Destroying the illegal alien child separation canard

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: face23785

But it does not have to be enforced either, does it? If it's been a choice for all other admins, or a situation has never arisen for it to be an issue... why does it become an issue for this one suddenly? What changed?

If you change the law you don't have to worry about whether it's enforced or not. Why is it suddenly an issue that it's "enforced more" when it was enforced before and nobody cared. Separating x many children is okay, but 2x is not? That a strange form of morality.

Sounds more like people just needed something to run on for the midterms.

That, and this is all a nice distraction from talking about the amazing North Korea situation. They had to do something to divert attention.

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: face23785

But it does not have to be enforced either, does it? If it's been a choice for all other admins, or a situation has never arisen for it to be an issue... why does it become an issue for this one suddenly? What changed?

If you change the law you don't have to worry about whether it's enforced or not. Why is it suddenly an issue that it's "enforced more" when it was enforced before and nobody cared. Separating x many children is okay, but 2x is not? That a strange form of morality.

Sounds more like people just needed something to run on for the midterms.

I agree with you, the laws should be changed but until they are, they should not be used as an excuse to perform such deeds.

If one thinks they should be changed, then don't engage in them -- that's a choice. No one was holding a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to enact zero tolerance and then to separate thousands of children, as per some law that never caused such issues before.

Besides, I think these facilities may have been equipped to deal with an occasional detained child, but I bet there is a big difference with having a child with a social worker, one on one... and a hundred children per social worker, with armed guards. Not letting senators in.

A bit different.

80% of these children arrive here without their parents. Many of the parents send them alone, or with strangers. The few with their actual parents are being dragged across dangerous terrain, in inhospitable conditions, and placed in very real danger. As for allowing some politician in, what about protecting these kids? What makes the politician have a right to waltz in to a facility for children, with no prior arrangement? Why would anyone assume that was acceptable? Can they waltz in to any place with children? Schools that paren't can't even enter without being buzzed in? Daycare facilities?

No one is holding a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to place their own kids in danger.

originally posted by: Kharron
Why is it inhumane to enforce this law, but perfectly fine to enforce every other law on the books?

Any law that ends in inhumane policies should not be enforced. Who said it was just one?

In a compassionate administration, Zero Tolerance should not have been enforced until preparations were made to make sure humans are not being abused and families are not separated, and especially illegally separated for more than 20 days that the law allows. Some kids have been separated for months now, illegal under every one of our laws, but no one talks about it any more because we have other distractions.

Besides, we're way past talking about laws on this. We all know the law only allowed a 20 day detention.

There is nothing "inhumane" about separating children from their criminal parents, at least not on the part of those enforcing the laws. Blame the parents who broke the law. Oh, wait, that would mean accepting personal responsibility. I forgot how much some avoid that.

These children are not being abused by being held in safe places, though they are being abused by the parents who drag them along, or send them alone (80% of them), to a foreign country. Some are being abused by the human traffickers. But, hey, don't worry about all that, because if you do, you can't blame Trump for stating that our sensible laws will be followed! Just don't claim your concerns are actually for the children.

For what other crime are criminals released after only twenty days, simply because they have children?

This bleeding heart BS isn't flying.

originally posted by: Kharron
Haven't read the rest of the replies but I will be back later, leaving the page up. Family time.

Family time is a good thing. Now, while thinking about that, understand that the vast majority of minors arriving here illegally are NOT with their families. LINK They were sent alone. Many are raped. Some die from heat stroke and other related issues. Many are trafficked into slavery. SECOND LINK What caring parent does this? As a parent myself, I cannot fathom sending one of mine off with dangerous people, to another country. If we, as parents, did what these people do, we'd be arrested for abuse and neglect.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I feel like I've stepped into a time machine and traveled back one month in the past, before all this was resolved. When I started replying to these posts I thought everyone was aware that this had already been found illegal and that the government was ordered to reunite the families. Now I see some must have missed all of that.

This was on the 27th of June:

A federal judge in California late Tuesday ordered a halt to most family separations at the US border and the reunification of all families that have been separated in the first major rebuke to the Trump administration during ongoing furor over family separations at the border.

The court order specifically requires federal officials to stop detaining parents apart from their minor children, absent a determination the parent is unfit or the parent declines reunification; reunify all parents with their minor children who are under the age of 5 within 14 days and reunify all parents with their minor children age 5 and older within 30 days.

The order also mandates that officials provide parents contact with their children by phone within 10 days, if the parent is not already in contact with his or her child.

CNN

This was two days ago:

On Tuesday, Sabraw told government attorneys he would not extend that deadlines set two weeks ago for the children under five or for 2,000 other children to be reunited by July 26.

The government had asked Sabraw to extend the deadlines because it needed time to test DNA to confirm family relationships, run background checks, find parents who were released from custody and review parental fitness.

Reuters

Yesterday, all of the youngest kids were reunited. The rest of them have to be by July 26th.

Everything being discussed here has already been found illegal and the government won't be separating any more kids. From now on, families will be kept together.

a reply to: Kharron

A judge in California does not get to dictate law, which is what they all seem to want to do out there.

Far from a settled issue, and way to ignore the many other points I made.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Kharron

A judge in California does not get to dictate law, which is what they all seem to want to do out there.

Far from a settled issue, and way to ignore the many other points I made.

Very easy to prove you are right: post a verifiable, clean link where it explains how the government does not have to obey this court order that it is already obeying. Let's start with facts, and then I'll respond to opinions.

a reply to: Kharron

No, how about instead you respond to the information I already posted, with links?

What, not comfortable for you?

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Kharron

No, how about instead you respond to the information I already posted, with links?

What, not comfortable for you?

Lady, I already posted the links above that explain that this has been resolved, that it was not alright, that the government was ordered to stop it and to reunite the children. The links are a few posts above, but it is news a couple of weeks old and numerous other links can be found.

If you don't think that is correct or that the government has cause not to follow that order, please provide proof. You're trying to get me to reply to opinions, while you ignore that those opinions are already refuted by the court orders and by the government's own compliance.

And no, I am not comfortable arguing in a circle, I find it a waste of time. But I will leave this tab pinned to check back and see if anyone has posted proof that the court order is invalid or that it will be violated for any reason.

Good night.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: JBurns

No but it is an official policy to jail people I The first place..

An official policy trump changed to zero tolerance.

So, 20,000 children every year on average are caught up in human trafficking from mexico, zero tolerance isnt such a bad idea if it keeps a 10 year old from being raped.

gvnet.com...

originally posted by: CB328

People committing illegal acts should not go to jail ?

So when you speed should you go to jail?

It's a stupid argument, you don't prosecute refugees, you either admit them, reject them or put them in camps but criminal prosecution is just stupid and pointless.

Pretty much everyone in the Trump campaign and administration are criminals, why aren't you calling for them to be prosecuted??

when you are caught speeding, do you not get a ticket and have to appear in court?

And I'm going to need you to list the crimes committed by each member. Otherwise, you just sound like a buthurt little cry baby.

originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I feel like I've stepped into a time machine and traveled back one month in the past, before all this was resolved. When I started replying to these posts I thought everyone was aware that this had already been found illegal and that the government was ordered to reunite the families. Now I see some must have missed all of that.

This was on the 27th of June:

A federal judge in California late Tuesday ordered a halt to most family separations at the US border and the reunification of all families that have been separated in the first major rebuke to the Trump administration during ongoing furor over family separations at the border.

The court order specifically requires federal officials to stop detaining parents apart from their minor children, absent a determination the parent is unfit or the parent declines reunification; reunify all parents with their minor children who are under the age of 5 within 14 days and reunify all parents with their minor children age 5 and older within 30 days.

The order also mandates that officials provide parents contact with their children by phone within 10 days, if the parent is not already in contact with his or her child.

CNN

This was two days ago:

On Tuesday, Sabraw told government attorneys he would not extend that deadlines set two weeks ago for the children under five or for 2,000 other children to be reunited by July 26.

The government had asked Sabraw to extend the deadlines because it needed time to test DNA to confirm family relationships, run background checks, find parents who were released from custody and review parental fitness.

Reuters

Yesterday, all of the youngest kids were reunited. The rest of them have to be by July 26th.

Everything being discussed here has already been found illegal and the government won't be separating any more kids. From now on, families will be kept together.

How they prove they are a family? Do these people bring birth certificates that are verifiable? Or, do we just believe them when they say the kids are theirs?

EDIT. Ah, I see now... they won't even give the government time to run DNA tests or anything. Just immediately return the children to whoever they happened to cross the border with. Sickening.

The problem isn't the children being separated from the illegal border crossers. It's the kids being separated from the parents that present themselves at the border seeking asylum. They don't cross illegally, they present themselves at the border and say "I need help." They are taken into custody to await an asylum trial, they have not committed a crime. Then their kids are taken from them. That is the problem most people have, at least that's the problem I have with it.

a reply to: 3n19m470

After children were separated from their parents or their guardians, kept in lock-down for 5-6 months or longer, not given representation since they did not commit a crime, but still were jailed, not given access to phones, many were abused and some or many were forcefully medicated or injected with who knows what... and now that the government had to be FORCED to return the children, you find that they weren't given DNA tests sickening? And were just returned to the people they came with?

We have REALLY different definitions of 'sickening'.

But I see no one has posted anything on this court order being invalid or not being followed, so I'll unpin the tab. I find it strange that people are discussing what has already found illegal, and still trying to make rationalizations for it, even after the children are reunited.

It was wrong, everyone who was for it was wrong also. It's getting fixed. There is no apology from the government for breaking the law and there won't be one. All we can do is move on and be more vigilant and make sure this admin or another one does not try anything like this again.

a reply to: Wayfarer

No, no...

It is very clearly shown above that seekers of asylum with VALID and CREDIBLE claims (ie: qualify for asylum) are NOT arrested. There is a process in place for handling affirmative asylum claims.

There is a process for applying for asylum that does not involve criminal charges/potential child separation.

I mean, this whole argument in favor of separating children from immigrants seeking asylum is so asinine its akin to advocating the death penalty for all crimes and misdemeanors....

This has nothing to do with illegal aliens.

Any person in the US who commits a crime will be separated from their children. Period.
If they don't have childcare arrangements, their children (US Citizen children) will be placed in state custody. period.

This is a non-issue because it happens THOUSANDS of times per day to citizens who break the law and are arrested.

Folks intending to make asylum claims here MUST read our asylum laws to be sure they qualify. If they do not qualify (ie: are not fleeing government violence, persecution, etc) then they are breaking our laws. Fraudulent asylum claims are also unlawful (conspiracy to commit fraud against the United States). Those who are permitted to seek asylum under our law MUST do so at a port of entry in accordance with US law.

Folks who do that will not be arrested. They will not be separated from their children. They will see an administrative judge who will determine if the claim is credible. If it is credible, they will be granted asylum in the United States. If it is not credible, they will be repatriated to their homes.

a reply to: mus8472

But that scenario is patently false.

Seekers of asylum with CREDIBLE and VALID claims are not arrested. They are not jailed. Their kids do not risk separation (if alternative caregivers are not available)

You are conflating lawful affirmative claims of asylum vs. unlawful immigration. Two very different issues.

Furthermore, many of these children (80%) were sent to the border ALONE by their parents in their home countries.

originally posted by: mus8472
The problem isn't the children being separated from the illegal border crossers. It's the kids being separated from the parents that present themselves at the border seeking asylum. They don't cross illegally, they present themselves at the border and say "I need help." They are taken into custody to await an asylum trial, they have not committed a crime. Then their kids are taken from them. That is the problem most people have, at least that's the problem I have with it.

Like i said early, an average of 20,000 kids a year from mexico are involved in human trafficking, so a lot of them have already been separated from their families to begin with, we are just doing those 10 year olds a favor from being raped regularly, unless you want to support human trafficking, pedophiles, and also want a 10 year old sex slave then have at it. Seems like a lot of people on here support that sick s*hit as long as it means hating on Trump, pffft, so pathetic STUPID of all of you and gross.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Well if you break the law you get arrested and yes in lots of DEVELOPED world if you get caught breaking into a country by crossing border illegally you get arrested.

originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: face23785

But it does not have to be enforced either, does it? If it's been a choice for all other admins, or a situation has never arisen for it to be an issue... why does it become an issue for this one suddenly? What changed?

Yes the law needs to be enforced!

1. Should there be laws?
A. Yes

2. Should all laws be equally enforced?
A. Yes

3. Should any law be subject to political discretion?
A. No

Makes laws and enforce them all equally and properly. If you don't like the law, change it.

My wife and I were just talking about this, and rational people understand this, but at any rate, now that they are putting children back with parents, what now? Disney land? Disney world? Send them back over the boarder? Make them citizens? They came here ilegally, what do they get out of this?