• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Uh...what the F**K is going on with border patrol?

Sàmban

Banned
Feb 21, 2014
811
302
0
I've been following a few stories on twitter and border prosecutions of immigrants are turning into a giant clusterfuck. It seems like pretty much everyone is being dehumanized and treated like a criminal and quite a few suffering people seeking asylum are being caught in the crossfire. Families are being split up and the parents don't know what the fuck is going on with their children.

For example, this man got separated from his SICK 18 MONTH OLD CHILD FOR 3 MONTHS AND THEN SENT HOME ALONE...WHAT THE FUCK
He had mortgaged his land in Guatemala to fund his sick toddler’s hospital stay, and needed to work in the United States to pay off the loan. Instead agents imprisoned the 28-year-old in July for coming back into the country after having been deported, a felony. They placed the toddler in a federal shelter, though where, Pastor didn’t know. Three months later, in October, the father was deported — alone. His child, he said agents told him, was “somewhere in Texas.” “I cried. I begged,” he said. “No one could tell me anything.”
You really have to read the whole thing. It is just...unbelievably fucked up.

We're also now having some illegal immigrants wear yellow armbands for identification. Because that doesn't have disturbing historical precedents.

Keep in mind that it was reported last month that HHS lost track of 1500 immigrant children and some of them ended up in the hands of child traffickers. Who knows what will happen to these children separated from their parents?

This has the potential to turn into a disaster. I haven't been watching the news lately so I don't know if it is being covered.

EDIT: to clarify, these families are not being torn apart to protect the children from irresponsible parents. This is being done ON PURPOSE as punishment to serve as a deterrent.

Here is John Kelly calling the practice a “necessary evil” that hopefully won’t be practiced for too long.
 
Last edited:

Dice

Member
Jun 6, 2004
35,533
1,254
2,015
Yeah. It’s clear that to authorities they have become just a problem to experiment new methods on instead of people.
 

cyclone88

Neo Member
Feb 16, 2018
14
9
110
Republicans stop caring about children after they're born as seen by their constant cuts to education and child services. Now think about how they feel about immigrants' children.
 

RubxQub

φίλω ἐξεχέγλουτον καί ψευδολόγον οὖκ εἰπόν
Dec 15, 2006
23,428
523
1,280
The fucked up thing about that story about the guy from Guatemala is that they didn’t just deport his kid with him or give him a way to get back his son.

...but at the same token, if he was deported once and then came back anyways and had to be deported again, he’s knowingly tempting fate that he’s going to get caught and something bad will happen.

Of course not saying that the guy shouldn’t have access to his kid or something sick like that...but come on man.

I’m sure there are a lot of heartbreaking stories of people trying to beat the system and get into the US and experiencing hardship as a result, but anyone attempting to enter the country illegally aren’t exactly setting them self up for a good time if caught.

I don't really have an answer on what to do, but I hope that guy can get back his child.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
The fucked up thing about that story about the guy from Guatemala is that they didn’t just deport his kid with him or give him a way to get back his son.

...but at the same token, if he was deported once and then came back anyways and had to be deported again, he’s knowingly tempting fate that he’s going to get caught and something bad will happen.

Of course not saying that the guy shouldn’t have access to his kid or something sick like that...but come on man.

I’m sure there are a lot of heartbreaking stories of people trying to beat the system and get into the US and experiencing hardship as a result, but anyone attempting to enter the country illegally aren’t exactly setting them self up for a good time if caught.

I don't really have an answer on what to do, but I hope that guy can get back his child.

There is no justification for this. I don't care if the dude tried to get into the country a dozen times, that's no excuse to take his child and lose them.
 
Last edited:

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
What kind of condition is the child in during crossing? In Norway, depending on it, they might've just taken the kid as well if it's viewed as endangering the child. I've always heard of it being dangerous, so if so, then it might've been justified.

The general problem is the whole system, immigration and border. Either you need to scrap it completely and just leave it open or you need something that totally shuts down any hope by crossing illegally, which really doesn't need to be a physical wall at all, but rather political measures in regards to consequences for the illegal alien and those employing them. The current system is wingling on whether you have democrats or republicans in power.
 
Last edited:

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
What kind of condition is the child in during crossing? In Norway, depending on it, they might've just taken the kid as well if it's viewed as endangering the child. I've always heard of it being dangerous, so if so, then it might've been justified.

The general problem is the whole system, immigration and border. Either you need to scrap it completely and just leave it open or you need something that totally shuts down any hope by crossing illegally, which really doesn't need to be a physical wall at all, but rather political measures in regards to consequences for the illegal alien and those employing them. The current system is wingling on whether you have democrats or republicans in power.

Yeah because a kid being separated from their family and then lost really is the better situation
 

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
Yeah because a kid being separated from their family and then lost really is the better situation

If their parents put them in danger, sure, it's a better situation in the view of a lot of western countries that become more progressive. That they're lost would be a problem with the foster system and things like that. Though I assume many would disagree, as a lot of people have in regards to child services in Norway, like how people from Poland have a great dislike for the norwegian child care services.
Let's say the child died during reentry, what then? Who would be to blame? It's quite a difficult thing, that's become more relevant in secular, progressive societies, as the biological connection is viewed with lesser importance than previously. It's equally "what about the children?" from both sides in the debate, arguing on what causes the worst consequences for a child.
As someone who has also been involved with the child care services as a child and scarred from that, I lean on the the child getting back to his parents as best unless clear signs of abuse or neglect, but there's a debate on this issue in Norway and what it means to be a responsible. For a young child things like this runs the danger of developing reactive attachment disorder, so I'm at least hoping that'll be avoided, as I've worked with kids with it and it's pretty tough and heartbreaking.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
If their parents put them in danger, sure, it's a better situation in the view of a lot of western countries that become more progressive. That they're lost would be a problem with the foster system and things like that. Though I assume many would disagree, as a lot of people have in regards to child services in Norway, like how people from Poland have a great dislike for the norwegian child care services.
Let's say the child died during reentry, what then? Who would be to blame? It's quite a difficult thing, that's become more relevant in secular, progressive societies, as the biological connection is viewed with lesser importance than previously. It's equally "what about the children?" from both sides in the debate, arguing on what causes the worst consequences for a child.
As someone who has also been involved with the child care services as a child and scarred from that, I lean on the the child getting back to his parents as best unless clear signs of abuse or neglect, but there's a debate on this issue in Norway and what it means to be a responsible. For a young child things like this runs the danger of developing reactive attachment disorder, so I'm at least hoping that'll be avoided, as I've worked with kids with it and it's pretty tough and heartbreaking.

They took people's kids and lost them, some of them may have even been turned over to human traffickers going by some reports. There is no need to spin this as somehow a possibly good thing or shift the blame to social services.

Trying to make this the fault of the parents, thousands of them, is ludicrous to me.
 
Last edited:

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
They took people's kids and lost them, some of them may have even been turned over to human traffickers going by some reports. There is no need to spin this as somehow a possibly good thing or shift the blame to social services.

Trying to make this the fault of the parents, thousands of them, is ludicrous to me.

If kids are lost in the foster system, then the foster system is at fault, which would be the social services. That's how it works, once you take someone kids away and put them away, you have two parts, the social services and the foster parents. Social services choose foster parents, so if they're choosing lightly, then it indeed is their fault and the foster parents.

It might seem ludicrous to you, but I'm discussing the actual issue, which should be something to reflect on. I understand the emotional appeal, as a parent and someone who was lucky to eventually to get back from foster care in the end, but one needs to consider the system, how it works, the various responsibilities and the ethical forefront and changes that might be looming in the future. As Norway is a pretty progressive country, it's a good sign of where things might lead.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
If kids are lost in the foster system, then the foster system is at fault, which would be the social services. That's how it works, once you take someone kids away and put them away, you have two parts, the social services and the foster parents. Social services choose foster parents, so if they're choosing lightly, then it indeed is their fault and the foster parents.

It might seem ludicrous to you, but I'm discussing the actual issue, which should be something to reflect on. I understand the emotional appeal, as a parent and someone who was lucky to eventually to get back from foster care in the end, but one needs to consider the system, how it works, the various responsibilities and the ethical forefront and changes that might be looming in the future. As Norway is a pretty progressive country, it's a good sign of where things might lead.

The kids wouldn't be in the foster system if their family wasn't ripped apart in the first place. Why are we even talking about social services and not why are ICE and border agents ripping children away from their families.
 
Last edited:

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
What victim? The one braking the law intentionally or the one breaking the law intentionally?

What victims? The children being taken from their families and then lost. Did you even bother to check what thread you're posting in?
 
Last edited:

Musky_Cheese

Banned
Oct 23, 2016
9,431
20,786
1,185
What victims? The children being taken from their families and then lost. Did you even bother to check what thread you're posting in?
It is a shame these parents are putting their children in danger and forcing them to partake in illegal activities.

I do agree they shouldn’t break up families. I feel bad for the children. I can’t imagine how scary it is for them. Unfortunately they can’t control what’s happening to them. They had no say in any of this from the start.
 

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
The kids wouldn't be in the foster system if their family wasn't ripped apart in the first place.

But they might've been ripped apart for the potential child endangerment that border crossing entails. That does indeed make merits for taking the child away, depending on how you weigh various aspects of a case. Again, it's something that's at the forefront of discussion and has caused a lot of heat from more conservative countries for countries like Norway, with how there's a pressure for biology and the family unite being less and less important than safety and a good environment to grow up in.
It's necessary to split what's two different cases, one is the case of splitting up a family, the other is the case of how things are handled once in the foster system.
A better question is the legality of splitting up the kids from the parents in the US, in handling this topic, if it's not on legal ground, then legal actions as to be taken and hold government accountable, but if it's on legal grounds, then you can't try to make something like border crossers some special class exempt from the child care system.

Anyway, the case here is in fact not child endangerment, although there's merits to discuss carrying babies across borders in the heat, in the desert, with potential armed guards, as child endangerment. It's the fact that it's a measure to stop human trafficking and the man was unable to prove he was the father, leading them to be separated and treated individually. This means it's a problem with the system and how it's set up. An option would be a paternity/maternity test in those cases, allowing these problems to not happen.
 
Last edited:

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
But they might've been ripped apart for the potential child endangerment that border crossing entails. That does indeed make merits for taking the child away, depending on how you weigh various aspects of a case. Again, it's something that's at the forefront of discussion and has caused a lot of heat from more conservative countries for countries like Norway, with how there's a pressure for biology and the family unite being less and less important than safety and a good environment to grow up in.
It's necessary to split what's two different cases, one is the case of splitting up a family, the other is the case of how things are handled once in the foster system.
A better question is the legality of splitting up the kids from the parents in the US, in handling this topic, if it's not on legal ground, then legal actions as to be taken and hold government accountable, but if it's on legal grounds, then you can't try to make something like border crossers some special class exempt from the child care system.

Anyway, the case here is in fact not child endangerment, although there's merits to discuss carrying babies across borders in the heat, in the desert, with potential armed guards, as child endangerment. It's the fact that it's a measure to stop human trafficking and the man was unable to prove he was the father, leading them to be separated and treated individually. This means it's a problem with the system and how it's set up. An option would be a paternity/maternity test in those cases, allowing these problems to not happen.

Who are ICE or border agents to even be making these decisions in the first place? You are so caught up on these unrelated talk of child social services you're ignoring the elephant in the room. These kids shouldn't even be introduced to the system at all and sent back with their parents.
 
Last edited:

Sàmban

Banned
Feb 21, 2014
811
302
0
So people doing illegal things are getting screwed over by people doing illegal things?
TrainedRage TrainedRage look, I think we can agree that people shouldn’t be crossing the border illegally and they deserve some form of punishment. But if you read the articles instead of just trying to make a shitty hot-take, you’ll see that there’s much more happening.

There are people seeking asylum showing up to the border and asking authorities for help and getting treated like criminals.

These families are getting ripped apart ON PURPOSE AS A DETERRENT. They don’t know where their kids are. That is inhumane punishment.

Liberal or conservative, we have to avoid crossing certain lines. This barbaric shit is not ok
 

Sàmban

Banned
Feb 21, 2014
811
302
0
But they might've been ripped apart for the potential child endangerment that border crossing entails. That does indeed make merits for taking the child away, depending on how you weigh various aspects of a case. Again, it's something that's at the forefront of discussion and has caused a lot of heat from more conservative countries for countries like Norway, with how there's a pressure for biology and the family unite being less and less important than safety and a good environment to grow up in.
It's necessary to split what's two different cases, one is the case of splitting up a family, the other is the case of how things are handled once in the foster system.
A better question is the legality of splitting up the kids from the parents in the US, in handling this topic, if it's not on legal ground, then legal actions as to be taken and hold government accountable, but if it's on legal grounds, then you can't try to make something like border crossers some special class exempt from the child care system.

Anyway, the case here is in fact not child endangerment, although there's merits to discuss carrying babies across borders in the heat, in the desert, with potential armed guards, as child endangerment. It's the fact that it's a measure to stop human trafficking and the man was unable to prove he was the father, leading them to be separated and treated individually. This means it's a problem with the system and how it's set up. An option would be a paternity/maternity test in those cases, allowing these problems to not happen.
Uhh, these families are being ripped apart as a deterrent, not for their protection. That is the actual policy. I should have emphasized that in the OP. That’s what makes it so fucked up.
 
Last edited:

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
Uhh, these families are being ripped apart as a deterrent, not for their protection. That is the actual policy. I should have emphasized that in the OP. That’s what makes it so fucked up.

In the first article it mentions splitting them up as connected to anti-trafficking measures. A man crossing a border with a baby is definitely suspicious.

Last July, Border Patrol agents found the father holding his baby in the New Mexican desert north of El Paso, and discovered his old deportation. He had no other criminal history beyond two tickets for driving without a license, according to their records.

[...]

Border Patrol agents said in their report that they removed the toddler because Pastor couldn’t prove he was the father. The agency has said such separations are often necessary to determine adults are not trafficking the children and lying about their relationship.

The problem is in regard to reunification, as said:
"Advocates say no systematic policies exist to ensure families don’t lose each other after the separation. U.S. Rep. Filemón Vela, a Texas Democrat, echoed those concerns at the congressional hearing.

“I worry that there are no reliable mechanisms in place,” he said."

It's clearly a systematic problem.
 
Last edited:

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
In the first article it mentions splitting them up as connected to anti-trafficking measures. A man crossing a border with a baby is definitely suspicious.



The problem is in regard to reunification, as said:


It's clearly a systematic problem.

ICE is part of the system causing these things.
 
Last edited:

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
ICE is part of the system causing these things.

That's not really an argument against either of those things. "X is a part of the system causing Z" doesn't really say a whole lot. There's a clear systematic problem with reunification and getting parentage verified. That's the responsibility of the US, of course, and needs to be dealt with.
There's besides this a big problem with some parents doing stupid things like thinking human trafficking isn't a concern and crossing borders without proof that you're the parent of someone you bring along and also, imo, doing something ridiculous like dragging a baby across the desert to pay off your debt faster by working in the US.
 
Last edited:

TrainedRage

Banned
Feb 3, 2018
9,302
14,339
1,080
35
USA
What victims? The children being taken from their families and then lost. Did you even bother to check what thread you're posting in?
So its just the kids being lost that's important to you? Yes the kids are victims of their own dumb as rocks parents who put them in that position. Whats so hard to understand? Be a good parent. Don't commit federal felonies. Then this wont be an issue. I wouldn't risk that with my child. Ever.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
That's not really an argument against either of those things. "X is a part of the system causing Z" doesn't really say a whole lot. There's a clear systematic problem with reunification and getting parentage verified. That's the responsibility of the US, of course, and needs to be dealt with.
There's besides this a big problem with some parents doing stupid things like thinking human trafficking isn't a concern and crossing borders without proof that you're the parent of someone you bring along and also, imo, doing something ridiculous like dragging a baby across the desert to pay off your debt faster by working in the US.

Yeah people with little to nothing sneaking into the US really should have proper paper work. Brilliant.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
So its just the kids being lost that's important to you? Yes the kids are victims of their own dumb as rocks parents who put them in that position. Whats so hard to understand? Be a good parent. Don't commit federal felonies. Then this wont be an issue. I wouldn't risk that with my child. Ever.

Them trying to get into the US for a better chance is exactly what they're attempting to do.
 

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
Yeah people with little to nothing sneaking into the US really should have proper paper work. Brilliant.

Yes, they should. Otherwise they're being reckless.
You have no right to entry into another country. The danger of doing so with a baby with you as well, it goes directly into your responsibility as a parent.
 

TrainedRage

Banned
Feb 3, 2018
9,302
14,339
1,080
35
USA
Them trying to get into the US for a better chance is exactly what they're attempting to do.
So you would risk putting your child in this situation? LOL no dude. Dont be dense. These people have options.
I cant just commit felonies and run around 'blaming the system' for my failures as a parent. Crossing the border is EXTREMELY dangerous. These dumb fucks are putting there kids right in the middle of that and they are ok doing it. That's as disgusting as the people separating/losing these kids.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
Yes, they should. Otherwise they're being reckless.
You have no right to entry into another country. The danger of doing so with a baby with you as well, it goes directly into your responsibility as a parent.

You realize how dumb it sounds asking the destitute and deprived to have proper paperwork right? Do you go around asking homeless people where their birth certificates are to make sure they can get into the shelter?

So you would risk putting your child in this situation? LOL no dude. Dont be dense. These people have options.
I cant just commit felonies and run around 'blaming the system' for my failures as a parent. Crossing the border is EXTREMELY dangerous. These dumb fucks are putting there kids right in the middle of that and they are ok doing it. That's as disgusting as the people separating/losing these kids.

These people aren't trying to get into the USA because their original situation was so damn good. They're not risking their lives or their families for no good reason. They might be doing something illegal but that doesn't make them deserving of this treatment.

And yes if my country and living situation was that terrible with no hope for improvement I would most certainly cross illegally if it meant a chance to better their lives.
 
Last edited:

TrainedRage

Banned
Feb 3, 2018
9,302
14,339
1,080
35
USA
You realize how dumb it sounds asking the destitute and deprived to have proper paperwork right? Do you go around asking homeless people where their birth certificates are to make sure they can get into the shelter?



These people aren't trying to get into the USA because their original situation was so damn good. They're not risking their lives or their families for no good reason. They might be doing something illegal but that doesn't make them deserving of this treatment.

And yes if my country and living situation was that terrible with no hope for improvement I would most certainly cross illegally if it meant a chance to better their lives.
Wow, you would put YOUR children in this situation? Why do you think these people are coming to America and not going to Mexico or S. America?
 

Sàmban

Banned
Feb 21, 2014
811
302
0
Yes, they should. Otherwise they're being reckless.
You have no right to entry into another country. The danger of doing so with a baby with you as well, it goes directly into your responsibility as a parent.
While I agree with this in theory, let’s not forget the practical reality of some dude who is probably not all that knowledgeable on the subject trying to get into the US so that he can have a job to save his baby.

Applying rules like mindless automatons can have disastrous results on human life and I think that is part of the problem here.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
Wow, you would put YOUR children in this situation? Why do you think these people are coming to America and not going to Mexico or S. America?

Where do you think these people are coming from? They're not flying down from Canada to Mexico to cross the Southern border.
 

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
You realize how dumb it sounds asking the destitute and deprived to have proper paperwork right? Do you go around asking homeless people where their birth certificates are to make sure they can get into the shelter?

Searching for a better life is understandable, but again, laws are still laws, whether you're poor or not. More so, whether your poor or not, endangering children isn't excusible just because you want a better life. You are still an individual responsible for your decisions.
If you don't have the paperwork, from the position of the other country, you can just as well have kidnapped the kid. So, necessarily, either birth certificate (most countries in the west have these) or a paternity test needs to be done, to ensure that the government isn't abetting in it. Being careless and uninformed isn't an excuse for doing something illegal. At best it might be milding circumstances.

If people want free movement of people, then they should vote for free movement of people, not try to emotionally appeal that a system should treat poor people as exempt from responsibility for themselves and others in their care . Or for economic co-operation and policies to help people in other countries. The state still has to uphold its rules and its concept of border (if they want to have one). It's really easy to think it's kind to treat people as being without agency, but it really isn't.
 

ssolitare

Manbaby: The Member
Jan 12, 2009
17,096
2,008
1,180
Watch the video that I posted. Ya'll are talking about responsibility, paperwork, and illegality, you're off topic.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Banned
Apr 21, 2012
23,121
18,227
1,335
Brampton, Ontario
Immigration is a tricky subject because I feel like there are times it can be justified but also not justified.

Like look at North Korea & South Korea. The border is militarized to hell yet North Koreans still cross anyway because they know all the propaganda is a lie and South Korea is a better country worth dying for.

On the other hand, if we let just anyone cross borders openly, you're inviting gangs and people who abuse the welfare system inside which just causes havoc for the host nation.

It's a tough situation but I feel like here in the West, it's impossible to be ok with illegal immigrants while having a welfare system. Get rid of that, and I really wouldn't care who makes the bold risk to hop the border and live here.
 
Last edited:

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
Searching for a better life is understandable, but again, laws are still laws, whether you're poor or not. More so, whether your poor or not, endangering children isn't excusible just because you want a better life. You are still an individual responsible for your decisions.
If you don't have the paperwork, from the position of the other country, you can just as well have kidnapped the kid. So, necessarily, either birth certificate (most countries in the west have these) or a paternity test needs to be done, to ensure that the government isn't abetting in it. Being careless and uninformed isn't an excuse for doing something illegal. At best it might be milding circumstances.

If people want free movement of people, then they should vote for free movement of people, not try to emotionally appeal that a system should treat poor people as exempt from responsibility for themselves and others in their care . Or for economic co-operation and policies to help people in other countries. The state still has to uphold its rules and its concept of border (if they want to have one). It's really easy to think it's kind to treat people as being without agency, but it really isn't.

So it's a rule to rip families apart at the border and then lose the children? You can't prop the system up when it's dropping the ball this hard.
 
Last edited:

Sàmban

Banned
Feb 21, 2014
811
302
0
Searching for a better life is understandable, but again, laws are still laws, whether you're poor or not. More so, whether your poor or not, endangering children isn't excusible just because you want a better life. You are still an individual responsible for your decisions.
If you don't have the paperwork, from the position of the other country, you can just as well have kidnapped the kid. So, necessarily, either birth certificate (most countries in the west have these) or a paternity test needs to be done, to ensure that the government isn't abetting in it. Being careless and uninformed isn't an excuse for doing something illegal. At best it might be milding circumstances.

If people want free movement of people, then they should vote for free movement of people, not try to emotionally appeal that a system should treat poor people as exempt from responsibility for themselves and others in their care . Or for economic co-operation and policies to help people in other countries. The state still has to uphold its rules and its concept of border (if they want to have one). It's really easy to think it's kind to treat people as being without agency, but it really isn't.
I understand your pragmatism, but you are missing the point I think. I don’t disagree that there shouldn’t be some form of punishment here; my argument is that separating families AS A DETERRENT is inhumane.

I know you’ve tried to address that point above by claiming that it is for the children’s protection, but that is NOT the case.

Here is John Kelly explicitly saying that it is a deterrent and a necessary evil that hopefully won’t be used for too long:

The language he uses here (I.e. calling it a necessary evil) directly implies that this is being purposefully done to punish them. You can’t argue against that; it’s pretty clear he knows this is fucked up. If it was for the children’s protection, you bet he would spin it a different way (I.e. they are irresponsible and we are saving their kids).

That’s fucked up. We can find another way than ripping families apart.
 
Last edited:

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
Watch the video that I posted. Ya'll are talking about responsibility, paperwork, and illegality, you're off topic.

That video doesn't really add much (and it's very deceptive, if you read the sources). More so, it's MSNBC. Could've just as well posted Fox News .
The administration have indeed chosen to be tough on the border, by prosecution the crime of illegally entering the US. That's what's happening amongst many different things (like the case discussed above), which leads to prosecution, which means that their kids have to be elsewhere in the meanwhile. The problem after that is the responsibility of the federal government and the institutions they put them into care in, if they are lost. Just like it would be in the case of an american. Then you have a further problem with reunification.

As mentioned in the same interview they based their quote on, prosecution and what it entails, is viewed as a tough deterrent, allowing for a faster turnaround on asylum seekers.

Again, if something is done illegally, then a legal case has to be started, if not, then you'll have to change the laws.
 

KINGMOKU

Member
May 16, 2005
8,387
7,538
1,710
So it's a rule to rip families apart at the border and then lose the children? You can't prop the system up when it's dropping the ball this hard.
Losing the child is a bad situation but this whole ordeal would have been avoided by not doing what he did the first time.

If you knowingly break the law(in this case he got booted the first time, and then came back)you may suffer the consequences.

This could have been avoided if he came across legally the first time. Laws are laws. This has nothing to do with propping up the system, or tearing it down because someone broke the law your attempting to turn it into that when its a whole lot simpler;

Don't break the law. If you do, there will be consequences.

Its so very simple.
 

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
I understand your pragmatism, but you are missing the point I think. I don’t disagree that there shouldn’t be some form of punishment here; my argument is that separating families AS A DETERRENT is inhumane.

I know you’ve tried to address that point above by claiming that it is for the children’s protection, but that is NOT the case.

Here is John Kelly explicitly saying that it is a deterrent and a necessary evil that hopefully won’t be used for too long:

The language he uses here directly implies that this is being purposefully done to punish them.

That’s fucked up. We can find another way than ripping families apart.


Here's the actual interview and not a secondary source:
https://www.npr.org/2018/05/11/6101...chief-of-staff-john-kellys-interview-with-npr
They're paraphrasing him there btw.

He says that it's being done, because it's a crime and its deterrent effect. It's their choice to enforce, that's right, but if they're prosecuting them, it's the natural consequence and it depends on there being grounds for it. It's easy to appeal to "but the children", but in this case there is merits in the position from the perspective of the current administration. Sure, it's shitty, but again, it's because we have borders and the concept of control over borders within a country.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
That video doesn't really add much (and it's very deceptive, if you read the sources). More so, it's MSNBC. Could've just as well posted Fox News .
The administration have indeed chosen to be tough on the border, by prosecution the crime of illegally entering the US. That's what's happening amongst many different things (like the case discussed above), which leads to prosecution, which means that their kids have to be elsewhere in the meanwhile. The problem after that is the responsibility of the federal government and the institutions they put them into care in, if they are lost. Just like it would be in the case of an american. Then you have a further problem with reunification.

As mentioned in the same interview they based their quote on, prosecution and what it entails, is viewed as a tough deterrent, allowing for a faster turnaround on asylum seekers.

Again, if something is done illegally, then a legal case has to be started, if not, then you'll have to change the laws.

Maybe we should start killing them all as a deterrent if you're already cool with this. Why half ass the evil? If it's so bad then someone will just start a legal case about it.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
Losing the child is a bad situation but this whole ordeal would have been avoided by not doing what he did the first time.

If you knowingly break the law(in this case he got booted the first time, and then came back)you may suffer the consequences.

This could have been avoided if he came across legally the first time. Laws are laws. This has nothing to do with propping up the system, or tearing it down because someone broke the law your attempting to turn it into that when its a whole lot simpler;

Don't break the law. If you do, there will be consequences.

Its so very simple.

It's almost like we are supposed to have rules about unfair punishments. Unless of course losing a child forever is a fair punishment for crossing the border in your eyes.
 

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,587
3,073
635
Norway
Maybe we should start killing them all as a deterrent if you're already cool with this. Why half ass the evil? If it's so bad then someone will just start a legal case about it.

"half ass the evil".
"If we do x, then why not just go all the way and do y?"
Because they're prosecuting a crime, not trying to protect a border from a military attack.
Again, if there's something wrong with your laws, then the best choice is to change them.

Laws are what protect your property rights, otherwise there are moral justifications to why people should just loot you, because they're doing worse and you're part of the system making them live like it. There's even merits to a discussion of this. We also call the result of competition, a necessary evil at times, or we justify and say that we earned it and they didn't. It's an interesting topic, both morally and politically, I might even do a topic on it later.
 
Last edited:

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Nov 23, 2015
31,114
138
475
New Jersey
"half ass the evil".
"If we do x, then why not just go all the way and do y?"
Because they're prosecuting a crime, not trying to protect a border from a military attack.
Again, if there's something wrong with your laws, then the best choice is to change them.

Hey they're just deterring people from the border like you said. Maybe some water boarding to make sure they think twice about coming back.