What human cost is acceptable in controling illegal immigration?

[kaz]

You endlessly parrot that platitude. First of all, I know of no study that has demonstrated that's a major factor for the criminals breaking our laws and coming here illegally.

Even if it is, that they chose to break the law and come here as criminals is a terrible example to set for their kids. If they really cared about their kids, they would work to show they can support themselves and go to a US consulate in Mexico and find out what it takes to come here legally and ... wait their turn ...

Having children is not any justification to commit a crime even if your platitude is accepted as fact.

And remind me again how you're against illegal immigration while you fight tooth and nail to ensure we do nothing to stop them

let's end our alleged wars on drugs and terror to stop creating refugees.

Seriously? Ok. So it's our fault then, eh? In that case we need to take responsibility and fix it. The first step is to approach all these countries diplomatically and put the pressure on their governments to stop the drug trade which is supposedly generating the asylum seekers. If that doesn't work with start applying economic pressure to let them know we're serious. And if that doesn't work we execute a regime change and in the process wipe out their drug trading infrastructure since they're too incompetent or corrupt to do it themselves. Then on our end we start applying stiff prison terms in the jails of the countries we conquered to any drug users or traffickers we catch in the USA. And we force them into community service and reconstruction in the countries we've probably destroyed. I'd say something along the lines of 25-30 years before we let them back into the country. Would that do it?

The US is the biggest market for illegal drugs in the world. Expecting countries with a small fraction of the wealth of the US to control the cartels is down right stupid. We must stop the demand and that begins with curtailing American's insatiable demand for illegal drugs.

"We must stop demand." That's leftist for do nothing. You're not going to stop demand, that's another moronic platitude. We need to legalize drugs. And we need to build a wall so drug dealers can't walk across the line we erroneously refer to as a "border" because it isn't.

Tough choice, huh, Flopper? We stop drugs from crossing the border so easily with a wall, and it keeps out Democrat voters too. You pass on that deal, keeping the flow of Democrat voters is more important

I find myself ambivalent about legalizing drugs. I live in a state where marijuana is legal and see both positive and negative results.

Legalizing drugs would put a serious dent in the cartels income however I think it would also increased the number of users in the US.

I see daily, the huge waste due to drug usage. Kids with real talent and intelligence dropping out of school and eventually just dropping out of society as they head toward the social trash bin. If America is going to compete in the world, we have to reduce drug usage and I'm not sure making it legal would do that.

OK, so we're destroying central America, which you blame on the United States. I actually agree with you on that.

You admit that legalizing it would hurt drug dealers, but you don't care about that because you believe some PSAs will fix the drug problem.

Oh, and taking drug dealers pushing drugs on the streets won't affect drug usage, actually you think legalizing it will drive drug usage up.

That while you want to open our borders because laws don't work and people don't follow them, but they do follow drug laws, er they don't, we need PSAs to fix that.

You're an imbecile

 

[Flopper]

No, the system isn't--the Democrats are.

It's Democrats who fight for illegals to be here.
It's Democrats who fight to keep their sanctuary cities and now states.
It's Democrats who are fighting against the wall.
It's Democrats who allow them to have drivers licenses in their states so they can get to the jobs they're not supposed to have.

The system isn't the problem. Democrats are the problem.

It's republicans who gave us SImpson-Mazoli, the law that puts verification on the employer which is like letting the Foxes watch the henhouse.
It's republicans who own the companies that hire them.
It's Republicans who oppose a national ID system.
It's Republicans who have blocked immigration reform for over a decade.

And what is immigration reform? Making laws that benefit the foreigners and a disadvantage to Americans. Of course we're against that. In other words, amnesty. It didn't work in the past and it won't work today.

It's Republicans that own companies? To my knowledge, there are just as many if not more Democrats that own companies as Republicans: Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Cosco's, Starbucks, Martha Stewart just to name a few.

National ID? We used to use drivers licenses as ID's, and then the Democrats started giving them to foreigners and we don't know who is a citizen and who is not. National ID's............from the same group of people fighting against Voter-ID claiming it won't solve any problems and it won't work?????

You are a perfect example of the Party of Excuses.

We need immigration laws that are realistic based on what the nation needs and doesn't need.

First of all we need more people, not less. As a result of improved health care, our country is getting older. Ten thousand Baby Boomers are turning 65 every day. Many of them are retiring and leaving the workforce.

There will be 35.3 million job openings by 2024 compared to 6.8 million today, mostly due to retirement. Combine that with an economy that’s expected to create 9.8 million additional job openings and a U.S. birthrate that is declining, it’s obvious that the U.S. economy will need more workers. If we don't have them, those jobs along with the economic benefits they would bring will go overseas and the US will go into economic decline.

The beliefs that more immigrants will mean more democrats, less jobs, and a shortage of workers is good for the economy is going to prevent any meaningful reform that would solve the worker shortage. In essence, the US is very likely to follow the same disastrous path Japan is following.

What we don't need is more illegal immigrants. This is one thing both republicans and democrats will be able to agree on. With less people attempting to cross the border and more security, illegal entry into the country will be a minor problem long before any wall gets build.

 

[kaz]

No, the system isn't--the Democrats are.

It's Democrats who fight for illegals to be here.
It's Democrats who fight to keep their sanctuary cities and now states.
It's Democrats who are fighting against the wall.
It's Democrats who allow them to have drivers licenses in their states so they can get to the jobs they're not supposed to have.

The system isn't the problem. Democrats are the problem.

It's republicans who gave us SImpson-Mazoli, the law that puts verification on the employer which is like letting the Foxes watch the henhouse.
It's republicans who own the companies that hire them.
It's Republicans who oppose a national ID system.
It's Republicans who have blocked immigration reform for over a decade.

And what is immigration reform? Making laws that benefit the foreigners and a disadvantage to Americans. Of course we're against that. In other words, amnesty. It didn't work in the past and it won't work today.

It's Republicans that own companies? To my knowledge, there are just as many if not more Democrats that own companies as Republicans: Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Cosco's, Starbucks, Martha Stewart just to name a few.

National ID? We used to use drivers licenses as ID's, and then the Democrats started giving them to foreigners and we don't know who is a citizen and who is not. National ID's............from the same group of people fighting against Voter-ID claiming it won't solve any problems and it won't work?????

You are a perfect example of the Party of Excuses.

We need immigration laws that are realistic based on what the nation needs and doesn't need.

First of all we need more people, not less. As a result of improved health care, our country is getting older. Ten thousand Baby Boomers are turning 65 every day. Many of them are retiring and leaving the workforce.

There will be 35.3 million job openings by 2024 compared to 6.8 million today, mostly due to retirement. Combine that with an economy that’s expected to create 9.8 million additional job openings and a U.S. birthrate that is declining, it’s obvious that the U.S. economy will need more workers. If we don't have them, those jobs along with the economic benefits they would bring will go overseas and the US will go into economic decline.

The beliefs that more immigrants will mean more democrats, less jobs, and a shortage of workers is good for the economy is going to prevent any meaningful reform that would solve the worker shortage. In essence, the US is very likely to follow the same disastrous path Japan is following.

What we don't need is more illegal immigrants. This is one thing both republicans and democrats will be able to agree on. With less people attempting to cross the border and more security, illegal entry into the country will be a minor problem long before any wall gets build.

We're talking about illegal aliens, not immigrants, you racist, race baiting dick head. What don't you grasp about that?

 

[Flopper]

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.​

First let's make it crystal clear that if you are refused entry at the border or are deported, if you are found within U.S. Borders again it is a felony.

Now let's talk about parenting.
I have always considered teaching right and wrong to a child is one of the main responsibilities of being a parent. If you are showing disdain for laws. Right or wrong only applies to others by your actions you are not much of a parent.
Some of these parents are traveling many miles with small children in dangerous conditions. Then they get to the desert southwest and attempt a crossing that kills on average 400 people a year. Does not say much for compassion of the parent. There are better ways then putting a child in such dangers.

There are people who kidnap a child to be sold, I would rather hundreds be inconvenienced then allow one child to spend their life in abuse.

Where was your voice when the last administration was doing the same thing? Where was your voice when Clinton signed the law that made this fiasco?

In short your faux outrage and pretend caring is reprehensible.

Families have been embarking on long dangerous journeys to America for hundreds of years. Only if they understand the journey is hopeless will they stop coming. As long as there is a chance, most of them will continue to come because they have nothing to lose by trying.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, the system isn't--the Democrats are.

It's Democrats who fight for illegals to be here.
It's Democrats who fight to keep their sanctuary cities and now states.
It's Democrats who are fighting against the wall.
It's Democrats who allow them to have drivers licenses in their states so they can get to the jobs they're not supposed to have.

The system isn't the problem. Democrats are the problem.

It's republicans who gave us SImpson-Mazoli, the law that puts verification on the employer which is like letting the Foxes watch the henhouse.
It's republicans who own the companies that hire them.
It's Republicans who oppose a national ID system.
It's Republicans who have blocked immigration reform for over a decade.

And what is immigration reform? Making laws that benefit the foreigners and a disadvantage to Americans. Of course we're against that. In other words, amnesty. It didn't work in the past and it won't work today.

It's Republicans that own companies? To my knowledge, there are just as many if not more Democrats that own companies as Republicans: Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Cosco's, Starbucks, Martha Stewart just to name a few.

National ID? We used to use drivers licenses as ID's, and then the Democrats started giving them to foreigners and we don't know who is a citizen and who is not. National ID's............from the same group of people fighting against Voter-ID claiming it won't solve any problems and it won't work?????

You are a perfect example of the Party of Excuses.

We need immigration laws that are realistic based on what the nation needs and doesn't need.

First of all we need more people, not less. As a result of improved health care, our country is getting older. Ten thousand Baby Boomers are turning 65 every day. Many of them are retiring and leaving the workforce.

There will be 35.3 million job openings by 2024 compared to 6.8 million today, mostly due to retirement. Combine that with an economy that’s expected to create 9.8 million additional job openings and a U.S. birthrate that is declining, it’s obvious that the U.S. economy will need more workers. If we don't have them, those jobs along with the economic benefits they would bring will go overseas and the US will go into economic decline.

The beliefs that more immigrants will mean more democrats, less jobs, and a shortage of workers is good for the economy is going to prevent any meaningful reform that would solve the worker shortage. In essence, the US is very likely to follow the same disastrous path Japan is following.

What we don't need is more illegal immigrants. This is one thing both republicans and democrats will be able to agree on. With less people attempting to cross the border and more security, illegal entry into the country will be a minor problem long before any wall gets build.

I simply can't follow your logic: we need more people because we have too many jobs for Americans to do. But if the jobs go somewhere else, we will go into economic decline???? Does anybody else here follow this logic because I can't.

You mean there is no middle ground? If some of the jobs go overseas, and then we have enough workers for the jobs available?

So if we need more people, then we increase our population to 400 million. Then after that, we will need more people so we increase it to 500 million, then 700 million. When does it stop?

It think 315 million people is too many already. Ever drive on the highway during the day? It's like rush hour half the time. I would like to see our population down to around 250 at most.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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.​

First let's make it crystal clear that if you are refused entry at the border or are deported, if you are found within U.S. Borders again it is a felony.

Now let's talk about parenting.
I have always considered teaching right and wrong to a child is one of the main responsibilities of being a parent. If you are showing disdain for laws. Right or wrong only applies to others by your actions you are not much of a parent.
Some of these parents are traveling many miles with small children in dangerous conditions. Then they get to the desert southwest and attempt a crossing that kills on average 400 people a year. Does not say much for compassion of the parent. There are better ways then putting a child in such dangers.

There are people who kidnap a child to be sold, I would rather hundreds be inconvenienced then allow one child to spend their life in abuse.

Where was your voice when the last administration was doing the same thing? Where was your voice when Clinton signed the law that made this fiasco?

In short your faux outrage and pretend caring is reprehensible.

Families have been embarking on long dangerous journeys to America for hundreds of years. Only if they understand the journey is hopeless will they stop coming. As long as there is a chance, most of them will continue to come because they have nothing to lose by trying.

Sure they will, because if there is a big wall to stop them, it makes no sense in coming here in the first place.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We are far too comfortable, seated in our overstuffed recliners, flipping the remote and passing judgement on people experiencing things that will never touch most of us.

That is correct, and it took us over 200 years to get it this way. We want to keep it that way too. Every generation of people worked hard and fought in wars to make it better for the next generation. But if Americans had someplace to run to when things got tough, we would never be the country we are today. We may be some third world crap hole like all the other countries.

It's up to the people of these countries to change their government, their environment, their politics. Your solution is to just let them keep breeding, and when they get sick of where they're at, come here claiming things are too crappy in their country.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

ng me greedy because you're stupid and know nothing about business. Wages are set by the market, not me. You don't grasp that if I don't pay market wages, I don't have employees. I don't even have a choice.

And if you overpay them, you won't be in business that long because your competitors will take all your customers due to higher prices you need for your products or services.

 

[Flopper]

No, the system isn't--the Democrats are.

It's Democrats who fight for illegals to be here.
It's Democrats who fight to keep their sanctuary cities and now states.
It's Democrats who are fighting against the wall.
It's Democrats who allow them to have drivers licenses in their states so they can get to the jobs they're not supposed to have.

The system isn't the problem. Democrats are the problem.

It's republicans who gave us SImpson-Mazoli, the law that puts verification on the employer which is like letting the Foxes watch the henhouse.
It's republicans who own the companies that hire them.
It's Republicans who oppose a national ID system.
It's Republicans who have blocked immigration reform for over a decade.

And what is immigration reform? Making laws that benefit the foreigners and a disadvantage to Americans. Of course we're against that. In other words, amnesty. It didn't work in the past and it won't work today.

It's Republicans that own companies? To my knowledge, there are just as many if not more Democrats that own companies as Republicans: Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Cosco's, Starbucks, Martha Stewart just to name a few.

National ID? We used to use drivers licenses as ID's, and then the Democrats started giving them to foreigners and we don't know who is a citizen and who is not. National ID's............from the same group of people fighting against Voter-ID claiming it won't solve any problems and it won't work?????

You are a perfect example of the Party of Excuses.

We need immigration laws that are realistic based on what the nation needs and doesn't need.

First of all we need more people, not less. As a result of improved health care, our country is getting older. Ten thousand Baby Boomers are turning 65 every day. Many of them are retiring and leaving the workforce.

There will be 35.3 million job openings by 2024 compared to 6.8 million today, mostly due to retirement. Combine that with an economy that’s expected to create 9.8 million additional job openings and a U.S. birthrate that is declining, it’s obvious that the U.S. economy will need more workers. If we don't have them, those jobs along with the economic benefits they would bring will go overseas and the US will go into economic decline.

The beliefs that more immigrants will mean more democrats, less jobs, and a shortage of workers is good for the economy is going to prevent any meaningful reform that would solve the worker shortage. In essence, the US is very likely to follow the same disastrous path Japan is following.

What we don't need is more illegal immigrants. This is one thing both republicans and democrats will be able to agree on. With less people attempting to cross the border and more security, illegal entry into the country will be a minor problem long before any wall gets build.

We're talking about illegal aliens, not immigrants, you racist, race baiting dick head. What don't you grasp about that?

You seem to have a problem understanding that our laws that regulated legal immigration are a primary cause of illegal immigration. Our immigration quotas push wait times to 10 years or more and for those that don't have a sponsor it's never. When there is no hope of legal entry, there no reason not to try illegally.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So rich white guys who break the law get commuted sentences and little kids crossing the border get throw into cages... yup, Welcome to Trump's America.

Trump's America? The MSM used pictures of kids in cages during the DumBama era. But we can't criticize a black guy, can we?

This guy isn't white, he's Jewish.

Everyone who died of a drug overdose took those drugs by their own choice. Can't get that worked up about it...

That wasn't the point. You're trying to change the point. DumBama let people who were selling drugs out of prison early, but for a guy that only hurt a bank, you want him in jail for over 25 years. That makes sense.

 

[kaz]

ng me greedy because you're stupid and know nothing about business. Wages are set by the market, not me. You don't grasp that if I don't pay market wages, I don't have employees. I don't even have a choice.

And if you overpay them, you won't be in business that long because your competitors will take all your customers due to higher prices you need for your products or services.

Yep. The ideal for an employee is if I overpay them but I don't overpay the other employees so I stay in business

 

[kaz]

No, the system isn't--the Democrats are.

It's Democrats who fight for illegals to be here.
It's Democrats who fight to keep their sanctuary cities and now states.
It's Democrats who are fighting against the wall.
It's Democrats who allow them to have drivers licenses in their states so they can get to the jobs they're not supposed to have.

The system isn't the problem. Democrats are the problem.

It's republicans who gave us SImpson-Mazoli, the law that puts verification on the employer which is like letting the Foxes watch the henhouse.
It's republicans who own the companies that hire them.
It's Republicans who oppose a national ID system.
It's Republicans who have blocked immigration reform for over a decade.

And what is immigration reform? Making laws that benefit the foreigners and a disadvantage to Americans. Of course we're against that. In other words, amnesty. It didn't work in the past and it won't work today.

It's Republicans that own companies? To my knowledge, there are just as many if not more Democrats that own companies as Republicans: Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Cosco's, Starbucks, Martha Stewart just to name a few.

National ID? We used to use drivers licenses as ID's, and then the Democrats started giving them to foreigners and we don't know who is a citizen and who is not. National ID's............from the same group of people fighting against Voter-ID claiming it won't solve any problems and it won't work?????

You are a perfect example of the Party of Excuses.

We need immigration laws that are realistic based on what the nation needs and doesn't need.

First of all we need more people, not less. As a result of improved health care, our country is getting older. Ten thousand Baby Boomers are turning 65 every day. Many of them are retiring and leaving the workforce.

There will be 35.3 million job openings by 2024 compared to 6.8 million today, mostly due to retirement. Combine that with an economy that’s expected to create 9.8 million additional job openings and a U.S. birthrate that is declining, it’s obvious that the U.S. economy will need more workers. If we don't have them, those jobs along with the economic benefits they would bring will go overseas and the US will go into economic decline.

The beliefs that more immigrants will mean more democrats, less jobs, and a shortage of workers is good for the economy is going to prevent any meaningful reform that would solve the worker shortage. In essence, the US is very likely to follow the same disastrous path Japan is following.

What we don't need is more illegal immigrants. This is one thing both republicans and democrats will be able to agree on. With less people attempting to cross the border and more security, illegal entry into the country will be a minor problem long before any wall gets build.

We're talking about illegal aliens, not immigrants, you racist, race baiting dick head. What don't you grasp about that?

You seem to have a problem understanding that our laws that regulated legal immigration are a primary cause of illegal immigration. Our immigration quotas push wait times to 10 years or more and for those that don't have a sponsor it's never. When there is no hope of legal entry, there no reason not to try illegally.

That's true, but not in the sense you mean it. We can't increase legal immigration because you insist on keeping illegal immigration fully ramped up because you correctly assume that's the way to maximize Democrat votes. We can't absorb more people because we're absorbing too many too fast already. If we could get illegal aliens entering the country under control, we could increase legal immigration.

BTW, your ass is white and I think you're a piece of garbage. I thought you kept saying my issue was race?

 

[AZGAL]

It doesn't take much brain power to realize that there is a tremendous financial strain that has been placed and continues to be placed on the average working class citizen of the United States by all this illegal immigration. It hits the nations working people in the pocketbook. That cost burden is placed on them/us without approval or consideration. What are we as a nation paying for in the amounts of millions and billions of dollars in order to accommodate illegal aliens?: WE in the USA are paying for: food, housing, utilities, transportation, workers at adult and child holding centers, teachers, lawyers, judges, border patrol, ICE, military and other airline flights to return people, border vehicles and gasoline, government agencies, communications with religious organizations that provide help and housing here, international efforts to help these people in their own countries, medical, etc, etc. There is a staggering cost to the Average citizen and the nation is recovering economically and has a debt. Blame the drug trade and weak ineffective governments. THANK ourselves for the generosity that kept millions of the world's children here through AMNESTY such as DACA, help for thousands of unaccompanied minors who came in gigantic waves surged here (spiked in 20140, all the volunteers from the United States from churches and social groups who give freely of their time and money to other countries in need. Stupid people are blaming a president now when the citizens of the USA have been giving and giving for years and also now. The children are NOT IN CAGES. What a lie. Some of the parents have abandoned their children here as in Venezuela because the refuse to keep them Sometimes it is a language barrier. Multi lingual citizens here should volunteer to be interpreters and help the parents who want to locate their children as soon as possible. The Democrats should encourage volunteering and stop tearing down our country and our president.

 

[AZGAL]

Despite separations, very few young children handed to Department of Health and Human Services

By Tal Kopan, CNN
Updated 3:43 PM ET, Fri June 22, 2018

Source: CNN
Washington (CNN)Though the potential separation of very young children from their parents as a result of the administration's "zero-tolerance" border policy has drawn concern across the country, new data released by the government show very few such children have been impacted.

As of this week, the Department of Health and Human Services had more than 11,600 migrant children in its care -- roughly 80% of whom are children who came to the US by themselves.
But of that total, a much smaller number were under the age of 13, or what is referred to as "tender age" children, and even fewer still were under five.
Since the initiative to prosecute all adults crossing the border illegally -- including those with children -- went into effect, only 36 children under age five have entered HHS care -- and not all of those were necessarily separated from adults with them because of the policy.

As a result of the zero-tolerance policy, parents were sent to the Department of Justice to face charges. As children can't follow their parents into jails, they were designated in the same way as unaccompanied migrant children, or those who come to the US by themselves, and thus turned over to the Department of Health and Human Services, which cares for such children.

Almost 80% of those children in the department's care were teenagers, according to the figures provided by a HHS spokesman. Out of the total population, 2,458 children under age 13 were in HHS custody, of which 482 were aged 5 years or younger.
But a much smaller number of those children would have come into HHS custody since May 6, when the prosecution policy was made public. While not all of these children may still be in HHS care, the agency received 1,045 children under the age of 13 years in that time frame. Of those, 36 were under the age of five and only three were under the age of 1 year old.
Customs and Border Protection has previously told CNN that it does not separate children under five from an adult except for a handful of circumstances, including concern for the child, an inability to verify guardianship or a criminal history of the parent.
There are also other circumstances that a young child may enter the country without an adult, such as a teenager bringing their younger sibling, or even their own child, that could account for some of the young children in HHS care.

 

[AZGAL]

Child Welfare Information Gateway

• Permanency for Specific Populations

Although many cases may share similar circumstances and practice issues, child welfare professionals should be aware of the unique issues they may encounter when working with specific populations. Understanding the cultures, life events, and issues that may affect these populations will assist professionals in better serving them and their families.

• Permanency for youth
• Permanency for children and youth from minority groups
• Permanency for children with disabilities
• Permanency for immigrant children and youth

 

[AZGAL]

Honduras: Refugees and internally displaced persons:
IDPs: 190,000

 

[Maxdeath]

Bu

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.​

First let's make it crystal clear that if you are refused entry at the border or are deported, if you are found within U.S. Borders again it is a felony.

Now let's talk about parenting.
I have always considered teaching right and wrong to a child is one of the main responsibilities of being a parent. If you are showing disdain for laws. Right or wrong only applies to others by your actions you are not much of a parent.
Some of these parents are traveling many miles with small children in dangerous conditions. Then they get to the desert southwest and attempt a crossing that kills on average 400 people a year. Does not say much for compassion of the parent. There are better ways then putting a child in such dangers.

There are people who kidnap a child to be sold, I would rather hundreds be inconvenienced then allow one child to spend their life in abuse.

Where was your voice when the last administration was doing the same thing? Where was your voice when Clinton signed the law that made this fiasco?

In short your faux outrage and pretend caring is reprehensible.

Many parents in this group of migrants are fleeing horrendous violence in Central America. But you seem to consider it child abuse for them to try and protect their children by fleeing with them. What good parent would leave their children at the mercy of those gangs? We are far too comfortable, seated in our overstuffed recliners, flipping the remote and passing judgement on people experiencing things that will never touch most of us.

But but but Clinton....but but Obama....”this fiasco” is the responsibility of one person, Trump, who CHOSE to innact a NEW zero tolerance policy, with zero prep, zero coordination, zero plans to track kids, zero plans to reunite them and vastly insufficient places to warehouse kids.

Agents have always separated kids when there is suspicion of trafficking, they aren’t stupid, they are trained to figure this out. No one has a problem with that. But you and I both know that this is not being done for that reason (direct from the mouths of Trump, Kelly and Sessions).

So forceably separating a child from his or her mother for months is now just an “inconvenience”....interesting take on the trauma it causes these children.

No...what is reprehensible is your cavelier attitude towards something you would never tolerate should it happen to your family.

Bu but nothing. Yes they may be fleeing bad conditions but that does not excuse anyone from doing it legally. Are you trying to say that you would be perfectly alright if they came here and started murdering just because of where they came from? No that is just backwards.

Let me see which would be better for a child? To stop at the border crossing station and ask for asylum or drag them across a desert for hundreds of miles? I would say that dragging them across a desert would be along the lines of child abuse. Unless you think torturing a child with bad weather, no water, and little or no food is acceptable. I would not put that past you.

I have no doubt that you would not mind a child suffering a life of abuse and neglect if you got your way with open borders.

As far as what I would tolerate. I would try to make things better. If that did not work I would attempt to make plans with a consulate to immigrate legally. If I could not do that I would stop at a border crossing station and cross there.
I fully believe that a country has a right to expect those entering their country to uphold their laws.

Put you don't want laws. Funny how people like you are confronted with facts they have no reply to always resort to but but to try and deflect.

Just once try using you mind instead of feelings.

 

[JoeB131]

I vote, government doesn't give a shit about me.

That's because you don't vote for anyone who is realistically going to be trusted with the levers of power. kind of like how we don't give 10 year olds the car keys...

Swish. No, we're the middle man. You want your salary in pay or benefits? I don't give a shit. I'm not the customer. I just pay market wages. If the workers want medical insurance rather than that amount of pay, that's fine. But it comes out of your wages. All of it, not just what you think you're paying for it. I pay market wages.

Well, actually, it all comes out of operating costs, but never mind. Bigger the company, less I have to pick up from my wages. I'm mean, I'm sure the shitball companies you ran into the ground before a mercy-buyout got the "If you lose an arm, we help you look for it" insurance. But companies I worked for offered real insurance for real professionals.

You keep calling me greedy because you're stupid and know nothing about business. Wages are set by the market, not me. You don't grasp that if I don't pay market wages, I don't have employees. I don't even have a choice. That makes me neither greedy nor generous. I pay them market wages, my customers pay market prices. If I don't match those up, I fail.

sounds like you fail a lot, given you are between businesses again... but never mind. The thing is, you pay people shitty wages and get shitty employees.

But, hey, if it weren't for shitty bosses like you, I wouldn't have a steady stream of resume customers.

 

[JoeB131]

It think 315 million people is too many already. Ever drive on the highway during the day? It's like rush hour half the time. I would like to see our population down to around 250 at most.

Well, no one is stopping you from offing yourself.

So your argument is we need to knock some people off because we didn't keep up the roads because we were too busy giving tax cuts to billionaires instead of investing in infrastructure like the rest of the world did.

Got it.

 

[Flopper]

It think 315 million people is too many already. Ever drive on the highway during the day? It's like rush hour half the time. I would like to see our population down to around 250 at most.

Well, no one is stopping you from offing yourself.

So your argument is we need to knock some people off because we didn't keep up the roads because we were too busy giving tax cuts to billionaires instead of investing in infrastructure like the rest of the world did.

Got it.

Well, be prepared for a 20% drop in GDP. The last time that happen was in the Great the Depression. Wouldn't be any need for that great beautiful wall, since nobody would be coming here.