Alphecca

WaPo: Ignore Immigration Laws

In an editorial today in the Washington Post, the complaint is made that a just passed bill would force sheriffs and employers and others to actually enforce many existing laws concerning illegal immigrants and it would increase penalties for violations by both the illegal immigrant themselves and others who encourage their coming into the US. Here's a quote:

Border security is a real issue, but it is not the only -- or even the principal -- issue confronting those who would tackle illegal immigration. Yet the bill would create new criminal penalties -- including some mandatory minimum sentences -- for people who encourage illegal immigration and for immigrants who return to the United States after being deported. It would broaden the range of deportable aliens so that, for example, repeat drunk drivers can be kicked out of the country. It would authorize lots of new spending on border control initiatives. It would force employers to verify employees' Social Security numbers against a national database. It would reimburse sheriffs in the counties that border Mexico for the costs of holding illegal immigrants. Following amendments added on the House floor, it would also create a giant fence along the Mexican border and require that border patrol uniforms be made in the good ol' USA.

It does no good to say that, well, there are already 11 million of them here so why bother closing the barn door? And certainly there are some jobs that no Americans are willing to take. But I see nothing wrong with trying to make it tougher on illegals.

Let's take a couple of WaPo's examples. What is so wrong with getting rid of illegals who rack-up countless DUIs? Did you know that a legal citizen of the US who has a DUI on their driving record can't drive into Canada? Canadians consider it an issue of safety. If you're a drunk, you'll have to ride in the passenger seat.

If illegals in the US are habitually drunk behind the wheel, why should we allow them to stay? That is -- safety issues aside -- breaking the law. We don't need law-breakers streaming across the borders, we have enough of our own.

And what could possibly be wrong with asking employers to actually verify -- just by checking for a valid SS# -- that the folks they hire have a right to be here and working and paying taxes?

I don't know what good a giant chain link fence is going to do -- a pair of bolt cutters or just a cheap pliers or socket wrench goes through that in seconds. I know since I used to install new chain link and take down old chain link fences for a living. Two people could take down and remove a 100 feet of chain link fence in an hour.

I can certainly see new spending on "border control initiatives" as WaPo puts it, and financially encouraging border town sheriffs to arrest illegals.

This isn't even about jobs. It's about taking simple steps to assist in preventing possible terrorists from entering our country. Right now, for every illegal caught, 10 more sneak in undetected. I say that is far more dangerous than any risk that lettuce prices will rise in the near future.