"Family values" in today's United States...

[desol]

What happened to my thread?  :-[

I was refering to the current  policy of taking very young children away from their parents, putting them in separate facilities often hundreds of miles apart without means of communication in order to deter immigrants from coming to the US.

Does anybody here think this is acceptable?

I couldn't watch the video. It took too long to download. Would need to know more info. Can only take your word that that is indeed what is happening.

 

[Gustav]

All I know is the law is the law...

In 39 Stalin held a speech in the politbureau. The content of the speech is not essential for this story, but in the middle of the speech, one of the listeners got up and said "that is appalling! We cannot abide by such policies without abandoning our moral compass!!"

Immediately, a second listener got up and interrupting him, saying "what are you doing, are you crazy? We are not allowed to interrupt or criticise comrade Stalin!!!"

The second guy was taken out back - and shot.

1- If there was a wall or secure border fence this girl would still be alive, somewhere else.
2- If mexico didn't give migrants free passage through their country this girl would still be alive somewhere else.
3-If she entered the country legally she would still be alive.
4- etc, etc

5. If she hadn't been shot in the head, she would still be alive

Gustav

 

[desol]

Either way shooting people is bad...so insinuating that I should be shot for following the law, is just as bad as John suggesting that someone could be shot for not.

In that Stalin example; the person that stood up against corruption, is a leading example of how things get changed in places that need changing. .

 

[Gustav]

Either way shooting people is bad...so insinuating that I should be shot for following the law, is just as bad as John suggesting that someone could be shot for not.

In that Stalin example; the person that stood up against corruption, is a leading example of how things get changed in places that need changing. .

I am sorry - I did not mean to insinuate you should be shot for following the law.

Exposing Stalin's policies as immoral is a politbureaucratical faux pas (first guy) but exposing the unsaid premise, that Stalin's laws cannot be challenged, even if one finds them immoral, is so perverse, that the guy who makes the perversion explicit has to be silenced, even though he is defending it.

Gustav

 

[JohnRoberts]

Either way shooting people is bad...so insinuating that I should be shot for following the law, is just as bad as John suggesting that someone could be shot for not.

John did not suggest that. 

I clearly stated that she would "not" have been shot if she followed the law, and if we had a secure border.  She shares a large share of the blame for this unfortunate incident, as do many who failed to secure the border, reform immigration, and even pacify central/south america.

Lots of blame to go around before we pile onto a border guard who was rushed by a crowd who refused to follow his instructions. 

In that Stalin example; the person that stood up against corruption, is a leading example of how things get changed in places that need changing. .

There are many ways to foment change, apparently the modern way is sharing inflammatory videos presented without context to promote an agenda. Immigration politics in the US is tangled up with both sides unwilling to resolve the key issues for different reasons.

Even the democrats have started saying drain the swamp as a 2018 talking point. If they start saying "make america great again" I'm looking for the candid cameras.  8)

JR

 

[desol]

I clearly stated that she would "not" have been shot if she followed the law...
JR

Isn't that the same thing as saying someone could for not?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Isn't that the same thing as saying someone could for not?

Being killed by gunfire just for crossing our border is a very low probability event****. The rareness of the killing from use of force by a border agent is why it is newsworthy.

The border guards are not armed so they can randomly shoot illegal immigrants, they are armed so they can protect themselves. There are lots of armed coyotes and drug trafficking occurring across that border, while not as much as there was in the past. From the records as many border agents die from car crashes (33)  as gun fire (32), but enough that they are armed for self defense. Only 4 reported border guard deaths on our northern border with canada, but none this century. 

People are not routinely shot for crossing the border, but disobeying commands and charging an armed border guard is never a good plan, anytime or anywhere. I have been stopped by police more times than I can count, I never once disobeyed their instructions, or gave them reason to fear for their lives. That is just common sense.

There is no excuse for death from all the sundry causes around the southern border. We need to secure the border and deal with the underlying causes for illegal migration.

JR

**** over the decades many thousands have died attempting to cross the border. There is no strict record keeping but a leading cause of death is exposure (hyperthermia). Then drowning (like in the rio grande). Then auto accidents. While this sounds like a bad mexican joke, one chevy suburban had 21 immigrants packed in like cordwood that lost control after running a border spike strip. Close to one hundred were killed in san diego county crossing the freeway on foot in the 80s. If you've ever driven on the 405 down south (I have)  you see the warning signs cautioning about migrants crossing the roadway. Border patrol use of force is on the list but nowhere near the top. Speaking of bodies, some poor small border towns on the American side are stuck with hundreds of unidentified human remains to deal with.

 

[desol]

So, it is the same.  8)

 

[cyrano]

Does anyone really believe amigration from the south to the north will be stopped by any measure?

A 2 year old girl was killed by accident by a Belgian police officer a few days ago. Hey'll have to cope with it for the rest of his life. The van the girl was in with her parents was fleeing from a police pursuit. There wasn't even a border involved.

Is risking lives worth pursuing an overloaded worn-out van, presumably driven by a criminal?

The people in the van are victims of exploitation. They had been pulled from refrigerated lorries before and sent back to Germany, or wherever they came from. Yet they chose to pay these criminals again. And again. Why?

The lesser evil?

Nothing has ever stopped migration. And it certainly will not end now, since the south is getting more dangerous, hotter and poorer every day.

 

[JohnRoberts]

So, it is the same.  8)

no... not remotely equivalent.

The likelihood of her being shot by the border guard if she obeyed the law and wasn't even there is far far lower than her likelihood of being shot for breaking any law.

Of course the likelihood of being shot if you charge an armed border agent while disregarding his commands to stop increases exponentially, irrespective of any law(s) being broken.

Her being shot involves two parts. First entering the country illegally putting herself in a dangerous circumstance, then more importantly behaving in such a way that the border guard felt threatened.

I repeat this is an unfortunate incident for all involved, and so far the discussion does not seem focussed on solutions, if we can't agree on the causal factors.

Being in the wrong place, doing the wrong thing...

JR

 

[tands]

..running from danger to safety.

 

[JohnRoberts]

What happened to my thread?  :-[

this is the internet so it's like herding cats...

I was refering to the current  policy of taking very young children away from their parents, putting them in separate facilities often hundreds of miles apart without means of communication in order to deter immigrants from coming to the US.

I didn't watch your original link, I get enough venom on social media.  I responded to other written comments and conflated the "family" policy you are upset about with the recent shooting.

Does anybody here think this is acceptable?

Apparently it is the law and will likely be challenged in court, and can be changed by congress that wrote the laws.

On the surface it seems logical that no, it is not OK to break up families, but there are snakes in the wood pile gaming the "family unit" angle to couple unattended illegal immigrant minors with single illegal immigrant adults, to get better treatment for both (but mostly to benefit the single young adult illegals). FWIW I can't find any real numbers about this that I would trust. This has been drawn into the team politics hyperbole.

Just arbitrarily breaking everybody up is a blunt instrument remedy and to return to my one note song that even I am tired of by now, this does not happen to people who don't enter the country illegally. Until we address the underlying problem there will be many of these unintended consequences. 

Too many swamp dwellers OK with the immigration status quo to fix anything. 

JR

 

[desol]

I don't know why people don't get this? I think it's because of the recent immigration blowup with trump, and the fact that trump is more or less a butthead....all of a sudden people figure this means, that it's just ok to break the law?

NO!? That's not what it means at all?

The law and trump are two separate issues...altogether. The law remains firmly in place!

 

[pucho812]

This is not about immigration,  but a good read.

https://amgreatness.com/2018/05/30/dear-ex-friends-in-the-resistance/

 

[JohnRoberts]

I don't know why people don't get this? I think it's because of the recent immigration blowup with trump, and the fact that trump is more or less a butthead....all of a sudden people figure this means, that it's just ok to break the law?

NO!? That's not what it means at all?

The law and trump are two separate issues...altogether. The law remains firmly in place!

For some reason your quotes do not attribute who you are responding to, so when quoted it looks like you said it. 

(illegal) Immigration has been a contentious hot button "team politics" issue for decades.  It was even "reformed" (cough) once before, but they never finished all the deliverables like securing the border, and blocking illegal employment, leading to new waves of illegal immigrants expecting a similar amnesty as the last group, and likely to get one.

This is an old issue but president Trump is not afraid to tackle hot button issues, for better and worse, so now he is the lightning rod for criticism.

JR
 

 

[desol]

I don't understand John...said what? I don't always feel the need to have to quote people when making responses(as in right now), when the point seems clear enough globally throughout a thread.  General statements are fair enough for me, when I don't want to quote somebody.

@pucho

Trump is not a 'good person', that much is clear...regardless of whether he's pragmatic in terms business/money. Those two things are two separate issues as well, that a lot of people seem to get confused.

He isn't fit for the position, and no one in the global, political community takes him seriously. Imo, they're all simply biding their time. I'm hoping the US can produce something a lot better next time around. At least someone that is educated.

He is tough about dollars and cents tho, which may be something the US needs right now. He could be screwing everybody over as well. Tough to say with him; his lot.

 

[Matador]

I clearly stated that she would "not" have been shot if she followed the law, and if we had a secure border.  She shares a large share of the blame for this unfortunate incident, as do many who failed to secure the border, reform immigration, and even pacify central/south america.

This is starting to sound dangerously close to, 'Well, she WAS wearing a skimpy outfit, and what self-respecting girl would have been in THAT part of town late at night?"  I think that, despite not 'following the law', that approaching a border should not be a death sentence.  This isn't supposed to be East Berlin in the 1980's.

this does not happen to people who don't enter the country illegally.

I think there are a large number of African American CITIZENS who would disagree that only illegal immigrants are shot by the government under dubious justifications.

Trump is a lightning rod for criticism because of his actual stances on immigrants.  I would link in the quotes about "they aren't sending their best", to "sh*thole countries", to "those animals", and how Haitian immigrants "all have AIDS", etc, etc, etc, but you get the point.  Trump is 'tackling immigration' in the exact same way that Rosanne is 'tackling race relations'.

 

[desol]

Like I said, in order for me to understand what's going on, I need to know the facts at hand. I don't know anything about it. I couldn't watch the video, because it was too slow to download. I like videos that stream/buffer after a few seconds...not five minutes. I'm busy, moving about, doing things, etc....not a lot of time to sit and wait, and wait....and wait.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Like I said, in order for me to understand what's going on, I need to know the facts at hand. I don't know anything about it. I couldn't watch the video, because it was too slow to download. I like videos that stream/buffer after a few seconds...not five minutes. I'm busy, moving about, doing things, etc....not a lot of time to sit and wait, and wait....and wait.

By law DHS must protect the interests of children. It is not always apparent that someone traveling with them and claiming to be a parent, actually is without documentation.

The ACLU is suing DHS over this so the legal basis is being tested.

JR

 

[desol]

Hmph. Interesting.

It isn't always apparent that people are who they say they are. In fact, people lie all the time, in order to configure certain means.

No quote again!  8)