That's a pretty obvious false equivalence.

Your argument was "We've done it before, so we can do it again." I have an example in which that argument is ridiculous.

it will not rupture society. And so what if it pisses people off? .. No non-citizen is entitled to enter the US -

You misunderstand me. I'm pointing out reasons why "you" Americans, in your own self interest, may wish to consider not limiting immigration in the ways you're thinking of. I think these arguments are valid, but I seldom see them made.

I will agree with you that creating a permanent underclass is an immoral and dangerous thing, which if left to smolder will result in a political bonfire. I'm fairly sure we can avoid it.

Hey, I'm fairly sure I can fly.

And until we can sort them out, we're best off simply keeping them all out.

You realize that saying "Some of you are bad, so all of you are bad" is, what's the word, bigotry? And before you say "It's our country to do with as we please, once again, my appeal is not to your law, it is to your own sense of justice (such as it is).

I'd prefer no immigration whatsoever for the next 10 to 20 years

Ah, the "I've got mine" attitude. Fortunately what you want is largely irrelevant, as is what I want.

free reign,

That's "rein", as in the thing you use to control a horse. "Free rein" means letting the horse do what he wants.

nor can we do it while fighting a war against religious extremists overseas

The way you talk it's like you think the wars you're fighting are the fault of these religious extremists.

while some are in our midst shooting innocents.

Yes, I agree that your shooting deaths are out of control. But correct me if I'm wrong, don't most shooting deaths, of innocents, have nothing to do with Muslims? There was a startling case a while ago, of some kindergartners.. Sandy something, was that a Muslim?