Archive for the 'Immigration' Category

There is a host of other information on illegal aliens (who will never fit in America), but for now it’s sufficient to focus again on the Venezuelan gangs.

The first time this came up over these pages caused a stir of comments, and it’s good to rehearse this again because it’s an instructional moment.

God rules His creation by covenant and contract. All men are under the Adamic covenant. They can like it, or dislike it, or think nothing of it, but none of that changes anything. The man cannot say to His maker “Why did you make me thus” (Romans 9). That’s not in the list of answers that the maker owes you.

Those who are saved and in Christ have had the Adamic covenant superseded by a salvific covenant, and that’s where you want to be. But rest assured, all men are under one of these two covenants. You will live, or you will perish.

God also rules His entire creation by covenant and contract. God arranges His relationships with men by covenant. Men arrange their relationships with other men by covenant and contract. Covenants and contracts have blessings for obedience, and curses for disobedience, surely in eternity, but also in time and on earth.

Marriage is a covenant and contract. Business is a covenant and contract. Church life is a covenant and contract. Commerce is a covenant and contract. Employment is a covenant and contract. The life of society (i.e., between the state and the people) is also supposed to be a covenant and contract. There is no lawlessness in the Christian economy. Libertarianism is a phantom, a ghost telling you lies. God doesn’t rule His creation by allowing men to become god. The only righteous law is His law. He expects obedience from all men.

The bill of rights is a covenant and contract. It is between the government and the people of America. It isn’t between everyone and everyone, and it’s not between the government and the government, or only one party, or no one and no one. A covenant and contract is always between two parties. In the case of the BoR, it’s the government and the people.

Illegal immigrants are not part of “the people.” They are illegally here and should be evicted from the country. And illegal immigrant doesn’t get to claim the umbrella of protection of the BoR (including the second amendment, or any other) by illegally crossing the border and perpetrating war on Americans or her institutions. That’s not how any of that works.

That’s not how a covenant and contract works. Once covenants and contracts have been signed, it’s final. You don’t back out, you don’t add to it, you don’t take away from it. God recognizes borders and national sovereignty and always has in the Holy Writ. The BoR restrains the government from infringements on the rights of “the people,” not the entirety of the world population. If that were the case, there could never be such a thing as war between countries, even in self defense. If a proposition leads to inconsistency, it cannot be true.

People in America illegally have no right to a trial by a jury of their peers (although that often becomes just a gaggle of idiots). They have no second amendment rights, they have no rights against search and seizure. They have no fifth amendment rights (unfortunately, even American citizens apparently have no fifth amendment rights in grand juries, which are an abomination of justice).

People in America illegally have only the right to be evicted.

This is proper covenant and contract. This is the way God rules His creation.

Gosh, it’s sort of like a foreign invasion by armed enemies, huh?

FULL STORY: https://t.co/jRzBNWNmZq

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 4, 2024

🚨#BREAKING: Listen to a 911 call reporting that a group of allegedly 32 armed Venezuelans has taken over an apartment building⁰⁰📌#Chicago | #Illinois ⁰⁰Listen as a 911 caller in Chicago, Illinois, reports that over 32 Venezuelans are trespassing in a residential building,… pic.twitter.com/epe54vbXUm

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) September 3, 2024

Coupling with what I said yesterday, David sent me this commentary. I must have missed this when it came out. That’s my mistake.

The “enforce exiting gun laws” faction of gun owners are the loudest objectors, evidently unaware that their position is ideologically no different than a Revolutionary era colonial demanding to enforce exiting Intolerable Acts. The hard truths no one wants to admit are that “gun control” laws don’t work – whether they’re favored by Everytown or by NRA, and that anyone who can’t be trusted with a gun can’t be trusted without a custodian.

It’s not a matter of “Should felons have guns?” That’s the wrong question. Try “Should those proven violent and predatory have access to the rest of us?”

Ditto with “Should illegal aliens have guns?”

Of course, all human beings are entitled to unalienable rights. And the Supreme Court has acknowledged, in the Heller case, and earlier, in Cruikshank, “The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it ‘shall not be infringed.’ As we said in United States v. Cruikshank… ‘[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.’”

But again, it’s the wrong question. What should be asked is “Why is a known illegal alien allowed to remain in the United States instead of being deported?”

[ … ]

At this writing, more, including an inordinate number of military-aged males of not just Mexican or Central American origin, but from China, and from hostile Islamic states, are adding to their unvetted numbers already here while our government, consented to under the premise that it would “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,” offers the lawbreakers incentives and rewards to embed themselves (and increase political power through apportionment) throughout the Republic.

It’s hardly unreasonable to conclude the “newcomers” (we aren’t supposed to call them “illegals” anymore) represent the equivalent of a standing foreign army, many with agendas directed by brutal criminal cartels and by bellicose powers like China, Russia, and Iran.

The Framers never intended to protect the right of invaders to keep and bear arms, but again, that’s the wrong issue. We need to instead ask ourselves “Who does it benefit to have Second Amendment advocates arguing over acceptable infringements while they ignore the damn elephant in the room?”

This issue all about avoiding confusion, thinking deeper than a sophomoric level of understanding, and focusing on the root questions. It’s easy to get distracted.

Do try not to get distracted. When you get distracted, it makes you look like a simpleton.

To understand if your view is perhaps a bit outlandish and should be unpersuasive – even to yourself – always use hyperbole. Ask yourself the hard questions to see just exactly how far this would go.

Pose questions to yourself such as “Should we open the borders to invading armies and in fact arm them so that we can claim that the FedGov isn’t infringing upon the RKBA?” “Should we invite in immigrants who would predominantly undermine our core rights, including the RKBA?” “Should we terraform the culture such that we couple a welfare state with illegal immigrants, effectively destroying the medical care system in the country?” [Ask me how I know that immigrants are destroying the medical system in the country – go ahead, ask me].

“The grant of citizenship is a transfer of political power.” Thinking through the implications of that might do everyone some good.

That’s the correct decision.

Notice I didn’t say that RKBA isn’t a God-given right, because it is. I agreed that illegals don’t have second amendment rights. It’s our contract, not theirs. They can go back to their own homeland and force the government to adopt a covenant and contract that recognizes God-given rights just like we did.

Everyone has problems. You have your problems, I have mine. The problems of the illegal alien are not my problems. I have enough of my own to deal with. I can’t solve everyone else’s problems for them. And neither can America.

I’m not interested in the libertarian answer to this. I’m not a libertarian. I’m a Christian.

Illegals don’t have a right to be here to begin with. The fact that they’re here doesn’t mean that they can take advantage of the covenant and contract we have with our country (such as it is, and for as long as it lasts).

The Holy Writ stipulates to be kind to the sojourner among you. Sojourners don’t lay down roots and steal from you and try to undermine your own covenant and contract. They pass through. Becoming part of the tribe means adopting the values and faith of the tribe.

Enough said. This is the right decision. Illegal aliens are not part of “the people.”

So if you work for the ATF, send me a note and tell me why you’re not in Aurora, Colorado? It’s not rhetorical. Let me know.

Does attacking and shooting law abiding, peaceable Americans at 0600 hours get your riz on, while tackling the issue of illegally armed Venezuelan gangs a bit too scary for you?

If you’re not there, then what good are you after all?

Sooner or later, the American public is going to have to deal with the concept of the militia and personal self protection rather than relying on politically motivated cops, whether local, state or FedGov, for protection.

First, a truth.

For the first two decades of this century, the conventional wisdom of paid political strategists for both parties was George W. Bush’s svengali Karl Rove’s grand strategy that opening wide the borders was what Hispanic voters cared about most, that whichever party pandered hardest to Latinos on immigration would rule the Hispanic-dominated future. Sure, the Republicans would lose out on each additional Latino let in, but they’d make up for it in volume. Or something.

I was a rare voice of dissent. It seemed to me that the Hispanics who cared most about Open Borders were exactly the the handful of Latinos whom strategists and journalists talked to the most, such as Hispanic politicians and NGO ethnic activists. Of course, they benefit from swamping the country with more warm Latin American bodies whom they could claim to be the leaders of.

My emphasis over the last 24 years has been instead that Americans of Latin-American descent who vote aren’t monolithic Open Borders fanatics like their white-subsidized elites want them to be. Instead, Hispanic voters tend to favor traditional Democratic Harry Hopkins-style policies of tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect for basic class reasons.

The Democrats appear to have finally figured out that Rove was wrong and I was right.

Karl Rove was always a putz, and GWB was always a putz for listening to him. He’s a shyster – a fraud – a carnival barker.

Now, if it’s not enough that Hispanics want to tax the country into oblivion, they are indeed a monolith (or very nearly so) concerning the RKBA.

Gun violence is a top voting issue for Latinos and Latinas this election cycle.

In fact, Latines across the country have widely supported gun safety initiatives for several election cycles now — likely because the community is disproportionately impacted by the dangers of guns. The Center for American Progress found that Hispanics are twice as likely to die from gun violence than their white counterparts. The U.S. Surgeon General also declared gun violence a public health crisis for the first time ever this year.

“Latino voters believe that guns are too easy to access and they want elected officials to put an end to school shootings and expand community safety and mental health programs,”  Clarissa Martinez De Castro, Vice President of the Latino Vote Initiative at UnidosUS, told Latino USA. “This really raises the need for candidates and parties to pay greater attention to this issue.”

They are importing people who do not believe in your RKBA. They know it. That’s one reason they’re importing these people.

I told you so. Consider yourself warned again.

Hispanics and Latinos Favor Gun Control

Hispanics Have Again Said They Favor Strict Gun Control

This reportedly happened yesterday in Carlsbad, California. A group of mostly military age males invaded our country illegally via boat and then dispersed throughout the city in cars.

Are any of them on the terror watch list? Do any of them have a criminal history?

We don’t… pic.twitter.com/MQHqpF27Gu

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) April 14, 2024

Source.

Roughly 125,000 migrants have been released onto the streets in the San Diego area since September, which has been unsettling for Firearms Unlimited California owner Cory Gautereaux and his customers.

After Texas worked to seal off large swaths of its border with Mexico with razor wire and boots on the ground, more migrants started making their way to California.

[ … ]

“The problem for people that live around the gun store is the street dropoffs,” Gautereaux said.

So you support these idiotic policies and send folks to government who institute them, and it’s all okay until your Ox gets gored? Okay, I see how this works.

This might make you feel better for a time, but here’s what a gun can’t do for you. Restore a broken medical system. You see, all of these migrants are heading first to their local hospital where it will forever be their PCP. It will overwhelm the system, and this includes surgical services too. Nay, it has already overwhelmed the medical system in the country. Ask me how I know.

You are literally watching the destruction of the medical system in America, and it will never come back. Not ever. We will pay for all of those services. In addition to perpetual votes, the uniparty gets a new slave class to fund the already bankrupt SS system.

See how this works? You paid for entitlements while “paying into social security,” because there was never a “lock box.” Now you pay for medical entitlements for the slave class who will return a pittance of what you paid in.

This is the moment when TX National Guard became overrun by migrants rioting to get across the border here in El Paso today

We were there and saw it all happen. Absolute chaos here. pic.twitter.com/VN6Kf663ie

— Jennie Taer (@JennieSTaer) March 21, 2024

As you’ve no doubt seen, some judge in Illinois made the decision that the 2A protected the right if illegal aliens to own and carry weapons.

David Codrea is right. The issue of guns is a red herring. Criminals were removed from society. I’d be fine with them being shot while crossing the border. Isn’t that what you do with an invading army?

I think the attempt by religionists or fakers (notice that I didn’t say Christians) to guilt me into welcoming the invading army by pointing to Exodus 22:21, Exodus 23:9 and similar passages is just rich. An invader who intends to be permanent isn’t a sojourner.

Nice try. Go home and try to think up some other stupid argument.

But note well, this has nothing to do with guns. This is about setting legal precedent to arm illegal aliens as cops.

Mark my words.