Whatever your particular viewpoint on the debate over immigration reform, what’s really annoying is the torturing of the English language. No longer do words mean things. Instead their meanings can be ignored. For example, try to parse this sentence (emphasis added):
Many of the 500,000 people who crammed downtown Los Angeles on Saturday to protest legislation that would make criminals out of illegal immigrants learned where, when and even how to demonstrate from the Spanish-language media.
A criminal is someone who breaks the law. An illegal act is one in which the law is broken. A=B=C. Thus an illegal immigrant is a criminal.
Yes, it sounds harsh to call all those people just yearning to breath free and make a buck criminals, but let’s be honest. They’re in this country illegally. If we’re going to address this problem, we have to be honest about what the problem is. And no, using the politically correct term “guest worker” is not being honest.
Technorati Tags: immigration, media bias
It is not always criminal to break a law. It is criminal to break a law only if that law (or some other law) makes it a crime to break that law.
Is there a rationale for making this a felony instead of a misdemeanor? Would it become a permanent stigma to disqualify the illegal immigrant from citizenship or permanent residency?
Bang on! Almost everybody’s got it!
John Derbyshire and others have made the same mistake as Dom. If you, for example, exceed the speed limit and get caught and fined, you are not a “criminal.” Nor do you have a “criminal” record.
When there is a “civil” penalty attached to a law, it’s like a traffic “violation” or a “regulation” being broken. Even with conviction, one is not a criminal.
Now there ARE certain crimes one can commit in connection with the breaking of immigration law. But overstaying one’s visa is not a crime and neither is sneaking in over the border. Thank God…
You’re all being too technical. I’m not talking about the niceties of the legal profession.
Look up the words in the dictionary. A criminal is one who breaks the law. Period.
Whether it’s a civil penalty or criminal penalty or misdemeanor or felony, being squeamish over the use of the word “criminal” is ridiculous.
I don’t think the Church likes the use of the word illegal in regards to persons.
That is a meaningless statement. What do you mean by “the Church”?
Sorry, Dom, YOU’RE the one who’s being silly.
If you exceed the speed limit and get a ticket, you’re NOT a criminal. You don’t feel like one. No one would call you one. And you’re NOT one.
Many people THINK that sneaking across the border is a crime. I don’t blame them; it’s a common and easily understandable mistake. But guess what? It isn’t a crime. It just isn’t. Maybe it SHOULD be. But it isn’t.
Illegal immigrants aren’t criminals. That’s our law. You can call them that if you want. But you’re just wrong. And YOU’RE the one who’s sloppily misusing language, not the ones you criticize.
Liam’s got the final knockout point. The whole point of the article you jumped on was to talk about a change in the nature of the offense.
There’s always a time to say: I was wrong. This is one of them. Not an arguable point. Just a Bettinelli mistake. Happens to the best of us!
BTW, illegal aliens ARE here ILLEGALLY. That’s why we call them that. That’s why the article calls them that.
I agree that they shouldn’t be called “guest workers” or something like that. It’s honest to call them “illegal” because they ARE illegal. But it’s not correct to call them criminals.
Parking too close to a red light is against the law. It’s illegal. But you’re not a criminal if you do it.
“Guest worker” is not a PC euphemism for “illegal immigrant”. It’s a term denoting a legal status for foreigners allowed in the country on a temporary basis. The term has been used in Germany for decades. W’s proposing to create such a status here.
There are difficulties with the idea: if “guest workers” have children while residing in the US, the children become citizens, and that weakens the possibility that the guest worker will eventually return home. Changing the law on citizenship might end up becoming part of a deal on this issue.
Being in the US illegally should be a felony. Felony offenses should bar the felon from American citizenship forever as well as making visits here impossible.
Moreover, multiple citizenships ought to be disallowed. US citizens don’t need to be involved in the jungle antics of their birth countries. We don’t need their problems.
“Jungle antics”? What kind of talk is that? Is that your image of immigrants and their original countries?
Jeff: You’re right. I did misread the article. The article was making the distinction between civil and criminal penalties.