Vetting refugees

[spence]

Originally Posted by fishbones

So, is that more of a "win" than committing more mass murders on our soil?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So far I'm only aware of a single Muslim immigrant who's been involved in a mass shooting on US soil. The experts seem to agree the bigger threat is self radicalization of people already here many who are citizens and can walk into gun stores and legally buy assault weapons.

Taking irrational action at the border to discriminate against Islam is not only going to be ineffective it's going drive self radicalization.

Newsflash, the worst mass shooting in US history appears to be a lover scorned.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...-mateen-224644

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

So far I'm only aware of a single Muslim immigrant who's been involved in a mass shooting on US soil. The experts seem to agree the bigger threat is self radicalization of people already here many who are citizens and can walk into gun stores and legally buy assault weapons.

Taking irrational action at the border to discriminate against Islam is not only going to be ineffective it's going drive self radicalization.

Newsflash, the worst mass shooting in US history appears to be a lover scorned.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...-mateen-224644

But we do have other countries that are having more attacks and that should be a lesson to us . What exactly is wrong with slowing the process down? When our parents immigrated here they needed sponsors and jobs . It was very strict . What was wrong with that system ? What purpose does it serve to have unlimited immigration? Do you not see the financial and social burden it creates ?
Oh scorned lover.. Lmao . Is that the new "work place violence "?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

But we do have other countries that are having more attacks and that should be a lesson to us . What exactly is wrong with slowing the process down? When our parents immigrated here they needed sponsors and jobs . It was very strict . What was wrong with that system ? What purpose does it serve to have unlimited immigration? Do you not see the financial and social burden it creates ?
Oh scorned lover.. Lmao . Is that the new "work place violence "?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The attacks in France and Belgium were by EU citizens.

The process for refugees to come to the US is not the same as the EU either. It's much harder, takes longer and I don't believe refugees even have any say where they are sent. They are fingerprinted and have their retinas scanned.

Sure there's always a possibility and we should be vigilant, but trying to sneak a terrorist into the US as a refugee is probably the most difficult path to take.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

The attacks in France and Belgium were by EU citizens.

The process for refugees to come to the US is not the same as the EU either. It's much harder, takes longer and I don't believe refugees even have any say where they are sent. They are fingerprinted and have their retinas scanned.

Sure there's always a possibility and we should be vigilant, but trying to sneak a terrorist into the US as a refugee is probably the most difficult path to take.

And my other questions ?
Btw who is " radicalizing " these US citizens?
If we let our fear that radicalized Muslim legal immigrants could be the result of stricter immigration controls , then the terrorist win. No ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by buckman

And my other questions ?
Btw who is " radicalizing " these US citizens?
If we let our fear that radicalized Muslim legal immigrants could be the result of stricter immigration controls , then the terrorist win. No ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yeah, Spence is so brainwashed by the administration and liberal media talking points he can't see the Catch 22 contradiction.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Yeah, Spence is so brainwashed by the administration and liberal media talking points he can't see the Catch 22 contradiction.

You should evaluate this remark in context of all domestic mass shootings and terror events.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

You should evaluate this remark in context of all domestic mass shootings and terror events.

OK. I evaluated my remark in the context of your words in this thread about vetting refugees: "If terrorists influence the US to take an irrational position that the majority believes compromises our values = terrorists win." And: "Taking irrational action at the border to discriminate against Islam is not only going to be ineffective it's going drive self radicalization." There's a flip side to both of those propositions that you choose not to recognize, but you slavishly stick only to the administration talking points.

After evaluating my remark within its proper context, my remark stands.

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

What exactly is wrong with slowing the process down?

The process is already pretty slow.

When our parents immigrated here they needed sponsors and jobs . It was very strict . What was wrong with that system ?

A lot has changed since then and the system is much more strict today. Have you seen the process?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015...-united-states

What purpose does it serve to have unlimited immigration?

We do not have nor has anyone I'm aware of called for unlimited immigration.

Do you not see the financial and social burden it creates ?

Tell that to the last 200 years of immigrants that created the most powerful country in modern history.

Oh scorned lover.. Lmao . Is that the new "work place violence "?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's a dynamic that would have significant implications on his real motive.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

The process is already pretty slow.


A lot has changed since then and the system is much more strict today. Have you seen the process?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015...-united-states


We do not have nor has anyone I'm aware of called for unlimited immigration.


Tell that to the last 200 years of immigrants that created the most powerful country in modern history.


It's a dynamic that would have significant implications on his real motive.

What Fishbones said
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by spence

So far I'm only aware of a single Muslim immigrant who's been involved in a mass shooting on US soil. The experts seem to agree the bigger threat is self radicalization of people already here many who are citizens and can walk into gun stores and legally buy assault weapons.

You don't pay attention, do you? I didn't mention shootings, yet you based your response on that. This thread is about immigration, not buying guns. Please try to come up with a response that fits the topic of the thread. You must have conveniently forgot about the marathon bombings and 9/11.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

So far I'm only aware of a single Muslim immigrant who's been involved in a mass shooting on US soil. The experts seem to agree the bigger threat is self radicalization of people already here many who are citizens and can walk into gun stores and legally buy assault weapons.

Taking irrational action at the border to discriminate against Islam is not only going to be ineffective it's going drive self radicalization.

Newsflash, the worst mass shooting in US history appears to be a lover scorned.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...-mateen-224644

"So far I'm only aware of a single Muslim immigrant who's been involved in a mass shooting on US soil"

Spence, I'll do you one better...I'm not aware of a Muslim immigrant who has gotten a parking ticket. But I don't know why that matters. So we should wait until it happens, and THEN devise a policy to prevent it?

My point was this...it's much easier for the FBI to investigate an American citizen, than it is for anyone, in any agency, to investigate someone from a mountaintop village which has no electricity or computers. So forgive me if I'm not relieved when Obama says "don't worry, we are vetting these people".

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

My point was this...it's much easier for the FBI to investigate an American citizen, than it is for anyone, in any agency, to investigate someone from a mountaintop village which has no electricity or computers. So forgive me if I'm not relieved when Obama says "don't worry, we are vetting these people".

Totally different processes.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Totally different processes.

As I said, I agree. One process (FBI vetting citizens) is a lot easier. And they still failed miserably in teh case of the Orlando guy.

You said that if we implement bad policies, terrorists win. How does the removal of second amendment rights fit into that argument?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

As I said, I agree. One process (FBI vetting citizens) is a lot easier. And they still failed miserably in teh case of the Orlando guy.

I'd think vetting citizens is probably a lot harder. There are significant protections that limit how far the FBI can go without violating a presumption of innocence. Refugees applying for UN sponsored status have no such protections and face a rigorous process that goes well beyond the scope of the FBI.

You said that if we implement bad policies, terrorists win. How does the removal of second amendment rights fit into that argument?

Who is calling for the removal of second amendment rights?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd think vetting citizens is probably a lot harder.

Bonkers.

We have publicly available data on citizens - birth records, immunization records, criminal records, that the FBI can easily get. Hell, I can look up someone's arrest record online.

Please tell me, Spence, how do we vet someone from a village with no computers, no schools, no jails, etc? Other than asking each refugee, "do you promise not to kill anyone", how the hell do you confirm anything?

Have fun with that.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Bonkers.

We have publicly available data on citizens - birth records, immunization records, criminal records, that the FBI can easily get. Hell, I can look up someone's arrest record online.

What good is that against someone with a clean record who can walk into a gun store and pick up some weapons?

Please tell me, Spence, how do we vet someone from a village with no computers, no schools, no jails, etc? Other than asking each refugee, "do you promise not to kill anyone", how the hell do you confirm anything?

I don't think you understand the process.

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by spence

Who is calling for the removal of second amendment rights?

I can tell you who,
pretty much any and all of the politicians who are trying to infringe our rights with further gun control legislation seeing as we already have enough laws on the books and they need to be enforced before any more infringement happens. That includes Senator Warren to begin with and all the rest who choose to take the lazy approach to issues of violence.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

I can tell you who,
pretty much any and all of the politicians who are trying to infringe our rights with further gun control legislation seeing as we already have enough laws on the books and they need to be enforced before any more infringement happens. That includes Senator Warren to begin with and all the rest who choose to take the lazy approach to issues of violence.

Yea, and left-wing nuts like four star Generals McChrystal and Petraeus who don't think the public has a rational need for a 223 semi auto configured with assault features.

What freaks.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd think vetting citizens is probably a lot harder.

U.S. Citizen:

Birth Certificate = Verify Age
Social Security Card = Verify Employment History
Drivers License = Driving Record/Insurance Issues/Infractions
Credit Cards = Credit History/Shopping History
Bank Accounts = Financial History/Transactions/

Interview Employers, Neighbors, Known Associates.
Check Facebook, Twitter, and other Social Media footprints


Syrian Refugee:

No Birth Certificate = Can't verify Age
No Social Security Card = Can't verify Identity
No Drivers License = Can't verify Identity
No Credit Cards
No Bank Accounts
No Way to verify Work History
No Way to interview Employers, Neighbors, or Known Associates

But he can say his name is Bob and he promises to behave....you're right, that is sooooo much easier.

I'll just google Bob and see if I can find his facebook account....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

U.S. Citizen:

Birth Certificate = Verify Age
Social Security Card = Verify Employment History
Drivers License = Driving Record/Insurance Issues/Infractions
Credit Cards = Credit History/Shopping History
Bank Accounts = Financial History/Transactions/

Interview Employers, Neighbors, Known Associates.
Check Facebook, Twitter, and other Social Media footprints


Syrian Refugee:

No Birth Certificate = Can't verify Age
No Social Security Card = Can't verify Identity
No Drivers License = Can't verify Identity
No Credit Cards
No Bank Accounts
No Way to verify Work History
No Way to interview Employers, Neighbors, or Known Associates

But he can say his name is Bob and he promises to behave....you're right, that is sooooo much easier.

I'll just google Bob and see if I can find his facebook account....

Gee, when you put it that way...

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

U.S. Citizen:

Birth Certificate = Verify Age
Social Security Card = Verify Employment History
Drivers License = Driving Record/Insurance Issues/Infractions
Credit Cards = Credit History/Shopping History
Bank Accounts = Financial History/Transactions/

Interview Employers, Neighbors, Known Associates.
Check Facebook, Twitter, and other Social Media footprints


Syrian Refugee:

No Birth Certificate = Can't verify Age
No Social Security Card = Can't verify Identity
No Drivers License = Can't verify Identity
No Credit Cards
No Bank Accounts
No Way to verify Work History
No Way to interview Employers, Neighbors, or Known Associates

But he can say his name is Bob and he promises to behave....you're right, that is sooooo much easier.

I'll just google Bob and see if I can find his facebook account....

You're missing the point. The FBI can't access most of that without a warrant. You also make it sound like the vetting process is totally open, it's not...read up.