13
   

Kids in cages; how does anyone defend this

 
 
layman
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2018 10:46 pm
[url][/url]Face it, Max, the politically-motivated, emotionally-charged selective outrage that you're trying to pass off as a "rational argument" kinda sucks, eh?

We spend $35,000 a year on these unwelcome kids. I'm sure there are plenty of kids in your town, who are actually American citizens, who live in effectively parentless circumstances because their Mama is a crack ho, and who live in violent neighborhoods dominated by criminals who could use some assistance like that. When's the last time you screamed about their circumstances and concerned yourself with "what's best" for them, I wonder?

You could actually help them, on a hands-on basis, if you really cared about kids. Instead you want to whine about alien kids on some remote Texas border. What's up with that?
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2018 10:52 pm
Lash I would like to know your stance on this one principle, Oralloy I would be interested to hear your opinion too.

I believe that law enforcement should make accommodations to minimize the trauma to children involved in any circumstance.

Do you agree or disagree with this principle?
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2018 10:56 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

Lash I would like to know your stance on this one principle, Oralloy I would be interested to hear your opinion too.

I believe that law enforcement should make accommodations to minimize the trauma to children involved in any circumstance.

Do you agree or disagree with this principle?


Stupid question, Max. Everybody agrees with that, at least if you're talking about "reasonable" accommodations, anyway.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2018 11:05 pm
Trump's plan is simple, yet brilliant. He'll give all these criminals a six month sentence while he sends their kids to live in the south side of Chicago.

While in prison they will be brutally abused by prison guards and raped by hard-core criminals.

Only then will he send them all back home to tell their tales about their adventures in USA border invasion to all their homeys.

Future illegal entries will soon be drastically reduced, saving Americans billions that otherwise would need to be spent on border patrol, immigration judges, child care and the like, not to even mention the costs of lost jobs, criminal assault by illegal aliens, etc.
coluber2001
 
  4  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2018 11:45 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Trump's plan is simple, yet brilliant. He'll give all these criminals a six month sentence while he sends their kids to live in the south side of Chicago.

While in prison they will be brutally abused by prison guards and raped by hard-core criminals.

Only then will he send them all back home to tell their tales about their adventures in USA border invasion to all their homeys.

Future illegal entries will soon be drastically reduced, saving Americans billions that otherwise would need to be spent on border patrol, immigration judges, child care and the like, not to even mention the costs of lost jobs, criminal assault by illegal aliens, etc.


No, I do not see that it makes sense, Layman. Not see, Layman. Not see, Layman.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 12:53 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
In the Obama era, the government considered what was best for the children involved.
Under the new Trump policy, there is no consideration for what is best for the children involved.
There is no real comparison.
Nonsense. What specifically about the Trump changes is objectionable?

And in any case, if you want to change the policy, try compromising with the President on border security.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 12:54 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Putting the needs of children first is not that difficult. If you have two policies, one that is rips kids away from parents cause trauma and hardahip, and another that keeps parents and kids together while they go through a legal process... a civilized person chooses the second option.
There is nothing to be gained by putting kids and families through this.
It is unecessary, which is why it is unexcusable.
So why did Obama do it then?

And why are you blaming Trump for Obama's policies?

And if you want the policy to change, why won't you compromise with the President on border security?

maxdancona wrote:
I would say the same thing for drunk drivers or for bank fraud. Either can be arrested, charged and punished in a way that is least traumatic for the children involved. Law enforcement should always make accommodations to minimize the impact on children. It's basic humanity
What exactly do you think happens with the children of people who go to prison for bank fraud?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 12:59 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Lash I would like to know your stance on this one principle, Oralloy I would be interested to hear your opinion too.
I believe that law enforcement should make accommodations to minimize the trauma to children involved in any circumstance.
Do you agree or disagree with this principle?
I think it would be reasonable for that to be one of several goals for law enforcement to balance.

I don't think you are fairly characterizing Trump's policy change. You keep blaming Trump for Obama's policies. When challenged on that, you resort to vague nonsense about Trump's policy change, and then after a few posts you go back to blaming Trump for Obama's policies.

I don't think you even know what Trump's policy change is. To be fair, I don't have much idea either. But then, I'm not making bold proclamations about how terrible his policy change is.

I do know that the policy of separating children from their parents came from Obama. I posted pictures on page one of this thread showing children in those same detention centers when Obama was president.

I also know that changing this policy would be pretty easy if you'd be willing to compromise with the President on border security. The only reason why this policy continues is because you want to defeat and humiliate the President more than you want to change this policy.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 01:50 am
@maxdancona,
Now that we see what’s happening, yes, we need a better response. You’ll be hard-pressed to find anyone who thinks our current situation is the best response.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 01:59 am
@Lash,
I don't know. Would sending these kids to prison alongside their parents be better? Would turning them loose to fend for themselves in the Mexican desert be better?

At any rate, the Democrats refusing to compromise with the President isn't likely to lead to a policy change.

And neither is them wrongfully accusing Trump of being responsible for Obama's policies.
Region Philbis
 
  2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 03:22 am

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/was-law-separate-families-passed-1997/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 06:10 am
@oralloy,
1. It is without question better for these kids to be detained with their parents in a humane facility.

2. These are immigrant families. These aren't serial killers. You can call them "criminals", but their crime is crossing a border, not "shooting up a liquor store".

3. The repeated insistence that Trump is just like Obama is ridiculous. Of that is true, than why did you hate Obama?

If you are going to support Trump, have the balls to support Trump. Saying he is just like Obama is both irrelevant and pathetic.
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 06:16 am
@Lash,
You, Layman and Orralloy all seem to be defending the policy of the Trump administration. The Trump administration is also defending the policy.
layman
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 06:24 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

I don't think you even know what Trump's policy change is. To be fair, I don't have much idea either. But then, I'm not making bold proclamations about how terrible his policy change is.


No policies about "separating families" have been changed in the least. The only "policy change" is that Trump is arresting law-breakers. He doesn't just catch them committing a crime and then let them go on their merry way, as Obama did.

Because there are now more arrests, and because these people carry their kids along with them in their criminal adventures, more kids are necessarily placed into protective custody. The law doesn't not allow them to be housed in adult jails, with their parents. Nothing new about that.
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 06:57 am
@layman,
As I pointed out initially, we are NOT, contrary to Max's claim, taking kids from parents who are seeking asylum without breaking the law. They are admitted into the country, but not arrested. Until their claims can be heard, they are detained as families.

However, given the Flores ruling (sought by the ACLU), the kids can only be held in detention centers (which are not "jails" in the traditional sense) for a short time. Within 20 days they must be shipped off to foster homes, or otherwise placed with responsible adults who will care for them. Trump has to follow that law.

There is a backlog of cases set for refugee status hearings of about 600,000, due to the massive invasion by aliens seeking asylum (frivolously in 80% of the cases), so that process generally takes more than 20 days.

These people are free to take their kids and leave the country at any time, however.
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 07:13 am
@layman,
Layman's repeated claim about the Flores decision is a lie.

The Flores decision related to unaccompanied children. It has nothing to do with children who come together with their parents.

There is no reason for the Trump administration to take children away from their parents. They could provide humane family detention space, likely at a lower cost to the American tax payer. it

The only purpose of the Trump policy is to use cruelty to dissuade people from coming.

If you support cruelty to children as a deterrent... do it honestly. Defend it without lying or blaming someone else for Trump's policy.
Lash
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 07:17 am
@maxdancona,
I’m pointing out that separating children from adults who have either broken the law or seem to be a danger to themselves or others has always been the procedure.

Always.

It happens with every arrest.

Recently, two of my kids’ mom was deemed by teachers to be a danger to her kids—not even anything overt she did. Excessive absences for the kid, poor hygiene for the kid—led to a requested mental health evaluation for mom by the school system.

Through the evaluation, it was discovered that mom was in fact endangering the kids and herself. Her estranged husband was awarded physical custody but
before that could be put in place, mom freaks out, cops are called, and those poor kids had to spend about a week in state facilities.

Since illegal immigration is against the law, the act of committing that crime automatically means children with the adult doing that are removed from them. The adults are not in an environment that is safe for the children.

Obviously, the separation from parents is almost as traumatic as the life-threatening trip children just lived through.

Since, Max, we know that your ultimate goal is opening the borders, I think you and others are likely to use this very upsetting issue as a battering ram to champion open borders.

It is a really bad situation, but that doesn’t change the fact that separation of children and law-breaking adults is an established procedure.
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 07:21 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

Layman's repeated claim about the Flores decision is a lie.

The Flores decision related to unaccompanied children. It has nothing to do with children who come together with their parents.


Max, get your facts straight for once, and stop letting your abject ignorance lead you to accuse honest people of "lying." You are the one who is completely dishonest because you present falsehoods as facts when you surely know you have no legitimate basis for your misrepresentations.

The courts have expressly held that Flores DOES apply to children accompanied by adults. And in that same ruling, even the cheese-eating Nutty Ninth Circus appellate court held that Flores does NOT require the parents to be released from detention too.

Apologize, like a man, rather than slink away like a coward, for once, willya?
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 07:23 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
The only purpose of the Trump policy is to use cruelty to dissuade people from coming.

If you support cruelty to children as a deterrent... do it honestly. Defend it without lying or blaming someone else for Trump's policy.


The purpose of EVERY single criminal law on the books is to deter people from breaking it, fool. This is the acknowledged legal purpose, not "Trump's."
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2018 07:28 am
@Lash,
Quote:
I’m pointing out that separating children from adults who have either broken the law or seem to be a danger to themselves or others has always been the procedure.

Always.

It happens with every arrest.


This is untrue (and I think you know it). Police making arrests often take the potential trauma to children into account when making arrests. Criminals, when possible, are often given the chamce to plan their surrender to police and make arrangements.

People arrested are promptly given bail hearings where the needs of children are considered. Children are considered in sentencing hearings.

In every stage of law enforcement accommodations are made for families with children.

The DHS under the Trump policy is the lone example where reasonable accommodations that would save children from trauma are denied.


If you support this policy of cruelty to children, do it honestly.
 

Related Topics

Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
GOP Empire Strikes Back - Discussion by parados
Government School Indoctrination - Discussion by H2O MAN
The Democrats will win again in 2016 - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Romney 2012? - Discussion by snood
Can Obama Lose? Will he be a one-term president? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Obama care 2014 - Discussion by wts
The 'I voted' thread! - Question by Cycloptichorn
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 06/05/2020 at 12:13:46