Utopia Talk / Politics / Illegals have 2nd Amendment Rights

Dukhat Member	Wed Mar 20 08:59:37 http://nbc...hern-border-2a-rights-illinois CHICAGO (TND) — A U.S. District Court judge ruled earlier this month that completely prohibiting illegal immigrants from possessing firearms is a violation of the Second Amendment. Nice. Is it still an invasion if we willfully arm them once they come here?
murder Member	Wed Mar 20 16:00:20 Finally there can be a counter force to all to all the white nationalist with assault rifles.
Rugian Member	Wed Mar 20 17:07:54 Illegals should have zero rights on account of them being, you know, illegal. That applies to rights to life and liberty as well.
jergul large member	Wed Mar 20 17:46:10 Ruggy What about illegals who, well instead of lacking proper migration documents, have parking fines?
Rugian Member	Wed Mar 20 17:53:01 Jergul Citizens don't lose all of their constitutional rights even when they commit crimes or fineable offenses. Legal migrants and foreign visitors would not either. Illegals, on the other hand, have no business being on national soil in the first place, so to extend the rights of a country that they shouldn't even be in in the first place is absurd.
kargen Member	Wed Mar 20 17:54:41 Basically what the judge has ruled is that state and local laws that restrict the 2nd amendment in any way are unconstitutional. In Illinois it is required to have Firearms Owner’s Identification Card to carry a firearm or ammo. The illegal immigrant does not have a FOID so legally can't possess a gun in Illinois. Until now.
jergul large member	Wed Mar 20 18:10:36 Ruggy The problem with your reasoning is the presumption of innocence on the one hand (for illegal status can only be determined in a court of law) and the status on criminals another (do some crimes or misdemours void the 2nd amendment? Interesting. I guess government can decide which ones do. Immigration certainly. What about parking tickects? Lets wait the man's call with baited breath). You cant have your cake and it eat too in other words :).
jergul large member	Wed Mar 20 18:13:08 Before you say it. A person becomes illegal only upon conviction of a number of migration offences. In the same way you become a murderer, not when the crime happened, but when you are convicted of the crime. Due process is such a female dog. I know. Very sad. :(
Rugian Member	Wed Mar 20 18:36:26 jergul I'm all for letting the court system play out its process before executing illegals, if that's what you're asking.
Forwyn Member	Wed Mar 20 22:46:10 Curious that a) this was ruled on in Illinois, where they don't even want citizens having guns, and b) it even went to a court. Who gives a fuck if he had a pistol? Smelt down the Saturday Night Special into some tangible Liberty Dollars and send him home.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Mar 21 01:05:20 [sebgul]: "for illegal status can only be determined in a court of law" Rugian, it's not even worth engaging with jergul's disingenuous bullshit. I outlined the stupidity of this argument in the Border Treason thread since sebgul has made this argument before: http://uto...hread=92538&time=1710228244606 Jergul the retard thinks he's found some kind of loophole, but, in reality, the presumption of innocence does not apply during the active commission of a crime. E.g., in jergtard's "murder" example, the *actual* analogy would be whether or not you have to file the right paperwork *while* someone is actively murdering someone to determine guilt. You do not. This person is factually guilty *immediately*. jergtard is intentionally conflating factual and legal guilt by pretending that something is not real until it is reflected in paperwork (paperwork and court being "legal" guilt). In the case of border crossing, the moment someone passes the border at a location which is not a designated port-of-entry, they are immediately in violation of code 8 U.S. Code § 1325 and are factually guilty ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325 ). They can later be charged with *additional* statutes that show illegal actions (legal guilt) as they are processed, but they are immediately, factually guilty of being an illegal alien. [Rugian]: "so to extend the rights of a country that they shouldn't even be in in the first place is absurd." Exactly. Some of the lol-bertarians on Twitter have been making an absurd counter-argument that because natural rights are from God that everyone in the world has them (i.e., including illegal aliens) *and* *therefore* that the government must protect the natural rights even of its enemies and invaders. But, this is globalist logic that puts the cart before the horse since, thankfully, this not reflected in U.S. law (yet, and hopefully never). In reality, even as natural rights are endowed by a Creator, the state must only preserve those rights among its citizens. It is this compact between citizen and government which establishes natural rights as something which government must protect, and certainly the founders expected that a citizen has duties to society in order for the government to protect them (whereas a non-citizen has zero duties and thus should have no expectation of their natural rights being protected as they violate the laws of another nation). The only grey areas for this come from general duties as outlined by international agreements, such as agreeing to a baseline level of humane treatment when someone enters illegally. Lots of those international laws need to be abolished so that it's possible to do things such as sink boats while Maghreb invaders cross the Mediterranean. Globalist-destroyers do not want this not because it's "not humane" but because destroyer logic such as sebgul's uses bureaucracy to slime the obvious distinction between factual and legal guilt, whereas preventing the West's destruction requires that people be able to determine and act upon factual guilt immediately (e.g.; as in self-defense, which they also oppose because they want the state to determine guilt only in abstract not in reality). Globalist-destroyers know that "processing" ultimately favors them (i.e., they can sneak-in their new client groups through bureaucratic manipulation) whereas observing factual guilt would bottleneck their project of destroying national sovereignty. TLDR: sebgul once again advocates for deceptions which ultimately destroy the West by eroding its sovereignty.
jergul large member	Thu Mar 21 01:42:31 CC Good to have cleared up that Fraud Trump is guilty immediately for the ongoing crime of being a fraudster /s. The presumption of innocence applies to the ongoing commission of a crime too. I think a "papieren bitte" person like yourself should try to avoid talking about libertarianism at all frankly. You obviously lack to moral and intellectual fortitude to understand it.
Habebe Member	Sat Mar 23 02:29:47 If a drunk driver sitting at a light, and sobre driver hits their car, who is at fault? The drunk driver, if he wasnt where he was not supposed to be the accident would not have occured. Legally speaking, like felony homocide. The pre existing condition of committing a crime makes it a crime for these illegals to possess firearms. Are they only guilty once caught and given due proccess? Sure, legally speaking, thats the case with nearly all crimes. If Rugian robs a bank he isn't guilty legally speaking until due process, but that doesnt mean it's not also a crime for him to have a firearm with him during the event bevause he wasnt found guilty yet.
patom Member	Sat Mar 23 04:35:40 If you are a convicted Felon, you have lost the right to own or possess a firearm of any kind.
murder Member	Sat Mar 23 05:31:34 If law abiding illegal immigrants are prohibited from having guns, then only criminal illegal immigrants will have guns.
Habebe Member	Sat Mar 23 07:31:58 Murder makes a damn good point....
Forwyn Member	Sat Mar 23 10:01:48 "If you are a convicted Felon, you have lost the right to own or possess a firearm of any kind." Who cares? You also need a FOID card in Illinois. ...unless you're an illegal. As there is no Equal Protection, ignore them all.
jergul large member	Sat Mar 23 15:52:39 A slippery slope. First they came for the felons guns. You did nothing. Then they came for the illegal's guns, you did nothing. Then they came for the insane's guns, you did nothing then too. When they come for your guns on some administrative violation, who will fight for you?
kargen Member	Sat Mar 23 16:35:34 That isn't a slippery slope. People know before they commit a felony what the consequences could be. A loss of certain rights is clearly outlined. They decide to commit the felony anyway. For your slippery slope to exist the law saying felons are not allowed weapons would have to have never existed and the government takes the guns anyway. This ruling is similar to minors and tobacco products in Colorado. There is no legal way for a minor to possess tobacco but also no crime against the actual possession. The crime would be either the minor stealing the tobacco product or some adult purchasing the product for them.
jergul large member	Sat Mar 23 17:27:47 Kargen In your system, it is more what felonies the State insists on in plea bargains more than any factual basis in what happened. The slippery slope could be a simple as an administrative decision to overpolice other demographics than those currently targetted.
jergul large member	Sat Mar 23 17:33:05 As for illegals. Well, illegal entry is a felony. Overstaying is not even a crime from what I can tell. By far the most common form of illegal status in the US. No crime, but yet, no guns. Hmmm. It feels slippery.
kargen Member	Sat Mar 23 18:48:26 Illegal entry isn't always a felony. That is why the problem in determining whether they can own a gun or not. The problem being how as an illegal immigrant do they legally obtain the gun. Goes back to the no legal way for them to have the weapon but no law preventing them from having it. Whoever gave or sold the weapon to the illegal immigrant likely committed a crime though that might not be true in all states. Most states you must be a resident of that state to purchase a weapon and that brings into question what a resident is.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: