Liberty4all
Banned
Perhaps a bad example on my part. What I was trying to point out is that laws have consequences. Be it a ticket for speeding, jail time for robbing a bank, or deportation for immigrating illegally.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
CNN: Undocumented Immigrant is Being Deported 5 Minutes After Being Told She Can Stay
- Thread starter Empyrean Heaven
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps a bad example on my part. What I was trying to point out is that laws have consequences. Be it a ticket for speeding, jail time for robbing a bank, or deportation for immigrating illegally.
metalslimer
Member
Sorry niggers the law is the law no equal access for you.
Seems about right since there are always the same people concerned about laws and not the consequence
Seems about right since there are always the same people concerned about laws and not the consequence
Frozenprince
Banned
Seriously. This is a stupidly easy concept to grasp I don't get why it's a struggle.
GrizzleBoy
Banned
Criminal law is not immigration law. Immigration law is not criminal law.
People taken into detention centres after being to be undocumented are not criminals. Dont confuse the two.
The argument here is actually, is enforcing immigration law to the detriment of innocent American children a proportional and reasonable punishment?
I say no.
You say yes.
Until I ask you why you think the children are acceptable collateral.
Then you say you're not a fan of that and the law should be looked at.
But only after casually suggesting the innocent children also suffer the same effective deportation if they want to be around their mother.
After I point that little inconsistency out, you're back to, "but the mother did something, so fuck the kids. Consequences, sorry."
Should we fuck American citizens who had no choice in the matter and are an innocent party?
You say yes. I say no.
Liberty4all
Banned
The fact that it's illegal IS substantive. In my opinion and many others of course.
That's the crux of the issue is it not?
Look I don't want to get accused of thread derailing. But if you want something other than an echo chamber, allow for dissenting points of view -- immigration is a massively polarizing topic. I have said my piece, to at least put out "the other sides" point of view. I'm willing to debate further over PM (or further in this thread if the mods permit). and I mean that sincerely.
cartographer
Member
LEOs are expected to make judgment calls every day regarding what laws are worth enforcing and when they are worth enforcing because law is often flawed or outdated. This concept is also carried over into sentencing, plea deals etc.
"The law is the law" is a pretty warped view of reality.
Nobody goes after all undocumented immigrants except racists. It's simply too irrational and too much of a waste of time to do so.
"The law is the law" is a pretty warped view of reality.
Nobody goes after all undocumented immigrants except racists. It's simply too irrational and too much of a waste of time to do so.
That's their fetish.
Frozenprince
Banned
Ah this old gem. As if I'm incapable of knowing anything and my view is wrong because it's an echo chamber. I'm so intellectually stunted that I can't tell up from down and all that.
It's illegality played no part in her and hundreds of thousands who report to ICE just like she did every year. It's arbitrary and random. It's nonsensical, and cruel. If you can admit that because you have to tow your sides line then, maybe you're the one with the issue with visibility.
You're point of view is vacuous because you're lying to us about any kind of good faith debate or discussion. You're just championing your cause and belief structure without any room or cause for self reflection or wiggle room on any issue because "I believe what I believe".
metalslimer
Member
It's also strange that she Canadian seems so worried about our issues
FF Seraphim
Member
Did I read this correctly, Immigration Offices found out about here status in 2005 and she has been going to the building twice a year since then?
Was something preventing her from getting a green card? I am so confused...
Was something preventing her from getting a green card? I am so confused...
Frozenprince
Banned
It's a fairly common occurrence for undocumented immigrants. It's to assess, basically, if you're allowed to stay and continue to petition for a green card or visa or other form of residency. Most people are indefinitely.
FF Seraphim
Member
Holy shit so they jerked her around for 12 years? The hell.
Liberty4all
Banned
I have family in the US
And I have family in Nigeria. Doesn't mean I presume to act as if my view points are more valid than theirs.
Liberty4all
Banned
I agree with that sentiment. Either they should enforce the law or the law should be changed. It's a political hot potato with enforcement depending on which party is in charge,
cartographer
Member
One guess as to what changed.
These check-ins aren't ideal at all, but they've often been a way to do less damage than deportation when deportation isn't necessary.
GrizzleBoy
Banned
That's not even entirely true.
He came I to this thread saying:" I understand this is a tragedy, but law is law".
Asked about why he feels it's acceptable to punish the kids, he then said he actually thinks the law affecting innocent kids should be looked at and that he's not a fan of that.
He suggested that if you don't like parts of law, that you should vote against those who impose them, make phone calls, be an activist etc. That's why he supports Trump.....And Bannon......Wait....
Which is why he came into this thread saying "hey! We need to look into this law as it's affecting her innocent kids!"..........Oh wait, no he was just happy that a strong message is being put out......Kids be damned....But wait I thought he doesn't want the kids affected?
But only after just a couple posts earlier showing that in truth doesn't give a damn about the kids by suggesting that the innocent American kids also leave with the mother.
When that was pointed out, he forgot that he didn't agree with the part where the law punishes innocent American kids and went right back into "law is law".
Look at all the holes. Not only in his argument, but also his perception of right and wrong.
He doesn't want families torn apart and thinks political activism is the way to prevent that, but given the chance he'd vote in someone who would implement exactly the things he says we need to have a look at stopping.
There is no stable argument. There is no argument. There is no base. There is no sense.
I disagree with the kids being affected, we should look into that. I'm happy that this sends a strong message though. The woman. Broke immigration law. This is a reasonable consequence. Hmm but the kids though.....Maybe we shouldn't fuck them over too just for one lady? BUT THE LAE IS THE LAW......Maybe the kids can just leave America too? But I'm against innocent kids being affected! But the law is the law!
There IS no argument. There IS no point here. Its.........What is it? What can you even call that?
It's just crazy....Isnt it?
LookAtMeGo
Member
No story here folks.
GrizzleBoy
Banned
So you also think her innocent American kids who had no choice on the matter being punished is a reasonable and proportional reaction to her contravention of I'm.igration law?
Why?
Replace the word "deported" with "beaten/killed". Replace the phrase "was here illegally" with "did steal that loaf of bread" and we start to understand why breaking a law does not automatically validate the harshest punishment and that proportional ity always matters.
Liberty4all
Banned
Really? Look I haven't attacked anyone here personally, simply presenting the "other" side of this argument.
A. I think there should be consequences to the mother for breaking US Immigration law
B. I do not think undocumented immigrants who were brought in at an early age should be deported - they had no choice in the matter. I hope the law is changed around this matter. The children in this topic are US Citizens.
C. I believe that any citizen that feels a law is unjust should fight to change laws they do not believe in via connecting with the political system
D. I made it clear I personally believe in rule of law - even those laws i disagree with.
E. I do not want to be accused of thread derailment, but felt I needed to present the "other" point of view. Willing to continue discussion via PM so thread does not derail (or here if mod says ok)
The real victim here is Trump.
Who even gives a fuck about those people? No story here.
openrob
Member
So people here agree that she did break the law?
Discussion about if the decision was proportionate for the contravention (or even a discussion about the dynamics of free movement or immigration) is different to repeating that this is an evil action against an innocent woman.
Honestly I think it's shit for her, but what did she expect? She probably expected that she deserved to stay. But that was her not decision to make.
P.s. the reason I call it anti trump rhetoric is because people were deported for staying illegally for years before, in every country. However it feels like the style and vibe of the article is propaganda against trump, and trump supporters. Trump does not need propaganda to make himself look bad.
However, reactionary responses to headlines with little substance, in my experience, is what people hate about right wing voters.
LookAtMeGo
Member
GrizzleBoy
Banned
As far as I can tell our thoughts about i.migration law are quite relevant to this public topic. I would like the option of input from more than just yourself. It's why I post on this public forum.
To be honest though, I feel I've gained enough from our discussion and I don't need to summarise what's been said as I can read it all again for myself.
You propose to be against the affects of devastation tearing a mother from five kids will do, but only after first stating how happy you are that this harsh implementation is actually a good way to deter others and you support those who would implement that same harshness you feel is wrong and should be changed.
You know political action is the way to change that which you believe is wrong, but you would happily vote for those who would do what you believe is wrong as long as the end result is to your satisfaction.
It's in your own posts.
What you're completely missing, is that not a single person in this thread has failed to acknowledge her contravention of an immigration law.
The point is whether a punishment for immigration law should also adversely affect innocent American citizens and whether punishment for a mother should include American children as collateral.
Especially after giving someone a year to sort themselves and their paperwork out, then immediately ejecting them from the country.
If someone argues that "law is law, oh well", I'm going to suggest that the law is shit or not implemented well if it harms more Americans than the foreigners that it punishes.
rokkerkory
Member
I dont know who's affecting the country more... her or a presidency who lies, evades taxes and supports a russian dictator.
Least100Seraphs
Neo Member
I must admit, I'm not very well educated on the Mexican and US political systems, so I thought I'd just ask here, apologies if it derails the conversation.
It seems the suggestion offered here is "if you don't agree with a law, vote for change."
Why didn't undocumented immigrants vote for the right to vote?
I mean, that's how women and African-Americans got the right to vote, yeah? By voting?
It seems the suggestion offered here is "if you don't agree with a law, vote for change."
Why didn't undocumented immigrants vote for the right to vote?
I mean, that's how women and African-Americans got the right to vote, yeah? By voting?
This is such a hot topic issue ... I can only point to an issue in India which had some Chinese soldier cross over during our war in 1962 had to live in India til I believe this year before we both countries could allow him to travel back cause he was in a strange limbo of being Chinese while having settled here and family and children here.
Now I will say a few things
1) immigration laws should be enforced similar to the same strictness as other laws . Yes it is unfair to ppl trying to enter legally when someone can enter illegally avoid prosecution for ages and then it's the entrenched argument
2) the entrenched argument does have merit and so the laws should be looked at again with provisions made for such cases
3) almost every country has a strict immigration policy if you're gonna go down the rabbit hole of help others not nationals you're opening up a whole can of worms and I feel many ppl haven't thought this thru on why borders exist and why immigration not us specific but in general is highly controlled . Ideally I'm for a complete meritocracy with no borders but were ages away from that situation .plus even a full on meritocracy has flaws eg Silicon Valley diversity issues etc
Now I will say a few things
1) immigration laws should be enforced similar to the same strictness as other laws . Yes it is unfair to ppl trying to enter legally when someone can enter illegally avoid prosecution for ages and then it's the entrenched argument
2) the entrenched argument does have merit and so the laws should be looked at again with provisions made for such cases
3) almost every country has a strict immigration policy if you're gonna go down the rabbit hole of help others not nationals you're opening up a whole can of worms and I feel many ppl haven't thought this thru on why borders exist and why immigration not us specific but in general is highly controlled . Ideally I'm for a complete meritocracy with no borders but were ages away from that situation .plus even a full on meritocracy has flaws eg Silicon Valley diversity issues etc
Non citizens don't have a right to vote , as an indian I can't vote to make America do anything and I'm here legally as a visa holder ... Not a citizen big difference . Un itself is non binding... We don't have a global unified structure we have some norms and agreements but there is nothing stopping any country from saying fuck you to any other country or non citizens ... Technically there isn't anything stopping a country to stop it saying fuck you to it's own citizens (eg coups in less democratic countries) but in general the norm as of today is developed democracies put a high premium on citizens . A secondary premium on non citizens . How close those two are depends from country to country and administration to administration .
Bottom line we are a not a global humanity nation and quite frankly are quite far from it currently .
Edit women and African Americans got it by protests discussions civil rights movements over ages ... But they had one thing going for them which undocumented immigrants don't . They were essentially born in the country they were fighting for rights within.
Liberty4all
Banned
To be fair I'm human too. I can recognize that breaking a family up, half of which are Americans, or forcing the American children to move to Mexico to be with their mother ... it's a very sad story. One completely avoidable if the mother had not broken US law to begin with.
You are also right in that I believe harsh imposition of immigration laws discourages others from breaking it. Illegal Immigration this month is down by 40%:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ercent-in-trumps-first-month-report-says.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39215655
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/10/jorge-ramos-trump-effect-driving-down-illegal-immi/
They are calling it "The Trump Effect"
Finally I did say that I think the laws should be looked at around citizenship fo children that arrive here undocumented at a young age as they had no choice in the matter.
That is not the case with these children, they are American. Their mother is not. She broke the law immigrating illegally and is now facing the personal consequences of that. I guess you are right that her children will feel those consequences too. Just like any children would have some blowout if their parents were incarcerated for breaking a law or in this case deported for breaking immigration law.
jakonovski
Member
1. Make country such a shithole that nobody wants to come there anymore.
2. ???
3. Profit!
andythinkpad
Member
I seem to remember this was a Viking tactic.
SolarMystic
Member
Deport Trump. Deport ICE.
Leave their families here in America so they can feel the pain and loss. Let them feel what these poor families feel that they have no empathy for.
Leave their families here in America so they can feel the pain and loss. Let them feel what these poor families feel that they have no empathy for.
I find it sad that people are cheering these specific cases. Nobody should cheer on the suffering these families are going through no matter your personal political leanings.
Then again, I also understand there is a need for some form of immigration law and enforce of that law as we do not have the resources to allow everybody to come here at will. Comprehensive immigration reform with at least a path to legalization for most people here illegally would be great, but that never will happen at this point.
Of course like everything else in our current political climate, it's one extreme or the other. Either you cheer mass deportations or you are against any and all deportations short of removing violent criminals. The middle ground doesn't even exist.
Then again, I also understand there is a need for some form of immigration law and enforce of that law as we do not have the resources to allow everybody to come here at will. Comprehensive immigration reform with at least a path to legalization for most people here illegally would be great, but that never will happen at this point.
Of course like everything else in our current political climate, it's one extreme or the other. Either you cheer mass deportations or you are against any and all deportations short of removing violent criminals. The middle ground doesn't even exist.
Liberty4all
Banned
Just noticed your post commedieu, I missed it earlier.
You make some good points. I will think about it.
EdibleKnife
Member
What exactly has the "Trump Effect" solved for America? I doubt this woman spent 18 years in the states sitting on her ass. She's worked hard alongside her husband to support their family. Now that financial and emotional pillar has been stripped away for what? So again, how has this law made the US better? Because on a macro perspective, it's only made the lives of families like this one significantly worse.
And please don't reply with something akin to "law is the law". The law didn't exist before and the family seemed to live fantastically normally here and now that it does they've been completely fractured. So why should a law so damaging be created, supported or continue to exist?
SolarMystic
Member
You probably would have been real fun at parties in 1776. Or pretty much any time before the end of the civil war.
So were you that guy hanging out at women's rights protests with a sign that said "Women can't vote, it's the law"?
Dreams-Visions
Member
I mean...it's not like he would have been alone. This is just how some people make sense of the world. A failure to understand proportionality as a guideline to living. Incapable of nuance, to a fault.
So yes, I'm pretty sure he is the type that would have said "the law is the law" in gay rights conversations before the LGBT community got some rights of their own...the guy not supporting voting rights for people of color and women...the guy trying to stop them from tossing tea off the boats and into the water.
Some people have a really hard time with the fact that law is organic. Ever changing. Its truth defined by the generation that enforces it, its details and application a function of what is needed for the greater good, not some cold, callous place where some objective truth always exists.
He will either lean that there is something he really doesn't know and begin to grow out of this very embryonic and sophomoric understanding, or he will forever allow himself to be "that guy" who lives in the same company and classification as those people usually on the wrong side of history described above. I wish him the best but I also know better than to expect that light to turn on. Gotta admit you might not be right first.
This is truer more than ever now Trump is in play.
Trump doesn't give a shit about rationality, the Law, or having a reasonable debate and finding a middle ground. He will bend, obfuscate and write EO's around the laws he doesn't like, and then say 'the Law is the Law' to stuff he does like.
This is why this whole thing smacks of bullshit
Liberty4all
Banned
Is that your answer, an ad hominem attack? Don't agree with us so you must be a racist/sexist/mysoginist/homophobic/etc? Saying I disagree with illegal immigration is none of those things as much as you and a couple others are trying to insinuate it is.
The problem with saying the law is organic is that there are two very diseperate political factions in the States interpreting that law. Which is why I'm glad the US Supreme Court got a great SC Justice in the same vein as Scalia who believes in originalism, particularly when it comes to the Constitution.
jakonovski
Member
If you appeal to the law regarding one thing you must be able to do so on all things governed by law. Or you're in fact not appealing to the law but using it as cover for the true motivation.
If it's any consolation Bamelin, I respect you for staying reasonable in the thread in light of everyone invariably gravitating to pile on your views.
Stepping away from this case in particular, Illegal immigration is a problem. And equally large sections of the left have a fundamental problem addressing issues without automatically waving the racist/sexist/mysoginist/homophobic/etc cards, however justified they may be in a percentage of cases.
Trump exploited this unwillingness to address sensitive issues and is one of the reasons we are where we are. He's disgusting and abhorrent and he played on the years of people being handwaved away with such labels for merely saying anything about immigration.
To paraphrase badly from the Dark Knight, they pushed the public to a man they didn't fully understand.
This case and this woman though, Jesus Christ.
GrizzleBoy
Banned
Nobody in this thread "agrees" with illegal immigration, but they DO care about the treatment of undocumented immigrants and their American families.
And yes, based on your "law is law" comment, you put yourself on the side of people 2ho would've been on the wrong side of history on a shit tonne of issues.
Not directly, but you're the guy who's have said "well he should've sat at the back of the bus", "she should've k own her place", "he shouldn't have loved another man", "he should've stopped resisting", while watching your fellow humans persecuted.
Because "law is law".
Youre certainly not on the side of protesting those things with your viewpoint. You're on the side of continuing status quo. Especially if your support of the status quo is in your words "the other side of the argument".
But you know, when you post things like:
Despite all the evidence that he likely has a preference or two.....along with using a supposed racial bias against yourself in Toronto to explain away your support for Steve Bannon, it just makes me think a little bit.
Liberty4all
Banned
Actually, I would have been the guy trying to get into office to bring change to the law using a textualist point of view. I believe in equal treatment under the law for all individuals, citizens or non.
With that said, the law is clear on unlawful entry and unlawful presence in the US. It's not even a criminal case in the case of unlawful presence it's civil -- with one of the main penalties being deportation. The law never really changed around this, it just hasn't been enforced until recently.
Then I'm sure you support and are anxious for Trump to see the consequences for laws he and his cronies have broken already and any future ones to come to light. We can expect to see you in those threads happy to see justice being done and laws being enforced, right?
pillowtalk
Member
I'd like to know if there are even legal immigrants being granted permanent residency at all right now. If yes, then how much compared to previous years. I also wonder what the conversion rate of resident legal immigrants to become US citizens in the last two months compared to the past.
chromatic9
Member
Having a two year check in over a period of 11-12 years and letting someone establish themselves with more children is the fault of the US and you have to concede and grant them stay.
If a country wants to start getting tough going forward then fine.
If a country wants to start getting tough going forward then fine.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked