Poll: Is it OK to put children in cages?

Adding @Paladin to the Yes tally

Everyone knows that, Maohs, most people were upset with catch and release though and demanded that "discretion" stop. So now criminals are being held accountable for their crimes and that is a very good thing.

WRT children supposedly not being sent to CPS, you are wrong, unless there is someone who can act as a guardian they would indeed be sent to CPS if you were sent to jail. It is exactly the same here with most minors released to a family member in a matter of days. You know it, I know it, yet there really were a ton of lies and outright disinformation on that topic which is disgusting.

CPS routinely rents buildings like that. Do you think every location is custom built?

So why just for border jumping misdemeanors? Why not get rid of all prosecutorial discression? Why not get rid of discression period? No warnings instead of speeding tickets, no plea deals, no paroles, no time off for good behavior, no giving someone a break because it's a first offense...zero tolerance across the board.

So the tent cities and keeping kids in abandoned WalMarts is all fake?

First offense is a class B misdemeanor which carries up to 6 months in jail while the second time (reentry) results in a felony. There are a ton of people who get deported and who are back in two days. It is a very serious problem here at the border with routine car chases and wrecks caused by smugglers trying to outrun CBP. Then there is the drug smuggling, the people smuggling, the whole organized crime element, crime, the costs associated with services legally locals have to provide and... Well... That really pissed locals off. They see it as the Feds not doing their job and so our taxes have to go up which is never popular.

Lastly, with 20 million illegals in the country it is a pretty epic and obvious problem to everyone. There is a housing shortage, lots of viable homelessness because some people can't afford the high rents much less own their own home, and adding a lot more people makes all those things worse and it just gauls people when they know those illegals aren't supposed to be here to begin with.

Edit: Who said what is fake? Do you have a genuine question or are you flowing Garamet's art of debating? I said, CPS often rents such buildings as old Wal-Mart's, etc...

But we aren't talking about that. We're talking about asylum seekers who have no previous criminal record in the US. In the past, especially if they had family with them, they got sent to civil court instead of criminal court while they had their asylum case heard.

Again, you're conflating Mexican border jumpers looking for work with Central American asylum seekers wanting to escape violent countries controlled by murderous gangs.

Also making the mistake that resources are limited in terms of jobs and housing. Growth has to be at a reasonable rate (and eventually reaches physical limits) but the people who argue that immigration is taking jobs away are ignoring all the evidence of history. By that standard 99% of the people in the US should be unemployed and homeless as the few million jobs that existed in 1778 have long since been "used up".

No, you are wrong. Saying there is high crime in their home country does not qualify someone for asylum. For most of them that is just an excuse and they are indeed coming here looking for work. They are just hoping to abuse the asylum system. The ones who have reasonable claims with evidence to prove it will be allowed to go through the system. Those who do not state a valid reason are rightly denied.

Now, first time offenders who illegally cross the border can get up to 6 months in prison and a $10,000 fine while repeated offenders can get 2 years in prison and a much larger fine. Those are pretty serious offenses with the second being a felony. Yes, I do believe the law should be enforced 100% of the time on illegal crossers. Those who would like to make asylum claims must do so following the proper procedures and there is nothing wrong with that.

No one has made that claim so why are you pretending someone has? The main economic impact has to do with suppression of wages and, yes, the wording of the housing crisis as there is no more room to grow in many coastal places. It doesn't help that NIMBYs block virtual all new construction of higher density buildings or that state law makes it so easy for them to file frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit in order to achieve that goal.

You're right. What kind of ex-model and First Lady pays any attention to what she wears?

Also, who the fuck wears a jacket in Texas in the summer??

And what kind of billionaire's wife owns a $39 jacket from Zara?

Obviously this was intentional. Trump claims it was aimed at the media, not the children. But given the context of her traveling to a migrant center, that claim is dubious.

Maybe in this case it is just Trump being confused because I am pretty sure he paid good money in Russia for hookers to drug him, handcuff him, abuse him, and piss on him. Perhaps he thinks that is what you are supposed to do to guests in your country? Maybe that is VIP treatment for him? VIP standing for varied immigrant pleasantries.

Sure that is a stretch, but it is better than the excuses faux news or the twitlerettes can come up with.

The same idiot who would marry the world's brokest billionaire for his money. I will give Macarena the benefit of the doubt here as reading is above the pay grade for models and whores.

The threat of rape, oppression, or death because someone won't join a gang does qualify them for asylum. If this weren't the case then four out of five wouldn't be granted a chance to have their status heard, and half of them wouldn't be granted asylum...but they do and they do.

Technically you're right. A little over half aren't granted asylum, and those who don't have a valid reason are denied. The problem here is that all of that is being circumvented. They aren't given a chance to apply for asylum at all.

Right, but again, we're talking about first time offenders, and there used to be prosecutorial discression. They were allowed to refer asylum seekers who cross illegally to civil court while their asylum case is heard, instead of sent to criminal court to be deported after serving their time.

Why just illegal crossers? Why not anybody and everybody for any crime?

But these asylum seekers were being thwarted for doing it legally...which is illegal. It doesn't excuse illegally crossing, but it's certainly extenuating circumstances.

Things that do not automatically equate with being imprisoned: committing a crime, being arrested and being found guilty of a crime.

If they did, the US would be mostly prison as it held such infringers of the law as jaywalkers behind bars.

Instead a method of sense and humanity is applied, or rather it is in most cases.

A proper solution would be to work with Mexico to place a US enclave to process refugees, and to improve on outreach programs in Mexico so the place isn't Disneyland for cartels and refugees might decide they'd rather stay there than schlep up to the US border.

But that doesn't sell as well as Soviet-style wall building apparently.

Point of order:

Paladin hasn't voted.

Paladin stated he won't vote over fake news. "Children in Cages" is fake news. If you think the temporary-holding chain-link fence enclosures are children in cages, then you should realize these were put in place and used since the Obama administration.

more

I don't like the idea of putting "children in cages".

But I also do not like at all the idea of a person entering the U.S. illegally (for any reason) and basically being given a "get out of jail free card" simply because they have a child with them. Anyone being reasonable about the subject knows that just encourages people to attempt to enter the U.S. with their children as basically "meat shields".

If you're going to come to the U.S. to flee violence overseas. Fine. But understand that there will be inconveniences and a price to pay (albeit temporary hopefully) before everything is sorted out.

Considering all the village idiots, aka modern republicans, have to say about this I had an idea that would make America a better place, and possibly a great again place. Why don't we take all the white nationalist twitlerettes like dayton and dinner and the boy and put them in cages and allow the immigrants to assume their lives. This may sound bad, but it would be good for everyone. Here is how.

First, we would get a whole bunch of hard working people who want to be here, and not a whole bunch of entitled whiners who just bitch all day long and blame everyone else for their troubles.

The people who are wanting to be victims and martyrs will actually have trouble for a change.

We can keep them secure and away from all the other criminals in the world by locking them up in cages and giving them iPods and faux news like they want. We could tell them the world was all blowed up by the evil Obama Hillary love child and their pens are the last safe place to avoid brown people and scary gays. They will love it as long as we tell them they are gods beloved creatures and this is how life was intended for them.

We could then monitor their food intake and keep them fat and happy and out of the way while we make the world a better place. They just want to be victims, and we can do that without actually screwing everything up.

The giving them iPods thing was not what I typed, but it seems like a good idea so give credit to the tablet for that.

"Children in cages" is not fake news.
We don't need to pretend that US policy was commendable before 2018 to answer the simple question. Silence on this issue speaks very loudly indeed.

Good idea. We can start with all the hopeless illegal drug addicts.

Even if this does impact our wordforge membership.

Yes, Children in Cages is fake sensationalist news. It's not leading to coherent discussion of the real issues.

Children in McOrphanages is news (but not new news).

Children purposely separated from their parents after illegally crossing the border is the news. That it is being done to influence potential border crossings and congress-critters is reprehensible.

And then move up to the wife beaters and felony hit and runners.

No complaining witnesses, statute of limitations,

Case closed.

Yes, it most certainly is fake news and well debunked.

"Fake" is not synonymous with "sensational", nor has it anything to do with whether it leads to what you consider coherent discussion. It is defined as forgery or sham.

But this is not forgery or sham. Children are being kept in cages. I'd argue that apoplexy is the appropriate reaction to that, and that your desire for a different type of discussion must raise suspicion that you don't give a fuck and would just rather talk about something else.

Where should they and their parents be kept until legal proceedings are conducted?