3 ms·

First time illegal border crossing is a misdemeanor. Should people have their children forcibly separated from them and shipped to detention centers for a spee

First time illegal border crossing is a misdemeanor. Should people have their children forcibly separated from them and shipped to detention centers for a speeding ticket? Jaywalking? Drunk in public? Inflicting cruelty on innocent children is not a reasonable deterrent in a civilized society that has any intention of being moral or just.

User23 8y ago
Pretty sure if you’re drunk in public with your kids and get arrested you will in fact be forcibly separated. Also this is a great example of static thinking, because it completely ignores dynamic effects. Ban family separation, how humane! Second order effect: incentivize bringing children when committing crimes. A sane and compassionate, as well as moral and just, society doesn’t want to encourage bring your kids to crime day either.
- vageli 8y ago
  I think they were pointing out that you typically get issued a summons in lieu of arrest for misdemeanors.
- GVIrish 8y ago
  > Pretty sure if you’re drunk in public with your kids and get arrested you will in fact be forcibly separated. For a misdemeanor the police are absolutely not going to take someone's children and ship them to detention centers in other states with no clear way of getting them back or even getting in touch with them. Most of the time a misdemeanor means showing up to court and paying a fine. > Also this is a great example of static thinking, because it completely ignores dynamic effects. Ban family separation, how humane! Second order effect: incentivize bringing children when committing crimes. That doesn't make any sense. Currently, even someone who is charged with one or more felonies does not have their children taken away from them and shipped elsewhere. The only time that would happen is in cases of neglect or abuse. Does that mean our justice system is incentivizing felonies? No. Bottom line is that the law can be enforced just fine without a barbaric policy that harms children for the sins of their parents.
  - User23 8y ago
    If it doesn’t make sense then, at risk of being too frank, you aren’t actually thinking about higher order effects. In an otherwise intelligent person, which you clearly are, this indicates emotion is dominating reasoning. I get it, pedophrasty* is extremely effective rhetoric. Domestic criminals who get arrested for a misdemeanor while having their children along don’t get to bring them to jail or get immediately released on their own recognizance. And yes there are plenty of arrestible misdemeanors. *https://medium.com/incerto/pedophrasty-bigoteering-and-other-modern-scams-c84bd70a29e8 https://medium.com/incerto/pedophrasty-bigoteering-and-other...
    - GVIrish 8y ago
      Show me one instance in the US judicial system where children are forcibly taken from parents and shipped off to detention centers in other states when the parent has been charged with a misdemeanor. Bottom line is that it is. Not. Done. And it clearly is appropriate to 'think of the children' when cruelty is being purposefully inflicted on children as official government policy. There's no rational defense for that policy that is compatible with our legal system.
      - User23 8y ago
        Actually it's done to US citizens routinely. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/us/family-separation-americans-prison-jail.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/us/family-separation-amer.... And before you quibble, recall that jail is for misdemeanors. Again, your reasoning faculty has been overwhelmed by effective rhetoric. Take a deep breath, step back, and start using your left hemisphere.
        GVIrish 8y ago
        You failed to read and/or comprehend what I said. Show me an example where children are forcibly separated and shipped to detention centers in different states when a parent is charged with a misdemeanor. I already pointed out that children are only taken away in cases of neglect or abuse. But if you must continue patting yourself on the back for how 'rational' you are while you can't provide any rational basis for your arguments, knock yourself out.

User23 8y ago

Pretty sure if you’re drunk in public with your kids and get arrested you will in fact be forcibly separated. Also this is a great example of static thinking, because it completely ignores dynamic effects. Ban family separation, how humane! Second order effect: incentivize bringing children when committing crimes. A sane and compassionate, as well as moral and just, society doesn’t want to encourage bring your kids to crime day either.

vageli 8y ago
I think they were pointing out that you typically get issued a summons in lieu of arrest for misdemeanors.
GVIrish 8y ago
> Pretty sure if you’re drunk in public with your kids and get arrested you will in fact be forcibly separated. For a misdemeanor the police are absolutely not going to take someone's children and ship them to detention centers in other states with no clear way of getting them back or even getting in touch with them. Most of the time a misdemeanor means showing up to court and paying a fine. > Also this is a great example of static thinking, because it completely ignores dynamic effects. Ban family separation, how humane! Second order effect: incentivize bringing children when committing crimes. That doesn't make any sense. Currently, even someone who is charged with one or more felonies does not have their children taken away from them and shipped elsewhere. The only time that would happen is in cases of neglect or abuse. Does that mean our justice system is incentivizing felonies? No. Bottom line is that the law can be enforced just fine without a barbaric policy that harms children for the sins of their parents.
- User23 8y ago
  If it doesn’t make sense then, at risk of being too frank, you aren’t actually thinking about higher order effects. In an otherwise intelligent person, which you clearly are, this indicates emotion is dominating reasoning. I get it, pedophrasty* is extremely effective rhetoric. Domestic criminals who get arrested for a misdemeanor while having their children along don’t get to bring them to jail or get immediately released on their own recognizance. And yes there are plenty of arrestible misdemeanors. *https://medium.com/incerto/pedophrasty-bigoteering-and-other-modern-scams-c84bd70a29e8 https://medium.com/incerto/pedophrasty-bigoteering-and-other...
  - GVIrish 8y ago
    Show me one instance in the US judicial system where children are forcibly taken from parents and shipped off to detention centers in other states when the parent has been charged with a misdemeanor. Bottom line is that it is. Not. Done. And it clearly is appropriate to 'think of the children' when cruelty is being purposefully inflicted on children as official government policy. There's no rational defense for that policy that is compatible with our legal system.
    - User23 8y ago
      Actually it's done to US citizens routinely. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/us/family-separation-americans-prison-jail.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/us/family-separation-amer.... And before you quibble, recall that jail is for misdemeanors. Again, your reasoning faculty has been overwhelmed by effective rhetoric. Take a deep breath, step back, and start using your left hemisphere.
      - GVIrish 8y ago
        You failed to read and/or comprehend what I said. Show me an example where children are forcibly separated and shipped to detention centers in different states when a parent is charged with a misdemeanor. I already pointed out that children are only taken away in cases of neglect or abuse. But if you must continue patting yourself on the back for how 'rational' you are while you can't provide any rational basis for your arguments, knock yourself out.