We're not talking about the people here first. We're talking Mexicans, Canadians, and Americans.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that's exactly who
@BillJ was talking about.
Some might come to believe you're arguing this in bad faith.
Watch yourself.
That's a problem, isn't it? Unless you are arguing that a valid path to citizenship is "Hide out and behave yourself for long enough."
It could be, although there should be more to it than that.
I mentioned someone here illegally getting getting a traffic violation:
But then:
Should they get that as well?
The fines, probably. You might be surprised to learn that few people face the literal penalties written into the law for
any crime you can think of. Turns out the law and its enforcement are quite negotiable. That's how it works.
First off, if they're here illegally how are they paying taxes? Sales tax, sure. Income tax? How does that work? I suppose if they're taking a paycheck they can have money deducted under someone else's SSN.
That's exactly how they do it. I find it somewhat disturbing you deign to speak on this issue while apparently knowing so little about the particulars of it.
Why is President Obama deporting anyone?
He is primarily deporting people who have committed serious crimes. Again, why do you feel qualified to comment if you don't even keep up with the basic facts at hand?
If this isn't a crime then why do we have border security at all? This isn't me throwing up my hands and throwing out a straw man. You asked why should it be illegal. If the argument is made that it shouldn't then that logically leads to there being no reason for it being a crime for anyone to cross into the U.S. Or am I not following the argument?
Who said it isn't a crime? To be a crime, something must be against the law. This is the kind of circular reasoning I'm talking about. They must be deported because they are criminals because illegal immigration is against the law, so they must be deported. The question begged: why is it against the law?
The issue of process came up which kind of danced around the real issue, which is that we want to have an orderly and effective immigration process rather than simply letting everyone in. And that's fine. But it's not practical to look at all the people who have already come here, who unlawfully crossed the border or overstayed visas, and try to deport them.
As it stands it IS a crime. For most (all?) other crimes we have law enforcement to prevent the crime from happening and also for punishing the criminals who were not prevented.
Do you realize police, prosecutors, and judges all have wide discretion as to their application and enforcement of the law?
If we do not deport them (like you said, there's a lot) then what becomes their status after they serve time / pay a fine for a first offense? What's the penalty for second offense? Third?
Under federal law, the penalties escalate with subsequent offenses.
What is the law that you break when you skip the line at McDonald's? I think can be actual consequences if you break into and Eagles concert without a ticket. At the very least being thrown out.
Sure.
EDIT: You're not arguing against any of Trump's border security plans because you don't think they won't work. You don't think anything SHOULD work. (If I have that wrong, then I apologize and I would like to hear your ideas that you think will work.)
No, I am prioritizing treating people humanely over serving some absolute, impractical objective that doesn't accomplish anything meaningful or positive. Laws are guidelines, not absolutes that must be applied indiscriminately. I am suggesting that people who believe Trump should attempt to deport 11 million people are willfully ignoring the human costs (to say nothing of the financial costs) of such an undertaking.
By all means, kick out the people who jump the border and actually pose a threat. But if they just came here to work and aren't doing harm to anyone, what's with the cruelty? What's with the seemingly inflexible desire to rip them away from their families and communities here and ship them back to wherever they came from? Do you think that serves any public interest? Is there some net benefit to that? What's the upshot?
