3 ms·

If a person takes his baby to rob a bank or commits any other arrestable offence and there is no other family available to take the child, then the child will e

by User23 7y ago

If a person takes his baby to rob a bank or commits any other arrestable offence and there is no other family available to take the child, then the child will end up in government custody. I concur that it is a sad and unfortunate result, but it's necessary supposing you don't want bringing a minor along to be a free pass for committing crimes. Since that policy creates incentives for endangering children, I strongly oppose it and anyone else who cares about the welfare of children should too. edit: I debated posting and then deleting this with myself quite a lot, but I'm going to leave it because I think it's important to consider more than just first order effects to protect child welfare, which is something we (I hope) all want.

arcticbull 7y ago
I agree with everything you said, of course, that if a crime is committed and nobody is left to look after the child, the child becomes a ward of the state. They don't go to county lockup, they end up in the foster care system. It certainly doesn't provide a free pass to commit crimes in a "you can do literally anything you want so long as you've got a baby on you" haha. Either way the consequences are negative to the child and the child is also innocent. That is definitely sad and unfortunate. In the case of legitimate refugees seeking asylum, fleeing war-torn areas, the worst case outcome of ending up in a prison in the US may be a better outcome than near-certain death at home, which is why asylum seekers do so, and why the program exists in the first place. I think very few people in the US actually internalize and recognize this. It's also important to remember that some half of all illegal immigrants in the US are visa overstays, and assuming they did intend to leave when they originally spoke with a border guard, merely being in the US while out of status is not a criminal matter, it's a civil matter, like a traffic ticket. This was addressed in 2012 in Arizona v. USA. Congress has repeatedly refused to criminalize unlawful presence. It's a criminal matter if you lie to a border guard, if you enter without inspection, or try to re-enter after deportation. [1] [1] https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/mar/15/florida-conference-catholic-bishops/being-united-states-unlawfully-crime/ https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/mar/15/fl...
toiletfuneral 7y ago
This ignores the objective truth that despite your intentions children are being harmed intentionally by the state. Stop pretending to care, it’s deceitful.
PhasmaFelis 7y ago
> If a person takes his baby to rob a bank or commits any other arrestable offence and there is no other family available to take the child, then the child will end up in government custody. "Government custody" in that case will most likely not involve being crammed into an overcrowded cage without sufficient food, blankets, or sanitation for weeks. When we get angry about border detention today, it's not because it exists, as it has for decades. It's because the way detainees are treated has changed suddenly and dramatically for the worse. And there's a huge difference between a robber bringing their baby along, and a parent struggling to get their children out of a broken nation where their health and survival are at risk. Nobody jumps the border for funsies. The law has no obligation to treat these people and bank-robbing thugs exactly the same.

by User23 7y ago

arcticbull 7y ago

I agree with everything you said, of course, that if a crime is committed and nobody is left to look after the child, the child becomes a ward of the state. They don't go to county lockup, they end up in the foster care system. It certainly doesn't provide a free pass to commit crimes in a "you can do literally anything you want so long as you've got a baby on you" haha. Either way the consequences are negative to the child and the child is also innocent. That is definitely sad and unfortunate. In the case of legitimate refugees seeking asylum, fleeing war-torn areas, the worst case outcome of ending up in a prison in the US may be a better outcome than near-certain death at home, which is why asylum seekers do so, and why the program exists in the first place. I think very few people in the US actually internalize and recognize this. It's also important to remember that some half of all illegal immigrants in the US are visa overstays, and assuming they did intend to leave when they originally spoke with a border guard, merely being in the US while out of status is not a criminal matter, it's a civil matter, like a traffic ticket. This was addressed in 2012 in Arizona v. USA. Congress has repeatedly refused to criminalize unlawful presence. It's a criminal matter if you lie to a border guard, if you enter without inspection, or try to re-enter after deportation. [1] [1] https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/mar/15/florida-conference-catholic-bishops/being-united-states-unlawfully-crime/ https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/mar/15/fl...

toiletfuneral 7y ago

This ignores the objective truth that despite your intentions children are being harmed intentionally by the state. Stop pretending to care, it’s deceitful.

PhasmaFelis 7y ago

> If a person takes his baby to rob a bank or commits any other arrestable offence and there is no other family available to take the child, then the child will end up in government custody. "Government custody" in that case will most likely not involve being crammed into an overcrowded cage without sufficient food, blankets, or sanitation for weeks. When we get angry about border detention today, it's not because it exists, as it has for decades. It's because the way detainees are treated has changed suddenly and dramatically for the worse. And there's a huge difference between a robber bringing their baby along, and a parent struggling to get their children out of a broken nation where their health and survival are at risk. Nobody jumps the border for funsies. The law has no obligation to treat these people and bank-robbing thugs exactly the same.