>Libertarians who believe that the Civil Rights Act was unconstitutional ... are essentially saying that private businesses have the right to use state and local law enforcement to exclude black people.

This is an interesting perspective that I had not heard before. Thanks for that.

If the EIC is a "social service", then so is deducting your mortgage interest. All you do to get the EIC is fill out the appropriate IRS form and send it in with your return, same as any other deduction or credit. There is simply no substantive difference between it (and the Additional Child Credit, the Making Work Pay Credit, and other "payments") and any other tax credit, other than that those other credits have an arbitrary cutoff of reducing your tax burden to zero. Sure, you could define any tax credit which results in a net payment as a "social service", but then the assertion becomes merely a tautology -- and one which conflicts with the language used in the tax code itself.

As for the FHC, your information is right for the 2008 version but wrong for the 2009 version. "For home purchased in 2009, the credit does not have to be paid back unless the home ceases to be the taxpayer's main residence within a three-year period following the purchase."

>At no point will the IRS 'rebate' more money than was paid. A person can only take more out than they put in if they collect some form of social service.

You're wrong. There are three types of tax breaks: deductions, credits, and payments, and there is a separate section of the 1040 for each of them. Deductions reduce the amount of your income that's taxed, and credits reduce the amount of tax you owe to not less than 0. But *payments* (lines 61-70 on the 2010 version of the 1040) can result in the government owing you more money than you ever paid in. A tricky point here is that several things referred to as "credits" are really payments. For example, the Earned Income Credit, the Additional Child Credit, and the First-time Homebuyer's Credit are all actually payments.

>But your work in someone else's hands, given validly cannot.

>Unless government get involved in what you do with your stuff in your home in private.

In your fantasy world, if I lend my buddy a lawnmower and he never gives it back, I should have no legal recourse.

>I had to go back and calculate the percentages and per capita

The stats are clearly listed as rate per 100k people. Per capita, Chicago's violent crime rate is almost 3 times El Paso's, you fucking moron.

Obviously, you haven't bothered to actually look at the numbers because 1) the violent crime stats for cities with large illegal immigrant populations compare even *better* than general crime stats versus the norm, and 2) the Wikipedia page includes a link to the data in Excel format from fbi.gov (and I said earlier, when I posted the link, that it was data from the FBI, so you really have no excuse on this one).

>Because when you commit one crime and get away with it ... you commit even more heinous crimes and usually violent ones at that

Let me repeat: Cities with large illegal immigrant populations have *lower* rates of reported crime. Unreported crime cannot, by definition, influence the size of the prison population. You have presented nothing but prejudices and intuition; while I have presented facts and logic. Your earlier stated opinion is demonstrably wrong, and I hope that by this point you have come to realize that. If not, I genuinely feel sorry for you.

>Then this page explains why crime reporting rates are lower among illegal aliens

You claimed that illegal immigration is the major contributor to our high imprisonment rate. But unreported crimes, by definition, don't affect the prison population at all! Care to try again?

>No other country has so many illegal immigrants per capita

This is almost certainly false (it's difficult to count illegal immigrants, so I can't say with 100% certainty, and neither can you). The highest estimate I've seen for the US is 20 million (the conventional estimate is ~12 million), making them less than 7% of the total population. Greece has about the same percentage (that was just the first country I bothered to check, based on an educated guess). In South Africa, estimates place the percentage at over 10%.

>illegal immigrants are more likely to commit crimes

Ignoring the crime of entering the country illegally (which would make your statement merely a tautology), this also does not seem to be borne out by evidence. If you look at the FBI crime statistics by city, you'll find that there is a distinct overlap between safe cities and those with large immigrant (and illegal immigrant) populations. Take a look at this chart. For both violent and property crime, San Jose, Los Angeles, San Diego, and El Paso(!), all with large immigrant populations, have relatively low crime rates. Whereas the most dangerous cities -- St. Louis, Buffalo, DC, Detroit, Baltimore -- all have relatively low immigrant populations.

Do you know what the word "percentage" means?

>or are "many" parents already sadistic and cruel?

Yes.

Milgram isn't really applicable to this situation. Milgram documents that normal people are willing to perform torture *when ordered to do so by authority figures*, even when doing so causes obvious emotional distress to themselves. The discussion is about whether normal people are willing to perform torture *in violation of the rules*.

No, they don't. Federal kidnapping laws only apply if you cross state lines in preparation for or during the commission of the crime.

>there's Switzerland, where every household just about has an assault rifle, very low violent crime rate.

From WP:
"To carry firearms in public or outdoors (and for an individual who is a member of the militia carrying a firearm other than his Army-issue personal weapons off-duty), a person must have a Waffentragschein (gun carrying permit), which in most cases is issued only to private citizens working in occupations such as security."

So Switzerland is not at all applicable in a discussion of the viability/utility of liberal carry laws.

From just a day or two ago:
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/crime/Stupid-Crimes-1007644-100078474.html

A more infamous incident:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Kay_Letourneau#Relationship_with_Vili_Fualaau

Note that in the latter example, the couple have been married for the past five years. Sounds like you're the one with the "bullshit ... cop outs".