BBC BLOGS - Have Your Say
« Previous | Main | Next »

How should the US tackle illegal immigration?

11:08 UK time, Wednesday, 7 July 2010

The US government has challenged an Arizona state law which makes it a crime to be in the state without immigration papers. What is your reaction?

Arizona is the biggest entry point into the US for illegal immigrants - home to an estimated 460,000 of them. Associated problems include drug-trafficking and violent kidnappings. The new law requires state and local officers to query the immigration status of people stopped for a legitimate reason who arouse suspicion of being in the US illegally.

However the justice department says the law is unconstitutional, claiming federal laws do not permit a "patchwork of state and local immigration policies". The law is opposed by President Barack Obama, civil liberties groups, and by the Mexican government.

How should the US tackle illegal immigration? Should Arizona have the right to pass its own immigration laws? Is the justice department right to intervene? Send us your comments.

Comments

Page 1 of 6

  • Comment number 1.

    Lets face it, its going to end with a very large Hadrians Walltype arrangement being built between the US and mexico.

    As long as the have the resources to man it its the only realistic chance of controlling movements into & out of the US along their massive border.

    Although, fairs fair, they should also build one at the Canadian end too.

    You never know what the future may hold.

  • Comment number 2.

    A good start would be not to pay any attention to any reports on the BBC.

  • Comment number 3.

    I have a DVD of the US comedian Robin Williams made after 9-11.

    In it he tells a joke about an airplane about to take off and the air stewardess announces that several travellers will be checked 'at random' and the stewardess then reads out a list of arab names. Then all the people on the flight called 'gomez' 'manuel' etc all say 'thank you god'.

    The objections to the Arizona law is that it would ONLY be used against hispanic people. The right-wing nutters in the US all say innocently that this is not the case. I know who I would believe.

    This law was brought in because the authorities in Arizona think they have no other means of controlling illegal immigration.

    On one side we have a liberal movement that believes that we should rigidly apply the letter of the constitution to protect 'freedom' and on the other side we have a conservative movement who feel they have no other choice in complying with the law than by amending it.

    All I know is I wouldn't get on a flight in Arizona if my name was Gomez.

  • Comment number 4.

    The national government has failed in totality to deal with this problem which is damaging and undermining USA citys/communitys.

    The USA central government is more prone to cutting deals with Mexico than taking action to counter concerns and problems regarding illegal immigration from mexico.

    Many areas have astronomical crime rates and horrendous poverty rates. Many illegal immigrants are absorbed into criminal enterprises within USA.

    The theat perceptions from immigration are as real in USA as in UK Europe. More and morte people have had enough. Theres only so much that any nation can do to help the poverty and desperation in other nations. If USA is not careful, as well as UK, then the resergence of extremist right wing political ideals will be a growing reality which could overwhelm more moderate behaviour and beliefs.

    This action taken by Arizona is backed by the majority of Ariznonans. If the USA central government continues to FAIL to deal with such issues then the GROWTH of states seeking independance may lead to MUCH MUCH greater problems than the loud voices of liberalists whos policys and beliefs undermine so many.

    The USA is growing sick and tired of liberalist policys, especially Obamas liberalist social policys. There is a huge and constantly growing undercurrent in USA building against Obama and his government.

    It's all very well being idealistic, but so many idealists and their beliefs are just NOT realistic.

    There are many places in the world where countrys are fragmenting, not just in North Africa or Asia but even in Europe, Holland/Belgium and also the USA has such growth.

    Governments, including USA, need to return to realism and to meet the needs of their own peoples before assimilating the liberalist ideals of a few.

  • Comment number 5.

    They should start by sending all the immigrants back......... to ireland, england, poland, etc! the country was built on immigration but only white immigration and slavery! land of the freeish!

    Bit like Aussies refusing asylum seekers in a country they stole in the first place!

    Or Israel refusing the indigenous people civli rights.

    Wait their is a pattern emerging showing best of friends UK/US and Aussies, oppose migration to lands they raped and murdered to appropriate!

  • Comment number 6.

    Arizona should not have the right.

    The state of Arizona DOES have a right to act pro domo sua, in view of our current Comader-in-Chief's dereliction of duty (persistent refusal to protect and defend United States' borders).

    Just like the state of Louisiana DOES have a right to take any independent action in order to minimize consequences of BP oil-spill, in view of an inaction and ineptess of the Federal Government.

    If Barack Hussein has a different view, he can take a matter to the Supreme Court.

    [no, I don't think he'd have guts to risk a Civil War (he ain't Lincoln)]

  • Comment number 7.

    What gives Britain the right to make any kind of comment.
    We don't even have the right in this country
    We have no rights on here.
    This is a joke question because of little or no British news.

  • Comment number 8.

    Who cares? The BBC is always banging on about America.

  • Comment number 9.

    "Illegal immigration is big business world -wide for the sex trade, slavery, marriage brokers, cheap labour for restautrant fast food outlets and many other jobs. people trffickers are well oganised and run by very clever gangs {The American probelm {Economic migrates}is only small one compared to what is happening world-wide. The only way to stop this is to deport them all back !!!! illegals' and they familys must be sent back to they own countries, no excuse excepted. The only way to stop them, but Who will do it?

  • Comment number 10.

    You can’t solve a problem until you know exactly what the problem is.
    On the surface of this problem: there are a lot of illegal immigrants practically flowing into Arizona. In typical knee-jerk reaction, the Washington crew has challenged the Arizona State Law which will make it a crime to be in the state without immigration papers.
    On the surface of this problem, it would appear that the problem is illegals illegally crossing into Arizona. Obama's fix - a planned overhaul of the nation's immigration laws. Republicans say they can't support an immigration bill until the border is under control.
    The Republican Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer, says that her state is "the gateway to America for drug trafficking, extortion, kidnapping and crime." She blames the federal government for failing to secure the border with Mexico.
    BUT dig this: the four largest American cities with the lowest rates of violent crime are in border states: San Diego, Phoenix, El Paso and Austin. Of course, there may be a lot of crime that doesn’t get reported, but still it's an interesting point.
    Brewer said. "The drug cartels have taken control of the immigration."
    This might be an exaggeration but it raises the question:
    Is illegal immigration through states like Arizona a consequence of the endless, constant demand for drusgs within the United States?
    Border Patrol agents say people encountered by the Border Patrol are not usually carrying drugs. Makes sense because the penalties for transporting drugs are far greater than the penalties for entering the country illegally; so why would people mule?
    From all of this (and more) I conclude that the border problem consists of
    1. regular people trying to escape the conditions in Mexico, which is laden with guns, drugs, blood and death
    2. drug cartel making use of a few of these people to smuggle drugs.
    How should the US tackle illegal immigration?
    Even from this little research, it becomes evident that the US immigration problem stems from Mexican problems, which are very much entangled with American problems.
    Now tell me how the Arizona Law will help? Would you rather cross the border, or get shot in Mexico? Would you rather mule drugs, or get shot in Mexico? Would you rather do both and make a little money?
    Further tell me how this is an Immigration problem vs. drugs, guns, etc.
    There is a saying: Mexican drugs go north; American guns go south.
    This is not a new problem; it's an old problem getting worse.

  • Comment number 11.

    They should make all immigration legal. Problem solved.

    Next, please.

  • Comment number 12.

    Typical American hypocracy yet again.

    The majority of US citizens are immigrants ! They wiped out the indigenious indians.

    America ignores the acts of terror around the world i.e. the IRA attachs on the UK only to scream when they get targetted in 9/11.

    Following that event the US goes very quiet when innocent civillians are targetted by Israel.

    US ignores Bhopal yet screams about BP.

    The US should accept immigrants, its not as if the US lacks space, resources like other countries.

  • Comment number 13.

    "The new law requires state and local officers to query the immigration status of people stopped for a legitimate reason who arouse suspicion of being in the US illegally."

    While I can understand Arizona's problem this just sounds far too much like the Gestapo asking 'VER ARE YOUR PAPERS'. Not good for the US's image as the 'land of the free'.

    The real irony is that many hard right Republicans who are no fans of illegal immigrants are likely to be the biggest opponents of this to counter the US turning into a police state where you have to have your papers with you at all times.

    As to "Should Arizona have the right to pass its own immigration laws?" It either can or it can't. If the constitution does not allow for individual states to set their own immigration policies (and I don't see how it can as there aren't passport checks between states) then there's not much room for debate.

  • Comment number 14.

    As part of our 'special arrangement' why don't they send them all over here. Our governments will let anyone in

  • Comment number 15.

    "Associated problems include drug-trafficking and violent kidnappings", and I thought large numbers of immigrants were supposed to be good for diversity and multiculturalism, at least that's what we keep getting told in the UK.

  • Comment number 16.

    The US should build a wall similar to the wall which seperates Egypt and Gaza. Their should also be a ditch which is filled with water to help stop tunnels.

    Then last but not least they should have a 'no mans land' between the first border and create a 2nd border to help spot illegal immigrants. Their is a few areas where the border cuts towns in half, you can't expect to control immigration when being so close together.

  • Comment number 17.

    Arizona is wrong in detaining illegal immigrants as it tries to supercede Federal domain. This step is mala fide and bad in law. At the same time, I do not agree with Prez Obama in going soft on illegal immigrants as they encroach upon legal immigrants who wait for years in queue for their turn. In Mumbai I have seen undeserving visa applicants who somehow 'create' illegal documents for a sum and avail of tourist visae only to settle in US. After working (the staple is $5/- an hour) clandestinely for a few years, Amnesty International pops up advocating their rights and plights and the applicants get green-card in no time. There should be a legal mechanism whereby only genuine applicants are processed in optimal time-frame and welcomed in US. All doubtful applicants should be shown the exit door at all US Missions abroad.

  • Comment number 18.

    "Associated problems include drug-trafficking and violent kidnappings."
    When drugs are illegal in the U.S. and the country is massively wealthier than Mexico, is it really that surprising?

  • Comment number 19.

    1. At 12:22pm on 07 Jul 2010, Jim Corrigan wrote:
    Lets face it, its going to end with a very large Hadrians Walltype arrangement being built between the US and mexico.

    They pretty much do have such a system- big fences, electronic sensors etc.

    It doesn't work as the US and Mexico trade a lot and that means gates in the fence, and gates mean people hiding in the back of vans. It also doesn't stop illegals in boats or planes getting in or tunnelling (as they do in Gaza to beat the blockade). Plenty got over the Iron curtain into the west and that had mine fields in places!

    Incidentally Hadrians wall wasn't a barrier against the 'Barbarian North' but a taxation generator. Anyone bringing goods from North of the wall had to pass through one of the gates where they could be hit with import taxes. The Romans weren't dumb! In fact they were smarter than the US in some respects... a large chunk of the US economy depends on illegal labour working for less than min.wage with no insurance etc. If they could magic away all the illegals overnight they'd be in real trouble.

  • Comment number 20.

    First, this is an internal issue in the U.S. why would anyone in London, Cairo or Tokyo care about something of this nature. Secondly, there is something called the law that must be respected and complied with. Many times here on HYS I see posings ranting about "respect of law" well the same applies in this case. My parents were immigrants and they played by the rules of the game to become citizens, the same needs to be applied here.

  • Comment number 21.

    This is Americas business not ours

  • Comment number 22.

    If the Federal Government is unable or unwilling to enforce it's own immigration laws, then the states should have the right to enforce their own.

    The Obama administration is just having a knee-jerk reaction to a right leaning state that is tired of paying the bills for illegals the Feds let in.

  • Comment number 23.

    Well, bearing in mind they stole the country from the American indians, they would be best sealing every border with sentry posts every 100 yards. Before not too long America will implode, people swamping America from the south will do what they did to the rightful owners of the land, pinch it. And bear in mind, their civil war was all about the north against the south, were where the slaves from Africa, you got it in the south, where are they now, they've taken over a good part of the north. The pioneers from europe went out there to start a new life, their following generations have messed up big time. America is a big mish-mash of different countries immigrants, cultures and religions. It's worked for a while, but wait until times get tough, heard the saying 'you aint seen nothin yet'. Remember where you heard it first.

  • Comment number 24.

    Ask the man who made the film 'Planet of the Apes' what it was really about. Was it like Orwells film, his vision of the future, only his apes are'nt really apes, yu no wot am sayin?

  • Comment number 25.

    4. MrWonderfulReality wrote:

    -------There is a huge and constantly growing undercurrent in USA building against Obama and his government.
    _____________________________________________________________________

    For 'growing undercurrent' read 'a bunch of repubican commentators in the media who have never accepted the election of Obama'.

    The Republican conservatives really hate this man, because he is a democrat, because he is black, but most of all because he is the symbol of the USA's rejection of conservative republicanism.

    So they promote stupid people like Sarah 'you betcha' Palin and so-called tea-party republicans (dispite their popularity being almost non-existant amongst the general population).

    All the opposition to President Obama amounts to is a mountain of hot air. The media claim he is unpopular just because the media says he is, and the media is owned by those who do not support him.

    I would not like to be an hispanic in Arizona, but there again I suppose I wouldn't want to be ANYBODY in Arizona.

  • Comment number 26.

    What amazes me on these sites is the poor educational standard of some of the contributors (not withstanding American English). It may help if the contributors were to inform the site of their origins, then we could perhaps gauge the educational standards in that country, or at least the standards of the contributor. It seems to me that the more right wing the contributor the less well educated they seem.
    I am Welsh so do not know Arizona, but don't American states have a governor to make thee decisions irrespective of central government? How much power does he/she have? Being on the border of a violent corrupt criminal state (Mexico) must surely have consequences for American citizens.
    It seems to me that do nothing would be to hand your country over to the drug barons and criminals because of political correctness. In our country the Labour Party lost the election because it not only refused to listen to its population, but lied over what it was doing in their name.

  • Comment number 27.

    14. At 1:05pm on 07 Jul 2010, exlabour wrote:
    As part of our 'special arrangement' why don't they send them all over here. Our governments will let anyone in

    You jest but NOTHING would surprise me! The new government will prove as impotent against all immigration problems as the last one, and the government before that, AND all the governments in the future. Not ONE politician has the guts to do it!

  • Comment number 28.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 29.

    19. At 1:09pm on 07 Jul 2010, Peter_Sym wrote:
    1. At 12:22pm on 07 Jul 2010, Jim Corrigan wrote:
    Lets face it, its going to end with a very large Hadrians Walltype arrangement being built between the US and mexico.

    They pretty much do have such a system- big fences, electronic sensors etc.

    It doesn't work as the US and Mexico trade a lot and that means gates in the fence, and gates mean people hiding in the back of vans. It also doesn't stop illegals in boats or planes getting in or tunnelling (as they do in Gaza to beat the blockade). Plenty got over the Iron curtain into the west and that had mine fields in places!

    -----

    Plese don't misunderstand me, personally I think the sooner humanity is all the same yellowy-brown colour the better off the human race will be, although I'm sure we'll still find geographical reasons to hate each other.

    The problem as I understand it is that at the moment the US mexican border is so porous that the authorities are losing/have lost track of how many people they've got, which has major implications for government infrastructure, especially when it comes to allocating resources.



  • Comment number 30.

    Interestingly the USA was born of illegal immigration, wasn't it?

    Other than that I wouldn't think anyone in the UK would understand enough about the vagaries of the US legal system to even base a comment.

    A wonder we in the UK haven't offered to have them all over here yet, but I suspect that it is only a matter of time before we do. It could just be the American version of Sangatte for us.

  • Comment number 31.

    As a UK citizen I say:

    Well done Arizona. You are doing the right thing. Don`t listen to the people it upsets.

    Here in the UK we have the same nutters who want the whole world and it`s dog to live here.

  • Comment number 32.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 33.

    The Justice Dept should be spending more time a true case of intimidation and racism. the voter intimidation case by the New Black Panthers in Philidelphia

    This group is as racist as the KKK, but because they are black Holder dropped the case.

    The AZ law allows no checking of status unless stopped for another reason, which all citizens are required to produce a photo id.

  • Comment number 34.

    We have a Black Attorney General who has refused to persue a civil rights case against memebers of the racist New Black Panters Party who were blocking a polling place with clubs and intimidating White voters with racial epithets as they tried walking in the door to vote. The same Attorney General who publiclly declared Terror Trials in downtown New York City though he has yet to persue a single case from Guantanamo.
    Now the same Attorney General wants to persue a case against the people of Arizona for a law wrtten exactly like the Federal law, he fails to enforce.
    This is the Obama plan playing on the emotions of Hispanics against Whites, Whites against Blacks, Straights verses Gays, and the Rich verses Poor, Then after he gets everyone in America to hate each other he will try and get enough votes to stay in office.

  • Comment number 35.

    We should send the whole bunch to the naive & self-righteous countries of the world.

  • Comment number 36.

    Given britains past record of human rights violations enslavement of peoples pillaging of nations for wealth etc.....
    I dont think we have any right to suggest anything.
    Were currently suffering from mass migration from eastern european states of minimum wage workers, which is putting an entire generation of youngsters on the benefits system so yes we have room to talk lol.

  • Comment number 37.

    #27 - BINGO!

    ~21 - right on.

    This really is none of our business, if you want to chat about immigration in tht UK, go and sign in to the 'Gay and Lesbian' debate, which should fulfil all your ranting needs.

    US citizens only on this page.

  • Comment number 38.

    I dont know but if it works we could use it here.

  • Comment number 39.

    I would send the lot back and give the country back to the native americans they stole it from.

  • Comment number 40.

    Which countries, or country, currently allows any and all to freely immigrate and become a legal resident and citizen? Every country I am aware of has immigration laws, and most of them enforce their laws more forcefully than does the U.S. The fact is, the U.S. has laws related to immigration, and many persons legally immigrate to the U.S. each year. On the other hand there are a great number who enter the country illegally each year. Ideally, the U.S. should pass a law which would allow for illegal immigrants to either register and put in a queue for legal reentry after returning to their home country, or face being apprehended and put on a list which would make legal reentry possible only after a grace period has expired AND the queue exhausted. Any other action, such as amnesty, would only be for political purposes.

  • Comment number 41.

    I am suprised by comments suggesting UK citizens shouldn't comment. If I am mistaken, since when was freedom of speach and ideas against the law?

    As a UK citizen interested on moving to the states I am of course going to be interested about the immigration debate. If people take notice and reply to what is another matter and you all certainly have the right to ignore UK citizens.

  • Comment number 42.

    That Obama, eh. Altogether now ... (silly voice) "He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!!!"

    I've been waiting to say that ever since he was elected.

  • Comment number 43.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 44.

    I am a British expat living in US. When one received ones "Permanent Resident" card (aka green card), giving right to reside in US, there are written instructions from the United States Citizen & Immigration Service (USCIS) that one must carry the green card with one at all times.

    Showing cards & giving numbers is nothing unusual here in US. All citizens & residents are given a "social security number"; without this number one basically does not exist. Without this number one cannot open a bank account or take out any contract for say a mobile telephone telephone line, electricity supply etc. etc. This number is linked into computers so that bank details & other information can be accessed in at least some shops & companies.
    It is very "normal" in US to be asked for this SS number & frequently, ones driving license number. I cannot see that showing a green card is so much of a big deal if, indeed, one is a legal immigrant.

    Regarding targeting people from Mexico. It would seem logical, since there is no abundance of people pouring into Arizona from Canada or any country other than Mexico, police will be more likely to ask people of Latin American appearance to produce their "green card". (People from Mexico cannot be called Mexican in US, for whatever reason that is considered rude & people from Mexico have to be called hispanics). Since all legal immigrants are to carry their green card on their person at all times it could not more than a minute to prove ones right to be there.

    When in the process of applying for my green card, the immigration lawyer we cosulted happened to say, in passing, that most of the people she represented were citizens of Mexico & that the Mexican government issues leaflets telling people how to get over the border.


  • Comment number 45.

    38. At 2:07pm on 07 Jul 2010, dogswhistle wrote:
    I dont know but if it works we could use it here.

    -----

    What ask anyone looking vaguely hispanic to prove their right to residency?

    It might get the odd spanish exchange student deported, but I doubt it would have the overall effect on numbers your'e hoping for....

  • Comment number 46.

    37. At 2:00pm on 07 Jul 2010, FrankandTomsDad wrote:
    #27 - BINGO!

    ~21 - right on.

    This really is none of our business, if you want to chat about immigration in tht UK, go and sign in to the 'Gay and Lesbian' debate, which should fulfil all your ranting needs.

    US citizens only on this page.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    HOUSE!

    This is a version of Bingo that applies to loony left comments.

    While the US meddles is our affairs we should meddle back

  • Comment number 47.

    I suggest the USA airforce bombs Mexico with condoms.

    The eleventh annual census, conducted in 1990, reported a total Mexican population of 81,250,000 in 20 years it has increased to 112,468,855 (July 2010 est.CIA)

    Reality, Mexico, like many countrys has economic and social unsustainable population expansion, in 20 years it has grown by around 25% and is presently growing at similar rates.

    If you put 20 rats into a box capable of sustaining 20 rats at a minimal level of sustinance, due to population expansion their existance will very soon become overburdened and the rats will turn on each other and fight for survival while others/many will seek to escape. Those that escape will locate in other areas, their population will also grow and eventually will also become unsustainable.

    I once knew someone that kept hamsters in a huge glass vivarium/tank, it was quite a terrible thing.

    The hamster population got on as normal and as behaviourally expected for a while, but soon the population grew beyond a sustainable level and the hamsters became more violent and more competative and even started eating one another. The new born/young were protected from the hamster society by remaining in smaller tubes which bigger adults could not gain access. Once the young grew beyond a certain size, they were forced to join the adult population, who were mainly stronger and more experienced. Many perished, but those that survived evolved into much more fierce behaviours.

    This is a reality of human populations around the world, whether Mexico, Africa, Asia.

    If you think the housing bubble or the Dotcom bubble were nasty and had attrocious outcomes, then to quote a USA Pres- " You aint seen NOTHIN yet," the human population bubble when it bursts will I think make WWI and WWII look like a tea party, because the carnage will be so beyond anything that most people could even remotely perceive.

    Humanity is failing to learn basic lessons of existance and sustainability.

    There are a few reasons why a population of lions or other animals rise and then collapse or even completely become extinct.

    There is so much evidence around us but we persist with the FALSE assuption that our inteligence and technical capabilitys put us beyond such an outcome.

    Why is it that we believe in such things as environmental warming but refuse to accept so much historical and factual evidence regarding population growth, which is actually the CENTRAL issue if environmental warming is to be restrained in any meaningful/factual way.

    I say to those in Arizona, do what you will, it's YOUR life, YOUR existance which is under threat.

    At the end of the day, I am NOT responsible for others mating habits, I am NOT responsible for millions of unsustainable lives being brought into this world. I AM responsible for MY OWN existance and my OWN sustainability and if sustaining the existance of my family or country meant taking action against those of other nations/races to impede their damaging effects on my own existance, then so be it.

    Its all very well being a liberalist and living to liberalist ideals, but I'd much rather be a live/living realist living a half decent existance than a liberalist living in dreamland resulting in myself and family becoming weaker and weaker sharing less amongst more and threatening our very existance because of liberalist and christian based ideals.

    There is NOTHING racist in seeking to maintain/sustain ones existance by excluding others uninvited.

    While a few at the top may benefit from profitting from such expansions of populations, the VAST majority lower down become increasingly desperate and are basically a commodity to be used and abused to maintain those with power and those who live excessive lives and burn up and discard the worlds resources for self-righteous selfish indulgences.

    In USA, there are growing factions seeking state independance, its a growing serious issue, no different to states in the Roman Empire or British Empire seeking independance or those in India or China, or Pakistan, or Yemen, or Sudan, or Turkey, or what was previously Greater Yugoslavia, or elsewhere in the world.

    Population is the CENTRAL key to SO MANY negative issues/problems.

    If population expansion/increases are NOT controlled, then eventually populations themselves will become uncontrolable.

    Insurgencys within USA as with many places around the world is a REAL and growing reality, if government doesnt act in the interests of its people, then its people will eventually act against the government or become increasingly intolerant and racists/nationalist against those it sees as a threat.

    This measure in Arizona could have been prevented if central government had acted more effectively. In reality, it just shows the endemic human trait of growth of extremism if government fails in its care of duty to its own people while proliferating liberalistic and greed orientated policys for the few.

    If USA central government manages to repeal this law without taking remedial action which basically provides for the same desired outcome, then I think confrontations between groups and individuals will greatly increase and with increasing violence to make these places look/seem and BE unatractive to those who seek to escape from their own national lives of harshness.

    In doing too little or not enough and persisting with liberalistic ideals, the USA government may create a much worse environment and experience for those it's liberalist ideals seek to protect.

  • Comment number 48.

    The last people they should ask is our last government.It was a disaster that wil have painfull and deadly results in a few years time.

  • Comment number 49.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 50.

    The US was built upon the rights of its citizens, to be governed primarily by state and local laws. The Federal government's role was to have been limited, though relative to this discussion, matters of immigration were to have been theirs. Whilst the Federal government was given the charge of securing our borders and handling immigration, it must be noted that our Constitution provides rights for it's citzens/states to assume responsibility in the event of an abdication of responsibility by the Feds. I would submit that it can be reasonably argued that our Federal government has failed its citizens on this issue. Consequently, the state of Arizona is within their rights to assume measures aimed at protecting its citizens. The details of the recently passed immigration law differ only slightly from those already on the books at the Federal level. The main difference is, of course, that the state of Arizona is intent on enforcing them, whereas the Feds have shown no inclination to do so. The Supreme Court will, ultimately side with the state of Arizona on this, and I believe Obama's administration already knows this. This is nothing more than election year window dressing for the hispanic vote.

  • Comment number 51.

    Under Bush, and now Obama, there has been a dereliction of duty to defend our country from a tide of illegal aliens, a hurricane, and floating oil. Some counties in Arizona are now posted as of limits to US citizens because of the dangers associated with armed drug dealers in the area. Arizona has picked up some of the slack with a proposal to do nothing more than enforce existing federal immigration law.

    Official US unemployment is 9.5% although 5.3% of the labor force is made up of illegal aliens. It makes no sense to be extending the unemployment benefits of US citizens while to save cheating employers a couple of doillars an hour.

    A simpler more effective way to do this might be to incarcerate and severly fine cheating employers who fail to send their employeees' Social Security numbers in to the Federal Government for a check. Leave the illegal aliens alone but jail their employers. I suspect this would soon dry up the job market for illegal aliens and most would drift back home.

  • Comment number 52.

    To all of those saying this is none of Britain's business (especially the american posters)

    Why are you commenting on a British web site? Doesn't that strike you as just a little bit hypocritical?

    Secondly the US has felt the urge to meddle in internal politics in dozens of countries, especially the UK. I'd say US senators suggesting the mass deportation of people who have been in a country for 400 years (Ted Kennedy speaking about the Protestants in Ireland) and then attending the funeral of terrorists who killed British civilians is somewhat worse than us commenting on your immigration policies.

    Considering the 'should we tighten UK gun laws' forum was overwhelmed with gun toting yanks you've got a nerve telling us not to comment on this.

    And to the Brits saying we should copy this:
    How would we do that without bringing in those damn ID cards? Much as the daily Mail can't tell the difference between an illegal migrant/ a legal migrant and an asylum seaker the truth is that almost every migrant in the UK is here perfectly legally. Asking a Pole for his papers will not get him deported when he's here quite legally under the same reciprocal deal that lets wrinkled orange coloured Brits retire to Spain.

  • Comment number 53.

    Jim Corrigan wrote:
    Lets face it, its going to end with a very large Hadrians Walltype arrangement being built between the US and mexico.


    And it'll probably be built by illegal immigrant workers...

  • Comment number 54.

    12. At 1:01pm on 07 Jul 2010, Slave to the System - I am not a number wrote:
    "Typical American hypocracy yet again.
    The majority of US citizens are immigrants ! They wiped out the indigenious indians."

    Where do I even begin with such mindless ignorance? Mexico also started with immigrants from Europe coming over and killed the Aztecs and formed the country known as Mexico today centuries later. They enforce their immigration laws on illegals coming from their South border with Guatemala with an iron fist and yet they have the gall to tell us to accomodate their people sneaking into the US illegally and not dare to do anything against their rights. Who's the hypocrite here?

    Also, if we go by your idiotic way of thinking, no country in the American continent, from Canada to Argentina, would have the rights to enforce their own immigration laws as all of them were founded by outsiders from Europe.

    "America ignores the acts of terror around the world i.e. the IRA attachs on the UK only to scream when they get targetted in 9/11."

    OK, so you complaint when the US does nothing about terrorism. But once it did, you ALSO complaint about war mongering Americans invading countries and Guantanamo Bay. Damn if we do and damn if we don't?

    "Following that event the US goes very quiet when innocent civillians are targetted by Israel."

    Same way you go very quiet when Hamas launches rocket atttacks and suicide bombers against Israel for 8 years and you scream injustice when Israel had enough and strikes back.

    "US ignores Bhopal yet screams about BP."

    Union Carbide continued to provide interim relief funds and worked with the Bhopal community on medical and economic aid, legal actions proceeded in both the U.S. and India. The US court ultimately decided that India was the proper country for legal proceedings. Matters were consolidated there and proceeded before the Supreme Court of India.In February 1989, the Supreme Court of India directed a final settlement of all Bhopal litigation in the amount of $470 million. The Government of India, UCC and UCIL accepted the Court’s direction.

    Ten days after the decision, UCC and UCIL made full payment of the $470 million to the Indian government.

    The settlement award was much larger than any previous damage award in India, and was $120 million more than plaintiffs’ lawyers had told U.S. courts was fair. In directing the settlement, the Supreme Court of India reviewed all U.S. and Indian court filings, applicable law and relevant facts, and an assessment of the victims’ needs. In its opinion, the Court said that compensation levels under the settlement were far greater than would normally be payable under Indian law. By November 1990, the Reserve Bank of India reported that the settlement fund, with interest, was approximately twice what was estimated to be needed to compensate the victims.

    To resolve continuing legal disputes, the Supreme Court of India in 1991 affirmed the settlement; described it as “just, equitable and reasonable,” and dismissed all outstanding petitions seeking review of the settlement. Pursuant to the settlement, the Government of India assumed responsibility for disbursing funds from the settlement.

    So in conclusion, no...the US did NOT ignore Bhopal. If you take the time to do this little thing called RESEARCH instead of talking through your a** about things you don't even have the slightest clue about, you wouldn't make such a damn fool of yourself.

    "The US should accept immigrants, its not as if the US lacks space, resources like other countries."

    How about I tell your country what they should do with their illegals? Hmm, let's see...The UK should welcome all Muslims immigrants without any pre-requisite for citizenship and turn London into the New Mecca and be ruled under Sharia Law.
    How does that grab you?

  • Comment number 55.

    39. At 2:08pm on 07 Jul 2010, frankiecrisp wrote:
    I would send the lot back and give the country back to the native americans they stole it from.

    THEY? I think you'll find the first white people in North America weren't Americans.........

    More to the point where would you send 'them' back to? If someone is Polish-Italian would you have them chopped in half? You might also want to consider what language the Mexicans speak.... not Mayan or Aztec is it?

    You might also want to consider that there were at least three waves of immigration into the americas thousands of years ago. The Indians didn't evolve there... they crossed a land bridge from Asia and the current Indians wiped out the first lot. Tribes like the Navajo only arrived in the south west of the US 1000 years ago (about the time the Normans were invading us) and wiped out the earlier tribes. In fact the Navajo word for these tribes "Anasazi" means "the ancient enemy"
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anasazi

    The problem I find with the 'send them back from where they came from Brigade" is that they have zero knowledge of history.

  • Comment number 56.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 57.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 58.

    46. At 2:24pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gareth wrote:

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    HOUSE!

    This is a version of Bingo that applies to loony left comments.

    While the US meddles is our affairs we should meddle back

    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

    In what way has the US 'meddled in our affairs'?

    Ok we've been involved in one dodgy war, one that looks like it may never end and we're signed up to a completely one sided extradition treaty.

    But the UK government of the day entered willingly into all of this, its got nothing to do with US 'meddling'.

    What is about those on the further right in all countries that they just cannot bring themselves to speak in civil terms about other nations, even allies?

    You remind me of some US posters who can't launch a justified attack on BP without extending it into a diatribe about Britain in general.

    Its neither fair or accurate.

    Anyway, back on topic, i would like to make it clear that whilst I understand and agree that a country needs to know who is living where within its borders, ultimately there is a danger that both legal and non-legal hispanics will come to resent being singled out.

    But I'm sure that the Arizona law makers realised that when they introduced the policy.

  • Comment number 59.

    If you fly in or sail into America, you are checked and double checked. Who knew that all you had to do was go to Mexico, and simply WALK in.

    The Key word here is ILLEGAL.

  • Comment number 60.

    "They should make all immigration legal. Problem solved.
    Next, please."


    Is all immigration to your country legal? And unlimited?


    Btw. Let's legalize cocaine, heroine, crack, etc, once at it.


    Then an "illegal drugs" problem will automatically disappear. :)

  • Comment number 61.

    53. At 2:52pm on 07 Jul 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
    Jim Corrigan wrote:
    Lets face it, its going to end with a very large Hadrians Walltype arrangement being built between the US and mexico.


    And it'll probably be built by illegal immigrant workers...

    &&&&&&&&

    Naturally, to keep costs down :)

  • Comment number 62.

    The "first world" is a leaky boat. It has been floating on top of the rest of the planet for centuries, keeping it's inhabitants out of poverty, keeping us in our place in the sun. Now we are being plagued with ethics, equalitarianism, humanitarianism. We are being forced to look at ourselves and our boat, and whenever we do, leaks spring out and people flood in.
    Trouble is, we don't want to give up our place in the sun to give all of humanity an equal chance because and we don't want our particular first world culture and wealth diluted by stangers and poor people. Our quality of life would certainly go down hill wouldn't it? And you only get one life don't you.
    So the simple and only really honest answer is:-

    Refusing mass immigration is unethical, inhumane, unequal and predjudical.

    Allowing it would utterly destroy our economies and our way of life.

    This is why we have to squint and very slightly avoid the real issues without admitting we are being unethical when we talk about immigration.
    You can bang on about your national identity, but I doubt you personally did anything to found your country or define it's economical position, you can talk about blood ties, but you can probably trace your DNA to some other immigrant, perhaps centuries ago, and anyway, almost everyone reading this will probably be dead within the next 70 years or so, but the rocks and soil of the USA and the UK will still be there in thousands of years when the USA and the UK no longer exist and are just land masses again, or have re-defined borders.

    Personally, I like my job and my motorbike and my car and my computer and my pub and my safety and my house and my money and my holidays and my place in the sun until I peg it. I guess I'm not much of an equalitarian or a liberal after all, quite selfish and mean and unethical really, like almost everyone in the first world, regardless of what politics they profess. At least I'm honest about it.

    Keep squinting or the boat will spring more leaks!

  • Comment number 63.

    "All I know is I wouldn't get on a flight in Arizona if my name was Gomez."





    Once I forgot my driver's licence and as a result was harrased on 405 by a California Highway Patrol officer.

    Whose name (according to a ticket he handed me) was...Jimenez. :)

  • Comment number 64.

    " Official US unemployment is 9.5% although 5.3% of the labor force is made up of illegal aliens. It makes no sense to be extending the unemployment benefits of US citizens while to save cheating employers a couple of doillars an hour."

    But it makes massive sense for the cheating employers as individuals to do this! Thats the problem.

    "A simpler more effective way to do this might be to incarcerate and severly fine cheating employers who fail to send their employeees' Social Security numbers in to the Federal Government for a check. Leave the illegal aliens alone but jail their employers. I suspect this would soon dry up the job market for illegal aliens and most would drift back home. "

    That would help...maybe.... but would be unworkable for jobs that use 'casual labour' on a day by day basis like picking crops. In the UK we have many temping agencies that supply labour for a few days. The agency SHOULD check the details but often don't. The employer will usually trust that the staff they're being sent are legal.

    It could also be beaten by ID fraud. The scam in the UK is to be issued an 'emergency national insurance number' which is basically the same as the US SS number. Job Centres can issue those for people who claim to have lost or never been given their number (such as legal migrants applying for a job here for the first time) and you can use such an emergency number for years. I have no idea if the same scam is possible in the US but I presume you have a way of issuing SS numbers to 'new' american citizens?

  • Comment number 65.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 66.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 67.

    Re #19 "If they could magic away all the illegals overnight they'd be in real trouble."







    Pretty hilarious! :-)))


    According to reliable MEXICAN sources roughy 20 BILLION US$ is being remitted from U.S. to Mexico year in year out.


    In CASH!!!

    Which means it is being spend by those illegals' extended families on cars, plasmas, fridges, microwave ovens, dishwashers, air-conditioners, DVD players, computers and other consumer goods not in U.S. (where it could at least help stimulate local economy) but in MEXICO.

    And I am not even counting hundreds of thousands of illegals from Belize, Costa Rica, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Salvador, Uruguay, etc., who do the same.

    And not including a high cost of crimes committed by those illegals in Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas and other U.S. states.

  • Comment number 68.

    Arizona should be applauded for taking matters into their own hands. The Federal Government won't enforce the law of the land so the State needs to. This is a politically motived failure by the B.O. admnistration to enforce immigration laws, so they don't lose the support of the Hispanic population.
    If the law says it is illegal to enter the country wthout following immigrations laws, and you enter the coutry without following the law it is illegal and is considered a crime. Period. If someone is suspected of doing something illegal, it should be investigated. If they are found to have commited a crime there should be consequenses.
    Arizona is only doing what is best for the state and should be allowed to do what is needed to enforce current immigration laws.
    "Arizona is the biggest entry point into the US for illegal immigrants - home to an estimated 460,000 of them. Associated problems include drug-trafficking and violent kidnappings." It sounds like Self Defense to me. I wish other States would join Arizona!

  • Comment number 69.

    Arizona has only resorted to this draconian measure because the Federal Government has been ineffective & has not done enough to staunch the flow of immigration. Besides, many of these would-be citizens of the US are prey to criminal gangs & many of them embrace the criminal life themselves: this is surely unacceptable. Given the clear division of State & Federal powers in the US it is a moot point whether Arizona is in breach of the legal framework by acting unilaterally in this case. If the Federal Government is unhappy then it should take all the illegal immigrants from Arizona & disperse them nationwide. I am sure the other States will be happy to oblige by accepting them. The Federalists cannot have their cake & eat it.

  • Comment number 70.

    Mexican street gangs traffick hard dope to America through Arizona. They enforce their illicit activity with murders of police officers. The mobs also traffick underground snuff films featuring slain women to necrophiles in the United States. Immigration laws will do nothing to stop this violence.

  • Comment number 71.

    58. At 3:12pm on 07 Jul 2010, Jim Corrigan wrote:
    46. At 2:24pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gareth wrote:

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    HOUSE!

    This is a version of Bingo that applies to loony left comments.

    While the US meddles is our affairs we should meddle back

    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

    In what way has the US 'meddled in our affairs'?

    Ok we've been involved in one dodgy war, one that looks like it may never end and we're signed up to a completely one sided extradition treaty.

    But the UK government of the day entered willingly into all of this, its got nothing to do with US 'meddling'.

    What is about those on the further right in all countries that they just cannot bring themselves to speak in civil terms about other nations, even allies?

    You remind me of some US posters who can't launch a justified attack on BP without extending it into a diatribe about Britain in general.

    Its neither fair or accurate.

    Anyway, back on topic, i would like to make it clear that whilst I understand and agree that a country needs to know who is living where within its borders, ultimately there is a danger that both legal and non-legal hispanics will come to resent being singled out.

    But I'm sure that the Arizona law makers realised that when they introduced the policy.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    So they never meddled in Northern Ireland? You should sse the pro IRA propaganda in some places.

    So they never meddled with BP? Afterall they want the oil, and built and supplied most of the parts.

    So they never meddle in any affairs that don't concern them? List too long.

    They are essentially hypocites.

    Who built the railroads for them? Chinese slave immigrants.

    Who built their economy? African slaves.

    Where are the only Americans left? Stuck on a reservation to be tolerated.

  • Comment number 72.

    I support the state of Arizona trying to control its borders. if you are a legal migrant you have nothing to fear as you will not be deported but if you are in the country illegally then you will be deported. Seems only fair as Mexican immigration laws are much tougher than American ones.

  • Comment number 73.

    #52 Peter_Sym wrote:
    To all of those saying this is none of Britain's business (especially the american posters) 

Why are you commenting on a British web site? Doesn't that strike you as just a little bit hypocritical?

    If the BBC didn't want Americans to comment then they should block this site, or refuse to print our comments. But don't hold your breath. And by the way, THIS IS NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS ANYWAY.

  • Comment number 74.

    It's a matter the Americans and the residents of Arizona are most qualified to answer, of course, but here's my take.

    My parents legally immigrated to the UK and worked and payed taxes before and after they became UK citizens.

    I, myself, have US permanent residency earned legally by working here. It took me years to become a legal resident and I have paid taxes and followed the rules every day whilst in the US.

    I am tired of people deliberately breaking the rules to become illegal residents. It's not fair either to the citizens of a country- any country - nor is it fair to the many non-citizens who follow the rules to become legal residents.

    I don't like the police to have even more powers than they have already, but every day you're here illegally, you're breaking the law, and so don't complain about the people or system that uphold the law when they check immigration status.

    And if a cop doesn't personally like someone because of race or religion, well, they can find plenty of other ways to get them in trouble, other than verifying their immigration status. And if the government was really serious about illegal immigration, they should have done something about it sooner, instead of complaining about Arizona.

    And it's not just illegal immigrants that should be closely scrutinized. Many legal ones regularly bend immigration rules. For example many people get residency then secretly work abroad - thereby contribute nothing in taxes by living and working abroad, whilst at the same time claiming benefits from the country they contribute nothing to. I am sick of my taxes supporting their unethical/immoral/illegal behaviour.

    The government should thoroughly check the goings on of legal immigrants too. Nothing to worry if they have nothing to hide. And if they don't like it, then they can go home. It's a free country, and no-one's stopping them from leaving.

  • Comment number 75.

    59. At 3:18pm on 07 Jul 2010, laura wrote:
    If you fly in or sail into America, you are checked and double checked. Who knew that all you had to do was go to Mexico, and simply WALK in.




    Not quite 'simple'... its more a case of cross at least one fence then walk 30 odd miles though some of the hottest deserts on earth avoiding the border patrols. Plenty die attempting it which is something thats been forgotten by both sides of this argument. If illegal immigration was made tougher a lot of people who are physically incapable of the trip wouldn't try it and might not die in the desert.

  • Comment number 76.

    Arizona isn't passing it's own immigration laws. The bill doesn't change border policy in any way. Local and State law enforcement have been looking the other way on immigration for 20 years. The law simply puts the federal law on the state books so the local police can stop passing the buck.

  • Comment number 77.

    The federal government has failed to do anything about illegal immigration for 50 yrs. Not a single President has made any effort to stem the flow. If the flow is NOT cut off, the Democratic Party will be able to legalize a new voting bloc of 12 million voters across every state in the US, allowing them to take control of US politics, and basically have a dictatorship in the US.

    This would greatly injure the entire republic, and could indeed, become a loss of freedom in America.

    The AZ law is designed to tackle the main problem of illegal immigration, which is, bluntly, the flow of drugs and drug cartel agents, freely across the border. This is a major problem, the politicians don't want to discuss, because it takes the focus off of "race" and the government is playing the race card to the hilt....improperly.

    Just imagine, BBC, what the impact of 12 million illegal Mexicans might be like, in your own country......with your signs, your TV programs, your restaurants, all becoming "Mexican". (Unhealthy food, by the way.)

    Or, translate that to any other country, as the source, of that increase in population, you might choose, that has a totally different language and culture, and just imagine it.

    There is no question, that if the flow of illegals is NOT stopped.....the US will cease to exist, as you know it, at some point, because there will be more Mexicans in the US, than any other group.

  • Comment number 78.

    "#60 Btw. Let's legalize cocaine, heroine, crack, etc, once at it.

    Then an "illegal drugs" problem will automatically disappear. :) "

    Thats not as daft as you think it is. The US govt could produce the stuff, slap an enormous tax on it and still undercut the dealers putting the dealers out of business, saving billions on coast guard and policing costs and greatly reducing the ill effects of the drug as it would be clean and of know quantity.

    Was America a better or worse place during alcohol prohibition?

    I'm not one of these people who claim that legalising all drugs would magically remove ALL the problems (kids getting hold it of being the biggest) but I don't see how it could be worse than the current system.

    The Taliban lose their #1 source of income as do FARC in Colombia and a dozen other groups who hate the US. You could stop wasting precious tax dollars propping up the Colombian army too.

  • Comment number 79.

    Our politicians would prefer to pander for Hispanic votes rather than provide for the safety of the country.

    The 911 commission recommended strengthening border security (fence etc) and tighten up immigration but our politicians are afraid they might lose the Hispanic vote.

    Arizona law may not be perfect but at least they are trying to address an important issue that has been largely ignored by our Federal politicians.

  • Comment number 80.

    On vacation in Arizona last Summer, I got stopped several times on roads that were coming from the Mexican border but were many miles from it at checkpoints run by Border Protection. My passport and I94 were checked (fortunate that I had them on me at all times) and I am in no doubt what would have happened if they had not been in order, and I am not nor look Hispanic.

  • Comment number 81.

    66. At 3:38pm on 07 Jul 2010, Darren wrote:
    37. At 2:00pm on 07 Jul 2010, FrankandTomsDad wrote:
    #27 - BINGO!

    ~21 - right on.

    This really is none of our business, if you want to chat about immigration in tht UK, go and sign in to the 'Gay and Lesbian' debate, which should fulfil all your ranting needs.

    US citizens only on this page.

    ---------------------------------------------
    US citizens only? Really? On the BBC website? Do you know what BBC stands for? Maybe you're right though. Its not as if the US ever meddled in other countries.... wait a minute!

    -----------------------------------------------

    Still not convinced. Did you look at the other debate I mentioned?

    Anyway, you've misunderstood, I don't feel that we have any business commenting on these issues when we clearly can't agree on the way we should deal with it. Why should they listen to us?

    Glass houses, etc?

    BBC? What does it stand for? What has that got to do with the price of fish?

  • Comment number 82.

    #63 Once I forgot my driver's licence and as a result was harrased on 405 by a California Highway Patrol officer.

    Whose name (according to a ticket he handed me) was...Jimenez. :)




    And who's family had possibly lived there for 300 years longer than yours
    :)
    Its amazing how many Americans seem to forget that Texas, California, New Mexico and Arizona were the richest part of Mexico until your 'manifest destiny' decided otherwise.

  • Comment number 83.

    73. At 3:51pm on 07 Jul 2010, lochraven wrote:
    #52 Peter_Sym wrote:
    To all of those saying this is none of Britain's business (especially the american posters) 

Why are you commenting on a British web site? Doesn't that strike you as just a little bit hypocritical?

    If the BBC didn't want Americans to comment then they should block this site, or refuse to print our comments. But don't hold your breath. And by the way, THIS IS NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS ANYWAY.


    And if the BBC DID block all US comments you'd be happy about this would you? Perhaps you can explain what business it is of the US's that your senators were walking around the streets of Belfast abusing British soldiers? You lot seem to have loads of opinions on britain and the Falklands, Britains gun laws, British abortion laws etc. Perhaps you can explain why Sarah Palin (who was damn near VP) launched an assault on our health system inventing stories of 'death panels'? Why is that her business?

    If you want us to ignore you, maybe you should stop posting here? With no US bigots we'd have far less to comment on.

  • Comment number 84.

    It's fairly obvious that the very concept of an 'illegal immigrant' is a illusionary construct to control the movement of human beings! Its addressing an 'effect' without thinking about the causes. I suggest we make all immigration a legal right for all humanity and I would go so far as to suggest the abolition of passports and any impediment to the free movement of people on this planet! You may believe this a crazy idea, but one must realise that the exploitative nature of our global economy, and the destructive practices of wealthy elites are the real cause of immigration. Defining the movement of humanity as illegal immigration is merely bending reality in order to counter the 'effect' of perverse distribution of resources and the theft and exploitation perpetrated by those with power and wealth! IF all immigration were legal, or to put it another way, if people were free to move as they wished around the planet - we would witness a revolution as the wealthy elites would loose their power and control over the populations of all nations....


    Have a Revolution inside your head....

  • Comment number 85.

    65. At 3:35pm on 07 Jul 2010, max_normal wrote:

    @Richard33p

    "Do you know how many US owned oil wells have been continuously leaking oil into the Gulf of Mexico since 2004?

    Perhaps you should do some research hmmm?"

    A third of a barrel a day in total for 26 wells, making 1,220 barrels in 6 years. Sort of a drop in a bucket compared to 20,000-40,000 barrels a day by one oil well. Now, I'm going to assume you were in a joking mood (hey, I have a sense of humor too) and that you were not actually serious when you brought up that worthless comparison.

  • Comment number 86.

    "What ask anyone looking vaguely hispanic to prove their right to residency?

    It might get the odd spanish exchange student deported, but I doubt it would have the overall effect on numbers your'e hoping for...."

    Luckily, the SCOTUS is more informed than BBC's readership. That rhetoric is a straight up lie. The bill says nothing about deportation, if they're found to be illegal, it's turned over to the feds.

    This issue is tied up by the separation of powers. Most Europeans don't understand what that means. I'll try to put it in a nutshell. The Federal government has refused to enforce immigration laws anywhere except the border. State and local governments have called it a Federal issue and refused to enforce the laws as well. So if the illegals can get past the border zone, there is no enforcement at all. The AZ bill is trying to end that impasse.

  • Comment number 87.

    FOUR STEPS:

    1) BUILD THE FENCE, DEPLOY THE NATIONAL GUARD, SHOOT TO KILL.

    2) JAIL EMPLOYERS.
    Five years and $250,000 per illegal alien should do it.

    3) CHARGE HOME GOVERNMENTS FOR ILLEGALS CAUGHT IN THE US.
    Most nations have US investments. Just charge their accounts for each illegal alien we find here. When the illegal alien is sent home, their gov sends them the bill. Just the financial burden should be a deterrent. Perhaps it would also "encourage" nations to watch who LEAVES their country, too.

    4) CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION.
    No more anchor babies! Your parents BOTH MUST BE US CITIZENS to pass US citizenship to their children. Imagine the evil person who would HIDE BEHIND THEIR OWN BABY AS A SHIELD FROM THE LAW. And we're supposed to want them as a NEW NEIGHBOR? Sorry, no thanks.

  • Comment number 88.

    Peter_Sym, The SS number in US is much, much more than the NI number in UK. Ones SS number has to be given very many instances which are not employment related. Without an SS number in US, it is as if one does not exist; it is taken as ID in very many instances, drivng license, mobile phone contacts, utility supplies to ones home, banks, car insurance etc.etc. The SS number is linked by computer so, if one has to give ones SS number in a shop where it is deemed necessary, the shop can tell which bank you bank with etc.etc.
    I am not sure how illegal immigrants cope if they do not have SS numbers. For instance I don't know how they could get their children into schools, SS numbers & proof of vaccination against numerous illnesses are necessary to put children into the state schools.
    Personally, presuming they don't get stopped every time they go out, I don't think legal residents would mind that much having to show their green card, as one is supposed to carry it at all times, but I don't think it would really solve the illegal immigrant issues.

  • Comment number 89.

    "59. At 3:18pm on 07 Jul 2010, laura wrote:
    If you fly in or sail into America, you are checked and double checked. Who knew that all you had to do was go to Mexico, and simply WALK in"

    No, you have to find a representative of the local Cartel and pay him. He'll make the arrangements. If you're cute they may have a bit of fun with you while you're in their "care". Stories of rape are pretty common. If you're rich, they may decide to raise the price and keep you until your family pays them off.

    That's how it's done. The border is tightly controlled, but it's by the Cartels, not the US and Mexican governments.

  • Comment number 90.

    71. At 3:49pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gareth wrote:
    58. At 3:12pm on 07 Jul 2010, Jim Corrigan wrote:
    46. At 2:24pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gareth wrote:

    -----------------------------------------------------

    Gareth, sounds just like the good 'ole British Empire there ma friend!!

    you don't write like someone who has a PhD?

    Usually, people of that level of education are more measured in their response and think of the possible hostiles that comments like 'economy built on African slaves' and 'chinese slaves built railway' might attract.

    For the record, the Chinese workers on the trans continental railway weren't slaves, they were paid, a pittance and they were appallingly treated and many died, but they weren't slaves. If they were, they may have been treated better.

    But hey, that's capatalism for you, treat the workers like dogs and pay as little as you can, sorry, dogs are often better treated than workers, well, back then anyway.

    (Don't think British Empire had Chinese slaves, just killed them for the opium.)

  • Comment number 91.

    Building a "wall" on the Canadian border, which I currently resided not more than 30 miles from the Canadian Border in Northern New York and--We don't have a fraction of illegal migrants that entered the U.S. from the route; The Mexican border needs and should've gotten a wall because of the illegal immigrants that entered the United States via those routes.

    (d)

  • Comment number 92.

    The Americans should throw out all the illegal and unwanted aliens with immediate effect, along with all their descendants. Only then can they return to a peaceful existence hunting bison on the great plains.

  • Comment number 93.

    As long as there is such a disparity of wealth and opportunity, human beings will always migrate. Building high walls will never stop it.

    Humans have migrated for millennia looking for something better.

  • Comment number 94.

    The fact is that the US cannot exist without cheap (immigrant) or slave (prisoners) labour. this is why the US - especially during this recession, will not tackle immigration atm simply because they need them!

    Sure, Arizona are on the front line and have a different attitude to the other states who seem naiive their stance however immigration (for better or for worse) needs some form of control.

    One of the better ways would be to grant immunity to the existing immigrants and force them all to pay taxes.

    Also then adopt an Australian policy of instantly deporting them back to Mexico.

  • Comment number 95.

    71. At 3:49pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gareth wrote:
    58. At 3:12pm on 07 Jul 2010, Jim Corrigan wrote:
    46. At 2:24pm on 07 Jul 2010, Gareth wrote:
    Who built the railroads for them? Chinese slave immigrants.

    Who built their economy? African slaves.

    Where are the only Americans left? Stuck on a reservation to be tolerated.

    &&&&&&&&&&

    Sorry, my mistake, carry on doing your bit for anglo-US relations.

    I'm sure you'll find some like-minded further right leaning American who will rise to the bait so that you can spend the next couple of days or so screaming at each other over the internet.




  • Comment number 96.

    I'm one American that welcomes international interest.

    No other country would look the other way while 30 million illegal immigrants enter their country.

    If the world understands the issue, they will support Arizona.

    Please also remember that there's currently a fight in congress to extend unemployment benefits for people who have been unemployed for years. The federal government is encouraging immigration at the same time they're paying the people immigration has displaced. Even if they hate America, anyone with common sense will see that our labor policy is flawed.

  • Comment number 97.

    Why is such a question being asked? This is the UK, BBC. How soon can we expect you to prioritise news into 1. UK news. 2. European news. 3. World news, including America....?

  • Comment number 98.

    Well done to Arizona.

  • Comment number 99.

    The US needs to secure the border with Mexico to stop the flow of illegal immigrants, which Mexico encourages and abets. Afterward, the US should legalize the illegal immigrants who are already here. These people are our neighbors, classmates, colleagues, and fellow workers. Mass deportations will never happen because such a move would require house-by-house searches and the American people will not stand for that.

    The posters railing about "liberals" need to take a step back and remember that the great "liberals" of immigration reform were Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, both of whom advocated amnesties. Reagan successfully implemented an amnesty while GWB did not.

  • Comment number 100.

    Most Americans are not opposed to LEGAL immigration as that is how most of our families got here in the first place. The problem is that our politicians have chosen to ignore this matter for decades and not enforced the federal laws we have on the books. Now we have 11 million ILLEGAL immigrants causing problems across our country. Why is it somehow okay for people to enter our country illegally, yet our neighbors impose jail sentences on us if we decided to enter their country in the same manner? Talk about hypocrisy!
    Don't worry all you 'bleeding heart liberals' out there. Obama and crew will have all 11 million of the ILLEGAL immigrants as US citizens before the 2012 elections. He and the Democrats need the votes too badly.

 

Page 1 of 6

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.