A poster boy for Amnesty

[CARLHAYDEN]

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/22/2602909/immigration-authorities-released.html

[CARLHAYDEN]

It would be good if the laws applied here were changed so that deportable felons were continued to be held until the conditions that led to a temporary suspension of deportations to their home country on humanitarian grounds were corrected.  However, the general policy of suspending deportations to places that have suffered major natural disasters, such as Haiti after its earthquake, is a good one.

"...the general policy of suspending deportations to places that have suffered major natural disasters, such as Haiti after its earthquake, is a good one."

Hmm.

Tell that to the three people who died as a result of that "good" policy.

[CARLHAYDEN]

This is horrible logic for opposing amnesty, unless you think that all foreigners have an innate drive to kill others.

"Illegal" immigrants can just as easily save lives, just like American citizens can do either.

Harry,

Your post illustrates a number of logical fallacies.

First, let us start with definitions.  An alien illegally present in the United States is an illegal alien, not an illegal immigrant.

An "immigrant" is a person who intends to take up permanent residence in a country whereas a "sojourner" is one who merely comes to a foreign country for a time (usually to obtain financial resources), who fully intends to return to their home country.  As numerous studies have indicated, roughly half of the illegal aliens present in the United States are sojourners NOT immigrants.

Second, your assertion that "unless you think that all foreigners have an innate drive to kill others" is really bizarre as absolutely nothing was said about aliens who are legally present in the United States.

Third, aliens who illegally enter the United States (generally called illegal entrants) are generally conceded too have a significantly higher rate of violent crime than both the average for the American population, or aliens who are legally present in the United States.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Language is a fascinating indicator of one's personal biases - for example, aliens are creatures that come off of UFOs.

Hmm.

United States Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter 1, Section 1101 Definitions. (a)(3) “The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.”

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_08_00001101----000-.html

Don't see any mention of UFOs or "creatures."

But you are correct that "(L)anguage is a fascinating indicator of one's personal biases."

Yours is showing.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Language is a fascinating indicator of one's personal biases - for example, aliens are creatures that come off of UFOs.

Hmm.

United States Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter 1, Section 1101 Definitions. (a)(3) “The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.”

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_08_00001101----000-.html

Don't see any mention of UFOs or "creatures."

But you are correct that "(L)anguage is a fascinating indicator of one's personal biases."

Yours is showing.

Choosing to use this particular legal term instead of any of a number of equally serviceable and less dehumanizing-sounding quotidian terms is telling.

Nathan,

This is getting to be hysterically funny.

[CARLHAYDEN]

... the general policy of suspending deportations to places that have suffered major natural disasters, such as Haiti after its earthquake, is a good one.

Hmm.

Tell that to the three people who died as a result of that "good" policy.

As as already been pointed out to you, I do not agree with the release of deportable felons simply because of a temporary suspension of deportation into disaster zones.  They should be held until they can be deported.  So now that sibboleth has been dealt with, do you really think deportations of non-violent illegals into disaster zones would be good policy?

First, yes I know you are in lockstep with the other lefties on this forum.

Second, for you "temporary" can go on for years, so you, like Obama and twisting the language to mislead.

Third, yes, I know you want the American taxpayers to house, feed, clothe, and provide medical care for illegal aliens, rather than deport them.  Gives you a pretext for arguing for more and higher taxes.

Finally, for those who bothered to read the article linked by the initial post in this thread, you will find that the individual cited had been previously convicted of burglary, which by Florida statute (and common law) is a "violent felony" (something affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States.  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-9264.pdf)  So, Ernest's argument about non-violent felons does not apply in this case, but rather is merely another example of his trying to change the subject.

Oh, and as to language. there is no such thing as a "sibboleth" except in lefty argot.

It is possible that Ernest was trying to use the word "shibboleth," but failed, again.

[CARLHAYDEN]

But you are correct that "(L)anguage is a fascinating indicator of one's personal biases."

Yours is showing.

Right, I'm not suggesting I am immune to it.  Your ruse of legalistic infallibility is a poor way to justify your views, since the law could easily be changed.  Then where you would you hide?

The term I used IS defined by law.  I cited the statute.

Apparently, you (and others) take the 'Humpty Dumpty' approach to language:

"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Through_the_Looking-Glass

[CARLHAYDEN]

... the general policy of suspending deportations to places that have suffered major natural disasters, such as Haiti after its earthquake, is a good one.

Hmm.

Tell that to the three people who died as a result of that "good" policy.

As as already been pointed out to you, I do not agree with the release of deportable felons simply because of a temporary suspension of deportation into disaster zones.  They should be held until they can be deported.  So now that sibboleth has been dealt with, do you really think deportations of non-violent illegals into disaster zones would be good policy?

First, yes I know you are in lockstep with the other lefties on this forum.

Second, for you "temporary" can go on for years, so you, like Obama and twisting the language to mislead.

Third, yes, I know you want the American taxpayers to house, feed, clothe, and provide medical care for illegal aliens, rather than deport them.  Gives you a pretext for arguing for more and higher taxes.

Finally, for those who bothered to read the article linked by the initial post in this thread, you will find that the individual cited had been previously convicted of burglary, which by Florida statute (and common law) is a "violent felony" (something affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States.  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-9264.pdf)  So, Ernest's argument about non-violent felons does not apply in this case, but rather is merely another example of his trying to change the subject.

I would have thought to anyone with minimal reading comprehension it would have been abundantly clear that I was not including the person in this case when referring to non-violent illegals.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No I purposefully used sibboleth, in reference to the origin of the word shibboleth, because I wished to indicate that I was finished with the narrow tragic case you were trying to use to justify your broader agenda of deport everyone no matter the circumstances or cost of doing so.  Alas, you seem to think language is something that comes out of a dictionary and should never be used imaginatively.

I must admit that you are very "imaginative" in you use of language.  So, please "imaginatively" continue to babel.

[CARLHAYDEN]

But you are correct that "(L)anguage is a fascinating indicator of one's personal biases."

Yours is showing.

Right, I'm not suggesting I am immune to it.  Your ruse of legalistic infallibility is a poor way to justify your views, since the law could easily be changed.  Then where you would you hide?

The term I used IS defined by law.  I cited the statute.

Apparently, you (and others) take the 'Humpty Dumpty' approach to language:

"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Through_the_Looking-Glass

Considering your repeated strenuous objections to the use of the phrase "illegal immigrant", CARL, it's clear that you are counted amongst those others who take the Humpty Dumpty approach.

Once again, I use the correct terminology, and you use inaccurate terminology.

If you check, you will see that the term "immigrant" means someone who moves to another country for a permanent residence.  All the experts agree that many of the aliens illegally present in this country are sojourners.

So, why do you persist in calling such persons immigrants?

[CARLHAYDEN]

I must admit that you are very "imaginative" in you use of language.  So, please "imaginatively" continue to babel.

You're incredibly consistent with spelling when correcting others' language.

(Consistently wrong!)

Thank you for your compliment.

Yes, I know you consistently disagree with everything I post.

Oh, BTW, let me say that I am opposed to Communism. 

[CARLHAYDEN]

... the general policy of suspending deportations to places that have suffered major natural disasters, such as Haiti after its earthquake, is a good one.

Hmm.

Tell that to the three people who died as a result of that "good" policy.

As as already been pointed out to you, I do not agree with the release of deportable felons simply because of a temporary suspension of deportation into disaster zones.  They should be held until they can be deported.  So now that sibboleth has been dealt with, do you really think deportations of non-violent illegals into disaster zones would be good policy?

First, yes I know you are in lockstep with the other lefties on this forum.

Second, for you "temporary" can go on for years, so you, like Obama and twisting the language to mislead.

Third, yes, I know you want the American taxpayers to house, feed, clothe, and provide medical care for illegal aliens, rather than deport them.  Gives you a pretext for arguing for more and higher taxes.

Finally, for those who bothered to read the article linked by the initial post in this thread, you will find that the individual cited had been previously convicted of burglary, which by Florida statute (and common law) is a "violent felony" (something affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States.  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-9264.pdf)  So, Ernest's argument about non-violent felons does not apply in this case, but rather is merely another example of his trying to change the subject.

I would have thought to anyone with minimal reading comprehension it would have been abundantly clear that I was not including the person in this case when referring to non-violent illegals.

[quote]

I noticed you did not indicate just how long "temporary" can encompass.

Also, since you NOW indicate that your argument concernig "non-violent felons" did not extend to the case in point, are you therefor conceding that since he was convicted of a violent felony, he should have been deported before he was able to kill?

[CARLHAYDEN]

I might point out that 'migrant' is another serviceable word that seems to lack that particular prescriptivist connotation without being dehumanizing and/or excessively clinical. We okay with 'undocumented migrant'?

mi•grant

noun \ˈmī-grənt\

Definition of MIGRANT

: one that migrates: as a : a person who moves regularly in order to find work especially in harvesting crops

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/migrant

So, are you trying to tell us that all aliens illegally present in this country move regularly to find work?

Oh, as as to "undocumented," that is simply a politically correct euphemism for "illegal."

Would you call a person operating a motor vehicle on the public roadways without ever having obtained a drivers license, an "undocumented driver"?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Also, since you NOW indicate that your argument concernig "non-violent felons" did not extend to the case in point, are you therefor conceding that since he was convicted of a violent felony, he should have been deported before he was able to kill?

I agree that he should not have been released until he could be deported.  That he should be deported back to a country whose already inadequate government had been effectively been wiped out by a natural disaster before at least the bare bones of government function had been restored, I absolutely reject.

For how long should he be held? 

[CARLHAYDEN]

Also, since you NOW indicate that your argument concerning "non-violent felons" did not extend to the case in point, are you therefor conceding that since he was convicted of a violent felony, he should have been deported before he was able to kill?

I agree that he should not have been released until he could be deported.  That he should be deported back to a country whose already inadequate government had been effectively been wiped out by a natural disaster before at least the bare bones of government function had been restored, I absolutely reject.

For how long should he be held?  

Until there was at least a semi-functional society in Haiti again.  If things were done the way I like it, he'd be in Haiti now, unless of course he made another illegal entry after we deported him there.  Haiti is not yet back to the point to where deporting otherwise non-criminal illegal entrants is wat I would consider good policy, but it is back to the point where it is about as capable as it was before the earthquake of handling someone like this.

So, there is NO time limit?

Oh, and to return to the facts situation, the individual is currently dead, so deporting him now would be, well, pointless.

But, if he had been held after completion of his sentence for burglary until he might sometime be deported, what if he killed another inmate, or guard while incarcerated while awaiting deportation?  These things happen.

Finally, while I am NOT an immigration lawyer, it seems questionable that one could hold an illegal alien for an extended period of time after the completion of his sentence for a violent felony.  

I suggest you consult Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, (2001),where the Supreme Court held that deportable aliens with criminal records could not be detained indefinitely.

The decision limited detention in such cases (absent terrorism charges pending), to six months

[CARLHAYDEN]

They are here illegally, and could not have gotten jobs here legally under current law.

And whose fault is that? 'Illegal' carries connotations of malice, although that's not part of the technical definition. Many of them did, in fact, forget or lack the resources to get paperwork done.

Nathan,

You get funnier and funnier.

"Malice" is a term which has very specific meanings.  While most serious crimes require general criminal intent, few require malice.

[CARLHAYDEN]

They are here illegally, and could not have gotten jobs here legally under current law.

And whose fault is that? 'Illegal' carries connotations of malice, although that's not part of the technical definition. Many of them did, in fact, forget or lack the resources to get paperwork done.

Nathan,

You get funnier and funnier.

"Malice" is a term which has very specific meanings.  While most serious crimes require general criminal intent, few require malice.

What's funny is how myopic you are about what I'm saying here. Here's a hint: It's about parole, not langue.

What you are posting makes absolutely no sense.

[CARLHAYDEN]

They are here illegally, and could not have gotten jobs here legally under current law.

And whose fault is that? 'Illegal' carries connotations of malice, although that's not part of the technical definition. Many of them did, in fact, forget or lack the resources to get paperwork done.

Nathan,

You get funnier and funnier.

"Malice" is a term which has very specific meanings.  While most serious crimes require general criminal intent, few require malice.

What's funny is how myopic you are about what I'm saying here. Here's a hint: It's about parole, not langue.

What you are posting makes absolutely no sense.

Have you actually read Saussure, and if not, will you make an effort to read up on the subject so that what I am posting will make no sense, or will you content yourself with the belief that it is my responsibility, not yours, that you cannot be bothered to Google two French words?

Uh, I'll try to make this clear.

The Atlas Forum is primarily designed for discussion of U.S. politics, with special boards for non-U.S. politics.

Now, the term "malice," is a term used in American law, with rather clear meaning.  So, I don't care what the French understanding (or misunderstanding) of that term.

Please go on with your irrelevancies if you must.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I agree that he should not have been released until he could be deported.  That he should be deported back to a country whose already inadequate government had been effectively been wiped out by a natural disaster before at least the bare bones of government function had been restored, I absolutely reject.

For how long should he be held?  

Until there was at least a semi-functional society in Haiti again.  If things were done the way I like it, he'd be in Haiti now, unless of course he made another illegal entry after we deported him there.  Haiti is not yet back to the point to where deporting otherwise non-criminal illegal entrants is wat I would consider good policy, but it is back to the point where it is about as capable as it was before the earthquake of handling someone like this.

So, there is NO time limit?

Oh, and to return to the facts situation, the individual is currently dead, so deporting him now would be, well, pointless.

But, if he had been held after completion of his sentence for burglary until he might sometime be deported, what if he killed another inmate, or guard while incarcerated while awaiting deportation?  These things happen.

I find it laughable that immediately after castigating me for making a very probable assumption that if he had been held until he could be deported that both he and his victims would still be alive you then bring up the far less probable scenario of him having killed someone else while in prison awaiting deportation.

[quote]

Please be so good as to indicate the post where I supposedly castigated you "for making a very probable assumption that if he had been held until deported that both he and his victims would still be alive."

I further repeat that you have given no real time limit, but have implied that it could well exceed six months.