-=> Quoting Roland Balke to John Sampson <=-
 JS> However, we need not only more people on the border, but more in the 
 JS> interior to remove those who are already here in the country. Forget 
 JS> another "amnesty". The last one was an unqualified disaster. But
 JS> that's the  subject of another post.
 RB> Which I will broach. Uncle conveyed this amnesty, requiring
 RB> documentation and  alll.. IMO he should REVOKE it and use the info to
 RB> round up and deport. Note I make no mention of country of origin; there
 RB> were more than just our southern  neighbors involved. 
I can't agree with that, Roland.  I was against the amnesty --
not the concept so much as the way it was expanded to cover so
many who will likely never be good citizens of _any_ country.
Just the same, the amnesty was conveyed by the United States
and people accepted it in good faith.  To do as you suggest
strikes me bordering on a human-rights abuse, the sort of thing
one might expect of a dictatorship.
We've made that particular bed, and we'll just have to keep
trying to find a comfortable spot somewhere in it.  However, we
do not have to make the same mistake in the future.  IMHO
amnesty should never be granted en masse, but only on an
individual basis and after presentation of evidence showing why
an exception to policy should be granted.
The same goes for political asylum, with one minor exception.
I would detain all amnesty cases (as in "behind bars") until
their cases are adjudicated, but I would permit political
asylum cases to be released into the custody of interested
third parties under an appearance-bond system similar to the
present bail system for suspects in criminal cases.  A federal
magistrate can determine the amount of the bond at a
preliminary hearing during which he/she can "size up" the
apparent legitimacy of the request and the reputation of the
sponsors.  No sponsors, no release on bond -- even if you
enter the country with a steamer-trunk full of cash.  (In
fact, *especially* if you enter the country with a
steamer-trunk full of cash!)
 RB> 'Twas foolish to see it enacted, whoever signed off on it.
No argument there.  But whether it's a good bargain or bad,
we are honor-bound to live up to our end of it.  If the
technically-legitimized "amnesty" recipients cause trouble,
then we have every right to bounce them out of the country;
in fact, the federal government is duty-bound to do so under
laws as binding as the ill-conceived "amnesty".
Walter, Forked Deer River Ilks
wluffman@usit.net
... A bleeding heart can be hell on the carpeting.
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0
---------------