Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Ariz. Posse to Arrest Illegal Immigrants


Thiebear

Whats the over/under on France letting him go?  

8 members have voted

  1. 1. Whats the over/under on France letting him go?

    • Never! They will make him Rot in jail
      2
    • 10 years, they forgive.....
      1
    • 5 years, they have to setup a deal
      1
    • 2 years, they will have to put out the fires
      1
    • 6 months, it'll be part of the student jobs protest.
      1
    • Immediately in a premeditated surrender...
      2


Recommended Posts

:doh::doh::doh:

My point is, people who have no respect for the bible and treat those who have respect for the bible with ridicule, should not be qouting it. It means nothing to them. They cant be saying it should be taken out of the schools and everything, saying it should not be taught, and then start quoting it for their own gains.

I know what your point is, it just ins't very good.

If you say your a Christian and you believe in the Bible, why shouldn't someone quote parts of it if they believe you are contradicting yourself?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what your point is, it just ins't very good.

If you say your a Christian and you believe in the Bible, why shouldn't someone quote parts of it if they believe you are contradicting yourself?

If someone doesnt have any respect for the bible, then they dont mean what they are qouting, meaning that it does not mean anything.

I dont understand the question in bold.

Also, if you want to continue this discussion, lets do it over PM so as to not hijack the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of laws, what about the law of the land?

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

Sorry but the US Constitution deals with US CITIZENS ONLY, so far as I am concerned.

For those of you who are harping on the legal reaction to the illegal action aspect.... so far as I'm concerned this Mexican border issue has gone well beyond a simple immigration issue. It has come to the point of an invasion of this country. The Second Amendment not only allows but basically commands the armed citizens of the United States to use violent military force to defend this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What should have been done is have people go out while the protests were going on and find out who was an illegal and who wasnt, and get rid of them that way.

I agree somewhat, but logistically, that isn't feasible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unlike those who will roll over for the sake of political correctness.. Bull **** I'm not rolling over for nothing.. These people are invaders plain and simple and should be treated as such... They care so much about changing this country screw them let them go back to their own damn country and change it..

Oh that's right they can't because they'll be imprisoned over there for disagreeing.

You are calling them invaders, and by definition they are invading our space, but you are using the semantics of the term to exaggerate the problem. They are not invading us in a classical sense of war, that is, they are not coming here to kill people and conquer, they are coming here to work and put food on the table for their families. If you think killing someone for that reason is justice then you have no sense of justice what-so-ever.

I'm glad people with your attitude have zero representation in our Government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:doh::doh::doh:

My point is, people who have no respect for the bible and treat those who have respect for the bible with ridicule, should not be qouting it. It means nothing to them. They cant be saying it should be taken out of the schools and everything, saying it should not be taught, and then start quoting it for their own gains.

I think I'm the only one that has quoted the bible so I have to assume your comment was directed at me. I don't know where you got the idea that I ridicule those that respect the bible - doing so would require me to ridicule myself.

You should apologize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but the US Constitution deals with US CITIZENS ONLY, so far as I am concerned.

For those of you who are harping on the legal reaction to the illegal action aspect.... so far as I'm concerned this Mexican border issue has gone well beyond a simple immigration issue. It has come to the point of an invasion of this country. The Second Amendment not only allows but basically commands the armed citizens of the United States to use violent military force to defend this country.

good thing YOUR interpretation of the Constitution means squat.

I'm REALLY glad you aren't an elected offial. I'd be put to death for speeding and Destino would have gotten the chair for tossing a cigarette butt out the window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm the only one that has quoted the bible so I have to assume your comment was directed at me. I don't know where you got the idea that I ridicule those that respect the bible - doing so would require me to ridicule myself.

You should apologize.

Heh, no I was not directing that at you, though your comment did remind of people doing that. I had just been in another thread where someone I know has no repect for it qouted it. If you took it as a shot at you, I do apologize because thats not what I meant at all. Had nothing to do with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's you that is advocating law breaking. You are advocating the slaughter of poor people not because you love the law but because you are in love with the idea of deadly reprisals for anyone that steps out of line. No matter how minor the infraction you support potentially lethal consequences as evidenced by your comments concerning jaywalkers.

I think we've already proven that our "legal" system doesn't work. Largely because it's contrary to human nature. FEAR and PAIN are two of the very few really useful motivators of human beings. The only way we're actually going to get people to start obeying the law is to use those two emotions against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we've already proven that our "legal" system doesn't work. Largely because it's contrary to human nature. FEAR and PAIN are two of the very few really useful motivators of human beings. The only way we're actually going to get people to start obeying the law is to use those two emotions against them.

:doh:

While I think the death penalty should be in use for murders, rapists, etc... To use those types of penalties for other crimes like crossing the border... Cant agree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm REALLY glad you aren't an elected offial. I'd be put to death for speeding and Destino would have gotten the chair for tossing a cigarette butt out the window.

No. You'd just lose your driver's license and vehicle registration for a year per MPH over the posted speed limit. Destino would get a fairly long community service sentence working at a landfill and the reminder that his insurance company is not required to cover any tobacco-related medical conditions he might end up with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but the US Constitution deals with US CITIZENS ONLY, so far as I am concerned.

For those of you who are harping on the legal reaction to the illegal action aspect.... so far as I'm concerned this Mexican border issue has gone well beyond a simple immigration issue. It has come to the point of an invasion of this country. The Second Amendment not only allows but basically commands the armed citizens of the United States to use violent military force to defend this country.

You are just plain wrong. There is no such command in the second amendment, and even by the biggest stretch, you have to prove that there is a security risk. People coming to work here are not a security risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but the US Constitution deals with US CITIZENS ONLY, so far as I am concerned.

Then you are wrong (Big surprise there :laugh: )

btw it would be nice to see the rational behind your idea. Will you ever do that? Of course not you have no rational behind them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are just plain wrong. There is no such command in the second amendment, and even by the biggest stretch, you have to prove that there is a security risk.

Did you miss that "A well-regulated militia being necessary for the common defense" clause that the anti-gunners seem so interested in harping on? So far as I am concerned that IS a command for all armed citizens (aka: the militia) to use those weapons in defense of this country.

People coming to work here are not a security risk.

People illegally bypassing the legal means of immigration to enter the country in order to do jobs that could be just as easily filled with the lazy ****s of American citizens stealing my money via welfare and unemployment and to enjoy government services that MY tax money pays for MOST CERTAINLY IS a security risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what the second amendment says.

You think defend against a security risk=murder people so they don't unfairly recieve a welfare check. You have zero common sense and zero decency.

I don't think the horse is dead enough. You and Mass should keep beating it for a few more pages and maybe one of you will come around to the other's position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the horse is dead yet you and Mass should keep beating it for a few more pages and maybe one of you will come around to the other's position.

When it comes to ANY discussion with me the horse is dead when I make my first comment on the topic. I don't debate simply because I know my opinion isn't ever going to be changed and I doubt that I am going to change other people's view's either. That's not what I'm here for.

For those of you who don't like my views of the world, and don't want to read them.... I suggest use of the "ignore" feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm the only one that has quoted the bible so I have to assume your comment was directed at me. I don't know where you got the idea that I ridicule those that respect the bible - doing so would require me to ridicule myself.

You should apologize.

You may be the only one in this thread, but not the only one on this board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to ANY discussion with me the horse is dead when I make my first comment on the topic. I don't debate simply because I know my opinion isn't ever going to be changed and I doubt that I am going to change other people's view's either. That's not what I'm here for.

For those of you who don't like my views of the world, and don't want to read them.... I suggest use of the "ignore" feature.

first of all no one likes your views, I don't even think you do. Secondly, I am asking you what is your opinion on the constitutions and how it only pertains to citizens. I am asking you to ELABORATE your point. I am not trying to change your mind, imo your mind isn't worth changing/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

btw it would be nice to see the rational behind your idea. Will you ever do that? Of course not you have no rational behind them.

It's so simple that I would think an "enlightened" mind like yourself could see it....

The passages discussed are part of the "UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION". Not the United Nations charter or some other treaty/accord that we shouldn't even be involved in to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are calling them invaders, and by definition they are invading our space, but you are using the semantics of the term to exaggerate the problem. They are not invading us in a classical sense of war, that is, they are not coming here to kill people and conquer, they are coming here to work and put food on the table for their families. If you think killing someone for that reason is justice then you have no sense of justice what-so-ever.

I'm glad people with your attitude have zero representation in our Government.

They are coming into this country demanding changes from a government that owes them nothing.. What would you call it? Bad manners?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...