Syrian Refugees

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    What percentage of refugees, in general, are potentially dangerous to Americans or our way of life?

    You are missing the point. We have no reasonable obligation to admit potentially dangerous persons. We have no obligation to engage in self-injurious policies. We have no obligation to put the well-being of everyone else on the face of the planet ahead of our own, particularly on our own soil. I fail to understand why some people are insistent upon taking significant risks which come with absolutely no benefit to the United States or its citizens.

    In case you are still missing the point, the actual percentage is irrelevant. If there is a realistic risk (which there is) we need to avoid actions which facilitate that risk.
     

    1911ly

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 11, 2011
    13,419
    83
    South Bend
    You are missing the point. We have no reasonable obligation to admit potentially dangerous persons. We have no obligation to engage in self-injurious policies. We have no obligation to put the well-being of everyone else on the face of the planet ahead of our own, particularly on our own soil. I fail to understand why some people are insistent upon taking significant risks which come with absolutely no benefit to the United States or its citizens.

    In case you are still missing the point, the actual percentage is irrelevant. If there is a realistic risk (which there is) we need to avoid actions which facilitate that risk.

    This 100% Well said Dave.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    The Jarrell Improved Theology 2.0 most definitly does not contain any Hypocrisy,Weaselism or plain fear...I'm just sayin...

    I would have to disagree. The man who consistently trashes religion is using religion as a justification for his position. I will, however, grant you that there is indeed an absence of fear. It brings to my recollection watching an episode of Star Trek (TNG) in which a misguided young man makes a remark about Klingon warriors being fearless to which Lt. Worf replies that 'only a fool is truly fearless'.
     

    1DOWN4UP

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Mar 25, 2015
    6,418
    113
    North of 30
    The media puts the numbers of woman and children at 30% of the emigrants. I have not saw a photo with as much as .03% woman and children.Now H. BAMMI wants to up our influx from 16,000 to 75,000...
     

    bingley

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 11, 2011
    2,295
    48
    If you want to stop the terrorists from getting into the US, then the question to ask is how to stop them from coming here. With professional forgers, training, and money, they have been able to get inside the US even without the refugee program. For example, those 911 guys didn't come as refugees. So if you abolish the refugee program, you won't stop the terrorists. There are so many other ways for them to infiltrate the US. They'll fly here with an EU passport on a business visa and disappear into the crowd. Or they'll fly to Mexico and walk across the border. Better yet, they can go on a nice hike in the spring down from Canada and maybe visit one of our many beautiful national parks before blowing themselves up somewhere crowded. Our border with Canada is much, much longer than our border with Mexico.

    Thinking that stopping the refugees will stop the terrorists is kind of like thinking that banning guns will stop crime. All these governors declaring their state won't accept refugees is just security theater like the TSA.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    If you want to stop the terrorists from getting into the US, then the question to ask is how to stop them from coming here. With professional forgers, training, and money, they have been able to get inside the US even without the refugee program. For example, those 911 guys didn't come as refugees. So if you abolish the refugee program, you won't stop the terrorists. There are so many other ways for them to infiltrate the US. They'll fly here with an EU passport on a business visa and disappear into the crowd. Or they'll fly to Mexico and walk across the border. Better yet, they can go on a nice hike in the spring down from Canada and maybe visit one of our many beautiful national parks before blowing themselves up somewhere crowded. Our border with Canada is much, much longer than our border with Mexico.

    Thinking that stopping the refugees will stop the terrorists is kind of like thinking that banning guns will stop crime. All these governors declaring their state won't accept refugees is just security theater like the TSA.

    Several problems:

    First, the comparison with gun control is at best untenable. Foreign nationals do NOT have a right to admittance, as opposed to the clear (albeit severely abused) Constitutional right to arms.

    Second, it is nonsensical to argue that because we cannot reliably exclude every potential terrorist that we should stop trying.

    Third, the methods you listed excluding allowing refugees allows one or a small few at a time. It is much easier to smuggle in significant numbers of dangerous persons in the middle of crowds of tens of thousands than it is onesies and twosies.

    Fourth, you, as with others, have failed to identify any rational justification for admitting refugees in terms of our national benefit. The Constitution establishes a number of reasons for the existence of the government it establishes. Providing for the well-being of foreign nationals at the expense of the well-being of our own society is conspicuously absent. To what purpose are you calling for admitting these people?
     

    bingley

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 11, 2011
    2,295
    48
    You're really reading things that aren't there. At no point did I say we should stop trying to counter terrorists. In fact, I started with the opposite in the first sentence -- we need to focus on how to stop terrorists. Also, at no point did I "call for admitting these people." I'm not sure your power of analysis is all there, Dave, at this late hour of the night.

    Finally, the analogy with guns stands. You are talking about rights. My analogy is about efficacy. Anti-gunners think banning guns will stop criminals from getting guns, when there are other venues for them to acquire guns. Opponents of refugees think stopping refugees will stop terrorists from getting in, when there are other venues for them to get in. Many of these venues are currently wide open. Why aren't we doing something about that? We need to take the fight to them.

    Anyway, I just learned a bit more about the refugee process. I am not a lawyer, but it looks like not many people outside of immigration law knows much about it --

    As Wilson explains: Refugees are identified outside of the U.S. by the United Nations' High Commissioner for Refugees; once the UNHCR has identified and certified them as refugees (these are people who prove they have a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country"); they then go through a background check through the UNHCR (this often involves Interpol, other types of law enforcement and international security agencies), extensive interviews, doctor check ups, etc.; once they go through all that processing, the UNHCR divides them into groups in accordance with the countries that have agreed to accept those refugees, including the U.S.; the U.S. security checks them again; only if they pass that security check, meaning it is proven they do not pose a threat to this country, are they allowed to come to the U.S. The refugees that make it here are teamed up with a refugee resettlement agency, which helps them get off their feet.

    The average processing time for refugee applications could take up to 18 months and no less than one year, but Syrian applications can take way longer because of "security concerns and difficulties in verifying their information," according to CNN.

    Tucson Immigration Attorney: I don't Think Ducey Understands How Refugee Resettlement in the US Works | The Range: The Tucson Weekly's Daily Dispatch | Tucson Weekly

    This may be an optimistic portrait. But it really seems easier to me for a terrorist to try any of the other venues currently available. Don't fall for the security theater. The TSA isn't making you safer. Banning refugees won't make you safer.
     

    Dead Duck

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    53   0   0
    Apr 1, 2011
    14,062
    113
    .
    Still -
    I'm not a Trump fan. I will vote for him if it comes down to that.
    But here, I can't argue with a thing he says because I completely agree with it all. :yesway:

    Donald Trump: Give Syrian Refugees 'Swatch of Land' for Safe Zone - NBC News







    And Banning refugees, will absolutely 100% with out a doubt make us safer.
    These aren't women and children and old men, boat people during Nam in the 70s. These are young able bodied men with the "I Hate Americans" attitude from the middle east.
     
    Last edited:

    dusty88

    Master
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Aug 11, 2014
    3,179
    83
    United States
    Seriously?
    Do you take medication?


    Oh, cut it out. I don't necessarily agree with this simplified list: it's not realistic to think we aren't going to get some problematic folks, especially considering the number of young males and our own employment problems.

    However, if we can't discuss both viewpoints, what's the point of having a discussion?
     

    dusty88

    Master
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Aug 11, 2014
    3,179
    83
    United States
    It's easy not to know what reality is when your face is buried in a computer all day scouring for articles to support the Candyland eutopia you think we live in. The reality is that this world is full of people who want anyone who is not like them dead, and many of these "refugees" are those people. What kind of person wouldn't fight to save their homeland? Why would they tuck tail and run? Why do they want to come here? Probably the same type that believes everything they read off the internet and never thinks for themselves. If you guys feel so bad for these "refugees," invite them to your home to stay with you, to interact with your children and sleep in the room next to your spouses. Otherwise STFU and get a clue.


    I agree with your sentiment overall.

    However, I would ask the question "why aren't they defending their homeland" in a serious, inquisitive way not just "what kind of person wouldn't"

    I don't know if any of us understand what is going on in Syria, but it seems we have military forces or at least input from the US, China, and Russia. Maybe it's like being at the theater when the mass shooter comes in: it may be time to save your family and live another day rather than going out a hero.

    I don't know. I also have the concern not only of a few refugees being problematic but that these people who choose dependence will simply create more of the American dependents that we already have too many of.

    So overall, I don't favor taking these refugees. But I say that with a heavy heart and hopefully an open mind.
     

    churchmouse

    I still care....Really
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    187   0   0
    Dec 7, 2011
    191,809
    152
    Speedway area
    Oh, cut it out. I don't necessarily agree with this simplified list: it's not realistic to think we aren't going to get some problematic folks, especially considering the number of young males and our own employment problems.

    However, if we can't discuss both viewpoints, what's the point of having a discussion?

    What we are seeing in this is the fear these folks will bring the madness closer to home.
    Have you ever been around early 20's males from that part of the world. They are border line nuts if they are not from an educated well to do family. It goes with the region and the life they live.

    I share this fear. Why rub dirt in a wound. We have so many issues right here that could be addressed with the funds and manpower this will require. Lets fix them 1st and then look beyond our borders.
    I feel empathy for the woman and kids that are caught up in this.
    Several thousand young men.....Hell no.
    We have no jobs to offer the unskilled.
    They will flood an already over burdened system.
    Our taxes will take a hit from this to fund this idiocy.
    There are so many more reasons to say "NO"

    Lets fix our problems. Seriously. There can be absolutely no argument made against this from a rational mind.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,116
    113
    Gtown-ish
    If this isn't trolling I don't know what trolling is. :faint:

    Maybe. If a person posting that were trying to use it to get people to better understand their opinion, and perhaps persuade more people to agree with it, it's not trolling. Persuasion isn't trolling. Was that the purpose? Heh. You decide.

    So... is this suppose to be reassuring or what??

    No. I don't think he's trying to reassure us. I think it's more like, I'm right so I scour the interwebs seeking confirmation of my opinions and then post it so I can say, see? You're wrong.

    It's a valid, thought out opposing viewpoint.

    Valid? I suspect you say it's "valid" because you likely accepted and agreed with the conclusion before you read the argument. Try it from the other side. If you believed that it is not the place of government to provide charity and believed that charity should not be given without responsibility, how would the argument presented convince you that the US should welcome the refugees?

    Also, concluding that we should welcome refugees is subjective and is an opinion. Opinions do not depend on truth or knowledge and are neither valid nor invalid.

    When you are on a primarily conservative (well maybe extremely) forum and you purposely post stuff that will not be received well, well that's trolling for a negative reaction. Hence, trolling. JMHO though.

    See above. Depends on the reason for posting it.

    If someone posted that because they're trying to get others to see their point of view, fair game. I don't frequent INGO for the echo chamber. If I never heard opposing views I'd probably interpret the world as I did when I was young.

    But we are talking about MRJ, so...

    they need to stay and be men and fix their own damn country. But they will come here and the government will give them free money and benefits to fund their jihad with. How ****ed up is that!

    Yes. That's how I see it too. If the progressives want us to see it their way, well snark and ridicule just isn't very convincing. And posting non-sequitur articles aren't very convincing either.


    So, dissenters, rather than posting articles dripping with progressive ideology, convince us why the responsible approach is not the correct approach.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,116
    113
    Gtown-ish
    There, that wasn't too difficult, which media outlets put the number at 70% men?
    http://www.milwaukeejewish.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/syrian_refugee_crisis.jpg


    What is that a photo of? What is the context? Why should I believe it is the thing you imply that it is? It's the same with the other side. What is the context of the photos showing primarily able-bodied men? Is that really the makeup of the refugees?

    Ideologies aside, reality is what it is. That's the thing we're trying to determine. You asserting your belief and then posting something that seems to agree with your belief doesn't tell me anything except that's what you believe?
     

    churchmouse

    I still care....Really
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    187   0   0
    Dec 7, 2011
    191,809
    152
    Speedway area
    What is that a photo of? What is the context? Why should I believe it is the thing you imply that it is? It's the same with the other side. What is the context of the photos showing primarily able-bodied men? Is that really the makeup of the refugees?

    Ideologies aside, reality is what it is. That's the thing we're trying to determine. You asserting your belief and then posting something that seems to agree with your belief doesn't tell me anything except that's what you believe?

    Here it is. At least for me.
    Believe as you will. That is why we are a great country....basically. Even if i disagree with you I will defend your right to be, well, wrong in my eyes but right in yours.
    But, to make those around you (Or attempt to) support your belief's, fund those same belief's, possibly put family and friends in danger doing so is just a serious push for me.

    Again, empathy and sadness for those woman and children caught up in this mess.
    Those young men fleeing just to escape.......have no desire for them around here.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,116
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Here it is. At least for me.
    Believe as you will. That is why we are a great country....basically. Even if i disagree with you I will defend your right to be, well, wrong in my eyes but right in yours.
    But, to make those around you (Or attempt to) support your belief's, fund those same belief's, possibly put family and friends in danger doing so is just a serious push for me.


    I agree. Opinion is opinion but the reality is, someone's opinion will be made policy. And this administration's policy is pretty clear. And as usual, that end of the political spectrum is behaving as if the people who want to execute responsible policy are morally corrupt.
     

    Jludo

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 14, 2013
    4,163
    48
    Indianapolis
    What we are seeing in this is the fear these folks will bring the madness closer to home.
    Have you ever been around early 20's males from that part of the world. They are border line nuts if they are not from an educated well to do family. It goes with the region and the life they live.

    I share this fear. Why rub dirt in a wound. We have so many issues right here that could be addressed with the funds and manpower this will require. Lets fix them 1st and then look beyond our borders.
    I feel empathy for the woman and kids that are caught up in this.
    Several thousand young men.....Hell no.
    We have no jobs to offer the unskilled.
    They will flood an already over burdened system.
    Our taxes will take a hit from this to fund this idiocy.
    There are so many more reasons to say "NO"

    Lets fix our problems. Seriously. There can be absolutely no argument made against this from a rational mind.


    Those whose point of view you agree with don't need to keep the discussion civil because they're scared?

    The emotional and the logical in human brains work in tandem. The emotional holds the logically in check and vice versa. We never want to pursue entirely utilitarian solutions to our problems, we hold our views in the context of humanity. It's these cold, calculating, sometimes less than toungue in cheek comments about 'turning the middle east into glass' which make you realize it's not a far hop in logic that has justified past tragedies in the minds of the perpetrators. Obviously there's no easy solution to fix these problems but its out of line with our values to not have a civil discussion about the issues.
     

    Jludo

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 14, 2013
    4,163
    48
    Indianapolis
    What is that a photo of? What is the context? Why should I believe it is the thing you imply that it is? It's the same with the other side. What is the context of the photos showing primarily able-bodied men? Is that really the makeup of the refugees?

    Ideologies aside, reality is what it is. That's the thing we're trying to determine. You asserting your belief and then posting something that seems to agree with your belief doesn't tell me anything except that's what you believe?

    That's 100% my point but we seemed to have jumped on the abled body men photo no questions asked, I was seeing if maybe a photo of women and children would garner the same support.
     
    Top Bottom