"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." Thomas Jefferson
The law is unjust. It is immoral to violate the rights of human beings and the law does so solely on the grounds that they were not lucky enough to have been born here.

Most of these people are trying to better their lives. Most of them are not looking for handouts. They can't get here legally. We don't let them. Only a select few are allowed. If I was in their shoes i would do the same thing. You would too and you know it. But you're not in their shoes, you're on this side of the border. And you think somehow that gives you the right to make a law that says they can't come in. Again, where do you get that right? You have violated their rights by making that immoral law. Where do you get that right? Did god give you that right? Because that's the only place you could have gotten it. It didn't come from the facts of reality.

Your view of Objectivism is completely irrelevant. The only thing relevant is that you have tried to twist Objectivism to fit your preexisting belief system with no intention of adjusting that belief system to fit the reality discovered by the application of Objectivism.

I don't blame America. America still stands for certain values and ideals. I blame the people who have perverted those ideals and twisted those values to fit their own needs. A lot of people have been hurt by the perversion of those ideals. A lot of blood has been shed over those twisted values. People are responsible for that. Those people have blood on their hands. I blame those people. And I blame myself for not stopping them.

Pick a damn side.

Wow, really? The looters and the cronyists are on this side of the border. They are the reason we have the war on drugs, the income tax and welfare, among other things. As much as I'd like to kick them outside the border, we can't. We can only face them with a consistent message and as long as we are still arguing about the non-problem called immigration, we haven't got a consistent message. And as long as some of us continue to advocate the violation of the rights of individuals just because they don't happen to be US citizens, we will continue to argue.

" The reason these people don't assimilate is because WE separate them. The only reason they're illegal is because WE demand it be so. The only thing that makes them lawless is because WE put them outside the law"

Sad that you take responsibility away from them and place the blame on us. They reason they are here is because they chose to come not because we brought them here and set them apart. No one "puts" anyone anywhere. People gather, for the most part, with those like themselves because its familiar - hence the barrios; this is natural. This has nothing to do with us. Their being outside the law IS ONLY THEIR FAULT since they violated the law to come here. Had they come legally they wouldn't be in the situation they are in at all.

The blame America philosophy doesn't comfort anyone, let alone those hurt by illegal immigration.

"You are arguing to deprive human beings of their rights. Where is it that you get that right from?"
I deprive nothing - they violate the law and come into our country. I don't even tell them not to come, simply how to come and they choose not to. Again blame America first.

Rights are given by God. Yeah yeah, you disagree - I already know that.

I've had enough of saying the same things repeatedly. These conversations about the Right to Travel vs. Private Property have been expensive, they have harshly tainted and diminished my view of objectivism.

Those who are left are the looters and cronyists. Without getting rid of the incentive for them to do what they do, all of your good work in eliminating welfare, the war on drugs, and the income tax is only a partial solution.

This paragraph from my comment earlier. Have you read it?
"The three things, eliminate welfare, end the war on drugs and end the income tax. Welfare only brings some of them here. The income tax alienates them all and keeps them out of the system, adding to the welfare numbers. And the war on drugs brings the violent ones or encourages them to be violent. Eliminate those and who is left? "

You comment as if doing those three things will accomplish nothing. The reason these people don't assimilate is because WE separate them. The only reason they're illegal is because WE demand it be so. The only thing that makes them lawless is because WE put them outside the law. We do this to ourselves. But you want to do something "Right Now". Isn't that where most of our bad laws come from? "We've Got To Do Something!!!" is shouted over any rational voice and laws are passed and on down the hill we go.

We are losing the immigration debate but that is because our message is inconsistent at best and somewhat self destructive. You are arguing to deprive human beings of their rights. Where is it that you get that right from?

I thank you for your service, but if what you are advocating is why you served then I can't put my heart behind it.

Reagan was by no means perfect, but he did a lot of things that were positive in the long run (lowering taxes, his brilliant bluff against the Soviets to end the Cold War, etc.). What this does point out is that electing the right ones will not solve the problem. On that you are correct. Even if veto-proof majorities were elected for a generation, we would still have the kangaroo court system to deal with. Repairing the damage to America would require a sacrifice on all of our parts of longer than our lives, and thus would be inconsistent with Objectivism.

I do expect the rare attack, but not as many as you have had, Zen.

A bit more: On LI, where I grew up for 18 years, my neighbors were a large Puerto Rican family (6 kids), a fresh off the boat family of Italians (3 kids), an authentic Irish family (2 kids), a family of mixed-race Shinnecock Indians (4 kids), a polish-American family (3 kids). All of the families spoke two languages and most of the senior adults spoke very broken English AND THEY WERE PROUD of the little English they spoke.

I have no issue with people's race, religion, or language. I never did care for, and still don't, pig-headed people, stupid people, slow people, or racists.

In the summer, I would take my bike out at 7 am while my mother slept. I would ride all day without my mother having to worry (much). This was before cell phones and before I had much money in my pocket (calls were a dime on the pay phone). I would leave town on my bike, visit the local airport to watch small planes, hang around and under the old bridge to watch trains and if I really felt adventurous go swimming in one of the two lakes in Yaphank or pay a visit to the LI game farm. Yes, there was an element of danger but nothing like what there is today.

The people, my neighbors. were decent hard working folks who worked just to be here, to be American. This mentality is completely absent in today's America and its a sign of the decay representing who we've become and what we've allowed ourselves/our children to be subjected to. Its obnoxiously disgraceful to our heritage and criminal to our kids.

Zephamy, we can take care of ourselves, lethally if need be. It shouldn't need be that way for children. Unfortunately my kids grew up with no trace or understanding of the freedom I enjoyed in what most would perceive a much more hostile place.

So do nothing? Allow lawlessness, open the border and let every turd flow in and turn what we've been building for the last 230 years into the dung-heap they left? The promise of this country is the ability to cast the sht off, dust yourself off, and work to improve yourself and your family. The issue is there are far too many people coming here illegally, reveling in their sht, and working to expand their former country's cancer to the culture/environment they desperately wanted to come to.

I have ZERO issue with legal immigration. I have ZERO tolerance for lawlessness and illegal immigrants.

I did my part, suspended my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for a time to ensure this nation is here for my children. Standing by why politicians and illegal aliens decimate every conceivable aspect of what I defended is not something I am willing to do.

I wasn't too far off so start with. It was the free travel/boarder issue where you guys really came through for me. Then things really fell into place. Debating it a little helps too.

Yeah, but I was trim enough then to run, so it wasn't too bad other than for my neighbor's wife that was taking her trash out as I ran by. She just yelled, 'Get the sonofabitch' I think he'd been in the neighborhood for awhile and he was a fast asshole.

Well, invading Mexico would sure shrink our southern border. :)

The downside is we'd probably just ruin all the good vacation spots.

By Jove, you've got it.

Wow, the stories that come out on here.
Kinda glad I'm not able to form a visual. :)

The only thing we need protection from is those that say they want to protect us.

It is our job individually to protect ourselves from real dangers, not imagined ones or ones the entertainment news tells us about. There wasn't then and isn't now, a BOOGIE MAN under the bed.

Reagan: "Reagan the environmentalist – as governor he protected California’s wilderness from dams and highways and created an air resources board, as president he launched the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer – did not appear.
Nor did Reagan the spender who raised taxes (four to 11 times, depending how you count) and increased the federal workforce by 324,000 people, raised the debt ceiling 18 times and almost tripled the federal debt.
Nor did Reagan the retreater who withdrew from Lebanon after terrorists killed 248 US marines, leaving the country to civil war, or Reagan the negotiator who reached out to the “evil empire”, or the Reagan who signed California’s liberal abortion law, the Brady gun law, collective bargaining for local government workers and amnesty for almost 3 million undocumented people."

This thinking that if only we elect the 'right ones', that they'll save us will eventually end us. It's up to each of us individually.

The failure is ours.

You've figured this all out haven't you?

Government influence and intrusion into our daily lives and every aspect of our society.

The native population is a lot larger than you imagine, not surrounded, and definitely not dependent on anyone. It's only those that try to live by dependence including the blacks that let LBJ move them into urban ghettos and the Latinos in LA that do the same in the 'Projects', the Barrio, the ghetto, the Reservations, the Housing Authorities that don't assimilate.

We don't need more law enforcement, we need less government influence and intrusion.

AJ; everywhere I've ever lived, what you describe has been a part of life. Bad things happen, mostly to the non-prepared and the most vulnerable. But as children we were taught what to avoid and where not to go, both natural and human dangers. And I've had to run, hide, and even fight, and today as an old man, I still stay prepared. Maybe even more so. But I don't live with any fear.

I've been shot twice, clubbed, and knifed. I was robbed once and peeped once (chasing the guy down the alley in my underwear), but the first man to ever try to kill me was my stepfather at 14 years old in my home. Reality can bite.

The idea that we can live without danger in our lives is not rational and it never has been. Nor do I expect, or even want government to protect me, for what I'd have to give up. I've taught my two sons and two stepdaughters the same things and done all I could to prepare them for a life that has danger in it.

So, protecting the "american culture" isn't going so well either, eh? And that was the point. Protecting the culture is the surest way to destroy it.

And everything you would do just adds to the destruction. And the american culture you would fight so hard to defend will be destroyed by your own hand.

I love him for how he treats prisoners. They are not abused but they are not pampered.

The rationality of his views is a whole new debate.
He doesn't have the authority but his voice would be heard far and wide. And his evidence of the destructive nature of the laws would be irrefutable.

Yes, thanks.