re: The next Civil War for this nation's future has already started, and not even debatable

i'll be on my boat and you will still be typing in your mom's basement.

... this is just fantasy. The only real divide in this country comes from old white men blaming their frick ups on minorities and women. If they would man up and admit that they are failures their betters would right the ship in just a few short years.

Step 1 is they begin to die off and/or retire.

The last time I checked, 5.56 penetrates black hoodies.

Your side’s little bitch army of 22 year old assholes better keep that shite in the rapidly deteriorating liberal cities where they operate.

That’s all I am saying.

This fricking thread.

Guys, guys.

The answer is simple, no muss, no fuss.

The City State Solution needs to be implemented.

City State of Los Angeles. San Francisco. Portland. Chicago. On and on.

The residents of these entities are not citizens. These places have clear borders (which will never expand - and will be specified by ... well not them).

I see walls around them.

As for their eventual fate?

Who cares.

quote:

---

When they come for your guns. 

That will be something people would consider worth fighting over. I definitely think conservative lawmakers and executives in conservative states would move to leave the union, and they would have

---

The effort to come after guns will be piecemeal. It'll start with the SC declaring there is no individual right to bear arms. The leftists will then say it's a state/local issue. Then eventually there will be a push for a ban at the federal level.

When that happens, I expect conservative states to break from the union.

quote:

---

Just look at this year ALONE, our southern border has been invaded by a foreign people the size of which no nation has ever seen before.

---

This isn't even close to true. Illegal border crossings are at a 10 year high, but they are still not even close to the number of crossings we had during the Bush era, and those numbers were down precipitously from the pre- 9/11 era.

From the mid 1980s to 2000, the government reported apprending 1 to 1.5 million border crossings per year.

The main difference now is that more families with children are crossing with the intent to stay, as opposed to just men crossing and sending money back to their families.

quote:

---

The main difference now is that more families with children are crossing with the intent to stay, as opposed to just men crossing and sending money back to their families.

---

That is one of two major differences.

The second is that the majority today are not attempting to cross the border covertly. More than half the “apprehensions” involve people who walk up to a checkpoint and say “Hola! Quiero asylum por favor.”. In some sectors the ratio is almost 2 of 3.

The VAST majority of those asylum requests will be rejected.

quote:

---

The second is that the majority today are not attempting to cross the border covertly.

---

Yeah, and this means the OPS claim that we only catch 1/4 of the entrants is also a bad eztimate. We are probably catching more than that because they want to be caught.

Regardless, the simple fact is that illegal immigration is still way down from the numbers we saw from 1980 to 2008.

quote:

---

Yeah, and this means the OPS claim that we only catch 1/4 of the entrants is also a bad eztimate. We are probably catching more than that because they want to be caught.

Regardless, the simple fact is that illegal immigration is still way down from the numbers we saw from 1980 to 2008.

---

Agreed.

Implicit in that statement, I think, is that we catch about 1/4 of those who attempt a covert crossing.

Even that notion is often spun the wrong way, because it is a vast improvement over the “catch rate” of decades past.