|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 6:45 pm Post subject: Re: Police state: How Mexico treats illegal aliens |
 |
|
| kcs0001 wrote: |
| � Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years� imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years� imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama�s illegal alien aunt � a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim). |
Article here.
| Quote: |
Yesterday, on CNN, host Wolf Blitzer probed Mexican Felipe Calder�n about his country�s own immigration laws. Blitzer quoted a Washington Times article entitled �Mexico�s illegals laws tougher than Arizona�s,� which states that �under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison.� The Washington Times then quotes Rep. Steve King (R-IA), Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) calling Calder�n �arrogant and hypocritical.� However, the Washington Times and its GOP sources are relying on dated information. As Calder�n informed Blitzer last night, Mexico has enacted its own immigration reform:
| Quote: |
BLITZER: I read an article in The Washington Times the other day. I�m going to read a paragraph to you and you tell me if this is true or not true. � �Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to reenter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals.� Is that true?
CALDERON: It was true, but it is not anymore. We derogate or we erased that part of the law�Not anymore, since one year ago. And that is the reason why we are trying to establish our own comprehensive public policy talking about, for instance, immigrants coming from Central America. [...]
BLITZER: Immigration is not a crime, you�re saying?
CALDERON: It�s not a crime. |
In 2008, the Mexican Congress voted unanimously with 393 votes to decriminalize undocumented immigration to Mexico. Undocumented immigration is now a minor offense punishable by fines equivalent to about $475 to $2,400. However, just because Mexico reformed its laws doesn�t mean its law enforcement authorities got the memo. Amnesty International recently issued a report saying there is still �widespread abuse of migrants in Mexico,� largely because Article 67 of Mexico�s immigration law still requires law enforcement to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country � which is nearly identical to provisions in Arizona�s immigration law. The Interior Department is reportedly working to repeal Article 67 �so that no one can deny or restrict foreigners� access to justice and human rights, whatever their migratory status.� However, rather than seeing it as a source of hypocrisy, the U.S. would be wise to examine Mexico�s experience with illegal immigration as an extreme, but poignant case study of the deputization of immigration law and what can happen when it turns immigrants into criminals. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| If it's good enough for Mexico, then it's good enough for us. If you can't prove you're in a country legally, then why should you not be deported? |
It's not just "illegal immigrants" being targeted. It's anyone who an officer thinks "might" be illegal.
Got an accent? Show me your papers. Have brown skin? Show me your papers. Walking with a tourist? Show me your papers, guy, and since you're with him, show me your papers, too!
One guy even went on to say you can tell by someone's choice of shoes whether or not they are "illegal". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, as a matter of fact, I have been "targeted".
What's the big deal?
Leftist fear mongering, is all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lithium
Joined: 18 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Moldy Rutabaga wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care. |
Not exactly onerous demands. This article seems to be trying to justify the Arizona laws by cherry-picking pieces of legislation from Mexico.
The article doesn't take into consideration that these Mexican laws are spottily enforced and effectively dead letters in many areas. I lived and taught in Mexico for a year on a tourist visa. There was no enforcement of work or residency rules. I went on a road trip to McAllen, Texas, one weekend. I came back on Sunday and drove right into the country without being stopped or questioned at any time during the day. I even went to a border patrol office and asked to be permitted into the country and my passport stamped, to renew my tourist visa. I am not inventing this: I couldn't wake anyone up! I gave up and drove on. |
The Arizona laws are justified regardless of Mexican legislation. The article just shows the complete hypocrisy of the Mexican government, which is basically a criminal syndicate at his point... |
^^THIS^^ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kcs0001
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
More U.S. citizens sacrificed at the alter of La Raza. Celebrate diversity
I guess since he ignored immigration laws already on he books, we need new, more comprehensive reforms laws to bring people like him "out of the shadows."
http://www.king5.com/news/local/Investigators-Edmonds-rape-suspect-deported-nine-times-94637479.html
Investigators: Edmonds rape suspect deported nine times
by CHRIS INGALLS / KING 5 News
KING5.com
Posted on May 21, 2010 at 8:16 PM
Updated today at 6:22 PM
Related:
�Alleged rapist caught in Edmonds
�Edmonds rape suspect deported 4 times
EDMONDS, Wash. � The KING 5 Investigators have learned that an illegal immigrant accused of raping a woman in Edmonds Sunday has been deported nine times. That's much more than previously reported.
Immigrations and Customs Enforcement won't comment on the case of Jose Lopez Madrigal. But KING 5 got the information through confidential sources and documents.
Larry Klein was the man who heard the alleged victim's cries for help. Police say the suspect pulled the woman off the street to a dumpster and raped her.
"I could see the back of his head. I could see his pants were down. I could see her lying on the ground. I could hear her crying, but I couldn't really see her face," said Klein.
Klein called police, who quickly arrested the suspect. But learning his identity took much longer because of some 30 aliases. It was only through fingerprints that they identified him as Madrigal, a Mexican citizen.
Madrigal's arrest and immigration record includes a staggering number of contacts with law enforcement since 1989. That's the year he was convicted of theft using a firearm in California.
He was deported a couple of times after that. Then in 1999, he was arrested for drug sales in both San Diego and San Francisco. Records show that he was deported three times that year between April and August.
He was arrested for drugs again in Stockton, Calif. in 2000. In 2002, he pleaded to third degree sexual assault in Denver. Later that year, he was deported again. And in 2003, records show he was deported three more times.
People who live near the scene of Sunday's alleged rape wonder how it could keep happening.
"Makes you wonder, what are we doing wrong? How is he getting back in here?" said Kirby Aumick.
"It�s troubling. I mean, if this man should not have been in this country, he should have been behind bars then, really, this is a senseless tragedy," said Klein.
According to our sources, Madrigal's last contact before Sunday was around 2003. So, it's not clear how much of that time Madrigal was in this country.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement has refused to comment on the case which started making national headlines when it was learned that Madrigal had been deported several times prior to the Edmonds case.
In reviewing records and talking with confidential sources, the KING 5 Investigators learned just how extensive Madrigal�s immigration and arrest record is.
They found he was first deported in California in 1989 and since then he�s returned from his Mexican homeland and been arrested for drug crimes, a sex assault in Colorado and other offenses.
One criminal justice source says Madrigal is a "poster boy" for the federal governments ineffectiveness at keeping the most serious "criminal aliens" � illegals who commit crimes � out of the United States. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Illegal immigrants are criminals.
Anyone who skirts the process and just walks their way to the USA and then feels entitled to US citizenship are criminals. I got Korean friends who are struggling in Korea. They are denied chances to go to the US and start a new life. I feel for them. Then I read about Mexicans sneaking into the US and demanding they want equal treatment and citizenship?
Screw that. Round them up and send them back. A cop could ask for my US citizenship documents 100 times a day. I wouldn't care because I know for every time they ask me for my papers, some other criminal illegal alien is getting caught and being sent back. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Illegal immigrants are criminals.
|
They're guilty of a Federal misdemeanor. Many misdemeanors are punished by monetary fines, some misdemeanants serve just community service and probation, and very few are incarcerated, and even then never for over one year. Just because someone commits a misdemeanor, doesn't mean they've lost their human rights. In fact, misdemeanants never lose their civil rights (outside of short-term incarceration).
Just as an example, most first-time marijuana possession offenses are punished as misdemeanors, although it varies from state to state. So illegal immigrants are punished roughly on par with people who enjoy a small amount of pot for personal consumption.
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Screw that. Round them up and send them back. |
No. I don't want a mother and her child separated because of a misdemeanor.
Please note the distinction between illegal aliens and criminal aliens.
| CRS Report wrote: |
The majority of aliens who are removed do not undergo formal removal proceedings in front of an IJ [Immigration Judge]. Most aliens are given the opportunity to depart voluntarily from the United States, and most of them agree to voluntary departure.
In addition, certain aliens who have been issued NTA�s may request voluntary departure before (in lieu of), during or after formal removal proceedings. Criminal aliens are ineligible for voluntary departure. The DHS officer or the IJ must specify the period of time allowed for departure and may impose conditions, such as bond
or detention, deemed necessary to assure the alien�s departure. Voluntary departure is not available to any alien who was previously allowed to depart voluntarily. |
Penalties for smuggling, immigration fraud, and crimes of moral turpitude are more serious.
For further information on this topic, consult this CRS Report prepared for Congress before the 2006 Immigration debates.
---------------------
I want to note that I would not oppose the Arizona immigration law, but that it has a disparate impact on the Hispanic citizen population. If it were possible to tell illegals on sight, and then issue them Orders of Removal, the Arizona law would be pretty uncontroversial. The problem comes with questioning and detaining American citizens who do not have their birth certificates on hand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Illegal immigrants are criminals.
|
They're guilty of a Federal misdemeanor. Many misdemeanors are punished by monetary fines, some misdemeanants serve just community service and probation, and very few are incarcerated, and even then never for over one year. Just because someone commits a misdemeanor, doesn't mean they've lost their human rights. In fact, misdemeanants never lose their civil rights (outside of short-term incarceration).
Just as an example, most first-time marijuana possession offenses are punished as misdemeanors, although it varies from state to state. So illegal immigrants are punished roughly on par with people who enjoy a small amount of pot for personal consumption.
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Screw that. Round them up and send them back. |
No. I don't want a mother and her child separated because of a misdemeanor.
Please note the distinction between illegal aliens and criminal aliens.
| CRS Report wrote: |
The majority of aliens who are removed do not undergo formal removal proceedings in front of an IJ [Immigration Judge]. Most aliens are given the opportunity to depart voluntarily from the United States, and most of them agree to voluntary departure.
In addition, certain aliens who have been issued NTA�s may request voluntary departure before (in lieu of), during or after formal removal proceedings. Criminal aliens are ineligible for voluntary departure. The DHS officer or the IJ must specify the period of time allowed for departure and may impose conditions, such as bond
or detention, deemed necessary to assure the alien�s departure. Voluntary departure is not available to any alien who was previously allowed to depart voluntarily. |
Penalties for smuggling, immigration fraud, and crimes of moral turpitude are more serious.
For further information on this topic, consult this CRS Report prepared for Congress before the 2006 Immigration debates.
---------------------
I want to note that I would not oppose the Arizona immigration law, but that it has a disparate impact on the Hispanic citizen population. If it were possible to tell illegals on sight, and then issue them Orders of Removal, the Arizona law would be pretty uncontroversial. The problem comes with questioning and detaining American citizens who do not have their birth certificates on hand. |
Separate? Send them both back. The child can come back to the US once they are 18 and no longer under the guardianship of their parents.
As for a misdemeanor, they should make the crime a felony. Its not like they trespassed into their neighbor's yard. They ILLEGALLY entered the country with the INTENT TO LIVE HERE.
Its ok to justify Mexicans getting the right to live in the US, but all the Doctors, Scientists, and Educators who can make a LARGE contribution to the US society has to sit back and be told, "Sorry, you went through the proper channels and you can't come to the US. But these Mexicans with no education and no money, they can stay because they didn't follow procedures."
That's great. What's the use for laws then? Why bother with any laws when you can just get rewarded for cheating the system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Separate? Send them both back. The child can come back to the US once they are 18 and no longer under the guardianship of their parents.
As for a misdemeanor, they should make the crime a felony. Its not like they trespassed into their neighbor's yard. They ILLEGALLY entered the country with the INTENT TO LIVE HERE. |
The law says such have entered the country WITHOUT PROPER INSPECTIONS and must return WITHIN A STATED PERIOD OF TIME.
The law also recognizes that forced removal is also painful, onerous, and burdensome, and often outweighs the severity of the transgression. The current law recognizes that immigrants without status may otherwise live lawful and productive lives in the community, and gives them a chance to restore the lives they have built, once they have rectified their immigration status. The current law further recognizes that often the child is an innocent, had no knowledge of what you term a trespass onto private property (as if the sovereign territory of the United States were private property, and the apartment/home an immigrant without status had worked and paid for were another's private dwelling!!!), and does not deserve to be ejected into a country of which he has no knowledge or experience and where the child may not even be able to communicate in their native language.
| Quote: |
Its ok to justify Mexicans getting the right to live in the US, but all the Doctors, Scientists, and Educators who can make a LARGE contribution to the US society has to sit back and be told, "Sorry, you went through the proper channels and you can't come to the US. But these Mexicans with no education and no money, they can stay because they didn't follow procedures."
That's great. What's the use for laws then? Why bother with any laws when you can just get rewarded for cheating the system. |
There is no reward for living as an immigrant without status in the United States. You live in constant fear of being apprehended, and cannot easily access the many social services available to the citizens who passed through the proper channels. Undocumented aliens never become doctors, scientists, or educators, and are thus relegated to the lowest sectors of societal employment. I mean America is great, and perhaps its better for a Mexican to be a janitor in America than a janitor in Mexico. But its not something I would call a reward.
Also, I want to echo Fox's sentiments that if Arizona wants to pass laws that allow them to enforce immigration laws against employers of undocumented immigrants, I will happily support Arizona. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Separate? Send them both back. The child can come back to the US once they are 18 and no longer under the guardianship of their parents.
As for a misdemeanor, they should make the crime a felony. Its not like they trespassed into their neighbor's yard. They ILLEGALLY entered the country with the INTENT TO LIVE HERE. |
The law says such have entered the country WITHOUT PROPER INSPECTIONS and must return WITHIN A STATED PERIOD OF TIME.
The law also recognizes that forced removal is also painful, onerous, and burdensome, and often outweighs the severity of the transgression. The current law recognizes that immigrants without status may otherwise live lawful and productive lives in the community, and gives them a chance to restore the lives they have built, once they have rectified their immigration status. The current law further recognizes that often the child is an innocent, had no knowledge of what you term a trespass onto private property (as if the sovereign territory of the United States were private property, and the apartment/home an immigrant without status had worked and paid for were another's private dwelling!!!), and does not deserve to be ejected into a country of which he has no knowledge or experience and where the child may not even be able to communicate in their native language. |
Their individual circumstances aren't really irrelevant. The law regarding immigration is (or should be) straightforward and is not unreasonable. Just because they've built a life up around a fallacy (that they're American citizens, when they aren't) doesn't mean they become exempt from the consequences if they get caught later as opposed to sooner. This line of reasoning is like saying that someone who robs a bank and uses the money to build a nice life for himself, is somehow exempt from the law if enough time passes. Not logical.
| Quote: |
| There is no reward for living as an immigrant without status in the United States. You live in constant fear of being apprehended, and cannot easily access the many social services available to the citizens who passed through the proper channels. Undocumented aliens never become doctors, scientists, or educators, and are thus relegated to the lowest sectors of societal employment. I mean America is great, and perhaps its better for a Mexican to be a janitor in America than a janitor in Mexico. But its not something I would call a reward. |
This is just silly. Of course there's a reward, otherwise they wouldn't be tripping over themselves to enter our country. Just because it's your opinion that working as a janitor isn't a "reward" doesn't mean they don't see it that way. They get a lot of benefits, and they use the lax laws to their advantage. Regardless, their illegal employment still affects the rest of us, as well as the prospects of those people waiting in line to immigrate legally.
Plus now a lot of people in the liberal arena are talking about just making them all legal anyway... if that's not a reward, I don't know what is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Illegal immigrants are criminals.
|
So then all current Americans living between Texas and California are criminals because they are living on historically Mexican land. I agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Illegal immigrants are criminals.
|
So then all current Americans living between Texas and California are criminals because they are living on historically Mexican land. I agree. |
How do you figure this?
In the case of Texas, it's pretty straightforward: Texas declared independence and fought a war against Mexico before becoming part of the union. Territory obtained from the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo is perhaps debatable, although it was paid for (and it was Mexico that fired the first shots in that war).
Anyway, this is not a racial/ethnic issue, it's one of national sovereignty (and also states' rights in the US). All of the states bordering Mexico happily became part of the union, and I don't think you'll find many Americans of Hispanic descent (ex. original Hispanic Texans) who support open borders or amnesty for illegals to this day. If border state populations were and always had been unhappy with being a part of the US and wanted to revert back to Mexico, then that would be another matter. But obviously this is not the case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Separate? Send them both back. The child can come back to the US once they are 18 and no longer under the guardianship of their parents.
As for a misdemeanor, they should make the crime a felony. Its not like they trespassed into their neighbor's yard. They ILLEGALLY entered the country with the INTENT TO LIVE HERE. |
The law says such have entered the country WITHOUT PROPER INSPECTIONS and must return WITHIN A STATED PERIOD OF TIME.
The law also recognizes that forced removal is also painful, onerous, and burdensome, and often outweighs the severity of the transgression. The current law recognizes that immigrants without status may otherwise live lawful and productive lives in the community, and gives them a chance to restore the lives they have built, once they have rectified their immigration status. The current law further recognizes that often the child is an innocent, had no knowledge of what you term a trespass onto private property (as if the sovereign territory of the United States were private property, and the apartment/home an immigrant without status had worked and paid for were another's private dwelling!!!), and does not deserve to be ejected into a country of which he has no knowledge or experience and where the child may not even be able to communicate in their native language. |
Their individual circumstances aren't really irrelevant. The law regarding immigration is (or should be) straightforward and is not unreasonable. Just because they've built a life up around a fallacy (that they're American citizens, when they aren't) doesn't mean they become exempt from the consequences if they get caught later as opposed to sooner. This line of reasoning is like saying that someone who robs a bank and uses the money to build a nice life for himself, is somehow exempt from the law if enough time passes. Not logical. |
I've already addressed these points, here, I'll bold them for you this time. Forced removal affects more than the alien; comparison of bank robbery (violent felony) with crossing border without inspection (non-violent misdemeanor) is self-serving.
| visitorq wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| There is no reward for living as an immigrant without status in the United States. You live in constant fear of being apprehended, and cannot easily access the many social services available to the citizens who passed through the proper channels. Undocumented aliens never become doctors, scientists, or educators, and are thus relegated to the lowest sectors of societal employment. I mean America is great, and perhaps its better for a Mexican to be a janitor in America than a janitor in Mexico. But its not something I would call a reward. |
This is just silly. Of course there's a reward, otherwise they wouldn't be tripping over themselves to enter our country. |
Is that an 'all men desire the good, and work towards it,' argument? People make poor choices all the time. One poor choice is to come North to live in the shadows to make a little more cash. That there are benefits that mitigate the great harm does not make it a reward. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Police speak out against Arizona's Immigration Law
| Chief Jack Harris, Phoenix, AZ wrote: |
I don't really believe that this law is going to do what the vast majority of Americans and Arizonans want, and that is to fix the immigration problem. This law adds new problems for local law enforcement. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AsiaESLbound
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Location: Truck Stop Missouri
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think I'd feel safe going to Mexico and my momma was sure to tell me to not be going there. It never was popular with American tourists despite how close to home it really is. Central America and the Caribbean are geared for package tourists anyhow where I hear about Asia being backpacker friendly as well as actually being affordable.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
