Save Our State  

Go Back   Save Our State > Save Our State Official Section > Save Our State Media

Save Our State Media Official Save Our State Videos, Audio's, and publications

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-01-2013, 09:58 AM
Ayatollahgondola's Avatar
Ayatollahgondola Ayatollahgondola is offline
SOS Associate
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,057
Default The Under-Prosecuted; Immigration Reform Meets The 2nd Amendment

By now I'm certain that most people here know that the Obama administration is not just focusing on guns in America, but also on illegals in America. A simultaneous major thrust to make grand changes in gun rights and immigration reform is shadowing other legislative and otherwise major world events affecting America. Guns and immigrants are two separate agendas in Washington, but the two share some common denominators that are not being discussed in either debate.

Immigrants can own guns, because they are naturalized citizens, and subject to the same laws any native born person is. Being convicted of a felony bars both from gun ownership. Lawful permanent residents are beholden to the same concepts of ownership that citizens and immigrants are, with an added threat that a felony conviction can trigger deportation. Where Washington is missing a connection in the gun debate is illegal immigrants, or illegal aliens as the formal term is. The current push by the Obama administration is to formally recognize the current unlawfully present population by first granting temporary lawful status, allowing an issuance of a green card, and then creating a pathway to citizenship for them. One could argue the benefits and downsides to this for decades, but for the gun community, we will only be examining how this may effect 2nd amendment issues, and the administration's simultaneous effort to limit guns.

Illegal aliens are prohibited from gun ownership. The courts have even ruled they do not have 2nd amendment rights like "the people" do. This is true, even where no felony conviction is present. A felony conviction still follows an illegal alien, even if they get lawful status eventually. Citizens, immigrants, and lawful residents are equals where the felony conviction and gun ownership is concerned. Where they have come up unequal is prosecution. It's no secret that many municipalities have taken a position of sanctuary where illegal aliens are concerned. They don't co-operate with immigration authorities and engage in some programs that help illegals get bank accounts, municipal ID's, and obtain other muni provided services. A recent effort has been gaining a foothold in several cities and a few states to encourage prosecutors to avoid charging illegals with some felonies because doing so can easily trigger the deportation process. One article, quickly located via an internet search points out this mindset:

For example, jail sentences could be reduced by a day to avoid mandatory deportation that comes with a yearlong sentence, or a defendant accused of dealing drugs could plead guilty to a lesser charge of possession, said Raha Jorjani, an in-house immigration consultant for the Alameda County Public Defender's Office who urged the district attorney to craft the new guidelines
Whatever side of the immigration debate you sit on, as a citizen, immigrant, or lawful permanent resident you should be a little suspicious of the special treatment that a class of residents, unlawful as they may be, are having their crimes prosecuted specifically to avoid felony convictions or the "less than a year sentence" which would normally trigger a gun ban as well as possible deportation proceedings. It has been discussed here on this forum very recently how some people have pled to crimes as misdemeanors, only to find out they are now in the prohibited class because the offense carried a penalty of over a year in jail. Why should citizens or lawful residents be denied this consideration during prosecution where the loss of a crucial and basic right is at stake, while a foreigner who has no such right is the beneficiary of such consideration. I doubt the Obama administration has considered the gun ban issue where immigration is concerned. Indeed, comprehensive immigration reform tends to have a mind numbing effect on reason in Washington, as does gun control.

The second portion of this post concerns the stated reasoning behind gun bans and gun ownership vs the immigration debate. The current media focus has been on the guns themselves, but there is an underlying current of background checks. Citizens have lots of background. Immigrants and lawful permanent residents have a little less in most cases, but illegals....they have some, none, or false backgrounds. We all know how well the government does its' job checking up on foreigners. Not to invoke the holy memories of the trade center victims, but the perpetrators of that repugnant event were background checked by our thorough team of highly trained investigators. I could cite numerous incidents where the feds failed us on the foreigners within us arena, but I think it's well know enough to be a given now.

So background checks, performed on illegals so that they can be allowed permanent status is going to be thorough, security oriented, and mindful of the threats to our country and our communities? Well, given the previous discussion about how felony convictions are being avoided to protect illegals from deportation, coupled with Washington's obvious desire to keep the millions of illegals in this country, working, voting, or otherwise, I'd say the background checks are going to be pretty weak. Add to that, an undocumented person from a country that doesn't do much in the way of documenting their citizens, criminals, or mentally unbalanced is not going to provide much of a history in the first place. Really, this background check push is full of holes where immigrants and more porous borders are concerned. Once you grant lawful residence, and that happens a lot here in America, the grantee gets to own a gun here, unless he's a convicted felon or otherwise The feds don't necessarily have access to foriegn databases of mentally unbalanced people, russia, china..mexico etc., so once again the application of this intended background check legislation is suspect from the outset, and mainly applicable to those with existing 2A rights as native born

This leaves one last area of semi importance where illegals and guns meet comprehensive immigration reform. The media has been hammering us with the 12 million illegals estimate, so just for the sake of limiting the argument, we go with that number. Washington anti-gunners say we have to get guns off the streets. As gun owners, we always question the terminology and buzz phrases used by anti gunners in political circles and media outlets. Guns on the streets in the hands of responsible owners we see as good; guns in the hands of criminals on the streets, we see as an inevitability when you deprive us of the former. But let's just concentrate on Washington's hypocrisy in this arena. Getting guns off the streets. Giving lawful status to 12 million people suddenly is going to create several million new gun owners suddenly. And these are low income, non-home-owners, that live in high population cities and counties, with limited access to the great outdoors for recreation shooting. In addition, an unknown percentage of them have been purposely spared gun ownership prohibiting prosecution in past encounters with the judicial system.
This begs the question of how effective the effort to "get guns off the streets" will be in the aftermath of Obama's Comprehensive immigration reform should it become law.

Certainly we can present these topics to counter some of the hyperbole being broadcast by anti-gunners, and demand the president, congress, and the senate take a harder look at the hypocrisy and duplicity of their current gun restriction arguments

Davi Rodrigues

Save Our State

Last edited by Ayatollahgondola; 02-01-2013 at 10:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2013, 07:32 AM
Ayatollahgondola's Avatar
Ayatollahgondola Ayatollahgondola is offline
SOS Associate
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,057

I will be contacting this senators' office today with a copy of our concerns over all these illegals suddenly being allowed to buy guns at once.
Happy to read that some senators think about these things, eh?

The committee avoided what likely would have been a bitter fight over guns and whether those on the government’s terrorist watch list should be allowed to buy firearms when Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island Democrat, withdrew his amendment.

Read more:
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2013, 10:15 AM
Patriotic Army Mom Patriotic Army Mom is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 829

They are also buying horses in Hesperia and riding them all over the place. Get ready for the calvary.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SaveOurState ©2009 - 2016 All Rights Reserved