quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

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.

quote:

Better border security and deport them after serving their sentence instead of just deporting them, also get rid of catch and release.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Better border security and deport them after serving their sentence instead of just deporting them, also get rid of catch and release.

Are you willing to raise taxes to pay the cost of added security...walls...and incarceration?

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
FR
I think arresting city officials is going a little too far at this point. Cutting off funding is an appropriate measure but there's no reason to start getting martial over this. If the data I've seen is right then most people don't support sanctuary cities and these leaders will probably be getting voted out of office anyway.

There might not be any way for the Federal Government to do that. Remember with the Obamacare Medicaid funding and the attempt to coerce States into expanding Medicaid? SCOTUS overturned the coercion by saying the Feds couldn't cut off Medicaid funding if a State declined to expand Medicaid, except for any funds offered specifically for expanding Medicaid.
If Federal funding to States or directly to a City is based on something the State/City is still doing, cutting that funding off wouldn't be Constitutional, either. The only funding that might be able to be cut off, is funding specifically for assistance in enforcing immigration laws.

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.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Better border security and deport them after serving their sentence instead of just deporting them, also get rid of catch and release.

Are you willing to raise taxes to pay the cost of added security...walls...and incarceration?

Butch

Are you willing to learn Spanish?
Better t spend it on a wall than on their welfare and such.

Do you remember "millions for defense, not one penny for tribute
"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Better border security and deport them after serving their sentence instead of just deporting them, also get rid of catch and release.

Are you willing to raise taxes to pay the cost of added security...walls...and incarceration?

Butch

Are you willing to learn Spanish?
Better t spend it on a wall than on their welfare and such.

Do you remember "millions for defense, not one penny for tribute
"?

Are you going to answer my question? How do you plan to finance your proposition?

Its a very simple nuts and blots question that needs an answer...don't you think?

Butch

PS... Spanish is better than Russian

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

So you want to pay to house them for the length of a prison sentence rather than just deporting them straight off?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Can you quantify that?... you should know that is a bull crap argument using even a tiny bit of common sense. Where are you getting the money? Do you realize what it will cost to prosecute and incarcerate and transport all illegals? Do you realize what it will cost to build the wall? Do you realize what it will cost to man the wall properly to even have a small chance of working... Do you realize the time it will take? Do you realize your plan would have to be in conjunction with building the wall and rounding up illegals and housing them awaiting adjudication...Where is the money coming from in the mean time?

Think practical... think what you idea will really take to pursue... then again quantify how you would finance it?

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheUltimate4Him

And yes, they should arrest all elected officials who are breaking the law by harboring illegals in their cities. And then since they are arrested and hopefully stand trial, they lose their seat as mayor as well as become felons.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Better border security and deport them after serving their sentence instead of just deporting them, also get rid of catch and release.

Are you willing to raise taxes to pay the cost of added security...walls...and incarceration?

Butch

Are you willing to learn Spanish?
Better t spend it on a wall than on their welfare and such.

Do you remember "millions for defense, not one penny for tribute
"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheUltimate4Him

And yes, they should arrest all elected officials who are breaking the law by harboring illegals in their cities. And then since they are arrested and hopefully stand trial, they lose their seat as mayor as well as become felons.

Taking action against those making it easy for the illegals will cut down on the number of illegals .
Go after the people hiring illegals, go after the people protecting them. Since that will be penalizing Americans I am sure the left will like it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

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.

{Out of 2825 detention requests for that week plays out to almost 146,900 detention requests for the year. 2400/146900 still equal 1.6%}

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.

Yep - the convicted felons where simply set free...
because they did their time or paid their fines, satisfying the terms of the conviction.
{How do you know what their jail terms were?}

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.
An Illegal, but not guilty of any state law. {What are the states' legal mandates to fulfill the police functions of the Federal Government? Show me please. Not just your bullshit opinions.}

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

{Out of 2825 detention requests for that week plays out to almost 146,900 detention requests for the year. 2400/146900 still equal 1.6%}

quote:


{How do you know what their jail terms were?}

quote:

An Illegal, but not guilty of any state law. {What are the states' legal mandates to fulfill the police functions of the Federal Government? Show me please. Not just your bullshit opinions.}

quote:

{One more point to consider. There are 12 Million estimated Illegals in America . . . and for 2400 detention rejections you wish to unleash the police power of the Federal, State, and local jurisdictions, and all the attendant costs? That makes sense to you? }

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Better border security and deport them after serving their sentence instead of just deporting them, also get rid of catch and release.

Are you willing to raise taxes to pay the cost of added security...walls...and incarceration?

Butch

Are you willing to learn Spanish?
Better t spend it on a wall than on their welfare and such.

Do you remember "millions for defense, not one penny for tribute
"?

Yes I do. Incarcerate and sell out the corporations that hire them, and the nutsuckers who protect them at our expense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

{Out of 2825 detention requests for that week plays out to almost 146,900 detention requests for the year. 2400/146900 still equal 1.6%}

percentages paint a different picture then numbers.

2% mortality rate for a medication seems low.
30,000 deaths due to a medication seems high.

So even if it is only 1.6% refusal to cooperate - 2400 annually may be an excessive value.
It is something you need to let pan out to see if it is really with in acceptable margins.

quote:


{How do you know what their jail terms were?}

Because you don't get convicted of a crime and simply walk out the front door afterwords. Once you're convicted of a crime, you're remanded to the custody of police/corrections until your sentence is resolved, then and only then do you get released. The DHS report implies that these individuals where 'released' - which means that their supposed sentences (what ever they may be) where resolved.

quote:

An Illegal, but not guilty of any state law. {What are the states' legal mandates to fulfill the police functions of the Federal Government? Show me please. Not just your bullshit opinions.}

Article 6 of the US Constitution...?
http://constitution.findlaw.com/article6.html
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi


This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Not sure how the US Constitution is a 'bullshit opinion'...

quote:

{One more point to consider. There are 12 Million estimated Illegals in America . . . and for 2400 detention rejections you wish to unleash the police power of the Federal, State, and local jurisdictions, and all the attendant costs? That makes sense to you? }

It is not a detention rejection - it is a refusal to fulfill a detainer.
In effect - the federal government is saying 'Hey, hold on to that guy until we can get down there and pick him up...'
and the state just ignored the call and cut the guy loose first chance they get.

While it may seem like nothing...
But in a worse case situation - It is like letting a Drug Overlord, Terrorist Leader, or Human Trafficker go because the broken tail light violation was just a simple ticket and the 'sanctuary city' didn't feel the need to inform Federal Authorities of the person in question.