Posted on 11/23/2007 5:32:54 PM PST by Fargo Rock
Hooray for this guy, give him immediate citizenship and a reward. But unfortunately, this one incident will be used by the illegal alien lobby to “prove” that all illegals are super heroes. I can picture them on the talk shows now, especially that grinning bandito bastard that keeps popping up on my TV.
True, my whole post was to call attention to the like of professional investigation by a half-a** sheriff that seems to be more interested in making a political statement than doing his job.
Excuse me - but just because words are ornately framed does not make them any more pleasurable to read, or truthful.
It reminds me of the story where some kids put dog feces in a box, wrapped it up real purty with a big bow, put it on a front porch, rang the doorbell and ran.
Would those boys have done that to someone they were trying to impress? Uh, I think not.
No one will ever gain acceptance, understanding or kudos by trying to jam their (so-called) beliefs down the throats of others.
I’ll take the logical, truthful, knowledgable words of others - UNWRAPPED - thank you very much.
Jumping to conclusions aren’t we? From what I understand, the roads back in there are fairly rugged. It may not take much to cause someone to lose control, if they are not familiar with them.
No Speculation. Improper Entry law speaks for itself; well at least if you're a lawyer!
Does Title 8 Chapter 12 Section 1325 (b) constitute a crime or a civil violation of the law? And is there a difference?
TITLE 8 - ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
CHAPTER 12 - IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY
SUBCHAPTER II - IMMIGRATION
Part VIII - General Penalty Provisions
§ 1325. Improper entry by alien
Entering this country "illegally" as an illegal immigrant would is clearly against our laws.
See this section from Sec. 212. [8 U.S.C. 1182] :
B) 13/ ALIENS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT.-
(i) In general.-Any alien (other than an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence) who-
(I) was unlawfully present in the United States for a period of more than 180 days but less than 1 year, voluntarily departed the United States (whether or not pursuant to section 244(e) ) prior to the commencement of proceedings under section 235(b)(1) or section 240 , and again seeks admission within 3 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal, or
(II) has been unlawfully present in the United States for one year or more, and who again seeks admission within 10 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal from the United States,is inadmissible.
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence.-For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Basically, that last line underscored and bolded defines what "unlawful presence" means, which is "against the law". So, yes, that would put them in contradiction of our laws, which makes them criminals.
So YOU automatically assume, since he's obviously an illegal, that he was involved in the accident? The story doesn't even HINT at that possibility, so until there is some proof, or intimation from the authorities otherwise, I go with the assumption that he's an all right guy, just coming here for a better opportunity. The FACT that he could have easily have left that boy to die, if he were in fact some sort of illegal alien monster, bolsters THAT assumption.
For all we know, she was there to meet this guy.
What I find amazing is with this kind of liberal thinking you lasted 7 years on FR. I think I am going to vomit.
Do you have a dictionary, are do you know how to use the ones' on line. What is the difference in conclusion and assumption!
Having driving road like these, there general is a reason. I just don't think the sheriff looked for it, Like in that country you will not find one lone illegal sneaking across the boarder by himself. Most of the time it is a group guided by a coyote, leading them to a waiting truck for their high speed get away.
My 1st thought as well. C’mon, a van? Near the border?
Criminal and related grounds of 'Inadmissible aliens' are described in paragraph (a)(2) and 'Aliens unlawfully present' is not one of those crimes.
TITLE 8 - ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
CHAPTER 12 - IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY SUBCHAPTER II - IMMIGRATION
Part II - Admission Qualifications for Aliens; Travel Control of Citizens and Aliens
§ 1182. Inadmissible aliens
(a) Classes of aliens ineligible for visas or admission ...
Agree
As I said, from the FACTS of this case, this man apparently cared more that the young boy, who surely told the man what happened to his mother, be cared for, and not meet the same fate. He risked giving up his chance at a new life in order to take care of the boy. It will be up to the authorities to decide his fate, but I don't jump to wild eyed conclusions about whether or not he was there to meet the mother, or jumped out in front of her car and caused the accident. NONE of that is supported by the facts of the story.
Do you know for a FACT that this woman and her son were there for any other reason than what was stated? There is no evidence to support that, so you and others DID jump to a CONCLUSION because of your ASSUMPTIONS.
I feel much better now. Anytime someone say they are here for a better life just makes me hurl. Sorry if I came off harsh to a fellow FR. Here in Houston (safe harbor) its like a little Mexico City.
Would be so kind as to point out where I said anything about what the woman was doing there?? My statement was, I don't think the sheriff did his job, I would bet there was more than one illegal there. Illegals pay a lot of money to be taken across the border, and they would never start walking in this part of the country alone unless they had a death wish. Someone was guiding them, someone was going to pick them up, and someone may have been paying someone else to look the other direction.
No, I think the bolded text is very clear:
“...or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.”
The definition of UNLAWFUL PRESENCE is very clear: is present WITHOUT BEING ADMITTED.
If the person is in this country WITHOUT being admitted and WITHOUT a visa, they are clearly in violation of the law.
I am not sure what argument you make here. Are you saying that people who enter our sovereign nation without the permission of the government are NOT in violation of our law, and are therefore NOT criminals?
Please clarify, because that sure does sound like the argument you are attempting to make. Why are you arguing this point? If you are making the point that people cannot cite chapter and verse stating it, that is fine.
However, you seem to be saying that these people entering our borders WITHOUT permission are not actually in violation of any laws, and that people who hold the contrary view are either misinformed, xenophobic, prejudiced or bigoted.
By the way, that response was not meant as an attack...I simply cannot figure out what point you are attempting to make.
In nearly every other sovereign nation on earth, attempting to bypass the legal entry processes and enter the country without the consent and approval of the government will land you in prison, and rightfully so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.