Leaderboard

I was worried this morning. When I started my truck the screen said, Caution Ice may be present

I feel sorry for the illegals who are taken advantage when they come here, but they shouldn't be here. We can't let in millions of unskilled people and expect our society to remain stable and prosperous. My wife had a friend who overstayed a tourist visa to secure work in restaurant. Her friend worked for that restaurant for a year without pay (was provided food from the restaurant and lived onsite) and when she demanded her back pay, the employer threatened to turn her into ICE (and to another employee they did the same thing to). She ended up going back to her home country without having gotten paid for a year's labor. We put her in touch with some NGOs that help illegals get their pay (illegal or not, nobody deserves to be taken advantage of like that) but none were able to help and so she went back home (she wanted to work in the US to earn money for her daughter's cancer treatment but wasn't able to find a job in her home country due to being past retirement age). At any rate, illegal immigration and fraudulent asylum migration will continue until the incentives are removed.

Aggressive ICE ops wouldn't be necessary if the Republicans in Congress would get off their asses and pass some laws that a) dramatically increased the penalties for employing illegals (i.e. seizure of business, heavy jail time, etc.), b) 50% tax on remittances, ban on illegals receiving any taxpayer funded assistance, c) bill their home countries for their education and medical care costs incurred in the US (and trade embargoes on those who don't pay up), and d) remove counting illegals in the Census for Congressional apportionment (which is why the Dems are fighting so hard to keep them here, plus the kickbacks and grift). Most would self-deport were these policies enacted and aggressive ICE ops wouldn't be necessary. But the Republicans in Congress are only pretending to oppose the Dems.

TL/DR: It depends entirely on the situation, but regardless I'm ready to be disarmed by a LEO. I'll fight it in court, not in the moment. It's about managing my own expectations and it all boils down to the officer and his/her assessment of the situation. If I talk to the sheriff in church as I walk by, I'm fine. She knows I'm armed. If I am the first responder who engages an active shooter in that same church, I fully expect that same sheriff to disarm me afterwards. A: the situation is over and shootings result in frayed nerves and shaking hands. B: evidence. The reason doesn't matter, I've decided before it all happens that I'm submitting to the proper authority. If the officer deems according policy/judgment that disarming me is advisable, I'm not resisting in the slightest. It might be a complete BS reason. There also might be a factor I don't know about. If I feel like my rights are getting trampled, that specific moment is NOT the time to take a stand. I must give the officer the benefit of the doubt. The officer is not required to reciprocate. In fact, the officer literally stays alive by NOT automatically giving people the benefit of the doubt. If it was wrong and/or illegal, we can figure that out in court...later...when loaded weapons aren't in play. I'm also of the opinion and experience that simply acting as described above will relieve any tension and most likely the officer will not escalate to disarming me. It's about expectations. If I act like I am superior with better legal knowledge than this officer, they can smell it, it's a red flag for them, and it does nothing to help the situation, regardless of how right I am. To use an analogy: I treat every police officer the same way I treat the range safety officer I've never met: With absolute deference to the authority they hold in that moment. Yes, some that suck. Most don't. But every single one should be treated with respect. If they prove undeserving, I bring it up with management later, not on the range.