Sanctuary Cities

#1

SpaceCoastVol

Jacked up on moonshine and testosterone
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
46,644
Likes
55,194
#1
Like San Francisco with their policies on illegal immigration resulted in a young woman being murdered because no public entity had the common sense to inform another of a violent criminal in their midst.

What do ya'll think? Should the city be held accountable? Is this what you socialist liberals think is a good thing?
 
#2
#2
Like San Francisco with their policies on illegal immigration resulted in a young woman being murdered because no public entity had the common sense to inform another of a violent criminal in their midst.

What do ya'll think? Should the city be held accountable? Is this what you socialist liberals think is a good thing?



Yes. We support murder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#3
#3
Yes. We support murder.

These are YOUR policies that resulted in this. I guess a much better solution would be to take away everybody's guns, then by your logic this asshat wouldn't have had one to kill her with. Is that about right?

Kum by freakin ya
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 people
#4
#4
These are YOUR policies that resulted in this. I guess a much better solution would be to take away everybody's guns, then by your logic this asshat wouldn't have had one to kill her with. Is that about right?

Kum by freakin ya

The gun was stolen from a federal agent, apparently who had never heard of the "don't display **** that is important to you, like your CDs and guns" rule for his or her car, while left alone.

Guns are guns. That is another question all together.

Regarding sanctuary cities, while I recognize the fact that deportation can sometimes make situations worse (kind of like sending a welfare mother an hour or two each way to work for Dick Clark's American Bandstand Cafe, while your child has to be left relatively unsupervised only to end up shooting and killing another kid at school), I think the idea is generally stupid.

I personally have nothing against Mexicans. I think they're fine people, most often very courteous, and designers of outstanding cuisine. But something has to be done about Mexican (specifically) immigration in this country.

It's not even the crime that concerns me. Crime is crime. Any ******* can commit a crime. But Mexican immigration to this country is fundamentally different than anything we've ever experienced. No other group to immigrate to this country (indigenous people are pretty much all dead and can't immigrate here anyhow because they're already here) can say it has "legitimate" claims to a good portion of this nation's rightfully earned land. It doesn't help matters either that they're basically ghettosizing themselves in our American Southwest.

While I think our govt. is too strong to allow Hispanicization to reclaim the West, I don't particularly want to flirt with the notion.

Give current illegals a simplified pathway to citizenship and tax payer status, but clamp down like a mother****er on the border. It needs to be highly regulated from now on. Like some scholars have pointed out, the diversity of American immigrants in our past allowed for assimilation and integration, because no one immigrant group was ever powerful enough to completely clamp down on another or to challenge the admittedly primarily Anglo-Saxon values (like individual liberty and democracy) of this country (that's not a nationalistic or racialist statement; merely an observation of fact). At the moment, however, we are experiencing our least diverse immigrant population, and this lack of diversity means a potentially powerful bloc against acclimating to and accepting American values and American sovereignty. I don't think a serious challenge to American sovereignty in our West will occur, but, like I alluded to above, I don't particularly want to risk it out of the name of "compassion" either. Ethics are ethics, and I'm looking out for the American people while trying not to be a dick at the same time.
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
These are YOUR policies that resulted in this. I guess a much better solution would be to take away everybody's guns, then by your logic this asshat wouldn't have had one to kill her with. Is that about right?

Kum by freakin ya


I do not understand the ins and outs of the label "sanctuary city." My understanding as to San Fran, in particular, is that they had adopted an ordinance which stated that, if they have in their jail an illegal immigrant and it is time for that person to be released, then the local jailer (the police department or sheriff, as the case may be) checks with ICE to see if there are any holds.

If there is no hold, then the person is processed out of the jail, as anyone else would be.

I gather this is largely a cost saving mechanism. That is, if the San Fran jail hung on to every illegal immigrant indefinitely, and regardless of whether the feds had actually placed a hold on them, then there would be substantial expense to the City to wait for the feds to act.

I do not know if that is how other cities handle it. I would say that in this case, the issue is not just "better" communication with the feds. Its a local and states rights issue, and who is going to pay for inmates like this, as the process sorts itself out.

I suspect that you favor a dramatically oversimplified solution to the problem, but you would, of course and as usual, be ignoring the substantial complexities in these situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#6
#6
The gun was stolen from a federal agent, apparently who had never heard of the "don't display **** that is important to you, like your CDs and guns" rule for his or her car, while left alone.

Guns are guns. That is another question all together.

Regarding sanctuary cities, while I recognize the fact that deportation can sometimes make situations worse (kind of like sending a welfare mother an hour or two each way to work for Dick Clark's American Bandstand Cafe, while your child has to be left relatively unsupervised only to end up shooting and killing another kid at school), I think the idea is generally stupid.

I personally have nothing against Mexicans. I think they're fine people, most often very courteous, and designers of outstanding cuisine. But something has to be done about Mexican (specifically) immigration in this country.

It's not even the crime that concerns me. Crime is crime. Any ******* can commit a crime. But Mexican immigration to this country is fundamentally different than anything we've ever experienced. No other group to immigrate to this country (indigenous people are pretty much all dead and can't immigrate here anyhow because they're already here) can say it has "legitimate" claims to a good portion of this nation's rightfully earned land. It doesn't help matters either that they're basically ghettosizing themselves in our American Southwest.

While I think our govt. is too strong to allow Hispanicization to reclaim the West, I don't particularly want to flirt with the notion.

Give current illegals a simplified pathway to citizenship and tax payer status, but clamp down like a mother****er on the border. It needs to be highly regulated from now on. Like some scholars have pointed out, the diversity of American immigrants in our past allowed for assimilation and integration, because no one immigrant group was ever powerful enough to completely clamp down on another or to challenge the admittedly primarily Anglo-Saxon values (like individual liberty and democracy) of this country (that's not a nationalistic or racialist statement; merely an observation of fact). At the moment, however, we are experiencing our least diverse immigrant population, and this lack of diversity means a potentially powerful bloc against acclimating to and accepting American values and American sovereignty. I don't think a serious challenge to American sovereignty in our West will occur, but, like I alluded to above, I don't particularly want to risk it out of the name of "compassion" either. Ethics are ethics, and I'm looking out for the American people while trying not to be a dick at the same time.

I appreciate this post. Although crime is a concern when it comes at the hands of people who would otherwise be prevented from entering - it pales in comparison to the issues you touched on
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
I do not understand the ins and outs of the label "sanctuary city." My understanding as to San Fran, in particular, is that they had adopted an ordinance which stated that, if they have in their jail an illegal immigrant and it is time for that person to be released, then the local jailer (the police department or sheriff, as the case may be) checks with ICE to see if there are any holds.

If there is no hold, then the person is processed out of the jail, as anyone else would be.

Except that he HAS committed a crime. He is here ILLEGALLY. Is it just me?

It is more don't inquire if the asshat in jail is an illegal, and if he is, they won't inform the federales. As I said:

kum by ****ing ya

There are no complexities. He was here illegally, and a known criminal at that, and at a minimum should have been put on a plane out of the country or at least to New York or some other third world country.

San Francisco Sheriff Brought Kate Steinle's Illegal Alien Killer Back to The City - Katie Pavlich

A fine display of liberalism at it's best folks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#8
#8
@MarkSKrikorian: Schumer & Durbin refused to listen to families of victims of illegal-alien crime at Senate hearing; wouldn't reenter room til families left.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
@MarkSKrikorian: Schumer & Durbin refused to listen to families of victims of illegal-alien crime at Senate hearing; wouldn't reenter room til families left.

Bet this will be ALL over the news next couple of days.

Blue font not needed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
@MarkSKrikorian: Schumer & Durbin refused to listen to families of victims of illegal-alien crime at Senate hearing; wouldn't reenter room til families left.

Just wtf is their problem?? Why do they (Dems) act the way they do?? If this tragedy had happened to one of their family members they would be calling for the Mayor & the City Council's heads to roll & doing something to change the law for sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#12
#12
Just wtf is their problem?? Why do they (Dems) act the way they do?? If this tragedy had happened to one of their family members they would be calling for the Mayor & the City Council's heads to roll & doing something to change the law for sure.

dems only value certain lives .. I mean voters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#19
#19
@CraigCaplan: 241-179: House passed @Rep_Hunter bill to end federal grant funding of #SanctuaryCities w/6Ds voting Yes & 5Rs No

Almost guaranteed to be vetoed, but republicans would not have votes to overturn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
This incident is concerning. But can you really judge these policies based on one incident? That'd be like judging gun policy based on one shooting incident.

Yes I think you can make that judgment. These policies allow known criminals to remain without fear of prosecution by a different agency. They are illegal. By definition, criminal. Couple that with a real potential to be a violent offender and you have this incident. I tend to think that most illegals keep their heads down and work under the radar. These sanctuary policies will do nothing other than concentrate the more violent criminals in these kinds of places, because they KNOW they are not in danger of being turned in. It's bizarre, but coming from the touchy feely liberal world, not surprising. They act surprised, but do not even feign outrage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#21
#21
@CraigCaplan: 241-179: House passed @Rep_Hunter bill to end federal grant funding of #SanctuaryCities w/6Ds voting Yes & 5Rs No

Almost guaranteed to be vetoed, but republicans would not have votes to overturn.

2016 can't come soon enough, it's a ****ing disgrace that the feds support the sanctuary cities..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#22
#22
our country has lost its way to political correctness... Somehow enforcing the law is row racist or extreme... We are a tipping point as a country
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#23
#23
our country has lost its way to political correctness... Somehow enforcing the law is row racist or extreme... We are a tipping point as a country

We're becoming a monarchy under Emperor Barak, he indiscriminately picks and chooses which laws he'll enforce..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#25
#25
We're becoming a monarchy under Emperor Barak, he indiscriminately picks and chooses which laws he'll enforce..

He is the great defender of law breakers.. He is about release 30k form prison in every Nov...... Maybe after more crime are committed .. He and his AG can investagate more police departments for profiling .. Brilliant
 

VN Store



Back
Top