Separating immigrant families and imprisoning children

[carpedm9587]

From a headline in the March 11, 2015 of the Washington Post: Mexican kids held for months as punishment for border-crossing

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't that nearly two months before Trump even announced his intention to run for President? And roughly one year and ten months before he was sworn in. So who then was president at this time?

These were not children separated from parents - they were unaccompanied children sent BY their parents into the U.S. Part of the "flood" that hit from 2013-2015 and overwhelmed resources. They eventually caught up, but some kids were in shelters for a long time.

We're comparing apples and oranges here.

[KingsGambit]

i.e. OJ Simpson was famously found not guilty of murder, but was subsequently sued in civil court and found liable for the deaths of the people he was alleged to have killed.

[Mountain Man]

Because you're claim is not true...?

But it is true. (Politifact? Really? )

Don't you remember the pictures making the rounds several weeks back showing children in cages and sleeping on the floor? The left was whooping and hollering about how terrible Trump was to keep kids in those conditions... until someone pointed out that those were pictures from when Obama was in office, and the left had a collective "gulp" and started hastily deleting all the posts.

Anyway...

Source: Obama’s Immigration Agencies Separated Children From Their Families, Too

Since 2008, the United States has had a policy known as the Alien Transfer Exit Program (ATEP), or Lateral Repatriation. This program focuses on detaining male migrants of Mexican descent.

Here’s how it works: Once an immigrant is caught attempting to cross the border without documentation, they are detained, flown or bused across the United States and then shown the exit at another segment of the U.S.-Mexico border–thousands of miles from their original point of entry.

[...]

Sparingly used upon inception, the Obama administration drastically increased the use of ATEP in 2011, responding to a perceived increase in attempts at immigration into the United States by Mexican nationals.

[...]

Multiple stories about those family detention centers [were] written during the Obama era–just not by the mainstream media. In particular, dozens of stories about the Nogales Placement Center in Nogales, Arizona particular were written by journalists at Shadowproof, a reader-supported media outlet, alone. Journalists for Shadowproof also frequently reported on the T. Don Hutto Residential Center in Taylor, Texas. Most media declined to investigate these facilities until fairly recently.

https://lawandcrime.com/immigration/...-families-too/

© Copyright Original Source

And for the record, this is from a piece that is attempting to defend the practice under Obama while hypocritically condemning it under Trump.

There's also this little inconvenient truth:

Source: Trustworthy Source

“We had ICE in our office last week, and they told us just on the asylum issue, just on asylum, 2,000 people a week showing up at the border,” Rep. Jordan said. “Think about that, that’s 100,000 people a year and they told us that 80 percent of those people wind up not being legitimate asylum seekers.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ction-mandate/

© Copyright Original Source

Then, of course, there is the fact that those families who enter legally are not separated. It's only those who choose to violate our laws who face the consequences.

[carpedm9587]

But it is true. (Politifact? Really? )

For someone who keeps calling people on the "genetic fallacy," you certainly engage in it regularly. The assertions of the article check out - check them for yourself.

Don't you remember the pictures making the rounds several weeks back showing children in cages and sleeping on the floor? The left was whooping and hollering about how terrible Trump was to keep kids in those conditions... until someone pointed out that those were pictures from when Obama was in office, and the left had a collective "gulp" and started hastily deleting all the posts.

Yes - they were from the time noted in my previous posts, when unaccompanied children were sent here in droves and overwhelmed resources. They were foolishly published as "Trump" pictures when they came from the Obama presidency.

Anyway...

Source: Obama’s Immigration Agencies Separated Children From Their Families, Too

Since 2008, the United States has had a policy known as the Alien Transfer Exit Program (ATEP), or Lateral Repatriation. This program focuses on detaining male migrants of Mexican descent.

Here’s how it works: Once an immigrant is caught attempting to cross the border without documentation, they are detained, flown or bused across the United States and then shown the exit at another segment of the U.S.-Mexico border–thousands of miles from their original point of entry.

[...]

Sparingly used upon inception, the Obama administration drastically increased the use of ATEP in 2011, responding to a perceived increase in attempts at immigration into the United States by Mexican nationals.

© Copyright Original Source

[...]

And nothing here about children...

[cite]Multiple stories about those family detention centers [were] written during the Obama era–just not by the mainstream media. In particular, dozens of stories about the Nogales Placement Center in Nogales, Arizona particular were written by journalists at Shadowproof, a reader-supported media outlet, alone. Journalists for Shadowproof also frequently reported on the T. Don Hutto Residential Center in Taylor, Texas. Most media declined to investigate these facilities until fairly recently.[/cite]

Correct. The Obama era policy was to NOT prosecute illegal immigrants with children specifically so they would NOT be separated from their families. Instead, they were detained together in family detention centers.

[cite]https://lawandcrime.com/immigration/...-families-too/[/cite]
And for the record, this is from a piece that is attempting to defend the practice under Obama while hypocritically condemning it under Trump.

As I noted in my previous post, it did happen under Obama - but was the exception rather than the rule. Trump is making it the rule.

There's also this little inconvenient truth:

Source: Trustworthy Source (really?) :wink:

“We had ICE in our office last week, and they told us just on the asylum issue, just on asylum, 2,000 people a week showing up at the border,” Rep. Jordan said. “Think about that, that’s 100,000 people a year and they told us that 80 percent of those people wind up not being legitimate asylum seekers.”

© Copyright Original Source

Source: Trustworthy Source (really?) :wink:

And this also has nothing to do with family separation.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ction-mandate/

© Copyright Original Source

Then, of course, there is the fact that those families who enter legally are not separated. It's only those who choose to violate our laws who face the consequences.

We all know this, MM. Of course they don't separate legally entering families. The entire issue is what happens to families that enter illegally. Most Christian leadership groups have denounced the action. All living first ladies have denounced the policy. The more I look at it, the more I find it reprehensible, especially when it could easily be avoided by housing the parents with the children and not prosecuting them for a crime. That doesn't mean they aren't going to be returned to their country of origin. They would still face an immigration judge and have to make a case for asylum to successfully enter. In this day and age, with this administration, I doubt most would be accepted.

But I said at the beginning of this presidency - a lot of people are likely to have to feel some pain before they will stand up and say "you're fired" in 2020. As best I can tell, Trump is doing a good job of burying himself for midterms and 2020. So much as I hate to see people hurt, some short-term pain may be worth getting out of this mess in the longer term. Trump is (predictably) digging in, and how he's caught between alienating his base by reversing himself, or alienating everyone else by not. It will be interesting to see how he (tries to) wiggle out of this one. So far the "it's the Democrat's fault" thing doesn't seem to be getting much traction, since it is demonstrably untrue.

[Cow Poke]

... Like how you break what other countries call "murder" into all sorts of degrees and names like 'justifiable homicide' etc. Or how you distinguish 'jail' and 'prison' etc.

Does your country not differentiate between, for example, accidentally killing somebody and premeditated murder?

[Cow Poke]

i.e. OJ Simpson was famously found not guilty of murder, but was subsequently sued in civil court and found liable for the deaths of the people he was alleged to have killed.

And it's not usual for somebody killing somebody in self-defense being ruled "justifiable homocide", or even "no billed" - even the grand jury wouldn't refer to trial - but that person could be sued for the wrongful death of a person, lost wages, mental anguish, and all kinds of civil 'remedies'.

[Starlight]

Does your country not differentiate between, for example, accidentally killing somebody and premeditated murder?

The two killing crimes are "manslaughter" (=accidental killing) and "murder" (=deliberate killing). There are no classes of murder, nor any oxymoronic titles like 'justifiable homicide' / 'voluntary manslaughter' etc.

This occasionally seems to cause miscommunication on this forum when I comment that a police officer murdered someone, where I uncontroversially mean "the police officer deliberately killed the person by firing 20 shots at them from close range", but it gets read by Americans as "he is claiming that the police action meets the US legal definition of 'murder', as opposed to one of the many other possible US legal names for deliberate killing!"

i.e. OJ Simpson was famously found not guilty of murder, but was subsequently sued in civil court and found liable for the deaths of the people he was alleged to have killed.

Oh yup. While we obviously have civil cases here where companies sue one another, nobody here can sue for personal injury, so there's no civil personal liability suits like that.

[Littlejoe]

In what I'm sure is no surprise, Schumer and the Democrats have rejected a GOP proposed legislation that would ensure children could stay with their parents while awaiting a ruling on their petition for asylum.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...-border-crisis

[Cow Poke]

The two killing crimes are "manslaughter" (=accidental killing) and "murder" (=deliberate killing). There are no classes of murder, nor any oxymoronic titles like 'justifiable homicide' / 'voluntary manslaughter' etc.

So how would it be differentiated that, for example, somebody momentarily took their eyes off the road and struck and killed a pedestrian, as opposed to somebody driving recklessly and killing a pedestrian?

[Starlight]

So how would it be differentiated that, for example, somebody momentarily took their eyes off the road and struck and killed a pedestrian, as opposed to somebody driving recklessly and killing a pedestrian?

Hmm, there are actually a variety of driving-specific crimes that I don't know very well. I think actually "Careless Driving Causing Injury or Death" is a charge in and of itself, and I think I recall from news articles that that's what people are often charged with... googling says yes, but it's got a maximum penalty of 3 months in prison so it's a pretty light charge as far as causing death goes ("Manslaughter" by contrast has no maximum sentence).

Otherwise "dangerous driving" is the usual charge, as is "manslaughter". So in your examples, I imagine the prosecution would pick some set of those 3 things to try and charge the people with. Presumably in the first example the person would get the 'careless driving cause death' charge and in the second example they'd get the 'dangerous driving' and 'manslaughter' charges.

[Mountain Man]

For someone who keeps calling people on the "genetic fallacy," you certainly engage in it regularly. The assertions of the article check out - check them for yourself.



Yes - they were from the time noted in my previous posts, when unaccompanied children were sent here in droves and overwhelmed resources. They were foolishly published as "Trump" pictures when they came from the Obama presidency.



And nothing here about children...



Correct. The Obama era policy was to NOT prosecute illegal immigrants with children specifically so they would NOT be separated from their families. Instead, they were detained together in family detention centers.



As I noted in my previous post, it did happen under Obama - but was the exception rather than the rule. Trump is making it the rule.



And this also has nothing to do with family separation.



We all know this, MM. Of course they don't separate legally entering families. The entire issue is what happens to families that enter illegally. Most Christian leadership groups have denounced the action. All living first ladies have denounced the policy. The more I look at it, the more I find it reprehensible, especially when it could easily be avoided by housing the parents with the children and not prosecuting them for a crime. That doesn't mean they aren't going to be returned to their country of origin. They would still face an immigration judge and have to make a case for asylum to successfully enter. In this day and age, with this administration, I doubt most would be accepted.

But I said at the beginning of this presidency - a lot of people are likely to have to feel some pain before they will stand up and say "you're fired" in 2020. As best I can tell, Trump is doing a good job of burying himself for midterms and 2020. So much as I hate to see people hurt, some short-term pain may be worth getting out of this mess in the longer term. Trump is (predictably) digging in, and how he's caught between alienating his base by reversing himself, or alienating everyone else by not. It will be interesting to see how he (tries to) wiggle out of this one. So far the "it's the Democrat's fault" thing doesn't seem to be getting much traction, since it is demonstrably untrue.

I don't know why I bother... everything gets thrown into the laundry, put on maximum spin, and out comes whatever narrative you want regardless of the facts. Maybe I should just start ironically agreeing with everything you say and spare myself the aggravation.

[Cow Poke]

Hmm, there are actually a variety of driving-specific crimes that I don't know very well. I think actually "Careless Driving Causing Injury or Death" is a charge in and of itself, and I think I recall from news articles that that's what people are often charged with... googling says yes, but it's got a maximum penalty of 3 months in prison so it's a pretty light charge as far as causing death goes ("Manslaughter" by contrast has no maximum sentence).

Otherwise "dangerous driving" is the usual charge, as is "manslaughter". So in your examples, I imagine the prosecution would pick some set of those 3 things to try and charge the people with. Presumably in the first example the person would get the 'careless driving cause death' charge and in the second example they'd get the 'dangerous driving' and 'manslaughter' charges.

Ah, so you have nutty names for killing, too!

[Starlight]

Ah, so you have nutty names for killing, too!

Fair point. I had forgotten that one. Although traffic violations tend to be legally treated separately to actual crimes.

[Cow Poke]

Fair point. I had forgotten that one. Although traffic violations tend to be legally treated separately to actual crimes.

For the most part, they do here, as well, except when the death of a human being is involved. Most jurisdictions actually have "traffic court" sessions and/or courts/judges.

[Mountain Man]

In what I'm sure is no surprise, Schumer and the Democrats have rejected a GOP proposed legislation that would ensure children could stay with their parents while awaiting a ruling on their petition for asylum.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...-border-crisis

Big surprise. Democrats don't give a crap about the kids, and they're not about to let a common sense compromise stand in the way of their anti-Trump agenda. They're hoping to ride this manufactured crisis all the way into November.