4 ms·
> I just can't get behind the whole "abolish ICE" thing. Not saying one way or another, but the argument is that ICE was only formed 16 years ago and that the
by AsyncAwait 7y ago
> I just can't get behind the whole "abolish ICE" thing.
Not saying one way or another, but the argument is that ICE was only formed 16 years ago and that the U.S. was not 'overrun' before then. The Border Patrol etc. would still remain, just the Stasi-like tactics of removing people from their homes in the middle of the night and holding people in cages would disappear.
At least that's how I've heard the argument.
- caseysoftware 7y agoICE was the merger of numerous things, including the INS which pre-dates WW2 making it older than the Air Force, Department of Ed, and dozens of other government agencies. Saying "only formed 16 years ago" is only right among the "well, actually" crowd.
- AsyncAwait 7y agoThe problem is that a merge increases the centralization of power and the ability to abuse that power with impunity. ICE was only formed 16 years ago as this sort of centralized organization. That is different than going via multiple separate entities, each of which have their own checks and balances, oversight and even internal politics that make it less likely widespread abuse would pass all the links in the chain untamed. That is gone. The difference in 'effectiveness' is sort of like the difference between the reach of the LAPD intelligence arm vs the CIA.