Should sanctuary cities be tolerated?

It seems to be lost (to Herc) that many immigrants are doing it legally, with work visas and other, legal, processes. However, The Regime is revoking their legal status en masse. Trump is creating illegality in order to deport people. "Your visa is revoked, you are now illegal, have fun in a gulag" is the Regime line.
 
Other than the actual boogeymen that are exploiting lax immigration enforcement to expand their criminal operations.
You mean the builders and farmers?
Literal gang members of foreign gangs should be singled out for being literal foreign gang members who are here illegally.
Or, we can just arrest them when they commit crime and deal with them accordingly.
 
You mean the builders and farmers?
I mean the drug cartels. But if you mean the illegal builders and farmers, I'm happy to form an anti-illegal-boogeyman alliance with you. More enforcement, more ICE raids, let's go!

Or, we can just arrest them when they commit crime and deal with them accordingly.
Like when they're here illegally and we arrest them and deport them.

Honestly, if I didn't know better I'd think you were actually against illegal immigration!
 
No, we have to profile them based on their skin and language, otherwise the goal doesn't work. The goal is White Supremacy.

You forgot the tats. Very important data.

But first let's employ what Carl Sagan (and others I betcha) called "the power of quantification."

HOW MANY of the illegal or undocumented foreigners in the US today are gangsters, hoodlums, thugs, or other sorts of dangerously bad news?

Let's cite authentic numbers, compiled by honest people.
 
It seems to be lost (to Herc) that many immigrants are doing it legally, with work visas and other, legal, processes. However, The Regime is revoking their legal status en masse. Trump is creating illegality in order to deport people. "Your visa is revoked, you are now illegal, have fun in a gulag" is the Regime line.
Trump is detaining and deporting Green Card holders and work/education visa holders en masse?

Prove it. I smell bull ◊◊◊◊.
 
You may not be aware of having done so, and may not have intended to do so, but by qualifying the issue with a single, numerical standard, you have, whether you like it or not. You have said, quite literally, that because a few illegal immigrants are likely to commit crimes, and since those crimes would not be committed if they were not here, then all illegal immigrants should be excluded....
All illegal immigrants should be excluded because they are ALL illegal.

Full Stop.


...However, as far as detention and deportation goes, we should focus on the criminals. Then once they all gone, go after folks who have recently entered.
 
At a far lower rate than Donald Trump does. At a far lower rate than his staff does. At a far lower rate than the Republican party. At a far lower rate than your neighbors. Gee, I'm really frightened.
So make a new thread about it.
 
I smell bull ◊◊◊◊.
That smell is coming from your end.


You are either not paying attention, or simply ignoring all the facts that paint your Dear Leader as a bad person.
 

The Trump administration is targeting international students with student visas and permanent residents who hold a green card as part of its immigration crackdown.

And while green card holders may legally remain in the U.S. indefinitely, work in the country, and are protected by U.S. laws, the Trump administration has made clear that the demographic is not off limits from its mass-deportation agenda.
 
That smell is coming from your end.


You are either not paying attention, or simply ignoring all the facts that paint your Dear Leader as a bad person.
These people are NOT Green Card holders or people with valid Visas.

So the ◊◊◊◊ is in your neck of the woods.
 
All illegal immigrants should be excluded because they are ALL illegal.

Full Stop.


...However, as far as detention and deportation goes, we should focus on the criminals. Then once they all gone, go after folks who have recently entered.
You have made that position plain. But holding that position is dehumanization, no matter how righteous it is. For, as thaiboxerkitten notes above, your "all" includes a non-trivial number of people who were legally within the system, whose status has been retroactively changed to "illegal," and once again, no matter how good you think that action is, and no matter how small you conceive that minority to be, it exists, and counting those people as simple numbers in the "all illegal immigrants should be excluded" group is dehumanization, pure and simple.

You can counter as usual with opinions on how the system ought to work, and how it ought to be reformed, but what is happening now is happening now. The system we have now is the system with which we all must reckon. And whether you think it unworthy of consideration, or permissible collateral damage, actual people are being actually abused by the system right now. People who thought they were operating correctly within the system are faced right now with deportation, which is irreversible and permanent.

With regard to the links above, you say they do not have valid visas, but the second link is exactly about the revocation of student visas which certainly were valid at some time. You're skirting pretty close here to the case of the official asking for papers, tearing them up, and saying "you have no papers!" And before we have to go round and round on this, revoking a visa is NOT THE SAME as saying a person is an illegal immigrant. Even if the revocation is reasonable and valid, and the expulsion justified, the person whose visa is revoked entered the US legally. Conviction of a crime that carries with it the penalty of expulsion is not retroactive.

You know, one of those other constitutional principles we once thought meant something, has to do with ex post facto laws. Now of course we can quibble about just where those lines are drawn, but retroactively declaring legal status illegal is pretty damned shabby no matter if it makes it through the literalist filter.
 
You have made that position plain. But holding that position is dehumanization, no matter how righteous it is...
Stupidest thing I have read in a while.

It is not "dehumanizing" to say all illegal aliens must be excluded because they are all illegal.

Such anarchist, one-world nonsense is not helpful.
 
...With regard to the links above, you say they do not have valid visas, but the second link is exactly about the revocation of student visas which certainly were valid at some time. You're skirting pretty close here to the case of the official asking for papers, tearing them up, and saying "you have no papers!" And before we have to go round and round on this, revoking a visa is NOT THE SAME as saying a person is an illegal immigrant. Even if the revocation is reasonable and valid, and the expulsion justified, the person whose visa is revoked entered the US legally. Conviction of a crime that carries with it the penalty of expulsion is not retroactive.

You know, one of those other constitutional principles we once thought meant something, has to do with ex post facto laws. Now of course we can quibble about just where those lines are drawn, but retroactively declaring legal status illegal is pretty damned shabby no matter if it makes it through the literalist filter.
There is ZERO evidence of large numbers of people with current Green Cards or Visas being round up.

Its a myth in your head.
 

Back
Top Bottom