4 ms·

> Families are separated when citizens commit crime. There have been reports of families being separated right as they cross the border. Is that the criminal a

> Families are separated when citizens commit crime. There have been reports of families being separated right as they cross the border. Is that the criminal act you're talking about? Because it in no way justifies separating families in my book. Also, deporting migrants who were in the US since they were 5, know no other country but the US and now they're being deported say 30 years later, when they have families here etc. is another example of an inhumane policy.

manigandham 7y ago
Yes, crossing the border illegally is a crime. Criminals are detained. If you get arrested for a minor crime as an American citizen, you are also detained and separated from your family. This is neither shocking nor unexpected. The other issue is far more complex. Obviously there must be a cutoff with some path to citizenship for those allowed to stay but this is why strong border security helps by preventing the issue in the first place.
- amalcon 7y ago
  It's a misdemeanor, though, like speeding or public drunkenness. People are not arrested for speeding unless it's particularly egregious, and are not held for months over public drunkenness.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    You're only released or skip arrest if you will show up to court, something that's offered to citizens who have no/minor criminal records, no outstanding warrants, and a reasonable expectation of showing up. The situation is different with illegal immigrants.
    - amalcon 7y ago
      Which part is different? - Do illegal immigrants with families mostly have significant existing criminal records in the destination jurisdiction? The ones that do should of course be treated more harshly, but most do not. - Do illegal immigrants with families mostly have outstanding warrants in the destination jurisdiction? The outstanding warrant should of course be honored in that case, but most do not. - Or are we imprisoning people for sometimes over a year, placing their children in (at best) the care of strangers, purely as a mechanism to ensure that they show up to court? Could you imagine the outcry if we did that for speeding?
      - manigandham 7y ago
        They are not citizens so don't have the same rights and don't have a legal residence to be sent to so detainment is the only option, other than immediate deportation and skipping any case processing at all. And yes, even if you are a citizen and you get arrested, you will be separated from your family. If you have children, they will be placed in protective services. They do not go with you to jail. Whether you are arrested for speeding is explained in my prior post.
        amalcon 7y ago
        The U.S. Constitution grants most of the same rights to non-citizens within its borders that it grants to citizens. Things like due process and legal representation are guaranteed to non-citizens within U.S. jurisdiction. There are of course exceptions, like voting, but none of those exceptions are relevant here. Homeless people also don't have a legal address, but a homeless person won't be imprisoned for a year pretrial and separated from their kids for speeding in the car they live in. And no, if you get arrested for most misdemeanor crimes, you will usually not be imprisoned and separated from your family for sometimes over a year with no planned method to ever contact each other again. You are just wrong about this. I'm aware of (and rather outraged by) cases where people convicted of serious felonies (in one case, assault with a deadly weapon) are given sentences that still allow them to live with their children most of the time.
        manigandham 7y ago
        It's not speeding or misdemeanor, it's whether you will show up to court or not. Illegal immigrants are not citizens, don't have the same rights, and don't have anywhere to be released to since they cannot be in the country in the first place. However they do have due-process and have access to lawyers and communications. Detainment is the only answer if you want their cases to be processed, and detainment may sometimes result in families being separated. Homeless people can be in the country and have the ability to show up in court but they do often spend time in jail and sometimes even commit crime because it ensures food and housing.
  - pandaman 7y ago
    It's an up to 6 months imprisonment on the first commission and up to 2 years imprisonment on subsequent ones[1]. Is there a definition of misdemeanor, which allows crimes (that are not called "misdemeanor" in the text of law) with up to 2 years imprisonment to be called as such? If so - I never seen one. 1. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325
    - amalcon 7y ago
      > In the United States, misdemeanors are typically crimes with a maximum punishment of 12 months of incarceration, typically in a local jail as contrasted with felons, who are typically incarcerated in a prison. Jurisdictions such as Massachusetts are a notable exception where the maximum punishment of some misdemeanors is up to 2.5 years.[20] People who are convicted of misdemeanors are often punished with probation, community service, short jail term, or part-time incarceration such as a sentence that may be served on the weekends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misdemeanor#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misdemeanor#United_States Public drunkenness can also be punished by 6 months imprisonment in California (not my state, but many HNers live there). Most cases of such are still "punished" by either a reprimand or being kept in a holding cell long enough to sober up.
      - pandaman 7y ago
        Since the federal offense in question is not called a misdemeanor in the law and carries up to 2 years penalty I fail to see how it fits the definition you quoted. Also most cases are not punished by reprimand or short arrest either. I understand that left is pushing the idea that it's as serious as parking violation at most but it takes just few seconds to read the actual law and few minutes to research how is it enforced in practice to realize how inappropriate this comparison is.
        amalcon 7y ago
        The first offense carries only up to a six month sentence. I would agree that the second offense should be punished more harshly. In that case, it is less likely to be a legitimate asylum seeker for obvious reasons, and more likely to involve other illegal activity. I meant most cases of public drunkenness are punished by a reprimand or short arrest, not most cases of unlawful entry. Previously, most unlawful entries were punished by deportation. Obviously unlawful entry is currently being punished by imprisonment for over a year awaiting hearing, followed by deportation and no plan to ever reunite you with your family. This seems to be technically legal, but the law surely does not require it.
- AsyncAwait 7y ago
  > Yes, crossing the border illegally is a crime. Criminals are detained. If you get arrested for a minor crime as an American citizen, you are also detained and separated from your family. Right. So you think that a child should suffer the trauma of being in an unknown place without their parents just because they dared to try to cross the border, (without committing any other crime). Ok. However I am sure you're able to see that i.e meddling in Venezuela as the Trump administration is doing is illegal, immoral and WILL produce more migrants. You can't have a policy that is very likely to result in more US-bound migrants, while at the same time being strongly for 'protecting borders'. Certainly not while maintaining any semblance of moral high-ground or legitimacy.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Respond to the argument please, don't assume what I say or think. Should has nothing to do with it. Yes, children suffer when enduring crime, war, and hunger all over the world. This is unfortunate but detainment happens because laws are enforced, just like when child services separates children from criminal parents. Sometimes children are used by people who are not actually their family members (common in the illegal drug trade) and sometimes they need medical assistance. In all cases, using software to speed up detainment and case processing would greatly help reunite children who may have been detained separately. The second part of your argument seems unrelated. Illegal immigration is still illegal and nothing causes as much emigration as a failed state. Venezuela and foreign policy is a separate topic.
    - AsyncAwait 7y ago
      > Sometimes children are used by people who are not actually their family members (common in the illegal drug trade) and sometimes they need medical assistance. Right, the keyword here is sometimes. Developing oppressive policies that punish a large number of children who are in fact with their legitimate parents is not a great way to structure society. It is generally accepted as being better to let a few guilty parties escape, rather than punishing innocent people. I am not saying it's an easy thing to solve, but just because something is hard doesn't give you the moral justification to start acting all authoritarian. > Venezuela and foreign policy is a separate topic. No, it's not, a lot of U.S. foreign policy has increased the flow of immigrants and thus resulted in the sort of policies we're seeing now. If that wasn't the case, it is unlikely there would have been such a strong push for as draconian policies regarding immigration as there currently is. That's like saying the US+EU destabilization of Libya, (and now Syria), have no bearing on the refugee flows to Europe from these countries. Of course they do. That in turn is then connected to rising Islamophobia and far-right activism. It's all connected, you can't look at these in isolation.

manigandham 7y ago

Yes, crossing the border illegally is a crime. Criminals are detained. If you get arrested for a minor crime as an American citizen, you are also detained and separated from your family. This is neither shocking nor unexpected. The other issue is far more complex. Obviously there must be a cutoff with some path to citizenship for those allowed to stay but this is why strong border security helps by preventing the issue in the first place.

amalcon 7y ago
It's a misdemeanor, though, like speeding or public drunkenness. People are not arrested for speeding unless it's particularly egregious, and are not held for months over public drunkenness.
- manigandham 7y ago
  You're only released or skip arrest if you will show up to court, something that's offered to citizens who have no/minor criminal records, no outstanding warrants, and a reasonable expectation of showing up. The situation is different with illegal immigrants.
  - amalcon 7y ago
    Which part is different? - Do illegal immigrants with families mostly have significant existing criminal records in the destination jurisdiction? The ones that do should of course be treated more harshly, but most do not. - Do illegal immigrants with families mostly have outstanding warrants in the destination jurisdiction? The outstanding warrant should of course be honored in that case, but most do not. - Or are we imprisoning people for sometimes over a year, placing their children in (at best) the care of strangers, purely as a mechanism to ensure that they show up to court? Could you imagine the outcry if we did that for speeding?
    - manigandham 7y ago
      They are not citizens so don't have the same rights and don't have a legal residence to be sent to so detainment is the only option, other than immediate deportation and skipping any case processing at all. And yes, even if you are a citizen and you get arrested, you will be separated from your family. If you have children, they will be placed in protective services. They do not go with you to jail. Whether you are arrested for speeding is explained in my prior post.
      - amalcon 7y ago
        The U.S. Constitution grants most of the same rights to non-citizens within its borders that it grants to citizens. Things like due process and legal representation are guaranteed to non-citizens within U.S. jurisdiction. There are of course exceptions, like voting, but none of those exceptions are relevant here. Homeless people also don't have a legal address, but a homeless person won't be imprisoned for a year pretrial and separated from their kids for speeding in the car they live in. And no, if you get arrested for most misdemeanor crimes, you will usually not be imprisoned and separated from your family for sometimes over a year with no planned method to ever contact each other again. You are just wrong about this. I'm aware of (and rather outraged by) cases where people convicted of serious felonies (in one case, assault with a deadly weapon) are given sentences that still allow them to live with their children most of the time.
        manigandham 7y ago
        It's not speeding or misdemeanor, it's whether you will show up to court or not. Illegal immigrants are not citizens, don't have the same rights, and don't have anywhere to be released to since they cannot be in the country in the first place. However they do have due-process and have access to lawyers and communications. Detainment is the only answer if you want their cases to be processed, and detainment may sometimes result in families being separated. Homeless people can be in the country and have the ability to show up in court but they do often spend time in jail and sometimes even commit crime because it ensures food and housing.
- pandaman 7y ago
  It's an up to 6 months imprisonment on the first commission and up to 2 years imprisonment on subsequent ones[1]. Is there a definition of misdemeanor, which allows crimes (that are not called "misdemeanor" in the text of law) with up to 2 years imprisonment to be called as such? If so - I never seen one. 1. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325
  - amalcon 7y ago
    > In the United States, misdemeanors are typically crimes with a maximum punishment of 12 months of incarceration, typically in a local jail as contrasted with felons, who are typically incarcerated in a prison. Jurisdictions such as Massachusetts are a notable exception where the maximum punishment of some misdemeanors is up to 2.5 years.[20] People who are convicted of misdemeanors are often punished with probation, community service, short jail term, or part-time incarceration such as a sentence that may be served on the weekends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misdemeanor#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misdemeanor#United_States Public drunkenness can also be punished by 6 months imprisonment in California (not my state, but many HNers live there). Most cases of such are still "punished" by either a reprimand or being kept in a holding cell long enough to sober up.
    - pandaman 7y ago
      Since the federal offense in question is not called a misdemeanor in the law and carries up to 2 years penalty I fail to see how it fits the definition you quoted. Also most cases are not punished by reprimand or short arrest either. I understand that left is pushing the idea that it's as serious as parking violation at most but it takes just few seconds to read the actual law and few minutes to research how is it enforced in practice to realize how inappropriate this comparison is.
      - amalcon 7y ago
        The first offense carries only up to a six month sentence. I would agree that the second offense should be punished more harshly. In that case, it is less likely to be a legitimate asylum seeker for obvious reasons, and more likely to involve other illegal activity. I meant most cases of public drunkenness are punished by a reprimand or short arrest, not most cases of unlawful entry. Previously, most unlawful entries were punished by deportation. Obviously unlawful entry is currently being punished by imprisonment for over a year awaiting hearing, followed by deportation and no plan to ever reunite you with your family. This seems to be technically legal, but the law surely does not require it.
AsyncAwait 7y ago
> Yes, crossing the border illegally is a crime. Criminals are detained. If you get arrested for a minor crime as an American citizen, you are also detained and separated from your family. Right. So you think that a child should suffer the trauma of being in an unknown place without their parents just because they dared to try to cross the border, (without committing any other crime). Ok. However I am sure you're able to see that i.e meddling in Venezuela as the Trump administration is doing is illegal, immoral and WILL produce more migrants. You can't have a policy that is very likely to result in more US-bound migrants, while at the same time being strongly for 'protecting borders'. Certainly not while maintaining any semblance of moral high-ground or legitimacy.
- manigandham 7y ago
  Respond to the argument please, don't assume what I say or think. Should has nothing to do with it. Yes, children suffer when enduring crime, war, and hunger all over the world. This is unfortunate but detainment happens because laws are enforced, just like when child services separates children from criminal parents. Sometimes children are used by people who are not actually their family members (common in the illegal drug trade) and sometimes they need medical assistance. In all cases, using software to speed up detainment and case processing would greatly help reunite children who may have been detained separately. The second part of your argument seems unrelated. Illegal immigration is still illegal and nothing causes as much emigration as a failed state. Venezuela and foreign policy is a separate topic.
  - AsyncAwait 7y ago
    > Sometimes children are used by people who are not actually their family members (common in the illegal drug trade) and sometimes they need medical assistance. Right, the keyword here is sometimes. Developing oppressive policies that punish a large number of children who are in fact with their legitimate parents is not a great way to structure society. It is generally accepted as being better to let a few guilty parties escape, rather than punishing innocent people. I am not saying it's an easy thing to solve, but just because something is hard doesn't give you the moral justification to start acting all authoritarian. > Venezuela and foreign policy is a separate topic. No, it's not, a lot of U.S. foreign policy has increased the flow of immigrants and thus resulted in the sort of policies we're seeing now. If that wasn't the case, it is unlikely there would have been such a strong push for as draconian policies regarding immigration as there currently is. That's like saying the US+EU destabilization of Libya, (and now Syria), have no bearing on the refugee flows to Europe from these countries. Of course they do. That in turn is then connected to rising Islamophobia and far-right activism. It's all connected, you can't look at these in isolation.