The immigrant round up has begun.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You've got a driver's license, don't you? You need those papers - or equal papers showing citizenship or visa - to get one. And having been in accidents with people who turned out to be illegal immigrants, they usually don't want the police to be called because (surprise, surprise) their documents aren't valid or present.

Someone with an expired visa may very well have a driver's license.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Someone with an expired visa may very well have a driver's license.

And just like with auto insurance and vehicle tags, a run of that DL number would show that their visa is expired.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

And nothing I said suggested that in the slightest. Please do not read into what I write, or assume my sentiments for your agenda.

That said, if you commit a crime and you don't show up in any database, things are bound to escalate.


And how do we know they fake a SSN? Oh, right--it's fake. But things like sanctuary cities exist.


I've got an idea; how about people stop resorting to tired drama and historical mis-comparison to plug sympathy for illegal activity?

"And nothing I said suggested that in the slightest. Please do not read into what I write, or assume my sentiments for your agenda."

I don't really think you know what you are saying. I think you view me as the opposition so naturally you must argue against what I say, regardless of whether you are making sense are not.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Why is it when there is a disagreement, the other must certainly "not know what they're saying"? I know what I am saying, and my position, Jeremiah. If we are opposed then so be it, but my position is not born of obstination.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Why is it when there is a disagreement, the other must certainly "not know what they're saying"? I know what I am saying, and my position, Jeremiah. If we are opposed then so be it, but my position is not born of obstination.

Let's review,

I said, "So what happens when cops start detaining US citizens because they can't immediately produce immigration papers. As it turns out some of us were born here, and don't have immigration papers. I never carry any papers proving I am a US citizen; I don't even carry my ID (as I don't want to lose it)."

To which you said, "You've got a driver's license, don't you? You need those papers - or equal papers showing citizenship or visa - to get one. And having been in accidents with people who turned out to be illegal immigrants, they usually don't want the police to be called because (surprise, surprise) their documents aren't valid or present."

See there is already a miss-connect.

I never said anything about criminal activity or a need for the cops to be called. That is something you added that was not my focus.

Then I said, "I already said I don't carry my ID. I don't carry important documentation, because it is important and I don't want to lose it."

To which you said, "All ID's are important; that's no excuse if you're looking to avoid detention. And yet should you be detained, you can be looked up on national databases by name and date of birth."

"Looking to avoid detention" see that is our split. You have criminals in mind, and I don't.

We are not on the same page. Deport the criminals, I support that, but that is not where we are heading, as law enforcement is already targeting peaceful individuals that have lived here a long time and have a family here. And guess what, they look just like your typical law abiding citizen. So how is law enforcement suppose to tell those individuals apart? It is not as simple as, "paper please", and that was my point. I think we have two different images in mind when we think about the words, "illegal immigrants".

 

[Quagmire]

Okay, settle down. I don't think anyone here is "anti-immigrant". In fact a couple here - myself included - have specifically stated proper immigration enforcement. This is a matter completely different from jaywalking; firstly in that jaywalking is illegal in the same scope as sneezing on a train in Massachusetts, secondly in that one is less than a misdemeanor and the other is an infringement of legal citizenship status.

Still. . .

To put a little perspective on auto/pedestrian accidents, here’s a few statistics published by the National Safety Council:



• Approximately 6,000 pedestrian accidents are caused by jaywalking every year.



• In the period from 1975 to 2005, approximately 180,000 pedestrians have been injured or killed.



• Approximately one pedestrian is injured every eight minutes, and one pedestrian is killed every 11 minutes due to jaywalking.

Jaywalking can create dangers on roadways

Laws and the prioritization thereof don't always make perfect sense.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I never said anything about criminal activity or a need for the cops to be called. That is something you added that was not my focus.

But you did begin by supposing that citizens could be detained if they don't have identification or proof that they're citizens. So the presence of police has already been made.

"Looking to avoid detention" see that is our split. You have criminals in mind, and I don't.

Partially in mind, yet also - per your example - citizens who don't have ID on them should they encounter law enforcement.

Let me give you an example here. Say that there's a hitchhiker walking along the side of the highway. A cop stops him and asks for identification.

• If he has a driver's license, the number can be run by the stations dispatch. From this, practically everything about him comes up on the database; his name, description, address, any open warrants, restrictions (including student/worker visas and their status), etc.
• If he does not have a DL, but has some other form of ID, the above information can be retrieved by name and date of birth. (I know how this works because I was a police dispatcher)

Deport the criminals, I support that, but that is not where we are heading, as law enforcement is already targeting peaceful individuals that have lived here a long time and have a family here.

Here's the problem. If someone is here illegally, then they are a criminal - by definition. Not all criminals or crimes are violent, and they are breaking the law. It does not matter if they are living here peacefully, it does not matter if they've been here for a long time, and legally it doesn't matter if they have a family here. Their children are citizens, they are not. I am all for allowing them immigration (perhaps expedited on account of their families,) but there is a law to enforce that they are in violation of.

And guess what, they look just like your typical law abiding citizen. So how is law enforcement suppose to tell those individuals apart?

I would assume - for those who aren't known - that it would be people who are suspect. How do we have estimations for how many illegal immigrants there are in the nation?

I think we have two different images in mind when we think about the words, "illegal immigrants".

Likely not. If you think that I envision drug peddling, thieving bandits, you'd be wrong. I get that they're "normal people".

 

[psychoslice]

Round them up rawhide.

 

[Lyndon]

In our country, Psycho, you're just another illegal immigrant!!

 

[Jeremiahcp]

But you did begin by supposing that citizens could be detained if they don't have identification or proof that they're citizens. So the presence of police has already been made.


Partially in mind, yet also - per your example - citizens who don't have ID on them should they encounter law enforcement.

Let me give you an example here. Say that there's a hitchhiker walking along the side of the highway. A cop stops him and asks for identification.

• If he has a driver's license, the number can be run by the stations dispatch. From this, practically everything about him comes up on the database; his name, description, address, any open warrants, restrictions (including student/worker visas and their status), etc.
• If he does not have a DL, but has some other form of ID, the above information can be retrieved by name and date of birth. (I know how this works because I was a police dispatcher)

Here's the problem. If someone is here illegally, then they are a criminal - by definition. Not all criminals or crimes are violent, and they are breaking the law. It does not matter if they are living here peacefully, it does not matter if they've been here for a long time, and legally it doesn't matter if they have a family here. Their children are citizens, they are not. I am all for allowing them immigration (perhaps expedited on account of their families,) but there is a law to enforce that they are in violation of.


I would assume - for those who aren't known - that it would be people who are suspect. How do we have estimations for how many illegal immigrants there are in the nation?


Likely not. If you think that I envision drug peddling, thieving bandits, you'd be wrong. I get that they're "normal people".

"But you did begin by supposing that citizens could be detained if they don't have identification or proof that they're citizens.

I said, "US citizens" not immigrants. When I said, "So what happens when cops start detaining US citizens" I was responding to the silly notion of how the cops are going to identify people. They can't just start stopping people that have brown skin and asking for their papers. I also said, "they can't detain people that can't immediately produce proof they are a US citizen." In this case I am not talking about immigrant so much as I am talking about Hispanic Americans who will get harassed over this. The racial profiling will get worst, all for the name of stopping "bad hombres". As far as I am concerned racial bias in the law is a much bigger issues than illegals. And if you really don't think this will inflame that issue then you are just being naive.

Some of you seem to think it is simple as, "papers please", but it is not.

"Partially in mind, yet also - per your example - citizens who don't have ID on them should they encounter law enforcement."

Cops should not be holding lawful citizen who have done nothing wrong simply because they don't have an id on them. But the more they harass and target actual US citizens the greater the push back will be. So I hope they are stupid to start harassing actual citizens.

"Let me give you an example here. Say that there's a hitchhiker walking along the side of the highway. A cop stops him and asks for identification.

• If he has a driver's license, the number can be run by the stations dispatch. From this, practically everything about him comes up on the database; his name, description, address, any open warrants, restrictions (including student/worker visas and their status), etc.
• If he does not have a DL, but has some other form of ID, the above information can be retrieved by name and date of birth. (I know how this works because I was a police dispatcher)"

I am familiar with the process, you don't need to explain it to me.

"Here's the problem. If someone is here illegally, then they are a criminal - by definition. "

Nice and simple right? You don't even have to think about it.

"It does not matter if they are living here peacefully, it does not matter if they've been here for a long time, and legally it doesn't matter if they have a family here. Their children are citizens, they are not. I am all for allowing them immigration (perhaps expedited on account of their families,) but there is a law to enforce that they are in violation of."

So much for the importance of family values. Maybe you think ripping apart a family doesn't matter, but I do. Who is suppose to raise and take care of the children when we deport their loving parents? Now instead of parents who work and provide for them, the state and the government has to raise them; and we, the taxpayers, get to pay for that. That is just thoughtless, but as you said by definition they are criminal, right? So we don't even have to think about it.

"How do we have estimations for how many illegal immigrants there are in the nation?"

A census or a national survey gives us a measure of how many immigrants (legal and unauthorized combined) are living in the United States. We then use a variety of data sources, mainly from the government, to estimate how many immigrants are living in the country legally.

Basically, then, our estimate of unauthorized immigrants living in the country is the total number of immigrants living in the country minus the number of immigrants living here legally

Unauthorized Immigrants: How Pew Research Counts Them and What We Know About Them

 

[Mister_T]

Ah, yes, the "anchor." This should not excuse their status, however. Immigrate them and fine them, I say.

Many of them have filed already to become legal, good luck though having those applications actually processed, same goes for the Phillipines, Africa and parts of Eastern Europe. I know people that have been waiting well over 10 years that have been here since they were children, just to have their paperwork processed to become legal. Now if you're from Western Europe on the other hand, you get an express lane.

The quota system is anything but fair for a lot of poor countries.

 

[Shem Ben Noah]

What reports are those exactly?

That's what they say on the evening news last night. I DID say 'IF'.

 

[Curious George]

I am sorry but if detecting illegals was as simple as, "Papers please", we would not currently have a problem with illegals.

Not to mention papers please is unconstitutional.

 

[columbus]

We should be. Or at the very least auditing their businesses.

But normally when I bring this up it's ignored, dismissed, or watered down. It's like prosecuting people buying medical marijuana, while ignoring the drug lords and pushers selling to second graders.

I see no reason we can't have the immigration issues well on their way to resolution by the spring. If all big employers, like Manpower inc. were given to know that in 2 weeks a list of all employees would be demanded. Every one would be audited and the company would be fined and management prosecuted if more than a tiny number of illegal employees were found on the books. Wall Street would be advocating for something sensible before the first block gets laid for that stupid Wall.
Tom

 

[Mister Emu]

Something needs to be done about illegal immigration, but I think this focus on deportation is misdirected, and a screen for ignoring the much more serious problem of wealth inequality in the country.

Mass immigration is one of the tools of the wealthy for furthering inequality.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

As long as they're not white, male, straight, and American, they're probably peaceful and wise altruists whose farts are rainbow-colored expressions of joy and healing. I can't imagine any of them have probably done anything worse than accidentally step on a bug they didn't see.

 

[metis]

I don't know if anyone posted this earlier on this thread, but someone either with ICE or Trump himself is lying because Trump said he's fulfilling his campaign promise with this raid, but ICE says this was planned under Obama's administration.

Wanna take odds on who's doing the actual lying?

 

[columbus]

I don't know if anyone posted this earlier on this thread, but someone either with ICE or Trump himself is lying because Trump said he's fulfilling his campaign promise with this raid, but ICE says this was planned under Obama's administration.

Wanna take odds on who's doing the actual lying?

Those aren't mutually exclusive. My understanding is that the only real difference is the treatment of people who aren't specifically targeted. If someone is targeted for actual criminal behavior the cops used to ignore the others with them. Now they are more inclined to also investigate anybody who happens to be with them at the time.
Tom

 

[metis]

Those aren't mutually exclusive. My understanding is that the only real difference is the treatment of people who aren't specifically targeted. If someone is targeted for actual criminal behavior the cops used to ignore the others with them. Now they are more inclined to also investigate anybody who happens to be with them at the time.
Tom

But the point is that the raid, according to ICE, had already been planned out. So, what you're saying could well be true, but then that still leaves Trump's bragging about it to be an overstatement at the least.

 

[Valjean]

ah.
right then.
That makes it perfectly OK to illegally enter the country then.

Laws are made to serve human needs, not impede them. When a law becomes an impediment to legitimate needs it should be ignored.

How are cops are supposed to tell the difference?

"Papiere, bitte."

If reports are true that 94% of those rounded up have felony criminal records, then it's about time, IMHO.

Most of the 'felonies' are for entering the country illegally a second time (yes, apparently this is a felony). What's more, if there are others in the household without green cards, they're arrested too.
Then there are arrests for no compelling reason: Mexican woman deported from the US despite protests - BBC News
Arrested when she showed up for a routine check-in with Immigration, as she'd been doing for seven years. It's no wonder even the law-abiding Hispanic population is in a panic.