Over at ammoland.com, the ubiquitous Alan Korwin points out that immigration reform will dramatically impact firearms freedom. “Neither political party has anticipated the effect,” Korwin cavils. “With the stroke of a pen, millions of people will suddenly find themselves eligible to buy guns. The law that currently bans them from gun ownership or possession only affects them as illegal aliens. With citizenship that disability evaporates. The freedom to keep and bear arms, which the Bill of Rights guarantees the rest of us, will instantly be theirs. This will cause a reordering of the political landscape beyond anything Congress has imagined.” Korwin believes this freshly laid path to citizenship will put these tired, poor, huddled masses (yearning to breathe free) on the road marked People of the Gun. Ralph says they will be Democratic stooges, bolstering the anti-ballistic party’s mission to infringe upon Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. What’s your take?
Home Gun Control Question of the Day: Gun Rights for Amnesty Americans – Good Thing...
Even if many become pro gun, I bet they will still cast Democratic votes, and so for the most part it is likely to hurt the cause politically.
Depends on how much they push Dem candidates to the side of truth and light on the gun issue.
Don’t forget that the Latino population tends to be tremendously religiously conservative. The Democrats may not be doing themselves any favors.
You mean like Cali?
Oh, that hasn’t effected that political landscape what so ever.
Very true. The Hispanics vote democrat, and the democrats elected run off to Sacramento and do whatever they damn well please. IN urban areas there are often few if any republican candidates. In the last election cycle, a young lady ran as a republican against DiFi–she couldn’t even get the support of her own party, even though there was no other republican in the race. With the exception of Yee and a few bozos from the Bay Area, all of the gun bills have been generated by south state legislators.
Unfortunately Hispanic political views tend to be typical of South America – highly leftist.
In their minds, a socialistic Government > A Government that matches their religious convictions.
You have two kinds of illegals in America. The ones who didn’t have the money to bribe their way to the US, but want opportunity beyond what they’d ever find back home. The hard working, honest kind.
Then you have the shiftless welfare peasants who know that the US has far better welfare and that a single anchor baby will entitle them to a Monthly Government check. Heck, you don’t even have to be American to get food stamps.
It’s amusing to note that the first kind usually does not want citizenship. They’d be thrilled with a guest worker plan.. BUT that would be horning in on the democrat-supporting labor unions, and the democrats are only interested in fortifying their own voter demographic. So we’re going to force citizenship on everyone! …and solidify the Democratic power base.
I’ve lived in SoCal. Saw the invasion from 20 years ago.
Anyone who thinks that more than about 15% of influx from south of the Rio Grande is going to be “conservative” or “libertarian” in any shape, manner or form is delusional.
Indeed. It is an invasion, pure and simple, with the usual aim of invasions: to take over and/or take things away from the invaded territory. See, e.g., La Raza. It would be cheaper to buy them all a first class ticket to Mexico City AND give them a $1,000 cash than to allow them here. If they do not like Mexico, let them fix their own country. WE have quite enough problems of our own and are quite crowded already. Moreover, an invasion of this magnitude (11 to 20 million already here, 46 million more over the next few decades per the CBO) will fundamentally change the nature of the target country. In short, this will make the U.S. much more like Mexico. Hardly an improvement. If I wanted to live in a country like Mexico…I would move to Mexico.
I pretty much agree, though there is not much you can expect a totally-disarmed people to do about it. I always liked the writer Ed Abbey’s take on the subject. Abbey was for very strong border protections, and said every would-be illegal immigrant caught at the border should be issued a modern assault weapon and a backpack of ammunition, and sent back into Mexico to set their own country aright again.
Amnestied Latinos are likely to be strongly Catholic, and the church and its hierarchy are consistently, vehemently anti-RKBA/2A, and have been exploiting recent shootings to further this position.
“This brings me to my central point: If any one group can effectively begin breaking the NRA’s stranglehold on our government it is the Catholic bishops.”
In my experience, Latinos who understand RKBA/2A were all legal immigrants who came to the US with respect for our system of law. Their Catholicism is not knee jerk, and a lot of them vote independent or Republican.
And I did not realize this country was founded upon denial of rights to people of the wrong religious conviction. But whaddaya know? I am finding out different here at TTAG.
Some of you should try listening to yourselves once in a while. You should be sickened by what you see and hear.
Thank you Marco Rubio. In the real world, many (most) of these newly-minted, but generally poor, citizens will be clients of the welfare state, and as such clients of the Democrat party. Sure they’ll be voting for food stamps, SSDI, Pell Grants and WIC, but they’ll be empowering the party of gun-grabbing.
Also, if we’re talking about tatted-up membersof MS-13, they’ll help convince moderate whites to join the gun-control side.
“Don’t forget that the Latino population tends to be tremendously religiously conservative”
That may or may not be true but they are voting for Democratic promises over God’s promises. They are voting like every other Gimmie-Dat interest group and looking for a free place at the trough.
And eventually turn us into the very same thing they are running away from.
Perhaps they understand the separation of church and state better?! :0
(no, not really.)
Neiowa: “Not Catholic/church going, Drugged out, Gangbagging, Drug production/transport/distirution, ILLEGAL immigration, Massive unwed births/promiscuious, rampant welfare use/abuse.”
I’m confused, are we still talking about latin-american immigration or inbred, midwest caucasians here?! Except for the ILLEGAL immigration bit, that resembles half of Missouri…
Clif H. “As such all of these people have that right whether or not they are citizens or receive amnesty.”
Nail, meet head. Smack! The right of the people, not the right of the citizen. Reading the rest of the Constitution and bill of rights, it’s clear they knew the difference. The meant to say people.\
Pascal: “we will have no such provisions here.”
Survey says not. As a naturalized citizen myself, let me tell you that the test is only given in English. There are few exceptions (people of a certain age). Try again.
For the record, I oppose amnesty. No criminal should reap the benefit of his crime. Ever.
The “Hispanic” (whatever that is) family is traditonal values is a BS myth. Likely developed by the DNC.
Look at the current demographics and the voting record. NOT Conservative AT ALL. Not Catholic/church going, Drugged out, Gangbagging, Drug production/transport/distirution, ILLEGAL immigration, Massive unwed births/promiscuious, rampant welfare use/abuse. Tell me when you find personal responsibility or Conservative values. Firmly in the degenerate wing of the dem party and dem voter/vote corruption corner. If not the lefties would not be pushing for amnesty.
I can only support this wholeheartedly. Amnesty is supposed to be a forgiving of the charges against one, and, as such, all the amnestee’s full Constitutional rights must be restored. IN FULL.
I agree that naturalized citizens should possess all constitutional liberties, else they become disenchanted with our concept of “Equal Rights”.
The real question whether or not those who found their way illegaly into our borders should be rewarded above and beyond those who worked honestly and diligently according to the system only to have some “Law Breaker” get the rights before them’ else they themselves become disenchanted at the unfairness of our political opportunisticism.
Screw the pinche illegals. Rule of law is deportation, Anchor babies, Illegals, Dreamers, period!! If ya can’t come legal don’t show at all.
EIther they’ll be Americans or they aren’t. Fuck creating more in-between limbo states.
The real question is:
If people are coming in (according to the rule of the state or not) to get handouts from the state, are they worse than whites born here and getting handouts? Everyone wants free stuff (like Glock giveaway drawings).
The problem is that we’re forced at gunpoint to contribute, rather than allowed to give freely as we see fit. If I don’t pay for handouts, it’s not the “illegals” who show up at my doorstep to haul me off. I’ll be more respectful of police when they stop being the gunmen in armed robbery.
“Banning” guns from unregistered folks is about as futile and destructive as trying to ban guns for the rest of us.
We must keep in mind that the right to bear arms (self defense) is a natural and civil right GUARANTEED by the Second Amendment of our constitution, not granted by that amendment or constitution. As such all of these people have that right whether or not they are citizens or receive amnesty. The only thing that will change is that they will not be subject to arrest for exercising this right and they will have an easier time legally purchasing appropriate equipment.
I seriously doubt that those that believe they need a firearm now, regardless of their legal status, have not found a way to purchase or otherwise acquire that item, whether for personal protection or illegal purposes.
+1 on your first paragraph. The right to keep and bear arms is a Human’s natural right, whether that human is a US citizen or legal resident or not. The 2nd Amendment guarantees that the government may not infringe on that right.
And if we don’t run them out/arrest them, we have decided they should be allowed to be armed and in the US. I did not make that decision.
Perhaps if we get people into shooting we can open them up to, and educate in, constitutionalism? I see an open door there.
Immigrants, especially immigrants who own / work at small businesses, are often gun owners. Sure, they’re not “tacticool” or “operators”, but take stroll with me through any Chinatown USA, and you’d find plenty of snub-nose revolvers, shotguns, 1911s, and Glocks. Making it easier for many of these immigrants to earn their citizenship will only bolster our numbers – if the gun owning community welcomes them.
I’m an immigrant and avid gun owner and gun right supporter. But I came here legally and am not eligible for any special program because I can more than take care of myself financially. Means my vote can’t be bought with ebt or obamaphones, so I don’t count anyway.
Oh yeah, I’ve never felt unwelcome in the gun community, in general they/we’re nice people. 🙂
Well, recently legalized immigrants will probably be like most other folks…a mixed bag. Maybe us RKBA types should make a real effort at outreach, rather than assume they are a lost cause, which would be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Does the NRA, GOA, SAF etc. have Spanish language literature?
Good question. Supposedly “Eddie Eagle” materials are available in Spanish… why not more pro-gun literature?
I am from Puerto Rico and I tried contacting the NRA a few times. Well most of the time i forward them legislation or police documents and they tell me they will get somebody that can read Spanish to take a look at them It sounds more like somebody knows a little bit of Spanish and not that they have somebody dedicated to it.
BS. You want to live in the US – LEARN THE LANGUAGE. Thats in not Mexican.
I’m fed up with “dial 1 for English, dial 2 for Spanish (Mexican)” and “dual language” signage in every massmarket chain store.
So you have studied the Mexican language? Where?
If you’ve been around enough Spanish speakers, you’ll realize that Mexican Spanish isn’t like South American Spanish. There are different dialects and even for people who don’t speak Spanish well (or even at all), once you’ve heard people side-by-side say the same thing, you’ll be able to spot who is from Mexico vs. (eg) someone from Columbia or Peru. Mexican Spanish has a much rougher sound, IMO.
I know all that, of course. But my point was there is no such thing as the “Mexican language”. And I certainly will stand by that.
The commenter put the Mexican in parentheses as a modifier to Spanish.
S/he is technically correct. Mexican Spanish diverges from Spain Spanish sufficiently that it is a constant source of discussion on tourism/travel and linguistics forums. Example:
Yes, it’s true. There is also Brazilian Portuguese, and Pidgin English, from the remote, U.S.-controlled Pacific nation of Pidgi.
Ironically, in order to become a Mexican Citizen you must demonstrate and take verbal and written exams in Spanish but we will have no such provisions here.
Then of course, no American goes to Mexico to become a common laborer.
Its the stuff of pipe dreams.
The ability to do something is meaningless without the motivation to act.
Those immigrants may be American on paper,but mentally they’re still fans of the “Old Country”- and the Old Country’s common sense gun laws.
Until we eliminate-by some as yet unknown process-their cultural bias against gun ownership as an act for criminals ,all we’ve done is created a bulletproof majority for our enemies.
I think a lot of those folks probably aren’t too fond of the gun laws in the “Old Country” that prevented them from protecting themselves from the cartels.
Many immigrants in our country are incredibly hard workers, value labor, and have a good moral compass. You would be surprised how many Mexicans here in Texas support Conservative values, have a strong work ethic and believe in freedom.
Do the folks out there busting their asses in 110 degree heat for a measly 3 bucks an hour strike you guys as Liberal Democrats? If anything their values are MORE American than the folks voting in Progressives in places like California and New York, and they are definitely more American than the asshats sitting back in their Navigators, sippin syrup and texting hoes on their Obama phones while they collect 1200.00 a month in welfare.
It would benefit us greatly to not write them off so hastily.
My 2 cents.
In my experience, and I freely admit I’m no expert, the first generation immigrents are hard working people who sacrifice much to give their offspring a shot at a better life. These people tend to be conservative small business owners who have a great work ethicand great pride.
Welcoming these people to the gun side should be a top issue with allof us. After all, they and their kids are going to vote.
I think it’s worth noting that there two types of immigrants, legal (who do tend to be conservative and hard working), and illegal (who by their nature are more concerned with themselves then with society at large, hence the illegal entrance). Not that illegals don’t work hard, but they are different in how they act compared to legal immigrants.
The problem (as a former SoCal rezidente) isn’t that they don’t hold social, or even fiscally conservative values. The problem is that they came to our country illegally in order to take advantage of the American Dream, which for them meant healthcare, schools, welfare, and other Government run things. So when given a chance they vote themselves more government handouts, they happily do.
The doofusi in Sacramento from SoCal don’t get elected running on socially liberal platforms. They get elected by pandering to the wants of the communities, the rest of the state be damned.
When someone is sitting there promising you more stuff, it’s really hard to turn it down just because someone else has to unfairly pay for it. Most of the illegal immigrants come from countries where the rich have been unfairly prospering from them for so long that when given the chance they don’t have any qualms about taking handouts here.
Just my $.02
I was under the impression that one’s rights aren’t contingent upon political affiliation. How could I have been so wrong?
Happily, I find myself in the minority opinion once more!
>> I think it’s worth noting that there two types of immigrants, legal (who do tend to be conservative and hard working), and illegal (who by their nature are more concerned with themselves then with society at large, hence the illegal entrance). Not that illegals don’t work hard, but they are different in how they act compared to legal immigrants.
You would be wrong.
Legal immigration has country quotas, so you get relatively higher percentage of people from countries which emphasize social welfare more, like Europe or even India. This does not necessarily mean that all of them will lean left, but on average that group will definitely trend towards the left in US (or, perhaps, the more appropriate way to put it is that US trends to the right relative to all other developed countries).
Illegal immigration is mostly from Mexico, so you’ll get a slice of poor, often rural people from that society alone. Their values are overall closer to conservative, at least on social issues. They might support Dems more, but solely over immigration and more visible racism on the right. If Reps want and can deal with that, they will get the majority of Latino vote for sure.
Also, the notion that illegal entrance translates to “not caring for society” doesn’t hold water. This would only be true if they actually did have a realistic legal venue for immigration, but choose to pursue the illegal option. If you are at all familiar with US immigration laws, you should know that there’s basically no way for a typical Mexican peasant to obtain US citizenship, unless he has a direct close relative with it already. Even for skilled workers, the queue is many years. Without a degree, you can pretty much forget it.
I’m all for an open-borders policy – with no government funded handouts for ANYONE. Business (regulation/subsidy) or Person (SNAP/FHA,etc) and ending the Drug War
Fix the money/drugs, and the flow of criminals stops.
This is the demo all gun rights orgs must focus on.
Here comes the gun ban…awesome -_-
If they are in fact, citizens, then the question is moot. The entire constitution protects them just as it protects you.
It’s been said (likely more than once here) that a gun grabber is someone who hasn’t been robbed yet.
Considering that these folks live in some hairy parts of town, and that they value their lives and the lives of their loved ones as much as any citizen, I’d think gun control, including restrictions on ownership, would be the sort of thing they’d resent the hell out of.
Could be the President is slitting his own political throat on this one.
They will be Democratic stooges. The gun issue doesn’t even move the needle for them. Big government entitlements do.
So true. Democrat voting block plain and simple.
“Bloc”, not “block”. Different things. Though I’ve often seen the term, “block voting”, it’s incorrect, and it doesn’t mean what the people who use it think it means.
Isn’t it true that you can be a resident alien and own firearms? Clearly you cannot be an illegal, but once you are no longer illegal, I believe you would then be able to purchase and own guns, of course depending upon where you live. You don’t have to become a full citizen, if I remember correctly.
A lot of people will continue to vote Democratic unless and until there is some other, realistic option to the Democratic Party. Republicans need to wake up and reclaim their party from the religious right that they sold their souls too back in the Reagan years. Maybe then things will become more balanced.
Dude, most of these new Americans would probably agree with the GOP on religious issues, just like a lot of blacks do. It’s (over-) educated whites who get their panties in a twist about the moral majority stuff. Poor and minority voters go Dem for the free stuff, plus some racial solidarity and scare-mongering. And of course, the abslutely vile way that minority conservatives are treated by their own ethnic communities scares folks back into line.
>> Isn’t it true that you can be a resident alien and own firearms? Clearly you cannot be an illegal, but once you are no longer illegal, I believe you would then be able to purchase and own guns, of course depending upon where you live. You don’t have to become a full citizen, if I remember correctly.
On the federal level, there’s nothing prohibiting you from that. You can even be a “non-resident alien” (which is a silly term, since you’re actually still residing in the country – what it means is that you don’t have permanent residency / green card; e.g. temp. workers on H1B are “nonresident aliens”).
On state levels, some state ban or otherwise restrict such ownership, or place additional requirements on it. For example, in WA, non-citizens require a license to merely possess any firearm, while citizens only require a license to carry concealed; and in NM, non-citizens cannot carry concealed at all. SAF has been fighting a battle for more even laws for non-citizens for a long time now – e.g. in 2008 they have forced WA to start issuing those alien firearm licenses, where before it was a “shall issue” scheme that was “no issue” in practice, and they’re now suing NM over their conceal carry ban.
Actually, in WA non-resident aliens need the permit, but resident aliens don’t.
The Nixon years, actually.
By dumping their roots and embracing was to became the double R (specifically by reversing their position on “family planning”) they split the Democratic vote by nabbing a large portion of the Catholic community.
For an illegal alien in the US, the path to US citizen should start with a plane ticket back home to wherever it was they came from. Then they can apply for US citizenship like everyone else who immigrates to the US legally.
Just like ancestors did!
I’m pretty sure the hypocrisy of your statement will continue to go over your head.
Tyler didn’t speak about his ancestors. I consider the “but the United States is an immigration country!” argument so glibly mouthed by every corporation and farmer in need of cheap labor. China was once populated by warrior invaders on ponies. That doesn’t mean they’d like that this year. The academic left cannot make up its mind. If we speak of the ancestors settling the country, they rant about Native Americans. If we speak against illegal immigration or extremely high quotas, they rant about how “this country is built on immigration.” Just after they’ve spoken about the need for birth control, zero population growth, and right after they’ve carried on about stopping urban sprawl and the bain of urban overcrowding in the same sentence. It doesn’t matter what your ancestors did. What matters is what leads to a good economy and liberty, to a populace abiding by law of their own will, not due to a jackboot on their throat.
You are so right. Illegal immigration is about, in this order: CHEAP LABOR, CHEAP LABOR, and CHEAP LABOR.
Oh, forgot. And UNION-BUSTING.
As someone that did it the legal way, I agree.
I think these new “citizens” may be the strongly funded and well armed civilian army oboner wants to have.
Great…. more people to compete with for ammo!
Maybe some of these immigrants will look around, see the opportunity and open an ammo factory. Sikorski was an immigrant, after all. As was Carnegie.
The bill of rights does not apply to citizens; it applies to the government. It restricts the government from doing things, such as infringing on the right of the “people” to keep and bear arms. They were people before amnesty, and will be so after.
Of course what people should be talking about in the amnesty bill is the backdoor national ID card it implements.
Many of them likely just vote Dem to get better benefits. Once they get citizenship they’ll have no need for the Dems. Still, a large portion will still possibly vote for them thoUgh.
When your whole life has been spent in forced poverty, and the only reason you came here was to not be murdered or starve to death, our overpriced inefficient safety net probably looks pretty damn good.
Not many new immigrants completely understand the American Dream anymore.
Stupid is a stupid does.
This will be asking for it.
13 million new folks voting for Democrats to get the free stuff.
Just what this angry old white man needs right??
Dem stooges all of them. Does anyone really thing they care about about a Bill of Rights? These people can’t even read it in Spanish, much less English. These are peasants brought in to bolster dem voting. Give them something free, and they will vote dem forever. Caring about human rights and freedom is beyonf them amd not why they were allowed herein the first place.
Gun rights for people that ACTUALLY need amnesty, yes.
Making millions of CRIMINALS able to vote against my gun rights in future elections gun owners… well there’s a whole horse before the cart with that issue.
The question is, how did you suddenly end up with MILLIONS of criminals in the first place? Generally speaking, a number that high indicates that the law is unjust, seeing how so many people routinely break it.
“Generally speaking, a number that high indicates that the law is unjust, seeing how so many people routinely break it”.
Bullshit, I spent 20K and 14 years becoming a US citizen, I didn’t sneak across the boarder and demand my free stuff, there is a way to do it legally and the “millions” should have done it the legal way, they are criminals and the government changing their status from illegal to legal doesn’t change the fact they broke the law.
Ross – I hope you write/email/tell your story to our elected officials – it is important to know that the system we have DOES work; however just because its overloaded doesn’t mean that we just give up.
Don’t you think that is is ridiculous to require 14 years and $20k in cash for someone to become a US citizen? This is a very arbitrary bar, and is so extremely high that most people from Mexico who have reasons to immigrate in the first place have no chance whatsoever of making it.
Lear enough Spanish to help fill out 4473’s and how the Democratic Party is almost universally anti gun.
Based on recent trends, newly legalized “immigrants” and the millions who follow them are likely be from drawn from the poor, the uneducated and the unintelligent classes. As such, they will support the Party of Free Sh1t, and they will do what they’re told in order to get their free sh1t. So anyone expecting any kind of help from those immigrants is nuts. They will sell their souls and your freedom for food stamps.
Ralph is right……again.
Ralph is correct, and I am stunned this is even a question. You people really believe that the illegals the amnesty bill would legalize will vote republicans? That they really care about the 2A? For example, Ted Cruz, a Cuban American for those of you unaware, was elected to the senate from Texas in a landslide, but lost the Hispanic vote to a “fat white guy with a mullet” to paraphrase a classic quote. Brian Sandoval, Governor of Nevada, lost the Hispanic vote to Harry Reid’s little boy while easily winning the election. Food for thought boys and girls.
Absolutely agree with Ralph. Check out SoCal inter-city schools with English as a second language in CA. 90% of this population will vote for more free sh!t, unions, and Dems. Y’all are fooling yourselves if you think a massive influx of poor, uneducated people from lower classes will vote pro-gun.
If I’m wrong, and I hope I am, please feel free to rub it in my face. Honestly, I hope that I am. There are certainly some hard working immigrants who I deeply respect. As a whole, however, I see illegal immigrants committing a disproportionate number of crimes and freely using social services while avoiding the income taxes required of those with social security numbers.
100% correct Ralph!!
I always laugh at the news articles saying how all these illegal aliens will “save social security” BS. As soon as they become citizens they will be entitled to all the rights and privileges of the rest of us, but they WILL NOT be paying their way. They will take from the system more than they will give back and will elect politicians who will continue the gravy train. They have zero desire or will to become free of the government handouts. Just imagine how well Obamacare will workout when you have all these new citizens who will qualify for free healthcare because they do not make nor have the desire to make enough to pay for it themselves. THAT math was never considered in Obamacare and will stress a poorly devised policy even more.
If anything, it will be a competition between the different welfare groups.
We only have to look over the pond to Europe to see how their socialist system combined with their immigration has worked out not so well. I see it not working any better here.
All these new citizens will stress all the social programs we have and there will not be enough people to pay for them so either everyone will have to accept less, or the country will go broke — the democrats are so found of Europe that we will be broke just like they are. Americans will have to become happy with less and having less because they will be taxed to the point where there will be little they can afford.
I’ve been around the left coast (and in particular SoCal) enough to tell people who haven’t been there that Ralph has this one pegged.
What most people don’t seem to understand is that the US economy can’t and doesn’t create many jobs any more for people with no educations and no desire to attain any education or training. Those sectors of our economy are gone, gone, gone. Talking about farm field work is a useless distraction. Automation will remove many of those jobs in the next 10 years or so. I used to be a farmer, and I’m here to tell people that most farmers, if they can make it pencil, will leap to buy a machine to replace manual labor – eight days a week. Why? Simple: You don’t have to listen to complaints, excuses, you don’t have to do paperwork, deal with housing and medical emergencies, etc. A machine doesn’t complain, and with only two operators, you can make a machine work 24×7 on a farm.
Many crops are being bred to adapt to automation (ever wonder why modern tomatoes taste like crap? Automation breeding, that’s why. Wonder why people are having issues with wheat now? Because wheat has been bred to prevent lodging first, yield second, and devil take the hindmost on what’s actually in the wheat), and automation is now picking up steam in places that most non-farmers have no clue about. For example, do you people know there are robots that will milk cows now? Do you know that milk production goes up when the cows can choose when to enter the milking parlor where the robot is? Well, it’s true. One machine will service over 200 cows a day, and it will even tell you which cows have a high bacterial counts or mastitis. The cows are either chipped with RFID chips or they wear chips on collars. The farmer knows when the cow is drying off and needs to be taken off the hot feed, the whole deal. It’s truly amazing stuff. And only 15 years ago, the idea that there would ever be a machine to replace humans in the milking parlor was pure science fiction.
The idea that this country is going to economically absorb all this low/no skilled labor is pure mental masturbation. These people, absent a huge drive to educate them (and most of these people have little to no desire to obtain any education) will end up on some form of welfare and public assistance. Oh, and wages for US citizens in the lower 20% of the wage scale will collapse under the huge surplus of labor available for the low skill jobs that there are in the US economy, so more US citizens might end up on welfare as well.
Well, we know who the party of welfare “rights” is, and they’re not friendly to gun rights.
Since you were a farmer, I couldn’t help but notice no problems with wheat (and many other crops) were laid at the feet of genetic modification. Are you down with GMO? Lab tests with rats on GMO corn proved they became sterile after three generations of feeding on it, and did not live full lives after the third, since they didn’t exist; their parents were sterile.
Such sticky issues cannot have escaped the attentions of Monsanto, could they?
I never planted the crops currently referred to as “GMO.” I planted varieties of our crops (grasses, alfalfa and cover crops) that were selectively bred, certainly, and even without genetic engineering issues, tomatoes and wheat have been bred for harvesting. Selective plant breeding has been going on for a long, long, long time. There’s nothing in our food chain that hasn’t been selectively bred for characteristics important to the farmer over what the consumer might want.
There’s lots of take issue with in the genetically modified (and patented) varieties of various crops, but I’ve not kept up on any of the issues WRT to health or other effects on test subjects who are consuming the crops. I’m aware of some of the contractual and legal issues involved when one buys GM seeds, and on those, I was quite adamantly against having anything to do with getting involved with GM products. The legal language in the “fine print” on those contracts for seed contain some truly draconian powers you’d be granting to your seed dealer or the manufacture. I said “no thanks.”
Good for you. Thanks for the reply.
Ralph is right. The new “citizens will be far more attached to “bread and circuses” supplied by Uncle Samta Claus that their neither appreciate nor be attracted to the possibilities of their God-given Natural Rights.
“… Ralph says they will be Democratic stooges, …”
A respectful memorandum to the political right:
My take is multipartite.
First, a path to citizenship isn’t citizenship; it’ll be a while before these folks get their 2A guarantees.
Second, by and large, the Hispanic (yes, that’s just as good a word as Latino) community tends toward social consertivatism and to have a very good work/enterprise ethic, “family values” et cetera.
While I detest social conservatism as much as approve of fiscal conservatism, overall I quite resect these people, even if shaking my head at how they got here.
On that score, “our” ancestors came here in the same way and worse. Invaders, shooting and enslaving the locals and spreading a dozen plagues. We have no right to complain. At least these people aren’t wiping out entire nations.
The Hispanic community tends toward the Democratic party only because the Right comes off as thinking of them only as fruit pickers, maids and landscapers.
Treat ’em with respect and they’ll listen. Also, they’re smart enough to know what matters — but injure their (quite justified) pride and you’ve lost, at least for a generation.
I’m not sure why the Right is more pro-gun, as individual freedom means to many righties only the freedom to choose one’s Christian denomination and to carry a gun.
That’s probably overly harsh, but it’s bsically the picture presented by those who speak most noticeably. The Right has a serious image problem.
I don’t mean the individuals. Hell, I live in rural Kansas. Just about ALL my friends are Republicans. As a collective, though, there are some serious shortcomings and even IBM has better marketing.
The folks hereabouts don’t care if you “live in sin,” what you do in your own home, how much you drink or if you bay at the Moon — so long as you’re a good neighbor. If someone comes up to the door with propaganda, they’re from the city.
I don’t really believe any political faction is all that great, but frankly I’d rather all these new votes align themselves with the fiscally conservative, personally accountable side of the aisle.
I’d also like that side to be a little more realistic about the little guy. It wasn’t lack of personal accountability that made my Enron ESOP portfolio disappear. I don’t approve of cherry-picking Leviticus to provide a convenient scapegoat. Contrary to Romney’s assertion, patriotism doesn’t depend on a belief in a single, white, male God.
It’s possible to have a country with a reasonable safety net, business-friendly climate, no cadmium in the drinking water, automobiles, a negative carbon footprint and safe streets.
I invite the Right to do the math, think further into the future than the latest projection of when the Rapture is supposed to occur (ESPECIALLY on environmental policy — anyone who believes we can’t fu¢k up our world should read up on the Dust Bowl) and to respectfully extend their Right hand to a pretty damned honorable bunch of people.
Yeah, they came here illegally. But they came here because the U.S. is still pretty damned cool, and they represent a serious chunk of the future.
Thats my pitch. I invite you to prove yourselves a worthy adversary and hit it out of the park.
EDIT: Actually, it was lack of personal accountability that made my Enron stock go byebye — but not on my part.
Not much to disagree with, Russ, except for your caricatures. Otherwise I think you’re pretty much on the mark. Most Hispanics, illegal or otherwise, would rather have a job than welfare, which the Republicans would do well to note and take advantage of it.
As for the single, white, male God (Anglo?), I don’t know why you’d think that. God the Son is a Jew.
I don’t believe the caricatures, and admit that they’re a tidge harsh, but unfortunately the less-than-favorable folks are the most visible, and they skew the presented image.
Just like Obama lin Biden, Feinkenstein et cetera overshadow the far more numerous Truman types. Unfortunately, they’re also leading us over a cliff.
As for Jeshua ben Merriam, I am among other things a journeyman framer born of a Jewish mom. Hmmm.
That comment was based upon his typically being drawn more like Ted Nugent than Tony Shaloub.
Best wishes, sir.
EDIT: Shaloub ain’t Jewish, but is in the right gene pool for Palestine and has the look…
Well said. There’s nothing conservative about trashing the planet where our grandchildren will live. And all the Republican talk about “personal responsibility” rings pretty damn hollow as Wall Street and corporate America run roughshod over the rest of us, then we pay to bail them out when they go too far. But let’s talk about those lazy people working only two or three part-time minimum wage jobs and getting food stamps (which are themselves essentially an agribusiness subsidy with an incidental benefit to the poor).
As I always say, “conservatives” don’t seem much interested in conserving ANYTHING, besides personal wealth, whereas “liberals” don’t seem very much interested in LIBERTY. And “libertarians” are interested in conserving the same thing the “conservatives” are…
A classical Liberal is someone who thinks much the same as the prototypical Classical Liberal, Thomas Jefferson, does.
Blame Ayn Rand and her followers for making Conservative=greedy sociopath. Alan Greenspan, as I understand, crashed on her couch and drank up her philosophy for quite some time.
Ewww. Makes an horrid kind of sense, though. Just — ewww.
The GOP needs generations to get rid of the religion, latent racism, and neocon global politics, but they don’t have that kind of time.
Wow, Bixby hates conservatives. That’s fine, I detest liberals. Treat them with respect? Your side treats them as helpless children and a treasure trove of potential votes. They vote democrat because most low income, poorly educated voters do, not because conservatives treat them as hired hands. Poor people and leftists believe the role of government is that of Santa Claus. A reasonable safety net? I believe we spend more on entitlements than on national defense. How much more would make you happy? Everyone wants clean water to drink and safe streets. The question is how we get there. Your side believes onerous regulations and taxes in the name of the environment, and banning the private ownership of firearms in the name of public safety. A swipe at Romney? Really? Give it a rest, Obama won, be happy. Rejoice. Blaming the right for Enron? Ok, I blame the left for Fannie and Freddie. Even Steven? And sorry about all those Native Americans that were killed. No one alive had anything whatever to do with it, but if it makes you feel better, I apologize. And you are correct, they did come here illegally. It is obviously your view that we should now reward them for that.
Please re-read my post. I was talking about image, not the dominant traits of the majority.
There are very few things I actually hate, and much about actual conservatism (other than social) that I admire.
EDIT: I don’t want a bigger safety net, just a reasonable one. No, I don’t blame the Right for Enron — but as a former Enron employee I can say with certainty that it demonstrates that self-reliance and financial sense are no guarantee that one won’t ever need a hand. Not a hand-out, by the way — just a hand.
I’m only pointing out that the public perception — thanks to talking heads — is that the position of the Right is that no net at all is best. There ARE those who feel that way.
Not everyone wants clean water; the owners of. Denver cadmium smelter fir years decried as “anti-business” laws forbidding them to dump their effluents into Cherry Creek.i know; I lived there.
I only mention Romney because his comment alienated a lot of people.
Safer streets? Honor 2A, damn it.
Of the two ajor wings of American politics, I don’t believe tat either hits the mark — the Left needs to be reigned in and some of it is in need of amputation. Same for the Right, but of course it’s different stuff.
As things sit, the Right scares me far more, but I also believe that it’s more savable than the current Left with its absolute worship of the Allmighty State.
It’s the Right of Eisenhower — tempered by the occasional moderate leftie — that I’d like to see, and in which I feel our best hope to lie.
Please, sir, re-read my post.
I would argue that both Clinton and Obama have governed far to the right of Eisenhower, who was basically a liberal in the classic WWII era sense of the word – he believed that great things could be accomplished with collective effort. He was also essentially a Keynesian, and the Interstate Highway project demonstrated both of these traits. And of course he famously warned us about just exactly what we’ve now bought ourselves, with no hope of a refund.
While you are correct, under Eisenhower there was work, reasonable freedom (irrespective of McCarthy) and real optimism.
He believed in fixing only things which were demonstrably broken.
That, and far fewer things were broken.
Dunno about you but my furthest traced ancestors were sent over here by James the deuce as slaves around 500 years ago. The rest either came here when Italy was fascist and they were not, or were Frenchies who helped the Native Americans unsuccessfully fight off British brutality. Not every “invader” was necessarily such. Even people who came here of their own free will tried to coexist with the natives, not every eebil wat maing was here dangling beads and tying nooses.
Excuses abound from the left about immigration, Ropingdown addressed them all quite well a few comments up from here.
Oh dear! Someone needs to issue an apology to you.
Purposefully obtuse response. Nobody asked for one, I would not care one way or the other if any were offered. It’s simply the point that all known human history is rife with people mistreating others, no single group should get special treatment over any other. People who break the law here should not be given special treatment over people who have not broken the law and spend years of effort and tons of money getting here.
Granting amensty and firearms to criminal aliens is a great victory for American sovereignty.
It’s a mystery to me why the Elephants preemptively surrender the Hispanic vote. There are plenty of lower middle class whites who vote Republican. In fact, according to Old Media, if you do, you’re either a hayseed or a tycoon. So why not other poor people.
It’s certain the Democrats aren’t interested in helping poor minorities, otherwise they would have tried to make it easier for reliably Republican Cubans to get into the U.S. They want 11 million new voters. Hispanics could be won over. But it won’t happen if the Republicans keep doing nothing.
One thing though about new Americans owning guns: tasting freedom makes most people want more, and want to keep what they have. I’d like to think that people who have seen what happened in gun-free Mexico would prefer to be able to defend themselves.
Cubans ARE Hispanic, but we don’t have a large undocumented Cuban population. Also, while most undocumented immigrants are Hispanic, not all are.
I know quite a few British, Irish, Kenyan, Chinese et cetera folks who, er, overstayed their legal welcome.
Russ, once a Cuban is “feet dry” in the U.S., they are granted amnesty from, you know, brutal Commies and all. Hence, no illegal Cubans, including known right-wing terrorists like Orlando Bosch, a mass murderer who died peacefully in Miami in 2011.
I believe at one point, Castro took advantage of this policy to send boatloads of criminals and mentally ill people to Florida.
I know, sir. Some of what I said was tongue in cheek.
It’s a pity “El Condor” Bosch died a free man in 2011, without paying for the murders he committed in the name of “freedom”.
But he will not escape his karma. That shit is REAL.
What’s the name of the rhetorical device by which through answering a query, you’re acknowledging the legitimacy of the statements made in that query? Because I feel like answering that question acknowledges the legitimacy of the amnesty to begin with.
I think the amnesty is bullshit, and I don’t think the Amnesty-Americans will be any help whatsoever on any issue I care about.
Couldnt agree more, this is one of those “No good can come of this” sort of deals.
Illegal immigrants granted amnesty will be Democratic party stooges. The GOP is too idiotic to be able to come across as reasonable to them. The GOP currently has made two major mistakes:
1) Coming across in the Primaries as so anti-illegal immigrant that it comes across as being thinly-veiled racism. A lot of Latinos are scared to death of the GOP. And that is why the Latino vote went 80% for Obama in the last election (as opposed to the sixty-so percent it usually goes for the Democratic party candidate)
2) Not explaining to the Latinos that conservatism is very much about helping people, but is for more limited government (and explain the reasons why it is about limited government). Explain to them that government and society are not one and the same, that people can help one another through things like the family, community, church, charity, and so forth, none of which are the government.
Unfortunately, the GOP has not done this and the Latinos have said that they do not necessarily even agree with the GOP message of more limited government, that in their culture, they believe in people helping one another (i.e. they do not understand conservatism).
I think anyone who thinks granting illegals amnesty will help the cause of gun rights is smoking crack.
The following quote is from a little write-up I read today, about Crabby Old Hags Demand Action, collecting signatures for a gun-control initiative in Washington state.
“Something that made me most proud,” Swenson said, “were the number of immigrants and newly-minted American citizens who came to sign the petitions.”
Ugh! Yuck! Bleah!
Anybody who lives in the 206 knows the kind of busy-bodies that run Mercer Island. If they’re really concerned about stopping violence, and saving the lives of children, I challenge them to spend time in the Rainier Valley, the southend, or hell, White Center. They won’t, though.
So I just finished perusing through the comments, some rational and others thinly veiled racism/xenophobia, and felt like I had to put in my two cents as you Americans like to say. Anyone who claims that Hispanics are reliant on welfare is misinformed.
Most Hispanics vote blue not because of any handouts, but rather because Dems usually support immigration reforms. They see them as tolerant, accepting people who are gonna help the family live the American dream and Republicans as the barrier. If Republicans changed their stance on this one issue, they would probably get the Hispanic vote.
going to give them the american dream at the expense of Americans
How is it at the expense of Americans? Wouldn’t them gaining citizenship make them Americans as well? Would it still be at the expense of “Americans” then?
There are three different terms in play here, “amnesty”, “citizen” and “American(s)”; let’s try and not confuse any of them for any other.
If they’re granted amnesty, I think that makes them “Americans”, since they’re residents of America. “Amnesty” is more a process than a thing, and “citizen” is contingent upon becoming a United States Citizen.
“Amnesty”, as I understand the concept, recognizes they are “Americans”, but not “citizens”necessarily.
Such a thoughtful reply! You just proved his point, and you are too stupid to comprehend it.
Just recently gained my legal status here in the US after 24 years of being here illegally (parents brought me over as a baby) and i have always wanted to exercise the right to bear and use arms , and now i can! .Been reading TTAG since before i became legal and will continue to do so! Love the site.
Welcome! Once you are granted your citizenship, by all means enjoy your Second Amendment Rights. I hope the right is still there when you do.
Amnesty is bullshit and exactly zero of them should own firearms or be entitled to any Constitutional rights unless and until they show the gumption and dedication to become a legitimate American citizen just as millions of non whiners have done.
I’m in Phoenix and I’m so sick of all these crybabies wanting to cut to the front of the line just because they’re Mexican. I have a message for them: F*ck off, quit feeling special and do it the right way.
If they do, it means the ATF won’t need to walk guns to Me-hico any more.
These once upon a time illegal aliens will be happy to do it for them, for free.
Then it WILL be American citizens who are running guns South of the border
and then Obama and Holder will will say we have to do something to stop it.
You think they won’t? Guns will flow south like a flash flood down an arroyo.
11 million of them avoided being caught by the Border Patrol just to get here.
Getting back shouldn’t be that difficult.
Sold a pistol to a friend of mine from Colombia (with a green card) legally through an FFL. He came from a family tradition of firearm ownership and is on his path to citizenship here. I think there is a possibility that a good number of immigrants from rural upbringing probably are familiar with the virtues of gun ownership and regardless of which party they support, will see the second amendment as an important part of their citizenship in the USA. I think a lot of the talk about immigrants following the liberal agenda of disarmament is unfounded. A rural setting (and many of our Central and South American immigrants come from such places) in any country is the same as far as goes the people who live there understanding what an important tool a gun is. I think these folks will bring this mindset with them, even if the rest of their politics is left leaning. How cool would it be if we had more liberals who support gun ownership?
The main reason a lot of socially conservative, possibly pro-gun Latinos and Blacks don’t vote Republican is that a lot of conservative White folks are straight up racists. You can hem and haw and bitch that it ain’t so, but I’m a sixth generation Texan – I grew up around these people, and I know how they think, what they say in private versus public. I know everyone here will claim that only 3% of conservatives who are hysterical about Obama (as a lefty, I don’t like him either) are hysterical because he’s (sort of) black, and I say “Bullshit!” That’s not to say that these same racists don’t embrace the Colin Powells, Herman Cains (crazy, cough, cough) and Condi Rices of the world. It’s not about skin color so much anymore (although it is somewhat about skin color), it’s about culture. And what says “different culture” better than someone speaking “Mexican?”
Another big reason Latinos lean Democratic has to do with labor rights (not “free stuff”). Illegal and even legal immigrants are abused by employers (even those Indian software engineers are often forced to work longer hours for less pay, in fear that their H1B visas will be revoked). In Texas, home builders hire Mexicans and classify them as “independent contractors,” so they can pay low piecework rates for labor that are often sub-minimum wage, and if these guys get hurt on the job, too f*cking bad – then the taxpayers will pay. The labor movement in the U.S. has always been largely fueled by immigrants – Irish, Polish, Italian, etc. back in the day. Today, a lot of union faces are brown and black. I think the labor movement should probably get a divorce from the Democratic party (what have you done for me lately?), but the Republicans really have nothing to offer.
The NRA has a Spanish language website. They need to start offering training in Spanish and lock these folks into the cause.
I think people who are automatically think Democrats are anti-2A are fools with no more sense of reality or history than that possessed by a rutabaga.
I won’t comment on the racists (I am more tolerant of fools).
well, past Democrats fought to keep slaves unarmed and current Democrats are trying to disarm their “fellow” Americans around them, is that not anti 2A enough for you?
Want to stop being seen as anti gun and anti freedom? stop associating with those who hate liberty.
When theyre given an amnesty document in one hand, Im sure the other hand gets a Democratic voter card.
The problem, Wassim, is that many “pro-gun” Democrats continue voting for their rabidly anti-gun leaders without seeing the connection to their loss of rights.
True, just as many Republicans were quite content as Bush/Cheney etc. passed the Patriot Act and shredded the rest of the Bill of Rights. I’m not saying Dems are any better, but let’s be realistic here. If we continue this partisan feuding, the Bad Guys will always win, and freedom will lose.
Certainly glad you are not saying the dems are better. In case you missed it, they also voted(most of them)in favor of the Patriot Act. Stop partisan feuding? Fine. You and Bixby and the rest of the voters who support democrats should tell them to support the 2A. That will stop a lot of feuding.
“full Constitutional rights must be restored. IN FULL.” How can something they’re stole be restored in full?
Harry Reid’s change of heart on gun control may have something to do with the changing demographics in his State. California is another example. The coming amnesty may well have a similar effect on politics in other parts of the country too.
To even as the question is to surrender to the anti-gun crowd. There is no question on how the mostly Hispanics will vote. They wil vote for gun control. After Jews and blacks, Hispanics are the most reliable Demoncrat voters and in polls they support gun control.
“After Jews and blacks, Hispanics are the most gullible voters and they, along with mainstream media sheeple, will be the first to line up for the “vacation” railroad cars.”
MUCH better. If you don’t study history, the world is a mystery.
Is crossing the border illegally a felony? If yes, case made for not allowing gun purchases from a dealer.
I get it. I really do. But I’d like to suggest the only reason you’re here is because there was no INS to deport your own hard-working parents.
My Irish german and french great grandparents were in the USA long before the INS was started in 1933.
I’m not saying immigrants shouldn’t get their constitutional rights, and I also support people coming to the U.S. to improve their futures, but also not sure how I feel about rewarding illegal immigrants by granting them amnesty in the first place…
It is a valid question though, 1) is crossing the border illegally a felony? 2)would that felony be exponged? 3) if so, why do illegal immigrants get a second chance that i would never get if I committed a felony?
Because you won’t work for minimum wage and live fifteen under one room. Which is, I suppose, an improved situation for many of them, or else why bother?
And I’d like to suggest you stick your head in a blender. There was no INS, sure there were no immigration laws either.
You guys should stick to talking about guns cause your political conversations suck
Yeah, ’cause you know, there’s nothing political about guns…