Rape focuses critical attention on Dems 'sanctuary' states - Maryland

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Allow me to ask a different question: if a father of the Catholic church-which has been under scrutiny in many nations for child abuse but many has committed no crimes, do you close the borders for every father who wishes to preach to the choir without having a sinister motive?

I'd like to close the borders on morons but that's not my choice as people are judged on their merits.

That's a bit easier to answer. You just don't go to their church. If you do then you are inviting it on yourself if it is a known problem. There aren't 78k Catholic priests clamoring over a particular boys school wall to get in either. If there were then I would think most of the world would have no issue putting them down for good.

I personally have no ounce of care in me for pedophiles, nor religion, so wall them up and let them molest each other for all I care.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Ok, please show me in my argument with the figures where I have misconstrued them.

I told you that those stats aren't indicative of the entire population of immigrants and don't illuminate anything in regards to the number of illegals that are violent criminals.

Slippery slope fallacy? The slippery slope started with not enforcing the current laws and even going against them by creating sanctuary cities.

Yes. Implying that just because we let illegal immigrants get away with border hopping in sanctuary cities will result in sanctuary cities for rapists is a slippery slope fallacy. It's textbook in how obvious it is too. I won't address this silliness any further and if you think that is a legit argument then I feel sorry for you.

Sure, morality is relative. Laws are not which is why they are written and passed...they don't leave room for morality and for good reason.

Except laws are written to reflect the morality of the society they govern, but they are currently too inflexible to keep up with humans' changing morals. That is a problem and is one of the reasons we have so many outdated laws on the books. I'm sure there are laws that we have that YOU don't agree with being on the books.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

It doesn't matter the reason the stats were collected. The numbers are there regardless.

Yes, when it comes to statistics the reason why they were collected (and how they were collected) is VERY important to the conversation at hand.

And yes, truly enforce the laws, not making sanctuary cities would be a good start at doing so. Instead we choose to say those laws don't matter and we don't have to listen to them because "feelz". So where does that stop really? If a large enough group of people decide that rape is cool and don't want to follow the law and suddenly sanctuary cities pop up for rapists would that be cool?

This is a slippery slope fallacy.

As for your "wrong" argument, that could be stated for every single written law since the beginning of time. It isn't as if I kill someone I immediately drop dead because the laws of nature strike me down. It was written on a piece of paper that killing is wrong.

Correct. All morality is relative. I can find situations where you'd agree to the most reprehensible crimes and I can find situations where you'd think something perfectly legal should be criminal or wrong. This is why law shouldn't be so hard and fast, and should instead be more flexible.

Karzy argued about how law is interpreted then gives illegal immigration a blanket pass on all illegal imigration ahahahahahs! Serously krazy? If every situation is different then why is it ok for all illegal immigrants and not new immigrants looking for citizenship? What you are advocating is for the legal process of vetting new immigrants through legal channels not illegal immigration.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Ok, please show me in my argument with the figures where I have misconstrued them.

I told you that those stats aren't indicative of the entire population of immigrants and don't illuminate anything in regards to the number of illegals that are violent criminals.

Slippery slope fallacy? The slippery slope started with not enforcing the current laws and even going against them by creating sanctuary cities.

Yes. Implying that just because we let illegal immigrants get away with border hopping in sanctuary cities will result in sanctuary cities for rapists is a slippery slope fallacy. It's textbook in how obvious it is too. I won't address this silliness any further and if you think that is a legit argument then I feel sorry for you.

Sure, morality is relative. Laws are not which is why they are written and passed...they don't leave room for morality and for good reason.

Except laws are written to reflect the morality of the society they govern, but they are currently too inflexible to keep up with humans' changing morals. That is a problem and is one of the reasons we have so many outdated laws on the books. I'm sure there are laws that we have that YOU don't agree with being on the books.

Of course those stats are not indicative of every immigrant. They are indicative of the ones that were criminals in 2016. 78K of them were caught at the border. 800K cross the border each year. 78K of those 800K were criminals. That is 10% of all illegal immigrants in 2016. That is a LARGE criminal element attempting to get into the US each year.

Whatever on the slippery slope.....I could go on and on with the slippery slope as was pointed out by an earlier poster and how illegal immigration and what we allow them to do is already an overly greased slope that has been slipped on for a long time.

Sure there are laws on the books I don't agree with. Does that mean I shouldn't follow them or be punished for them? I find no U-turn signs one of the most ridiculous traffic violations in the area. Sure they are good for some really large cities, but where I am, it is the dumbest law on the book. Same with jaywalking, yet I have seen people get cited for it in downtown Atlanta. When we begin as a people to choose which laws we want to follow and how stringently we want to follow them, then we will quickly revert to chaos as the reason for laws is because of those that have a different moral compass and may think that rape/murder/molestation is OK. Laws are written and followed by the justice system for a reason, not for interpretation as the accused sees fit.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you wrote a thread singling out Maryland.

If anything, he was singling out sanctuary states. I live in California and this crap makes me sick but I'm in the minority here.

What no answer to my post krazy? Common lawyer lets hear about how morality is changing and the laws are having a hard time keeping up! What you are also advicating is for some immigrants to require vetting and a legal process while others get a free pass wouldn't this be considered favoritism? What makes mexican foriegn nationals or illegals fom other south american country better then any other immigrants that are required to go through the legal process? Where is the morality in this situation? Do you believe we should rewrite the laws? Also if someone can just ignore the laws to become a citizen why even have a process at all? Krazy do you believe this to be a good situation where everyone is welcome and all that is required to become a United States citizen is a plane or bus ticket?

I will be waiting on your responses! Lol

See people this is what liberals do in these type of threads
If the fight can't be argued on morality or emotion they switch too legally and if they can't argue the legality of the situation they swith to emotion or morality and if they cant make an argument on both they ignore your post and cherry pick the ones they can or simply leave the topic

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I live in Maryland and am still 100% ok with Maryland's immigration laws.

Maryland doesn't have immigration laws

the United States does

originally posted by: digital01anarchy
What no answer to my post krazy? Common lawyer lets hear about how morality is changing and the laws are having a hard time keeping up! What you are also advicating is for some immigrants to require vetting and a legal process while others get a free pass wouldn't this be considered favoritism? What makes mexican foriegn nationals or illegals fom other south american country better then any other immigrants that are required to go through the legal process? Where is the morality in this situation? Do you believe we should rewrite the laws? Also if someone can just ignore the laws to become a citizen why even have a process at all? Krazy do you believe this to be a good situation where everyone is welcome and all that is required to become a United States citizen is a plane or bus ticket?

I will be waiting on your responses! Lol

The thing that really irritates me about the folks wanting illegals to be here is that they say they committed a small crime on the order of a starving family stealing bread. Basically they really didn't commit a crime in their eyes. Ok....let's roll with that for just a second. Now say we turn a blind eye to them doing this. Do we also turn a blind eye to those employing them? Because that is a federal offense. Do we then penalize them and call them immoral when they don't pay this illegal alien minimum wage as defined in the US for it's citizens? Are they now bad people for taking advantage of those that took advantage of the US?

I actually have people I would consider friends that are illegally here. I debate them on this all the time and tell them to go through the proper channels to get it fixed. They say it takes too long and in the same breath talk about their family and future here....how does that make sense? Logically, if you have a child here you would want to be around for them, so why risk NOT being around for them simply because it takes too long in your opinion? I would stand in line for years if it was for my kids. These are some of the nicest people I know. They would give you the shirt off their back, literally. I only throw this out there to show that I am not some backwoods retard with Utopian ideas. If these friends of mine were deported I would feel very sorry for them, but everyone has a choice to make in life and some choices are hard and some milestones take a LONG time to reach. I would think that if you wanted to be in the US that bad, then doing it in a way that you don't have to look over your shoulder would be a top priority.

I have yet to meet a single illegal that did not know they were doing something illegal when they crossed the border. Moral compass is low so I don't expect moral factors to be a driver in their decisions.

originally posted by: acackohfcc

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I live in Maryland and am still 100% ok with Maryland's immigration laws.

Maryland doesn't have immigration laws

the United States does

Thread winner!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So using what argument you've posted here...By what you replied to me with, you're stating you think we should remove our immigration laws and make everywhere a sanctuary? I don't exactly get what you're trying to say unless I did get it above and you think we should just open the doors wide and let em all in.

My stance is that it is illegal and enforcement should be 100% on it...If you didn't come in legally you should be sought out and deported. Same for drug laws...Even the ones on pot...Of which I do partake. Not because I think it should be illegal but because it sets a precedent which leaves law and enforcement open to much much more abuse and unfairness.

LOL. DC, Ricky, Vasa...you guys are wasting your keyboards.

Its good for stamina though.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I live in Maryland and am still 100% ok with Maryland's immigration laws.

Really?

Do you understand how these two got access to this girl in school?

The two suspects were 17 and 18 years old. Despite that, they were in the same ninth grade class as their victim, leading to questions about the wisdom of placing nearly illiterate, non-English speaking illegal immigrants in classes attended by younger American children.

pjmedia.com...

It is the policy to enroll older illegal teen immigrants in lower grades because of their poor English skills in Maryland.

The horrific attack Thursday, in a Rockville, Md., high school bathroom, grimly underscores the challenge of enrolling upper-teen illegal immigrants with poor language skills in public schools. The suspects in the attack were both in ninth grade, as was their victim. One, identified by police as Henry E. Sanchez-Milian, had been caught crossing the Mexican border just months ago.

So basically, the state of Maryland enabled the rape of this child by making her attackers her classmates. I can completely understand why you would be on board with offering sanctuary to and enrolling 17 and 18 year old men and boys into classes with 14 year old girls and allowing those men and boys to continue to age as they progress through the next four years of high school together.

All good I'm sure.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well I showed earlier that immigrants and even illegals have lower crime rates than neighborhoods with native citizens. They really aren't that dangerous. Sure your 10% number LOOKS scary in a vacuum, but data suggests it isn't as scary as it first appears.

a reply to: RickyD

I hope you know that this country was founded on bucking authority.

a reply to: ketsuko

Oh PLEASE! It's not like there aren't cases of Americans flunking grades and winding up in grades with peers several years younger than them. Plus that is also flat out ignoring all the 17 and 18 year olds who went to those classes and DIDN'T rape anyone.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

Oh PLEASE! It's not like there aren't cases of Americans flunking grades and winding up in grades with peers several years younger than them. Plus that is also flat out ignoring all the 17 and 18 year olds who went to those classes and DIDN'T rape anyone.

Somehow, I doubt you hold the same position on Catholic Priests ...

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well I showed earlier that immigrants and even illegals have lower crime rates than neighborhoods with native citizens. They really aren't that dangerous. Sure your 10% number LOOKS scary in a vacuum, but data suggests it isn't as scary as it first appears.

It has already been determined that the illegal crime rate is not reported and for a simple reason...they are illegal and don't want to be caught. My 10% number is based on them going through the system and finding that they have a record.

If we roll with your determination then that would mean even MORE criminals exist as an illegal isn't going to turn themselves in for a crime they were involved in. It is similar to the "I scratch your back" policy of criminals....if one tells on another then the whole neighborhood disappears.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

Oh PLEASE! It's not like there aren't cases of Americans flunking grades and winding up in grades with peers several years younger than them. Plus that is also flat out ignoring all the 17 and 18 year olds who went to those classes and DIDN'T rape anyone.

Somehow, I doubt you hold the same position on Catholic Priests ...

Do you really want to go down this road with me? I know you don't enjoy having theology debates with me.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

No. One rape happening within my own family does not change the fact that it is still one rape and not necessarily indicative of a larger trend. Like I said, emotional appeals don't work on me.

And one lynching happening would mean that there is a group of racists in a community that needs to be prosecuted for hate crimes. It doesn't mean there is a larger trend of racists committing lynchings across the state or even country.

Lynchings happen in all ethnicities so do not pretend its always Racist. India had a problem with lynchings for people for witchcraft so is that racism?