Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Jihadin wrote: The "Federal Government" Frazz He does not recognize the Federal Government He stop paying grazing rights to the feds being he started trying to pay the State the fee Went FUBAR at that point.
Considering it is Federal Land, and that there is an actual Federal Government, and that the state is part of that system, the whole argument it pants on head.
Exactly. If you don't recognize the federal government you're either a foreign alien or a traitor. Choose carefully. The gallows awaits.
Same was said after a fashion by the British to the Colonists.
EPIC MILITIA HORSE gak. Do you recognize the sovereignty of the USA? Do you even consider yourself a citizen of the US? If not get the feth out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: I hear that Obama is planting a potato farm there.
Thanks Obama!
I wish the government recognized the sovereignty of the United States and enforced our borders and our laws on illegal immigrants, didnt traffic weapons to drug cartels, didnt start wars on false pretenses, didnt stick its nose in our private lives and violate the Constitution at every turn. I am a United States Citizen. Just wish our government acted like they were too.
So pretty much doing what they're already doing in this situation? I mean, they're following the law throwing out someone who's illegaly been using federal land.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
d-usa wrote: You know how I know that article is bs and not worth reading?
Because of the headline: Armed federal agents defend turtle habitat but fail to secure our national borders.
If the author starts off with a lie in the headline, then you can be pretty certain that the rest of the article is pure trash.
Agree... and it is full of lies like: "and if that diminishes the interests of private property owners" - Nothing in this case has to do with private property, just because Bundy (wrongly) believes it to be his private property, it isn't. it never has been, it never will be. This is not a case about imminent domain. It is about a crazy, violent deadbeat squatting on public land he has no right to be on.
and "Other people are breaking the law far worse than me, so I shouldn't be held accountable for my crimes" is not a valid defense.
He is arguing from a false premise right off the bat and using lies to fit his agenda.
Take a step back please... half the article the writer was being facetious.
It's not about, one department isn't enforcing the laws, why should BLM?
It's about how it appears that the various Federal department appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforces laws on the book.
d-usa wrote: You know how I know that article is bs and not worth reading?
Because of the headline: Armed federal agents defend turtle habitat but fail to secure our national borders.
If the author starts off with a lie in the headline, then you can be pretty certain that the rest of the article is pure trash.
Um... weren't they armed feds?
The turtle habitat part. The turtle habitat is only tangentally related to why the Feds were present. They were present because Bundy hasn't been paying for the land he's been using and refuses to leave.
Jihadin wrote: The "Federal Government" Frazz He does not recognize the Federal Government He stop paying grazing rights to the feds being he started trying to pay the State the fee Went FUBAR at that point.
Considering it is Federal Land, and that there is an actual Federal Government, and that the state is part of that system, the whole argument it pants on head.
Exactly. If you don't recognize the federal government you're either a foreign alien or a traitor. Choose carefully. The gallows awaits.
Same was said after a fashion by the British to the Colonists.
EPIC MILITIA HORSE gak. Do you recognize the sovereignty of the USA? Do you even consider yourself a citizen of the US? If not get the feth out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: I hear that Obama is planting a potato farm there.
Thanks Obama!
I wish the government recognized the sovereignty of the United States and enforced our borders and our laws on illegal immigrants, didnt traffic weapons to drug cartels, didnt start wars on false pretenses, didnt stick its nose in our private lives and violate the Constitution at every turn. I am a United States Citizen. Just wish our government acted like they were too.
So pretty much doing what they're already doing in this situation? I mean, they're following the law throwing out someone who's illegaly been using federal land.
LordofHats wrote: Not to mention this continued nonsense about the Border Patrol not doing a job that can't be done in the first place.
Before moving forward... what is their job description?
Who here thinks that going door to door and collecting every gun in the country will actually be effective in getting rid of all the tens of millions of guns in the US? Raise your hand.
?? Not going to happen, so moot point?
You'll have the same amount of success trying to deport all of the tens of millions of illegal immigrants (and unlike guns, they multiply). Nothing is happening on that issue because no one wants amnesty granted, but its infeasible to deport that many people, the border between the US and Mexico is too long to police, and genocide is generally looked down upon these days.
I'm actually pretty damned liberal regarding the illegal immigrants... they're looking for a better life and I have no qualms about them seeking it here. Just sign the damned guest book when you get here.
As to your comment about the border is "too long to police". Bull. fething. gak.
It's not about, one department isn't enforcing the laws, why should BLM?
You say it's not.
We're talking about enforcing the laws... right?
It's about how it appears that the various Federal department appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforces laws on the book.
But then you say it is.
I'm saying, I'm not against what BLM is doing. That's fine as that rancher is a nutter (but, I gave him props for going up against the feds... any way you slice it, he has some cojones)
So... you applaud BLM for doing their job. Great. Good job. Me to.
Now you want to give me grief when I complain about other Federal Department NOT enforcing the laws?
d-usa wrote: You know how I know that article is bs and not worth reading?
Because of the headline: Armed federal agents defend turtle habitat but fail to secure our national borders.
If the author starts off with a lie in the headline, then you can be pretty certain that the rest of the article is pure trash.
Um... weren't they armed feds?
The turtle habitat part. The turtle habitat is only tangentally related to why the Feds were present. They were present because Bundy hasn't been paying for the land he's been using and refuses to leave.
I know that. The feds werent standing over the turtles "defending" them.
It's a fething headline. o.O You can only put so much in there...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/04/17 15:02:08
As to your comment about the border is "too long to police". Bull. fething. gak.
The US Mexican Border is 2000 miles long. The coast line that can be used to get into the country is five times that.
The border cannot be secured. It's a pipe dream.
Depends on what your criteria "secured" means.
I think that's what get lost in the shuffle....
I don't think that advocates to "secure" the border means that we'll build a great wall of china over every square inch... It's simply a cause that we ought to spend more resources than what we're doing now. Ie, more border guards, tech, coast guards, port authorities...
I don't think that advocates to "secure" the border means that we'll build a great wall of china over every square inch... It's simply a cause that we ought to spend more resources than what we're doing now. Ie, more border guards, tech, coast guards, port authorities...
So then we're not selectively chosing to leave the border unsecured, we just don't spend enough money to secure it sufficiently?
The border patrols job is pushing a giant sombrero wearing boulder up a very steep mountain built of old discard maracas. The task granted to them is impossible. Throw all the money at it you want, they still won't be able to do their job. At this point giving them more money is in all likely hood a waste of resources.
I don't think that advocates to "secure" the border means that we'll build a great wall of china over every square inch... It's simply a cause that we ought to spend more resources than what we're doing now. Ie, more border guards, tech, coast guards, port authorities...
So then we're not selectively chosing to leave the border unsecured, we just don't spend enough money to secure it sufficiently?
You got it.
The border patrols job is pushing a giant sombrero wearing boulder up a very steep mountain built of old discard maracas. The task granted to them is impossible. Throw all the money at it you want, they still won't be able to do their job. At this point giving them more money is in all likely hood a waste of resources.
Uh huh... take a look at how Mexico enforces their immigration laws and come back to me with that one.
It's a fething headline. o.O You can only put so much in there...
You can start with the truth. If you can't do that, then you're not credible.
See... you want to nitpick.
Yet, you don't want to engage me on a tangent...
Because border security has feth-all to do with Bundy breaking the law.
You're still missing it...
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/17 15:17:07
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
You're still missing it...
This still has feth-all to do with Bundy breaking the law unless you are arguing that he shouldn't be persecuted because somebody somewhere else isn't enforcing some other law.
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
It is not discretion, a lot of it is due process, funding and authority.
In this case, the situation has worked through lawsuits and due process for 20 years, they have the funding to implement it and the authority. You are comparing one person getting pulled over for speeding to enforced speed cameras on every corner of every street for the entire state... You can say by not enforcing speeding laws by hundreds of thousands of speed cameras but still pulling people over manually, you are 'not enforcing' laws based upon discretion and no one should ever get a speeding ticket ever until everyone always gets a speeding ticket.
Turning this into an immigration debate is a total red herring... they are totally different issues.
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA."
Seeing as they keep finding their way up here, I don't think Mexico is having much luck (and their southern border is puny).
True... but the have all that coastline there.
I recall that the UN human rights complained to Mexico about their policy. (need to find that).
Let’s take a look at Mexico’s immigration policy.
Spoiler:
For instance, did you know that:
-Mexico deports more illegal aliens that the U.S. annually -Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico
Or that immigrants must – -Have the means to sustain themselves economically; -Not be burdens on society; -Be of economic and social benefit to society; -Be of good character and have no criminal records; and -Contribute to the general well being of the nation.
Mexico’s immigration policies also ensure that – -Authorities have a record of each foreign visitor; -Foreign visitors do not violate their visa status; -Foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics; -Foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported; -Foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported; -Those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.”
Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society: -Foreigners are admitted into Mexico “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.” (Article 32) -Immigration officials must ‘ensure’ that ‘immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance’ and for their dependents. (Article 34) -Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets ‘the equilibrium of the national demographics,’ when foreigners are deemed detrimental to ‘economic or national interests,’ when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when ‘they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.’ (Article 37) -The Secretary of Governance may ‘suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest.’ (Article 38) -Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country: -Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73) -A National Population Registry keeps track of ‘every single individual who comprises the population of the country,’ and verifies each individual’s identity. (Articles 85 and 86) -A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91). -Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned: -Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116) -Foreigners who sign government documents ‘with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses’ are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons: -Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117) -Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118) -Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). -Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico – such as working with out a permit – can also be imprisoned. -Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says, A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally. (Article 123) -Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125) -Foreigners who ‘attempt against national sovereignty or security’ will be deported. (Article 126) -Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law. -A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127) -Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)”
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
You're still missing it...
This still has feth-all to do with Bundy breaking the law unless you are arguing that he shouldn't be persecuted because somebody somewhere else isn't enforcing some other law.
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
It is not discretion, a lot of it is due process, funding and authority.
In this case, the situation has worked through lawsuits and due process for 20 years, they have the funding to implement it and the authority. You are comparing one person getting pulled over for speeding to enforced speed cameras on every corner of every street for the entire state... You can say by not enforcing speeding laws by hundreds of thousands of speed cameras but still pulling people over manually, you are 'not enforcing' laws based upon discretion and no one should ever get a speeding ticket ever until everyone always gets a speeding ticket.
Turning this into an immigration debate is a total red herring... they are totally different issues.
This is what I get for not creating another thread...
I'm not defending Bundy... I'm on BLM's side for feth sake!.
Cool?
The article I posted was very facetious... but one thing stood out to me (I'm not bringing in the Bundy/BLM saga here with this question): isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book? <--- on my part, maybe this should've been a separate thread.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/04/17 15:33:22
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
You're still missing it...
This still has feth-all to do with Bundy breaking the law unless you are arguing that he shouldn't be persecuted because somebody somewhere else isn't enforcing some other law.
I'm. NOT. Defending. Bundy!
No, you are supporting him.
And in the process you managed to once again find some weird pro-government-is-bad article making a ridiculous point "Isn't it interesting that Bundy broke the law for decades and a court has found him guilty and ordered this action and isn't it interesting that the border hasn't been secured yet so why is the BLM not chasing Mexicans won't somebody please think of the citizen children" and completely latched onto it while ignoring the actual situation.
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
You're still missing it...
This still has feth-all to do with Bundy breaking the law unless you are arguing that he shouldn't be persecuted because somebody somewhere else isn't enforcing some other law.
I'm. NOT. Defending. Bundy!
No, you are supporting him.
And in the process you managed to once again find some weird pro-government-is-bad article making a ridiculous point "Isn't it interesting that Bundy broke the law for decades and a court has found him guilty and ordered this action and isn't it interesting that the border hasn't been secured yet so why is the BLM not chasing Mexicans won't somebody please think of the citizen children" and completely latched onto it while ignoring the actual situation.
I'll rephrase... isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book?
You're still missing it...
This still has feth-all to do with Bundy breaking the law unless you are arguing that he shouldn't be persecuted because somebody somewhere else isn't enforcing some other law.
I'm. NOT. Defending. Bundy!
No, you are supporting him.
And in the process you managed to once again find some weird pro-government-is-bad article making a ridiculous point "Isn't it interesting that Bundy broke the law for decades and a court has found him guilty and ordered this action and isn't it interesting that the border hasn't been secured yet so why is the BLM not chasing Mexicans won't somebody please think of the citizen children" and completely latched onto it while ignoring the actual situation.
Whatever man... you go on and think that.
Let's review:
In some weird twisted way (and I was like this during OWS), it's nice to see Americans *pushing back* at the Feds every once in a while.
Sometimes I feel like people need to be reminded that the Feds works for us. knowhatimean?
That's fine as that rancher is a nutter (but, I gave him props for going up against the feds... any way you slice it, he has some cojones)
The article I posted was very facetious... but one thing stood out to me (I'm not bringing in the Bundy/BLM saga here with this question): isn't it interesting that the various Federal departments appears to have so much discretion on whether or not to enforce laws on the book? <--- on my part, maybe this should've been a separate thread.
You seem to think that the feds have the ability and authority to swoop in like the BLM is the second a boarder-related crime happens. The issue is, immigration situations are handled case by case, and have to have due process and often are tied up in bureaucracy and lawsuits exactly how this situation was. So think of it this way... it took 20 years to get to this point in regards to the FEDS acting... in most cases, immigration enforcement happens much faster than 20 years when all is said and done... so if anything, why did the BLM wait so long?
It isn't discretion, it is limiting factors of numbers of incidents, infrastructure to enforce, authority, due process, lawsuits and so on which make every individual enforcement potentially take decades to enforce or go missed all together.
Discretion is the Hawaiian police who would sleep with prostitutes because the prostitutes were asking for 'cop checks' before handling money assuming cops would never actually go through with sex. There is a huge difference between someone standing there and letting a crime to happen and the unknown but probable chance of crime happening because it is going unwatched.
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA."
@_@ Have you looked at the gulf coast line? It's nearly 10,000 miles of unpoliceability. Unless we honestly want to pay to post a border agent every fifty feet for 12,000 miles* they're going to get in no matter what we do. Mexico can deport all the immigrants it wants, it doesn't change the fact that they don't go into Mexico to live in Mexico, they go to Mexico to get into the US, and its working pretty well for them.
*Just for fun; That's over 1,250,000 border agents.
@_@ Have you looked at the gulf coast line? It's nearly 10,000 miles of unpoliceability. Unless we honestly want to pay to post a border agent every fifty feet for 12,000 miles* they're going to get in no matter what we do. Mexico can deport all the immigrants it wants, it doesn't change the fact that they don't go into Mexico to live in Mexico, they go to Mexico to get into the US, and its working pretty well for them.
*Just for fun; That's over 1,250,000 border agents.
So... no more border patrols. Let's terminate that department... since you say it's impossible.
We'd only save about 3 million dollars (or 300 mill?) or so.
whembly wrote: So... no more border patrols. Let's terminate that department... since you say it's impossible.
Honestly, as far as stopping immigrants goes, yeah. They're kind of not making an progress and progress is kind of impossible. On the whole drug war thing they're still useful but I think we should end the drug war so that would kabosh that too XD
We could always try Stephen Colbert's idea of a 3000 mile porch staffed with old people, but I suspect that would be more funny than effective.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/17 15:52:07
whembly wrote: So... no more border patrols. Let's terminate that department... since you say it's impossible.
Honestly, as far as stopping immigrants goes, yeah. They're kind of not making an progress and progress is kind of impossible. On the whole drug war thing they're still useful but I think we should end the drug war so that would kabosh that too XD
We could always try Stephen Colbert's idea of a 3000 mile porch staffed with old people, but I suspect that would be more funny than effective.
Stick frazz on the border, that'll feth em
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
