captain obvious

Their first act in entering our country illegally makes every act they commit whether good or bad criminal.

Visa overstays are a way to become an illegal alien without breaking a law.

Unlike entering illegally, which is a misdemeanor and can involve jail. Overstaying a visa is still a civil offense, you can be automatically deported and you will have a criminal record. When deported or if you leave on your own, you will be prohibited from re-entering for 3 - 10 years.

https://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/criminal-law/criminal-law/civil_offense_crime.htm

You should be honored to know that this "radical" meme just earned me a 3 day suspension from Facebook. I'm a violator of community standards. It's a badge of honor!! Congratulations!

How is a statement of a fact a violation? Is Facebook saying that they no longer want to display facts or truth?

Below is their "standards" which I am challenging and they are supposedly reviewing.

This post goes against our standards on hate speech, so no one else can see it.
We define hate speech as language that attacks people based on their:
• • Race, ethnicity, national origin or caste
• • Religious affiliation
• • Sexual orientation
• • Sex, gender or gender identity
• • Serious disabilities or diseases

This isn't even speech or opinion. It is not an attack on anybody, it just a statement of a single fact. That is the problem with this whole hate speech thing. WHO decides what is hate speech and what is just speech? Because you don't like a fact, does not mean that is hate speech, it just means it is an inconvenient fact that you don't like. Move-on.

EXACTLY!! This isn't an attack anymore than stating that the sky is blue today.

And it actually would have nothing to do with discrimination against anyone. This is a fact true for ALL countries.

Posting this one on facebook will get you a ban...speaking from experience.

But it’s not a victimless crime in this case.

And the victim is...

Also, before you comment, note that this is strictly about "illegal" immigration. Whatever these immigrants may or may not do criminal (murder, theft, rape, assault etc) does not count. Only going from one side of the border to another.

The crime is against the taxpayers and unemployed Americans, as illegal immigrants are given tax money that should go to homeless Americans and taking jobs away from Americans.

Again, this is strictly about going from one side of the border to another without the government's permission. Whathever they may do or whathever may happen to them does not count. But even while ignoring that, there are still quite a few flaws with your argument.
1. Would it be any different if these immigrants entered legally?
2. Taxpayers gave their money to the government (well, actually, the govt stole it, but most taxpayers are brain-dead flagwavers and utterly ignorant of the fact that taxation is theft, so what the hell). The government can give it to whomever they want to. And if you say otherwise, don't forget who owns you, citizen no. 3082935, or you just might rest a few nights between the bars, like this guy did: https://en.wikimannia.org/Larken_Rose
3. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QVyRwWKCtKQ

There does not have to be a victim to be a crime. Look up the word "crime". Your argument is without any merit. It is a crime to enter the United States illegally according to the multiple sections of the U.S. Code.

I don't care what your codes, laws, constiturions or other worthless pieces of paper say. Something is not a crime just because a group of slavers AKA government said so.

There's a difference between a crime and a felony.
A felony is an act which government forbid you to do, and does not need to be wrong by itself (for example, possessing cannabis is a felony in my country, but it isn't in, for example, Jamaica).
A crime is a harmful act commited upon a person or a group of people, regardless of whoever says is right or wrong. No human being can make any criminal act non-criminal and vice-versa.
If you can't understand that, then we've nothing to discuss here.

You really sound like an anarchist, PowerMeathead. Are you??? They are not my codes, laws, and Constitution. They belong to the US and everyone should abide by them or we may as well get rid of all laws. Or perhaps that is what you advocate. You just don't get it and probably never will. There is no reasoning with people like you because you live in your own universe and are a lost cause. Don't bother writing any further drivel as I will not read it or waste any more of my time.

As you wish

And yes, I am an anarchist in my body, mind and spirit.

If I am a lost cause because I wish freedom for everything and everyone, then by all means I will remain lost for all eternity. As for you, enjoy being a slave, citizen no. 2746391.

You're right. I don't get it. I don't get why would anyone want a group of people who are, by some miracle, above the morals of mere mortals to tell them what to do and to think it is just is anyone who dares go against the will of these "morally superior" men be kidnapped and imprisoned by these higher powers. It's shit-brained.
If you think you don't have a moral conscience and need to be told by the government what you can and what you can't do, then by all means you deserve to be enslaved by the government.

Yes it is, that's why it's /called/ a crime, and not just an "occurrence".

Say someone's driving their car in a major city and traveling at 200 mph, but nobody gets hit by the time they get where they're going. That makes that a victimless crime. Are you willing to now just let everyone drive at 200 mph in the middle of a city?

You used a very good example. However, it's still a crime with a victim. Every crime can be seen as a from of theft (murder is theft of another's life, rape is theft of another's consent, etc). In this case, what the reckless driver took from the pedestrians of the city is their safety. A lot of people could've got hurt or killed. And even if none did, it's a crime for taking away their safety and bringing them into a situation where they can do fairly little to avoid being hit by a rushing car.

Was just re-reading old comments, and noticed something here. Yes, every crime can be viewed as a sort of theft, in the way you're putting it. That can also be applied to illegal immigrants.

I already detailed the theft of safety and health, though you don't seem to accept those. However, it can also be viewed as theft of /money/ from American citizens. Money such as taxpayer money that could be better used elsewhere, like solving America's own homelessness crisis. LA and San Francisco get federal funding as sanctuary cities, yet have among the highest populations of homeless American citizens, not to mention the health and waste problems I cited in my other comments.

Another type of money that is stolen, by your criteria, is employee wages. Many of these illegal immigrants get work in the US that could be done by American citizens. In fact much of the work they do is unskilled work that the aforementioned homeless people could be doing.

I'll grant, however, that the /employers/ are as much criminals as the illegal immigrants in that particular crime, since both know that the illegals can be paid much less than American citizens for the work without complaint

You still haven't answered the questions.

I don't accept the safety and health issues, because the discussion is not about the immigrants which currently travel from Mexico to the US. The discussion is about illegal immigration itself. You have a much greater say about the illegal Mexican immigrants than I do, so I trust in everything you say about them. But they're not the point. The point is the illegal immigration in and by itself, regardless of who commits it and for which reason. If a person illegaly immigrates in a country and murders somebody, the said person is a criminal not because it immigrated illegally, but because it murdered somebody.

And just one thing about the health problems, no wonder they exist since the medical institutions are corrupt to the core. Most doctors today know very little about diseases, and even lesser about the cures. They only know which pills and drugs to take and at which time of the day to take them. But that's another story. Back to the topic at hand.

It's not the immigrants who steal your money. It's your government. They just give your stolen money to the immigrants. If somebody robs a bank and gives the stolen money to me, that does not make me a robber. And even if the immigrants weren't there, they'd just use your stolen money to fund their military bases, war projects, atomic warheads etc, but you don't seem to complain about that. Sure, they'll build roads, hospitals and firefighting stations from time to time as well, but only to give you the illusion that they actually care about you and make you think that they are there to protect you and enhance your living standards.

And about the stolen employee wages and the employers firing their own countrymen for immigrants, that's capitalism for you. Your kin and kinship mean nothing. Your loyalty and blood bonds mean nothing. The only thing that matters is what is profitable and what is not. But I have the hunch that you'll call me a socialist snowflake for even laying a finger on capitalism. Or someone else on this site will, if you won't.

Good, glad to see I changed your mind then.

Not sure what you mean. I still advocate that illegal immigration is not a crime, because there is no victim involved. And I debunked your 'driving maniac' argument.

You didn't change my mind, but I'm sure that, of all the people on this thread, you have the greatest chances of accomplishing that.

Well you didn't actually debunk my argument. I figured since you already cited taking away other people's safety, you actually saw where I was going with that.

Many (though of course not all, and not even most) of those "immigrants" will do the same thing. Some are human traffickers, drug mules or actual members of the cartels, and some are indeed rapists and murderers. There are already any number of stories of people being murdered by "undocumented immigrants". (Try to google them without any specific details though, like the name Marrisa Shen, and google does its best to hide them and redirect you to more left-leaning, sympathetic articles).

And they're not even all Mexican. Did you know a "caravan" from /Africa/ was apprehended trying to cross from Mexico into the US? (That's really just an aside, though.)

While yes, American citizens can be just as much a victim of other American citizens, that's entirely beside the point. That very fact means it's almost a crime in and of itself to add the danger of being the victims of people who can't be traced through any system because they're "undocumented.

On top of that, Mexico doesn't have the vaccination standards of the US (I don't know about Africa's vax standards), and they're bringing diseases into America that haven't been a problem in decades. Although a good part of the blame for that falls on the current misguided anti-vax movement as well.

And that's not even counting the /medieval/ diseases that are popping up in California, where a lot of these "immigrants" head to, looking for the free handouts dems promise them. This adds to the homeless problem, as well as the growing piles of garbage and literal human feces in the street, all of which are contributing to outbreaks of typhus, tuberculosis, and a very real danger of an outbreak of bubonic plague, aka the black death.

And then of course, as others have mentioned, there's all this funding going towards helping these immigrants that should first be used towards fixing the horrendous homeless problem that plagues liberal states, yet they don't /actually/ do anything about.

Ahh, was waiting for someone on this thread to make the trespassing comparison. We'll get to that in a sec.

Everything you said about human trafficking, drug smuggling, rapes, murders and disease-spreadings may or may not be true. I do not live in the US, let alone at the south border through where all these people come from, so I have no right to say anything about these immigrants, good or bad. And you are most likely right, for all I know. But all that is irrelevant with what I'm trying to argue. What I'm trying to argue is that illegal immigration itself is not a crime, regardless of the immigrants themselves or what these immigrants intend to do on the other side of the border.

So, with that out of the way, let's get to the trespassing comparison. It's a very strong-looking argument, I'll admit that. But that's it - it's strong-looking. Illegal immigration and trespassing are incomparible. Trespassing is taking away another person's security by entering their private property without their persmission. I admit, it does sound similar to illegal immigration, but there's a gigantic difference, and a fatal flaw:
Which of these two do you think take away your security: a Mexican on the street who got there illegaly, or an American in your house without your permission? Who has a higher potential of doing harm to you? Trespassing is trespassing only when private property is involved, and a country ain't that.

On the other issues like drug-smuggling and human trafficking, it's the same as my metaphor about driving a car at 200mph. Speeding itself is a victimless crime, by your logic. It's the potential consequences that can happen as a result of the speeding that make it a crime.

And we'll have to agree to disagree on your second point. It's quite likely that, in strict legal terminology, the US (or indeed any other country) isn't considered "private property", because the US government isn't a private entity. But for all intents and purposes, it could technically be considered as private property, as could other countries, because that's the whole point of borders. They're walls (albeit invisible ones usually) that let you decide who is and is not allowed to enter your home.

And many people consider their country to be "home".

(In any case, upvoting your comments as thanks for a good, civil discussion :) )

Well, if we'll use the speeding again, it would be more precise to say that, by my logic, driving a car without a licence is not a crime. Licence possession is not a sign of driving skill. For example, there's a 16-year-old from my village who drives around in his car all the time, never crashed, and doesn't have a licence. And in contrast, a lot of people who die/get injured in car crashes have a licence. And similar can be said for immigration. Passport possession is not a sign of trustworthyness. Hope you get what I'm trying to say.

If you propose that US is a private property, you also have to accept that:
1. That property has an owner which is not the president of the US (owners of land do not give their possession to someone else every 4-8 years)
2. You, yourself, are not in full ownership of your house and the land surrounding it (evident, since you're a taxpayer), meaning you live in a feudal system (and feudalism is a subtype of slavery)
Nothing to do with immigration. Just a little food for thought. Now, back to the subject.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I used the wrong phrase. By private property, I meant a real estate (as in, a house, building, shack etc) and any outdoor part of the real estate where regular visitors aren't meant to be (for example, you wouldn't feel most comfortable if a mailman hanged around in your backyard). And again, that is incomparible to an entire country (which is better seen as a network of private properties connected by infrastructure, rather than private property itself, and even that excludes the places where relatively few to no people live, such as forests, deserts, high mountains, swamps, plains etc).

Upvotes returned to you as a sign of graditude for writing well-thought out and interesting arguments, as well as presenting them in a civil matter.

Umm, yes it can be.

How can it be? A crime is a wrongdoing commited upon a person or a group of people (victim(s)). Therefore, no victim, no crime.

Running naked and drunk in an open field is a crime and yet harms no one.

It isn't a crime. It's just stupidity and lunacy (and that, as a metter of fact, is quite entertaining for the viewers).

Try doing it and see if you don't get arrested. It's called public intoxication and you will get arrested for it.

I wrote somewhere else up the thread the difference between a crime and a felony, because a lot of people seem to confuse those two. For the sake of convenience, I'll write it here again:
A felony is an act which government forbid you to do, and does not need to be wrong by itself. A felony can change over time depending on the government's decisions, law passings etc.
A crime is a harmful act commited upon a person or a group of people, regardless of whoever says is right or wrong. No human being can make any criminal act non-criminal and vice-versa.

Another thing people have a hard time understanding is that something is not wrong because you will get arrested for doing it, and something is not right because the government allows you to do it. You may get arrested for public intoxication, but it's not a crime. As I said, it's actually quite entertaining for the viewers. If you see a drunk, don't arrest him. Grab a camera, take as much footage of him as possible and have a good time with your friends afterwards.