4 ms·

Who said "you can't arrest people who cross the border illegally"? I will not discuss this with you while you continue to whip out Straw Man arguments, nor will

Who said "you can't arrest people who cross the border illegally"? I will not discuss this with you while you continue to whip out Straw Man arguments, nor will I engage with your aggressive manner.

DuskStar 7y ago
"Don't separate families" is equivalent to "don't arrest people who say they're a family" - in effect if not in intention.
- wbronitsky 7y ago
  Again, you throw around a Straw Man to service your point of view. I'm not here for this. Good day.
  - DuskStar 7y ago
    You said "that's a straw man". I attempted to show how it wasn't - specifically that there wasn't a gap between the thing you called a straw man and the beliefs you thought the code author had. You then continued to call it a straw man without elaborating how. I'm not sure that I'm the person refusing to engage here.
prepend 7y ago
Not OP but what confuses me that I don’t know how it’s possible to arrest families without separating them. In a hypothetical situation where a family of four (mom, dad and two kids) cross illegally and ICE catches them. They are arrested. What is the desired outcome? The options I can think of are: 1) Let them go 2) Don’t arrest them at all 3) Arrest one parent, let the other parent free in the US with kids 4) arrest both parents, set the kids free alone 5) arrest both parents, let kids stay with citizens 6) arrest both parents, let kids stay with non-citizens 7) arrest all four, keep kids in jail 8) arrest parents, detain kids in non-prison weird foster care thing All of these seem to suck for me and make me confused. Are there other options that I’m missing? I’m against separating families and putting kids in cages and want to solve it. What are the options that we can do?
- DuskStar 7y ago
  9) toss the entire family back across the border (immediately) 10) arrest parents, toss kids back across the border 11) keep kids, toss parents back across the border (I think those are even worse, for the record) 5/8 are what we do for other crimes, though. And that's part of the reason this is such a good scissor - a lot of people see others saying "you can't break up illegal immigrant families!" and wonder why that doesn't apply to the families of US citizens, too.
- jadell 7y ago
  Until relatively recent history, "let them go" with an order to appear in court at a later date was the SOP for anyone without a criminal history. I'm not sure what the official name for this policy was, but political operatives sometimes use the pejorative "catch and release" to describe it. Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor. Unless we start separating and detaining families indefinitely for speeding and public intoxication, we should probably stop doing it for crossing illegally. Otherwise, we should change the laws regarding illegal crossing to make the procedures and penalties more explicit. As it stands now, locking up non-violent offenders for illegal crossing is a totally arbitrary policy dictated by the whichever administration is in power. There's nothing in the laws that say families have to be detained (and thus separated.)
  - DuskStar 7y ago
    The problem with comparing "catch and release" with letting someone out on bail/with a citation for public intoxication is that for the latter, we have a positive identification for the person in question, we know where they live, and generally they have a lot to lose from failing to show. This isn't really the case for people crossing the border illegally. Almost by definition they won't have a permanent address or a life to be uprooted from (or if they do, they're already uprooted from it - that's why they're crossing the border), and if they're set free they most likely won't have legal ways to support themselves. (No green card == no legal employment prospects) I'd love to see historical rates of people showing up for their court hearings in illegal immigration cases like you describe, though - maybe I'm wrong!

Who said "you can't arrest people who cross the border illegally"? I will not discuss this with you while you continue to whip out Straw Man arguments, nor will I engage with your aggressive manner.

DuskStar 7y ago

"Don't separate families" is equivalent to "don't arrest people who say they're a family" - in effect if not in intention.

wbronitsky 7y ago
Again, you throw around a Straw Man to service your point of view. I'm not here for this. Good day.
- DuskStar 7y ago
  You said "that's a straw man". I attempted to show how it wasn't - specifically that there wasn't a gap between the thing you called a straw man and the beliefs you thought the code author had. You then continued to call it a straw man without elaborating how. I'm not sure that I'm the person refusing to engage here.

prepend 7y ago

Not OP but what confuses me that I don’t know how it’s possible to arrest families without separating them. In a hypothetical situation where a family of four (mom, dad and two kids) cross illegally and ICE catches them. They are arrested. What is the desired outcome? The options I can think of are: 1) Let them go 2) Don’t arrest them at all 3) Arrest one parent, let the other parent free in the US with kids 4) arrest both parents, set the kids free alone 5) arrest both parents, let kids stay with citizens 6) arrest both parents, let kids stay with non-citizens 7) arrest all four, keep kids in jail 8) arrest parents, detain kids in non-prison weird foster care thing All of these seem to suck for me and make me confused. Are there other options that I’m missing? I’m against separating families and putting kids in cages and want to solve it. What are the options that we can do?

DuskStar 7y ago
9) toss the entire family back across the border (immediately) 10) arrest parents, toss kids back across the border 11) keep kids, toss parents back across the border (I think those are even worse, for the record) 5/8 are what we do for other crimes, though. And that's part of the reason this is such a good scissor - a lot of people see others saying "you can't break up illegal immigrant families!" and wonder why that doesn't apply to the families of US citizens, too.
jadell 7y ago
Until relatively recent history, "let them go" with an order to appear in court at a later date was the SOP for anyone without a criminal history. I'm not sure what the official name for this policy was, but political operatives sometimes use the pejorative "catch and release" to describe it. Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor. Unless we start separating and detaining families indefinitely for speeding and public intoxication, we should probably stop doing it for crossing illegally. Otherwise, we should change the laws regarding illegal crossing to make the procedures and penalties more explicit. As it stands now, locking up non-violent offenders for illegal crossing is a totally arbitrary policy dictated by the whichever administration is in power. There's nothing in the laws that say families have to be detained (and thus separated.)
- DuskStar 7y ago
  The problem with comparing "catch and release" with letting someone out on bail/with a citation for public intoxication is that for the latter, we have a positive identification for the person in question, we know where they live, and generally they have a lot to lose from failing to show. This isn't really the case for people crossing the border illegally. Almost by definition they won't have a permanent address or a life to be uprooted from (or if they do, they're already uprooted from it - that's why they're crossing the border), and if they're set free they most likely won't have legal ways to support themselves. (No green card == no legal employment prospects) I'd love to see historical rates of people showing up for their court hearings in illegal immigration cases like you describe, though - maybe I'm wrong!