Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 12:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 12:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 12:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:56:00 AM (view original):
BTW, the 'defending from someone potentially shooting you' isn't an argument against illegal immigration, it's an argument against everyone. Maybe we should deport Bracco, he could potentially shoot you, CCCP! Maybe we should deport all3! He could potentially cause danger to some of us!

They are citizens and have citizens rights. People who come here illegally do not. Stepping foot on our soil illegally should not give them equal rights to people who are here legally. In my opinion.

The constitution disagrees. Sorry.

Eh? When they wrote it they didn’t foresee the border issue

Actually, unlike things like handguns and abortion, immigration is an issue that has always been around. The founders certainly contemplated it.

You were there?

Were you? You just said they didn’t foresee it.

How could they have? LOL

Because immigration is not a new issue. It literally predates America.

Of course but they did not foresee the political climate. Heck we didn't even own Texas and Cali then. Stop it.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:47:00 AM (view original):
CCCP, if due process goes, what stops the government from arresting you, me, or anyone else without trial?

Strawman. I said give agents more authority at the border only. I never said eliminate due process and certainly not for people here legally. LOL. Listen to the podcast and then talk to me.

When someone is arrested by a border patrol agent, is the person in custody a suspect?

cccp?

Same as someone who shoots someone in front of a police officer.

You tell me.

Yes, the shooter is a suspect.

Is the person under arrest by the border patrol a suspect?

Same was as the shooter is. Suspect in name only but really guilty.

What? No. Not "really guilty." A suspect. Jesus christ. They have not been found guilty yet.

Are you using the letter of the law or logic?

By the letter of the law they are innocent by logic they are guilty. Even you must see that. Right? bad luck?

Not "by logic" they are guilty. They aren't guilty yet.

Can you imagine a scenario where a police officer witnesses person A shoot person B and it turns out it isn't murder?

Of course but they did not foresee the political climate. Heck we didn't even own Texas and Cali then. Stop it.

The political climate of the 1700's was brutal. They included due process for a reason.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:43:00 PM (view original):
Not "by logic" they are guilty. They aren't guilty yet.

Can you imagine a scenario where a police officer witnesses person A shoot person B and it turns out it isn't murder?

It is attempted murder 100%. Murder only the victim dies.

I know you lack logic but try it.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:46:00 PM (view original):

Of course but they did not foresee the political climate. Heck we didn't even own Texas and Cali then. Stop it.

The political climate of the 1700's was brutal. They included due process for a reason.

Again. Were you there? No. So stick to the topic. I understand the slippery slope argument. I do get where you are coming from. I am calling for a radical response to a dangerous issue at the border.

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:43:00 PM (view original):
Not "by logic" they are guilty. They aren't guilty yet.

Can you imagine a scenario where a police officer witnesses person A shoot person B and it turns out it isn't murder?

It is attempted murder 100%. Murder only the victim dies.

I know you lack logic but try it.

So you're really arguing that there is no situation where one person shoots and kills another and it isn't murder?

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:46:00 PM (view original):

Of course but they did not foresee the political climate. Heck we didn't even own Texas and Cali then. Stop it.

The political climate of the 1700's was brutal. They included due process for a reason.

Again. Were you there? No. So stick to the topic. I understand the slippery slope argument. I do get where you are coming from. I am calling for a radical response to a dangerous issue at the border.

You know, they have these things called books. And in some of them, people who were there wrote down stuff about what was going on.

What is dangerous about the border issue?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:43:00 PM (view original):
Not "by logic" they are guilty. They aren't guilty yet.

Can you imagine a scenario where a police officer witnesses person A shoot person B and it turns out it isn't murder?

It is attempted murder 100%. Murder only the victim dies.

I know you lack logic but try it.

So you're really arguing that there is no situation where one person shoots and kills another and it isn't murder?

You mean accidentally? Of course that happens. Are you arguing that people can cross the border into the US by accident? LOL

Are you drunk?

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:43:00 PM (view original):
Not "by logic" they are guilty. They aren't guilty yet.

Can you imagine a scenario where a police officer witnesses person A shoot person B and it turns out it isn't murder?

It is attempted murder 100%. Murder only the victim dies.

I know you lack logic but try it.

So you're really arguing that there is no situation where one person shoots and kills another and it isn't murder?

You mean accidentally? Of course that happens. Are you arguing that people can cross the border into the US by accident? LOL

Are you drunk?

Not necessarily accidentally. I'm asking if there is a situation where someone intentionally shoots another and then, in the course of the investigation and trial, it turns out it wasn't murder.

Regarding immigration, can you imagine a situation where someone crosses the border, is arrested, and then, after the immigration hearing, is allowed to stay?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:43:00 PM (view original):
Not "by logic" they are guilty. They aren't guilty yet.

Can you imagine a scenario where a police officer witnesses person A shoot person B and it turns out it isn't murder?

It is attempted murder 100%. Murder only the victim dies.

I know you lack logic but try it.

So you're really arguing that there is no situation where one person shoots and kills another and it isn't murder?

You mean accidentally? Of course that happens. Are you arguing that people can cross the border into the US by accident? LOL

Are you drunk?

Not necessarily accidentally. I'm asking if there is a situation where someone intentionally shoots another and then, in the course of the investigation and trial, it turns out it wasn't murder.

Regarding immigration, can you imagine a situation where someone crosses the border, is arrested, and then, after the immigration hearing, is allowed to stay?

#1) Possible not probable

#2) See #1.

Possible, not probable. Fine, we can use that for the sake of argument.

If you eliminate due process, what happens to the people who fall into that range? How many "not guilty" people are executed by the cop in the street after the shooting?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 2:07:00 PM (view original):
Possible, not probable. Fine, we can use that for the sake of argument.

If you eliminate due process, what happens to the people who fall into that range? How many "not guilty" people are executed by the cop in the street after the shooting?

Are you equating murder to asking people to go back to their country? Really?

Come on man.

I have already stated if you want due process then allow for arrests and separation of kids from parents. You screamed bloody murder. I said fine, send them back as a family. You screamed bloody murder.

How about anyone who crosses gets an automatic green card? Would that make you happy?

There are more than two options for families arrested. The third is citation and release pending their hearing.

You're the one who brought up shootings.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 1:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 1:46:00 PM (view original):

Of course but they did not foresee the political climate. Heck we didn't even own Texas and Cali then. Stop it.

The political climate of the 1700's was brutal. They included due process for a reason.

Again. Were you there? No. So stick to the topic. I understand the slippery slope argument. I do get where you are coming from. I am calling for a radical response to a dangerous issue at the border.

You know, they have these things called books. And in some of them, people who were there wrote down stuff about what was going on.

What is dangerous about the border issue?

You never answered this.