Here's a workable experiment for 'Red Flag' Laws

but yeah, on the serious side, we take in a goodly number who are willing to risk the snow to escape ICE. The second one isn't that far off in that the PQ/NY border sees a lot of travel... generally from francophone Caribbean and African countries.

well then take it up a notch! I say fuck the wall, build runways and charter planes to fly every immigrant at our southern US border right straight to the northern US border.
Hell, have a lottery where some lucky immigrants get flown across the pond to England - they want safety & security (and who doesn't?) take them to the gun free, crime free paradise they deserve.
Sounds crazy but it just might work!

we don't make'em, so we're not as obligated to take'em.

we do anyways, and it tends to work out pretty good.

Still, I'm afraid your caveat in this has to be ignored... America does have a major hand in creating migrant refugees.

ah, there it is! I knew you'd point that blame finger sooner versus later.

unfortunately, that's the finger of "you can't address the problem without addressing the source of the problem finger."

let me reframe it for you...
"My wife keeps getting black eyes"
"Might that have something to do with you punching her in the face"
"I knew you'd point that blame finger!"

but you know what the real irony here is? It's that many of these refugees from places America has had a hand in fucking up are the people who supported that interference in the first place... and (America) lost.
Cubans in Florida? Roots of that community were Batista's beneficiaries.
Vietnamese? Based on Van Thieu loyalists.

Sorry sunshine, but you can't omit one of the principle influences.

over the last two years, it's been about -45 000.
seems the spike we've seen is in part due to 45's ignoring obligations of the Safe Third Countries Agreement.
And nothing says "MAGA" like violating treaties...

I thought you did not like the undocumented immigrants. It is really nice you want to send them to a safer place. Or is it just that you are racist and don't want them in your neighborhood?

I want what's best for them! If the US is such a dangerous shithole then maybe they should go to a safer, more welcoming place. Why don't you want brown people to be safe, racist?

I did not say the US was a dangerous shithole. The US has concentration camps for them, and that is not good. It would be better if they could be someplace safer without being abused by ICE.

well if the US is doing it wrong (concentration camps as you put it) then we should transport them immediately to Canada. I'm sure they would have completely acceptable conditions for them and a streamlined system of finding them gainful employment and affordable housing. It just makes sense!

I personally don't think the US is inherently better or worse than any other group of human beings.

I do, however, think it's healthy to challenge the perception of superiority which all massive nations generate, precisely because self deception is the enemy of progress.

not the greatest, but still... we at least remember these are human beings.

********************
TORONTO — The treatment of migrants has recently been thrust into the spotlight as accounts emerge of overcrowding and unsanitary conditions in American border detention facilities. Here’s a look at how Canada deals with immigration detainees.

Immigration holding centres, sometimes jails

The Canada Border Services Agency can detain foreign nationals and permanent residents under certain conditions — including if they pose security risks or are unlikely to appear for immigration proceedings — but must first consider all reasonable alternatives. The CBSA says the physical and mental health and well-being of detainees are key considerations.

A person may be detained at a CBSA immigration holding centre in Toronto, Laval, Que., or Vancouver. In other regions, people may be held in provincial jails.

The Toronto centre can hold up to 195 detainees, while the Laval one can house up to 109. The CBSA says both provide separate accommodation for men, women and families, have outdoor recreational areas, provide daily meals, access to games, televisions and telephones, visitation areas and medical services.

The Vancouver centre is at the city’s airport and can hold up to 24 detainees for up to 48 hours. Men and women are held separately while children may be housed with their mothers. The facility has common rooms, access to games, televisions and telephones.

The CBSA says everyone in its holding centres get three meals and two snacks per day, and special dietary needs, such as food allergies or specialized diets, are catered to.

The agency says it relies on provincial correctional facilities to hold higher-risk detainees such as those with a violent criminal background, lower-risk detainees in areas that don’t have an immigration holding centre, and those detained for more than 48 hours in the Vancouver area. It says it tries to minimize interaction between immigration and criminal detainees.

You have people here who are left with really horrifying choices to make in these situations

If a child has Canadian citizenship and their parents are considered non-citizens when detained, the children themselves are not considered detainees if their parents keep their kids with them, Gros says.



The CBSA says there were 6,609 people detained in holding centres in 2017-18, up from 4,248 a year earlier. There were 1,831 detainees held in jails last year, compared to 971 in 2016-17.

Stephanie Silverman, who is with migrant advocacy group Thinking Forward Network, says detainees have their cases reviewed at certain intervals — the first within 48 hours of detention, again after seven days, and then every 30 days until their detention is resolved.

“It can only really be resolved through release into the community, usually on conditions, or through deportation,” says Silverman, noting there’s no limit on how long a person can be held.

“It could be 48 hours before you get out, it could be three months, or it could be five years.”

In 2017-18, the CBSA reported 3.8 per cent of detainees were held for more than 99 days, while 47.2 per cent were held for 24 hours or less. The rest were held somewhere between 25-48 hours and 40-99 days.

The CBSA estimates it costs approximately $320 per day to detain someone.


The luggage of soon to be deported detainees at the Canada Border Services Agency’s Immigration Holding Centre in Toronto on Thursday July 7, 2011. Ernest Doroszuk / QUI AGENCY


Limited amenities

Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees, says those in immigration holding centres are afforded an adequate amount of food and water but have limited amenities.

“They’re not allowed to have internet access which makes it very difficult for them to communicate with family members or others that may be able to help them get the documents that they need,” she says, adding that detainees also have restricted access to phone calls.

The CBSA says it provides on-site access to NGOs and legal counsel at holding centres where possible, and notes that a detainee can ask to speak to a CBSA officer at any time, or ask to see legal counsel or an NGO rep.

The agency also says it has on-site medical, nursing, psychological and psychiatric care within CBSA-run facilities. Those with special needs are dealt with on a case-by-case, it says.

Detainees held in jails are subject to the same rules as inmates. If a jail goes into lockdown, detainees have to deal with the situation and it can be difficult for family and others to visit them, Dench says.

“We’re talking about people here who have not been accused of any crime, and yet they are treated according to rules that are invented and problematic in themselves for people who are accused or convicted of a crime,” she says. “(It’s) completely unfair.”

Parents decide if families stay together

Canadian law states that the best interests of the child must be observed in immigration holding centres. The CBSA says children are detained only as a last resort.

In 2017-18, the CBSA says there were 151 minors detained. Of those, 144 were accompanied by their parent or guardian, and seven were unaccompanied.

In theory, parents largely decide whether or not their child remains with them in detention, but Hanna Gros, an immigration and refugee lawyer, says the situation can be a “catch-22.”

“This is really a false choice,” she said. “When you’re new to a country, you don’t necessarily know anybody here, you don’t have family friends, contacts or community support. You have people here who are left with really horrifying choices to make in these situations.”

If a child has Canadian citizenship and their parents are considered non-citizens when detained, the children themselves are not considered detainees if their parents keep their kids with them, Gros says.


Leaving can be hard

For a migrant to be deported to another country, both countries have to agree to the person leaving one state and coming to another, says Silverman.

“Deportation is a two-way agreement between states, and not so much contingent on the individual,” she says. “There has to be an admission or an entrance of some sort into a another state.”

If neither the state nor the person leaving the country can verify the detainee’s identity, the person has to prove it from inside a detention centre, which can be hard, Silverman says.

For immigrants with a criminal record, the process can be even more difficult.

Certain states don’t issue travel documents for nationals who have been convicted of crimes in another country, which could also lengthen the detention process, Silverman says.


*****************

Notable is that a federally run service seems to be doing it for less than half (and in Cdn$) than your private system. Shades of health insurance!

Also note that without some sort of evidence of crime or security threat, people are presumed innocent and released once proper documentation is begun. Yes, some are held in provincial jails if there's one of those risks, but again over half are out in 24 hrs and most within a week.


​

So you are saying you are a racist and would really rather them not be near you.

no that's not what I'm saying.

Sure you are. "You don't like that we commit crimes against these children? Well take them away from us then! You can't just expect us to stop!"

and what does this have to do with racism? I guess the only way to test your theory is to have white people at our southern border and see if my position changes.

There already are white people at the southern border, and everywhere else too.

That also depends on how you define race, there are plenty of people here who are racist regarding the French.

As for your suggestion which was clearly tongue in cheek I actually think there's value in it. The load borne with regards to immigrants arguably should be distributed amongst agreeable nations and that is exactly what in principle happens in the EU. Sadly we got into a national hissy fit about it because we're just as racist towards our white neighbours as we are towards black people and decided to throw out our collective dummy.

you missed the point. Or perhaps you're trying to be clever. Either way color me unimpressed.

What colour is that?

yes I was going to say SWIDT? but figured the joke would go over K's head. He's a pretty somber fellow.

He is indeed serious, but he's also very sharp indeed and has a habit of seeing the flaw in an argument, he's caught me out once or twice to be honest.

I think you missed the point. There are white people at the border, but you're not interning them.

This, because if white people at the border where being treated as ICE is treating people who appear hispanic in some way people would have a fit. It would be challenged and changed right away. However, since ICE uses racism to single out people who are hispanic for abuse not much is being done to stop them. This is the same sort of cultural/racial profiling that went on in Nazi germany.

This is actually a decent comparison. Where before Trump had not gone full Nazi, this is trump going full Nazi on hispanic people.

California’s red flag law seems to be working well with San Diego issuing over half of all red flag injunctions in the entire state. The reason seems to be because the D.A. has made it a priority to use the red flag law where ever possible.


https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/top...alifornias-red-flag-law-as-much-as-san-diego/

Speaking of Red Flag laws:

I’d accuse you of lying in your premise, but I suspect you’re just parroting a popular but debunked number. The truth is that the number is a tiny fraction of that. ~5180 deaths a year are directly caused by adverse medical events from treatment, of which “misadventure” — medical errors in epidemiology parlance — make up 8.5%, or about 440/year. Even if you assume, as the source’s author does, contributions to deaths are 20x direct causes, that’s still only 8806 deaths/year with medical error somewhere in the causal chain of death, 108,780 from all AMETs.

Which makes much more sense than 500k on its face because there are only 750k/year hospital deaths and the idea that medical errors are responsible for ⅔ of them is ludicrous.

I’m no gun-grabber but I will demand you argue with true facts.

I am thinking this is a great first step to getting guns out of the hands of crazies. If you don't have enough self control to not make threats and crazy statements we take your guns. Probable cause for a search warrant for weapons and you have applicable laws for arresting and charging these people for preparing for assault and murder. I don't have any real problems taking away the guns of the angry and prone to emotional outbursts. we should start monitoring places like stormfront, pro-gun sites where these guys often pop off about how they are going to shoot everyone, and start grabbing guns and putting people in the no guns database and tossing them in prison any time they try to buy a gun. You go to walmart, a pawn shop, or even a straw sale and try to buy a gun and those people had better call the cops right away, or we arrest them for selling just like we would arrest a clerk or person for selling cigarettes or alcohol illegally.

Seriously, we would lower a lot of the threats online in places like this when @Forbin comes out and has a hissy fit showing how unstable him and the guntards are, and next thing we know they are dragged off and disarmed before they go off the rails. It would quiet the aggressive attitudes of the guntards right down. To make room in prison for them we can let out potheads. They are generally less dangerous, and more pleasant when they talk about their hobbies.

Are you fucking serious about Forbin throwing a "hissy fit?" At no point has Forbin ever came off as threatening or unstable.
If anything you are the one with the emotional stability of Stevie Wonder playing Jenga wearing boxing gloves. And the way you talk about your road rage issues somebody should confiscate your car the next time you pull in to gas up.

Thanks, I forgot about you. You should be nowhere near a gun also, given your outbursts.