22 May 2007
10:14 AM
I heard Tamara Jacoby say (on Laura Ingraham) that the comprehensive immigration bill will “make people come out of the shadows.” By “people” she meant illegal immigrants. If she meant by “make” what I normally understand “make” to mean, then one should wonder: If we can make a law that makes 12 million illegal immigrants come out of the shadows, then can’t we make law that makes those same 12 million people go back to their country of origin? (After all, we wouldn’t have to bother deporting them.)
We should also wonder: If such a law can really make 12 million people come out of the shadows (or do anything else for that matter) can’t a law make people not commit murder? How does that work? Is it that our laws against murder aren't written as well as this comprehensive immigration bill? Or is it something else? Is there in this legislation some sort of enticement to come out of the shadows? If so then perhaps we need similar enticements in our anti-murder legislation.
On the same subject, in a 20-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay wrote that the Farmer’s Branch apartment measure pre-empts the federal goverment's power to regulate immigration. As my daughther would say, “What the crap?”
If Farmers Branch had a law which prohibited property owners from knowingly leasing to known meth manufacturers, would this same judge rule that such a law interfered with the fed’s power to enforce federal drug law?
We should also wonder: If such a law can really make 12 million people come out of the shadows (or do anything else for that matter) can’t a law make people not commit murder? How does that work? Is it that our laws against murder aren't written as well as this comprehensive immigration bill? Or is it something else? Is there in this legislation some sort of enticement to come out of the shadows? If so then perhaps we need similar enticements in our anti-murder legislation.
On the same subject, in a 20-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay wrote that the Farmer’s Branch apartment measure pre-empts the federal goverment's power to regulate immigration. As my daughther would say, “What the crap?”
If Farmers Branch had a law which prohibited property owners from knowingly leasing to known meth manufacturers, would this same judge rule that such a law interfered with the fed’s power to enforce federal drug law?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- James Frank Solís
- Former soldier (USA). Graduate-level educated. Married 26 years. Texas ex-patriate. Ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(187)
-
▼
May
(17)
- UPDATE: If the President were not (apparently) re...
- Larry Elder explains “Skyrocketing” fuel prices he...
- ANOTHER UPDATE (to this posting): Thomas Sowell ha...
- ANOTHER UPDATE (to this posting): Thomas Sowell ha...
- UPDATE (to the previous posting): Michael Gerson e...
- Respect the law? The law? What law?
- We flatter ourselves most sweetly -- Wisdom Sunday
- I heard Tamara Jacoby say (on Laura Ingraham) that...
- An update to this posting: N. Z. Bear has user fr...
- The Bible and (Illegal) Immigration
- Introducing Wisdom Sundays
- According to James Lewis (American Thinker), "The ...
- Those greedy universities
- Talk about your mood-killers
- Consistent with declaring an end to debates over m...
- Should a free society permit an end to “legitimate...
- Ground Hog Day
-
▼
May
(17)
0 comments: