Bounties work for predatory beasts, whether on four legs or two. Another fact.>>
You here are directly calling for the killing of human beings (”the two legged”) and for other (white?) people to get paid for killing them.
I could use many words to describe that but I will not pollute the term “conservative.” That’s not conservative.
I’m not implying. I merely hold up a mirror.
Let me add: an aggressive program of anglification and assimilation must go hand in hand with the amnesty to prevent a lot of the cultural problems you describe here. Let ‘em know that if they want to stay they need to learn English, first of all, followed by make sure their kids go to school.
We’ll have generations of problem, yes. But those problems will go away.
Do you know the term “paddy wagon”? It’s an anti-Irish slur. The Irish that came to the US after the potato famine in relatively huge numbers were ignorant, unlettered, and (thanks to systematic undernourishment) of less than average intelligence. The “Shanty Irish” were viewed as “the other black race”. Heavy drinkers, adherents of Romanism, drunken rioters, violent, sexually uncontrolled peasants from the back woods of Connaught.
But time passed. They had kids. And they had kids. Eventually one became President. Today anti-Irish bigotry is unheard of. It took a century and a half, but the Irish (who were thought impossible to assimilate) were assimilated.
But one way to keep them in their shanties would have been to declare “open season” on them and make them eternally afraid of the rest of the country. We didn’t do that to them; they assimilated. We shouldn’t do that to the Hispanics. (And the vast majority of Hispanics are here *legally*.)
It will take a century or so to assimilate these people. But we can, and should, assimilate them.
I never said that amnesty was gonna be easy. But it beats, er, hunting the two legged with bounties.
Bounties were a part of American law.
Until the citizens allowed commies in media and education to brainwash us, it was accepted that any violent criminal, or any escaping criminal took his own life in his hands when he committed the crime.
When a citizen was forced, by the criminal act of the criminal, to kill the criminal it was accepted that the criminal had signed his own death warrant.
When a citizen shoots a criminal (of ANY color, race, etc) that citizen is acting within Judeo-Christian, American, and Natural Law. When that citizen kills a criminal, the killing of said criminal saves the community the cost of trail and execution or long incarceration.
On what basis do you find Judeo-Christian and American Law to be in error on the issue of bounties or the citizen killing a criminal who is a threat to life and/or property?
I would be interested in specific theological or legal sources, if you have them at hand.