While perusing the Libertarian Party platform, I came across this jewel under the heading of -

[b]Immigration[/b]

We hold that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality. We condemn massive roundups of Hispanic Americans and others by the federal government in its hunt for individuals not possessing required government documents. We strongly oppose all measures that punish employers who hire undocumented workers. Such measures repress free enterprise, harass workers, and systematically discourage employers from hiring Hispanics.

We welcome all refugees to our country and condemn the efforts of U.S. officials to create a new "Berlin Wall" which would keep them captive. We condemn the U.S. government's policy of barring those refugees from our country and preventing Americans from assisting their passage to help them escape tyranny [b]or improve their economic prospects.[/b]

[b]Undocumented non-citizens should not be denied the fundamental freedom to labor and to move about unmolested.[/b] Furthermore, immigration must not be restricted for reasons of race, religion, political creed, age, or sexual preference.

[b]We therefore call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.[/b] We oppose government welfare and resettlement payments to non-citizens just as we oppose government welfare payments to all other persons.

[size=4][b]Come one, come all.[/b][/size=4]

Eric The(WelcomeToTheBraveNewWorld,You'veBeenHereAllAlong)Hun[>]:)]

Post from Garand Shooter -

You first posted that link weeks ago, I just got around to looking for a statement on the death penalty, when I found this crap.

Unrestricted access to our country by [b]un-documented, non-citizens[/b], Hell, boy, isn't that what we've got already?  Why would the Libertarians want that?

No, I don't have an 'immigration fixation', but I'm wondering who else might!

A country that can't define, enforce, and safeguard its borders is no country at all. It is the [i]sine qua non[/i] of soverignty.

Screw the jobs for Americans aspect of this, just think of the utter chaos that this sort of idiocy would invite!

I suppose with the INS disbanded, the job of documenting these undocumented visitors would fall to what governmental agency?

What do you think turned California from a safe Republican stronghold, mindful of the RKBA, into a fairytale land of failed Socialist experiments and a hotbed of anti-RKBA crapola?

Eric The(HeWhoFailsToTakeCareOfHisOwnHouseholdIsWorseThanAnUnbeliever)Hun[>]:)]  

I don't mind free immigration. However, I do oppose allowing immigrants new to this country the right to VOTE and be citizens. I would require at least something like a 30 year residency period and some sort of stringent testing in order to become a citizen. They do this in Switzerland and France. This idea has been floating around in libertarian circles, even applied to born American citizens.

We could have some sort of very strict test about the constitution and government functions to see if say an 18 year old is truly qualified to vote and be a citizen. This would entail testing on such matters as the Bill of Rights, limitations of power by the three branches, history of the foundation of the Republic, etc.

I don't think the libertarian party actually favors allowing them to become citizens right off the bat. Amnesty is entirely different. I think people should be able to move freely around our country as long as they do not trespass on private property.

themao [chainsawkill]

And then there's the issue of the billions in welfare and support.

I've got no problem with people who come for the work.  People who come for the "free" stuff get under my skin.

post from Stealth -

I don't either so long as they come in the front door, ask if they may enter, and find a job that is not being performed by an American citizen already here.

Otherwise, what is our country for?

Eric The(GetReal-WeCan'tSupportTheWorld)Hun[>]:)]

Post from Garand Shooter -

Yes, when you were unable to explain to me the Libertarian Party's position on the death penalty.

But the direct link was posted before, I just never bothered to look up the death penalty issue as carefully as I just did.

Thanks for the info, though.

Eric The(IAin'tSkeered,I'seALawyer)Hun[>]:)]

EricTheHun said:
"Screw the jobs for Americans aspect of this"

    By americans you mean Native American "Indians," of course?

    What?  You don't?  In the musical "1776" while debating the matter of slavery for the Declaration Of Independence, John Adams states that "black slaves" are americans because they're here and they're people.  The real problem with that most people have with open borders is that they don't want people to "come here have baby's and go on welfare" (a less than a day old quote from my stepmother.)  The Libertarian Party is against governmental socialism of all types including welfare.  If you get the monthy Libertarian newspaper check out the article on this very topic in it.  I have it at home if you need the info.
-bill card carrying libertarian

Post from Garand Shooter -

Then let them stay home and market their labor and services in their own country, what's so wrong about that? I believe in the freedom that made our country the envy of the World. They should not assume that they are free to come into someone else's home and do as they please.

Let's look and see what the [b]nasty, brutish[/b] Republicans thought in their Party Platform about immigration -

Sounds like something more to my liking, how about you?

Eric The(StayHome,We'llCallYouWhenWeNeedSomeone)Hun[>]:)]

Post from murphquake -

But of course, them too. Heck, I'm a native American, as well.

Eric The(MakeSafeTheBorders)Hun[>]:)]

Post from murphquake -

Yes, and when and if they get into power, I will be 100% behind them in this and quite a few other matters, but not abortion, opposition to the death penalty, or unrestricted immigration.

Eric The(NeverHappen)Hun[>]:)]

Post from Troy -

Oh, well then, I feel much better about the Libertarian stance on unrestricted immigration.

It ain't never gonna happen because the list of things that [b]must[/b] be accomplished will never be accomplished.

Whew, that was close. I thought it actually might happen.

Eric The(INeedACigarette,AndIDon'tSmoke!)Hun[>]:)]

That is the way it use to be.

I could be converted with ideas like these.

For someone that claims to have voted Libertarian you sure don't know very much about their platform. Is that you Bill Maher?

A modest proposal (three, really) from Seth Lipsky at the Wall Street Journal:
[url]http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/slipsky/?id=95000903[/url]

Post from Imbrolio -

'Claims'? I suppose you'll just have to take my word on my having voted for the Libertarian Party back in 1976.[:D]

Gerald Ford just wasn't my idea of what the Republican Party needed back then, Ronald Reagan was!

And I'm learning more about the Libertarian Party's platform every day now, it seems. I'll say this, that for a party that managed to squeeze a whopping .4% (382,000) votes in the Presidential Election of 2000, they sure pack a wallop. I thought they had gotten about half a million votes, but I was corrected by none other than Harry Browne Hisself on his campaign website.

Another kernal of truth that I managed to glean from that website is this -

So think about it gentlemen, these folks speak of the differences between AlGore and President Bush as if they were trivial, that there is no real difference between DemocRat and Republican
(what an insult that is), and gleefully point out the fact that they almost cost Bush the election! Wow, that is [i]chutzpah[/i]!

[b]So, Mr. Imbrolio, do you know what the official position of this Party is on the death penalty?[/b]

I mean I went through their official website and found not a hint of their views on a subject that is the single most important controversy in the whole crime and punishment debate in our country. And yet not a peep is to be heard. Not very courageous, IMHO.

Eric The(MaybeTheyDon'tHaveAPosition?)Hun[>]:)]    

It has been my limited experience with illegal immigrants, that they are hard working, family oriented, and religious people, who appreciate what we take for granted.

Personally, I think they reflect America, the way it oughtta be, more so than most second or third or fourth generation Americans.

They don't mind starting at the bottom, doing the dirty jobs, and working their way up the ladder. They work their tails off, and scrimp and save, learn the language, educate themselves, and set out on new careers or on their own in new businesses.

Maybe it's different in other parts of the country, like California, but I think that is a reflection on the citizens who set policy, not the immigrants who take advantage of that policy.

As far as the death penalty is concerned, I've never seen an official position taken by the LP, and rightly so. It is a very complex legal and moral issue, and it is probably one that our collective conscience should handle. I can see pros and cons to the death penalty, and tend to lean toward the idea that it is better to err on the side of making sure an innocent person is not put to death. Yet, in clear cut cases of cold blooded murder, I won't shed any tears for the deceased perpetrator.

I will say that I would trade the death penalty for a ban on abortion. When I debate liberals (commies) on the issue of abortion, they inevitably bring up the death penalty and tell me it is hipocritical to believe in the death penalty and the right to life. I ALWAYS come back with, "I'll trade you, abortion ban, for a ban on executions, right now!" This always reveals their true nature. They never take me up on the offer. They enjoy killing babies.

I know the LP is on record as being opposed to gov't involvement on the abortion issue. That is my main conflict with the LP. I believe that gov't eventually HAS to recognize the fact that life begins at conception.

All in all, I believe the LP has more to offer more people than any other party. I will continue to vote LP, and may even run next year as a Libertarian, for either a local or state level seat.

Post from Garand Shooter -

No, the interesting concept is that freedom is something that is available to all people the world over.  All they have to do is refrain from taking the easy way out and moving to the United States, and obtain their freedom the good old-fashioned way - [b]Earn it.[/b]

If that means bullets and bayonets, that's a shame, but that's how we did it! And if freedom is worth anything to these people, it should be worth dying for, in your homeland, among your kith and kin.

But wait, you simply don't realize what these people may be up against! Nonsense, we took on the World's only Superpower at the time!  All it took was eight long years of struggle.

Under your policy, why should any indigenous people ever resort to a revolution to overthrow a dictatorship that is abusing them, and denying them basic human civil rights? Just get on the bus, Gus, and come to US.

The Founding Fathers thought that our country's struggle for freedom would be a bright and shining [b]example[/b] to the enslaved peoples of the world, not their free meal ticket.


'Undocumented non-citizens' is the phrase used in your Party's platform, doesn't that assume that they have [b]already[/b] broken the law?

Or are you assuming that all those national immigration laws have already been done away with?

And with the INS and Border Patrol gone, just who is going to be around to ensure that the criminals aren't going to come into the country?

Let's leave it to the states, then. Yeah, right.


Those were quite different times, my friend. I think that immigrants that came after the creation of the Welfare State were a whole lot different than those coming before.

And in the old days you could count on a strong school system that educated everyone in a common language and common ideals. Can you count on that any longer? I think not.

Only good thing out of all this is that you can be certain that none of this Libertarian Plan will ever be passed into law.  

Eric The(ThanksToE.F.HuttonFor'EarnIt'Quote)Hun[>]:)]

Post from critter FR -

Who here among us has not done exactly the same thing. Hell, I ain't no millionaire's son, boy!

But isn't that precisely what they would be doing in their own homeland?


You'll have to trust me on this, but it is totally different in Texas, and other states along the border.  Texas Monthly just ran an article on the problems that illegals are causing along the Rio Grande. Most kids can't go out and play on their own farms because of the possibility of running into coyotes (of the human variety) with their human flocks.  Women are hanging out their laundry on the clothesline with a pistol strapped to their side.

Ranchers are dealing with cut wire, butchered cattle, and a general collapse of their faith in a way of life that has made our Country great, and for what?

This is not the way it was, you'll have to trust me on that, but I grew up here. And it just isn't safe any longer.



How about that it's a reflection on the citizens who set policy [b]and[/b] the immigrants who take advantage of that policy?
With that simple change, I agree with you.

And for your arguments in the future regarding abortion and the death penalty, just remember that it's [u]because[/u] we value [b]innocent human life[/b] so greatly that we oppose abortion and yet are in favor of the death penalty.

Some people argue that gun control is such an issue as well, but I don't see that at all.

Eric The(Hell,IWasForcedToStudyEnglishInSchoolToo!)Hun[>]:)]

Post from Garand Shooter -

God have mercy on me, Garand Shooter, but I have no idea what you're talking about!

If you are saying that I'm saying is that people who are coming here as refugees should stay at home and fight for their freedom in their homeland, then yes I am.

Surely our Founding Fathers could have formed their own little republic somewhere other than in His Majesty's American Colonies. Surely, being the rich successful men that they were, they could have waited it out for a change in attitude of King George and his ministers.

But they chose otherwise.


I don't have any problem with people asking for and receiving visas to travel to the United States.  Once they get here, lawfully, if they intend to ask for permanent residency, then we can discuss that matter when it arises. There will be questions that will need to be asked, about their connections, their relations, their job skills, their proficiency in English, etc.

Why, are we being overwhelmed by a flood of immigration from Switzerland?


No, we never did face a 'hoard of immigrants' from the old 'Iron Curtain' nations. Does it surprise you that those are the very nations who just so recently obtained their freedom?

Communism thought it was keeping all the good Socialists in their country. What it was doing was raising a generation of individuals who would not submit to the Soviet boot.


Funny, but whenever I or anyone else I know of says 'yeah, right', I assume that others know we're being facetious. But not you.

Well, anyway, you are right, I am a staunch believer in States Rights, as is, more or less, the GOP, but I just don't think that the Feds are going to hand back illegal immigration enforcement to the States anytime soon.

And that's just the problem that I have in discussing any of these matters with you.  Whenever something is glaringly wrong with a Libertarian proposal, such as continued welfare for illegal immigrants, rather than addressing the problem head on, you retreat behind a 'oh, we're gonna end welfare prior to relaxing immigration.'

Yeah, but when you gonna end welfare as we know it? (Since you so lightly dismiss the GOP version of welfare reform)

When we come to power! Yes, and when will that be? When the media starts to give us a fair shake. And when will that be? When we have the right numbers to be considered a real party. And when will that be? When you lifelong Republicans turn your backs on the party of Reagan, give up the House, give up the Senate, give up the White House, and come take your place at the barricades!

Almost thou persuadest me - not!

Eric The(HaveYouOppressedAForeignerToday?)Hun[>]:)]

I wish I would have read this thread sooner. I agree with Eric on this. I personally believe America needs to rebuild itself from within. Letting a lot of immigrants in right now will only add to America’s growing list of problems. All of us here are fighting for the right to keep our firearms – many of us are fighting to keep (or get) a decent job. Letting more people into this country will not help us to do either.

Tyler

I have yet to find a naturalized American citizen who was well versed on the right to keep and bear arms. I suppose it must be the educational system or something.

Last week I was speaking with a Iranian client of mine and mentioned an upcoming gun show.

He was actually scared of talking about guns!

I realize that in his homeland, the RKBA does not exist, but he's here now! Been here since 1980!

'Oh Mr. Hun', he said, 'the people can do nothing with their guns. The government is too well armed to permit such a thing.'

[size=4][b]Welcome to the Brave New World (You've Been Here All Along).[/b][/size=4]

Eric The(WeCanCertainlyCountOnHimWhenTSHTF)Hun[>]:)]

Of course I find many foreign nationals, as well as naturalized Americans, at the gun shows, that understand the RKBA, but that is only to be expected.

We have tuuka and PaoloAR(maybe), and a lot of others on this board, that, although not here in America, think the same way, more or less.

But generally, such attitudes are not likely to be encountered among the general population.

Hell, it's even being lost among the native Americans.

Eric The(NativeAsYouCanGet)Hun[>]:)]

Post from Garand Shooter -

Damn right I say we get to pick and choose. It's our country, ain't it. Well, let's just say it's our country until the Libertarian Party rises to power, then whose country it becomes is left up to who can traverse the muddy Rio Grande with his clothes rolled up in a grocery bag the fastest![:D]

We simply need to make certain that whosoever is invited to stay in this Country has something of value to contribute to this Country, in some manner or the other.

If it's family connections, fine. If it's capital, we'll take that too! But if it's only sweat and hard work, we got plenty of that now!

Stay home, use your sweat and hard work to improve your homeland!

Have you ever played baseball or some other team sport? Did you get to choose 'your side' in that sport?  Well, who did you choose?

Why can't we expect that the 'best and brightest' will be chosen from among all applicants for visas or permanent residency?

I mean, after all, we're inviting him or her into the greatest nation in the history of the world, shouldn't they bring at least a covered dish?

Eric The(ISayTunaCasserole,ButBringWhatYouWant)Hun[>]:)]

Well, my dad has a green card and he's about to be naturalized, although he hates guns I love them... when I get naturalized I will vote in favor of guns. About the iranians, heck in their country they were either taught that guns are all bad or that only governments can have guns (kinda like you're the subject), thats how my dad thinks at least. I know that alot of Muslims here in the US (most of them forigners by the way, good number of them American converts) I can say they support the right to bear arm. Have you seen ANY islamic organization that opposes the right to bear arm? I dont know of any. I do know of many Jewish organization (well except JPFO) that supports gun control....

Post from rahimiv -

Excellent, you are well on your way to becoming a good American citizen already!

Eric The(NowThat'sTheKindaTalkILikeToHear)Hun[>]:)]

I agree with both Eric the hun and Garand shooter ha ha!!

i have'nt found it yet, but has the Death penalty been proven to affect homocide rates? this would go along way into being for or against it.

besides what does immigration matter? just ask people in Montana [whacko] theres plenty of spanish speaking people there!!

european immigrant lib

Post from libertarian -

Yes, it has definitely been proven that Ted Bundy will never kill young girls again, nor will Timothy McVeigh ever rent another Ryder truck. Not in this World, nor in the Next.[:D]

Seriously, though, I never really thought it made a difference whether or not the death penalty actually affected homicide rates. There are so many other factors which must be considered, such as consistency by prosecutors in even asking for the death penalty, plea bargaining where the usually-more-guilty perp is offered a life sentence in exchange for his testimony against the least culpable perp in order to avoid the death penalty, the extreme period of time between the murder and the actual execution (average time almost nine years!), the quality of the murder defendant's legal counsel, and so forth.

And even more seriously, there are certain cultural factors that must be taken into account.  If there were no legal means to pronounce and render a death sentence for an individual who has committed a particularly shocking murder, then either the victim's family or the citizenry itself might resort to vigilante style justice and murder the criminal prior to trial. The fact that a death penalty exists provides the citizens with a certain measure of confidence in the criminal justice system, even though such ultimate penalty is seldom or ever used.

Also, it may even provide the victim with some modicum of protection during the crime itself. It does so by giving an otherwise unarmed citizen a chance to use the spectre of a death penalty to try and persuade the perp [b]not[/b] to kill them and thereby avoid even the possibility of being strapped to a gurney and receiving a lethal injection.

The Death Penalty has a certain logical symetry to it. It is a threat to a perpetrator when no other threat would suffice. Such as a lifer in prison with no possible hope of parole, who has no reason [b]not[/b] to kill his cellmate, fellow inmate, or prison guard or employee, absent the threat of an even greater punishment - death.  

If you were a two-time loser in a state with a 'three strikes you're out' policy, and you were in the midst of an armed robbery of a rural convenience store, wherein you had just tied up one employee and raped and sodomized the other employee, what would be the most likey way for you to avoid apprehension by the authorities and a conviction for a third felony?

That's right, kill the only witnesses to the crime and (1) you most likely will never be a suspect in the crime, and (2) if you are arrested, then in any trial on these charges at least the two victims will not be available for testimony.

The only imaginable factor that would keep you from murdering the two employees to conceal your crime and avoid prosecution, would be the credible threat of a well-used gurney, electric chair, or gas chamber, facing you somewhere in the not too distant future.

Eric The(IfTheyDon'tRespondToReason,TheyWillRespondToJuice!)Hun[>]:)]