frogza

I am with Pan 100%. We can't change our legal system just because a group of people broke the law and don't want the natural consequences of their actions. The idea that we should declare amnesty is a prime example of a slippery slope. What other laws will become null and void? Where do we draw the line?

For a law to be fair it must apply equally to everyone and be within the grasp of everyone to obey it. That is the measure of a fair law. The fairness of a law is not defined by those who choose to break it, of course they'll think it's unfair.

How can we seriously say that since some of our ancestors may have come to this country illegally that we should continue to allow or even facilitate people to come in illegally. That amounts to the same argument I'd get in grade school of "everyone else is doing it"

My great great grandfather was a bank robber, he made a lot of money and never got caught. He even became a US Marshall in the Indian Territories. As Marshall he did a lot of good. He was only able to become a marshall because he owned land and cattle that he had purchased with stolen money. Perhaps I should become a bank robber. After all my great great grandfather did it. Or maybe we should declare amnesty to bank robbers, as long as they say that they are doing it to help their families.

The fact that people are crossing our borders in secrecy is evidence that they know they are breaking the law. That being the case, they know that if or when they are caught they will have to pay. Instead of having enough moral strength to admit they were wrong and accept the due punishment, they protest. They cry in the street. They get their freinds and family to threaten our politicians with their jobs if they don't save their miscreant associates.

If a law isn't being enforced you don't scrap the law, you reform the manner in which the law is enforced. Usually that means stronger deterants, and increased vigilance.