We already arrest 12,408,899 people each year according to the FBI. Each of those people have to be processed and detained for a given amount of time. So I don’t understand why deporting illegal aliens will require concentration camps that some seem to imply.
“The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program counts one arrest for each separate instance in which a person is arrested, cited, or summoned for an offense.” Someone who is caught shoplifting and released with a court appearance ticket is counted as “arrested” in these statistics, even though they probably never even saw the back of a police car let alone a cell. It also sounds like someone who is arrested and released for three crimes at once might very well count as three arrests.
I don’t get the impression that a single arrest for multiple offenses would be count as more. The numbers would be much higher.
Well done, I think we’ve got that far.
The poster’s point was about “stop and identify” statutes, which Maine doesn’t have. I suggested police have enough powers under present laws.
Eva Luna’s point is that looking and sounding Mexican is not a valid ground for a police officer to stop someone, contrary to your suggestion that would be sufficient legal basis.
Two things will solve the problem over night. 1) Fine/imprison any employer who hires someone without a valid work visa. 2) Offer citizenship to anyone who turns in an employer who is successfully so convicted.
I disagree. If there are 11 million deportees at large and the law requires their repatriation, that of itself offers perfectly reasonable grounds to stop an individual who presents as being potentially of that group.
You think police, immigration and border patrol officers will just walk straight past families of Mexican’s hanging out in the park?
People are going to be pointing out their neighbours - there are millions of homeless in the USA, a lot of people are going to like the results of this.
Cite that trump will give them due process :dubious:
These people will also be overwhelmingly Catholic - maybe we can round them up while they are attending Sunday service! We can even make jokes about “letting God sort out” the citizens and non-citizens.
In the UK the problem is over paid civil service not doing the job they are paid to do. They talk a great job but fail to get results. The cure is to start kicking arse
This is going to save a lot of police time!
Think about the difficulties we had in Iraq, multiply it by the ability to buy your weapons and ammo at the local store, and raise it to the power of being in an infrastructure-rich occupation zone with hundreds of thousands of soft targets spread across 3.5 million square miles…
Ironic isn’t really the word I would use.
I’m sure we can get this pogrom up to German efficiency levels in no time! USA!
But to answer the question, again, it depends upon the sort of volume levels you desire. Different volumes require different tactics requiring different processes as the program scales up.
Want to deport an extra 100 a day? Could probably do that with existing infrastructure.
Want to deport an extra 1,000 a day? Need more buildings, more processing centers, more people.
Want to deport 10,000 a day? This is a whole new Federal Agency requiring its own infrastructure, rules, bureaucrats, etc.
Sorry, but Holocaust comparisons are apt because the essential goal of Trump’s plan was the essential goal of Hitler’s Germany: the locating, arresting, transporting, encamping, and removing of unwanted people from a geographical area. In the end, whether or not you gas and shoot these people or dump them off onto some Mexican or Venezuelan or Brazilian shore, you’re still removing people from your country, which involves setting up a systemic method of production to attain the levels of deportation you desire, and the numbers I’m hearing (6.5 million – 11 million) have been attempted, successfully, before.
From an operational planning viewpoint, it would be complete folly to ignore historical instances where this has been attempted, and it would be even greater folly to ignore the one historical instance where this has been done to the greatest success. So, honestly, complaining that I’m talking about the Holocaust completely misses the point of the OP and makes it impossible to answer this question.
(Betcha Sheriff Joe Arpaio thinks about this all the time. I wonder who’s side he is on?)
The Germans began getting serious about removing people from Germany and occupied lands in 1941, according to this calendar of the Holocaust; https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007653 While many date the beginning of the Holocaust from the ascent of Hitler, for the purposes of this post, I’m only interested in the true “removal” period. So, let’s say four years, the same as a Presidential administration.
Numbers of souls “removed” during Hitler’s Holocaust are estimated at 11,000,000, 6 million of which were Jews. If we want to do 6 million in 4 years, we are at 5,000 people a day to be processed. If 11 million, we’re close to 8,000/day. As I mentioned before, this is conveniently the same number of illegal aliens in America AND the number that are initially to be removed, so we have an almost 1-for-1 comparison here. Hell, even the time frames are similar!
Well, except for two things that make this a less apt comparison:
- The Holocaust didn’t happen in a country where the Jews could buy guns and ammo at Walmart with a global communications device in their shirt pocket giving them counter-insurgency advice. This is going to dramatically increase the resource gathering (locating and arresting) cost compared to the Holocaust and should be factored into Trump’s operating plan.
- Since the actual goal is deportation, there will need to be procedures for placing the people in a location where they can’t literally walk back. This requires ships, a lot of them, and this transportation expense will be massive.
- Every assumption assumes that the target countries are just going to allow America to dump thousands, millions of people on their beaches. If we go to war against Mexico or a Latin America coalition… well, that’s beyond the scope of this discussion but that, going to war against Mexico, increases the cost into the trillions of dollars automatically.
So that was three things, sue me.
Anyway, a 30,000 foot view of how this can be organized can be done in spreadsheets. Trump has promised getting rid of people from day one, so let’s say he plans to deport 6,500,000 people in a 2-year period (before we get killed in the midterms!) To do that, we will need:
To arrest 9,000 people a day
To transport 9,000 people a day to detention facilities
… Using 150 buses or 90 cattle cars arriving at the detention facilities daily, take your pick (actually, double or triple this number – they leave empty, right?, while other cattle cars full of people are still arriving.)
A minimum of 350,000 square feet of detention center space (assumes 40sf per prisoner, us average)
5 ships with 1,750 people each loaded daily, possibly 40-50 ships working in rotation. (I’m assuming these ships are taking people back to their country of origin. I’m also assuming they are full. In reality, we’ll likely end up with hundreds of ships of varying sizes, but this is a message board post, not a job assignment. 
)
9,000 people dropped onto another sovereign nation’s shores.
… And this is before we factor in the costs associated with this not going peacefully, either at the resource location stage or the resource allocation stage. We can probably handle transportation and processing with a sufficient display of firepower, but rounding up 6.5 million armed people and then fighting off the countries who don’t want them are costs that have not been borne by any of the historical examples I’ve found. (Well, yes, the Germans were at war with Poland, but they had already won and… damn, like I said, this is a message board post. Leave me alone.)
Note that all the death camps in Germany probably killed about 6-7k people a day. We are going to have to beat German efficiency to do this in 2 years, but I have faith in the USA.
This is the correct answer. The alpha and omega of ending illegal immigration is cracking down on the people who employ illegal immigrants. Hard. Jobs is most of the motive for people to come here (some people are fleeing drug violence in Mexico, or other violence in Central America, but even then, without job prospects what is the point?)
As to “how is this supposed to work?” the answer is this: Trump calls a lot of attention to Mexican immigrants, promising to get tough with them. Ignorant white GOP voters who hate Mexicans, along with any darker-hued individuals or people of the “wrong” religion e.g. Muslims tune right into Trump’s message and vote for him. Theoretically anyway, this gets enough votes for Trump to get elected president and enact his self-interested billionaire’s agenda, which mostly has to do with cutting taxes for the rich, eliminating the estate tax, that sort of thing. The focus never goes to the people who employ illegals because that includes wealthy businesspeople like Trump- wealthy establishment types who want a cheap, disposable labor force with no official voice in anything (they can’t vote). Illegal immigrants are not taking your jobs, they are being given to illegals by employers. But that message doesn’t resonate with ignorant racist voters.
The mass deportation of 11 million people never happens. It is a stupid and unworkable proposal. It exists only to get the ignorant white bigot chump vote.
But it is being proposed, millions are expecting it, and it can happen.
The issue reminds me of that old line from here
Trump represents the losing faction. He outlines his cruel proposals to Make America Great Again by returning us to the Jim Crow era and reprising Operation Wetback. Plenty of seething ignoramuses would love to see it followed through on, but what I think it means is this faction gets defeated and these proposals, after an extensive public hearing via the election, get filed under, “yah, we’re not gonna do that.”
Proposed? I agree. Millions expecting it? I agree. Can happen? I really don’t think it can. As you described so well, it is a Final Solution kind of project, implemented in an era and context where it simply isn’t going to fly. Even if Trump manages to win the election, I think the proposal remains unworkable. Trump’s victorious GOP may not be willing to compromise on anything whatsoever with the Democrats, but they would be forced to compromise with reality sooner or later. I think it would be sooner- Hitler won 90% of the plebicite vote to become both president and chancellor. Trump is widely reviled. He won’t acquire dictatorial powers to follow through on something so stupid.
Now, if you want to say Trump might use Hitler’s tactics to consolidate power, things like following through on his threats to have Hillary locked up or deported along with the rest of his opponents and harness fear and intimidation to force a mandate to follow through on his deportation scheme… um, I just don’t think this country is ripe for that. People are angry, but is it a post-Versailles, global depression, let’s question Western values and start a world war level of anger? I don’t think so. Do you?
Who knows? Not everybody in Germany was pissed off either - it took the Depression to assist Hitler - but I’d rather not chance it. And many argued that “he’s just saying that.” Well… Donald Trump is “just saying that” as well.
My worry is since Americans are so assured it can’t happen here that they aren’t capable of seeing it happen while it’s happening. But it is happening - the outright lies, the demonization of opponents, the misdirection of what your true aims are (“traitors to Germany” = “Jews”, “illegal immigrants” = “brown Catholics”), the calls to violence, the appeals to bullyism.
Hell, it’s even a bunch of White Protestants going against a “swarthy” group of non-Protestants. What a surprise.
And I also worry that people assume that there are checks in place that will stop Trump so it’s OK to vote for him because the worst that can happen is it gets appealed to the Supreme Court for 4 years.
But:
… Trump arrests the Supreme Court*.
… Doesn’t appoint another Justice.
How does that play out when the person arresting the USSC is also responsible for appointing members? How, then, is Trump, Arpaio, Christie, Bannon going to be stopped?
Power of the purse? Hell, arrest Congress. Or enough of them to intimidate the rest. This is a process as old as politics.
Each step closer is a step too close for these people. So, yeah, I do think this could happen here because it is actually happening. Whether it will be stopped…? Hopefully, that is answered on November 8th, or else the struggle will take a far more dangerous, darker turn.
*Doesn’t matter what for, 38% will support, 38% will be outraged, and the remainder will be confused as to why this is happening.
First of all, there are not 11 million deportees in the United States. There are an estimated 11 million people who are in the U.S. without legal authorization (a decent chunk of whom have immediate family members who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents). Two different things.
Second of all, about 3/4 of the immigrants in the U.S. are living here legally, the vast majority of whom are U.S. citizens or permanent residents:
“As of 2012, the plurality of immigrants were naturalized citizens, at 42%. An additional 27% were legal permanent residents, and 4.5% of foreign-born residents are temporary legal residents such as students. As of 2012, unauthorized immigrants—those in the country illegally—made up about a quarter of the foreign-born population (26%), numbering more than 11 million (Passel, Cohn, Krogstad and Gonzalez-Barrera, 2014).”
Those numbers don’t count native-born U.S. citizens who may also happen to speak a foreign language.
Trump wants to end birthright citizenship and deport them as well, so please add those numbers (~4.5 million) to your calculations, thanks. Saying that there are illegals that cannot be deported because they have “family members who are US citizens” is irrelevant under the Trump plan: They are still fully subject to deportation.