Jump to content

DACA, immigration reform whatever

hayden_horn

By hayden_horn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You're right.  That chart doesn't speak to lives saved/lost.

But this one does:

bi_graphics_overdose-death-rates%20(2).p

The harder we fight the "drug war"....the more we lose.

There is no logical way to conclude that the drug war is worth our time, treasure, and the lives sacrificed in fighting it (I'm not kidding -- it's in the millions).  By any reasonable metric, we either have failed to gain ground, or have actually lost ground.  What we have done has not worked.  At all.  We should stop doing things that are proven failures.  I don't give a fuck how you feel, or what you believe.  I look to real-world results and data.  And they scream "FAILURE" at 10,000 decibels.

I feel like I’m resorting to tautology at this point, so forgive me, but I have no issue with changing strategy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

mchookem
mchookem

bitching about immigrants not paying income tax while simultaneously bragging about paying immigrants with cash so they can avoid paying income tax. i did not have that on my bingo card.  

TSipper
TSipper

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them

Chrispy
Chrispy

Spin it however you wish, this man forced his daughter into the river, not our policies. 

Posted Images

Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106897

Posted
Posted
Just now, Chrispy said:

I feel like I’m resorting to tautology at this point, so forgive me, but I have no issue with changing strategy. 

"changing strategy" is so broad as to be meaningless.  What sort of strategy change would you have in mind?  And remember, this all started with your continued support for massive interdiction efforts at our southern border, which is the epitome of the "war on drugs," and is a proven failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

If by "change tactics" you mean "treat it as a health problem, not a criminal problem," then you'd finally be on to something.

If by "change tactics" you mean "go after drug dealers even HARDER!", then you're wasting everyone's damned time.  We've been attacking drugs on the supply side for decades.  It has completely failed.  Just stop.

That’s fine, but the genesis of the debate started from focusing on the southern border. It will not matter one iota if you treat it like a health concern, if your border is merely a sieve. Keeping track of what enters this country is a basic function, one that shouldn’t be terribly difficult. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, ndawg said:

It pains me to say this, but if it feels like I'm insisting on going backwards to you, it's because you aren't comprehending me. If we spent $1 trillion on the war on drugs, and saved just, say, 10 lives from fentanyl overdoses, was our drug policy effective or wasteful?

But I get why you feel this way. It sounds like drugs have affected you or people close to you, as they've affected too many of us. It really is shitty, and I'll say that we have that in common. However, you are choosing to allow your personal emotions to override analysis that would demonstrate that your position, well-intentioned as it may be, is utterly impractical in the real world. This really isn't a whole lot different that commies concluding that we can just end poverty by letting the state control wealth.

So, you've shown us you've got a bleeding heart, just like us libs, so now own it!

Forgive me, I have about ten responses I’m trying to respond to and it gets a bit exhausting. Sounds like we have a common experience, so I will take what you said and chew on it for a bit. Well, except the Lib part. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106897

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

That’s fine, but the genesis of the debate started from focusing on the southern border. It will not matter one iota if you treat it like a health concern, if your border is merely a sieve. Keeping track of what enters this country is a basic function, one that shouldn’t be terribly difficult. 

"Shouldn't be terribly difficult."

Yet we have decades of failed efforts as evidence to the contrary.

Treating substance abuse as a criminal matter has never been a successful path.  Treating it as a health concern, alternatively, HAS had some measure of success when it's been tried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

"changing strategy" is so broad as to be meaningless.  What sort of strategy change would you have in mind?  And remember, this all started with your continued support for massive interdiction efforts at our southern border, which is the epitome of the "war on drugs," and is a proven failure.

Well, it’s time to get my rear out of the office and get home. What a productive day it proved to be. My entire point was to beef up the border so we could get an idea of what and who was entering our country, I think that should be the first step to be sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90646

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

"Shouldn't be terribly difficult."

Yet we have decades of failed efforts as evidence to the contrary.

Treating substance abuse as a criminal matter has never been a successful path.  Treating it as a health concern, alternatively, HAS had some measure of success when it's been tried.

It’s become a revenue matter as well. Too many law enforcement organizations and private companies are pulling in too much money from it. They don’t want that gravy train to stop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
InkaUtexas

InkaUtexas 26885

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

OR....you could reach the conclusion that makes sense: no human-created system, of ANYTHING, has a 0% error rate.  That doesn't mean "it doesn't work, so let's get rid of the thing it allows altogether."

Folks have bribed examiners, or cheated on tests, etc., to get a driver's license.  But we don't say "well, the driver's license process doesn't work -- let's shut down letting people drive."

Although, you raise an interesting point -- do you apply that reasoning across the board?  If we have a system for X, and that system has failed in at least one instance, should we stop doing X?  Do you feel that way about capital punishment?  About the FAA-mandated inspection and maintenance processes for aircraft?  About the FDA process for approving drugs?  I'd be quite interested to know about your logical consistency.

Not blowing you off, but slammed on a project and want to respond to you and atom when I have time. All I am going to say is I think we need to have a system, which does result in citizenship, for migrants from all places. The current checks we have in place do not, and have not worked. My mom was a Consulate Officer in the Dominican Republic in the early 1980's. She saw the same level of corruption then as we see now on all sides. 

I am on record saying for Central America we should think about an economic revitalization plan that would strengthen the region and at the same time keep the Chinese a bit at bay. Win Win for our Hemisphere. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, JimmyHoffa said:

 

Not that anybody will care but he was indeed here illegally. 

I hope nobody with any intelligence was swayed by some sleazy lawyer trying to smokescreen via twitter or whatever. Of course everyone knew he was here illegally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28929

Posted
Posted
On August 23, 2018 at 1:02 PM, JimmyHoffa said:

 

Not that anybody will care but he was indeed here illegally. 

That made him a member of a set of people who are statistically less likely than American citizens to commit a crime. What the president is trying to do is use anecdotal evidence to suggest that all illegal immigrants are dangerous criminals. His racist base eats that shit up. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

It’s strange, albeit humorous, to see individuals  bending over backwards to defend illegal aliens. 

I guess it's the utilitarian streak that dismisses the negatives/cons/avoidable-death-suffering because the positives/pros/contributions-to-society outweigh them. I can see why it's a sticky issue and I honestly see both sides. I don't envy anyone having to stake a career in trying to appease people and curry votes/favor because it's a hard issue. I would argue that anyone who is creative and intelligent enough to fix this issue of immigration, will have done so with a very novel and genius approach and should get a Nobel Peace Prize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

I guess it's the utilitarian streak that dismisses the negatives/cons/avoidable-death-suffering because the positives/pros/contributions-to-society outweigh them. I can see why it's a sticky issue and I honestly see both sides. I don't envy anyone having to stake a career in trying to appease people and curry votes/favor because it's a hard issue. I would argue that anyone who is creative and intelligent enough to fix this issue of immigration, will have done so with a very novel and genius approach and should get a Nobel Peace Prize.

Sure, immigration is an important life blood to any thriving country and worthy of defense. Illegal aliens, on the other hand, have broken the law and should be treated accordingly. I’m with you on the Nobel Peace Prize, as I envision this divisive issue raging for the foreseeable future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Yeah, treating them as humans, what a terrible thing to do. . .

I’m not quite sure how the treatment of illegal aliens is pertinent to the discussion. I was merely expressing my disappointment that some choose to defend those that break the law. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90646

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

Sure, immigration is an important life blood to any thriving country and worthy of defense. Illegal aliens, on the other hand, have broken the law and should be treated accordingly. I’m with you on the Nobel Peace Prize, as I envision this divisive issue raging for the foreseeable future.

c99c80442a43b9a4ab458cffea61d9e6.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lurch

Lurch 5950

Posted
Posted

A misdemeanor. Wherein they work for our businesses (often paying SS tax that they’ll never benefit from), pay rent and buy food, clothes and goods.

Yes, they shouldn’t do it. Yes, we need to fix our broken immigration system where so many feel they have to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

c99c80442a43b9a4ab458cffea61d9e6.jpg

lol. They absolutely should have done this. Is this cartoon arguing AGAINST the idea that the natives should have protected their land, culture and way of life from those who, as we have the benefit of hindsight, completely genocide'd them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 18321

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

I’m not quite sure how the treatment of illegal aliens is pertinent to the discussion. I was merely expressing my disappointment that some choose to defend those that break the law. 

Oddly enough, in this country even conviction of more serious crimes (e.g., felonies) does not waive constitutional rights or allow inhumane treatment. So yes, I will defend the rights of those that are accused of crimes, any crimes, because these are fundamental rights and beliefs of our country. We must jealously guard them, especially for the worst of us, so that they may not fade and so that they may continue to benefit us all.

And, from a practical stand point, spending a bunch of resources to address crimes that at worst have a very slight negative overall effect on society (and the evidence is actually that illegal immigrants have a significant net benefit) is wasteful and inefficient. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90646

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Lurch said:

A misdemeanor. Wherein they work for our businesses (often paying SS tax that they’ll never benefit from), pay rent and buy food, clothes and goods.

Yes, they shouldn’t do it. Yes, we need to fix our broken immigration system where so many feel they have to.

It's funny that we will jail them, but not the people who knowingly employ them or don't bother doing checking.

It's not a mystery why they are here - plenty of "law-abiding" Americans are more than happy to pay them, including completely under the table, to do their lawns, raise their kids (which was alway a WTF? to me), marry them, etc.

And they will keep on coming as long as they are hearing there is work here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90646

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

Looking back, I bet they wish like hell they would have done just that. 

 

14 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

lol. They absolutely should have done this. Is this cartoon arguing AGAINST the idea that the natives should have protected their land, culture and way of life from those who, as we have the benefit of hindsight, completely genocide'd them?

It would have worked about as well as Trump's fabled wall.  Which is to say, not really.

Maybe they would have asked England, The Netherlands, France, and Spain to pay for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

It would have worked about as well as Trump's fabled wall.  Which is to say, not really.

Maybe they would have asked England, The Netherlands, France, and Spain to pay for it.

So you are saying that ultimately invasion, and whatever may come with it, is inevitable. There and now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Oddly enough, in this country even conviction of more serious crimes (e.g., felonies) does not waive constitutional rights or allow inhumane treatment. So yes, I will defend the rights of those that are accused of crimes, any crimes, because these are fundamental rights and beliefs of our country. We must jealously guard them, especially for the worst of us, so that they may not fade and so that they may continue to benefit us all.

And, from a practical stand point, spending a bunch of resources to address crimes that at worst have a very slight negative overall effect on society (and the evidence is actually that illegal immigrants have a significant net benefit) is wasteful and inefficient. 

I failed in explaining my position if you believe I advocated for inhumane treatment, I certainly find that behavior appalling. I’m arguing for deportation and it’s a perfectly reasonable stance. 

Your second paragraph is peddling selective law enforcement, that’s a position I find completely insane. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Invasion.

Nice.

I mean, I'm not wrong. And this isn't equivalent to infestation-gate, this is simply a matter of fact declaration using a word that means something. Google invasion, this is what we did to the Natives in America and it's what any culture of illegal immigrants do to a sovereign nation with immigration laws of record. I am not necessarily saying that invasion is bad; an invasion of beautiful women and an invasion of those who give money away or whatever would be awesome of course, but realistically even an invasion of low-skill/low-value workers is valuable to us within reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

I mean, I'm not wrong. And this isn't equivalent to infestation-gate, this is simply a matter of fact declaration using a word that means something. Google invasion, this is what we did to the Natives in America and it's what any culture of illegal immigrants do to a sovereign nation with immigration laws of record. I am not necessarily saying that invasion is bad; an invasion of beautiful women and an invasion of those who give money away or whatever would be awesome of course, but realistically even an invasion of low-skill/low-value workers is valuable to us within reason. 

Your attempt is admirable, but I’m going to save you the time and energy, everything comes down to pigmentation for David. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Total invasion.

Buh bye, Murica.

America is just a name for the patch of earth we live upon. It's not going anywhere, anytime soon, and will be afoot whomever eventually rules-- invasion, wars, or otherwise.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...