Brewer: Most illegal immigrants are smuggling drugs

USFREEDOM911 said:
Then you are of the idea that anyone should be able to go were ever they want, without anyone or any government placing any restictions on that movement?
Click to expand...

Of course not. I did not say there was no such thing as a trespass. There is no trespass against the collective. Property rights are rights of the individual not the collective.

I don't object to all laws concerning immigration. To call it a trespass is nothing more than propaganda and it denotes a collectivist regard for property.

USFREEDOM911 said:
If you truly believe it; then you should sneak into Mexico and see how much they agree with your thinking, when you are caught.
Click to expand...

That is completely irrelevant.
 
RStringfield said:
Of course not. I did not say there was no such thing as a trespass. There is no trespass against the collective. Property rights are rights of the individual not the collective.

I don't object to all laws concerning immigration. To call it a trespass is nothing more than propaganda and it denotes a collectivist regard for property.



That is completely irrelevant.
Click to expand...

So would you feel better, if they referred to them as invaders.

And you are incorrect; there can be a trespass against a collective, you just don't want to admit it because you just like to bitch and moan against anything.
 
We are worried by this surge of violence against Mexicans, which comes along with a surge of other anti-immigrant and anti-Mexican occurrences in the United States.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
And you are incorrect; there can be a trespass against a collective, you just don't want to admit it because you just like to bitch and moan against anything.
Click to expand...

There is no trespass against THE collective. THE collective does not own the land. That does not imply you can not trespass against property owned by A collective.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I see that when you are challenged by something you can't defend, you automatically resort to trying to be insultive or denigrating.
Click to expand...

I am not going to laugh...
I am not going to laugh...
I am not going to laugh...
I am not going to laugh...

Oh hell...BWAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...WHOOOOOOOOO!!

Oh man, thanks for the laugh...that's hysterical...YOU accusing another of resorting to "insultive" and "denigrating" comments when challenged.
 
RStringfield said:
There is no trespass against THE collective. THE collective does not own the land. That does not imply you can not trespass against property owned by A collective.
Click to expand...

But the collective (citizens of the State) do own the land and it is held in a trust, by our elected officials.
We agree to allow them to regulate how it is utilized and what laws pertain to it.

You really need to find another subject to try and convince someone that you know what you're taling about; because you're doing nothing more then showing that you don't have a clue about what you're trying to promote.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
I am not going to laugh...
I am not going to laugh...
I am not going to laugh...
I am not going to laugh...

Oh hell...BWAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...WHOOOOOOOOO!!

Oh man, thanks for the laugh...that's hysterical...YOU accusing another of resorting to "insultive" and "denigrating" comments when challenged.
Click to expand...

Let's put a visual with that:

 
Last edited:
USFREEDOM911 said:
But the collective (citizens of the State) do own the land and it is held in a trust, by our elected officials.
We agree to allow them to regulate how it is utilized and what laws pertain to it.
Click to expand...

Okay, Marxist. Again, the state of Arizona is a republic, not a people's republic or a socialist state. The land is not owned by the collective.
 
RStringfield said:
Okay, Marxist. Again, the state of Arizona is a republic, not a people's republic or a socialist state. The land is not owned by the collective.
Click to expand...

It's a representative government and the rest of my statement stands.

Since you keep saying I'm wrong, on who owns the land; why don't you prove me wrong, instead of just pointing and going "UH-UH".
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
It's a representative government and the rest of my statement stands.

Since you keep saying I'm wrong, on who owns the land; why don't you prove me wrong, instead of just pointing and going "UH-UH".
Click to expand...

You are the one making the extraordinary claim that Arizona is a socialist state, where the rights of property belong to the collective. The burden of proof is on you.
 
RStringfield said:
You are the one making the extraordinary claim that Arizona is a socialist state, where the rights of property belong to the collective. The burden of proof is on you.
Click to expand...

Now you're spinnig in embarassment, unless you can show where I stated that AZ was a socialist state.

I've said that the land belongs to the people, we have a representative government, and that the State holds the land in a trust for the people.

You on the other hand have just ran around in circles, shouting UH-UH, pointing fingers, and haven't shown a single thing to support your convoluted thinking.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Now you're spinnig in embarassment, unless you can show where I stated that AZ was a socialist state.
Click to expand...

It's right here...

I've said that the land belongs to the people, we have a representative government, and that the State holds the land in a trust for the people.
Click to expand...

You on the other hand have just ran around in circles, shouting UH-UH, pointing fingers, and haven't shown a single thing to support your convoluted thinking.
Click to expand...

You really expect me to go out of my way to prove that individuals have property rights in Arizona or that land is owned individually? I am not going to bother trying to prove something that is clearly evident.

If I were a land owner in Arizona neither the state nor the US government would have the right to tell me who I may allow on to my property. Certainly, they may prohibit me from aiding someone in violation of the law, but it would be absurd to call the person I might aid a trespasser.

There is no trespass. You are simply trying to spin so that you apply a more ominous label to the illegal immigrant.

An illegal immigrant violates laws concerning immigration. He has not necessarily violated anyone's property rights or person and is therefore not guilty of trespass.
 
RStringfield said:
It's right here...

You really expect me to go out of my way to prove that individuals have property rights in Arizona or that land is owned individually? I am not going to bother trying to prove something that is clearly evident.

If I were a land owner in Arizona neither the state nor the US government would have the right to tell me who I may allow on to my property. Certainly, they may prohibit me from aiding someone in violation of the law, but it would be absurd to call the person I might aid a trespasser.

There is no trespass. You are simply trying to spin so that you apply a more ominous label to the illegal immigrant.

An illegal immigrant violates laws concerning immigration. He has not necessarily violated anyone's property rights or person and is therefore not guilty of trespass.
Click to expand...


So basically, all you have is a FEELING that you're right!!
Unfortunetly, you are in error and will continue to be in error.

As of July 29th, 2010; any illegal immigrant found to be in Arizona; runs the risk of being charged, with trespassing, among other things.

The fact that you don't want to accept it, just means that as usual you're on another "rant-du-jour".
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So basically, all you have is a FEELING that you're right!!
Unfortunetly, you are in error and will continue to be in error.
Click to expand...

Property rights are an individual right in Arizona just as they are in every other state. Again, you are the one making the extraordinary claim and you offer no proof or even an argument in support of it.

USFREEDOM911 said:
As of July 29th, 2010; any illegal immigrant found to be in Arizona; runs the risk of being charged, with trespassing, among other things.

The fact that you don't want to accept it, just means that as usual you're on another "rant-du-jour".
Click to expand...

You could pass a law labeling it murder, that does not make it murder.

Your law won't take effect. Not in its current form. The legal challenge is coming.
 
RStringfield said:
Property rights are an individual right in Arizona just as they are in every other state. Again, you are the one making the extraordinary claim and you offer no proof or even an argument in support of it.



You could pass a law labeling it murder, that does not make it murder.

Your law won't take effect. Not in its current form. The legal challenge is coming.
Click to expand...

And you can continue to spit into the wind; but it doesn't mean that you're a rain cloud.

The challange will be more then welcome; because I want to see the Feds defend thier complete lack of action over the illegal immigration problem.
 
ok....fuck

USF...cite me the code where someone from another country enters this country illegally and this is chargeable as a trespassing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top