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

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Well...i wonder how many in Montgomery County want to be a sanctuary state now? This is EXACTLY the thing all of the left PC snowflakes have been screaming doesn't happen...and yet it happened to a 14 year old girl in school. Good job Maryland Dems!!!!

Anyone else think those that pushed for the sanctuary should face charges as well? This has to stop....hopefully it will get us that much closer to shutting the border to depravity like this.

link

The rape of a 14-year-old girl last week in a boys’ bathroom of a Maryland high school, for which two immigrants have been charged, has fueled opposition to officials making the state a sanctuary for illegal immigrants.

At least they'll be tried as adults and likely get life sentences...but then we get to pay for them as well! Lose lose situation!!!

Your really using one incident to make a broad statement on all immigrants....

Really..

This breaks like every logical fallacy rule from debate class....

This is just the latest one. Read the entire thread and you will see more.

Also take a look at my last post from the ICE webpage directly.....plenty of criminals crossing the border.

originally posted by: Martin75

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Voyaging

Sanctuary cities don't offer full citizenship to illegals. They just protect them from deportation efforts when they aren't violent criminals or attached to cartels.

Right, Sanctuary cities allow illegals to continue breaking the law.

What's your point? This has nothing to do with what I was discussing with Voyaging.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Also take a look at my last post from the ICE webpage directly.....plenty of criminals crossing the border.

You realize that your ICE report just shows that the ICE is also prioritizing real criminals over just merely border hoppers right?

a reply to: Martin75

If you are here illegally...as in not going through the proper channels you are in fact a criminal. 100% of of illegal immigrants are criminals. Not all are violent criminals, and I'm sure some percent and I don't know what that is are perfectly decent people, take the legal route. For those of you in the states that don't agree with current immigration law, seek to change it, but you cannot ignore the laws you don't like. Some people don't like the anti murder laws...by your logic they are free to ignore them, and hell maybe there can be sanctuary cities for rapists and criminals...my my doesn't that sound fun.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Why don't you tell me why they are a dire problem in need of fixing instead?

It's illegal. A nation without borders is not a nation.

I was hoping for an explanation that didn't rely on political rhetoric that you can speak from rote memory. I just gave you a bunch of studies showing that sanctuary cities really aren't a threat to our country and your only response to this is that these people are illegal? Well how about we just legalize them? It's just a stroke of a pen.

Should the law be followed? I don't feel I need to argue that point.

You also gave me evidence that illegal immigrants are more likely to be incarcerated than legal ones.

And that is despite the underreporting of crimes and the unwillingness of these cities to tell the truth.

the 'Sanctuary City' Ploy allows for additional 'Equality' for the favored immigrants over the general population

just like 'Affirmative Action' allowed for defacto 'reverse-discrimination' to be slapped on the majority 'whites'

Neither action is commendable, nor should continue to be practiced as the Law-of-the-land


Open Border policy was contrary to well thought out Immigration Policy & quotas/limitations/vetting standards
...& the Sanctuary City Operations, we will find out in the future, allowed for the placement or stationing of particular terrorist specialists in strategic locals to complete a well staffed NGO terror cell ...

(the "Conspiracy-Theorist" in me just had to take a stab at poking the dragon)

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Agreed! I live in Texas and we routinely urge the illegals to seek refuge in Sanctuary states like Maryland and California! So I fully support Maryland's immigration laws.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Also take a look at my last post from the ICE webpage directly.....plenty of criminals crossing the border.

You realize that your ICE report just merely shows that the ICE is also prioritizing real criminals over just merely border hoppers right?

Yes...I realize exactly that. The fact people are saying that immigrants are not all that bad is false. That is 240,000 immigrants that ARE that either got in or tried in 2016 alone. Now out of the roughly 800,000 that try to cross each year, having 78,000 apprehended at or near border facilities or ports of entry would suggest that roughly 10% of the illegals coming in are a criminal element. 10%!

So we have around 12 million here now, the numbers ICE puts up for those caught crossing that are criminals that would put the illegal criminal population around 1.2 million criminals....just a tad alarming...

The leading countries of origin for removals were Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador.

No shocker those are the leading countries of origin either...

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Yes...I realize exactly that. The fact people are saying that immigrants are not all that bad is false. That is 240,000 immigrants that ARE that either got in or tried in 2016 alone. Now out of the roughly 800,000 that try to cross each year, having 78,000 apprehended at or near border facilities or ports of entry would suggest that roughly 10% of the illegals coming in are a criminal element. 10%!

So here is what you just did. You admitted that your sampling is biased (it favors people who commit harsher crimes over just hopping the border) and are trying to use that as reflection on the total population. That is a misuse of statistical sampling and is one of the reasons why people distrust that field of Mathematics currently.

So we have around 12 million here now, the numbers ICE puts up for those caught crossing that are criminals that would put the illegal criminal population around 1.2 million criminals....just a tad alarming...

No one claimed that there weren't ANY violent criminals here, but what ICE is doing here is good. They prioritize real criminals over people just hopping the border. What is wrong with that? Do you know how hard it would be to deport 12 million people all at once?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe


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.

So there is a group of rapists in the community there? Birds of a feather right?

Group being the two rapists who committed the rape.

Minimizing this doesn't address the issue. Any law that makes it easier for somebody to commit crime or makes it more difficult to keep criminals off the street is counter intuitive. Illegal immigrants are committing a crime and should not be protected by the state.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Yes...I realize exactly that. The fact people are saying that immigrants are not all that bad is false. That is 240,000 immigrants that ARE that either got in or tried in 2016 alone. Now out of the roughly 800,000 that try to cross each year, having 78,000 apprehended at or near border facilities or ports of entry would suggest that roughly 10% of the illegals coming in are a criminal element. 10%!

So here is what you just did. You admitted that your sampling is biased (it favors people who commit harsher crimes over just hopping the border) and are trying to use that as reflection on the total population. That is a misuse of statistical sampling and is one of the reasons why people distrust that field of Mathematics currently.

So we have around 12 million here now, the numbers ICE puts up for those caught crossing that are criminals that would put the illegal criminal population around 1.2 million criminals....just a tad alarming...

No one claimed that there weren't ANY violent criminals here, but what ICE is doing here is good. They prioritize real criminals over people just hopping the border. What is wrong with that? Do you know how hard it would be to deport 12 million people all at once?

The sampling isn't biased at all...those were the exact numbers reported by ICE. Roughly 800k illegals cross our border every year. 78K of those 800K are a criminal element...that is almost 10% and that is a LOT of criminals coming across...and that is only based on the ones they caught!

Yes ICE does prioritize. A previously deported illegal caught again is now a felon. 58% of removals were previously convicted of a crime. That's 138,669 actual criminals, 60,318 of which were interior meaning living in the US. That's not a number to just brush under a rug. The 78K I referenced were those caught at the border.

Sure it would be hard to deport all at once. It is a similar situation to the old "beg forgiveness later" thought. Had the US truly enforced the laws and had real consequences we would not be in this situation. I always hear that 2 wrongs don't make a right...is that not the case in this instance? Or is it human laziness and incompetence keeping us from doing it?

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
The sampling isn't biased at all...those were the exact numbers reported by ICE. Roughly 800k illegals cross our border every year. 78K of those 800K are a criminal element...that is almost 10% and that is a LOT of criminals coming across...and that is only based on the ones they caught!

As far as sampling the total population of immigrants, yes it is biased, but that is ok because those stats weren't collected to tell a story about immigrants in general. Only a story about how ICE does its job. However, you appear to be misusing the stats and using them for a purpose they weren't collected for.

Sure it would be hard to deport all at once. It is a similar situation to the old "beg forgiveness later" thought. Had the US truly enforced the laws and had real consequences we would not be in this situation. I always hear that 2 wrongs don't make a right...is that not the case in this instance? Or is it human laziness and incompetence keeping us from doing it?

Truly enforced the laws? You realize that if someone wants to enter the country, they will find a way to do so? Also, the only reason we say this is "wrong" is because we wrote it on a piece of paper. That can easily change with a different piece of paper.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
The sampling isn't biased at all...those were the exact numbers reported by ICE. Roughly 800k illegals cross our border every year. 78K of those 800K are a criminal element...that is almost 10% and that is a LOT of criminals coming across...and that is only based on the ones they caught!

As far as sampling the total population of immigrants, yes it is biased, but that is ok because those stats weren't collected to tell a story about immigrants in general. Only a story about how ICE does its job. However, you appear to be misusing the stats and using them for a purpose they weren't collected for.

Sure it would be hard to deport all at once. It is a similar situation to the old "beg forgiveness later" thought. Had the US truly enforced the laws and had real consequences we would not be in this situation. I always hear that 2 wrongs don't make a right...is that not the case in this instance? Or is it human laziness and incompetence keeping us from doing it?

Truly enforced the laws? You realize that if someone wants to enter the country, they will find a way to do so? Also, the only reason we say this is "wrong" is because we wrote it on a piece of paper. That can easily change with a different piece of paper.

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

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?

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.

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.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Would you not agree picking and choosing when and how to enforce laws is a slippery slope? If we applied the type of logic used in sanctuary cities to all laws this country would be an absolute mess. We would hear cries of unfair treatment and we would watch those with means or those in specific classes get away with sooooo much more...Wouldn't you agree?

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.

This topic is interesting and i feel the illegal immigration topic cannot be discussed by certian people who avoid logic because they want to believe in ideology over reality.

This law would create the same situation that got a 14 year old raped again. Logically speaking this crime shouldn't take place as it is a gateway crime that allows bigger crimes to be committed on the population. You can not point to a united states citizens who has committed the same crime as evidence that by stopping illegal immigration it wont stop rape because that is misleading. Obviously stopping illegal immigration would have stopped this girls rape from happening however with legal us citizens that is our problem.

Its just like when liberals avoid the subject of cities like chicago with its gun laws yet its high murder rate. Obviously these cities policy affect it citizens and allow for a breeding ground of crimmal activities because victims are not allowed to be armed or can defend themselves from illegal activity.

Allowing illegal sanctuary status allows for undocumented adults to pretend they are children and rape teen's in high school. Having no documentation allows them to avoid prosecution, having no legal documentation requires them to steal ones from legal citizens. See the progression

Now lets note that not all illegal aliens are going to pretend to be underage and attend high school or decide to rape teen girls. But obtaining documentation yeah they need these illegally obtained documents to work! Also remember these documents are not who they really are so if they commit a crime they have the ability to obtain new ones and pretend to be someone else as new illegal aliens come to the country everyday whos to say they are not a new one.

Allowing a situation of lawlessness doesnt breed good results just like requiring citizens who follow the rules to remain helpless to illegal activity will not produce good results because crimmals dont follow rules they break them.

The situation is simple yet people are trying to obscure the obvious truth that illegal immigrants pose a risk to our society of laws.

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.

Ok, please show me in my argument with the figures where I have misconstrued them.

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

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.

a reply to: RickyD

No I'm not doing that at all. I'm actually heavily suggesting we should do it even more than we already do.

Keep in mind that we are currently selective with our drug enforcement laws too. How many people are complaining about drug users being unfairly kept out of jail because of this?

In Los Angeles, reports of rape, spousal abuse, and other related crimes among Latinos are down about 10%.

Why?

Because of fear of reporting them.