5 ms·

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

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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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.
        amalcon 8y ago
        You've mentioned rights accorded to citizens, but not to noncitizens, twice now. I can't see the relevance. Which relevant right is guaranteed to citizens, but not to noncitizens in U.S. jurisdiction? Detainment is not the only answer if you want these cases to be processed. I cite as evidence the fact that there was a backlog of these cases to be processed when the zero-tolerance policy was implemented. If cases were not being processed, there would be no backlog. Homeless people sometimes going to prison is not relevant to whether or not every illegal immigrant should go to prison.
pandaman 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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.

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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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.
      - amalcon 8y ago
        You've mentioned rights accorded to citizens, but not to noncitizens, twice now. I can't see the relevance. Which relevant right is guaranteed to citizens, but not to noncitizens in U.S. jurisdiction? Detainment is not the only answer if you want these cases to be processed. I cite as evidence the fact that there was a backlog of these cases to be processed when the zero-tolerance policy was implemented. If cases were not being processed, there would be no backlog. Homeless people sometimes going to prison is not relevant to whether or not every illegal immigrant should go to prison.

pandaman 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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.