Why Is Our Government Putting People In Cages?

[3rdnlng]

18 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

"It was the first time a member has voluntarily left the United Nations Human Rights Council. The United States now joins Iran, North Korea and Eritrea as the only countries that refuse to participate in the council’s meetings and deliberations."

 

I can tell you which country is hosting the party, and it ain't Eritrea.

Did you know that when the Council was created in 2006 the Bush administration refused to join? Do you know why?

[HappyDays]

I'm changing my tactic in this thread.

 

I'll take you all at your word that you are genuinely concerned about child trafficking victims. That we can't know for sure which adults are lying about the children they're traveling with.

 

Luckily there's an easy solution:

 

https://dnacenter.com/blog/long-take-get-dna-paternity-test-results/

 

Paternity test results take 1-2 days and they cost a maximum of $500. Let's say we ran it on 20,000 adult men. That would cost at most a total of $10 million, or 0.00025% of the US federal budget in 2017.

 

We all agree that separating parents from their children is wrong. We all agree that even if the parents are wrong for illegally crossing the border, the children don't deserve to be punished with forced separation from the only family they know.

 

So who here would support a policy that ended zero-tolerance family separation and replaced it with state funded paternity tests?

[Buftex]

1 hour ago, LABillzFan said:

 

I repeat.

 

Best. Meltdown. Ever.

 

Nicely done, progs. You simply never disappoint. 

Well, just to make your day a little happier, I think you may be the most consistanly repulsive person I have ever encountered on the internet. I suspect your probably not as big an !@#$ in rhe real world...but that is probably just me being optimistic.

[4merper4mer]

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Lol at Menendez standing back there on the moral high ground.

[Prickly Pete]

17 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

 

So who here would support a policy that ended zero-tolerance family separation and replaced it with state funded paternity tests?

 

No one. Now come up with a reasonable solution.

 

 

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by OJ Tom

[HappyDays]

11 minutes ago, OJ Tom said:

 

No one. Now come up with a reasonable solution.

 

 

 

 

Why not? Why is my solution less reasonable than forcibly separating every single child from their guardians for weeks at a time? I'd like to think our solution to this problem can be both reasonable and moral. It would cost $500 to save each young child and actual parent from the pain and distress that comes with months of forced separation. If my taxes have to go up 0.00025% to make it happen I would accept that.

Edited June 20, 2018 by HappyDays

[keepthefaith]

18 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

I'm changing my tactic in this thread.

 

I'll take you all at your word that you are genuinely concerned about child trafficking victims. That we can't know for sure which adults are lying about the children they're traveling with.

 

Luckily there's an easy solution:

 

https://dnacenter.com/blog/long-take-get-dna-paternity-test-results/

 

Paternity test results take 1-2 days and they cost a maximum of $500. Let's say we ran it on 20,000 adult men. That would cost at most a total of $10 million, or 0.00025% of the US federal budget in 2017.

 

We all agree that separating parents from their children is wrong. We all agree that even if the parents are wrong for illegally crossing the border, the children don't deserve to be punished with forced separation from the only family they know.

 

So who here would support a policy that ended zero-tolerance family separation and replaced it with state funded paternity tests?

 

That's a bandaid.  We need to get to a point where we can legally and effectively prevent as many illegal entries as possible and turn people away immediately when that occurs. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

23 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

I'm changing my tactic in this thread.

 

I'll take you all at your word that you are genuinely concerned about child trafficking victims. That we can't know for sure which adults are lying about the children they're traveling with.

 

Luckily there's an easy solution:

 

https://dnacenter.com/blog/long-take-get-dna-paternity-test-results/

 

Paternity test results take 1-2 days and they cost a maximum of $500. Let's say we ran it on 20,000 adult men. That would cost at most a total of $10 million, or 0.00025% of the US federal budget in 2017.

 

We all agree that separating parents from their children is wrong. We all agree that even if the parents are wrong for illegally crossing the border, the children don't deserve to be punished with forced separation from the only family they know.

 

So who here would support a policy that ended zero-tolerance family separation and replaced it with state funded paternity tests?

You would be ignoring the part where the parent committed a crime. Once United States citizens who commit a crime are allowed to keep their children with them in prison/jail and not have the child(ren) stay in CPS custody or with a designated family member, then your argument would make sense. (For the record, I do not want to see children incarcerated with their criminal parents.)

[HappyDays]

1 minute ago, keepthefaith said:

 

That's a bandaid.  We need to get to a point where we can legally and effectively prevent as many illegal entries as possible and turn people away immediately when that occurs. 

 

This thread isn't about our entire immigration policy. I'm not trying to solve that and I'm not saying I have all the answers. All I want to stop is the new Trump administration policy of forcibly separating every single child from the people that claim to be their parents. It was explained to me in this thread that the true aim of this policy is to stop child sex trafficking. No one here has bothered to present statistics that show how many of these supposed parents are secretly child sex traffickers. But sure, let's assume some of them are. So I have come up with another solution that costs a mere $500 per child. I would assume that everyone in this thread agrees that child sex trafficking is bad, and that forcibly separating children from their real parents is bad. My proposed policy would solve both problems. So what is your objection?

4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

You would be ignoring the part where the parent committed a crime. Once United States citizens who commit a crime are allowed to keep their children with them in prison/jail and not have the child(ren) stay in CPS custody or with a designated family member, then your argument would make sense. (For the record, I do not want to see children incarcerated with their criminal parents.)

 

So you mean to tell me this policy is not actually about stopping child sex trafficking, but that it is about punishment/deterrence? I guess you will have to take that up with others in this thread who explained to me that that has nothing to do with it. Apparently Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump are fighting child sex trafficking. Someone should tell them my idea.

[Buffalo_Gal]

3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

This thread isn't about our entire immigration policy. I'm not trying to solve that and I'm not saying I have all the answers. All I want to stop is the new Trump administration policy of forcibly separating every single child from the people that claim to be their parents. It was explained to me in this thread that the true aim of this policy is to stop child sex trafficking. No one here has bothered to present statistics that show how many of these supposed parents are secretly child sex traffickers. But sure, let's assume some of them are. So I have come up with another solution that costs a mere $500 per child. I would assume that everyone in this thread agrees that child sex trafficking is bad, and that forcibly separating children from their real parents is bad. My proposed policy would solve both problems. So what is your objection?

PUBLIC LAW 107–296—NOV. 25, 2002 116 STAT. 2205 in connection with the functions transferred by this section, and the assets, liabilities, contracts, property, records, and unexpended balance of appropriations, authorizations, allocations, and other funds employed, held, used, arising from, available to, or to be made available to, the Immigration and Naturalization Service in connection with the functions transferred by this section, subject to section 202 of the Budget and Accounting Procedures Act of 1950, shall be transferred to the Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement for allocation to the appropriate component of the Department of Health and Human Services. Unexpended funds transferred pursuant to this paragraph shall be used only for the purposes for which the funds were originally authorized and appropriated. (g) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section— (1) the term ‘‘placement’’ means the placement of an unaccompanied alien child in either a detention facility or an alternative to such a facility; and (2) the term ‘‘unaccompanied alien child’’ means a child who— (A) has no lawful immigration status in the United States; (B) has not attained 18 years of age; and (C) with respect to whom— (i) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States; or (ii) no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.

public law 107 296

Who voted for this law

It passed in 2002 under George W with a Democratic Congress. HTF is this "Trump administration policy"? It is a LAW. And, crazily enough, the law is being followed. After the last administration's antics, I understand that this is an odd concept. Please note above where Cruz got shot down by Schumer that Congress (the legislative branch) should change the law.

 

[keepthefaith]

12 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

This thread isn't about our entire immigration policy. I'm not trying to solve that and I'm not saying I have all the answers. All I want to stop is the new Trump administration policy of forcibly separating every single child from the people that claim to be their parents. It was explained to me in this thread that the true aim of this policy is to stop child sex trafficking. No one here has bothered to present statistics that show how many of these supposed parents are secretly child sex traffickers. But sure, let's assume some of them are. So I have come up with another solution that costs a mere $500 per child. I would assume that everyone in this thread agrees that child sex trafficking is bad, and that forcibly separating children from their real parents is bad. My proposed policy would solve both problems. So what is your objection?

 

Reasonably said, but the adults entering the country illegally are taking the risk and choosing separation.  Many are arriving with minors because they've known that in the recent past they were given preferential treatment.  They are free to leave the country with the kids in tow.  Just like jobs being a magnet to come here illegally, we encourage more illegal crossings if we are offering friendly border service. 

Edited June 20, 2018 by keepthefaith

[Buffalo_Gal]

11 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

So you mean to tell me this policy is not actually about stopping child sex trafficking, but that it is about punishment/deterrence? I guess you will have to take that up with others in this thread who explained to me that that has nothing to do with it. Apparently Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump are fighting child sex trafficking. Someone should tell them my idea.

1

You'd have to go back to 2002 and query everyone that voted for that law to find out the reasoning behind it. Was it to stop children from being used as drug mules? Was it to stop children from being used in sex trafficking? Was it to stop children from being used as shields so adults could claim "amnesty" as they crossed the border? I have no idea. Write to your Congress-critter (from 2002) who was in office at the time and CC W while you are at it to ask their reasoning behind passing that law. 

[HappyDays]

14 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

Reasonably said, but the adults entering the country illegally are taking the risk and choosing separation

 

No they are not choosing separation. Many tried to present themselves at legal ports of entry but were turned away. If it were me and my child I wouldn't think twice about trying to cross over illegally at that point. There is a perfectly legal procedure for seeking political asylum at these legal ports of entry, but what should they do when they arrive to find that procedure blocked? I suppose they should just suck it up and go home, but if you're a parent you know that is not really an option for them. Also since this policy is new the first families affected by it literally would not have known about it, and therefore couldn't be held responsible for choosing their punishment.

 

The law posted above refers to persons who are criminally prosecuted for crossing the border illegally. Past administrations would not prosecute every single person that crossed illegally, certainly not those with a "credible fear" of their country of origin (asylum seekers). The Trump administration, driven by Jeff Sessions, has changed that policy and now prosecutes every single person that illegally crosses the border regardless of their situation. There is no law which says they have to do that. They intentionally created a zero tolerance policy and are trying to hide behind a law that wouldn't apply if the zero tolerance policy wasn't in effect.

Edited June 20, 2018 by HappyDays

[HappyDays]

And if anyone wants to read more about how the Trump administration specifically created this new policy, this article explains it in detail:

 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2018/06/18/fact-check-no-law-requires-family-separation-border-despite-trump-administrations-claims

 

In anticipation of cries of media bias, I will note that this paper endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016, however she was the first Democrat they had endorsed since FDR. They are not a liberal news rag. These are the facts of this new policy and no one can pretend that it is a simple matter of enforcing existing laws.

[IDBillzFan]

49 minutes ago, Buftex said:

Well, just to make your day a little happier, I think you may be the most consistanly repulsive person I have ever encountered on the internet. I suspect your probably not as big an !@#$ in rhe real world...but that is probably just me being optimistic.

 

And just to make your day a littler happier, it's impossible to express how absolutely little I care about what you think. 

 

I have watched and listened to progs like yourself B word and whine and moan for YEARS when people like myself criticized Barry for his amazing race to the bottom, with his ridiculous "phone and pen" and his embarrassing "If you like your doctor..." lies. He prodded and poked and trolled everyone, and the moment anyone tried to stand up, they were called racists and pigs. 

 

All of sudden you whiners don't like what the hell is happening, and not a one of you is smart enough to understand how Barry and his identity politics lapdog progs CREATED the Trump candidate. Not a single one of your idiots.

 

I genuinely can not stand Trump. He's a disgusting pig. And yet people like you and Barry have me cheering for him simply because he makes all of you schitt your diapers every single day.

 

 

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

I'm changing my tactic in this thread.

 

I'll take you all at your word that you are genuinely concerned about child trafficking victims. That we can't know for sure which adults are lying about the children they're traveling with.

 

Luckily there's an easy solution:

 

https://dnacenter.com/blog/long-take-get-dna-paternity-test-results/

 

Paternity test results take 1-2 days and they cost a maximum of $500. Let's say we ran it on 20,000 adult men. That would cost at most a total of $10 million, or 0.00025% of the US federal budget in 2017.

 

We all agree that separating parents from their children is wrong. We all agree that even if the parents are wrong for illegally crossing the border, the children don't deserve to be punished with forced separation from the only family they know.

 

So who here would support a policy that ended zero-tolerance family separation and replaced it with state funded paternity tests?

 

It could certainly be a valid part of a solution, though I'd want see data on reliability, and cost benefit actuarial data.  Please note that I said "part".  You'd want much more than that for what I believe are fairly obvious reasons, though what you've presented could have positive impact in working towards a solution.

[Buftex]

22 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

And just to make your day a littler happier, it's impossible to express how absolutely little I care about what you think. 

 

I have watched and listened to progs like yourself B word and whine and moan for YEARS when people like myself criticized Barry for his amazing race to the bottom, with his ridiculous "phone and pen" and his embarrassing "If you like your doctor..." lies. He prodded and poked and trolled everyone, and the moment anyone tried to stand up, they were called racists and pigs. 

 

All of sudden you whiners don't like what the hell is happening, and not a one of you is smart enough to understand how Barry and his identity politics lapdog progs CREATED the Trump candidate. Not a single one of your idiots.

 

I genuinely can not stand Trump. He's a disgusting pig. And yet people like you and Barry have me cheering for him simply because he makes all of you schitt your diapers every single day.

 

 

 

 

And that right there is what makes you so repulsive. You know better, but you take glee. You are like a walking, talking, typing Chinese finger trap. Smug, hypocritical and so high and mighty.  Keep telling everyone you genuinely can not stand Trump, but take every opportunity you can find to contort your ethiics to support his bull ****.  

Edited June 20, 2018 by Buftex

[Doc Brown]

13 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

And if anyone wants to read more about how the Trump administration specifically created this new policy, this article explains it in detail:

 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2018/06/18/fact-check-no-law-requires-family-separation-border-despite-trump-administrations-claims

 

In anticipation of cries of media bias, I will note that this paper endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016, however she was the first Democrat they had endorsed since FDR. They are not a liberal news rag. These are the facts of this new policy and no one can pretend that it is a simple matter of enforcing existing laws.

I'm still confused after a week of conflicting reports from the media and the different players in Trump's administration.  Sessions, Miller, and Kelly called their policy a deterrent for those who broke the law.  Nielsen said they don't have a policy of separating children at the border.  Trump's all over the place.  The Democrats are focused solely on going over the top to make Trump look like the bad guy.

 

The problem seems to be that each administration has the "discretion" of what to do when people try to cross illegally.  It would be nice if we had a consistent policy that each administration has to follow (whether there's a Democrat or Republican president).

[Prickly Pete]

5 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Why not? Why is my solution less reasonable than forcibly separating every single child from their guardians for weeks at a time? I'd like to think our solution to this problem can be both reasonable and moral. It would cost $500 to save each young child and actual parent from the pain and distress that comes with months of forced separation. If my taxes have to go up 0.00025% to make it happen I would accept that.

 

 

Your motivation for posting here seems to solely be to "scold Whitey".

Piss off, I don't need a scolding.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by OJ Tom

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

4 hours ago, Buftex said:

And that right there is what makes you so repulsive. You know better, but you take glee. You are like a walking, talking, typing Chinese finger trap. Smug, hypocritical and so high and mighty.  Keep telling everyone you genuinely can not stand Trump, but take every opportunity you can find to contort your ethiics to support his bull ****.  

 

No one who voted for obama is serious about ethics.

5 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Lol at Menendez standing back there on the moral high ground.

 

Gotta trot out the token Hispanic, no matter how corrupt he is.