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.

 CptJake wrote:
Oh and:

In 1998, Public Law 105-277 amended the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968 and made it illegal for nonimmigrant aliens to possess or transport firearms or ammunition in the United States. On 05 February the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms of the United States Department of the Treasury published regulations that became effective on 19 February 2002.

http://www.visaservices.duke.edu/FireArms.html

...
That looks important.

reds8n wrote:But in general, no you or indeed any other non US citizen doesn't have the same legal protections as an established citizen.

Same as most countries.

True in general, but Peter went a step further, and a step too far:

Peter Wiggin wrote:The rights and privileges of being a US citizen do not apply to those who are not US citizens. That is the entire point of having said rights and privileges clearly defined, by law.

This is factually deficient. Please refer to the second post of this thread, or here for a brief explanation.

 kronk wrote:

Ouze wrote:
would you think it outrageous that illegal immigrants have the right not to be tortured

Oh.

I guess I need a new weekend hobby.

Damn.

Exalted.

Anyway, they shouldn't even be able to buy guns period. Nobody should.
Its why there is very little gun realted crime in the UK.

rowboatjellyfanxiii wrote:
Anyway, they shouldn't even be able to buy guns period. Nobody should.
Its why there is very little gun realted crime in the UK.

Thank you for your post. Your argument definitely brings a much-needed fresh new perspective to this discussion and I think we're going to have a lot of reasoned debate on that idea.

Exalted, obviously.

Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886)

In Yick Wo v. Hopkins, a case involving the rights of Chinese immigrants, the Court ruled that the 14th Amendment's statement, "Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," applied to all persons "without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality," and to "an alien, who has entered the country, and has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction, and a part of its population, although alleged to be illegally here." (Kaoru Yamataya v. Fisher, 189 U.S. 86 (1903) )

What I take from this is that the whole illegal immigration debacle is a hell of a lot older than I thought

 reds8n wrote:
One is reasonably certain that the trial aspect is taken care of through various treaties between nations, hence why we can, at times, deport people to stand trial in other countries and vice versa.

There has been, IIRC, some issues here and there to do with the death penalty affecting some , as well as occasional concerns with sentencing etc.


But in general, no you or indeed any other non US citizen doesn't have the same legal protections as an established citizen.

Same as most countries.

Non-citizens have a great deal of the same legal protections as an established citizen. Aside from the obvious deportation, what other legal protections don't legal immigrants have?

 Henry wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
The rights and privileges of being a US citizen do not apply to those who are not US citizens. That is the entire point of having said rights and privileges clearly defined, by law.

This is ridiculous.

So as a foreigner visiting the US, I would have no right to free speech, no right to a fair trial, etc. ?

Nope.

/popcorn

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Henry wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
The rights and privileges of being a US citizen do not apply to those who are not US citizens. That is the entire point of having said rights and privileges clearly defined, by law.

This is ridiculous.

So as a foreigner visiting the US, I would have no right to free speech, no right to a fair trial, etc. ?

Nope.

/popcorn

Except you're just wrong.

The Supreme Court has stated more than once that all people within the United States enjoy the same fundamental, undeniable constitutional rights.

 LordofHats wrote:

Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886)

In Yick Wo v. Hopkins, a case involving the rights of Chinese immigrants, the Court ruled that the 14th Amendment's statement, "Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," applied to all persons "without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality," and to "an alien, who has entered the country, and has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction, and a part of its population, although alleged to be illegally here." (Kaoru Yamataya v. Fisher, 189 U.S. 86 (1903) )

What I take from this is that the whole illegal immigration debacle is a hell of a lot older than I thought

Yeah. As the saying goes, there is nothing new under the sun. Currently, the focus is on Mexican immigrants. Previously? It was on the Irish. Or Italians. Or Eastern Europeans. Or the Chinese. Throughout our history, America has been settled by immigrants who turn around and try to block the next wave of immigrants from coming here.

With the obvious exception of detainees at Guantanamo (which are in a legal limbo, as we haven't charged a lot of them with anything, yet don't consider them prisoners of war and thus do not extend the strictures of the Geneva Convention to them, but want to claim the prison as a US territory, which would thus extend due process to them, which we won't do because Reasons... it's a fething mess and a distinct embarrassment to the country) we extend due process of law to everyone in the country, regardless of their status as citizens. At least, it's supposed to work like that, and our laws are written under that assumption in most cases.