The Fence - Page 7

Ron61 · #**121** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 10:20 AM

Under IRCA, employers may hire only persons who may legally work in the U.S., i.e., citizens and nationals of the U.S. and aliens authorized to work in the U.S. The employer must verify the identity and employment eligibility of anyone to be hired, which includes completing the Employment Eligibility Verification Form (I-9). Employers must keep each I-9 on file for at least three years, or one year after employment ends, whichever is longer.

That is from the 1990 version I believe and no, I don't pretend to know much about all the ins and outs of the immigration and Customs acts and laws. Wish I did understand these issues better but I am to dumb to sort through all the crap they write and decipher just what they are trying to say. So I post what I feel, not claiming that it is right.

By the way, NAPA is a great place to lecture about this as there is plenty of wine to keep you laughing.

Ron

Jamo · #**122** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 10:36 AM

Don't take it personally, Ron...you are one of millions who know only the very basic facts about immigration and enforcement against employers. Because the media and politicians have made immigration a hotbed issue (like abortion and gun control), folks simply rely on what is fed to them.

Read the discrimination portions, and it might help you understand the catch-22 employers are faced with...or don't. Nobody else does.

Ron61 · #**123** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 10:49 AM

I wasn't taking it personally Jamo. And I have read a lot of the stuff on the immigration, but would be a liar if I said I understand much of it. It just seems to me they use pages to say what could be condensed down to shorter versions. I will read more of the discrimination portions, but probably still won't understand nearly all of it. The gun control issue, I do try to keep up with as I am involved with it in a minor sense here, but like all things it is twisted so much that I am not sure even the politicians understand all they have written.

Ron

jdog · #**124** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 11:18 AM

This border thing reminds me of Corrections (something I know a little bit about, Jamo)

They vote in laws, like "3 strikes", and then b*tch about the cost of building the new prison cells to lock them up in!

*HIT OR GET OFF THE POT! You've got those of us actually trying to do this stuff, chasing our tails!

Build the fence, or hire the motherphucker's!

and

Build the prisons, or quit locking them up!

jdog
P.S. NAFTA & the North American Union, are both jokes. If you really want to change things offer them 'statehood' or build the fence (on both sides). Take a look at Hawaii & Alaska to see what happens when you become a state!

Ron61 · #**125** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 11:28 AM

I saw an article in the local paper today about the fence and some small town that it will cut into two parts. According to the Wretched Flashlight, the fence will be built about 100' this side of the river and go through the town, which will leave part of it in a sort of no mans land. I don't know how true this is as this local paper has a habit of printing things that aren't quite what they say at times.

Ron

Joe Wicked · #**126** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 11:40 AM

There are several towns right on the border all along the border. Most of these cross the border into Mexico and are a Mexican town on the other side. 100' is only ~33yards. By the time you take into count the existing measures in place at these locations, you are not displacing a large amount of the land/population. Anybody that it directly affects can easily be moved. The number should be small enough that the budget for building the fence can absorb the cost.

Jamo · #**127** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 11:46 AM

jdog

I know Mike Reynolds pretty well, and he would agree with you.

Wayne Maybury · #**128** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamo

I went out of my way to educate myself about Canada: History of Canada Link

That is funny. By the way, go to that site and plug in United States. Guns seem to get mentioned in just about every sentence.

Wayne

VRM · #**129** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 12:42 PM

Jamo,
It really does not matter what the policies are if we have people who throw monkey wrenches into the efforts to enforce those policies. There was an ICE raid in my state and the governor here (despite his office having advance notification) attempted to negate the raid on humanitarian grounds.

Steve

Jamo · #**130** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 02:49 PM

You ever been around an ICE raid?

Venamm · #**131** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomelia

Loved the history lesson!

mike (btw, who is he talking about?)

Originally Posted by Venamm
I thought you were going to be silent? I prefer that in you. He just doesn't know when to quit and SHUT THE HELL UP about Canada!!!

Dude enough already, go start a "I hate Canada thread" or purchase a personality. You better be careful when you spread hate about a country.
Jamo, is there nothing you can say to him?

...lol jack ass!

Like if you don't know.

Venamm · #**132** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron61

How about a covered freeway from our Southern Border to the Canadian Border? Reserved only for illegals to use.

Ron

Ron.......

Don't forget your free health care, when you need it, it will be exhausted.

Venamm · #**133** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamo

How about maintaining some damn humor around here on such issues and stop being so damn serious and maybe, just freeking maybe, fights won't occur on every damn page and you won't have to worry about threads being shut down?

Hmmm...helluv'a concept.

Damn liberals and Canadians.

Jamo,
Me and including every lawyer in my family are proud conservatives...

Damn Yankee's (not the musical or team)

jdog · #**134** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 03:22 PM

.......about this one!

Folsom inmate wins suit against prison
By Denny Walsh - dwalsh@sacbee.com
Published 10:58 am PST Saturday, November 10, 2007

A federal court jury has awarded an inmate $39,000 in punitive damages after determining that his constitutional right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment was violated when he was deprived of outdoor exercise during four extended lockdowns at a state prison in Folsom.

The jury directed six high-ranking current and former corrections officials to pay Gregory Lynn Norwood $39,000 in punitive damages, which are meant to punish and make an example of defendants and to deter others from similar conduct.

The jury of seven women and one man deliberated nine hours and returned its verdict Thursday.

At the heart of Norwood's civil rights lawsuit were the four lockdowns at the facility where he was housed at California State Prison, Sacramento - also known as New Folsom - in 2002 and 2003. The lockdowns stemmed from separate prisoner attacks on staff.

Norwood, 46, who is doing life without parole on first degree murder and second degree robbery convictions, claimed the lockdowns deprived him of outdoor exercise, resulting in stress, anxiety, depression, headaches and muscle cramps.

He contended the lockdowns were needlessly prolonged, ostensibly for security reasons, but actually as punishment and retaliation.

What a bunch of BS! Fricken juries!

jdog

bomelia · #**135** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 03:39 PM

Mike who?

I would like to vote for Steve (VRM) to be a moderator. He spanked me good....

Well, according to my friend who is involved in building the towers, the idea is that the physical fence will stop maybe 40%. Still hard to believe, but thats his number. The towers are suposed to bring that number into the 90's. (when combined with the physical fence). BTW, isn't this what the thread was originally about?

So whats up in Napa? Can't pick the grapes without illegals?

Like I said before, illegals keep prices artificially low, I would gladly pay higher prices knowing that our political and economic system were on sound ground. If the illegals get legal, they won't work for low wages!! So WHO replaces them? With a fence, no one. And growers have to start paying fair market wages. And yes, we get to watch prices come up...or imports might take over. Ok, so then put up trade barriers. BS. All of it is BS. Let the markets do there own thing, ferret out cheaters and move on.

Mike

jdog · #**136** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 05:43 PM

Sorry, I was responding to Jamo about a mutual aquantance. Kinda hijacked the thread!

jdog

Scott S · #**137** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 06:37 PM

If this isn't reason enough for a fence....http://www.statesmanjournal.com/apps...D=200771109045

Why is it businesses duty to fix the border problem, tell you what government sell it to me!

I will control it and make a profit.....

Scott S

bomelia · #**138** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 07:05 PM

dead link...

Venamm · #**139** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 07:22 PM

Just wondering, is it a problem based on a person coming over and working illegally only? Or do these fence jumpers also carry stuff over, like drugs, guns, booze?.....Are they carrier pigeons? Because if that's the case, you might have a larger internal "organized" problem then you think.

Jamo · #**140** (**permalink**) 11-12-2007, 10:18 PM

As jdog said, sorry: Mike Reynolds authored the Three Strikes; You're Out law after his kid was brutalized and killed.

Napa? Nope...just assplaining to a multitutde of HR folks and owners about how to comply with the DHS's Social Security No-Match regulations in case the ACLU's injunction is lifted. A legal minefield with folks (unions, plaintiffs attorneys, civil rights groups) ready to sue employers who try to comply or face fines and imprisonment if they don't.

Media never tells you that sh!t...they just take videos of a few raids and some protestors.

It's a living...