Destino Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 If he were leaving bus passes, fake IDs, and directions to where illegal employers are, would you still be in favor? Nope. There is a pretty huge gap between helping people survive and helping them falsify documents. I'd think that would be obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Nah, they stop being humans when they become poor Mexicans who are trying to provide for their families. Tell you what. I'll admit that they're human. When you admit that they're criminals. Or maybe, you could stop telling everybody else what they think, and stick to stating your own opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeysc23 Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 no. Why not they could die if they went the wrong way ... where's the compassion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Nope. There is a pretty huge gap between helping people survive and helping them falsify documents. I'd think that would be obvious. Both of them are actively aiding someone who is in the process of committing a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 Tell you what. I'll admit that they're human. When you admit that they're criminals. Sure they are breaking the law, and if you remember I was the one who pointed out that the CNN title of the article was missing the term "illegal". As I see it, in instances like this their humanity needs to be valued more than an immigration law. Or maybe, you could stop telling everybody else what they think, and stick to stating your own opinions. I'm not telling everybody what they think, I'm just reflecting back what I see as the logical conclusions of their thought processes, with a hint of snark. That I will readily admit is not helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 Why not they could die if they went the wrong way ... where's the compassion? Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeysc23 Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed. To aid people in illegal activity and claim it under the disguise of being "compassionate" is wrong headed. Give them water and send them back. You have your compassion without breaking the law ... or you can go on keep making smug remarks about people not wanting to promote illegal activities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Both of them are actively aiding someone who is in the process of committing a crime.Aiding someone who is in the process of committing a crime is not the same thing as aiding someone in the commission of a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pwyl Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed. That would make the Tiramisu all runny :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed. But we are not dealing with giving,but rather leaving water. If the guy had simply given water he would not have been charged. More die in trucks and containers than of thirst in the desert. You don't have enough compassion to give them a ride? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 That would make the Tiramisu all runny :mad: dessert! lol....oh my and all this time I have been watching to make sure I wasn't adding 2 S's....grrr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 How about leaving water for people so they don't die? I thought it was hilarious that they were concerned about bottles "strewn around the park" but they don't seem as concerned about bodies being "strewn around the park." My wife lived 20 miles north of Mexico in the 60's, 70's and 80's and folks die in the desert all the time. I agree with you AsburySkin no crime what so ever leaving water bottles in the desert. The folks fleeing desolation aren't the criminals. The criminals and the crime is in the large and medium companies who employ these folks illegally. No jobs, no people coming or staying here. Criminalizing the individuals while companies like Wall Mark are making bank off their backs is stupid and ineffective policy. Handing water to a man dieng of thirst should not be a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 But we are not dealing with giving,but rather leaving water.If the guy had simply given water he would not have been charged. He may not have been charged but people would still say that he was aiding their illegal activities, much like what was said earlier in this thread. More die in trucks and containers than of thirst in the desert.You don't have enough compassion to give them a ride? If I was in the truck with them then surely I'd give them a drink of my water. And you are making an illogical leap to say that illegally transporting someone across the border is the same as leaving a bottle of water in the desert in case someone passes by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 More die in trucks and containers than of thirst in the desert. You don't have enough compassion to give them a ride? I think you are wrong on that. I think the boarder patrol finds more folks in trucks, it's not the same thing at all. Folks die all the time. Men, but also women and children die in the southern Arizona desert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Handing water to a man dieng of thirst should not be a crime. It isn't And I agree about the employers...as well as the govt officials that excuse it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 The criminals and the crime is in the large and medium companies who employ these folks illegally. No jobs, no people coming or staying here. Agreed, if there was no work then they wouldn't be coming, but since so many regularly employ illegals then they do come, and eagerly so, by any means they can find, and when people are in such a desperate situation they become a very vulnerable people, and indeed they find themselves truly on the margins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 He may not have been charged but people would still say that he was aiding their illegal activities, much like what was said earlier in this thread.:secret: He wasn't charged here either - at least not with an immigration crime. He was convicted of littering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Handing water to a man dying of thirst should not be a crime.There's the rub. No one was handing anything. It was left lying around the desert. Thus the littering violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 :secret: He wasn't charged here either - at least not with an immigration crime. He was convicted of littering. Ahh, but why was he charged with it in the first place? The prosecution was pushed because of those wanting to stop him from giving water to the people crossing the desert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 There's the rub. No one was handing anything. It was left lying around the desert. Thus the littering violation. And as we all know, plastic bottles are worse for the environment then dead bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 And you are making an illogical leap to say that illegally transporting someone across the border is the same as leaving a bottle of water in the desert in case someone passes by. Am I? People here are equating opposition to leaving water to denying a person dying of thirst....Which is the bigger reach? How fine is your line between compassion and aiding and abetting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 14, 2009 Author Share Posted August 14, 2009 People here are equating opposition to leaving water to denying a person dying of thirst....Which is the bigger reach? Considering that the people are actually dying of thirst... Oh and for the record I never said that any who aren't leaving water are denying people water. If an illegal was getting water from a fountain and someone pushed them away from it then yes, but that certainly doesn't apply here. As such its not really fair to use someone else's false logic on my argument. How fine is your line between compassion and aiding and abetting? Its thicker than you seem to think I'm drawing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 People here are equating opposition to leaving water to denying a person dying of thirst....Which is the bigger reach? I see no reach there at all. Where is the reach? You know where they come through, you know where they have died, you put water there. Where is the reach? because you don't see it, it doesn't count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 And as we all know, plastic bottles are worse for the environment then dead bodies.I, personally, recycle all of my dead bodies, so I would not know. I do know that if I litter, I risk getting a ticket, despite my higher morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaxBuddy21 Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Ok here is a question for those who do not think this was a crime. If a serial killer comes to your house looking for refuge from the law knowing he will get the death penalty for what he has done, does your compassion say to hide him because he will die otherwise? Or if you are a doctor and someone comes to your house in the middle of the night after committing a crime and running from the law with a broken leg, do you fix the leg and let him go? See if I came across someone in the desert that was dying of thirst and I knew they were an illegal immigrant, I would most certainly give them water. But after, I would alert the authorities and have him sent back home. That is different than leaving a trail of water bottles through the desert. Helping a single person in need when you come across them is compassion. Reporting them to the authorities is your duty as a law abiding citizen. Leaving supplies for criminals is aiding and abetting and you should be prosecuted as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.