I am not saying we should not address the problem, just that it's tougher to deal with because of our previous inaction. Example, someone from Mexico enters the US illegally, has many children (who are legal, another area we should look at) and then we send the breadwinner packing back to Mexico? And taxpayers pick up the tab?

Examples of laws requiring action (I am not a lawyer and do not know if this type of thing applies, but something to consider)

-Trademarks, if you don't actively enforce these, you lose the right to
-Zoning restrictions, if you don't complain about the violation in a short amount of time, it gets grandfathered in
-Squatting, if you illegally occupy land for long enough, it becomes yours
-Statute of Limitations prevents you from being punished after a prescribed amount of time passes (except for things like murder/kidnapping)

My point is, our inaction in the past may give them some wiggle room in our system.

Bob

>>>I do believe people that have been here illegally for a long time is a tougher problem.
>
>I disagree. The key word here is "Illegally". If you came here illegally 10 years ago, you're
>still illegal. I fail to see the problem.
>
>
>
>
>
>>I believe all sovereign nations should control their borders, that's a no-brainer. If we decide to alter immigration policy to allow more people legally from Mexico (or wherever) I have no problem with that as long as it's done above board.
>>
>>I do believe people that have been here illegally for a long time is a tougher problem. A lot of law is based on the fact that you must constantly and evenly apply the law (and punish the criminals) for it to be effective. So it is partly (mostly) our fault for not enforcing the laws we already have.
>>
>>That being said, I think we need to increase legal immigration, so we have enough workers to pay for my Social Security and to keep the economy rolling, but it would be nice to screen the people based on our criteria.
>>
>>Bob
>>
>>
>>>Amnesty blocked: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19475868/. Reagan did this, and it was wrong then,
>>>and it would be wrong now. Any plan that allows illegals to stay here for any amount of time
>>>only sends the message that if you can get here and lay low for a while, eventually you'll become
>>>legal.
>>>
>>>I just don't understand the issue with immigration.
>>>
>>>People who enter the United States, or any country that has laws against it, are
>>>criminals and should be prosecuted. The cost of this prosecution could be offset by
>>>taking from the redicouls amount of foreign aid we hand out to Mexico each year.
>>>
>>>
>>>Read this http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=8387
>>>"And immigration enforcement serves the exact same purpose as those locks: allowing us to choose who comes into our home to live with us, and who is kept out. Immigration is a long American tradition, and it can be a benefit to our society and our economy, but not if it is unregulated. Many of us had ancestors that passed through Ellis Island. This was not just a rest stop on the way to the next exit. Ellis Island was an immigrant screening center. America has always retained the right to screen entrants, separate the bad from the good, and deport those deemed harmful. Uncontrolled immigration is ludicrous. A nation without the most basic power of all -- the power to defend its own border -- invites lawlessness and disaster, especially after September 11th."
>>>
>>>Companies that employe illegals should be fined heavily.
>>>
>>>And for those of you who are thinking, "Illegals do the jobs no one else wants to", I bet you could
>>>find some unemployed people right in your own town who would love a job.
>>>
>>>Living in Southern California I get to see firsthand the effects of the hords of illegals who
>>>are flooding our nations daily.
>>>
>>>I welcome your thoughts.