The evils of an amnesty for illegal immigrants
Why should the misdemeanours of British nationals be doggedly pursued and punishable until justice is seen to be done, yet those of illegal immigrants expire after a couple of years? If the preoccupation is cost, it would probably be cheaper to pardon all of our non-violent offenders, so why stop with illegal immigrants? We are not here talking of genuine asylum seekers, who indeed may be driven by acts of desperation to escape persecution and oppression, but illegal immigrants from Kenya, Russia, or Latin America, and their economic needs are supposed to challenge us to pardon the forging of government documents, and the intrinsic fraud, lies, theft and deception.
Cranmer is bemused that those immigrants involved in these dubious pursuits are termed ‘honest’, ‘good’, and ‘hard-working’. In a world of moral relativism, ‘honesty’ may indeed mean whatever people wish it to mean, but it is a definition that is antithetical to honest, right-thinking, and law-abiding people.
Aside from placing further strain on housing, hospitals, schools, doctors and dentists, not to mention the costs involved in translating every document into the myriad of necessary languages to give them access to their ‘rights’, an immigration amnesty will only serve to encourage more illegal immigration, as it has ever done.
The occasional ‘normalising’ and ‘regularising’ of the odd 500,000 is certain to compromise the peace and security of the Realm. The solution? Deportation. And if that means Cranmer is ‘racist’, then let the debate begin.