Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Spin Forum Dumping Bin


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 22.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Jason

    2388

  • Taylor

    1750

  • St1ck

    1600

  • Amazing Larry

    1456

28 minutes ago, Tank said:

so when someone seeks asylum, what's the process? are they supposed to sneak in or what?

I always thought you go to the embassy with 20 cops chasing you and the Marines going you have no jurisdiction here, this is American Soil.  And then the cops having the nasty look on their face.  Then the guy takes out a Marine and runs to the roof and climbs down and finds some weird chick and goes to France.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Tank said:

so when someone seeks asylum, what's the process? are they supposed to sneak in or what?

So this is my question. Are all the separated families those that snuck in? There's conflicting info based on your source preference that those who go to the proper crossing points and do it according to established procedures are also getting separated. If so then the smug asshole response of "shouldn't have broke the law" seems misguided. I'm not shedding any tears for the border crashers but dismissing all of them like this seems like a pure chickenshit way to deal with a difficult situation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

So this is my question. Are all the separated families those that snuck in? There's conflicting info based on your source preference that those who go to the proper crossing points and do it according to established procedures are also getting separated. If so then the smug asshole response of "shouldn't have broke the law" seems misguided. I'm not shedding any tears for the border crashers but dismissing all of them like this seems like a pure chickenshit way to deal with a difficult situation

if i was in the position where i needed asylum, i would take the time to find out what procedure my intended new country would want me to follow. i think following a nation's laws is important, especially if i'm trying to escape to that as my new home.

i don't know all the specifics of what's happening in mexico and elsewhere, but it seems to me that sneaking over the border (instead of following whatever procedure and laws may be in place) is going to carry a good deal of risk with it. is it going to be worth it to me? i'd better know ahead of time and be prepared to deal with those consequences, whatever they may be.

i also realize not all people may have the time or resources at the time they decide to run to follow protocol. they, too, had better be prepared for whatever consequences may follow.

i was never really aware of US policy for this issue until the last year (and I'm guessing most here weren't well versed in it, either, until it became a national story). if there's a way to reform the process on both sides, it's worth doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tank said:

if i was in the position where i needed asylum, i would take the time to find out what procedure my intended new country would want me to follow. i think following a nation's laws is important, especially if i'm trying to escape to that as my new home.

i don't know all the specifics of what's happening in mexico and elsewhere, but it seems to me that sneaking over the border (instead of following whatever procedure and laws may be in place) is going to carry a good deal of risk with it. is it going to be worth it to me? i'd better know ahead of time and be prepared to deal with those consequences, whatever they may be.

i also realize not all people may have the time or resources at the time they decide to run to follow protocol. they, too, had better be prepared for whatever consequences may follow.

i was never really aware of US policy for this issue until the last year (and I'm guessing most here weren't well versed in it, either, until it became a national story). if there's a way to reform the process on both sides, it's worth doing.

Once more, I'm not referring to anyone sneaking over the border. The correct process as stressed by ICE is to go to a legit crossing point and make your request. It's widely reported that those doing it this way are still getting separated. If so then it's just a discouragement tactic like Australia stranding them in island camps for years at a time. If this is our national policy then we should own it instead of pigeonholing them with the illegal crossers to pacify our sense of righteousness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, arch stanton said:

Once more, I'm not referring to anyone sneaking over the border. The correct process as stressed by ICE is to go to a legit crossing point and make your request. It's widely reported that those doing it this way are still getting separated. If so then it's just a discouragement tactic like Australia stranding them in island camps for years at a time. If this is our national policy then we should own it instead of pigeonholing them with the illegal crossers to pacify our sense of righteousness

1. links?

2. no, it's not. Trump's zero-tolerance lasted a couple of months and ended by executive order over 2 months ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tank said:

if i was in the position where i needed asylum, i would take the time to find out what procedure my intended new country would want me to follow. i think following a nation's laws is important, especially if i'm trying to escape to that as my new home.

i don't know all the specifics of what's happening in mexico and elsewhere, but it seems to me that sneaking over the border (instead of following whatever procedure and laws may be in place) is going to carry a good deal of risk with it. is it going to be worth it to me? i'd better know ahead of time and be prepared to deal with those consequences, whatever they may be.

i also realize not all people may have the time or resources at the time they decide to run to follow protocol. they, too, had better be prepared for whatever consequences may follow.

i was never really aware of US policy for this issue until the last year (and I'm guessing most here weren't well versed in it, either, until it became a national story). if there's a way to reform the process on both sides, it's worth doing.

Here is the thing.  If you are seeking asylum, for instance from the Central American countries like earlier in the year.  Why not just go to the consulate?  They are traveling through many countries, some unsafe and usually in an unsafe manner since they had to travel in a caravan to keep the safety of numbers.  Also in the meantime putting stress on their precious children.  All in the hopes of getting into the US.  Whether at the border, or jumping the border.  Doing the American thing of I am more important than those that are legitimately waiting in line going through the proper channels.

And don't get me started on the libotard definition of asylum now.  Since these poor folks should get into the US because of domestic violence or fleeing gang violence.  F*ck, that means all of South LA and Chicago could get asylum from anywhere in the world.  Used to be asylum was extreme political or religious.  As in you would be killed or jailed if you were the wrong political or religious faction.  Now if Juan bitch slaps you for mouthing off, you could run off to the US.  

Which goes back to going to the consulate.  Because if you went to the consulate with some oh poor me, they would deny the application because it makes a joke of what asylum is.  But if you go to the border.  Then the libotards take over and cry woe is them, we are being so cruel, wa wa wa we need to let them in.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florida sheriff backs Uber driver who killed 'goofball'

Dashcam video shows Jason Boek, 34, swerving his truck in front of driver Robert Westlake, then jumping out and claiming to have a pistol.

Mr Westlake, 38, who had just completed training to be a police officer, fires once, fatally striking Mr Boek.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45350434

The accompanying video has the Sherrif start off with, "Goofball here..." Pretty much summing up the idiot who accidently commits suicide bluffing he's got a gun and will shoot someone who actually has one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...