6 ms·

I am going to be downvoted to oblivion but sanctuary cities for what you are saying is like a monkey patch in code. It "works" for now but it's not a long-term

I am going to be downvoted to oblivion but sanctuary cities for what you are saying is like a monkey patch in code. It "works" for now but it's not a long-term viable solution. A person breaking the law and be fine to be a criminal to be in a country is already the wrong mindset. And these persons are only at step 1 in a life in the US. What happens when life will be tough later are they now magically going to stop all criminal solutions? Their solution to be in the US was already to break the law. Thankfully there are already laws to protect people being persecuted, in danger, people needing asylum, etc... We need even better laws in these areas and improvements in witness protection laws for a part of your example. But again sanctuary cities "work" for now but it is not a long-term solution. Beyond attracting criminals, it also creates a weird lawful oxymoron at the opposite of the rule of the law. (And again, there are things like asylum, etc...)

nemomarx 1y ago
Sure, we should also reform immigration and make the legal pathways better and more accessible to attract citizens but cities have no ability to control that, while they can impact some things locally, so it's different groups of people doing both of these?
- bdelmas 1y ago
  To be honest, for me personally having cities that have that much power is weird to me. It should be something at the state or federal level. But as a counterargument: if this is not monkey patching, why not create a full sanctuary state? Sounds scary to me. We need better laws. Current laws are also in place because it's just easier and works for now. Like instead of redoing visas and how they are processed for the 1M undocumented persons working in agriculture (that's 40% of ag workers!), people are fine with how things are now and also can justify to give lower unlawful salaries. Like this state is also bad for undocumented people too. They can just be taken advantage of and fired/used/disregarded when their managers want to... Solutions that go against the rule of the law are overall a very bad idea for everyone.
  - kstrauser 1y ago
    94% of Californians live in cities. It's not that a "city" has so much power, as that large populations of people living near each other decided how they wanted to handle their business. Because they have a large proportion of the state's legislative representation, as is appropriate, that legislature tends to vote in ways that the cities' residents want them to.
trhway 1y ago
>What happens when life will be tough later are you sure that their life wasn't much tougher before they came here?
SimbaOnSteroids 1y ago
Calling it a crime vastly overstates what the offense is. Entering in the country illegally is a misdemeanor, when you call them criminals you rhetorically frame it as a serious offense like a felony. Its disingenuous.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  > Being in the country illegally is a misdemeanor No, its not. Entering the country illegally is at least a misdemeanor (can be a felony depending on specific details), but being in the country illegally is not, itself, a crime, and it is possible to be in the country illegally without entering illegally.
  - SimbaOnSteroids 1y ago
    ah my mistake, regardless calling people here illegally criminals is disingenuous given the potential offense committed.
    - IncreasePosts 1y ago
      Is your argument really "misdemeanors aren't crimes"? Imagine, "someone knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to you or with criminal negligence the person causes bodily injury to you by means of a deadly weapon". Would you not consider yourself the victim of a crime in that case? Because that's just third degree assault - a misdemeanor(at least, here in Colorado)
      - goatlover 1y ago
        Smoking a joint can be misdemeanor. Many people don't think it should be criminal at all. It really depends on who passes and enforces said laws. Similar to smoking a joint, crossing a border illegally is a victimless infraction. Depending on who you ask, it's not a big deal and possibly even a positive for the US, or it's the end of America, when it's the POTUS posting on his social media account.
      - 1y ago
jmull 1y ago
An aside: “monkey patch” doesn’t mean what you think it means. More on topic… crimes aren’t all the same, and the willingness of a person to commit one kind of crime doesn’t necessarily mean they are willing to commit another kind of crime. For example, a large proportion of drivers in the US break the law every time they drive, from speeding to rolling stops, etc. By your standard all of these people are criminals who we can expect to keep reaching for “criminal solutions”. Why shouldn’t we imprison or deport all such people? Or at least take away their driver’s licenses and cars?
- lostmsu 1y ago
  Of the options you mentioned the law only prescribes taking away driver licenses AFAIK. And you could, see no problem with that.
  - jmull 1y ago
    The point is, people are breaking the law all the time, that law is rarely enforced, yet no one seems to be calling for a widespread crackdown on speeding. The previous poster calls on us to be concerned about crimes and criminals leading to more crimes, but we already live in a country where very large numbers of “criminals” are driving around all over the place, yet it doesn’t seem to be a problem. You might ask yourself why it’s supposed to be a big problem for one kind of law but not for another.
    - lostmsu 1y ago
      > You might ask yourself why it’s supposed to be a big problem for one kind of law but not for another. It is not a hard question. Speeding has already been determined to be of lesser harm and therefore the law calls for lesser punishment for violations.
      - ModernMech 1y ago
        > Speeding has already been determined to be of lesser harm Determined by whom? Each year, speeders kill more people than illegal immigrants.

nemomarx 1y ago

Sure, we should also reform immigration and make the legal pathways better and more accessible to attract citizens but cities have no ability to control that, while they can impact some things locally, so it's different groups of people doing both of these?

bdelmas 1y ago
To be honest, for me personally having cities that have that much power is weird to me. It should be something at the state or federal level. But as a counterargument: if this is not monkey patching, why not create a full sanctuary state? Sounds scary to me. We need better laws. Current laws are also in place because it's just easier and works for now. Like instead of redoing visas and how they are processed for the 1M undocumented persons working in agriculture (that's 40% of ag workers!), people are fine with how things are now and also can justify to give lower unlawful salaries. Like this state is also bad for undocumented people too. They can just be taken advantage of and fired/used/disregarded when their managers want to... Solutions that go against the rule of the law are overall a very bad idea for everyone.
- kstrauser 1y ago
  94% of Californians live in cities. It's not that a "city" has so much power, as that large populations of people living near each other decided how they wanted to handle their business. Because they have a large proportion of the state's legislative representation, as is appropriate, that legislature tends to vote in ways that the cities' residents want them to.

trhway 1y ago

>What happens when life will be tough later are you sure that their life wasn't much tougher before they came here?

SimbaOnSteroids 1y ago

Calling it a crime vastly overstates what the offense is. Entering in the country illegally is a misdemeanor, when you call them criminals you rhetorically frame it as a serious offense like a felony. Its disingenuous.

dragonwriter 1y ago
> Being in the country illegally is a misdemeanor No, its not. Entering the country illegally is at least a misdemeanor (can be a felony depending on specific details), but being in the country illegally is not, itself, a crime, and it is possible to be in the country illegally without entering illegally.
- SimbaOnSteroids 1y ago
  ah my mistake, regardless calling people here illegally criminals is disingenuous given the potential offense committed.
  - IncreasePosts 1y ago
    Is your argument really "misdemeanors aren't crimes"? Imagine, "someone knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to you or with criminal negligence the person causes bodily injury to you by means of a deadly weapon". Would you not consider yourself the victim of a crime in that case? Because that's just third degree assault - a misdemeanor(at least, here in Colorado)
    - goatlover 1y ago
      Smoking a joint can be misdemeanor. Many people don't think it should be criminal at all. It really depends on who passes and enforces said laws. Similar to smoking a joint, crossing a border illegally is a victimless infraction. Depending on who you ask, it's not a big deal and possibly even a positive for the US, or it's the end of America, when it's the POTUS posting on his social media account.
    - 1y ago

jmull 1y ago

An aside: “monkey patch” doesn’t mean what you think it means. More on topic… crimes aren’t all the same, and the willingness of a person to commit one kind of crime doesn’t necessarily mean they are willing to commit another kind of crime. For example, a large proportion of drivers in the US break the law every time they drive, from speeding to rolling stops, etc. By your standard all of these people are criminals who we can expect to keep reaching for “criminal solutions”. Why shouldn’t we imprison or deport all such people? Or at least take away their driver’s licenses and cars?

lostmsu 1y ago
Of the options you mentioned the law only prescribes taking away driver licenses AFAIK. And you could, see no problem with that.
- jmull 1y ago
  The point is, people are breaking the law all the time, that law is rarely enforced, yet no one seems to be calling for a widespread crackdown on speeding. The previous poster calls on us to be concerned about crimes and criminals leading to more crimes, but we already live in a country where very large numbers of “criminals” are driving around all over the place, yet it doesn’t seem to be a problem. You might ask yourself why it’s supposed to be a big problem for one kind of law but not for another.
  - lostmsu 1y ago
    > You might ask yourself why it’s supposed to be a big problem for one kind of law but not for another. It is not a hard question. Speeding has already been determined to be of lesser harm and therefore the law calls for lesser punishment for violations.
    - ModernMech 1y ago
      > Speeding has already been determined to be of lesser harm Determined by whom? Each year, speeders kill more people than illegal immigrants.