Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:21:00 AM (view original):
That this needs to be explained and that an American citizen is talking about getting rid of due process rights is astounding to me

Due process rights for illegal aliens that are caught red handed. Absolutely.

A guy is shooting at a police officer, the officer fires back and kills him. Sorry, didn't have time for due process, as he was getting shot at. Same here. If these persons are caught red handed, its time to send them back. Sometimes commons sense needs to prevail.

I am glad your are astounded. I too am astounded by your narrow mindedness.

The officer is defending himself, not administering punishment.

If a police officer witnesses a murder and the suspect surrenders, the police officer is not empowered to kill the suspect.

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:21:00 AM (view original):
That this needs to be explained and that an American citizen is talking about getting rid of due process rights is astounding to me

Due process rights for illegal aliens that are caught red handed. Absolutely.

A guy is shooting at a police officer, the officer fires back and kills him. Sorry, didn't have time for due process, as he was getting shot at. Same here. If these persons are caught red handed, its time to send them back. Sometimes commons sense needs to prevail.

I am glad your are astounded. I too am astounded by your narrow mindedness.

Can you trust every border cop to be law abiding? What if they decide to deport the ex-girlfriend. There are a zillion things that can go wrong in your scenario. They could snatch you up and send your *** back to Russia. Yeah, we caught him red handed...don't listen to his protestations. Red handed I say!

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:25:00 AM (view original):
We should have just empowered George Zimmerman to be the neighborhood cop in Florida, let him be judge, jury and executioner. What could go wrong?

I said border agents. Trained paramilitary group. I didn't say private citizens. False equivalency. Which is the main weapon of the Left and the Right.

Sorry, won't work here. Try again.

You mean a group already set up even more to abuse their power.


Gotcha.


I don't have time for this nonsense. So ridiculous.

If you don't like the constitution, I hear mother Russia is a great place.

Dumb*ss b_l arguing that pursuing and hopefully catching the "alleged" criminal is not part of Due Process - classic. Only those who walk right into the Police Station are part of it in his World, I guess. What will this imbecile argue next, that people should be able to pick their gender every day, or maybe that left-handed 2nd basemen have an advantage, or that polls are gospel? (The list goes on and on . . . and on . . . and on.)

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:28:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:21:00 AM (view original):
That this needs to be explained and that an American citizen is talking about getting rid of due process rights is astounding to me

Due process rights for illegal aliens that are caught red handed. Absolutely.

A guy is shooting at a police officer, the officer fires back and kills him. Sorry, didn't have time for due process, as he was getting shot at. Same here. If these persons are caught red handed, its time to send them back. Sometimes commons sense needs to prevail.

I am glad your are astounded. I too am astounded by your narrow mindedness.

Can you trust every border cop to be law abiding? What if they decide to deport the ex-girlfriend. There are a zillion things that can go wrong in your scenario. They could snatch you up and send your *** back to Russia. Yeah, we caught him red handed...don't listen to his protestations. Red handed I say!

Did you take hypothetical scenario lessons from bad luck? LOL.

Police officers have the right now to pull you over. They can give you a speeding ticket, arrest you or give you a warning. They likely won't shoot you. Same here. You have to trust the officers. Why would they send me back to Russia as I am crossing the border of Mex and US? That doesn't make any sense.

But nice try.

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:25:00 AM (view original):
We should have just empowered George Zimmerman to be the neighborhood cop in Florida, let him be judge, jury and executioner. What could go wrong?

I said border agents. Trained paramilitary group. I didn't say private citizens. False equivalency. Which is the main weapon of the Left and the Right.

Sorry, won't work here. Try again.

You mean a group already set up even more to abuse their power.


Gotcha.


I don't have time for this nonsense. So ridiculous.

If you don't like the constitution, I hear mother Russia is a great place.

Abuses their power how? What are you talking about?

Do police officers abuse their power when bad guys shoot at them and they shoot back?

Yes or No?

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 9:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
Seriously, how are you so freakin' stupid about so many things? "Due process", by whatever definition you want to use, involves someone or some group determining if some other person or group has done something illegal. Pursuing and catching that person or group is most certainly a vital step in that. You want to have Judges and juries sit in a courtroom with no defendant. Never mind, you're dumb enough to say yes.

I almost never open your posts because 99% of the time they are unintelligible rants of an idiot and, while this one is also the rant of an idiot, it’s hilarious. So, here we go.

CCCP is arguing that due process isn’t working so it needs to be eliminated when dealing with illegal immigrants.

He also cited the BP not pursuing the coyote as a failure of due process.

So...um...which is it? Should we give the coyote due process and bring him to trial? Or should we let him go without pursuit?

bad luck, wait. What exactly is your operational definition of "due process" please?

I like this one: "Fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement".

Thanks

Due process is a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.

Does that apply to citizens or to anyone who steps on US soil?

How is sending an illegal back denying them life, liberty or property?

1. They don't own property in the US
2. We aren't taking their life
3. Liberty is earned not given just by stepping on US soil. They are free to go back to their country and reapply to enter the US legally.

So by your own operational definition we are not denying these persons their due process.

Anyone on US soil. Due process is the only process available to determine if someone doesn’t belong. If we deport people who do belong here, we are depriving them of liberty.

OK, what sort of due process do you want to give to people who are obviously here as illegals?

• Do we provide them attorneys
• Do we provide them food and shelter and medicine
• What time frame do we allocate per case

How do you intend to pay for all this? US tax $$?

Would it not make more sense to increase border security and to provide an expedited level of due process by empowering our border agents?

I know it is difficult for you to use logic. I do. But can you at least sort off see where I am coming from here?

Vegas odds state you won't answer my questions. LOL

The flaw in your argument is that there is no such thing as obviously. We can deny entry to people outside. Once they are here, they get due process.

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 10:31:00 AM (view original):
Dumb*ss b_l arguing that pursuing and hopefully catching the "alleged" criminal is not part of Due Process - classic. Only those who walk right into the Police Station are part of it in his World, I guess. What will this imbecile argue next, that people should be able to pick their gender every day, or maybe that left-handed 2nd basemen have an advantage, or that polls are gospel? (The list goes on and on . . . and on . . . and on.)

He will argue that people should be able to pick their age. I feel like I am 65 so give me the Senior Citizens discount....

If you can’t afford to provide due process to all of the people you arrest, the answer isn’t skip due process for some of them. The answer is arrest less people until you can afford to provide due process to all.

You can't possibly be this naive.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 9:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
Seriously, how are you so freakin' stupid about so many things? "Due process", by whatever definition you want to use, involves someone or some group determining if some other person or group has done something illegal. Pursuing and catching that person or group is most certainly a vital step in that. You want to have Judges and juries sit in a courtroom with no defendant. Never mind, you're dumb enough to say yes.

I almost never open your posts because 99% of the time they are unintelligible rants of an idiot and, while this one is also the rant of an idiot, it’s hilarious. So, here we go.

CCCP is arguing that due process isn’t working so it needs to be eliminated when dealing with illegal immigrants.

He also cited the BP not pursuing the coyote as a failure of due process.

So...um...which is it? Should we give the coyote due process and bring him to trial? Or should we let him go without pursuit?

bad luck, wait. What exactly is your operational definition of "due process" please?

I like this one: "Fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement".

Thanks

Due process is a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.

Does that apply to citizens or to anyone who steps on US soil?

How is sending an illegal back denying them life, liberty or property?

1. They don't own property in the US
2. We aren't taking their life
3. Liberty is earned not given just by stepping on US soil. They are free to go back to their country and reapply to enter the US legally.

So by your own operational definition we are not denying these persons their due process.

Anyone on US soil. Due process is the only process available to determine if someone doesn’t belong. If we deport people who do belong here, we are depriving them of liberty.

OK, what sort of due process do you want to give to people who are obviously here as illegals?

• Do we provide them attorneys
• Do we provide them food and shelter and medicine
• What time frame do we allocate per case

How do you intend to pay for all this? US tax $$?

Would it not make more sense to increase border security and to provide an expedited level of due process by empowering our border agents?

I know it is difficult for you to use logic. I do. But can you at least sort off see where I am coming from here?

Vegas odds state you won't answer my questions. LOL

The flaw in your argument is that there is no such thing as obviously. We can deny entry to people outside. Once they are here, they get due process.

When someone shoots at a police officer and he shoots back, he can't argue that obviously the bad guy was trying to kill him? Again, please use some common sense. He argues that he was defending himself.

In this case they stepped into our country. I questioned them, on video. I then sent them back.

Not sure what you don't understand here.

And you didn't answer my questions (as I knew you would not)

Who pays for this "due process"?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:35:00 AM (view original):
If you can’t afford to provide due process to all of the people you arrest, the answer isn’t skip due process for some of them. The answer is arrest less people until you can afford to provide due process to all.

It is fewer people and by your definition you want to allow criminals to run amok. OK.....

Who pays for this due process?

Posted by The Taint on 6/26/2018 10:36:00 AM (view original):
You can't possibly be this naive.

I was just thinking the same thing about you. Funny.

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:35:00 AM (view original):
If you can’t afford to provide due process to all of the people you arrest, the answer isn’t skip due process for some of them. The answer is arrest less people until you can afford to provide due process to all.

It is fewer people and by your definition you want to allow criminals to run amok. OK.....

Who pays for this due process?

Then they run amok. As Franklin said, “it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.”

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:35:00 AM (view original):
If you can’t afford to provide due process to all of the people you arrest, the answer isn’t skip due process for some of them. The answer is arrest less people until you can afford to provide due process to all.

It is fewer people and by your definition you want to allow criminals to run amok. OK.....

Who pays for this due process?

He only wants due process for those who turn themselves in, since he claims pursuing "alleged" criminals is NOT part of the process, so it really wouldn't cost much at all. Maybe we could save costs on the Judgement phase too, by only imprisoning those who voluntarily walk-in. As we agreed last week, nobody on this site comes even remotely close to being as off-the-charts stupid as b_l.