WTF!!! I wish I was illegal

Off Topic
16yFollow

WTF!!! I wish I was illegal

Nick J.
Residential Real Estate Broker · Payson, AZ · Member since 2009 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes

So as many know the SB1070 was to go into place at 12:01am tonight but the judge just ruled blocking the KEY components of the law.

Law enforcement are not required to make a reasonable attempt to determine immigration status.

illegal immigrants DON'T have to APPLY or CARRY legal document/ I.D because its not a crime!!! I'm required by LAW to carry my identification and I'm a LEGAL citizen.

Its also ok now for the crowd of illegal immigrants to stand out in front of Home Depot and solicit for work. If I were to seek employment, I must provide identification.

Here's whats funny, the judge is allowing some of the silly stuff like making it a dumb@ss misdemeanor for harboring/transporting illegals. This means that I can become a coyote and charge $1500 a head for transporting them and if I get caught, get a slap on the wrist :roll:

Seriously, whats going to be left of our great nation if illegal immigration isn't dealt with and enforced.

2Reply
204 views

Most Popular Reply

Timothy W.
Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
16y
Originally posted by Tracey Bowers:
One thing I know for certain is most contractors beat their wives. Not you Bill, but everytime I have ever listed a job on craigslist and looked up prospects, that ole domestic abuse charge always pops up.


This is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard on this forum, and I've heard some severe loads of crap here. You need to think before you open your mouth next time given the number of contractors turned investors on this forum.
6Reply
See this reply in the discussion

100 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Ryan A.
    Rental Property Investor · Lisbon, CT · Member since 2008 · 120 posts · 29 votes
    16y

    Totally true. When they are legal.

    I'm sorry - I didn't read every word of the last few posts because it makes my eyes hurt, so somebody may already have said this - but....

    Vikram - your theory about cheap labor and how 'more workers does not mean less jobs' may hold water when you talk about legal cheap labor.

    But these illegals are not integrated, don't pay taxes, aren't putting back into the economy, and are probably sending the money back to their own country. If they truly intended to integrate and participate in our economy they would be working towards residency or citizenship and would at least have a work visa.

    It seems the debate keeps going back and forth between cheap labor and illegal immigrants and there is a very distinct difference to keep in mind.

    0Reply
  • Marc Freislinger
    Flipper · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 973 posts · 679 votes
    16y

    How much of that criminal immigration and drug trafficing would stop if the war on drugs was ended, and marijuanna and cocain legalized and taxed?

    2Reply
  • Ryan A.
    Rental Property Investor · Lisbon, CT · Member since 2008 · 120 posts · 29 votes
    16y

    Ahhh the answer: legalization.

    Stop trying to enforce laws that don't stop the activity - they're just going to do it anyway. Besides if everyone is doing it, it can't be that bad.

    I mean who makes these stupid laws anyway? Its ridiculous that mind-altering narcotics can't be used freely.

    Its silly to say you can't come and live in our country just because you don't want to abide by our laws. Laws are for idiots.

    0Reply
  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 18k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    16y
    Originally posted by Ryan A.:
    Its ridiculous that mind-altering narcotics can't be used freely.


    I assume that was sarcasm...

    Does that mean you think alcohol should be banned as well?

    If not, what's the difference?

    And if it's the government's job to keep us from putting bad stuff in our bodies, should they be allowed to tell us what foods we can and can't eat? Should they be allowed to force us to exercise, too?
    Podcast Guest on Show The Truth About Real Estate Investing in 2024 (What Investors NEED to Know)
    4Reply
  • Marc Freislinger
    Flipper · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 973 posts · 679 votes
    16y

    I personally think that "Stop trying to enforce laws that don't stop the activity - they're just going to do it anyway" is a great argument. People are going to do it anyway, and right now, that money is going to Middle America instead of staying here. There are millions of dollars wasted every year arresting people for smoking something that is only illegal because of a smear campaign years ago.

    According to the government, marijuana and cocaine are in the same drug category. Studies have proven that the long term effects (and short term effects, and detox effects) of marijuana are far less harmful than alcohol. Why are we spending millions to get rid of a harmless plant that we could make millions selling? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Hemp can be used as a cheap alternative for clothing, paper, dye, jewelery, clean burning fossil fuel, and probably hundreds of other uses.

    1Reply
  • Mike McKinzie
    Investor · Westminster, CO · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    16y
    Originally posted by J Scott:
    And if it's the government's job to keep us from putting bad stuff in our bodies, should they be allowed to tell us what foods we can and can't eat? Should they be allowed to force us to exercise, too?

    Yes and No. The first problem here is "Who is going to define what is BAD STUFF?" Our government has the FDA that has to approve just about anything that we put into our bodies. Next, just about everything we put into our bodies has positive and negative effects. History has shown that the FDA prefers to error on the "disapproving" of substances so as to keep American Safe. Thus we have many people going to foreign countries to get treatment for diseases.

    This is not an "all or nothing" argument. I can walk out in the woods and eat some wild berries, and there is nothing anyone can do about it. But if I pick those berries to sell them, then there are several government agencies that get involved. Thus my answer 'Yes and No.'

    There is a myriad of substances and chemicals in the world that most folks have no idea what it is. I am grateful that there are laws that involve the labeling, the preparing, the growing, the care and handling of products I purchase. I believe it is the government's job to make sure what I purchase is safe.

    But then comes the gray area of "are pot, hemp, cocaine, etc.." safe? I think if the FDA regulated it, it would be about as safe as possible. If these types of drugs were legalized, the money would shift from the Drug Lords to the Rehab Lords. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? There would probably be less violence. But more social issues. I don't know what the answer here is. A very complicated issue.

    1Reply
  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 18k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    16y
    Originally posted by Mike M:
    But then comes the gray area of "are pot, hemp, cocaine, etc.." safe?


    First, let me say that I think we agree 99% on this overall issue (maybe 100%), so I'm not arguing with anything you said...

    Second, let me say that I've never used any illegal drugs, so I really have no vested interest in the outcome of any legalization. That said, I'm very Conservative when it comes to government interference into personal lifestyle choices.

    Certainly, I think the government has a right to control potentially harmful substances to some degree and also has the right to ban the legal use of substances that are clearly dangerous.

    My issue is the lack of consistency.

    For example, in my opinion, cigarettes, alcohol, sugar and trans fats probably have a much greater health risk (both short-term and long-term) than marijuana. But, if you were to suggest making those things illegal to use in the privacy of your own home, people would riot in the street and say that the government was interfering where it shouldn't be.

    That inconsistency is troubling, and the fact that the government won't even bother to address it is even more troubling.


    If these types of drugs were legalized, the money would shift from the Drug Lords to the Rehab Lords. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? There would probably be less violence. But more social issues.

    '
    Again, alcohol is a great analogy here. If you ban other "mind altering drugs," why isn't alcohol on the list?

    Unfortunately, the answer boils down to the fact that alcohol (and cigarettes and sugar and trans fats) have much better -- AND RICHER -- lobbying organizations behind them.
    Podcast Guest on Show The Truth About Real Estate Investing in 2024 (What Investors NEED to Know)
    2Reply
  • Bryan Hancock
    Investor · Round Rock, TX · Member since 2010 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    16y

    Is this thread about immigration or drugs? I am confused ;-)

    1Reply
  • Marc Freislinger
    Flipper · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 973 posts · 679 votes
    16y
    Originally posted by Mike M:

    But then comes the gray area of "are pot, hemp, cocaine, etc.." safe? I think if the FDA regulated it, it would be about as safe as possible. If these types of drugs were legalized, the money would shift from the Drug Lords to the Rehab Lords. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? There would probably be less violence. But more social issues. I don't know what the answer here is. A very complicated issue.



    I once saw a debate on TV between a anti-legalization activist in CA, and a NORML representative. The anti-legalization activist made a comment about all the money spent on rehab. When asked how many of the residents of Rehab clinics were in for pot, she was stumped. The statistics that the NORML gentleman had showed that it was very, very low. I won't insult your intelligence and pretend to remember the exact stats, but by far the majority of people in rehab are in for alcohol.

    Having tried all three of the drugs mentioned, (yes, I went to college) I can't fathom putting pot and cocaine or even pot and alcohol in the same category. I think we'd have far less social problems. You don't get stoned and beat your wife, or get stoned and get in a bar fight. Drinking is just the legal alternative. The reason I mentioned that cocaine and marijuana were in the same catagory was basically J Scott's point: that the government can't figure **** out. The regulations are implemented inconsistently.

    The repeal of the 18th Amendment (prohibition of alcohol) has already shown how crime can be reduced simply by regulating, and how tax revenue can be greatly increased.

    Sorry for being off-topic Bryan.
    0Reply
  • Ryan A.
    Rental Property Investor · Lisbon, CT · Member since 2008 · 120 posts · 29 votes
    16y
    Originally posted by J Scott:
    Does that mean you think alcohol should be banned as well?
    If not, what's the difference?

    Good point however alcohol is not a narcotic and can be used responsibly with little side effect (beer after work anyone?). And no alcohol can't be used 'freely'. Ever been cutoff at a bar? How about drinking an ice cold beer at the beach? Not in my town. Walking down the street? Nope. There are laws concerning alcohol also and they weren't made for the responsible people. Don't get me wrong there are plenty of things wrong with our legal system but I still think there is logic behind these laws.

    Originally posted by J Scott:

    And if it's the government's job to keep us from putting bad stuff in our bodies, should they be allowed to tell us what foods we can and can't eat? Should they be allowed to force us to exercise, too?

    I disagree that they have a job of controlling our activities. No disrespect J Scott (and I do respect you) but we typically hear that argument from the lower class - as if "the Man wanna keep us down". Remember these laws are all reactive. Bad things happen as a result of people abusing their freedoms, then people want government to enact change so bad things don't happen. So government answers the call of the people and creates the laws. Its a balancing act.

    Bottom line - there has to be structure, limits, rules etc while still enjoying reasonable personal freedom (that doesn't harm others, ourselves). This country wouldn't be what it is if it weren't for this blend.

    I think the same about immigration. We should seriously consider the state of economy/illegal activity/trafficking were there no border regulation. I can't imagine it would be pretty. Maybe some think there is nothing here to protect?

    About aliens - Of course they can come and work. Just do it legally.

    0Reply
  • Ryan A.
    Rental Property Investor · Lisbon, CT · Member since 2008 · 120 posts · 29 votes
    16y
    Originally posted by J Scott:

    Unfortunately, the answer boils down to the fact that alcohol (and cigarettes and sugar and trans fats) have much better -- AND RICHER -- lobbying organizations behind them.


    I share that sentiment. There are definitely powers that encourage government on many issues. I quit smoking March of this year. I am amazed that cigarettes have not been banned due to the complete awareness of their effects. It is one of the most deadly habits of Americans. There is no safe way to enjoy/smoke a cigarette.

    So instead of helping nicotine addicts, they continue to allow cigarettes but just tax the sh*t out of them. LOL. Like adding insult to injury.

    0Reply
  • Marc Freislinger
    Flipper · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 973 posts · 679 votes
    16y
    Originally posted by Ryan A.:


    Good point however alcohol is not a narcotic and can be used responsibly with little side effect (beer after work anyone?). And no alcohol can't be used 'freely'. Ever been cutoff at a bar? How about drinking an ice cold beer at the beach? Not in my town. Walking down the street? Nope. There are laws concerning alcohol also and they weren't made for the responsible people.


    Can you find a source that marijuanna can't be used responsibly with little side effect? How about a source that says marijuanna withdrawl may include seisures or death? Because I can find one for alcohol.

    No offence intended, but there's no way to argue that one should be legal and not the other. Legalization and regulation will be the only way to control who gets it, where they use it, and who gets the proceeds from it.

    1Reply
  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 18k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    16y
    Originally posted by Marc Freislinger:
    Can you find a source that marijuanna can't be used responsibly with little side effect? How about a source that says marijuanna withdrawl may include seisures or death? Because I can find one for alcohol.


    Damn, I hate when political threads get resurrected...let them rest in peace! :)

    Anyway, you can easily convince me that certain drugs should be more controlled than others, assuming the stories I hear about their addictiveness are true.

    But, I've yet to hear a reasonable explanation for why alcohol should be legal but pot should be illegal. Can someone shed any light on this for me? What am I missing?

    Podcast Guest on Show The Truth About Real Estate Investing in 2024 (What Investors NEED to Know)
    0Reply
  • Mark N.A
    Real Estate Investor · North Carolina · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 483 votes
    16y

    Are there any studies out there estimating what sort of TAX REVENUES would be generated with drug legalization? It would be one vast VAST (Value Added SIN Tax).

    0Reply
  • Marc Freislinger
    Flipper · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 973 posts · 679 votes
    16y

    im only on my mobile right now, but I'm sure CA has done the study. Check the NORML website or LEAP website. Ill try to remember to look it up when I get on a desktop.

    0Reply
  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 18k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    16y
    Originally posted by NC Mark:
    Are there any studies out there estimating what sort of TAX REVENUES would be generated with drug legalization? It would be one vast VAST (Value Added SIN Tax).


    I've never seen any official studies (and I know virtually nothing about the subject), but I can Google with the best of them... :)

    Here is one take (the pro side):

    http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2009/03/legalize_mariju.html

    The professor estimates tax revenue of $40-100B.

    Of course, others disagree (including the guy who wrote the con side), so who knows...

    One thing that most people agree on is that it will reduce the illegal trade, which will reduce violence, including border violence.

    This Harvard Economist says that legalizing every drug will be much more effective when it comes to reducing violence, illegal trade and increase tax revenue:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-vlBHqkVDU

    Podcast Guest on Show The Truth About Real Estate Investing in 2024 (What Investors NEED to Know)
    2Reply
  • Mark N.A
    Real Estate Investor · North Carolina · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 483 votes
    16y

    Thanks for posting the interesting links, J Scott. It's obviously a hot-button topic among both the informed and mal-informed as witnessed by some of the comments following the Business Week article.

    Not heavily touched-upon is that besides the estimated $40-100B tax revenues would be the savings generated among police agencies, courts, prisons and so forth.

    Here where I'm at in NC it has traditionally been a busy moonshine area. Now the usual suspects have turned to either growing cannabis or off-loading various substances along the coast.

    Interesting but sad anecdote: during WW2 there were some local clans that traded bread and other commodities to German submariners for gold.

    How do you legislate morality?

    0Reply
  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 18k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    16y
    Originally posted by NC Mark:
    How do you legislate morality?

    The better question is why would you try?

    Supposedly this is a free country...as long as you're not infringing upon the rights of others (including putting them at risk), I'd think you should be able to pretty much do as you please...

    Podcast Guest on Show The Truth About Real Estate Investing in 2024 (What Investors NEED to Know)
    2Reply
  • Mark N.A
    Real Estate Investor · North Carolina · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 483 votes
    16y

    >> The truth is all laws legislate morality (even speed limits imply a moral right to life). And everyone in politics — conservatives, libertarians and liberals — is trying to legislate morality. The only question is: “Whose morality should be legislated?†<<

    -- Frank Turek, LEGISLATING MORALITY: WHY EVERYONE IS DOING IT

    0Reply
  • Tadd Bennett
    Investor · El Centro, CA · Member since 2010 · 44 posts · 34 votes
    16y

    http://cis.org/Everify

    http://www.endillegalimmigration.com/Illegal_Immigration_Facts_&_Statistics/index.shtml

    I am not implying anything other than some reading i came across. I myself am half Mexican and have a lot of family living in Mexico but facts are facts.

    0Reply
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.
Log InJoin for Free