I don't think that's the point at all. The point is that if you're a man in dress with a towel around your head and a beard, or five times a day you drop to the floor and stick your behind in the air and you frequent establishments known for harboring illegals, there is a pretty good chance that you have no right to be here. That's why it's called "illegal." While profiling may have its drawbacks, it also works in many cases and for the ones who are doing nothing wrong and are legitimate immigrants, visitors or even citizens, they have nothing to worry about. While I wouldn't like to see these tactics in widespread use, in areas where there are known concentrations of illegals, I think there is validity to it unless and until we find better ways.
That said, I don't think fear should be the primary motivator for these people to leave though. In the first place, it really doesn't work. It just drives them farthur underground and in many cases may serve as an encouragement to them to commit other crimes. No; what we need is to remove their reasons for wanting to be here so that they leave on their own. I would like to see severe penalties imposed on employers who hire them, removal of ALL freebies to illegals beyond emergency medical (followed by immediate deportation), the elimination of anchor baby citizenship and the denial of any special consideration to those who are already here. Employers who hire those who "do work that Americans won't do" must be required to pay a competitive wage and if he then is unable to employ an American after a reasonable period of time, he may employ a non-American from a pool of registered and approved workers who are still IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WAITING FOR WORK, and then only for a brief period of time. He should be required to extend the position to Americans at least once a year. A guest worker should also have absolute limits on the length of time he can be here and must sign documents stating that he understands that not returning to his home country upon expiration of his permit subjects him to criminal penalties and deportation and furthur, as a condition of his acceptance into the guest worker program, he would be required to waive any access to the American courts for the purpose of contesting removal or to bring any type of civil rights action against either his employer or immigration officials.
While such guidelines might impose some uncomfortable restraints on guest workers, if their claim is legitimate and they only desire to work jobs Americans won't do and send money home, then compliance shouldn't be overly burdensome. If, however, their intention is to get here, stay here, bring their entire families here and take whatever they can get, or if their intention is to import more crime to our streets and communities, then this should serve as a potent deterrent, which is exactly what it should do.
That's why it's called "illegal." While profiling may have its drawbacks, it also works in many cases and for the ones who are doing nothing wrong and are legitimate immigrants, visitors or even citizens, they have nothing to worry about.
The old, if you aren't doing something wrong, you have nothing to worry about argument. As I posted to another FReeper, apparently you'd have no problem with yearly inspections of your home by the federal government? What you are missing, is that what is considered illegal/socially acceptable changes over time. Your views are fine until the things you do or say become the target of the government's wrath. People in this country have the right to be different, and they have the right to be left alone. Now, that doesn't mean I believe in amnesty for illegals, but there are many ways to solve the problem. Giving the government the power to randomly question people who are minding their own business is not the answer. Ending taxpayer funded social benefits (health, education, etc.) for illegals is a start. In this case, if the government is aware of specific abuse by an individual, then the government should get involved. (I am not conceding that the government should be providing social services in the first place, but I am working in the system). While I wouldn't like to see these tactics in widespread use, in areas where there are known concentrations of illegals, I think there is validity to it unless and until we find better ways.
There are better ways.
That said, I don't think fear should be the primary motivator for these people to leave though. In the first place, it really doesn't work. It just drives them farthur underground and in many cases may serve as an encouragement to them to commit other crimes. No; what we need is to remove their reasons for wanting to be here so that they leave on their own. I would like to see severe penalties imposed on employers who hire them, removal of ALL freebies to illegals beyond emergency medical (followed by immediate deportation), the elimination of anchor baby citizenship and the denial of any special consideration to those who are already here. I Agree with these points.Employers who hire those who "do work that Americans won't do" must be required to pay a competitive wage and if he then is unable to employ an American after a reasonable period of time, he may employ a non-American from a pool of registered and approved workers who are still IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WAITING FOR WORK, Why exactly should the government be able to impose its will on privately owned business? What right do you (acting through the government) have to tell me how much I have to pay a worker? and then only for a brief period of time. He should be required to extend the position to Americans at least once a year. A guest worker should also have absolute limits on the length of time he can be here and must sign documents stating that he understands that not returning to his home country upon expiration of his permit subjects him to criminal penalties and deportation and furthur, as a condition of his acceptance into the guest worker program, he would be required to waive any access to the American courts for the purpose of contesting removal or to bring any type of civil rights action against either his employer or immigration officials. While such guidelines might impose some uncomfortable restraints on guest workers, if their claim is legitimate and they only desire to work jobs Americans won't do and send money home, then compliance shouldn't be overly burdensome. If, however, their intention is to get here, stay here, bring their entire families here and take whatever they can get, or if their intention is to import more crime to our streets and communities, then this should serve as a potent deterrent, which is exactly what it should do. In the end, you are very comfortable with your neighbor being able to dictate your daily life. A direct democracy is very dangerous to liberty.