Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-16-2018, 12:45 PM
Channing Idaho Banks's Avatar
Channing Idaho Banks Channing Idaho Banks is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: beautiful Idaho
Posts: 2,567
Separating immigrants from their children is child abuse.

This is a dastardly deed that Trump and Sessions have planned. it seems to me that they are doing this in order to force the Democrats to vote for their stupid border wall which nobody wants. I also think that they are using this as an opportunity to indoctrinate the immigrants to our country instead of allowing them to just come here and roam free.

This isn't something that our country should be involved in. How low will we go?
  #2  
Old 06-16-2018, 12:57 PM
Siam Sam Siam Sam is offline
Elephant Whisperer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 40,053
And on top of it all, they're claiming this is a law forced through by the Democrats, so their hands are tied. If anyone had any doubts left about the inherent evil of these two, of the Republican Party or even your average Republican voter, this should erase it.
__________________
Everything happens for a reason. But sometimes the reason is you are stupid and make bad decisions.
  #3  
Old 06-16-2018, 01:01 PM
Channing Idaho Banks's Avatar
Channing Idaho Banks Channing Idaho Banks is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: beautiful Idaho
Posts: 2,567
I realize that this subject isn't really debatable and it's more just a rant so feel free to transfer to the pit so people can cuss.
  #4  
Old 06-16-2018, 02:20 PM
OldGuy OldGuy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Very east of Foggybog, WI
Posts: 5,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siam Sam View Post
And on top of it all, they're claiming this is a law forced through by the Democrats, so their hands are tied. If anyone had any doubts left about the inherent evil of these two, of the Republican Party or even your average Republican voter, this should erase it.
I may be wrong, but as I recall, Republicans control both houses of Congress and the Presidency. If there really is a law causing problems, they could change it.
  #5  
Old 06-16-2018, 02:36 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGuy View Post
I may be wrong, but as I recall, Republicans control both houses of Congress and the Presidency. If there really is a law causing problems, they could change it.
Yeah, but what they'll do is load a bunch of other crap in like $25B for the border fence.
  #6  
Old 06-16-2018, 02:53 PM
kanicbird kanicbird is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 18,944
Figuratively Trump would hold your own children under water till you agreed with him and gave him what he wants, and meanwhile lie and blame you for your child drowning and also his wet shoes and suit, which he will hold over you as his normal way of negotiating. He is self justified in his actions. In truth he would get one of his subordinates to do so, but the effect would be the same. He is a very evil man who has hurt a lot of people.
  #7  
Old 06-16-2018, 03:11 PM
OldGuy OldGuy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Very east of Foggybog, WI
Posts: 5,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Yeah, but what they'll do is load a bunch of other crap in like $25B for the border fence.
I know that Trump has great** respect for the law and understand he feels trapped, but it's hard to complain about a law you have the power to change and are not even trying to as far as I can see.

**typo for no
  #8  
Old 06-16-2018, 03:13 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGuy View Post
I know that Trump has great** respect for the law and understand he feels trapped, but it's hard to complain about a law you have the power to change and are not even trying to as far as I can see.

**typo for no
It's also a law that the Justice Dept has the discretion to enforce or not. This business about hands being tied is pure BS.
  #9  
Old 06-16-2018, 03:30 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,037
Obligatory cartoon:

https://fair.org/home/anti-trump-car...-post-gazette/

Obligatory also in the sense that the cartoonist was censored first for that and other anti-Trump cartoons. And then dismissed by the paper.


Also reprehensible was Sessions trying to hide behind religion:

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order,” he said.

Only that Romans 13 has a history all right, a history of being used by slavers to justify slavery in America and to discredit the American revolution too as it was used to defend the "divine rule of kings" then. And just like now, guys like Sessions likes to ignore what the rest of the bible says about foreigners in need.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ans-13/562916/
Quote:
Where does Jeff Sessions fit in this brief history of Romans 13? Sessions, like so many other Americans throughout history, thinks he has the Bible on his side. The verses Sessions chose to cite, and the interpretation that he has given them, is part of the broader Trump administration strategy of playing to the fears and identities of American evangelicals, who have been bringing Romans 13 back into public discourse since the rise of law-and-order politics and the Christian Right. But the Bible is a text less often read than read into. As many of his “church friends” persist in pointing out, Sessions did not cite the verse later in Romans 13 where Paul writes that God’s laws “are summed up in this word, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself,’” with the word “neighbour” echoing both parable of the Good Samaritan and the countless verses in the Law and the Prophets on treating the stranger and the immigrant with mercy. Sessions may claim the Bible’s contested authority, but what the attorney general actually has on his side is the thread of American history that justifies oppression and domination in the name of law and order.
“As for the foreigner who does not belong to your people Israel but has come from a distant land because of your name— for they will hear of your great name and your mighty hand and your outstretched arm—when they come and pray toward this temple, then hear from heaven, your dwelling place. Do whatever the foreigner asks of you, so that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your own people Israel, and may know that this house I have built bears your Name." (1 Kings 8:41-44)
  #10  
Old 06-16-2018, 03:46 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 24,626
Usually politicians seek political advantage from the extreme protection of children. The effort to derive political advantage from the wanton abuse of children is a refreshing change.
  #11  
Old 06-16-2018, 03:56 PM
China Guy China Guy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGuy View Post
I may be wrong, but as I recall, Republicans control both houses of Congress and the Presidency. If there really is a law causing problems, they could change it.
Ahhhh, but Trump and Republicans now admit that without 60 guaranteed votes in the Senate, then they "don't" have a majority. Pot, kettle, black
  #12  
Old 06-16-2018, 04:02 PM
Chisquirrel Chisquirrel is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Yeah, but what they'll do is load a bunch of other crap in like $25B for the border fence.
Paul Ryan already put together a bill that includes funding for the wall, eliminates tearing children from their families, fixes DACA, and cuts down on legal migration (because that's a brillliant way to stop illegal immigration, letmetellya). Other Republicans are dragging their feet, saying the issue "needs more study" on border security and such. As support for the bill doesn't satisfy the Pedophile Hastert Rule, Republicans won't bring it to the floor yet.
  #13  
Old 06-16-2018, 04:33 PM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 6,706
So what are we supposed to do? I am reading most immigrants arrive with children, even if they are not theirs, because they think they will get automatic asylum.
  #14  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:06 PM
andros andros is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 10,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
So what are we supposed to do? I am reading most immigrants arrive with children, even if they are not theirs, because they think they will get automatic asylum.
Where on earth are you reading that nonsense?
.
  #15  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:11 PM
Chisquirrel Chisquirrel is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
So what are we supposed to do? I am reading most immigrants arrive with children, even if they are not theirs, because they think they will get automatic asylum.
Keep families together while they await a decision on asylum? Is that something incredibly difficult to do or comprehend?


"We" are building tent cities for children, stripped from their families (sometimes literally from their mother's arms), in the South, in the middle of summer. I'm generally against human rights violations, are you?
  #16  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:21 PM
Richard Parker Richard Parker is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 12,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
So what are we supposed to do? I am reading most immigrants arrive with children, even if they are not theirs, because they think they will get automatic asylum.
Stop reading white supremacist news.

This is a new policy designed to deter immigration. It is not some necessity imposed by circumstances.
  #17  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:22 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
Keep families together while they await a decision on asylum? Is that something incredibly difficult to do or comprehend?


"We" are building tent cities for children, stripped from their families (sometimes literally from their mother's arms), in the South, in the middle of summer. I'm generally against human rights violations, are you?
Depends on how you define human.

There does seem to be quite a bit of effort going into demonizing and dehumanizing The Other these days. What would be utterly unthinkable to do to white people (how much debate was made over the rights of parents to hold onto their terminally ill and brain dead children recently), is perfectly acceptable to do to brown immigrants. That *anyone* is okay with what is going on is a sad and poor reflection of how we are as a nation.
  #18  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:24 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
Keep families together while they await a decision on asylum? Is that something incredibly difficult to do or comprehend?

I’m genuinely curious: what happens in other cases?

Let’s say a guy is arrested for armed robbery, or attempted murder, or whatever. And say, too, that he is now awaiting a trial to see if he’ll be executed or spend years behind bars or just get let go or whatever. And say as well, in order for the comparison to be useful, that (a) when he got arrested, he had a kid with him; and that (b) the kid with him has no other family in this country.

Honest question: what happens?
  #19  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:26 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
I’m genuinely curious: what happens in other cases?

Let’s say a guy is arrested for armed robbery, or attempted murder, or whatever. And say, too, that he is now awaiting a trial to see if he’ll be executed or spend years behind bars or just get let go or whatever. And say as well, in order for the comparison to be useful, that (a) when he got arrested, he had a kid with him; and that (b) the kid with him has no other family in this country.

Honest question: what happens?
As illegal border crossing is a misdemeanor, not a felony, it would be a better question to ask what happens to the children of people awaiting a trial to see if they will be paying a fine.
  #20  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:34 PM
UltraVires UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
As illegal border crossing is a misdemeanor, not a felony, it would be a better question to ask what happens to the children of people awaiting a trial to see if they will be paying a fine.
Let's say he is caught possessing a small amount of an illegal drug (also a misdemeanor) with the child in his care. Say he shoplifts? What if the parent is unable to post bond? Does the child sit in the holding cell with him?

Further why do you make the felony/misdemeanor distinction? Many people are unable to post bonds on misdemeanors.

Last edited by UltraVires; 06-16-2018 at 05:36 PM.
  #21  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:35 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
As illegal border crossing is a misdemeanor, not a felony, it would be a better question to ask what happens to the children of people awaiting a trial to see if they will be paying a fine.

Well, I guess the problem with either comparison — felony or misdemeanor — is that, as I understand it, if we stop a lone would-be border-crosser and find out that he’s on the brink of breaking that law, we don’t let him in once he pays a fine; we still shoo him away, right? So for the parallel to really work, I guess we need a scenario where the outcome of the trial could be “you don’t get to be in this country”.

Still, I’d genuinely like to hear all of the answers: what do we do when some guy is awaiting a misdemeanor trial and a kid is in the mix; what do we do when some guy is awaiting a felony trial and a kid is in the mix; what do we do when, I dunno, exile is on the table and a kid is in the mix? What do we do when anything even remotely like this comes up, is my question.
  #22  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:43 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Let's say he is caught possessing a small amount of an illegal drug (also a misdemeanor) with the child in his care.
Do you lose your children for possession of a small amount of an illegal drug?
Quote:
Say he shoplifts?
Do you lose your children if you are charged with shop lifting?
Quote:
What if the parent is unable to post bond?
Are these asylum seekers given a chance to post a bond?
Quote:
Does the child sit in the holding cell with him?
Under the assumption that we have made decision to incarcerate them for being charged with a misdemeanor, is there anything physically preventing that from happening?
Quote:
Further why do you make the felony/misdemeanor distinction?
Because TOWP was asking about felonies, with possible consequences of life imprisonment or execution.
Quote:
Many people are unable to post bonds on misdemeanors.
And that is actually a problem with our legal system that should be addressed as well, that people sit for months, or even years in jail, awaiting a trial for crimes that doesn't even require a prison sentence.
  #23  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:44 PM
UltraVires UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,057
Missed the edit window: The DHHR in my state routinely files abuse and neglect petitions and removes children whose parents commit crimes in their presence.
  #24  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:48 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Well, I guess the problem with either comparison — felony or misdemeanor — is that, as I understand it, if we stop a lone would-be border-crosser and find out that he’s on the brink of breaking that law, we don’t let him in once he pays a fine; we still shoo him away, right? So for the parallel to really work, I guess we need a scenario where the outcome of the trial could be “you don’t get to be in this country”.

Still, I’d genuinely like to hear all of the answers: what do we do when some guy is awaiting a misdemeanor trial and a kid is in the mix; what do we do when some guy is awaiting a felony trial and a kid is in the mix; what do we do when, I dunno, exile is on the table and a kid is in the mix? What do we do when anything even remotely like this comes up, is my question.
Generally, in the legal system, we do whatever is most punitive and painful for the family and the child. Not sure really that we should model other things on what are already harmful practices to our citizenry. Be better to fix our problems than make sure that others suffer for them.

There aren't all that many situations remotely like this, other than this situation. We don't have exile, we only have deportation of people we've decided don't belong here.

But, in general, if a kid is taken from a family that is not capable of legally caring for it, it goes into child protective services. There will be fostering, maybe orphanage type of thing. But not tent cities in the southern desert in summer. How many children will we suffer to die in those conditions before anyone bothers to give a shit? I know we let adults die from exposure in these conditions without doing anything about it, I doubt that the "compassionate conservatives" will give one more damn about children, as long as the are of the wrong skin color and nationality.
  #25  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:49 PM
UltraVires UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,057
But this crime is unique in that it is a misdemeanor where there is a great unlikelihood that the defendant will appear for trial if released on any bond. Even if a bond is set and he cannot post it, do we really put children in holding cells with their parents?

I think the answer is that those on the left do not consider border crossing to be a "real" crime like DUI or domestic battery, therefore, there should not be arrests at all. Then, change the law.
  #26  
Old 06-16-2018, 06:13 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,110
The OP is too general, and assumes we are all talking about the illegal immigration/asylum issue. There are certainly some times when children need to be separated form their parents. One might even argue that illegally smuggling children across the border (especially in dangerous circumstances) is child abuse.

But, as noted, this is a new policy rooted in punishing the parents or deterring future border crossing by others, not protecting the child. It's using children as pawns in a policy ploy. We should not be doing this.
  #27  
Old 06-16-2018, 07:05 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
But this crime is unique in that it is a misdemeanor where there is a great unlikelihood that the defendant will appear for trial if released on any bond. Even if a bond is set and he cannot post it, do we really put children in holding cells with their parents?

I think the answer is that those on the left do not consider border crossing to be a "real" crime like DUI or domestic battery, therefore, there should not be arrests at all. Then, change the law.
These are asylum seekers. They generally turn up, because if they don't then their chances of being granted asylum are zero. As far as bonds that cannot be posted, like I said earlier, that's a problem with our legal system in general. If we want to solve that issue as well, tat's great, otherwise, it's a distraction.

As far as "real crime", sure illegal immigration is. But it is not a felony, and it does not have a victim, so I would treat it more along the lines of possession of drugs crime than a DUI or battery, where you have actual or potential victims of physical harm.

And as far as asylum seekers, which is what we are talking about here, they are not committing any crime at all. Even if they are turned down, they still did not commit a crime when they crossed the border with the intent of seeking asylum. They would only commit a crime by staying i the country after being rejected or after not showing up for their court date.

It would be like charging someone for trespassing on their neighbor's lawn while their house burned down and taking away their children. Even if you say they can't stay on their neighbor's lawn, you still can't charge them with trespassing and tell them that you are taking their children away for a bath, never to be seen again.
  #28  
Old 06-16-2018, 07:34 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 24,626
Let’s also remember why a big number of these families are showing up in the US: fleeing horrible violence in their own countries. The idea of these parents showing up in the US, hoping to find a home where they won’t be tracked down and murdered, only to find that their children are taken away not simply as a logistical consequence of not having appropriate places to house them, but as a punishment for fleeing their gang-ridden hometowns.

It’s evil. Just pure malevolence.
  #29  
Old 06-16-2018, 08:17 PM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 6,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Let’s also remember why a big number of these families are showing up in the US: fleeing horrible violence in their own countries. The idea of these parents showing up in the US, hoping to find a home where they won’t be tracked down and murdered, only to find that their children are taken away not simply as a logistical consequence of not having appropriate places to house them, but as a punishment for fleeing their gang-ridden hometowns.

It’s evil. Just pure malevolence.
Well now that is a separate issue but it is something I agree on. We must do more to help those people back in their home countries so they do not have to move here.

As I understand it alot of the newer immigrants are from Central America fleeing violence.
  #30  
Old 06-16-2018, 08:27 PM
OldGuy OldGuy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Very east of Foggybog, WI
Posts: 5,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by China Guy View Post
Ahhhh, but Trump and Republicans now admit that without 60 guaranteed votes in the Senate, then they "don't" have a majority. Pot, kettle, black
I'm sure they'd get a lot of Democratic votes if they proposed a simple bill to stop doing this. I wouldn't be surprised if they got more Democratic votes than Republican votes.
  #31  
Old 06-16-2018, 08:28 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 24,626
I see it as part and parcel of the same issue. These people are essentially fleeing for their lives from gang wars, and we are going to tell them, “Go somewhere else, or we will take your children! Hope ya don’t get murdered!”

I don’t see how anyone can countenance this policy and still assert they care about humanity.

ETA: responding to urbanredneck

Last edited by Ravenman; 06-16-2018 at 08:29 PM.
  #32  
Old 06-16-2018, 08:33 PM
Ionizer Ionizer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
snip... I am reading most immigrants arrive with children, even if they are not theirs, because they think they will get automatic asylum.

How about a cite for the mentioned reading, please, and bringing someone else's kids to be put through such.
  #33  
Old 06-16-2018, 08:34 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Also reprehensible was Sessions trying to hide behind religion:

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order,” he said.
This one isn't complicated.

Even if all you know about Jesus is what your average secular person knows, you'd know that Jesus would hate gratuitous cruelty to children. You don't even need to crack a Bible to know Sessions is wrong.

But if you're a Christian and you need more than that, consider "love your neighbor as yourself." This is one of the two Great Commandments, encompassing the Law and the Prophets. You interpret other Scriptures in the light of these, not the other way around. If your interpretation of some other Scripture justifies actions that run roughshod over "love your neighbor as yourself," as this policy does, you're doing it wrong. It's that simple.
  #34  
Old 06-16-2018, 08:35 PM
Llama Llogophile Llama Llogophile is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: 50% chord point
Posts: 3,828
Here is an article in the Texas Monthly that goes into detail about how and why these policies are being carried out.

The last time I had a visceral reaction of this kind to reading about what my government is doing on my behalf it was about Abu Ghraib.

How fucking dare they? We need to be shouting about this. It’s beyond wrong, and it’s the sort of thing you get from immoral pricks like Trump and Sessions and the people who elected them. The latter group can begin redeeming themselves by leading the resistance to this inhumanity.
  #35  
Old 06-16-2018, 08:42 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
As far as "real crime", sure illegal immigration is. But it is not a felony, and it does not have a victim, so I would treat it more along the lines of possession of drugs crime than a DUI or battery, where you have actual or potential victims of physical harm.

But, again, what complicates the analogy is that, if a guy gets caught in possession of drugs, he doesn’t simply pay a fine and then get handed back those drugs so he can keep on possessing them; and, if he gets caught starting up a car before he actually does any driving under the influence, he doesn’t just serve time behind bars before being told that he can now go out and drive under the influence.

And, likewise, if a guy gets caught trying to illegally slip across the border, the idea is that he gets penalized and then doesn’t get to stay, right?
  #36  
Old 06-16-2018, 09:28 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
But, again, what complicates the analogy is that, if a guy gets caught in possession of drugs, he doesn’t simply pay a fine and then get handed back those drugs so he can keep on possessing them; and, if he gets caught starting up a car before he actually does any driving under the influence, he doesn’t just serve time behind bars before being told that he can now go out and drive under the influence.

And, likewise, if a guy gets caught trying to illegally slip across the border, the idea is that he gets penalized and then doesn’t get to stay, right?
That would make sense, if agents at the border would not turn away people that can apply for asylum.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...asylum-illegal
Quote:
It’s legal to seek asylum at an official border crossing. But border agents are blocking people from getting that far.
Quote:
But some immigrants who try to seek asylum the “right way” are being turned away and told there’s no room for them now. And there’s evidence that border agents are physically blocking some asylum seekers from setting foot on US soil — in other words, from triggering a legal right to claim asylum in the US — to begin with.

Over the weekend, journalist Robert Moore (writing for Texas Monthly) witnessed a group of Guatemalans try to cross the bridge that connects Ciudad Juarez in Mexico to El Paso, Texas. They aimed to present themselves at the official US port of entry, on the other side of the bridge, where Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials check the papers of people entering the country. But at the top of the bridge — right where Mexican territory ends and US territory begins — the group was stopped by CBP agents and asked for identification, and then told that there wasn’t room at the port of entry to process asylum claims.

Ultimately, three of the Guatemalans, who had proceeded a few steps into US territory, were allowed to go through to the port. But according to Moore, those who hadn’t yet set foot in US territory were blocked from doing so:

Quote:
Two CBP agents who had been standing a few feet from the border stepped forward and stood directly on the line. I witnessed one of the agents, whose nametag said Augustin, take a couple steps into Mexico to prevent one of the Guatemalans from crossing into the United States. CBP spokesman Maier later said port officials denied that any agent crossed into Mexico.
Advocates have long alleged that government officials illegally turn away people trying to present themselves for asylum at ports of entry. (The Trump administration maintains that it’s not turning anyone away — just trying to manage limited capacity by telling people to come back when they can be processed.) But stopping people before they can set foot in the US is an apparent escalation.
  #37  
Old 06-16-2018, 09:34 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 27,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Do you lose your children for possession of a small amount of an illegal drug?
No one is losing their child. They're being separated while in custody.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #38  
Old 06-16-2018, 09:34 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,037
As for what they do with children of people that are arrested for other reasons in the USA, there are organizations that look for the welfare of the children of the people that are incarcerated.

https://www.childwelfare.gov/topics/...ces/prisoners/

It looks like so far, that agencies like those ones are not being consulted at all regarding the children of the people asking for asylum.
  #39  
Old 06-16-2018, 09:39 PM
DWMarch DWMarch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
So what are we supposed to do? I am reading most immigrants arrive with children, even if they are not theirs, because they think they will get automatic asylum.
Hahaha, that's a good one! Could you please describe for the audience how exactly this works?

"Hey Luiz, I'm heading up to the border where I am certain to get arrested! Can I borrow your kid for extra sympathy points?"

"Sure Hector, go ahead! Just make sure the kid joins MS-13 as soon as he gets there, that's his real family!"

That one little statement about borrowing a kid to defeat the immigration system packs a lot of assumptions into it. Immigrants value their children less? Immigrants are happy to lend out their children to defeat the border authorities? Immigrants are dumb enough to think a sad story and a crying kid will be the magic bullet that the border authorities cannot defeat?

Come on.
  #40  
Old 06-16-2018, 09:51 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
No one is losing their child. They're being separated while in custody.
Again, not the way it should be done, and there are other reasons why it should not.

https://www.theatlantic.com/educatio...cation/414720/
Quote:
The researchers also found that a child who’s had a parent in prison is more likely than one who hasn’t to experience additional “adverse childhood experiences,” or ACEs—long-term, “toxic” circumstances such as witnessing domestic or community violence, suffering from extreme poverty, or living with someone who’s mentally ill. Research has shown that ACEs, especially when they’re cumulative, often cause childhood trauma, which can ultimately result in poor immunity and mental-health problems in adulthood and even early mortality. As James Perrin, the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, told The Atlantic’s Olga Khazan last year, “If you have a whole bunch of bad experiences growing up, you set up your brain in such a way that it’s your expectation that that’s what life is about.”

Parental incarceration often acts as one such ACE because it causes a confusing, troubling loss of an attachment figure and involves ongoing contact with law enforcement, the corrections system, and child-welfare officials. But what Murphey and Cooper find is that having a parent in prison is likely to coincide with even more traumatic experiences: Children who’ve undergone parental incarceration suffer from 2.7 ACEs on average, according to their analysis of of the National Survey of Children’s Health, which lists 8 ACEs total. Children who haven’t experienced parental incarceration suffered from 0.7 ACEs on average.

Ultimately, the researchers conclude that “the harm associated with parental incarceration can compound the already difficult circumstances of vulnerable children,” a reality that’s particularly evident in their schooling. Yet, as the University of Minnesota paper shows, education policy has done little to address these kids’ particular needs. And in this age of mass incarceration, perhaps it should. In his recent cover story for The Atlantic about the topic, Ta-Nehisi Coates described mass incarceration as a vicious cycle that victimizes entire families, holding them “in a kind of orbit, on the outskirts, by the relentless gravity of the carceral state.”

“Through it all,” Coates wrote, “children suffer.”

Last edited by GIGObuster; 06-16-2018 at 09:52 PM.
  #41  
Old 06-16-2018, 10:16 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 27,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Again, not the way it should be done, and there are other reasons why it should not.
The way it should be done is to follow the rule of law in the first place.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #42  
Old 06-16-2018, 10:34 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
The way it should be done is to follow the rule of law in the first place.
The rule was set expecting that ass-holes like the current administration would not be in a position to interpret it in the worst possible way. And then the rule of law can be said to have been twisted even further.

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/174431...arated-parents
Quote:
3) Is the policy of separating families new?

Yes. But it’s building on an existing system, and attention to family separation has brought more awareness to problems with that system that have been going on for some time.

For the past several years, a growing number of people coming into the US without papers have been Central Americans — often families, and often seeking asylum. Asylum seekers and families are both accorded particular protections in US and international law, which make it impossible for the government to simply send them back. Those protections also put strict limits on the length of time, and conditions, in which children can be kept in immigration detention.

When the Obama administration attempted to respond to the “crisis” of families and unaccompanied children crossing the border in summer 2014, it put hundreds of families in immigration detention — a practice that had basically ended several years before. But federal courts stopped the administration from holding families for months without justifying the decision to keep them in detention. So most families ended up getting released while their cases were pending — which immigration hawks have derided as “catch and release.” In some cases, they disappeared into the US rather than showing up for their court dates.

The Trump administration has stepped up detention of asylum seekers (and immigrants, period). But because there are such strict limits on keeping children in immigration detention, it’s had to release most of the families it’s caught.

The government’s solution has been to prosecute larger numbers of immigrants for illegal entry — including, in a break from previous administrations, large numbers of asylum seekers. That allows the Trump administration to ship children off to ORR, rather than keeping them in immigration detention.
And now we can see one reason why Trump threatens to leave the UN Human Rights Council, those human rights are really a bother.
  #43  
Old 06-16-2018, 11:31 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 27,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
The rule was set expecting that ass-holes like the current administration would not be in a position to interpret it in the worst possible way. And then the rule of law can be said to have been twisted even further.
yes, we'll just pretend the sanctuary cities didn't create the situation in the first place.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #44  
Old 06-16-2018, 11:54 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
yes, we'll just pretend the sanctuary cities didn't create the situation in the first place.
We'll just realise that you have no good reply to what was posted so it stands.
  #45  
Old 06-17-2018, 12:07 AM
Huey Freeman's Avatar
Huey Freeman Huey Freeman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
The OP is too general, and assumes we are all talking about the illegal immigration/asylum issue. There are certainly some times when children need to be separated form their parents. One might even argue that illegally smuggling children across the border (especially in dangerous circumstances) is child abuse.

But, as noted, this is a new policy rooted in punishing the parents or deterring future border crossing by others, not protecting the child. It's using children as pawns in a policy ploy. We should not be doing this.
(Emphasis mine)

The white privilege packed into this statement is pretty amusing. I bet it never occurred to the poster here that raising a child in an abject poverty is a form of child abuse. Have you? Of course not. Does the poster know that there are children in Central and South America whose whole existence rifling through trash to find food? If you saw a child in your neighborhood going through your trash cans for food, would you even register this as abnormal or even something reportable to the authorities? Or would you ignore it because, you know, it's all good?

Your last paragraph is insufficient. This isn't a policy "rooted in punishing parents" or "deterring future border crossing[s]." It is a policy rooted in white supremacy. It is rooted in the dehumanization of Hispanics. It is policy crafted to incite schadenfreude with Trump supporters.

This isn't new. White folks deliberately separated Native Americans from their families, white folks deliberately separated African-Americans from their families, and white folks are deliberately separating Hispanic families from each other. White folks are masters at cloaking hateful policies under the thin veneer of "law and order" and manifest destiny".
  #46  
Old 06-17-2018, 12:09 AM
Huey Freeman's Avatar
Huey Freeman Huey Freeman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
The way it should be done is to follow the rule of law in the first place.
What does this even mean?
  #47  
Old 06-17-2018, 12:09 AM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 27,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
We'll just realise that you have no good reply to what was posted so it stands.
And we'll just realize that you can't deal with reality. The sanctuary cities created an outlet to hide illegal aliens. The result is incarceration to prevent this from happening.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #48  
Old 06-17-2018, 12:16 AM
Huey Freeman's Avatar
Huey Freeman Huey Freeman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
yes, we'll just pretend the sanctuary cities didn't create the situation in the first place.

This highlights, in my view, the futility in the opposition. There is no way to get them to take responsibility for their actions. It's always someone else's fault. You're inhumanely separating children from their families? It's OK because the Democrats created the situation in the first place.
  #49  
Old 06-17-2018, 12:16 AM
andros andros is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 10,183
"Sanctuary cities" are to blame? Codswallop. Stuff and nonsense.
.

Last edited by andros; 06-17-2018 at 12:17 AM.
  #50  
Old 06-17-2018, 12:17 AM
Wolf333 Wolf333 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
And we'll just realize that you can't deal with reality. The sanctuary cities created an outlet to hide illegal aliens. The result is incarceration to prevent this from happening.


Ah, the "why are you making me hurt you?" Defense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017