It is one or the other. Bottom line, let their officials let in every MF from anywhere, and when the place turns to hell, the government gets lynched. Problem solved, well part of it. T^T

mnottertail -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/30/2017 8:56:20 PM)
send all the illegal aliens to work in your cities for your corporations.

BamaD -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/30/2017 9:31:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or quote: In the 70's, when they dropped the speed limit to 55 Federal funding was withheld from states that didn't comply. Any public program that knowingly supports illegal alien could lose its funding. There is know comparison between no going along with a program which openly promotes violating the law. Yup, and Nevada told them to stick it up their ass, kinda. Going over 55 you got a ticket for "wasting energy" and it was like ten bucks and not s moving violation. But anyway, if they want to be sanctuary cities, let them. Send all the immigrants and refugees and whatever else other countries empty out of their prisons. Then they will learn and there might be some real conservatives again. Ever hear the phrase "If it ain't broke don't fix it" ? Then liberals come along and want to fix everything, they say they can do better. Yup some thirty year old yuppie straight out of college which is a liberal indoctrination center, knows better than the people who really built this country, and world in fact. So these liberals, for some stupid reason that I am NEVER going to understand, just want to let people in the country. What the fuck ? You almost can't go anywhere in this world without some money, or maybe a job sponsor like on an H1B visa, or their equivalent. I was pretty sure congress was given the power to control immigrtion but now I am not so sure. But if states have control, then Texas and Arizona have ever right to shoot anyone who crosses that lie. It is one or the other. Bottom line, let their officials let in every MF from anywhere, and when the place turns to hell, the government gets lynched. Problem solved, well part of it. T^T They know that we are a nation of immigrants, and they don't understand that there is a difference between legal and illegal immigrants. They do not understand the difference between people who want to be part of our society and those who want our society to change to be part of their's

mnottertail -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 5:02:03 AM)
The nutsuckers know they are corporate catamites, they dont understand the difference between corporations are people too and should be imprisoned and dismantled and sold to the highest bidder with the proceeds going into the treasury for hiring illegals.

bounty44 -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 7:32:42 AM)
"New DHS Report Reveals Sanctuary Cities Are Releasing Violent Criminal Aliens" quote: The Department of Homeland Security released its weekly “Declined Detainer Outcome Report,” which shines a spotlight on sanctuary cities where local police have released illegal immigrants even though federal authorities requested that they be detained until Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents can come get them. The latest report, which covers February 4-10, shows that contrary to the myth sanctuary city proponents peddle—that those released are nonviolent—dozens who were released have been convicted of violent crimes, such as sexual assault, domestic battery, and cruelty toward children. In total, ICE issued 2,825 detainer requests across the U.S. and 47 were declined. quote: Although cities and counties in New York and California accounted for nearly half of the refusals, communities in Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, Texas, Virginia, Washington and the District of Columbia also made the list. The new report also highlights jurisdictions that have recently declared themselves sanctuary cities. Since January, Baltimore, Tulare, Calif.; Ithaca, N.Y.; Travis County, Texas; Iowa City, Iowa; and Boulder, Colo., have publicly announced their intentions to not honor ICE detainers. The report noted that ICE field offices have been instructed to continue issuing detainers on all removable aliens in law enforcement custody regardless of prior non-cooperation. As a result, the report states, the number of issued detainers will increase over the next several reporting periods. The report comes days after Attorney General Jeff Sessions threatened to pull federal funding from cities that refuse to comply with federal immigration law. “Such policies cannot continue," he said Monday. "They make our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on the street." https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2017/03/31/new-dhs-report-reveals-the-types-of-illegal-immigrants-sanctuary-cities-are-letting-go-hint-theyre-not-nonviolent-n2306882

mnottertail -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 8:42:49 AM)
oh, really? give us a list of the 47 and their violent crimes, must be on the ICE website. No way you would post factless nutsucker slobberblogging as you always do.

Musicmystery -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 8:45:53 AM)
Those who commit violent crimes are imprisoned and/or deported. Problem solved. Next.

vincentML -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 9:00:27 AM)
quote: "New DHS Report Reveals Sanctuary Cities Are Releasing Violent Criminal Aliens" So, there were 47 declines out of 2825 detention requests. That works out to be a rate of 1.66% Is that what all the fuss is about? 1.66% noncompliance within a public sector bureaucracy? Looked at from the other side = 98.34% compliance. I wonder if the headline isn't over inflated. I should think that little punk ass Jeff Sessions would be grateful for that much cooperation. Of the 47, 17 were convicted of felonies. Are we to believe that these convicted felons were simply set free? Where is the evidence for that? Sometimes public agencies have been known to release news bulletins to suit their own particular agenda. Is Jeff Sessions lying just a little bit? The RW used to rail at the dishonesty of Washington. Now, they want us to accept the government's pronouncements as gospel. The times they are a changing. [8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 9:22:22 AM)
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: InfoMan idealistically - it would also include aiding and abetting because it allows the city to provide illegals medical and financial support through healthcare and welfare, and theoretically it could also cover accessory and obstruction of justice because they are willingly not enforcing Federal Law, making them partially responsible for anything illegal that is done by those illegals. Do you have a cite for this ignorant shit or do you just make it up as you go along? Shit like that is common knowledge, where they fuck have you been ? If it is such common knowledge then it should be easy for you to cite proof.

thompsonx -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 9:28:18 AM)
ORIGINAL: InfoMan ORIGINAL: thompsonx You do not like the way I post, now isn't that special. It has nothing to do with addressing the issue but you continue to post that sort of inane bullshit rather than actually address the issues. You don't like my typos don't read my post. I do not care. If you cannot address the issue then phoque off and die no one cares what you like or don't like. Grow up or shut the phoque up. If you cannot validate your opinion it remains opinion and worth a little less than the price of used shit paper. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. Some ones panties are in a bunch... Your panties are in a bunch and that is yuor excuse for being unable to validate your ignorant opinions? Hit a nerve with your inability to spell... or form logical points... or rational thought... Spelling errors allow you to post and act as though you have done something more than increase your post count. The logical point and rational thought is simply asking you to cite the source of your ignorance.

bounty44 -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 9:45:41 AM)
I trust the low percentage rate will be of comfort to the victims of their crimes, both past and future. that said, please note that "47" is the number for a week. I don't know how ICE does it business but I feel pretty confident in saying 47 per week nevertheless adds up to many hundreds per year. if you want to read more, here's the source material: https://www.ice.gov/doclib/ddor/ddor2017_02-04to02-10.pdf

BamaD -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 10:19:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Those who commit violent crimes are imprisoned and/or deported. Problem solved. Next. Problem not solved, violent criminals who are deported just come back

mnottertail -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 10:20:34 AM)
Lots of drive by in that report. Seems like most wont cooperate with a detainder unless there is a warrant. Some will cooperate if they are paid back. It is unclear what and where the charges are from. The bulk of the refusals are county sheriffs. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Constitution expresses a preference for searches, seizures, and arrests conducted pursuant to a lawfully executed warrant (see Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 [1978]). Probable cause can be established by out-of-court statements made by reliable police informants, even though those statements cannot be tested by the magistrate. However, probable cause will not lie where the only evidence of criminal activity is an officer's affirmation of suspicion or belief (see Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 [1964]). On the other hand, an officer's subjective reason for making an arrest does not need to be the same criminal offense for which the facts indicate. (Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 [2004]). So, there is the constitution to consider.

InfoMan -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 11:10:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: "New DHS Report Reveals Sanctuary Cities Are Releasing Violent Criminal Aliens" So, there were 47 declines out of 2825 detention requests. That works out to be a rate of 1.66% Is that what all the fuss is about? 1.66% noncompliance within a public sector bureaucracy? Looked at from the other side = 98.34% compliance. I wonder if the headline isn't over inflated. I should think that little punk ass Jeff Sessions would be grateful for that much cooperation. But it should also be noted that this is over the course of a single week - feb 4th to 10th. If we where to continue this trend over a year, you would see over 2400 of these cases occur. i'm not sure if that is as equally acceptable, even for a 98% cooperation rate. quote: Of the 47, 17 were convicted of felonies. Are we to believe that these convicted felons were simply set free? Where is the evidence for that? Sometimes public agencies have been known to release news bulletins to suit their own particular agenda. Is Jeff Sessions lying just a little bit? The RW used to rail at the dishonesty of Washington. Now, they want us to accept the government's pronouncements as gospel. The times they are a changing. [8\|] Yep - the convicted felons where simply set free... because they did their time or paid their fines, satisfying the terms of the conviction. And those that where charged with crimes posted bail. From the states perspective there is nothing legally wrong with releasing them - just as there is nothing wrong with releasing a US Citizen that posts bail or fulfills the conditions of their conviction. It is just that in these cases, the person in question is an Illegal.

thompsonx -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 2:46:13 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD They know that we are a nation of immigrants, Slaves and the decendants of slaves are immigrants? and they don't understand that there is a difference between legal and illegal immigrants. The difference is a misdomeanor dumbass. They do not understand the difference between people who want to be part of our society and those who want our society to change to be part of their's Who wants that besides you and other assorted bigots and racists?

thompsonx -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 2:49:24 PM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 I trust the low percentage rate will be of comfort to the victims of their crimes, both past and future. that said, please note that "47" is the number for a week. I don't know how ICE does it business but I feel pretty confident in saying 47 per week nevertheless adds up to many hundreds per year. Still lesss than 2% mr. college professor. Jesus yuare phoquing stupid.

thompsonx -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 2:51:05 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD Problem not solved, violent criminals who are deported just come back What is your solution?

mnottertail -> RE: Should we arrest officials in santuary cities? (3/31/2017 2:55:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: BamaD Problem not solved, violent criminals who are deported just come back What is your solution? Its got to be something with strap ons and sidearms.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.140625