Gallup: Five Million Latin Americans Coming to U.S. in Next 12 Months

[phill4paul]

ICE has been running dragnet checkpoints in Charlotte the last couple weeks, without local police involved or even notified. People are starting to get pissed off and some ugly videos of confrontations have started coming out. Do we really want federal agents running checkpoints on residential streets in neighborhoods?? That's a really bad precedent to support, given history of what happens when large segments of the population supports such things.

They are doing it because local law enforcement won't report foreign nationals that trespass and commit crimes in our neighborhoods. This is a result of progressive half-backs that have come in enough numbers to create sanctuary cities.

[Anti Federalist]

No. I would let them leave freely and let other property owners, whose properties are none of my business, decide if they want to allow them on their properties. Once they're not on my property, I have no right to impose my will on others. Neither do you, or anyone else.

If you don't want them on your property, you shouldn't be forced to let them be on it. But outside the limits of your own property, you no longer have any legitimate say over whether they should be allowed anywhere else.

The hell I don't.

If your cheap migrant labor runs amok and ruins the value of my property I have every right to sue you for damages.

[Anti Federalist]

ICE has been running dragnet checkpoints in Charlotte the last couple weeks, without local police involved or even notified. People are starting to get pissed off and some ugly videos of confrontations have started coming out. Do we really want federal agents running checkpoints on residential streets in neighborhoods?? That's a really bad precedent to support, given history of what happens when large segments of the population supports such things.

These would not be justified, I would not have to live in a "Constitution Free Zone" if we stopped these $#@!ers at the border like any sane and rational country would.

That is of course, opposed to a country hell bent on suicide...like this one.

[Ender]

These would not be justified, I would not have to live in a "Constitution Free Zone" if we stopped these $#@!ers at the border like any sane and rational country would.

That is of course, opposed to a country hell bent on suicide...like this one.

It isn't immigrants that caused the"Constitution Free Zone" crap. It's .gov- and it's NOT about "protecting" you- it's about keeping you a prisoner.

The Matrix has never been more obvious than it is today.

[Superfluous Man]

The hell I don't.

If your cheap migrant labor runs amok and ruins the value of my property I have every right to sue you for damages.

If they ruin the value of your property by actually doing something *to* your property, then sure you do. But that wouldn't be outside the limits of your property.

But if you just mean that them being nearby results in lowering the price you would be able to get by selling your property, then no, you absolutely do not.

If you want to control the other properties that are near yours so that you can keep the people you consider undesirable off of them, then you need to buy those properties. Until you do, they don't belong to you. And you don't have a right to control them just because of how they affect the market value of your land.

[Anti Federalist]

It isn't immigrants that caused the"Constitution Free Zone" crap. It's .gov- and it's NOT about "protecting" you- it's about keeping you a prisoner.

The Matrix has never been more obvious than it is today.

I agree...not disputing that at all.

Take away the justification i.e. illegal migrant hordes invading at will, and you will stand a good chance of convincing enough people that constitution free zones are not needed.

Analogy:

Thirty years ago people were terrified of street crime. Many would say justifiably, to walk down certain streets at night was almost certainly a death sentence.

Convince people that arming citizens will reduce crime (stopping migrants at the border) and when successful, you can start making inroads on prison and sentencing reform, which is happening now, even under El Hombre Naranja.

[phill4paul]

If they ruin the value of your property by actually doing something *to* your property, then sure you do. But that wouldn't be outside the limits of your property.

But if you just mean that them being nearby results in lowering the price you would be able to get by selling your property, then no, you absolutely do not.

If you want to control the other properties that are near yours so that you can keep the people you consider undesirable off of them, then you need to buy those properties. Until you do, they don't belong to you. And you don't have a right to control them just because of how they affect the market value of your land.

If you own property that has a swine farm and I buy property next to it then I do not have cause to complain.

If I own property and you buy property next to it and start a swine farm then we have a problem.

[Anti Federalist]

But if you just mean that them being nearby results in lowering the price you would be able to get by selling your property, then no, you absolutely do not.

So, if you decide to build a toxic waste disposal facility next door to me, thus rendering my property worthless, I have no recourse.

Strange...I thought this was a cornerstone of libertarian property rights in which people can recover for damages and losses without government regulations.

I must have been mistaken.

[Superfluous Man]

If you own property that has a swine farm and I buy property next to it then I do not have cause to complain.

If I own property and you buy property next to it and start a swine farm then we have a problem.

A problem that you could have solved by buying the property yourself, or entering a contract with the person who owned it.

If you own a property, and some black people buy the house next door, and then you find that it's not as easy to sell your property as it used to be, and you think it's because now black people live next door, well, sorry, but you have no just cause to take any action to prevent that happening, or retaliate against them for it.

[Superfluous Man]

So, if you decide to build a toxic waste disposal facility next door to me, thus rendering my property worthless, I have no recourse.

Are you talking about a toxic waste facility that does nothing at all that has any physical effect on your property? If yes, then see above. If no, then we're back to talking about something where my actions did encroach into your property.

Strange...I thought this was a cornerstone of libertarian property rights in which people can recover for damages and losses without government regulations.

Yes, for actual damages and losses. Other people not wanting to pay you as much as you want them to for your property on account of something that didn't actually affect that property itself is not a damage or loss.

But if you really want to go down this road, then the increased demand for land in the US that would result from allowing all of the people to come live here who want to do so would cause the price you could sell your property for to go up, not down.

[Stratovarious]

ICE needs to be shut down today.
We have border patrol that is what we need we
are building redundancy upon redundancy, time to
back the truck up over all of these Tyrannical agencies,
non of which were designed to protect any of us.
-
Shut down;
ICE
DHS
TSA
and so much more.

[Stratovarious]

If they ruin the value of your property by actually doing something *to* your property, then sure you do. But that wouldn't be outside the limits of your property.

But if you just mean that them being nearby results in lowering the price you would be able to get by selling your property, then no, you absolutely do not.

If you want to control the other properties that are near yours so that you can keep the people you consider undesirable off of them, then you need to buy those properties. Until you do, they don't belong to you. And you don't have a right to control them just because of how they affect the market value of your land.

Petition the government to build a maximum security prison next door, heck your property
value might even go up, do you want it there?
Then don't forget to take all your South American poor to China with you and start that Shangri la,
utopia, with MASSIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL.

[phill4paul]

A problem that you could have solved by buying the property yourself, or entering a contract with the person who owned it.

If you own a property, and some black people buy the house next door, and then you find that it's not as easy to sell your property as it used to be, and you think it's because now black people live next door, well, sorry, but you have no just cause to take any action to prevent that happening, or retaliate against them for it.

I don't mind if black people buy the house next to me. That's their right as an American citizen. Now if they turn it into a drug house and have all kinds of traffic from customers coming up and down the road in my community then we are going to have a problem. They should have set up shop in an area zoned for business. Mines zoned for residential. And there is a reason for that.
You seem to me a naive man. One that does not understand how communities work. You seem to have a belief system that is just as naive as socialists that call for a Green New Deal. There is the real world, and then there is the land of unicorns and glitter farts.

[Superfluous Man]

I don't mind if black people buy the house next to me. That's their right as an American citizen.

I never said anything about their citizenship. That's totally irrelevant. If the previous owner of the property chose to sell it to them, then it's now theirs, and they have a right to be there, regardless of citizenship.

Now if they turn it into a drug house and have all kinds of traffic from customers coming up and down the road in my community then we are going to have a problem. They should have set up shop in an area zoned for business. Mines zoned for residential. And there is a reason for that.

You support zoning laws too?

Holy smokes.

You seem to me a naive man. One that does not understand how communities work. You seem to have a belief system that is just as naive as socialists that call for a Green New Deal. There is the real world, and then there is the land of unicorns and glitter farts.

Perhaps. If so, then everyone who supports our site mission is naive.

[Superfluous Man]

For those who are interested, this question of whether or not central planners in the government should protect someone's land value by dictating what or who can be allowed on nearby land owned by someone else (i.e. zoning laws), rather than handling this issue in the free market, comes up from time to time, and there are a lot of articles and talks on it already available from organizations that share the same mission as this website.

Here are some to peruse.

https://www.google.com/search?q=zoni...w=1920&bih=969 (<-- This one is mises.org. They're own search function doesn't produce a link I can share.)

https://fee.org/search/?q=zoning

https://www.fff.org/?s=zoning

http://www.independent.org/issues/go...ing&gsc.page=1

https://www.aier.org/search?keys=zoning

https://tomwoods.com/ep-932-zoning-do-we-need-it/

[Stratovarious]

No Federal Checkpoints
No Checkpoints period

[phill4paul]

I never said anything about their citizenship. That's totally irrelevant. If the previous owner of the property chose to sell it to them, then it's now theirs, and they have a right to be there, regardless of citizenship.


You support zoning laws too?

Holy smokes.



Perhaps. If so, then everyone who supports our site mission is naive.

Life just doesn't work the way you want it too. I'm sorry. It just doesn't. I've networked and have a good relationship with my neighbors. We have a child friendly neighborhood. We have a neighborhood watch.
If you think that you're going to move into a house in our neighborhood (and stop with the "You should have bought it," idiocy) set up a meth lab and have all the unsavory meth-heads that you want travel through our neighborhood...you'd be wrong.
Your anarchic, "hey, man, individual rights, dude!" doesn't cut it. Not here where we don't always practice the NAP.

[Superfluous Man]

Life just doesn't work the way you want it too.

I wasn't saying anything about how things work. I was talking about right and wrong.

Of course we live in a world where people regularly do wrong. The fact that people commonly do something doesn't make it less wrong though.

And if I understood you correctly, you also weren't just making statements about what people commonly do, but rather about what people actually ought to do.

Now it sounds like you're basically saying, "I know that what I advocate is wrong. But I advocate it anyway because it's what I want to do and what I'm going to do, wrong or not."

Well, ok. If that's what you're saying, then at least we agree that what you're talking about is wrong.

ETA: But if you're not just talking about how things are commonly done in this statist world (which demonstrably doesn't work), but what kind of solutions actually would work to accomplish the desired ends with the most good for the most people and the least harm, then you are completely wrong to advocate your statist solutions thinking they work better than the free market would. One of the many advantages of the free market over centrally managed economies, is that it really does work much better, in every way for every issue.

[spudea]

No Federal Checkpoints
No Checkpoints period

How was the recent Antifa rally comrade?

"No borders, no wall, no USA at all!"

[Slave Mentality]

You can contemplate your navel while hostile foreigners impose tyranny and begin genocide against your neighbors, friends and family if you want but they will come for you too in the end.

And you can froth at the mouth on an internet forum while hostile natives keep stealing your liberties. The result will be the same. They will come for you too in the end. I have just made peace with it.

[Zippyjuan]

I don't mind if black people buy the house next to me. That's their right as an American citizen. Now if they turn it into a drug house and have all kinds of traffic from customers coming up and down the road in my community then we are going to have a problem. They should have set up shop in an area zoned for business. Mines zoned for residential. And there is a reason for that.
You seem to me a naive man. One that does not understand how communities work. You seem to have a belief system that is just as naive as socialists that call for a Green New Deal. There is the real world, and then there is the land of unicorns and glitter farts.

So government should tell you what you can and can't do with your land.

[devil21]

They are doing it because local law enforcement won't report foreign nationals that trespass and commit crimes in our neighborhoods. This is a result of progressive half-backs that have come in enough numbers to create sanctuary cities.

That may be true but "Your Papers Please" is not acceptable. We've been put into a no-win situation where there are no good solutions to advocate for. ICE says it's because the new Sheriff pulled out of the 287g program that checked immigration status and held people at the jail. Local PD checkpoints are bad enough (to local police's credit, they've scaled DUI and ID checkpoints way back over the last couple years) but Feds operating them in neighborhoods instead is terrible and history warns why repeatedly.

[phill4paul]

That may be true but "Your Papers Please" is not acceptable. We've been put into a no-win situation where there are no good solutions to advocate for. ICE says it's because the new Sheriff pulled out of the 287g program that checked immigration status and held people at the jail. Local PD checkpoints are bad enough (to local police's credit, they've scaled DUI and ID checkpoints way back over the last couple years) but Feds operating them in neighborhoods instead is terrible and history warns why repeatedly.

The "win" is to enforce border security. If we didn't have a problem with foreign national trespassers then we wouldn't have this situation.

[Swordsmyth]

It's also my right to employ them here on property that I rightfully own and the government does not, or to sell or rent my property to them, or to welcome them on it as guest for whatever reason I want, as long as I'm not violating anyone else's rights. The decisions of what constitutes a benefit to me in any of those things is mine to make, not the government's.

Every other person in America has these same rights with their property. If some of us want to welcome these people onto our properties, and others don't want to welcome them onto theirs, then those who don't want to welcome them shouldn't have to, but only with respect to their own privately owned property. They don't have a moral license to impose their wills on the rest of us, and the properties that we, and not they, own.

They don't have a right to be here to be hired by you.

[Swordsmyth]

If they ruin the value of your property by actually doing something *to* your property, then sure you do. But that wouldn't be outside the limits of your property.

But if you just mean that them being nearby results in lowering the price you would be able to get by selling your property, then no, you absolutely do not.

If you want to control the other properties that are near yours so that you can keep the people you consider undesirable off of them, then you need to buy those properties. Until you do, they don't belong to you. And you don't have a right to control them just because of how they affect the market value of your land.

Them being nearby results in communism, communism is a direct harm to everything I own.

[devil21]

The "win" is to enforce border security. If we didn't have a problem with foreign national trespassers then we wouldn't have this situation.

There's already fences and obstructions wherever feasible. It's not like the border is wide open and I question why people keep talking like it is. But even a new wall doesn't address the situation of those already here.
No liberty minded man or woman could seriously consider advocating for mass round-ups or federal dragnet checkpoints since, as I pointed out, history clearly warns why that ends badly. Especially since the issue has been engineered from the beginning for this outcome by the same people that are now offering such solutions.

[Anti Federalist]

And you can froth at the mouth on an internet forum while hostile natives keep stealing your liberties. The result will be the same. They will come for you too in the end. I have just made peace with it.

Made peace with what, specifically?

[Superfluous Man]

They don't have a right to be here to be hired by you.

If "here" is my property, then that's for me to decide and no one else.

[Swordsmyth]

ICE needs to be shut down today.
We have border patrol that is what we need we
are building redundancy upon redundancy, time to
back the truck up over all of these Tyrannical agencies,
non of which were designed to protect any of us.
-
Shut down;
ICE
DHS
TSA
and so much more.

We had INS before ICE, somebody needs to enforce immigration law inside the country, visa overstays can't be stopped at the border, we can discuss reducing ICE/INS when we have deported most of the 20+ Million invaders.

[Swordsmyth]

If "here" is my property, then that's for me to decide and no one else.

"Here" is our national territory and you are not sole owner of that.