Biden still locks kids in cages

Eacaraxe

Elite Member
Legacy
May 28, 2020
773
660
98
Country
United States
Gethsemani said:
So your idea to save money is to do a lot of things that will require expanding the security staff several times over?
Dude, they're kids, not al-Qaeda. They don't need a crack team of highly-equipped and well-trained armed federal agents following them around and monitoring them 24/7. One counselor or social worker could do the same job of keeping the kids' needs met and keeping them from doing stupid shit, as an entire team of security guards more effectively and cheaper, and without that whole "concentration camp" flavor that is more likely than not to make the kids resist detention in the first place.

And if half what's said about what goes on inside these detention facilities is true, the people the kids need protection from are the federal agents and security guards in the first place.

A hotel is a place not designed with security in mind...
I mean it's not like most hotels are multi-story and you could reserve one or more floors for the kids, which means avenues of entry and egress would be limited to elevators (that can be locked down) and staircases (most of which are alarmed because they're fire escapes), that are already under video surveillance, which creates easily monitored and staffed chokepoints atop the hotel's limited number of entries and exits on the ground floor. As opposed to, I dunno, a detention facility in which everything's on the ground floor meaning the entire fucking perimeter has to be guarded.

As shit as the ICE compounds where (and I am guessing they still are, for the most part), they were designed to ensure the safety of the people detained in them.
I'm pretty sure detainee safety was among the last on the list of design intents.

Because those people, the children especially, are at a massively elevated risk of falling victim to human trafficking, slavery or simple organ harvesting from organized crime.
Okay, first, a helluva lot of these kids get here via coyote to begin with. Ship's long since sailed on these kids not having fallen victim to human trafficking. Once they get here, they're comparatively safe -- much safer than doing some stupid ish like, oh I dunno, deporting them to countries rife with human trafficking. Or, leaving them in detention centers where they're already being sexually predated. Or anything.

Second, you wanna talk about "slavery" when three quarters of immigrant detainees -- children or not -- are in facilities run by Geo, CoreCivic, and CCA?

Last, organ harvesting? Are you fucking serious? Lay off the sensationalist journalism, good God.

Seanchaidh said:
oh, was Pinochet not letting people leave?
Last I checked their souls were free to leave any time, as long as they checked their bodies at the nearest mass grave.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,775
310
88
Country
USA
The substitution of "refugees" for "illegal immigrants" hasn't gone unnoticed. Nor the unseemly implications that go along with it.
Refugees are legal immigrants.....
Whoooooosh!

Someone argued to me that borders opening allows the current migrant situation, and your defense of that is that refugees are legal? I really think you may have missed the point in a big way here. The point of that phrasing was not to moralize the actions of migrants, it was to point out that immigration law is quite visibly an insufficient deterrent to people fleeing violence.
 

Revnak

We must imagine Sisyphus horny
Legacy
May 25, 2020
2,599
2,499
118
Country
USA
Whoooooosh!

Someone argued to me that borders opening allows the current migrant situation, and your defense of that is that refugees are legal? I really think you may have missed the point in a big way here. The point of that phrasing was not to moralize the actions of migrants, it was to point out that immigration law is quite visibly an insufficient deterrent to people fleeing violence.
You should tell Republicans that
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaitSeith

Gordon_4

The Big Engine
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
1,788
990
118
Australia
Whoooooosh!

Someone argued to me that borders opening allows the current migrant situation, and your defense of that is that refugees are legal? I really think you may have missed the point in a big way here. The point of that phrasing was not to moralize the actions of migrants, it was to point out that immigration law is quite visibly an insufficient deterrent to people fleeing violence.
Seeking asylum as a refugee IS legal though *looks at Manus and Naaru* however governments are fucking with their definitions of refugee for the express purpose of denying refugee status to people.
 

Fieldy409

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 18, 2020
264
84
33
Country
Australia
How fast can Biden actually change things anyway. He's had what two months of power? He's gotta go through the political system which takes time right? It'd take him even a little longer than most presidents because Trump didn't facilitate the changeover. Is this actually fair to blame him for yet?
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,388
1,205
118
Country
United States of America
How fast can Biden actually change things anyway. He's had what two months of power? He's gotta go through the political system which takes time right? It'd take him even a little longer than most presidents because Trump didn't facilitate the changeover. Is this actually fair to blame him for yet?
It is if you think his promises mean any fucking thing. And if you don't, that's condemnation enough.
 

Eacaraxe

Elite Member
Legacy
May 28, 2020
773
660
98
Country
United States
How fast can Biden actually change things anyway. He's had what two months of power? He's gotta go through the political system which takes time right? It'd take him even a little longer than most presidents because Trump didn't facilitate the changeover. Is this actually fair to blame him for yet?
No. In this regard, he doesn't have to go through Congress or the courts and it's entirely fair to blame him already. ICE is an executive agency, and its policy and staffing are under the direct control of the White House. He can grant amnesty by executive order, something both Reagan and Bush did. Saying Biden "has" to go through "the political system" is about as insensible with regards to immigration, as it is student debt because student debt is also forgivable through executive order.

All the administration is doing, is trying to run out the clock until the midterms when either House or Senate, or both, return to Republican control. Meaning they don't have to do shit, and get to blame Republicans for it without backlash from dipshit Democratic voters.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
1,718
1,164
118
Country
United Kingdom
Someone argued to me that borders opening allows the current migrant situation, and your defense of that is that refugees are legal? I really think you may have missed the point in a big way here.
No, I'm simply making the point that you incorrectly called them illegal. I suspect (as is often the case) that you did so in an effort to undermine sympathy for their situation.

What, correcting a factual inaccuracy is "missing the point" now? No, fuck that noise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Avnger

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,449
583
118
No. In this regard, he doesn't have to go through Congress or the courts and it's entirely fair to blame him already. ICE is an executive agency, and its policy and staffing are under the direct control of the White House.
In theory, but I've heard (no idea if it's true) that ICE has a habit of quietly ignoring directives they don't like. Not to say I think Biden is doing a great job or anything.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
3,712
2,662
118
In theory, but I've heard (no idea if it's true) that ICE has a habit of quietly ignoring directives they don't like. Not to say I think Biden is doing a great job or anything.
My feeling about ICE is that the Trump administration quite happily left them a free hand to do as they chose. Hiring xenophobic thugs and maltreating immigrants with plausible deniability for the administration suited both ICE and Trump fine.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,775
310
88
Country
USA
No, I'm simply making the point that you incorrectly called them illegal. I suspect (as is often the case) that you did so in an effort to undermine sympathy for their situation.

What, correcting a factual inaccuracy is "missing the point" now? No, fuck that noise.
If you're trying to be pedantic, the post I was responding to and referenced illegal immigration simply stated people leaving en masse, and was by no means necessarily applied to specifically refugees. So no, you aren't correcting a factual inaccuracy.

If you want to apply your disagreement to the context that more open borders allowed for the migrant crisis: if they're refugees, the laws aren't preventing them from moving. If they aren't refugees, they're breaking the laws either way. The person I was responding to was wrong no matter what. Feel free to agree.

So what? Given the option of having some refugees as neighbors or those same refugees dying tragically and violently, you picked the latter.
I did not pick the latter. I quite like immigration, and would prefer it expanded.

I just also like having facilities to house and protect children who were either sent or transported across the border.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
1,616
880
118
Country
USA
I did not pick the latter. I quite like immigration, and would prefer it expanded.

I just also like having facilities to house and protect children who were either sent or transported across the border.
Lol, no you don't. If you actually gave a shit, this conversation would never have taken place.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
1,718
1,164
118
Country
United Kingdom
If you're trying to be pedantic, the post I was responding to and referenced illegal immigration simply stated people leaving en masse, and was by no means necessarily applied to specifically refugees. So no, you aren't correcting a factual inaccuracy.
What weaselly bollocks.

Gethsemani originally talked about people "fleeing countries", clearly in reference to people seeking refuge. It was that to which you responded and (2 posts later) shifted the topic onto "illegal immigrants".

And this is hardly pedantry. Its an underhanded rhetorical trick to shift the conversation away from the situations these people are coming from, their requirement for safety, and the international community's duty of care. Its easier to talk of "illegal immigrants" because it makes it easier to condemn and dismiss.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,775
310
88
Country
USA
Lol, no you don't. If you actually gave a shit, this conversation would never have taken place.
Just tagging you to read my response to Silvanus.
What weaselly bollocks.

Gethsemani originally talked about people "fleeing countries", clearly in reference to people seeking refuge. It was that to which you responded and (2 posts later) shifted the topic onto "illegal immigrants".

And this is hardly pedantry. Its an underhanded rhetorical trick to shift the conversation away from the situations these people are coming from, their requirement for safety, and the international community's duty of care. Its easier to talk of "illegal immigrants" because it makes it easier to condemn and dismiss.
I'm not the one shifting the conversation. All of you are. I have not condemned refugees. I have not said I don't want them here. I have not blamed them for their decisions, nor for the crisis the US has on the southern border in general. I haven't said anything I'm being accused of. You all just saw a simple phrase you've been trained to dislike and let your internet argument heuristics take over, and completely derailed the conversation.

I don't think the US is to blame for refugees existing and wanting to take refuge in the US, nor do I think it's a bad thing to build shelters for these people during the time it takes to process them, and it's going to take time because there are multiple major issues at the southern border. There is a refugee crisis, and the US is the destination rather than the cause, and CBP are the good guys protecting the refugees.If any of you have anything to say about any of that, feel free, but you're wasting your time pretending I have anything against people from other countries and/or in bad situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Specter Von Baren

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
725
508
98
Country
United States
Just tagging you to read my response to Silvanus.

I'm not the one shifting the conversation. All of you are. I have not condemned refugees. I have not said I don't want them here. I have not blamed them for their decisions, nor for the crisis the US has on the southern border in general. I haven't said anything I'm being accused of. You all just saw a simple phrase you've been trained to dislike and let your internet argument heuristics take over, and completely derailed the conversation.

I don't think the US is to blame for refugees existing and wanting to take refuge in the US, nor do I think it's a bad thing to build shelters for these people during the time it takes to process them, and it's going to take time because there are multiple major issues at the southern border. There is a refugee crisis, and the US is the destination rather than the cause, and CBP are the good guys protecting the refugees.If any of you have anything to say about any of that, feel free, but you're wasting your time pretending I have anything against people from other countries and/or in bad situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Revnak and Buyetyen

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
1,718
1,164
118
Country
United Kingdom
I'm not the one shifting the conversation. All of you are. I have not condemned refugees. I have not said I don't want them here. I have not blamed them for their decisions, nor for the crisis the US has on the southern border in general. I haven't said anything I'm being accused of. You all just saw a simple phrase you've been trained to dislike and let your internet argument heuristics take over, and completely derailed the conversation.
When others were talking about refugees, you switched the topic with "illegal immigrants". You didn't have to explicitly condemn them; that switch-out is indicative of the attitude I'm criticising.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buyetyen

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
1,616
880
118
Country
USA
Just tagging you to read my response to Silvanus.

I'm not the one shifting the conversation. All of you are. I have not condemned refugees. I have not said I don't want them here. I have not blamed them for their decisions, nor for the crisis the US has on the southern border in general. I haven't said anything I'm being accused of. You all just saw a simple phrase you've been trained to dislike and let your internet argument heuristics take over, and completely derailed the conversation.
And if you think I'm buying any of that nonsense, you must think I'm really stupid.

CBP are the good guys protecting the refugees.If any of you have anything to say about any of that, feel free,
Not that I needed your permission, but I'm not letting this little bit of grotesque gaslighting go unremarked upon.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/06/05/us-stop-using-untrained-abusive-agencies-protests#

A 2014 independent review of 67 incidents in which Border Patrol agents used deadly force found that “Agents have deliberately stepped in the path of cars, apparently to justify shooting at the drivers and have fired in frustration at people throwing rocks from the Mexican side of the border.”

One policy organization found that of 809 complaints of alleged abuse lodged against Border Patrol agents between January 2009 and January 2012, 97 percent resulted in “no action taken” by the agency. A June 2015 interim report of the Customs and Border Protection Integrity Advisory Panel similarly found that “CBP did not have sufficient IA [internal affairs] investigators to investigate these incidents, nor until recently did its IA investigators have authority to conduct investigations involving potential criminal misconduct in the exercise of use of force by CBP’s LEOs [Law Enforcement Officers.]”

A 2011 study by the Homeland Security Studies and Analysis Institute on CBP workforce integrity found that its disciplinary system fails to “foster timely discipline or exoneration .” Five years later, the Homeland Security Integrity Advisory Council’s 2016 Integrity Advisory Panel found that the agency’s disciplinary system remained “broken” and its “disciplinary process takes far too long to be an effective deterrent.”

Incidents involving use of force by firearm have declined in recent years, but there has been an increase in dangerous and sometimes lethal car pursuits by Border Patrol agents, even as police agencies have placed more restrictions on when to pursue fleeing suspects. The agency has not updated its use-of-force statistics since fiscal year 2018.
ACAB