MA declares a State of Emergency because of too many migrants

[Adhdferret]

- There was a time when people from South of our border were literally shoving their babies and young children across our border in the hopes that, 'at least my children will grow-up having a better life than I can give them', and then just walking off leaving them. Others came unaccompanied as part of a larger caravan of immigrants.
- The 'Dream Act' (later to become the 'DACA Act') tried/tries to solve the problem of what to do with the babies and other underage unaccompanied children that were in our country illegally. It would not have been morally right to just push them back across the border where a magnitude of child rapists, child trafficers, and drug pushers were just waiting outside our border to pounce on these new victims.
- It's not perfect but what the 'Act' does is to open a path for these children to eventually become American citizens provided they meet the requirements, namely to get a college degree or serve honorably in our military, don't break our laws, maintain good moral character, etc.
- We made a pact that if they did what they were required to do then we would hold up our end of the deal and grant them citizenship. We, as a Nation need to keep our promises. For those 'kids' that didn't comply with the rules of the 'Act', they need to be treated like any other illegal foreigner and booted out of our country just as soon as they reach adulthood.

Did your kids serve in the military, never get in trouble, go to college?

I got in trouble, never went to college either. That mean I am less of an American than say someone who did do your honey do list?

 

[Seadog]

You brought up some great points...I got one since you mentioned the amendments.

Right to bear arms....should someone like John Podesta, or anyone else that could afford it a nuclear weapon?

It is a means of defense...how about this one if that is too crazy.

Do you agree with the limitations of say my ability to purchase an automatic weapon?

OK, I’ll play your game.

Atomic or nuclear bombs? They have never been a privately owned item. These nation killers have been commissioned, and made explicitly for the government by the government. Can’t say there’s been a time that I’ve known anyone except for Uncle Sam or communist regimes in possession of them. They are an interesting deterrent. Do I think anyone person should have an atomic bomb that has a kill radius of 20-100 miles x2 with the fallout in miles or more? Not liking the idea.

John podesta? A man in charge of billions of dollars in money laundering and BS, green energy? Not a fan. He should already be in jail like along with Fauci.

Automatic weapons? Why that? Americans can still go out and buy automatic weapons. They’re just expensive as all get out and take about a year to take possession of. So technically they’re not illegal. You just have to be rich. Should it be just for an exclusive rich club? I don’t think so. It be nice to able to buy modern full autos other than old antiques. I don’t care who has them as long as they’re not being used in the commission of a crime.

The government has the power, not the authority to limit what people have. The second amendments last sentence clearly says shall not be infringed. The first 10 amendments are not restrictions on the people, it is limitations and restrictions on the government. The 2A says “shall”, that is a command word. It doesn’t say “should” which is a suggestion or recommendation. The government shall not infringe. Yet it does.

 

[Adhdferret]

OK, I’ll play your game.

Atomic or nuclear bombs? They have never been a privately owned item. These nation killers have been commissioned, and made explicitly for the government by the government. Can’t say there’s been a time that I’ve known anyone except for Uncle Sam or communist regimes in possession of them. They are an interesting deterrent. Do I think anyone person should have an atomic bomb that has a kill radius of 20-100 miles x2 with the fallout in miles or more? Not liking the idea.

John podesta? A man in charge of billions of dollars in money laundering and BS, green energy? Not a fan. He should already be in jail like along with Fauci.

Automatic weapons? Why that? Americans can still go out and buy automatic weapons. They’re just expensive as all get out and take about a year to take possession of. So technically they’re not illegal. You just have to be rich. Should it be just for an exclusive rich club? I don’t think so. It be nice to able to buy modern full autos other than old antiques. I don’t care who has them as long as they’re not being used in the commission of a crime.

The government has the power, not the authority to limit what people have. The second amendments last sentence clearly says shall not be infringed. The first 10 amendments are not restrictions on the people, it is limitations and restrictions on the government. The 2A says “shall”, that is a command word. It doesn’t say “should” which is a suggestion or recommendation. The government shall not infringe. Yet it does.

I would buy you a beer!

A true American far as I can tell.

I used the example of a nuclear weapon because it showed me where you stand with the person I listed, far as by government and for government, eh...I know we have lost some over the years, and if USA did....many others have as well.

I am positive some are held outside of government control. However "Shall" keep and bear arms.

It is the same with automatic weapons, you will freely allow ATF into your life, and your home?

As I understand it is that they can inspect the storage at any time for any reason....the wording is similar with some states and home schooling for specific districts that they can observe the learning environment.

The fact that you know it is what we as the people say they can't take, as to them saying what they will allow warms my heart.

You would be amazed how many do NOT know that, your age, mine, and most Gen Z! This is from educational institutions as I call them....it isnt school.

Each of my sons friends that I get permission to take them to a range....this is the lesson they get before we go, I tell them about what the 1st all thr way to the 10th really mean.

I have them disassemble each weapon, tell me each part, then put it back together and explain its function. Only then will I take them, upon me be satisfied they understand it is a tool, and that they respect it as a tool.

Thank you for being how you are, it is just so rare that I meet someone that put it like you did.

 

[Seadog]

I would buy you a beer!

A true American far as I can tell.

I used the example of a nuclear weapon because it showed me where you stand with the person I listed, far as by government and for government, eh...I know we have lost some over the years, and if USA did....many others have as well.

I am positive some are held outside of government control. However "Shall" keep and bear arms.

It is the same with automatic weapons, you will freely allow ATF into your life, and your home?

As I understand it is that they can inspect the storage at any time for any reason....the wording is similar with some states and home schooling for specific districts that they can observe the learning environment.

The fact that you know it is what we as the people say they can't take, as to them saying what they will allow warms my heart.

You would be amazed how many do NOT know that, your age, mine, and most Gen Z! This is from educational institutions as I call them....it isnt school.

Each of my sons friends that I get permission to take them to a range....this is the lesson they get before we go, I tell them about what the 1st all thr way to the 10th really mean.

I have them disassemble each weapon, tell me each part, then put it back together and explain its function. Only then will I take them, upon me be satisfied they understand it is a tool, and that they respect it as a tool.

Thank you for being how you are, it is just so rare that I meet someone that put it like you did.

The federalist papers explain clearly what an Americans birthright is when it comes to the 2A. (“Every destructive device of the soldier”) At that time it wasn’t just what one could hold, like swords, tomahawks, pistol or rifle. It also included grenades, mortars, cannons and warships bristling with lots of cannons.

And Beijing Biden said Americans never could own cannons. Dummy doesn’t know his history.

 

[Adhdferret]

The federalist papers explain clearly what an Americans birthright is when it comes to the 2A. (“Every destructive device of the soldier”) At that time it wasn’t just what one could hold, like swords, tomahawks, pistol or rifle. It also included grenades, mortars, cannons and warships bristling with lots of cannons.

And Beijing Biden said Americans never could own cannons. Dummy doesn’t know his history.

Ex navy myself, I spent many times after my watch at 600ft in the pacific ocean reading all I could to grasp why it was that I was in that sardine can under the waves.

Problem now, that I see in the world around me, isn't that people don't know what you said, it is that they don't want to know it.

Our society is built upon distraction and substitution. You see the parks after these rallys for Biden, or Trump, and pretty much anyone.

If it is boomers and Gen x chances are it will be left as good as it was when people got there, if it is Millennials or gen z, looks like a disaster.

You ever go on reddit? Stupid question I know, but think of it as a museum of poop, you can look just don't touch, and by touch I mean interact with them.

A sub called antiwork is where you should start.

Some of them...they make good arguments, others are just lazy breeders. However it gives you some insight as to the world as it is.

 

[Chuckie]

Sure I’m against illegal, alien anchor babies.

When we look at the 13th, 14th, 15th amendments, the reconstruction amendments act. They served as very special and precise protections for freed slaves that were not considered human or considered as citizens. They went into affect because Democrats were still trying to put the blacks back into indentured servitude and oppress them. It’s kind of funny how this has been bastardized by the Democrats and the left in this time period to mean any illegal can come across our borders, squat, and pop out a baby rewarding it with citizenship and the parent or parents with American taxpayer money to take care of it.

Amendment 13 section 1 was wrote specifically for freed blacks and their offspring. It was not intended for people in the future coming here illegally. I don’t know of any law that rewards anybody for breaking it, except for Democrats in this one bastardized amendment.

13 amendment section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and (“subject to the jurisdiction thereof”), are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

Granted, this isn’t all of it, just the pertinent opening part. Where does it say illegal criminal aliens pushing out babies, breaking the law become citizens?

This part of the amendment has been bastardized and abuse so much that people take it for what democrats say. That it gives citizenship to an illegal aliens baby. They are not citizens so they are not afforded those rights of citizenship, yet the liberal progressive government has been claiming this for a long time and no one has wanted to challenge it. Part of the subject..

If this was for everyone all around the world then why did the government explicitly exclude the Indians until the 1930s? Why did the government exclude a few foreign ambassadors that had children while residing in the United States? Why exclude these few minute categories, but leave it wide open to everybody else in the entire world?

Because they didn’t. A big lie pushed by Democrats for the longest damn time. Oh, they’re just children, think of the children, the poor children. All heart strings, sympathy and BS over something that’s never been, yet has been accepted because the government has had the power, but never the authority. That’s why we’re in this boondoggle.

So if you’re saying, you want clarification, that illegals and their anchor babies aren’t citizens? Sure I’d be cool with that. If we could get this passed Democrats would be almost as mad as when Republicans freed and took their slaves away.

Before you get too anti-Democrat with your replies you need to read about the history of the 'Dream Act' and its associated versions, which were all pretty much bi-partisan endeavors.

 

[Chuckie]

Did your kids serve in the military, never get in trouble, go to college?

I got in trouble, never went to college either. That mean I am less of an American than say someone who did do your honey do list?

- I don't believe that the requirements of the 'Dream Act' and its' associated versions were worded specifically to keep less-than-perfect kids from ever being allowed to become US citizens, but it was/is within reason to try and weed-out those that may have had/have had a high propensity of becoming just a drain on our civil resources or those that seemed to have a tendency towards anti-social behavior.
- Setting a requirement for attending college or military duty was one reasonable way to [hopefully] ensure that the young immigrant adult had at least some 'drive' to improve themselves as well as making a contribution for the good of their new country, and in the process, also acquire a minimum amount of English language skill.

 

[Judi]

Ok, fair enough on that assessment of citizenship.

How about this one then? A child that is raised from say infant to adult in usa. One that speaks both English, and Spanish, never been to Mexico either?

Went to American schools, American parks, ate American food and said the pledge of allegiance, but their parents were border jumpers, and never got that kid a ss#

Are they an American? Should they go back to a nation they have never known, a culture they have never been part of?

Should we as Americans support them being thrown out?

blame the parents for bringing them over....not me...












........................................Now go get your shine box...

 

[Adhdferret]

blame the parents for bringing them over....not me...












........................................Now go get your shine box...

I am not blaming you, I am attempting to chip away that blackness surrounding your withered compassion.

It's funny to me how you used a reference on a movie about how a criminal enterprise was used to inflict untold damage and destruction to the American way of life.

 

[Adhdferret]

- I don't believe that the requirements of the 'Dream Act' and its' associated versions were worded specifically to keep less-than-perfect kids from ever being allowed to become US citizens, but it was/is within reason to try and weed-out those that may have had/have had a high propensity of becoming just a drain on our civil resources or those that seemed to have a tendency towards anti-social behavior.
- Setting a requirement for attending college or military duty was one reasonable way to [hopefully] ensure that the young immigrant adult had at least some 'drive' to improve themselves as well as making a contribution for the good of their new country, and in the process, also acquire a minimum amount of English language skill.

In my 44y walking this planet I have seen the places where these migrants come from, seen how horrid conditions they have to endure.

Thing is that more often than not they realize how fortunate they are to be here, their parents demand they treasure it, and when they dont...I can assure you it is because of the absence of a male role model.

Far as learning American language, you do know that isn't required to make it here? USA has never had an official language per say.