What human cost is acceptable in controling illegal immigration?

[HappyJoy]

In Guatemala, you do not sent your kids to a playground because there's a good chance you will never see them again. If your oldest son was run down in front of you by cartel members because he wouldn't work for them and a 7 year old across the street was raped and murdered by a local gang and the police refused to even investigate, I think you would do what is needed to get the fuck out.

Who can blame the families trying to escape from that kind of life?

The problem is not with those people trying to come to the United States, or Donald Trump for that matter. Why not focus on the countries and governments that are so bad that people risk their families lives to escape them?

Yep. These humanitarian Democrats describe hell on earth, then want to do nothing to help them other than allow them to come here. If that were really their view and they had a soul, they would want to help rescue all those people from their criminal governments and do it there.

Can you expand on this? What do you want our government to do 'over there' exactly?

But unless they come here, they can't vote for Democrats. So that doesn't interest the left

The last thing anyone cares about is who refugees, who wouldn't become citizens if at all for many, many years is going to vote for. It'd be best if we could eventually relocate them back to their homes though I'm not against them staying either as we need more legal immigration anyway.

You were melting down about guatamala, not me. What is your plan?

Get rid of this policy and go back to what we had. Employ more immigration judges so that they can get through this back log quicker. Did you know that currently children as young as 4 and 5 are going to court alone and facing our legal system? Pretty sick.

We also need more legal immigration and these people need a home, many of them probably meet our standards so I'm not against letting many stay, then again, I'm not afraid of taco trucks or whatever keeps you dolts shaking under the covers.

I'd also work with Mexico to take on many of these refugees, but that would require us having a working relationship with them, not sure we have that now.

 

[pismoe]

and its YOU younger hip hop types that are helicopter parents with fat kids playing video games . I was walking in the woods with my own guns at 10 - 11 years old and fishing in the creek at 7 years old HJoy !!

 

[HappyJoy]

and its YOU younger hip hop types that are helicopter parents with fat kids playing video games . I was walking in the woods with my own guns at 10 - 11 years old and fishing in the creek at 7 years old HJoy !!

Go find a cloud to yell at, Goober, the world is moving on without you.

Hip hop types, what are you 150 years old?

 

[pismoe]

yep , you hip hopper types are going to get what YOU and your kids deserve . Begging for nasty healthcare , and the paltry 15 dollars an hour , living in parents basement and riding skateboards and watching your fat widdle kids when they aren't in daycare HJoy .

 

[pismoe]

Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump:

"If you are smuggling a child then we will prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you as required by law," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Monday at a law enforcement conference in Scottsdale, Arizona. "If you don't like that, then don't smuggle children over our border."

Administration officials explained that the goal of the program is 100 percent prosecution of all who enter the U.S. illegally. When adults are prosecuted and jailed, their children will be separated from them, just as would happen for a U.S. citizen convicted and jailed.​

Anguish at Southwest border as more immigrant children are separated from parents

The Trump administration's willingness to take children from their parents has raised concerns about how far authorities should go to stem unauthorized border crossings and what human cost is acceptable in the name of border security and immigration control.

"There is something terrible happening here that Americans would not support if they understood it," said F. Scott McCown, director of the Children’s Rights Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law.​

I don't care how much you hate illegal immigrants this is EVIL. You are punishing the children. It's abhorrant and wrong and inexcusable. I hope they rot in hell for this. 700 children so far have been seperated from the only family they know and lost to our often incompetent and mismanaged child care system. I fail to see how any parent could support actions like these.

When parents are held for prosecution, their children are turned over to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, part of the Department of Health and Human Services. The children are then designated as "unaccompanied minors," and the government tries to connect them to family members who are already in the U.S. Until then, children wait in shelters or are sent to federally contracted foster homes, often without parents being told exactly where they are, immigration advocates said.

It may soon become even more difficult to place children with relatives. The Department of Homeland Security is proposing immigration checks be done on all people in a household who may take in these "unaccompanied" children, which means relatives who are undocumented may be less likely to come forward.

In the meantime, space in shelters and foster homes is limited; The Washington Post reported the administration plans to open facilities at military bases to house some of the separated children.​

/——/ Libtards seething with rage as they lose yet another talking point:
Trump says he's going to sign a 'preemptive' measure to keep migrant families together

----------------- well , probably smart , tweak it a TINY bit so it still tweaks the libs like HJoy but tweak it for the elections .

 

[pismoe]

just hearing on El Rushbo that there is nothing that The TRUMP can LEGALLY do about this widdle baby mexican issue and i of course hope that The RUSH is correct .

 

[kaz]

In Guatemala, you do not sent your kids to a playground because there's a good chance you will never see them again. If your oldest son was run down in front of you by cartel members because he wouldn't work for them and a 7 year old across the street was raped and murdered by a local gang and the police refused to even investigate, I think you would do what is needed to get the fuck out.

Who can blame the families trying to escape from that kind of life?

The problem is not with those people trying to come to the United States, or Donald Trump for that matter. Why not focus on the countries and governments that are so bad that people risk their families lives to escape them?

Yep. These humanitarian Democrats describe hell on earth, then want to do nothing to help them other than allow them to come here. If that were really their view and they had a soul, they would want to help rescue all those people from their criminal governments and do it there.

Can you expand on this? What do you want our government to do 'over there' exactly?

But unless they come here, they can't vote for Democrats. So that doesn't interest the left

The last thing anyone cares about is who refugees, who wouldn't become citizens if at all for many, many years is going to vote for. It'd be best if we could eventually relocate them back to their homes though I'm not against them staying either as we need more legal immigration anyway.

You were melting down about guatamala, not me. What is your plan?

Get rid of this policy and go back to what we had. Employ more immigration judges so that they can get through this back log quicker. Did you know that currently children as young as 4 and 5 are going to court alone and facing our legal system? Pretty sick.

We also need more legal immigration and these people need a home, many of them probably meet our standards so I'm not against letting many stay, then again, I'm not afraid of taco trucks or whatever keeps you dolts shaking under the covers.

I'd also work with Mexico to take on many of these refugees, but that would require us having a working relationship with them, not sure we have that now.

So you want to do nothing for the people in guatamala. Just help the ones you want to vote for Democrats

 

[Cecilie1200]

Trump will go down in history beside Andrew Jackson (whose picture is on the wall of the oval office). Jackson dislocated all the Native Americans across the Mississippi River, including the Cherokee, who had adopted Christianity, created a written language, ran a newspaper, and lived in peace with an agricultural economy.

I Just Don't See The Equivalent Nature Here
BTW, Jackson WAS A Democrat...

The equivalent is that Trump doesn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of ending immigration. Just like Jackson didn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of getting gold. They both thought they had the right to do this because they considered themselves as representing America's best interests. I'm giving Trump the benefit of the doubt since I believe he's doing it because he wants to placate his base. I believe, if your willing to disregard morality when going after goals, you are nothing more then a thug and history will judge you accordingly.

That's IF you think what he's doing is immoral; enforcing the law and trying to provide a deterrent.

I don't think taking kids away from "people" who dragged them across a place like Mexico, dirty, hungry and confused, putting them someplace where they get showers, food, medical care, new clothing, a bed to sleep in; something they probably haven't seen in over two weeks, as being immoral.

That's also IF we let leftists get away with ignoring the history of the situation and pretending that this all just mysteriously happened since Trump took office.

Ain't gonna happen.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Coyote

If you don't mind me bringing you back to this discussion, I've had a burning question. What is the probability that every adult who crosses our border illegally with a child is related to the child? How do we know they aren't lying? In that case, the moral onus lies on the adults who bring them here and use them as tools to leverage our government.

Of the 12,000 children who came here, 10,000 of them came here alone. The other 2,000 were brought here by adults claiming to be their parents. When DHS could not verify their relationship, they were separated. Once again, in accordance with existing law.

So I ask again, how can we know that these so called "parents" aren't lying and simply using the child as a tool? Do you wonder why so many children are classified as unaccompanied? Because their "sponsors" abandon them for fear of being discovered and deported themselves.

How can your side of the aisle claim to care about the relationship between parent and child when the parent willfully separates (yes, separates, something you're currently making a bid deal about) themselves from their child via sending them across the dangerous frontier and across our border? Where is the outcry over that? Oh, is it because the parent is trying to "make a better life for their child"? Where is your concern over the possibility of child trafficking?

Could it be possible you are ignoring, forgetting, or downright dismissing the fact that the separation in about 80% of the cases has already occurred?

Why all the emotion and no solution?

If there is any evidence of child trafficking, the immigration authorities should definitely act. However it is not logical to make that assumption without evidence of such. One of the few rights illegal immigrants have is Due Process. Since most of these families came with the intent of applying for asylum, most of them will have some documentation.

First... I can contend that the exact opposite is true. You can't assume that all of these adults with minors are in fact families.

Second, these people had no rights in America (constitutional or otherwise) before they crossed the border illegally, why should they suddenly attain them when they do? If you aren't a citizen, you should not be entitled to constitutional rights until you go through the proper channels. Period. Full stop.

So there are no basic human rights?

Of course. We aren't shooting them on sight, we aren't selling them into slavery, we aren't starving or torturing them. Even in jail, they're housed in better quarters than they had back where they came from. They're fed regularly. They're provided clothing if they need it. They're provided with the speediest processing through the legal system we can manage.

I think the problem here is that you have no clue what a "basic human right" is, and think it means "whatever I want to demand at the moment".

 

[Cecilie1200]

In Guatemala, you do not sent your kids to a playground because there's a good chance you will never see them again. If your oldest son was run down in front of you by cartel members because he wouldn't work for them and a 7 year old across the street was raped and murdered by a local gang and the police refused to even investigate, I think you would do what is needed to get the fuck out.

Who can blame the families trying to escape from that kind of life?

The problem is not with those people trying to come to the United States, or Donald Trump for that matter. Why not focus on the countries and governments that are so bad that people risk their families lives to escape them?

Yep. These humanitarian Democrats describe hell on earth, then want to do nothing to help them other than allow them to come here. If that were really their view and they had a soul, they would want to help rescue all those people from their criminal governments and do it there.

Can you expand on this? What do you want our government to do 'over there' exactly?

But unless they come here, they can't vote for Democrats. So that doesn't interest the left

The last thing anyone cares about is who refugees, who wouldn't become citizens if at all for many, many years is going to vote for. It'd be best if we could eventually relocate them back to their homes though I'm not against them staying either as we need more legal immigration anyway.

You were melting down about guatamala, not me. What is your plan?

Get rid of this policy and go back to what we had. Employ more immigration judges so that they can get through this back log quicker. Did you know that currently children as young as 4 and 5 are going to court alone and facing our legal system? Pretty sick.

We also need more legal immigration and these people need a home, many of them probably meet our standards so I'm not against letting many stay, then again, I'm not afraid of taco trucks or whatever keeps you dolts shaking under the covers.

I'd also work with Mexico to take on many of these refugees, but that would require us having a working relationship with them, not sure we have that now.

No. We will not go back to catch-and-release. Not gonna happen.

 

[HappyJoy]

Who can blame the families trying to escape from that kind of life?

The problem is not with those people trying to come to the United States, or Donald Trump for that matter. Why not focus on the countries and governments that are so bad that people risk their families lives to escape them?

Yep. These humanitarian Democrats describe hell on earth, then want to do nothing to help them other than allow them to come here. If that were really their view and they had a soul, they would want to help rescue all those people from their criminal governments and do it there.

Can you expand on this? What do you want our government to do 'over there' exactly?

But unless they come here, they can't vote for Democrats. So that doesn't interest the left

The last thing anyone cares about is who refugees, who wouldn't become citizens if at all for many, many years is going to vote for. It'd be best if we could eventually relocate them back to their homes though I'm not against them staying either as we need more legal immigration anyway.

You were melting down about guatamala, not me. What is your plan?

Get rid of this policy and go back to what we had. Employ more immigration judges so that they can get through this back log quicker. Did you know that currently children as young as 4 and 5 are going to court alone and facing our legal system? Pretty sick.

We also need more legal immigration and these people need a home, many of them probably meet our standards so I'm not against letting many stay, then again, I'm not afraid of taco trucks or whatever keeps you dolts shaking under the covers.

I'd also work with Mexico to take on many of these refugees, but that would require us having a working relationship with them, not sure we have that now.

No. We will not go back to catch-and-release. Not gonna happen.

We probably will.

 

[candycorn]

Coyote

If you don't mind me bringing you back to this discussion, I've had a burning question. What is the probability that every adult who crosses our border illegally with a child is related to the child? How do we know they aren't lying? In that case, the moral onus lies on the adults who bring them here and use them as tools to leverage our government.

Of the 12,000 children who came here, 10,000 of them came here alone. The other 2,000 were brought here by adults claiming to be their parents. When DHS could not verify their relationship, they were separated. Once again, in accordance with existing law.

So I ask again, how can we know that these so called "parents" aren't lying and simply using the child as a tool? Do you wonder why so many children are classified as unaccompanied? Because their "sponsors" abandon them for fear of being discovered and deported themselves.

How can your side of the aisle claim to care about the relationship between parent and child when the parent willfully separates (yes, separates, something you're currently making a bid deal about) themselves from their child via sending them across the dangerous frontier and across our border? Where is the outcry over that? Oh, is it because the parent is trying to "make a better life for their child"? Where is your concern over the possibility of child trafficking?

Could it be possible you are ignoring, forgetting, or downright dismissing the fact that the separation in about 80% of the cases has already occurred?

Why all the emotion and no solution?

If there is any evidence of child trafficking, the immigration authorities should definitely act. However it is not logical to make that assumption without evidence of such. One of the few rights illegal immigrants have is Due Process. Since most of these families came with the intent of applying for asylum, most of them will have some documentation.

First... I can contend that the exact opposite is true. You can't assume that all of these adults with minors are in fact families.

Second, these people had no rights in America (constitutional or otherwise) before they crossed the border illegally, why should they suddenly attain them when they do? If you aren't a citizen, you should not be entitled to constitutional rights until you go through the proper channels. Period. Full stop.

So there are no basic human rights?

Of course. We aren't shooting them on sight, we aren't selling them into slavery, we aren't starving or torturing them. Even in jail, they're housed in better quarters than they had back where they came from. They're fed regularly. They're provided clothing if they need it. They're provided with the speediest processing through the legal system we can manage.

I think the problem here is that you have no clue what a "basic human right" is, and think it means "whatever I want to demand at the moment".

“these people had no rights in America (constitutional or otherwise)”

Your problem is that you are not contradicting what I said… It is what TK said.

 

[Cecilie1200]

just hearing on El Rushbo that there is nothing that The TRUMP can LEGALLY do about this widdle baby mexican issue and i of course hope that The RUSH is correct .

I have no idea what Rush said, but Trump does NOT have the legal power to change it. Congress does, and it's high time these leftists start acting like they care about this issue the way they pretend and yank their Congressmembers out from in front of the media cameras and make them do their jobs.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yep. These humanitarian Democrats describe hell on earth, then want to do nothing to help them other than allow them to come here. If that were really their view and they had a soul, they would want to help rescue all those people from their criminal governments and do it there.

Can you expand on this? What do you want our government to do 'over there' exactly?

But unless they come here, they can't vote for Democrats. So that doesn't interest the left

The last thing anyone cares about is who refugees, who wouldn't become citizens if at all for many, many years is going to vote for. It'd be best if we could eventually relocate them back to their homes though I'm not against them staying either as we need more legal immigration anyway.

You were melting down about guatamala, not me. What is your plan?

Get rid of this policy and go back to what we had. Employ more immigration judges so that they can get through this back log quicker. Did you know that currently children as young as 4 and 5 are going to court alone and facing our legal system? Pretty sick.

We also need more legal immigration and these people need a home, many of them probably meet our standards so I'm not against letting many stay, then again, I'm not afraid of taco trucks or whatever keeps you dolts shaking under the covers.

I'd also work with Mexico to take on many of these refugees, but that would require us having a working relationship with them, not sure we have that now.

No. We will not go back to catch-and-release. Not gonna happen.

We probably will.

No, we really won't. You vastly overestimate how much moral authority you have - none - and how much people care about the good opinions of leftists - we don't.

Trump was elected to enforce immigration law. It was the primary issue in his campaign and subsequent election win. You need to figure out that you're not on the majority side on this issue, and learn to live with the fact that you can't stamp your feet and demand the world change itself to suit you.

 

[Flopper]

Scare them? You have to be joking. In Guatemala children 10 to 15 are routinely kidnapped, raped and murdered and the police don't even investigation. Teens are forcibly recruitment by street gangs and transnational drug cartels, after witnessed the murders of family members, friends and classmates. Exactly how do you plan to scare the shit out of them?

And the same thugs would think nothing of abducting a child and crossing our border with them.

Think about that

Immigration officials are required to interview all detainees regardless of age. Do you really think kidnap victims are not going to speak up?

These families came seeking asylum. You can not apply for asylum with out complete documentation of all family members.
Think about that.

Poor children from third world countries who are being abused and threatened and told the American will kill them? Of course they could lie. And you're saying keep them in the abuser's hands to keep doing that

I'm saying you don't presume that a family is human traffickers and victims without evidence any more than you would presume that a man carrying a briefcase walking out of a bank is a bank robber.

When you stop a criminal at the border who has a kid that isn't his with him...you think that we should allow the kid to stay with that criminal in jail?

Because that's what you fools are advocating.

A person stopped at the boarder, is not a criminal until he or she crosses the border and a court of law declares him guilty of improper entry, a criminal misdemeanor. Accompanying children are not assumed to be victims of human trafficking without any evidence. This is called due process, a concept you may find strange.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And the same thugs would think nothing of abducting a child and crossing our border with them.

Think about that

Immigration officials are required to interview all detainees regardless of age. Do you really think kidnap victims are not going to speak up?

These families came seeking asylum. You can not apply for asylum with out complete documentation of all family members.
Think about that.

Poor children from third world countries who are being abused and threatened and told the American will kill them? Of course they could lie. And you're saying keep them in the abuser's hands to keep doing that

I'm saying you don't presume that a family is human traffickers and victims without evidence any more than you would presume that a man carrying a briefcase walking out of a bank is a bank robber.

When you stop a criminal at the border who has a kid that isn't his with him...you think that we should allow the kid to stay with that criminal in jail?

Because that's what you fools are advocating.

A person stopped at the boarder, is not a criminal until he or she crosses the boarder and a court of law declares him guilty of improper entry, a criminal misdemeanor. Accompanying children are not assumed to be victims of human trafficking without any evidence. This is called due process, a concept you may find strange.

Chuckles, we don't stop them UNTIL they've crossed the border. They can wander around on the Mexican side all they like, as far as we're concerned.

And yes, they are criminals. We've discussed this before. Your inability to comprehend right and wrong, guilty and innocent, moral and immoral, has no impact whatsoever on reality.

Accompanying children are assumed to be in the company of someone caught in the act of breaking the law. Whether or not that person is the child's parent can be assessed later, but the operative point on the spot is that the adult is being arrested.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"My life sucks, so I'm going to break the law, and I'm going to drag my kid along while I do it so that I can use him to get out of being punished." Yup, that's insanely irresponsible, and they deserve exactly what they get for it.

Oh, and no one is "sending them on their way minus the children". Maybe you should have spent less time "laying on the sarcasm", and a little more time laying on the truth.

See link posted above.

I'll take that as an "I have nothing".

I"ll take that as" I'm to chickenshit to click a link that directly contradicts what I'm claiming"

More like I don't respect you enough to bother scrolling back that far. If it ain't in the post right above where I'm typing, it ain't worth it. The only fear you engender in me is the possibility of you drooling on my shoes.

You have something to say, say it. You don't, then we're done here.

I hope I'll be able to live my life without having to have earned your respect. I guess I'll just have to life with the emptiness of not having your highly developed intellect enlighten me about why it's justified to separate parents from children because them wanting a better life for their kids.

I could not possibly care less if you live your life or not. Just so long as you understand that YOUR opinion has no impact whatsoever on what the law is, what the proper procedure for changing the law is, and whether or not having a good sob story that appeals to simpletons like you somehow changes the law.

 

[pismoe]

just hearing on El Rushbo that there is nothing that The TRUMP can LEGALLY do about this widdle baby mexican issue and i of course hope that The RUSH is correct .

I have no idea what Rush said, but Trump does NOT have the legal power to change it. Congress does, and it's high time these leftists start acting like they care about this issue the way they pretend and yank their Congressmembers out from in front of the media cameras and make them do their jobs.

---------------------------- course all i want to see is zero tolerance and the separation that has been happening .

 

[TemplarKormac]

 

[Flopper]

Lots of good information but the fact remains there is no law that requires Trump to separate the kids from their parents at the border. This is policy which can be changed at the discretion of the president. Claiming the law made me do it is just bullshit. He clearly feels separating the kids from the parents is a determent so why doesn't he admit it. I'm sure most of his supporters would agree.

If you say so. Was there a law to separate kids from parents while Barry was president? Was there law like that while Dubya was president? Both of them were doing it, but only now it's somehow not acceptable.

Policy hasn't changed, laws neither. Border patrol and DHS are doing their jobs by the book, and if Congress doesn't like the law, than they should change the law.

Changing the law to prevent the separation of families during detention means taking the option away from the administration to separate families. I doubt that congress had ever imagined a president would use children as a pawn to expedite deportation. Previous administration have separated families when family detention centers were full and when officials felt families should be separated to protect the children.