Everything you didn't want to know about Trump and were not afraid to ask

[Brian Peacock]

The 'terribleness,' or otherwise, of a law sits in its drafting, it's justification and its implementation. Putting aside the implication that my saying something good about the administration is a condition of you dealing with my point, do you think it is right to separate children from their parents and guardians and warehouse them in crates even if it's legal? Are those children criminals?

[Forty Two]

The 'terribleness,' or otherwise, of a law sits in its drafting, it's justification and its implementation. Putting aside the implication that my saying something good about the administration is a condition of you dealing with my point, do you think it is right to separate children from their parents and guardians and warehouse them in crates even if it's legal? Are those children criminals?

Objection, lack of foundation - "warehouse them in crates?" That's not what's happening.

Is it right to separate children from their parents or guardians? Sometimes. Anytime a parent is arrested and jailed for crime, they are separated from their kids. I've never heard anyone complain about that when it comes to American parents.

What happens is the children are placed with a close relative, or they are placed in the care of the State. That's what's happening with the illegal border crossers, too.

What needs to happen is exactly what Trump wants: comprehensive immigration reform that addresses what the government does when it apprehends people at the border. The situation we have now is like this:

Joe Blow crosses the border illegally alone, trots across the Rio Grande, and he's apprehended. He is violating the law. He is not entitled to a visa of any kind. He is not entitled to green card, even if he manages to stay legally and finds an American wife. Because he crossed without inspection, he has no eligibility - except - he can apply for asylum status if he's apprehended inside the US. If he does that, he can make his case, or not, and if he doesn't, he's deported. If he does, he gets a visa. That's about it.

Joe Blow crosses the border illegally with a child in tow. He trots across the Rio Grande, and he and the child is apprehended. He is violating the law, and neither he nor the child are eligible for a visa. They are not entitled to green cards, even if the adult manages to stay illegally and finds an American wife. Because they crossed without inspection, they have no eligibility, except, they can apply for asylyum status if they're apprehended inside the US. If they do that, the adult can make the case and show that he is the father of the child and that he is entitled to asylum status. The difficulty comes in with what to do with the child. The law won't allow the child to be detained with the adult for long, so either (a) the adult who is claiming asylum is set free into the US to be with the child, or (b) the child is separated fromt he adult.

There is no way to track or locate them once they're in the US and often they fade into the local ethnic communities and live illegally. Then, years later, we have to have sympathy because they are there for so long and it's not the kid's fault. And, I agree, it's not the kid's fault.

But, isn't the better way to deal with this to somehow arrange the law so that families can be detained together? Isn't that what other countries do? But that is going to take a good overhaul of the law to do that. Now, who wants that, and who is opposing that? Who likes the status quo, and who is asking for Congress to revamp the system so that this problem is resolved?

[Brian Peacock]

Objection over-ruled...



I'm not talking about separating kids from the their parents, or putting them in cages, in the abstract. I'm talking about it in a specific context. If you want to argue that traumatising children is legal, appropriate, and in their best interests, then please continue.

[Cunt]

The 'terribleness,' or otherwise, of a law sits in its drafting, it's justification and its implementation. Putting aside the implication that my saying something good about the administration is a condition of you dealing with my point, do you think it is right to separate children from their parents and guardians

Do I think it's right to separate children from their parents?

Yes, sometimes. Do you disagree?

and warehouse them in crates even if it's legal?

I don't know about crating children, but 'warehousing them in crates' sounds like exaggerating or highlighting the worst cases to make a political point against someone.

Are those children criminals?

Some, yes. If you want to go case-by-case, we can, but I won't answer about a large group of children you haven't defined clearly.

Why do you think that border security shouldn't apply to children? (as it seems you do)

Do you think people trying to sneak into the country criminally using children as a shield, are guilty for the mistreatment of those kids? Or is only the law enforcement action worthy of scrutiny?

Objection over-ruled...



I'm not talking about separating kids from the their parents, or putting them in cages, in the abstract. I'm talking about it in a specific context. If you want to argue that traumatising children is legal, appropriate, and in their best interests, then please continue.

This looks not too bad, as prison goes. Fairly sweet as compared to the last few emergency shelters I have visited.

The dramatic, artistic photography is a bit telling, but basically, it looks clean, well-maintained and safe.

What would you suggest instead? Set them free without their parents/guardians? Is that your idea of 'better'?

[Cunt]

Oh, and I still don't see any crates. Where are the crates in this photo?

[Brian Peacock]

That's a lot of text to avoid the issue.

[Cunt]

That's a lot of text to avoid the issue.

What 'issue'? I still don't see the crates you were describing.

Was that just some kind of weird fantasy? You wouldn't make up crates to make your story sound more punchy, would you?

Where are the crates, and why do you think this photo makes your point?

[Brian Peacock]

If you want to equivocate and pretend you don't know what I'm talking about then please carry on.

[Forty Two]

Objection over-ruled...



I'm not talking about separating kids from the their parents, or putting them in cages, in the abstract. I'm talking about it in a specific context. If you want to argue that traumatising children is legal, appropriate, and in their best interests, then please continue.

I would like it if they were detained with their parent(s) in better circumstances. Who wants that done right now, and who doesn't? (referring to lawmakers)

Is there any alternative other than to release a parent and child into the general population with a note stating that they should return at a given date?

What do you suggest we do with a man showing up with a child? Do we believe the immigrant, and just assume it really is the man's child? Or do we do an inquiry to verify? What do you want done with them in the meantime?

Right now, there are rules and protections that make sure that if one parent wants to travel with a child, there are documentation requirements. In general, besides your passport, you should bring written consent from the child’s biological parent(s) along with the child’s birth certificate. Many countries require that the consent document be witnessed and notarized. What happens when someone shows up without that documentation? Should the rules be different for people who break the law by crossing a border without going through customs inspection?

Let's say I take a child into Canada, and I have no passport, no birth certificate, no letter from the child's mother or father. I walk across the border, being careful to sneak around the customs border people. I am apprehended with the child in Toronto. What do you think Canada will do? Will they be interested in knowing if I'm the real father? What if I don't have a way to show the authorities there? Will I be detained or held? The answer is that I would be arrested and if I did not claim asylum, I would definitely be deported. Canada would put the kid somewhere until they could verify whose kid it was, etc.

Canada houses illegal immigrants in tents near Cornall Ontario. How's that? Would it be like Auschwitz if the US made a law that said that illegal immigrants would now be housed in tents somwhere in New Mexico? Tent city on the border of Ontario and Quebec must be nice in the winter time. Lots of cross country skiiing, I'm sure.

But, the US can't house the kids with the parents like that, because the kids have to be moved to care centers. But would it be o.k. to do what Canada does for the illegal Haitians?

[Cunt]

If you want to equivocate and pretend you don't know what I'm talking about then please carry on.

I'm not equivocating, I'm just looking at you photo, and I don't think it agrees with the picture you were describing.

I understand you think conditions in that photo are horrible, and I think you should thank your lucky stars. Those aren't nearly as horrible as modern prisons or shelters. It looks like they were trying to make use of space not designed for this purpose.

Why don't you show me a great example of a youth incarceration facility, then we can demand that ICE uses at least those standards.

Or would you rather they get put up at your house?

[Brian Peacock]

Objection over-ruled...



I'm not talking about separating kids from the their parents, or putting them in cages, in the abstract. I'm talking about it in a specific context. If you want to argue that traumatising children is legal, appropriate, and in their best interests, then please continue.

I would like it if they were detained with their parent(s) in better circumstances. Who wants that done right now, and who doesn't? (referring to lawmakers)

Is there any alternative other than to release a parent and child into the general population with a note stating that they should return at a given date?

What do you suggest we do with a man showing up with a child? Do we believe the immigrant, and just assume it really is the man's child? Or do we do an inquiry to verify? What do you want done with them in the meantime?

Right now, there are rules and protections that make sure that if one parent wants to travel with a child, there are documentation requirements. In general, besides your passport, you should bring written consent from the child’s biological parent(s) along with the child’s birth certificate. Many countries require that the consent document be witnessed and notarized. What happens when someone shows up without that documentation? Should the rules be different for people who break the law by crossing a border without going through customs inspection?

Let's say I take a child into Canada, and I have no passport, no birth certificate, no letter from the child's mother or father. I walk across the border, being careful to sneak around the customs border people. I am apprehended with the child in Toronto. What do you think Canada will do? Will they be interested in knowing if I'm the real father? What if I don't have a way to show the authorities there? Will I be detained or held? The answer is that I would be arrested and if I did not claim asylum, I would definitely be deported. Canada would put the kid somewhere until they could verify whose kid it was, etc.

Canada houses illegal immigrants in tents near Cornall Ontario. How's that? Would it be like Auschwitz if the US made a law that said that illegal immigrants would now be housed in tents somwhere in New Mexico? Tent city on the border of Ontario and Quebec must be nice in the winter time. Lots of cross country skiiing, I'm sure.

But, the US can't house the kids with the parents like that, because the kids have to be moved to care centers. But would it be o.k. to do what Canada does for the illegal Haitians?

It's OK because doing something else is difficult and expensive?

If you want to equivocate and pretend you don't know what I'm talking about then please carry on.

I'm not equivocating, I'm just looking at you photo, and I don't think it agrees with the picture you were describing.

I understand you think conditions in that photo are horrible, and I think you should thank your lucky stars. Those aren't nearly as horrible as modern prisons or shelters. It looks like they were trying to make use of space not designed for this purpose.

Why don't you show me a great example of a youth incarceration facility, then we can demand that ICE uses at least those standards.

Or would you rather they get put up at your house?

It's OK because the physical conditions could be so much worse? That photo was taken in 2014 btw.

[Cunt]

So that photo was the Hussein administration scrambling to tend to a difficult situation.

You can't call him racist, he IS a race!

But how do you want them taken care of? I am waiting for you to answer Forty Two about this. Or ignoring him...reading him must be awkward for someone trying to maintain the position that law enforcement is undesireable in the area of immigration.

[Brian Peacock]

I want the state to treat children in a way that doesn't traumatise them. I think the policy, which the current administration didn't invent but merely ramped up, is morally dubious and amounts to a cruel and unusual punishment. My condemnation of the policy is not dependent on having a better idea, let alone one that would satisfy you or 42, but I would suggest assigning a social worker to each family seeking entry into the country who could shepherd them through the processes of paperwork and hearings - and if their application was unsuccessful a right to appeal before being returned, if needed. But that's not the point. The point is that I'm challenging you to offer some justification for this practice. At the moment we have: that as criminals they only have themselves to blame, it's not as bad as it could be, and that doing better is too difficult to contemplate. How many countries address their immigration issues without separating children and putting them in cages?

[pErvinalia]

Objection over-ruled...



I'm not talking about separating kids from the their parents, or putting them in cages, in the abstract. I'm talking about it in a specific context. If you want to argue that traumatising children is legal, appropriate, and in their best interests, then please continue.

This looks not too bad, as prison goes. Fairly sweet as compared to the last few emergency shelters I have visited.

The dramatic, artistic photography is a bit telling, but basically, it looks clean, well-maintained and safe.

You've got to be kidding.

[pErvinalia]

So that photo was the Hussein administration scrambling to tend to a difficult situation.

You can't call him racist, he IS a race!

But how do you want them taken care of? I am waiting for you to answer Forty Two about this. Or ignoring him...reading him must be awkward for someone trying to maintain the position that law enforcement is undesireable in the area of immigration.

Adult detention facilities in Australia (not talking Nauru or PNG here) are far better than that. Each person has a room, or at least a small dorm. Beds and proper blankets and pillows.

Failing that, if the space just isn't available in the US, then you'd foster them out temporarily to families. Putting kids in those conditions without a caring adult in sight is barbaric.