Shutdown Over Border Security?

[Bill the Cat]

Where is your compassion? Violence drives immigration from Central America. It is an outdated notion that people from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras are primarily looking for economic opportunity in the US and, therefore, should wait in line for a visa. For people fleeing these countries, waiting for a visa can result in death, rape, or forcible recruitment into crime.

There are enough of them to do something about their own countries. Compassion does not suspend the law.

[Starlight]

Do you understand the first word of ILLEAL immigrant?

No, illeal is not a word I'm familiar with.

But I guess it answers my question: Your rantings were about illegal immigration. Ok, well at least now I understand the topic of the rant even if the rant itself was still stupid.

I don't support illegal immigration. Care to accuse me of something sane?

[Bill the Cat]

No, illeal is not a word I'm familiar with.

But I guess it answers my question: Your rantings were about illegal immigration. Ok, well at least now I understand the topic of the rant even if the rant itself was still stupid.

I don't support illegal immigration. Care to accuse me of something sane?

Please show where I said "Starlight supports illegal immigration".

[Starlight]

Please show where I said "Starlight supports illegal immigration".

Since I am a lefty I took this to include me...

And you idiot lefties fail to see that what you support is criminals. There is no compromise with lawlessness.

I welcome the statement "Starlight is NOT, I repeat, NOT, an 'idiot lefty'" if you wish to make it.

[Bill the Cat]

Since I am a lefty I took this to include me...
I welcome the statement "Starlight is NOT, I repeat, NOT, an 'idiot lefty'" if you wish to make it.

Ok, then I'll ask you directly. Do you support DACA?

[Starlight]

Ok, then I'll ask you directly. Do you support DACA?

It seems to have some pros and some cons, but overall I probably am more for it than against it.

To you, is support of DACA identical with support of illegal immigration? Do you not distinguish at all between wanting illegal immigration in general versus desiring humane treatment to those who were brought to the US as kids (thus without their informed consent) and who have grown up in the US knowing no other home?

[Bill the Cat]

It seems to have some pros and some cons, but overall I probably am more for it than against it.

To you, is support of DACA identical with support of illegal immigration? Do you not distinguish at all between wanting illegal immigration in general versus desiring humane treatment to those who were brought to the US as kids (thus without their informed consent) and who have grown up in the US knowing no other home?

If you are not here legally, you are here illegally. That's basic logic. Supporting DACA is supporting their illegal status. Regardless of the emotional charge, they are here illegally and should be sent back to their country of origin. If you support not enforcing the immigration laws as written, you are supporting criminal activity.

[Starlight]

Supporting DACA is supporting their illegal status.

? If politicians change the illegal status of someone into a legal status, that is not "supporting their illegal status" whatever that phrase is supposed to mean.

It's also quite normal to apply different laws to adults vs children, as children are not making informed actions, so often when a child does something we do not consider it a crime. It seems quite rational for politicians to thus declare that children who were brought to the US and did not themselves choose to break any law to come to the US, should not be deemed criminal/charged with that crime.

Regardless of the emotional charge, they are here illegally and should be sent back to their country of origin.

If they have grown up in the US, knowing no other country as their home, it seems rather unjust to be sending them to some other country which they may know nothing about and not speak the language of.

If you support not enforcing the immigration laws as written, you are supporting criminal activity.

But we are talking about changing the laws aren't we? If you change the law so something is not criminal, then it is not criminal. At the very least we are talking about official guidelines being issued with regard to enforcement policy, which is a fairly commonplace and accepted occurrence with regard to the enforcement of many and various laws.

And again, I don't understand your desire to conflate the promotion of future illegal border crossings (which I don't do) with concern for the humane treatment of and the possibility of leniency toward some of those who have already crossed the border (which I have).

[Tassman]

If you are not here legally, you are here illegally. That's basic logic. Supporting DACA is supporting their illegal status. Regardless of the emotional charge, they are here illegally and should be sent back to their country of origin. If you support not enforcing the immigration laws as written, you are supporting criminal activity.

You are too rigid in invoking the law and totally lacking in compassion... the United States recognizes the right of asylum for individuals as specified by international and federal law and this is currently being rendered unworkable by a hostile US government. Gang warfare and violence have transformed parts of Central America into some of the most dangerous places on earth. In recent years, El Salvador, Honduras and have experienced a dramatic escalation in organized crime by gangs. The victims and potential victims have a right according to international law to seek asylum.

[JimL]

You are too rigid in invoking the law and totally lacking in compassion...

Well, after all, BtC is a tweb christian. They are not much known for their compassion for strangers.

[Starlight]

the United States recognizes the right of asylum for individuals as specified by international and federal law and this is currently being rendered unworkable by a hostile US government.

Indeed, the Trump administration has reportedly closed or blocked the legal ports of entry, in order to illegal prevent people from requesting asylum. Trump should follow the immigration laws as written and not illegally prevent those asylum seekers applying for asylum.

Bill's complaint appears to be basically that some of us don't agree with him about the different extents to which different existing laws should be enforced.

[Tassman]

Indeed, the Trump administration has reportedly closed or blocked the legal ports of entry, in order to illegal prevent people from requesting asylum. Trump should follow the immigration laws as written and not illegally prevent those asylum seekers applying for asylum.

Bill's complaint appears to be basically that some of us don't agree with him about the different extents to which different existing laws should be enforced.

As usual Trump is playing to his racist base in keeping asylum-seekers out...all under the guise of their not following due process, whilst at the same time making "due-process" impossibly hard to observe.

[Bill the Cat]

? If politicians change the illegal status of someone into a legal status, that is not "supporting their illegal status" whatever that phrase is supposed to mean.

Not without changing the law. By pushing "delayed action", which basically means no action, they are acknowledging they are here under illegal circumstances, and remain so. This is supporting their status and not actually changing it.

It's also quite normal to apply different laws to adults vs children, as children are not making informed actions, so often when a child does something we do not consider it a crime. It seems quite rational for politicians to thus declare that children who were brought to the US and did not themselves choose to break any law to come to the US, should not be deemed criminal/charged with that crime.

Punitive action is applied differently in some cases, true. But in matters of trespassing, which is what they are essentially doing, they are always removed from the area they trespassed in.

If they have grown up in the US, knowing no other country as their home, it seems rather unjust to be sending them to some other country which they may know nothing about and not speak the language of.

That just means they avoided being caught. It's not unjust to send them back to their country of origin with their family. It's unjust to allow them to continue to knowingly break the law. It also sets a pretty bad precedent of disrespect for the law.

But we are talking about changing the laws aren't we?

Actually, no. You are talking about amnesty from the law. The law does not change for the actual incident, it's just not enforced on a particular group. Others that may later fit the criteria of that group, but were not committing the crime at the passing of the delayed action are still held guilty

If you change the law so something is not criminal, then it is not criminal. At the very least we are talking about official guidelines being issued with regard to enforcement policy, which is a fairly commonplace and accepted occurrence with regard to the enforcement of many and various laws.

That's exactly what we are talking about. Enforcement of existing laws. Not making new laws.

And again, I don't understand your desire to conflate the promotion of future illegal border crossings (which I don't do) with concern for the humane treatment of and the possibility of leniency toward some of those who have already crossed the border (which I have).

Wasn't me that conflated it. Jimmy did.

This is how stupid you are. The democrats reluctantly offered 25 billion for the stupid wall in exchange for DACA a while back ...

Jim made the connection as if DACA and the wall were somehow the same issue.

[Bill the Cat]

You are too rigid in invoking the law and totally lacking in compassion...

Oh horse pucky. Teaching respect for the law is compassionate.

the United States recognizes the right of asylum for individuals as specified by international and federal law and this is currently being rendered unworkable by a hostile US government.

Sorry Captain bait and switch... there is a process for asylum, and sneaking past the barbed wire fence in the middle of the night isn't it.

Gang warfare and violence have transformed parts of Central America into some of the most dangerous places on earth.

And there are tons of other places they could go, like Oz.

In recent years, El Salvador, Honduras and have experienced a dramatic escalation in organized crime by gangs. The victims and potential victims have a right according to international law to seek asylum.

And they are welcome to follow the process. But this isn't the process...

[Bill the Cat]

Well, after all, BtC is a tweb christian. They are not much known for their compassion for strangers.

And you libtards are only known for your "compassion" for future voters. Just like the pimps you are.