Dennis Orcullo banned from USA for five years

[kanzzo]

I Think I just realized, why we never be able to understand each other.

Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)
1. Obedience and punishment orientation(How can I avoid punishment?)
2. Self-interest orientation(What's in it for me?)(Paying for a benefit)
Level 2 (Conventional)
3. Interpersonal accord and conformity(Social norms)(The good boy/girl attitude)
4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation(Law and order morality)
Level 3 (Post-Conventional)
5. Social contract orientation
6. Universal ethical principles(Principled conscience)
The understanding gained in each stage is retained in later stages, but may be regarded by those in later stages as simplistic, lacking in sufficient attention to detail.

someone stuck at stage four at his development won't get arguments from stage six

stage 4: Most active members of society remain at stage four, where morality is still predominantly dictated by an outside force.
stage 6: Laws are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws.

What happened to Dennis was lawful but unjust.
I guess this is what most people on this forum feel and mean when they are saying "It doesn't seem fair"

 

[The_JV]

...and in other immigration news:

Reaction to Novak Djokovic's canceled visa in Australia

— Rafael Nadal, who is tied with Djokovic and Roger Federer with 20 Grand Slam singles titles. “If he had a fair exemption from the rule, well, he should be here; if he didn’t, he shouldn’t be here.”

www.yahoo.com

Djokovic to remain in visa limbo until Monday

Novak Djokovic faces more time in immigration detention as the nine-time champion's Australian Open fate remains in legal limbo following the adjournment of his court case against deportation.

www.espn.com

Thank you for taking the time to post this.

 

[The_JV]

What happened to Dennis was lawful but unjust.
I guess this is what most people on this forum feel and mean when they are saying "It doesn't seem fair"

You say that, but it's more likely that because Dennis pretains to the subject matter of this forum and the vast majority of people cannot form a truly unbaised objective opinion that we are seeing the bleeding heart responses.

The penality is what it is, and the activists here only care this time because it hits 'close to home'. No one here cares about the others who have been subjected to the same penality. Now I am of course assuming that it is a standard penalty. I'm also assuming that others have been subjected to it. Why...? Because I don't believe that in the eyes of your border authority, Dennis is considered special and/or is being singled out beyond the fact that his duration in your country flagged him.

All that said... Good on the people trying to help out Dennis. I wish him the best.

 

[kanzzo]

You say that, but it's more likely that because Dennis pretains to the subject matter of this forum and the vast majority of people cannot form a truly unbaised objective opinion that we are seeing the bleeding heart responses.

The penality is what it is, and the activists here only care this time because it hits 'close to home'. No one here cares about the others who have been subjected to the same penality. Now I am of course assuming that it is a standard penalty. I'm also assuming that others have been subjected to it. Why...? Because I don't believe that in the eyes of your border authority, Dennis is considered special and/or is being singled out beyond the fact that his duration in your country flagged him.

All that said... Good on the people trying to help out Dennis. I wish him the best.

Thank you. This is the level of discussion I would have liked all along. Now one can try to find arguments, why he thinks the penalty is justified or not.

 

[chefjeff]

Just because the law is wrong, immoral, or just plain stupid, doesn't give you the right to break it just because you don't like it. Get the law changed!

Have you ever tried to do that?

I have.

I'd like to hear your success story.


Jeff Livingston

 

[kanzzo]

garczar wrote in another forum:

Called a lawyer friend who put me touch with a immig. lawyer in Miami. He said they use the term "intending immigrant" for people who try to circumvent the laws and basically live here. Its done on a case-by-case basis. Its up to the visa holder to prove to the immig. officer the need for his quick return to the U.S. The attorney also said staying the full 180days on a regular basis with short stays home will red-flag you and you better have really good explanation for why you need back in so quick. He said that there is no set-in-stone % like the 65% mentioned earlier but that a lot of immig. officers use that as a rough guide. Said until 9/11 this hardly came-up but after that things changed big-time. I agree 100% that this is beyond vague. If they want you stay home a certain amount of time between stays it should be clearly stated.

First, my respect for being able to change your opinion and being able to admit being wrong.

So you get flagged by some software if you are staying the full 180 days on a regular basis. And then it's in the hands of some immigrant officer to decide to let you in the country or not. This is beyond vague and qualifies for an unjust law. If this officer happens to be a pool fan and fan of Dennis he will probably decide differently as when his wife just filed for divorce and left him for some guy who reminds him of Dennis.

 

[kanzzo]

The penality is what it is, and the activists here only care this time because it hits 'close to home'.

You are right that I care because it hits 'close to home'. I have neither time nor energy to fight all the injustice in the world. It's a tough uphill battle most of the time. I'd rather spend my days playing with my kids or practicing straight pool.

I am happy if I can leave the world a little better, than it was before me. If I helped to change garczar's mind or improved the quality of this thread with some helpful post, I accomplished just that.

 

[chefjeff]

You are right that I care because it hits 'close to home'. I have neither time nor energy to fight all the injustice in the world. It's a tough uphill battle most of the time. I'd rather spend my days playing with my kids or practicing straight pool.

I am happy if I can leave the world a little better, than it was before me. If I helped to change garczar's mind or improved the quality of this thread with some helpful post, I accomplished just that.

Most times, the fight finds you before you find it.

That's been my experience.

We can each deal with what is here, now, and not much else.

Jeff Livingston

 

[buckshotshoey]

Have you ever tried to do that?

I have.

I'd like to hear your success story.


Jeff Livingston

So you believe the riots are acceptable?
And yea i have been involved in changing a stupid law. Even if it was in a miniscule way, I was involved in getting concealed carry passed in Ohio.

 

[chefjeff]

So you believe the riots are acceptable?

What? Riots????

This has what to do with Dennis' plight?


Jeff Livingston

 

[kanzzo]

Most times, the fight finds you before you find it.

absolutely. Couldn't put it better.

 

[buckshotshoey]

Have you ever tried to do that?

I have.

I'd like to hear your success story.


Jeff Livingston

So you believe the riots are acceptable?

What? Riots????

This has what to do with Dennis' plight?


Jeff Livingston

Don't pretend to be so thick-headed... Or maybe you are. What do you think happens when there are no laws or no enforcement of them? Or choosing which ones you enforce and which ones you don't.

 

[The_JV]

You are right that I care because it hits 'close to home'.

Nice... own it. This I can respect.

All these bs comments about immig. law this, political that, is nothing but hot air. None of that has changed recently. The only new variable is some guy people like to watch play pool.

 

[chefjeff]

So you believe the riots are acceptable?
And yea i have been involved in changing a stupid law. Even if it was in a miniscule way, I was involved in getting concealed carry passed in Ohio.

Good for you. I'm glad it worked to help. Very rare in my experience.

I believe that having a dialogue is THE way to prevent troubles. I also believe in defense if attacked first. Lesson: don't hit first.


Jeff Livingston

 

[chefjeff]

So you believe the riots are acceptable?

Don't pretend to be so thick-headed... Or maybe you are. What do you think happens when there are no laws or no enforcement of them? Or choosing which ones you enforce and which ones you don't.

I don't advocate for no laws, so you're asking the wrong guy.

That's twice on this thread I've been accused of being lawless. Strange, considering my posts here saying the EXACT OPPOSITE.

Oh well,


Jeff Livingston

 

[kanzzo]

Don't pretend to be so thick-headed... Or maybe you are. What do you think happens when there are no laws or no enforcement of them? Or choosing which ones you enforce and which ones you don't.

Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)
1. Obedience and punishment orientation(How can I avoid punishment?)
2. Self-interest orientation(What's in it for me?)(Paying for a benefit)
Level 2 (Conventional)
3. Interpersonal accord and conformity(Social norms)(The good boy/girl attitude)
4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation(Law and order morality)
Level 3 (Post-Conventional)
5. Social contract orientation
6. Universal ethical principles(Principled conscience)
The understanding gained in each stage is retained in later stages, but may be regarded by those in later stages as simplistic, lacking in sufficient attention to detail.

Applying to laws (4) is better than acting on self-interest alone (2). Applying to universal ethical principles (6) would be better still.
Some flaws are flawed since they were just made by people and people are not perfect.

 

[kanzzo]

Or choosing which ones you enforce and which ones you don't.

If you make your choice in regards to some universal ethical principles - we would end up with a better world.

 

[chefjeff]

Kannzzo, why don't you post that take on it on the Integrating principle with issue thread.

It's a better place for it, imho.



Jeff Livingston

 

[buckshotshoey]

I don't advocate for no laws, so you're asking the wrong guy.

That's twice on this thread I've been accused of being lawless. Strange, considering my posts here saying the EXACT OPPOSITE.

Oh well,


Jeff Livingston

All I am saying is you cant pick and choose which laws to follow because of someone's opinion about them. Dennis screwed up and is paying the consequences. PERIOD.

My original quote was to kanzzo, but you got In the loop. Maybe we agree, maybe we dont, but my original comment wasn't directed toward you.

He will be back. If I had to take a guess, he well appeal the decision, and maybe his ban will be shortened.

 

[chefjeff]

There's a book out that says every American does 3 felonies a day, imrc.


Jeff Livingston