The Real timschochet

1. Agreed. 2. This fact doesn’t make them ineligible to seek asylum. 3. I don’t mean to doubt you but which international law are you referring to and why does it take precedence over our asylum laws which I linked? 4. Why? This is not part of our asylum laws. 5. I assume some are seeking asylum and at least some should be given it IMO. 6 You haven’t proven your point here. Some of those arriving at our border legitimately deserve asylum. Others will not be granted it but legitimately deserve to be called asylum seekers. Your main argument against this appears to be your points 3 and 4 and I don’t find them compelling as they are not part of what the rules actually say.

No surprise that I disagree with your take on most of this but it’s too much to unpack in one post. I’ll focus on one aspect of what you wrote: sanctuary cities. Here is a definition of a sanctuary city: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctuary_city Pleaee go to the third paragraph which cites the numerous studies which show that sanctuary cities have no relationship to increase in crime and actually increase and strengthen the economic prosperity of the cities who are welcoming to migrants. These studies would seem to contradict your arguments.

You’ll have to be more specific. Which specific stance of mine ignores the evidence in your opinion?

Here are the rules for seeking asylum: https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum/obtaining-asylum-in-the-united-states I don’t understand your argument, Why do you believe that it is impossible that anyone arriving at our southern border cannot qualify for this?

As a side note I knew Mr. Roper (Norman Fell) growing up. Distant member of my family.

The main difference between nowadays and the 1930s is that both we and our opponents have nuclear weapons. That means any war with Russia would be unthinkable.

Listen @RaiderHaters Revenge I know this is your position and I respect it. I know you believe this honestly. I disagree. I believe that if we don’t support Ukraine they will lose this war, and if that happens it will cost us a lot more than what we’re proposing to spend now. It very much looks like your side is going to get your way on this. The House of Representatives basically has veto power and Trump and the Republicans who count are opposed to further aid to Ukraine. That’s the bottom line and I don’t believe Biden, the Democrats, or the few Republicans who still support aid are going to defeat those who are now opposed. So we are going to find out who is right about this. Frankly I hope that you are right and I am wrong. This is not an outcome I would ever enjoy being right about.

I will respond later to this in detail.

You’re right, it’s happened before. And it may again. But there is a little bit of a difference here. At FBG, with a very few exceptions, I enjoyed talking to everyone. Here it’s different: there is only a minority of people I enjoy talking to: about 5-6. The majority of people here either irritate or bore me. Sorry but it’s true. Hopefully that could change at some point; I’m open to it. But we’ll see. And that’s the last you’ll hear from me about my posting history, or what people think of me, or whatever. I meant what I wrote: I will discuss issues with folks who want to discuss them with me. Nothing else.

The answer is no. And I’m prepared to discuss that issue as well in detail a little later. But I don’t think it has anything to do with Ukraine.

Thank you. This was the first of 3 reasons I am for doing this. Here are the other 2 reasons: 2. The weapons we’re purchasing are being made in St Louis, Long Beach, Seattle. It’s a boon for our aerospace industry. Frankly I’d rather see the money going to them than to companies in Britain, France, Denmark, etc. 3. Most important of all IMO: our role as the leader of NATO and the Free World. I’m not eager to give that up.

Yes. I’m leaving for dinner so I have to stop for now. I will respond to you in detail later on. But my answer to your question is yes 100%.

Not necessarily. It depends on the murder. A single murder could apply. But most important I want to be sure that the killer is indeed guilty: I certainly don’t agree with the complaint, implied here already, that the process takes too long. If we’re going to do this I want every possible t crossed however long it takes.

Well I’ve spent far too much time here responding to ignorant comments and getting myself entangled in stupid discussions. Thats my own fault. Im trying not to do that anymore. I’m happy and eager to engage in serious discussion as much as other people to desire to with me.

Interesting about John Grisham: in his first and best novel, A Time to Kill, his hero Jake Brigance is strongly in favor of the death penalty. But by the time he wrote The Confession and The Innocent Man nearly 20 years later he was opposed. He encountered too many instances of innocent people being put to death.

I never wrote I was leaving, I wrote that I would post far less. That’s probably still true. But if people want to engage me in serious talk then I will.

I read a couple of novels that changed my mind about it: The Confession by John Grisham The Green Mile by Stephen King Before I read those I was pretty neutral. Now I am opposed except in rare instances. For example, I’m still pretty good with rapists, habitual pedophiles, serial killers, mass murderers, and terrorists being put to death. But most of those executed don’t fall into those categories.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/they-the-old-days-hawaii-supreme-court-says-aloha-spirit-trumps-2nd-amendment/amp/ If Texas can defy the Supreme Court on border issues, then why not Hawaii on gun control?

Thanks for the clarity. The bigotry in this forum is especially ugly against young black men, transsexuals, and most of all undocumented immigrants. It’s gotten to the point where I really don’t want to post much any more because I just don’t want to engage with so many of you, it’s that awful. You guys are free to think what you want but my participation here is about to go way way down. I’m just less and less interested.

Even if you had been correct your post would still have been awful. Though not quite as awful as some of the other posts in this thread.

Maybe it’s simply too dangerous to have these large public parades anymore? It’s not like a football stadium where everyone gets checked going in. You have hundreds of thousands of people gathered on public streets and anyone can be armed. Impossible to stop. We live in crazy times in which a tiny number of crazy people are able to cause widespread terror.

Completely irrelevant issue and I don’t think it applies to violent crimes anyhow.

Could you be any more disgusting?

They’re reporting 10 victims, multiple children. so horrible

This was supposed to be tight but it isn’t. This may be a message for November…