What exactly is your problem with my statement? That we have a responsibility to act justly? That it is wrong to punish children for what their parents did.
I never said we can’t, I said we shouldn’t.
Instead of brilliant arguments such as “Says you” and lame jokes, maybe you can address the actual content of my argument.
I think the point is that “booting the kid out of” THE “country” is not objectively “wrong”, or “unjust” or “immoral”. Those are your opinions. In other words, “Says you”.
I don’t see a real difference between punishment and consequences in this case.
And, as I said before, you can’t simply blame the parents to absolve you of responsibility. We are still the ones sending men with guns to take an innocent person away from their home.
I surmise from your ignoring of my “innocent” comment and dropping your oft repeated “good people get caught up in the justice system” line, that you aren’t for punishing innocent people. Baby steps I suppose.
Gee, let’s see what I’d have to say about that:
Unfortunate is tripping and breaking your arm. Being taken from your home when you have done nothing wrong is wrong. It’s not random chance that is taking these people from their home. It is preconceived and planned action by the government.
shrug I don’t see anyone trying to defend it as a right, moral, or just action. But by all means, if you feel that it is, go ahead and provide your argument. After all, right/wrong, just/unjust, and moral/immoral are all opinions in the end.
Ha! I call bullshit. That’s why you’ve been using “punishment” as much as you have. And that is a different argument, your fallacious appeal to emotion aside. Now you seek to have it both ways: “well, okay, it’s not really punishment, but the consequences are negative so it’s kinda like punishment. So let’s just call it that. Because that sounds so much harsher.”
May I suggest,
MEN WITH GUNS
I mean, if you want to use inflammatory language to beef up an appeal to emotion, I mean, go for it.
Not if you’re in a place you have no right to be in.
“These people”? I thought we were talking about Vargas. And what in the world do you mean by your last sentence.
I’ve already done so. Try rereading.
And that makes sense. But if a person like Vargas falls into their hands, it seems wrong to let him go.
Neither.
My problem with your statement is the claim that this is a punishment.
Right. Your claim that we shouldn’t is simply your opinion. There is no argument supporting it. There’s nothing for me to address.
He hasn’t fallen into their hands. As far as I know, he has not, to date, been arrested for anything, nor has he been placed in deportation proceedings. Both of those things take resources.
I didn’t mean it quite so literally.
Oh noes you’ve got me!
You aren’t going to repeat the “good people get caught up in the law all the time” argument?
Says you.
These people, as in immigrants who came here as children. What do you think I mean by the last sentence? You can’t blame something on fortune when you are taking deliberate actions.
Also, the law.
ICE means it quite literally - there are probably millions of people who are supposed to take priority over him for deportation. Or even if we’re just counting people with criminal convictions, hundreds of thousands.
Unbeknownst to Steve Smith, his parents illegally immigrated with him from Turkmenistan when he was 2. John Smith, Steve’s father, worked as a humble gardener for a private family who did not adequately check his social security number. John Smith was in contact with the local branch of the Turkmenistanian mafia, and with his meager savings bought a legitimate copy of a birth certificate and SSN for a deceased new born baby who was born at the same time. With these fraudulent documents, Steve was enrolled in school.
In school Steve Smith was of above average, but not exceptional intelligence. With hard work, and diligence he was able to graduate near the top of his class and earn a scholarship to a local University. At the University, he studied engineering, and managed to graduate with a decent GPA. He managed to land a job with a respected design firm, although as a ill paid entry level employee. Steve was satisfied, as he was able to live on his own, was getting serious with his girlfriend. After several years of gaining experience, he applied for his dream job with a big defense firm, and managed to land the position. During his background check for his security clearance, investigators discovered the fraud. When they confronted Steve’s parents, they admitted that Steve was born in Turkmenistan and confessed to the fraud. The next day, ICE agents came, arrested Steve, and deported him to Turkmenistan.
This is wrong because:
(1) Removing him from his job, friends, girlfriend, and everyone he knows causes him a great deal of pain.
(2) Having to live in Turkmenistan will cause him a great deal of distress as he does not know the language, has no contacts, and likely will unable to have a good life.
(3) He bears no culpability for the situation he finds himself in.
Even if I grant that this is wrong – which I do not – this hypothetical differs materially from Vargas’, where he learned of the decpetion at 16 and continued to perpetuate it on his own for ten more years.
What would you have had him do? Turn himself in?
Quoth magellan01:
If this kid were a gang-banger type, then there would be a problem by virtue of the fact that he was a gang-banger. This would be true regardless of his citizenship status. Gang membership is a completely independent issue from immigration.
Yes. Or leave, without turning himself in.
Why shouldn’t he? Your question seems to suggest that it’s absurd to turn himself in, but he’s committed felonies. Isn’t it the right thing to do if you’re guilty of a crime – turn yourself in?
Well,if you break a law, you are not 100% innocent of any crime, no matter what you say.
Even if, the moment he turned 16, he bought himself an airline ticket to leave the country, he’d still be staying here for a few days while he was waiting for his flight. Wouldn’t he be committing a crime just by virtue of being here for those few days?