5 ms·

>just as all other governments do. I take issue with this, as the manner in which other state actors enforce their border security do not all involve similar c

>just as all other governments do. I take issue with this, as the manner in which other state actors enforce their border security do not all involve similar cruelty to the particular manner in which ICE enforces border security.

leereeves 7y ago
I assume you're referring to the conditions in ICE facilities. I agree, they're in bad shape. But they're in bad shape because Democrats refuse to fund them. What share of the blame do you allocate to the Democrats for that? Edit: Downvote away, if you want to bury the truth, but this is a fact. Democrats are limiting the number of beds in ICE facilities, causing overcrowding, in a misguided attempt to stop immigration enforcement. https://www.npr.org/2019/02/11/693460861/ice-detention-beds-new-stumbling-block-in-efforts-to-prevent-another-shutdown https://www.npr.org/2019/02/11/693460861/ice-detention-beds-...
- SauciestGNU 7y ago
  I absolutely assign lots of blame to Democrats and I was one of the few who were protesting Obama in support of the DREAM Act and against his high rate of deportation.
  - leereeves 7y ago
    That sounds like you blame Democrats who don't entirely agree with you. But how much do you blame the far-left Democrats, who want exactly the same open borders policy you want, for the predicable consequences of their policy of defunding ICE? And if these activists succeed in blocking ICE's contract with GitHub, and that causes even worse conditions, will you also blame these activists for that?
    - SauciestGNU 7y ago
      I reject the premise that ICE must incarcerate these people. Instead of continuing to hold people in camps with inadequate facilities, ICE could have changed their detention policies when faced with reduced funding. After all, that is clearly the intent of Congress, whose duty it is to set policy priorities via budgetary allocations.
      - leereeves 7y ago
        It's not clearly the intent of Congress. If it were, Congress could change the law. Congress is divided. Democrats only have the power to block funding, because it's easier to block legislation than to enact it.
      - zer00eyz 7y ago
        > I reject the premise that ICE must incarcerate these people. When your boss tells you "do X" and you don't agree with it you have choices. Do it, or don't do it and face the consequences. There are very few people in ICE who can actually make this sort of decision and not risk consequences. Most of the people who COULD set this sort of policy are politically appointed, they aren't the (more or less) apolitical staffers who simply do as they are told (assuming it is respectful of the law). > After all, that is clearly the intent of Congress The intent of congress and the president interpreted by the courts, NOT individual ice agents, or for that matter you or I. > whose duty it is to set policy priorities via budgetary allocations. Again, that isn't how it works. Budget can be guiding but it is not always absolute, and sometimes it is (earmarks, pork) but in this case the "cut" isn't a "removal of the underlying law that is to be enforced".
mc32 7y ago
Quite a few other countries simply ship people back as soon as they are found to have violated their visas, or if they lacked a visa. These are normal democratic countries with advanced economies. I’ve seen people given hours to days to settle their stuff (sell or give away property) and leave. That’s an alternative.
- SauciestGNU 7y ago
  That would be preferable to indefinite detention in squalid conditions.
  - pandaman 7y ago
    It's an option for illegal aliens in the US too. However some of them do not seem to share your preference.

leereeves 7y ago

I assume you're referring to the conditions in ICE facilities. I agree, they're in bad shape. But they're in bad shape because Democrats refuse to fund them. What share of the blame do you allocate to the Democrats for that? Edit: Downvote away, if you want to bury the truth, but this is a fact. Democrats are limiting the number of beds in ICE facilities, causing overcrowding, in a misguided attempt to stop immigration enforcement. https://www.npr.org/2019/02/11/693460861/ice-detention-beds-new-stumbling-block-in-efforts-to-prevent-another-shutdown https://www.npr.org/2019/02/11/693460861/ice-detention-beds-...

SauciestGNU 7y ago
I absolutely assign lots of blame to Democrats and I was one of the few who were protesting Obama in support of the DREAM Act and against his high rate of deportation.
- leereeves 7y ago
  That sounds like you blame Democrats who don't entirely agree with you. But how much do you blame the far-left Democrats, who want exactly the same open borders policy you want, for the predicable consequences of their policy of defunding ICE? And if these activists succeed in blocking ICE's contract with GitHub, and that causes even worse conditions, will you also blame these activists for that?
  - SauciestGNU 7y ago
    I reject the premise that ICE must incarcerate these people. Instead of continuing to hold people in camps with inadequate facilities, ICE could have changed their detention policies when faced with reduced funding. After all, that is clearly the intent of Congress, whose duty it is to set policy priorities via budgetary allocations.
    - leereeves 7y ago
      It's not clearly the intent of Congress. If it were, Congress could change the law. Congress is divided. Democrats only have the power to block funding, because it's easier to block legislation than to enact it.
    - zer00eyz 7y ago
      > I reject the premise that ICE must incarcerate these people. When your boss tells you "do X" and you don't agree with it you have choices. Do it, or don't do it and face the consequences. There are very few people in ICE who can actually make this sort of decision and not risk consequences. Most of the people who COULD set this sort of policy are politically appointed, they aren't the (more or less) apolitical staffers who simply do as they are told (assuming it is respectful of the law). > After all, that is clearly the intent of Congress The intent of congress and the president interpreted by the courts, NOT individual ice agents, or for that matter you or I. > whose duty it is to set policy priorities via budgetary allocations. Again, that isn't how it works. Budget can be guiding but it is not always absolute, and sometimes it is (earmarks, pork) but in this case the "cut" isn't a "removal of the underlying law that is to be enforced".

mc32 7y ago

Quite a few other countries simply ship people back as soon as they are found to have violated their visas, or if they lacked a visa. These are normal democratic countries with advanced economies. I’ve seen people given hours to days to settle their stuff (sell or give away property) and leave. That’s an alternative.

SauciestGNU 7y ago
That would be preferable to indefinite detention in squalid conditions.
- pandaman 7y ago
  It's an option for illegal aliens in the US too. However some of them do not seem to share your preference.