Border Patrol Is Detaining Migrants in ‘a Human Dog Pound’

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Yes, and I am also slamming it.

But it is Congress who sets ICE and CBP’s budgets.
Congress should be slammed though. Absolutely.

Very much so, this Republican lead Congress is very much a failure.

I thought America was a land of freedom and democracy? And yet here we are seeing migrants being treated like dirt.

Illegal immigrants, criminals. We treat regular migrants who go through the correct proceedings very well. (Like every other country on Earth) Take Australia for example who shot at boats full of illegal migrants coming from asia, or just throws them on an island and forgets about them.

US prisons have climate control, so no. Criminals get treated better.

And these people are only suspected criminals. Until they have a fair and just trial, they are innocent until proven guilty.

Yes but sense there's really nothing the US can do to prevent illegal immigration surges, the only thing to do would be give sufficient resources to ICE and CBP.

Well there are things we could do to but yes, we absolutely need to give sufficient resources to ICE and CBP (well and probably make ICE a component of CBP).
They are going to need vastly increased infrastructure to deal with this, and far more personnel so they do not have to rely on outsourcing schemes.

Plus probably deploy the national guard and military resources, the military has experience with rapidly building shelters in difficult circumstances. The military also has highly mobile medical units.

I'd be ok with this.

Yes but sense there's really nothing the US can do to prevent illegal immigration surges, the only thing to do would be give sufficient resources to ICE and CBP.

We could set mexico as a safe third country and refuse all asylum seekers crossing the border, we could make it abundantly clear that any person seeking asylum will be detained while they're processed, we could build a wall, we could occasionally dust the border with itching powder lots of options.

Can't do the first one as Mexico is outside US jurisdiction, that would be cruel to the second one, third one would be ok, fourth one would be massively expensive and non effective, last one wouldn't also be effective.

Yes, and I am also slamming it.

Yeah it's pretty shitty but it's not inhumanity it's a lack of funding and an unexpected demand.

It is. Inhumanity is inhumanity no matter what the context is.

[Telconi]

But it is Congress who sets ICE and CBP’s budgets.
Congress should be slammed though. Absolutely.

Very much so, this Republican lead Congress is very much a failure.

Illegal immigrants, criminals. We treat regular migrants who go through the correct proceedings very well. (Like every other country on Earth) Take Australia for example who shot at boats full of illegal migrants coming from asia, or just throws them on an island and forgets about them.

US prisons have climate control, so no. Criminals get treated better.

And these people are only suspected criminals. Until they have a fair and just trial, they are innocent until proven guilty.

Well there are things we could do to but yes, we absolutely need to give sufficient resources to ICE and CBP (well and probably make ICE a component of CBP).
They are going to need vastly increased infrastructure to deal with this, and far more personnel so they do not have to rely on outsourcing schemes.

Plus probably deploy the national guard and military resources, the military has experience with rapidly building shelters in difficult circumstances. The military also has highly mobile medical units.

I'd be ok with this.

We could set mexico as a safe third country and refuse all asylum seekers crossing the border, we could make it abundantly clear that any person seeking asylum will be detained while they're processed, we could build a wall, we could occasionally dust the border with itching powder lots of options.

Can't do the first one as Mexico is outside US jurisdiction, that would be cruel to the second one, third one would be ok, fourth one would be massively expensive and non effective, last one wouldn't also be effective.

Yeah it's pretty shitty but it's not inhumanity it's a lack of funding and an unexpected demand.

It is. Inhumanity is inhumanity no matter what the context is.

What makes Congress "Republican led?"

To be fair their legal innocence is irrelevant. We put normal criminals in jail pending trial too.

[Des-Bal]

Can't do the first one as Mexico is outside US jurisdiction, that would be cruel to the second one, third one would be ok, fourth one would be massively expensive and non effective, last one wouldn't also be effective.

It is. Inhumanity is inhumanity no matter what the context is.

If a safe third country was within US jurisdiction it wouldn't actually be a third country. Either it's cruel to put somone in a dog pound or it's cruel to tell them there's no room in the dog pound but both can't be true. AA wall would be pretty effective because if you haven't crossed the border illegally and surrendered you aren't in BP jurisdiction and don't need a room at the dog pound. With enough itching powder everything is possible.

No it's not actually, inhumanity is defined by context. Whether or not it's inhumane to deny someone water is dependent on whether or not you have any water.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Very much so, this Republican lead Congress is very much a failure.



US prisons have climate control, so no. Criminals get treated better.

And these people are only suspected criminals. Until they have a fair and just trial, they are innocent until proven guilty.



I'd be ok with this.



Can't do the first one as Mexico is outside US jurisdiction, that would be cruel to the second one, third one would be ok, fourth one would be massively expensive and non effective, last one wouldn't also be effective.



It is. Inhumanity is inhumanity no matter what the context is.

What makes Congress "Republican led?"

To be fair their legal innocence is irrelevant. We put normal criminals in jail pending trial too.

Ok, my bad I misread what house is has a majority of what party. Regardless of what parties are involved, Congress is failing to provide the money ICE needs.

Zed jail had climate control.

[Saiwania]

I'd express my true sentiments here now, if I weren't so uncertain about whether or not I'd risk breaking that stupid and silly "trolling" rule. All I'll say now, is that the Trump administration is by far, the very best on immigration in my lifetime; especially if you're broadly speaking: anti-immigration in political alignment. If it as if the past 50+ years of allowing people to cross over and take advantage of our society and resources never did have to happen. I'm loving every minute of what I'm reading from the whining liberal press.

[Novus America]

What makes Congress "Republican led?"

To be fair their legal innocence is irrelevant. We put normal criminals in jail pending trial too.

Ok, my bad I misread what house is has a majority of what party. Regardless of what parties are involved, Congress is failing to provide the money ICE needs.

Zed jail had climate control.

Both parties are more interested in using illegal as a controversial wedge issue than actually coming together to address it.

[Telconi]

What makes Congress "Republican led?"

To be fair their legal innocence is irrelevant. We put normal criminals in jail pending trial too.

Ok, my bad I misread what house is has a majority of what party. Regardless of what parties are involved, Congress is failing to provide the money ICE needs.

Zed jail had climate control.

Sure, and they really.should expand their facilities. But that takes time and requires Congress to fund it.

[Flaxxony]

De facto open borders is not as humanitarian as it seems after all. Especially when Congress insists on keeping these people in limbo.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Can't do the first one as Mexico is outside US jurisdiction, that would be cruel to the second one, third one would be ok, fourth one would be massively expensive and non effective, last one wouldn't also be effective.

It is. Inhumanity is inhumanity no matter what the context is.

If a safe third country was within US jurisdiction it wouldn't actually be a third country. Either it's cruel to put somone in a dog pound or it's cruel to tell them there's no room in the dog pound but both can't be true. AA wall would be pretty effective because if you haven't crossed the border illegally and surrendered you aren't in BP jurisdiction and don't need a room at the dog pound. With enough itching powder everything is possible.

No it's not actually, inhumanity is defined by context. Whether or not it's inhumane to deny someone water is dependent on whether or not you have any water.

So how exactly would you turn Mexico safe? Considering the cartels have turned the country into civil war for the past decade or so.

No, a wall would not be effective. It would just popularise air and marine crossings. That and tunnels.

Inhumanity is defined as "the quality or state of being cruel or barbarous". Regardless of context this is cruel or barbarous.

[Inkopolitia]

I'm one to hate illegal immigration, but this just isn't justifiable. Replace this with bigger and better facilities to keep the illegals in, and we're good.

[Blueflarst]

It is his fault for tresspassing i would have received them with bullets if i were in charge
Look illegal inmigrants are invaders and should be treated like it, they have no identity and no rights in the invaded nation excepting the ones the invaded want to create, the borders are better closed to inmigrants whom come without authorization, the illegal inmigrants generate people without job or wealth to the invaded country, usually do not have knowledge about secondary school and if they enter they create cultural clashes as they try to impose their culture inside the invaded nation. If these people do not like their situation they should change their countries government by force if necessary instead of fleeing to another place to be maintained by governments influenced by compassiveminds

Emergency shelters and air conditioning are expensive and these people not only will not pay these thing but also brokes the law and the national soveringty of the people native of the country they invade

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Ok, my bad I misread what house is has a majority of what party. Regardless of what parties are involved, Congress is failing to provide the money ICE needs.

Zed jail had climate control.

Sure, and they really.should expand their facilities. But that takes time and requires Congress to fund it.

Yes, that is what they should do.

I understand the time constraints, but this is a non acceptable temporary solution. The morons at ICE who thought this up should be fired.

[Telconi]

Sure, and they really.should expand their facilities. But that takes time and requires Congress to fund it.

Yes, that is what they should do.

I understand the time constraints, but this is a non acceptable temporary solution. The morons at ICE who thought this up should be fired.

Got a better idea? Shall they be housed in nothing? Maybe just skip the trial since we can't house them?

[Des-Bal]

So how exactly would you turn Mexico safe? Considering the cartels have turned the country into civil war for the past decade or so.

No, a wall would not be effective. It would just popularise air and marine crossings. That and tunnels.

Inhumanity is defined as "the quality or state of being cruel or barbarous". Regardless of context this is cruel or barbarous.

There are sasfe places in mexico. Detroit doesn't make the US lawless.

Yes and the number of people capable of making marine or air crossings is smaller meaning a wall would be effective. People can build tunnels but if you're crossing without a coyote (perhaps because you're totally destitute and planning to surrender after crossing) you don't really know where tunnels are.

No it's not. If someone begs you for water in the desert saying "no" is only cruel and barbarous if you have water.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Yes, that is what they should do.

I understand the time constraints, but this is a non acceptable temporary solution. The morons at ICE who thought this up should be fired.

Got a better idea? Shall they be housed in nothing? Maybe just skip the trial since we can't house them?

Put them in a motel? Get a bunch of RV's with AC's in them? Use the military to build shelters quickly? Rent out vacant apartments to ICE?

[Des-Bal]

Put them in a motel? Get a bunch of RV's with AC's in them? Use the military to build shelters quickly? Rent out vacant apartments to ICE?

So have more money, have more money, seize control of the military, or have more money?

[Purpelia]

Got a better idea? Shall they be housed in nothing? Maybe just skip the trial since we can't house them?

Put them in a motel? Get a bunch of RV's with AC's in them? Use the military to build shelters quickly? Rent out vacant apartments to ICE?

So your solution for foreign criminals illegally invading your country is to waste money on making them comfortable? Would you mind terribly if I broke into your house and stole your TV? Sounds like you'd be the sort to offer me tea and crumpets for my trouble.

[Farnhamia]

It is his fault for tresspassing i would have received them with bullets if i were in charge
Look illegal inmigrants are invaders and should be treated like it, they have no identity and no rights in the invaded nation excepting the ones the invaded want to create, the borders are better closed to inmigrants whom come without authorization, the illegal inmigrants generate people without job or wealth to the invaded country, usually do not have knowledge about secondary school and if they enter they create cultural clashes as they try to impose their culture inside the invaded nation. If these people do not like their situation they should change their countries government by force if necessary instead of fleeing to another place to be maintained by governments influenced by compassiveminds

Emergency shelters and air conditioning are expensive and these people not only will not pay these thing but also brokes the law and the national soveringty of the people native of the country they invade

*** Warned for trolling. ***

You don't get it, do you? We don't tolerate this sort of posting here. You're welcome to express your opinion but do it civilly, not by saying people seeking asylum should be met with bullets.

[Telconi]

Got a better idea? Shall they be housed in nothing? Maybe just skip the trial since we can't house them?

Put them in a motel? Get a bunch of RV's with AC's in them? Use the military to build shelters quickly? Rent out vacant apartments to ICE?

Literally everything here requires money. And money requires Congress to give them the thumbs up.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

So how exactly would you turn Mexico safe? Considering the cartels have turned the country into civil war for the past decade or so.

No, a wall would not be effective. It would just popularise air and marine crossings. That and tunnels.

Inhumanity is defined as "the quality or state of being cruel or barbarous". Regardless of context this is cruel or barbarous.

There are sasfe places in mexico. Detroit doesn't make the US lawless.

Yes and the number of people capable of making marine or air crossings is smaller meaning a wall would be effective. People can build tunnels but if you're crossing without a coyote (perhaps because you're totally destitute and planning to surrender after crossing) you don't really know where tunnels are.

No it's not. If someone begs you for water in the desert saying "no" is only cruel and barbarous if you have water.

And the unsafe places are why people running away in the first place.


Not necessarily a smaller number. People who would be dissuaded by the wall could have not been determined enough to cross the border anyway. The determined people would just find away to go around it anyway.

Does the US have client controlled housing? Because that argument only works if your saying no such housing exists in the US.

[Geneviev]

This is horrible, it would almost be better to treat undocumented refugees like criminals. Instead of building a wall, that money should be spent on detention centers or emergency shelters with air conditioning and border patrol.

[Telconi]

There are sasfe places in mexico. Detroit doesn't make the US lawless.

Yes and the number of people capable of making marine or air crossings is smaller meaning a wall would be effective. People can build tunnels but if you're crossing without a coyote (perhaps because you're totally destitute and planning to surrender after crossing) you don't really know where tunnels are.

No it's not. If someone begs you for water in the desert saying "no" is only cruel and barbarous if you have water.

And the unsafe places are why people running away in the first place.


Not necessarily a smaller number. People who would be dissuaded by the wall could have not been determined enough to cross the border anyway. The determined people would just find away to go around it anyway.

Does the US have client controlled housing? Because that argument only works if your saying no such housing exists in the US.

They don't need housing. They need detention facilities.

[Des-Bal]

This is horrible, it would almost be better to treat undocumented refugees like criminals. Instead of building a wall, that money should be spent on detention centers with air conditioning and border patrol.

It would be much better to treat them like criminals because it would give them constitutional protections including the right to a speedy trial and the right to counsel.

And the unsafe places are why people running away in the first place.


Not necessarily a smaller number. People who would be dissuaded by the wall could have not been determined enough to cross the border anyway. The determined people would just find away to go around it anyway.

Does the US have client controlled housing? Because that argument only works if your saying no such housing exists in the US.

Guatemalans aren't fleeing to the US to escape Mexico.

It would certainly be a smaller number because it's not an issue of determination it's an issue of resources. It's easier to walk across an imaginary line than to climb a very real wall.

"client controlled housing" has one result on google, it is a newspaper from the 90s I don't have the subscription to read. Regardless we probably don't have housing for 30k+ people laying around, presuming we did it would require some serious transportation which goes back into that "have more money" issue.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

This is peak socio-political psychopathy, treat everyone who isn’t in your “in-group” with inhuman callousness and disdain, it’s absolutely disgusting.

When looking at things, view it from the lens of "what if it was me?"

Golden rules is crappy tho.

Only if you’re experiencing some form of sociopathy or psychopathy where you don’t care about receiving the same kind of callousness you give to others.

It's not. It's a perfectly functional rule.

Also yay 30000 posts.

I really don't want to be treated the way you do, and I don't doubt the opposite is true.

So... you don’t want to be treated with respect, kindness and civility?

[Farnhamia]

This is peak socio-political psychopathy, treat everyone who isn’t in your “in-group” with inhuman callousness and disdain, it’s absolutely disgusting.

Golden rules is crappy tho.

Only if you’re experiencing some form of sociopathy or psychopathy where you don’t care about receiving the same kind of callousness you give to others.

It's not a good idea to speculate or make insinuations about another poster's mental health.