Poll of the Day > Why is the president kidnapping children?

(+) Yeah! (+)

And it sounds like, after insisting that only Congress could fix the problem that he and Jeff Sessions created, he'll be signing an order to end this.

https://www.npr.org/2018/06/20/621798823/speaker-ryan-plans-immigration-votes-amid-doubts-that-bills-can-pass

He's gonna put the children in the wall like attack on titan
---

EvilMegas posted...

He's gonna put the children in the wall like attack on titan

or The Great Wall. the actual Great Wall of China has corpses inside it. when workers died, they buried them inside the wall

Doctor Foxx posted...

are the conditions these people have to live in, and the speed at which they're processing them

Doctor Foxx posted...

Other than children in custody being sent off to be abused while being denied basic comfort, I see no human rights violation

It's like you didn't read what I said at all. Detaining a child separately from their alleged parent temporarily is not a human rights violation. As I have said multiple times before, what they are doing in practice is gross. But taking time to verify that their so-called parents aren't taking them in the country to be sold on the fucking sex-slave market is not a bad thing. It's ridiculous to think otherwise.

They've just royally fucked up the way they do it. It shouldn't take more than a couple of days to process them and in the mean time, they should be kept in good living conditions.

But go ahead and keep straw-manning the argument. I'm sure it'll work. Make next you can call me a nazi.
---

Trump just signed an executive order ending family separation at the border....I wonder if his fana are going to inmediatelly change their position juat becauase Trump did...
---

https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/1009520734140534784

My read of the Trump executive order:

1) They have left clear grounds to keep separating families if they want.

2) They want to keep families together but indefinitely detained, which is currently illegal.

3) They want to make that not illegal.

https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/1009530698645016577

BREAKING: Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen met with Congress. Gave message the administration knows keeping families together is illegal and knows the request to overturn law will fail. But idea is this buys Congress time to change the laws.

well okay then, you fucking idiots.
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/1009520734140534784

My read of the Trump executive order:

1) They have left clear grounds to keep separating families if they want.

2) They want to keep families together but indefinitely detained, which is currently illegal.

3) They want to make that not illegal.

https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/1009530698645016577

BREAKING: Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen met with Congress. Gave message the administration knows keeping families together is illegal and knows the request to overturn law will fail. But idea is this buys Congress time to change the laws.

well okay then, you fucking idiots.

Get people mad about children being sent to concentration camps solo, use it as justification to put entire families in the camps. Great move. No one should be happy about this
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/1009520734140534784

My read of the Trump executive order:

1) They have left clear grounds to keep separating families if they want.

2) They want to keep families together but indefinitely detained, which is currently illegal.

3) They want to make that not illegal.

https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/1009530698645016577

BREAKING: Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen met with Congress. Gave message the administration knows keeping families together is illegal and knows the request to overturn law will fail. But idea is this buys Congress time to change the laws.

well okay then, you fucking idiots.

What will this do?

1. Families will not be immediately separated, but they will be held in detention together.
2. Crossing the border illegally will no longer be deemed a civil violation, it will be deemed a criminal violation.
3. Because it is a criminal violation the parents will be charged criminally. At that point, their children will be forcibly taken.
4. The Executive Order will provide a provision that families will be expedited through the criminal process. This means that the removal of their children will be expedited.

There is still a need for the Tent Cities. There will still be Tender Age Facilities. This serves as optics for Trump to claim he is not ripping families apart. He is. The GOP are. They are just hiding in in the fine print.

This is prolonging and expanding the suffering under the optics of being a benevolent leader
---

well fuck

It's pretty impressive when the leader of a free country can fuck up hard enough that the freaking pope takes time out of his day to single out the assholery.
---

Smarkil posted...

So releasing someone with the expectation that they'll come back for a court appearance rarely ever works. The Trump administration, immigration being one of their main campaign promises, is cracking down on ineffective immigration policies. This doesn't seem illogical. The practice of this might be flawed, but the principle of it doesn't appear to be.

I agree that catch-and-release is a flawed system, but if the alternative is gross violation of human rights and incarcerating children, then I'd rather go with the flawed catch-and-release method.

When I said people were being treated the same way, I meant they were being treated like cattle (IE placed in cages with mats and space blankets). This isn't something that changed under the Trump administration. People were already being treated like that since at least as far back as 2014. Possibly earlier.

Normally, when people are put into cages with space blankets, it's a temporary situation and they do everything they can to get those detainees into better accommodations if they are to remain detained.

But yes, those minors were unaccompanied. These ones aren't. If we had the option of immediately deporting these people to their country of origin, children included, this wouldn't be a problem. But apparently that's unconscionable too. So what choice do you leave the administration? Apparently the only option is to just say 'fuck it' and let them in the country.

That was part of my previous point. We did have a means to expedite the deportations process... if they kept the families together. The moment you remove the children, they then become unaccompanied minors and the process becomes much more complicated from a legal standpoint. Trump's policy created more issues than it was solving.
---

And apparently it wasn't all that well executed because [human trafficking] was still being done in spades.

"In spades" is dubious, at best. But any human trafficking at all is unacceptable. The problem is that Trump implemented a blanket policy. Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor offense. Very minor. It's like detaining every person who gets a parking ticket and taking their kids away just to try and catch one person who committed a hit-and-run and killed somebody.

What's funny is that there is, or was at one time not sure if it's still a thing, an expedited process for handling families. If we could detain families together, there is a streamlined process for either vetting or deporting them...

Again, detaining families together can present potential problems when it comes to trafficking. Separating them makes sense. Why they don't have an expedited process for families, or why they can't seem to get their shit together and do it within a few days for each family, I don't know. That needs to be resolved.

The issue with detaining families is that it's illegal to detain the children. I don't profess to have a better solution, but the one proposed by Trump is unlawful and immoral.

As for electronic monitoring, how is that supposed to work? Electronic monitoring for parolees and the like works because the people who are on it are relatively (at least compared to an immigrant) stable. They have a home, which is used for the homepoint for the device. They have a set schedule/location that they'll be in. And in terms of scope, it's relatively few compared to the amount of parole officers to monitor them.

You can't do that on the scale of immigrants. More so because there's virtually no reason for them not to just destroy the device and fuck off.

This is true. I didn't propose this as the only sensible solution. Only to point out that there are other solutions that don't violate human rights and have the US incarcerating toddlers.

My only problems with this whole situation are the conditions these people have to live in, and the speed at which they're processing them. Otherwise I don't consider this a human rights violation.

Again, even if they're only being separated for a couple of days, that is a gross violation of human rights. If their only crime is crossing the border illegally, removing their children is a disgusting overreach of authority.
---

so since the kidnapped kids are still remaining kidnapped....how long til they get set loose? will they just be raised as wards of the state until they are 18? and then what? do they get deported and sent on a Dark Souls level quest to find their parents somewhere, knowing after all these years they might not even still be alive? or are they given citizenship or what? what's gonna happen to these kids?

Zikten posted...

so since the kidnapped kids are still remaining kidnapped....how long til they get set loose? will they just be raised as wards of the state until they are 18? and then what? do they get deported and sent on a Dark Souls level quest to find their parents somewhere, knowing after all these years they might not even still be alive? or are they given citizenship or what? what's gonna happen to these kids?

Raised in a shit situation, released at 18, arrested at 18.5, folded into the for-profit prison system to keep them at >95% capacity, the end.
---

I hope every garbage poster who defended this gets laughed out of every political discussion on the board.

Even their god daddy backed out of this. They're worse than Trump at this point.
---

Blightzkrieg posted...

I hope every garbage poster who defended this gets laughed out of every political discussion on the board.

Even their god daddy backed out of this. They're worse than Trump at this point.

They'll all flip just like trump wants everyone to think he did, they're sheep.
---

Like every single one of the usual suspects was willing to die on this will mere hours before Trump changed his mind. XD

It's like they all simultaneously shit themselves in front of a restroom door. It's the funniest thing I've seen on this board in ages.
---

Me trying to find where all the trump supporters went in this topic
---

What if I told you that legal citizens are also separated from their children when they get arrested? It's crazy but sometimes the parents are to blame and not the government when they get their children into less than ideal situations

OhhhJa posted...

What if I told you that legal citizens are also separated from their children when they get arrested? It's crazy but sometimes the parents are to blame and not the government when they get their children into less than ideal situations

What if I told you that everyone involved is backing down it's crazy but sometimes when you defend child kidnapping you end up being wrong
---

OhhhJa posted...

What if I told you that legal citizens are also separated from their children when they get arrested? It's crazy but sometimes the parents are to blame and not the government when they get their children into less than ideal situations

what if i told you, again, that those children don't get put in cages in abandoned walmarts to be lost in a system potentially to never be reunited with their families again? especially not for misdemeanor crimes?
---

Jen0125 posted...

OhhhJa posted...

What if I told you that legal citizens are also separated from their children when they get arrested? It's crazy but sometimes the parents are to blame and not the government when they get their children into less than ideal situations

what if i told you, again, that those children don't get put in cages in abandoned walmarts to be lost in a system potentially to never be reunited with their families again? especially not for misdemeanor crimes?

I personally know 2 guys who went through very shitty foster "care" situations. What if I also told you this happened during the Obama administration as well. Oh that's right... you'll make excuses about how those pictures were odd circumstances

I wonder if Ohhhja had thousands of friends who were kidnapped and caged in walmarts by the Obama administration.
---

OhhhJa posted...

I personally know 2 guys who went through very shitty foster "care" situations. What if I also told you this happened during the Obama administration as well. Oh that's right... you'll make excuses about how those pictures were odd circumstances

yeah there are shitty foster care situations. but they're not literal cages in abandoned walmarts where they aren't even being accounted for with no hope of ever being able to be reunited with their parents ever again.
---

OhhhJa posted...

What if I told you that legal citizens are also separated from their children when they get arrested? It's crazy but sometimes the parents are to blame and not the government when they get their children into less than ideal situations

What if I told you it was once against the law to be black without a white slave owner?

Or being black and walking into a whites-only restaurant?

In Germany, it was illegal to be Jewish.

Laws without ethics are the crutch of those that do harm
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

What if I told you it was once against the law to be black without a white slave owner?

Are you in favor of caging children? If so, why?

1/ "THEIR PARENTS BROKE THE LAW"
(A) Like every federal statute, illegal entry has *never* (until last month) been criminally enforced 100% against everyone all of the time
(B) Border crossing has almost always been treated as a civil violation, not a criminal one
(C) Per international law, asylum seekers are not supposed to be criminally prosecuted
(D) Even if they cross an invisible line on a map without permission
(E) You probably committed three federal misdemeanors today before lunch
(F) So did Paul Manafort, who engaged in actual witness tampering *while out on bail for a far more serious suite of major felonies* and didn't I just see you posting last week that he got a raw deal?
(G) You are a sociopath***

2/ "WE DON'T LET OTHER KINDS OF LAWBREAKERS STAY WITH THEIR CHILDREN"
(A) This conduct has never been prosecuted en masse as a criminal offense in US history (see above)
(B) Our carceral state imprisons everyone as the unisized solution to everything from drug addiction to homicide.
(C) That's not a *good* thing
(D) There are alternatives to detention for immigrants in deportation proceedings, and they were working just fine before this
(E) You are a sociopath

3/ "OBAMA DID IT TOO"
(A) No, he didn't
(B) No, he didn't
(C) No, he didn't
(D) No, he didn't
(E) No, he didn't
(F) No, he didn't
(G) No, he didn't
(H) No, he didn't
(I) No, he didn't
(J) No, he didn't
(K) No, he didn't
(L) No, he didn't
(M) Yes, he did some pretty bad things (even to migrant kids), and there's a universe of possibility to his left on immigration issues
(N) Seriously, I promise he didn't do this
(O) For real, he actually didn't
(P) Also, it couldn't be more obvious that you don't care if *anyone* has ever done this objectively awful thing and that you're just going in for a particularly sociopathic round of whataboutism here, which reminds me did I ever mention that
(Q) You are a sociopath

4/ "THE DEMOCRATS MADE THE LAW, TRUMP HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO ENFORCE IT"
(A) Cool. What law?
(B) How does it work?
(C) Are you talking about Flores v. Reno, because that's a judicial order to *keep families together*
(D) Are you talking about the TVPRA, because that was Bush and also you're wrong
(E) What we're actually talking about is 8 USC 1325(b), the misdemeanor illegal entry statute which Jeff Sessions has now required all federal prosecutors to charge in 100% of cases, and that's been around for going on 100 years but, like most federal criminal statutes, barely charged ever for first-time offenders
(F) You are a sociopath

5/ "DEMOCRATS COULD STOP TRUMP WITH A NEW LAW"
(A) That's abuser logic
(B) You're standing by (and, implicitly, behind) a horrific negotiation tactic which is causing permanent trauma to thousands of children for life for political gain
(C) Not one Congressional Republican will agree to sign off on a simple fix which would keep these families together
(D) Trump wants to blow up the entire immigration system by ending *nearly all family visas* (among other horrible stuff) and is literally holding children hostage to get what he wants
(E) You are a sociopath

6/ "HEY, WE ALL REMEMBER THAT PICTURE OF ELIAN GONZALEZ IN A CLOSET WITH A GUN TO HIS HEAD DON'T WE? WASN'T THAT YOUR BOY BILL CLINTON?"
(A) That was awful
(B) But done in the name of *keeping a family together*
(C) Bill Clinton was bad; Janet Reno was worse
(D) You are a sociopath

7/ "THE GOVERNMENT DOES OTHER THINGS THAT SEPARATE PEOPLE FROM THEIR CHILDREN"
(A) Those things are also bad
(B) You are a sociopath

Continued below
---

2/2

8/ JEFF SESSIONS IS CARRYING OUT GOD'S LAW
(A) So it turns out we don't live in a theocracy (yet)
(B) Sessions specifically cited Romans 13:1, which was also used by German Nazi-sympathizing Christians against Nazi-opposing Christians
(C) And slaveowners
(D) The rest of Romans 13 isn't so good for your argument, have you ever actually read it or
(E) You are a sociopath

9/ "WE HAVE ENOUGH PROBLEMS OF OUR OWN"
(A) We sure do!
(B) Trump is actively doing everything possible to make every one of them worse
(C) They're fleeing for their lives
(D) US has a moral debt to #CentralAmerica after 150 yrs of military, economic, and political interference
(E) Turns out we can aid refugee kids *and* homeless vets, what a country
(F) You are a sociopath

10/ "THEY SHOULD HAVE COME THE RIGHT WAY"
(A) Tell me more, how does that work
(B) Very cool, you're wrong
(C) No, for real: learn how our system works
(D) THERE IS NO LINE
(E) What would you do if you had to choose between watching your kids die & crossing an invisible line on a map
F) You are a sociopath

11/"THEY SHOULD COME AT PORTS OF ENTRY OR OTHER LOCATIONS DESIGNATED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL"
(A) Did you know the phrase "port of entry" before last week?
(B) Asylum claims at POEs are being intentionally limited to a point that people are now being forced over the border
(C) This is an intentional tactic to manufacture a crisis and declare war on asylum seekers so that Trump and Congressional Republicans can justify pushing the worst possible legislation and call it "immigration reform"
(D) Hard-right "populist" government in Hungary did exactly the same thing for the same reason
(E) You are a sociopath

12/ "100% OF PARENTS WHO STAY IN THEIR HOME COUNTRIES GET TO STAY WITH THEIR KIDS"
(A) Might want to check your math there
(B) El Salvador & Honduras trade off each year as the world's murder capitals
(C) Being murdered separates parents from kids
(D) You are a sociopath

13/ "WHY DON'T THEY CLAIM ASYLUM IN MEXICO?"
(A) Mexico is not legally a "safe third country" for asylum purposes
(B) Same gangs operate with impunity there, easy to find anyone they want
(C) The Mexican asylum system is overloaded right now
(D) The US has a moral debt to #CentralAmerica after 150 yrs of military, economic, & political interference
(E) You are a sociopath

14/ "WHY DON'T THEY STAY AND FIX THEIR OWN COUNTRIES?"
(A) You are a sociopath

15/ "THERE IS A CRISIS ON THE BORDER"
(A) Only the one that Sessions/Trump have intentionally manufactured
(B) Border crossings at their lowest in 40 years, a relative trickle now
(C) Private prisons spent a lot on Trump's campaign, and their stock did *very* well after the inauguration; this is very obvious ROI
(D) Mexicans are no longer coming, most of what we're seeing now is direct result of a sociopolitical crisis in Central America for which our country bears direct moral responsibility
(E) You are a sociopath

16/ "BAHAHA!1!! *TRIGGERED* MUCH, SNOWFLAKE?"
(A) Knowing that thousands of children are being permanently traumatized & legally orphaned with my tax dollars in my name just so that Trump can get $130 billion for unnecessary border security?
(B) Yeah. I'm upset
(C) Also angry
(D) Don't *ever* mistake my kindness for weakness
(E) You are the *worst* kind of sociopath
---

Truth_Decay posted...

That was part of my previous point. We did have a means to expedite the deportations process... if they kept the families together. The moment you remove the children, they then become unaccompanied minors and the process becomes much more complicated from a legal standpoint. Trump's policy created more issues than it was solving.

I don't have the time to go through all the points, but they're all somewhat related to this. The reason we can't immediately deport this people is because they're claiming not to be illegal immigrants. They're claiming amnesty. So in order to process them for amnesty, they have to be detained while they go through the rigor. As you said, children cannot be detained. So what do we do with them? We can't leave them with their alleged family (trafficking not withstanding which, by the way, I would consider 'thousands' in spades according to the snopes link I posted) because detaining them with or without their family is still detaining them; which is illegal.

So because they won't revoke their amnesty, we have no choice but to detain the parents. What do we do with the children then? We can't just release them into the US and we certainly can't send them home on their own either. So basically the parents are forcing the government to do something illegal one way or another. At best we can release them to relatives in the states, but there's a lot of paperwork and verification that goes with that as well, which is how the Obama administration ended up releasing thousands of children to alleged traffickers.

Also, the amount of accompanied children compared to the amount of unaccompanied children is still staggeringly high. I can't find the figure I was looking at again and I don't have time to look further, but I seem to recall it was something like 14k unaccompanied children (for the year?) to roughly 2k accompanied. Only 3.5% of unaccompanied minors are eventually removed once in the states, for the record, according to the DHS.

The government is trying to enforce the law and now everyone is jumping down their ass about it. As I said before, apparently the only way they can appease their detractors is to just let all these people in and say 'Fuck it'.

The conditions are deplorable. The amount of time is gross. Obviously no child should be subject to the abuse that some have faced. But at some point we have to be realistic. We have a border for a reason.
---

Who does it benefit to incarcerate minors?

And now to send whole families to internment camps?

The swamp in the White House

http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/24/investing/private-prison-stocks-soar-trump/index.html

Trump's Chief of Staff John F. Kelly is someone that directly profits from these child internment camps. They are being run by Dyncorp. Kelly was a paid advisor to this company.

https://wapo.st/2vACzWd

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DynCorp

A company with known histories of trafficking and abusing children. Saving children from traffickers by taking them from family and giving them to companies known to traffic children
---

Smarkil posted...

I don't have the time to go through all the points, but they're all somewhat related to this. The reason we can't immediately deport this people is because they're claiming not to be illegal immigrants. They're claiming amnesty. So in order to process them for amnesty, they have to be detained while they go through the rigor. As you said, children cannot be detained. So what do we do with them? We can't leave them with their alleged family (trafficking not withstanding which, by the way, I would consider 'thousands' in spades according to the snopes link I posted) because detaining them with or without their family is still detaining them; which is illegal.

As I said, any trafficking is horrible, no matter the amount. But even as pervasive as it may be, it's still a small percentage of border crossers. The majority of these families have legitimate claims to seek asylum. I'm not comfortable punishing everyone for the actions of a comparative few. I think that's one point where we differ. Crossing illegally is a very minor offense. Having your children taken away is terrible. Having your children taken away for something as minor as this is way over the line of what is appropriate punishment considering the offense.

So because they won't revoke their amnesty, we have no choice but to detain the parents. What do we do with the children then? We can't just release them into the US and we certainly can't send them home on their own either. So basically the parents are forcing the government to do something illegal one way or another. At best we can release them to relatives in the states, but there's a lot of paperwork and verification that goes with that as well, which is how the Obama administration ended up releasing thousands of children to alleged traffickers.

We do catch traffickers at the border. It's not as if every trafficker slips through. While I'm sure it happens, and will continue to happen, again you're punishing thousands of people for the actions of a comparative few.

And if you're releasing children to traffickers, you're not catching them, so deporting them doesn't solve this. Then, you're just deporting them with their traffickers. Or you're detaining children with their traffickers. How is that any better? And you're traumatizing thousands of families for no more than crossing illegally just to go after this comparative handful of traffickers.

Also, the amount of accompanied children compared to the amount of unaccompanied children is still staggeringly high. I can't find the figure I was looking at again and I don't have time to look further, but I seem to recall it was something like 14k unaccompanied children (for the year?) to roughly 2k accompanied. Only 3.5% of unaccompanied minors are eventually removed once in the states, for the record, according to the DHS.

And we need a solution to that, as well. But the solution is certainly not adding even more minors into the internment population.

The government is trying to enforce the law and now everyone is jumping down their ass about it. As I said before, apparently the only way they can appease their detractors is to just let all these people in and say 'Fuck it'.

Detractors for the most part aren't just throwing their hands up and saying "Fuck it." Again, there are other solutions, and probably none of them are ideal. But some of those solutions are better than violating human rights and terrorizing children. Trump wanted to be the big, tough border protector and use helpless children as a bargaining chip for his dumb wall, and it backfired on him.
---

The conditions are deplorable. The amount of time is gross. Obviously no child should be subject to the abuse that some have faced. But at some point we have to be realistic. We have a border for a reason.

Agree, but I believe we differ as to where we draw the line. I'm not okay with breaking families up at the border. Being a parent myself, I realize how damaging that can be. I'd be okay with detaining families under certain conditions. The modified motels from the 90s were okay, as each family had a somewhat decent living space, but they'd need to be better. Children should have access to education, and even recreation. Conditions need to be improved all-around, including at temporary holds.
---