Port Authority Bombing

33055

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 7:00 pm

southernbubby wrote:

I do agree that if someone broke the law, they pay the consequences. Would Canada let us abuse their immigration laws?

Not a chance. Their laws make sense for the good of the country.

I am not a bad person because I believe our borders must be protected and that the cost of our lax policies should be across the nation rather than concentrated on the backs of local taxpayers.

SixOfWands

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 7:39 pm

southernbubby wrote:

So if the housing authorities want to open a section 8 housing project or a homeless shelter in your neighborhood and you know that it is likely to bring in crime and drugs, are you going to say NIMBY or are you going to welcome it with open arms? You want to help the homeless don't you? So are you going to offer one of them your couch tonight or does that feel a bit scary?

Well, let's take this back to Soviet immigration.

Where I'm from, middle class Jews were mostly opposed to Soviet immigration. A large number of Soviet Jews moved into the area, and crime rates rose precipitously. Supermarkets closed due to the extremely high level of losses from shoplifting. Property valued plummeted. Neighborhoods were destroyed.

And that was more than one person.

We also, FTR, had Israeli mafia operating in the area in the 1980s, particularly in the electronics industry. Should we have banned all Jews because of them?

You're suggesting that tens of thousands of people be punished for the act of one.

Of course, his actions were far worse than shoplifting, or even the Israeli mafia. No question. But I'm not into collective guilt, or judging people based on their race of country of origin.

33055

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 7:47 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Perhaps when there is large scale corruption incompatible with our values, then the extreme vetting should come into effect.

Do you think there should be a different level of scrutiny for groups which produce known terrorists like Isreal has to protect their boarders? Why not let in all the Palestinians because you may by chance ban innocent ones?

You are not punishing the group. You need to reframe it that they are not getting privedges because we are protecting ourselves.

FTR - I don't want the Jewish mob here either.

southernbubby

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 8:02 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

So how do we protect ourselves? Do we simply accept crime and terrorism? If punishing Bangladesh by adding them to the ban, l'kovod this terrorist, is unfair and wrong, then what is the answer? a police state? How will NY protect 2 million people in 2 and a half weeks in that very location? Are they in any more danger than they were last year?

WhatFor

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 8:07 pm

southernbubby wrote:

I could also see bringing parents over but should people be automatically allowed to immigrate over siblings or aunts and uncles?

Just as an FYI, the notion that an aunt or uncle can sponsor a niece/nephew for citizenship is simply false. There is no pathway to citizenship through an aunt/uncle.

As to siblings, you cannot automatically bring them over. Take a look at the Department of State's visa bulletin. For December 2017 for siblings, they're currently processing visas that people filed for in June 2004. That means that people have to wait over 13 years, at earliest, to bring a sibling over. For Mexico, it's over 20 years. For the Philippines, it's 23 years. I'd hardly characterize that as "automatic".

33055

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 8:36 pm

WhatFor wrote:

Sayfullo Saipov won the lottery around 2010 and brought over 23 relatives. It is beyond idiotic to have allowed this man here because he won a lottery. Tell his victims who he murdered in cold blood that it takes over 23 years to get your family here. Once again data is cherry picked.

WhatFor

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 8:55 pm

Squishy wrote:

I'm not cherry picking data. I'm looking at the DOS's visa bulletin. Can you provide me a source for how you know that this man brought 23 relatives with him to the US?

streak

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 9:12 pm

um just curious... why does america need people like marina and sequoia (however that's spelled) no offense to them but just what was the point trying to be made because as far as I know they are opposites. And if it was referring to marina being a lawyer I don't see why america needs lawyers any more than it needs cashiers and mailmen teachers, accountants, make up artists, businessmen, babysitters, and cleaning ladies.

southernbubby

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 9:35 pm

WhatFor wrote:

You are right. The aunt and uncle come as a sibling to a parent or as a parent to a cousin. There are plenty of aunts and uncles who come; just not as part of a person's nuclear family chain.

southernbubby

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 9:37 pm

streak wrote:

Successful high earning people add to the economy and raise educated children who add to the economy. America is a very young country and was built on immigration. Now, however, we can either make sure that immigrants are our friends or we can just count on some terrorist attacks and just accept that.

dancingqueen

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 10:00 pm

tigerwife wrote:

SouthernBubby,

Somehow I don't think that a man whose object is to kill as many people as possible, redardless of race or identity (like the mix of people on a subway) will care much about how his actions will impact immigration for his countrymen.

Six, you don't see a difference in the motives of the two incidents you are comparing? Yes, they were both madmen and fortunately one was a failure, but he didn't have to be. His referencing to ISIS is a huge concern IMO.

I really hate Islamic terrorism and think that steps should be taken to stop it on our borders. Today’s subway attacker is scum. That said, I find the Vegas shooter/other domestic mass shooters even more disturbing. As far as anyone knows, he killed 59 people for sport? What was the motive there?

dancingqueen

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 10:02 pm

southernbubby wrote:

Look at it this way, the Democrats want gun control and the Republicans don't and the Republicans want immigration control and the Democrats don't. Both guns and terrorists are dangers to the way we live so how to we make our world safer? What is the solution?

This. Our government is more into partisan bs lately than actually being concerned with protecting us from violence.

33055

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 10:21 pm

dancingqueen wrote:

He wanted to go out in a blaze of glory or whatever. We obviously have homegrown problems. There is no need to import more.

tigerwife

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 10:31 pm

dancingqueen wrote:

... and injured hundreds more. Yes, it is severely disturbing to me. I guess there is something about ISIS that evokes visions of organized, mass-produced terror that is very frightening, more so than a freak incident.

33055

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 10:36 pm

streak wrote:

Firstly, we know them. There is a person attached to the SN. Once you know the person, it is harder to be objective. This is why Save The Children attaches faces to the children or the ASPCA shows pictures of sad puppies to raise money.

Secondly, lawyers, accountants, mailman, teachers, businessmen add to our economy. They are more invested here and are more stable. Accountants are not know to be murderers in general. They are usually good citizens.

The Dream Act proponents only highlighted the educated ones and represented them disproportionately to the population, so we would get to know the few that enhance the economy.

33055

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 10:41 pm

WhatFor wrote:

I'm not cherry picking data. I'm looking at the DOS's visa bulletin. Can you provide me a source for how you know that this man brought 23 relatives with him to the US?

The source is DT who told his cabinet that.

https://www.dailywire.com/news.....notti

33055

Mon, Dec 11 2017, 11:28 pm

WhatFor wrote:

He's actually not a credible source of information. Do you have any other source to back that up?

Are CNN, NYT, or NBC more credible? DT's fake news claims seem to be true.

There is a far- reaching lack of ethics and responsibility with most of the news media which is seriously biased against Trump.

It doesn't matter if DT said the earth revolves around the sun, idiots out there would say that it is not true because he said it.

Raisin

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 4:12 am

I think it is funny. About 220 people each year die from car related accidents in NYC. Apart from in 2001, far less people die in terrorist related acts then in car accidents.

If people really wanted to stop unnecessary deaths, they would increase gun control laws.

If that guy yesterday had got hold of a gun, he would have caused a LOT more harm.

etky

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 4:27 am

Raisin wrote:

I don't know. Theoretically, a person with a gun can be taken down by someone else with a gun or even overpowered by physical force- hopefully before he shoots too many people.
OTOH an exposive blast within a contained area like a bus or train - and especially in a tunnel - does its terrible lethal damage before it is detected and once its gone off, that's it.
Yesterday's attack could potentially have inflicted many more casualties if the timing had been different.
That doesn't mean that gun control shouldn't be increased but I think its kind of too little too late.