4 ms·

>Sure, as long as we apply this principle evenly. It is applied fairly evenly, despite how many people try to frame it. Online piracy is often referred to as "

by fiblye 9y ago

>Sure, as long as we apply this principle evenly. It is applied fairly evenly, despite how many people try to frame it. Online piracy is often referred to as "illegal downloading/filesharing". People selling fentanyl aren't referred to as "unauthorized pharmacists" but "illegal drug dealers." And speeding isn't "illegal driving." When you're speeding, it's not the act of driving itself that's illegal. It's the speed violation, which is often referred to as illegally speeding or illegally exceeding the speed limit. Illegally driving would involve either driving without a license or driving a stolen vehicle. Illegal immigration involves actively violating the law in order to gain access or maintain access to another country. The argument over what term is appropriate is bikeshedding.

mikeash 9y ago
"The argument over what term is appropriate is bikeshedding." Maybe you should take that up with the fellow who started the argument? And I don't understand why you'd state this after arguing a bunch about the appropriate term. Your examples are good, but do you have any that aren't crimes? Entering the US without authorization is a crime, but staying without authorization is merely a civil infraction. The majority of "illegal immigrants" fall into the second category. Driving without a license is a crime, so a more apt analogy would be parking where it's not allowed. It may sound hyperbolic to compare an immigration violation to a parking ticket, but that is what the law says. We don't call people "illegal parkers" when they park where it's not allowed. Other analogous violations might be trying to take a prohibited item through airport security ("illegal passengers"?) or violating a building code (a builder who deliberately and frequently does this might well be referred to as an "illegal builder"). Interesting side note: in addition to confusing the issue enormously when it comes to the seemingly straightforward "illegal immigrants are criminals by definition" argument, the fact that it's only a civil infraction to be in the country without authorization means that there is no right to a public defender. People without the means to hire a lawyer or the luck to find one who will represent them for free get the joyous experience of representing themselves.
- legostormtroopr 9y ago
  > Driving without a license is a crime, so a more apt analogy would be parking where it's not allowed. Sure, and the similar analogy is "sure he's parked illegally, but you can't charge him for driving without a licence because parking illegally is a civil infraction." Prosecuting illegal migration protects the system. If you want to petition for easier access to migrate between countries, thats fine. But willfully ignoring very clear laws and crimes helps no one.
  - mikeash 9y ago
    I don’t understand your analogy. Why would the driver be unlicensed in this scenario?

by fiblye 9y ago

mikeash 9y ago

"The argument over what term is appropriate is bikeshedding." Maybe you should take that up with the fellow who started the argument? And I don't understand why you'd state this after arguing a bunch about the appropriate term. Your examples are good, but do you have any that aren't crimes? Entering the US without authorization is a crime, but staying without authorization is merely a civil infraction. The majority of "illegal immigrants" fall into the second category. Driving without a license is a crime, so a more apt analogy would be parking where it's not allowed. It may sound hyperbolic to compare an immigration violation to a parking ticket, but that is what the law says. We don't call people "illegal parkers" when they park where it's not allowed. Other analogous violations might be trying to take a prohibited item through airport security ("illegal passengers"?) or violating a building code (a builder who deliberately and frequently does this might well be referred to as an "illegal builder"). Interesting side note: in addition to confusing the issue enormously when it comes to the seemingly straightforward "illegal immigrants are criminals by definition" argument, the fact that it's only a civil infraction to be in the country without authorization means that there is no right to a public defender. People without the means to hire a lawyer or the luck to find one who will represent them for free get the joyous experience of representing themselves.

legostormtroopr 9y ago
> Driving without a license is a crime, so a more apt analogy would be parking where it's not allowed. Sure, and the similar analogy is "sure he's parked illegally, but you can't charge him for driving without a licence because parking illegally is a civil infraction." Prosecuting illegal migration protects the system. If you want to petition for easier access to migrate between countries, thats fine. But willfully ignoring very clear laws and crimes helps no one.
- mikeash 9y ago
  I don’t understand your analogy. Why would the driver be unlicensed in this scenario?