The borders are protected. Trump says so. (see my sig).Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratovarious
The borders are protected. Trump says so. (see my sig).Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratovarious
No wonder I haven't heard that acronym for a while, I'm dead against DHS, I believe ICEQuote:
Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
is an offshoot of it.
How does protecting our borders equate to a police state, not wut' DONE' Trump say......:frog:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyjuan
I know you can't answer the question , carry on........
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Ender
We had and still have much more liberty and much less tyranny than the Demoncrats will implement when the invaders have turned the entire country into Kalifornia.
Standing armies=police state.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratovarious
The FF were explicit on this- thus the 2nd Amendment- and it is THIS problem we should be shouting about- not immigrants.
Apples and bowling balls, there was no equivalent to the invaders imposing a Demoncrat dictatorship in the financial crisis.Quote:
Originally Posted by devil21
No zipender , protecting our borders is essential.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ender
Why do you want open borders?
Maybe you oughta learn a little REAL history, Mr. Neocon. And BTW- there's no difference between the right & left that you want us to fight about. That's just a ruse to take everyone's eye off the real "take-over".Quote:
Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
That is nonsense, the Founding Fathers explicitly authorized a standing army as long as it had to be authorized every two years and it isn't a police state to have one that patrols the border and leaves the citizens alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ender
We are also in the middle of a war and our country has been overrun by 20+ Million invaders, if that doesn't justify an army to repel them then I don't know what would.
Trump claims crime was bad and then dropped in El Paso (where he is flying off to meet hordes of adoring fans at a rally later today). Problem is, crime was never that high and dropped a decade before any barriers were added. He is trying to show that walls prevent crime.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...crime-el-paso/
More at link.Quote:
No, border barrier did not drive down crime in El Paso, Texas
As he promotes his border wall, President Donald Trump holds up El Paso, Texas, as a successful test case.
"The border city of El Paso, Texas, used to have extremely high rates of violent crime — one of the highest in the country, and considered one of our nation's most dangerous cities," Trump said during his Feb. 5 State of the Union address. "Now, immediately upon its building, with a powerful barrier in place, El Paso is one of the safest cities in our country. Simply put, walls work and walls save lives."
That wasn’t the first time Trump hailed El Paso’s barrier as a solution to crime. And it might not be the last: Trump plans to be in El Paso on Feb. 11 for a campaign rally.
But the claim is not true.
To start, El Paso has not been considered one of the nation’s most dangerous cities. Its violent crime rate has been significantly below the national average compared to cities of similar size. Even more, the violent crime rate went up — not down, as Trump claimed — after the construction of a border fence in the region.
An FBI tool allows users to view violent crime rates reported by police agencies, from 1985 to 2014. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program classifies four offenses as violent crime: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.
Every year from 1985 to 2014, El Paso’s violent crime rate was significantly lower than the average for all localities of similar size. (Note: Not all departments reported data every year.)
https://www.motherjones.com/wp-conte..._1991_2014.gif
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Ender
https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=h...Fshark.jpg&f=1
We had and still have much more liberty and much less tyranny than the Demoncrats will implement when the invaders have turned the entire country into Kalifornia.
Look, Mr name-caller, did I mention open borders? Standing armies are NOT lawful- neither are entitlements & immediate citizenship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratovarious
The answer is, and always has been:
NO ENTITLEMENTS
FREE TRADE
AND THE LAST TIME YOU WERE IN CALIFORNIA WAS.........?Quote:
Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
False dichotomy. Not wanting a bigger b order force/ wall does not equal not wanting any border force. We have adequate protection. You can spend an unlimited amount of taxpayer dollars on the problem if you want. But you start getting less return from every additional dollar. How much is enough? The border will never be 100% secure. Even a 100% secure border will not prevent having people in the country illegally- half of them entered legally and simply didn't leave when they were supposed to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratovarious
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb...forum-20120201Quote:
"Now there's a lot of antagonism and resentment turned just automatically on immigrants," he continued. "You say, no not immigrants, it's just illegal immigrants. I do believe in legal immigration. I want to have a provision to obey those laws. You have to understand this in the context of the economy."
Paul said he's not one of those politicians who believes that "barbed-wire fences and guns on our border will solve any of our problems." That's not, he said, the American way. And he doesn't think that a national identification card is the way to go.
What the country does need, he said, is "a much better immigration service" fed by more resources. Not that he'd "vote for extra money." But he does, he told the crowd, have a plan.
Obama sold Chrysler to FIAT. He used the whole thing to steal from us all and give untold millions to Solyndra. Dictatorship, robbery, cronyism, assets to foreign socialist governments--sounds like the DNC dictatorship has been here for years. Maybe trying to prevent it is kind of like giving a vaccine to a patient that already has the disease and actually needs the cure instead?Quote:
Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
He lives somewhere in the Pacific time zone...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ender
THE ONLY WAR THE US IS IN IS TRYING TO TAKE0VER THE WORLD & ALL RESOURCES- MAYBE IF THAT WAS STOPPED, THERE WOULD BE MORE FREEDOM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyjuan
There is government, and then there is overbearing government. There has always been government and there will always be government. There will never be anarchy. As much as some believe that this is the natural state of a free society. Because in that open state of anarchy there will always be oppressors. Those that do not play by the anarchists NAP.
Individuals band together for any number of reasons. They have since the beginning of time. They create covenants and laws to enforce these covenants. These they create to help maintain the peace.
So, in some instances, is it not, perhaps, better that individuals come together, map out certain areas for industrial parks, waste disposal facilities, pig farms and chicken farms and some areas for family housing? As opposed to allowing someone setting up a meth-lab on the property adjoining yours?
You seem unable to understand the concept of 'common' space. Perhaps if you want them on your property you should buy adjoining parcels all the way from the border to your front door?Quote:
Originally Posted by Superfluous Man
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Ender
Why don't you tell me about how much of a libertarian paradise it is?
You are making a fool out of yourself, the list of liberties that Kalifornia has deprived its citizens of that other states and even the feds have not is endless.
Hmmm. If you fail to vigorously support certain draconian immigration measures then you're a traitor.
The CONstitutional penalty for treason is death.
Logically then, it looks like somebody would like to see a great many of us dead.
So who then am I supposed to side with, and who should I fear? Those leftists who want me dead because I'm white and productive? Or the righties who want me dead for my thoughtcrimes of failing to support their authoritarian crap and just. being a voluntaryist?
This is a tough one.
We do NOT have adequate protection on the borders or against overstays, 20+ Million invaders is ample proof of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyjuan
Nobody wants to kill you but if you continue to give aid and comfort to the enemy that wants to kill and enslave us that may change when the collapse comes.Quote:
Originally Posted by CCTelander
20+ Million invaders are proof that you are wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ender
What you said only proves my point and has nothing to do with the invasion.Quote:
Originally Posted by acptulsa
Running out of arguments I see. You keep repeating the same talking points from your guidebook. "Invasion." "Hordes". "commies".Quote:
Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
Let's be clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyjuan
It's not "your" land.
So until such time as it is...
My bad I thought you'd be flattered or just admit that you and zippy were the sameQuote:
Originally Posted by Ender
poster, just playing darts,,,,,sorry.
-
Ok so, then , mmm, lets see, you didn't call for 'open borders' .
I didn't call for 'standing armies' , ''now we have something we can agree on'' :frog:
How are you going, I mean how in the hell are you going to keep out disease ridden felons, rapists, murderers,
terrorists, ms13 and drug traffickers merely by cutting all incentives (something I've called for a million times)?
I don't need more argument, the facts are on my side and my arguments are sufficient.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyjuan
WE MUST REPEL THE INVADERS!Quote:
Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
Too late. They're already here.
ALL THE MORE REASON TO KEEP THEM FROM COMING IN!!!1!!
Are you talking to anyone in particular?Quote:
Originally Posted by CCTelander