ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags ICE incidents , ICE issues , immigration incidents , immigration issues

Reply
Old 17th February 2017, 08:49 AM   #41
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,254
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Good enough. As I mentioned, we should look at the results. If they are catching the people we ask them to catch, then their suspicions are reasonable. At least reasonable in the sense those suspicions accomplish the task at hand. If not, not.
Bull. Ends don't justify means.

From Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute:
Quote:
Reasonable suspicion is a standard used in criminal procedure. It is looser than probable cause. Reasonable suspicion is sufficient to justify brief stops and detentions, but not enough to justify a full search. When determining reasonable suspicion, courts consider the events leading up to the brief stop and a decide whether these facts, viewed from the standpoint of an objectively reasonable police officer, amount to reasonable suspicion.

Courts look at the totality of the circumstances of each case to see whether the officer has a particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing.
To put it succinctly, it's what is known or suspected before the harassment, not what one can justify after the harassment.
__________________
Never let anyone forget that the American people elected a rapist to be their president. President Rapist is the only name that should be used when referring to this evil narcissist.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 08:50 AM   #42
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
 
Dumb All Over's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name)
Posts: 5,024
Running to a hypothermia shelter to escape ICE; makes sense to me.
__________________
The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty forum word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead."
"Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." -Steve Martin
Dumb All Over is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 08:55 AM   #43
Newtons Bit
Philosopher
 
Newtons Bit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 9,886
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
So, they just took your word for your birth date? Surely, you must be from California. I guess that's why even TSA won't accept a driver license from the States without Real ID. Are you sure the law hasn't changed since you got yours?
I live in New Mexico. The state has since changed the rules and now requires all sorts of a legal documents to get a new license (which my wife found out when she finally got around to getting a New Mexico license).

My ID, on the other hand, just required a piece of mail to verify my address IIRC.
__________________
"Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein
Newtons Bit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 08:58 AM   #44
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,872
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
So, they just took your word for your birth date? Surely, you must be from California. I guess that's why even TSA won't accept a driver license from the States without Real ID. Are you sure the law hasn't changed since you got yours?

Would you be happy to present your ID at any time when instructed to do so by a LEO?
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 08:58 AM   #45
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,342
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Good enough. As I mentioned, we should look at the results. If they are catching the people we ask them to catch, then their suspicions are reasonable. At least reasonable in the sense those suspicions accomplish the task at hand. If not, not.
You realise that this argument is exactly the same for police swooping in on a basketball court where young blacks are playing and then running warrant checks on them all? That if they are catching the people we ask them to catch, then their suspicions are reasonable. At least reasonable in the sense those suspicions accomplish the task at hand. If not, not.

How do you think that would fly in court?
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:11 AM   #46
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,492
For all of those opposing me on this issue, YOU pay the freaking taxes to support these illegal free loaders.

I have a Walmart near me, which I occasionally use because it's convenient. Recently, I followed a Latino family thru the Checkout line. The kids spoke some English because i spoke with them. The parents (I presume) obviously spoke very little. They had a ton of groceries, which were paid for with a fist full of food stamp type cards.

Now, in order to legally immigrate into the US, one has to prove they are financially able to support themselves. That is a requirement for legal immigration.

It's no freaking wonder we are going broke. So, if you want to support these freeloaders be my guest. But, you pay the freaking taxes to support them. I suggest you voluntarily pay an addition several hundred $$ more tax this year.

In addition, I would support a national referendum that those who support this crap be taxed at a different rate than those who don't.

One of the reasons Hillary lost is that she supported open borders. Illegal immigration was a major campaign issue and the opinions expressed here are one of the reason you suckers lost. So, continue to support this and you'll continue to lose. Be my guest.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:12 AM   #47
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,633
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Bull. Ends don't justify means.
Um, platitude aside, they do. The very reason I do something is to accomplish some end I have in mind. What is probably meant is more of a moral caution so that unjust means taint ends, thereby making them unjust as well. However, if we wish to capture undocumented visitors and deport them, we are entitled to examine the methods at hand and reject those which do not accomplish the objective. If they do give us the correct results, only then should we ask if those means are themselves warranted. But the first step is to see if they work at all. If ICE's method isn't catching who they want, the means aren't justified on that basis - no need to get all moral about it.

Quote:
From Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute:

To put it succinctly, it's what is known or suspected before the harassment, not what one can justify after the harassment.
Yes, of course. So the question is whether or not the information available to ICE before the stop ("harassment" being an unduly loaded term) was reasonable or not. Part of that would be visual identification of characteristics they felt identified the proper targets. So again, we come round to: does it work? Do visual criteria give them reliable information?

This isn't new territory. Gang colors/tats are more likely found on gang members. Prostitutes dress in sexually suggestive clothing. Drug dealers walk around asking people if they want to buy drugs. None of these characteristics constitute final proof, but I'd say they were on the scale of "reasonable" somewhere.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:12 AM   #48
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,872
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
For all of those opposing me on this issue, YOU pay the freaking taxes to support these illegal free loaders.

I have a Walmart near me, which I occasionally use because it's convenient. Recently, I followed a Latino family thru the Checkout line. The kids spoke some English because i spoke with them. The parents (I presume) obviously spoke very little. They had a ton of groceries, which were paid for with a fist full of food stamp type cards.

Now, in order to legally immigrate into the US, one has to prove they are financially able to support themselves. That is a requirement for legal immigration.

It's no freaking wonder we are going broke. So, if you want to support these freeloaders be my guest. But, you pay the freaking taxes to support them. I suggest you voluntarily pay an addition several hundred $$ more tax this year.

In addition, I would support a national referendum that those who support this crap be taxed at a different rate than those who don't.

One of the reasons Hillary lost is that she supported open borders. Illegal immigration was a major campaign issue and the opinions expressed here are one of the reason you suckers lost. So, continue to support this and you'll continue to lose. Be my guest.



A massive victory in misdirection for the 1%
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:14 AM   #49
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,633
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
I live in New Mexico. The state has since changed the rules and now requires all sorts of a legal documents to get a new license (which my wife found out when she finally got around to getting a New Mexico license).

My ID, on the other hand, just required a piece of mail to verify my address IIRC.
I just got licensed in Michigan. I went for the "enhanced" driver's license which does require proof of citizenship, mainly because it allows me to travel into Canada and back.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:16 AM   #50
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,254
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Yes, of course. So the question is whether or not the information available to ICE before the stop ("harassment" being an unduly loaded term) was reasonable or not. Part of that would be visual identification of characteristics they felt identified the proper targets. So again, we come round to: does it work? Do visual criteria give them reliable information?
Let's just say that I'm glad you're not on the Supreme Court.

What's unfortunate is that people like Oscar Martinez (the man with a green card quoted in the article) won't sue ICE for the patently illegal harassment. These scumbag agents won't stop until they're told to do so, and they won't be told to do so until someone who respects the law is running the show or until those in charge are forced to do so by court order.
__________________
Never let anyone forget that the American people elected a rapist to be their president. President Rapist is the only name that should be used when referring to this evil narcissist.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:20 AM   #51
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,492
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
I live in New Mexico. The state has since changed the rules and now requires all sorts of a legal documents to get a new license (which my wife found out when she finally got around to getting a New Mexico license).

My ID, on the other hand, just required a piece of mail to verify my address IIRC.
Understand. My father had no birth certificate so he got both a drivers license and a Passport with a written notarized statement from his oldest relative verifying his birth date and legal residency. (All of his ancestors had been in the US for over 200 years). I thought the laws had changed in all states, but I guess that's only for the States that comply with the Real ID laws...
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:21 AM   #52
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,633
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
You realise that this argument is exactly the same for police swooping in on a basketball court where young blacks are playing and then running warrant checks on them all? That if they are catching the people we ask them to catch, then their suspicions are reasonable. At least reasonable in the sense those suspicions accomplish the task at hand. If not, not.

How do you think that would fly in court?
It would fail. It would fail because swooping in on a basketball court would not accomplish the objective based solely on the basketball court part. Playing basketball would not be enough of a discriminator.

If, however, it happened to be that basketball were such a thing - I don't know, maybe the Hell's Angels have a game they play preferentially? - then basketball would be.

Case in point. Some dude drives around and buys pseudoephedrine (Sudafed), a dozen at a time, store after store. Sudafed is legal to buy. But I also know it's used to make meth. If I start searching people who have lots of Sudafed AND I find a lot of meth, then I would say the legal activity tips me off to the illegal one. The results tell me my method works or doesn't work.

This is science, deal with it.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:24 AM   #53
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,120
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
For all of those opposing me on this issue, YOU pay the freaking taxes to support these illegal free loaders.

I have a Walmart near me, which I occasionally use because it's convenient. Recently, I followed a Latino family thru the Checkout line. The kids spoke some English because i spoke with them. The parents (I presume) obviously spoke very little. They had a ton of groceries, which were paid for with a fist full of food stamp type cards.

Now, in order to legally immigrate into the US, one has to prove they are financially able to support themselves. That is a requirement for legal immigration.

It's no freaking wonder we are going broke. So, if you want to support these freeloaders be my guest. But, you pay the freaking taxes to support them. I suggest you voluntarily pay an addition several hundred $$ more tax this year.

In addition, I would support a national referendum that those who support this crap be taxed at a different rate than those who don't.

One of the reasons Hillary lost is that she supported open borders. Illegal immigration was a major campaign issue and the opinions expressed here are one of the reason you suckers lost. So, continue to support this and you'll continue to lose. Be my guest.
You didn't actually speak with them, but because they are brown and on food stamps you assume they must be illegal immigrants. Do I have that right?

Originally Posted by marplots View Post
It would fail. It would fail because swooping in on a basketball court would not accomplish the objective based solely on the basketball court part. Playing basketball would not be enough of a discriminator.

If, however, it happened to be that basketball were such a thing - I don't know, maybe the Hell's Angels have a game they play preferentially? - then basketball would be.

Case in point. Some dude drives around and buys pseudoephedrine (Sudafed), a dozen at a time, store after store. Sudafed is legal to buy. But I also know it's used to make meth. If I start searching people who have lots of Sudafed AND I find a lot of meth, then I would say the legal activity tips me off to the illegal one. The results tell me my method works or doesn't work.

This is science, deal with it.
It has been dealt with. "Reasonable suspicion" has a higher burden of evidence than post-hoc results can allow, especially where race is involved. To use your Sudafed analogy, stopping someone loading armfuls of Sudafed into the trunk of a car would fall under reasonable suspicion. Following black guys who buy a single box of sudafed and searching their homes for meth is not reasonable suspicion, it's racial profiling and it's illegal, even if it gets results.

Last edited by Beelzebuddy; 17th February 2017 at 09:34 AM.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:31 AM   #54
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,171
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
What criteria should they use? (I'd go with, "seems to like soccer" for a start.)
And they call it "football" (probably due to their poor english skills).
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:33 AM   #55
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,254
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
You didn't actually speak with them, but because they are brown and on food stamps you assume they must be illegal immigrants. Do I have that right?
Of course. No real American would speak in a language that's not English and need public assistance. That was certainly true of my dirty wop of a great-grandfather who never learned English...whose word would have I guess been enough to get me an ID because his last name wasn't Martinez, Garcia, or Rivera.
__________________
Never let anyone forget that the American people elected a rapist to be their president. President Rapist is the only name that should be used when referring to this evil narcissist.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:40 AM   #56
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 20,800
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Bull. Ends don't justify means.
If ends don't justify means, then what does?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:42 AM   #57
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,295
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
And they call it "football" (probably due to their poor english skills).
Football here in the UK is called football because it is a game played with a ball that is controlled mostly by using ones foot.

What is known as football in the US should really be called something else instead, if we are basing the nomenclature on "english skills"

At the risk of beating a dead horse, you don't solve illegal immigration by chasing illegal immigrants and deporting them.

You solve illegal immigration by making it a "putting you out of business" violation for employers who employ them.

If they can't get work, they won't come.
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:44 AM   #58
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,254
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
If ends don't justify means, then what does?
How about we all agree that respecting individual civil rights is of fundamental importance and go from there? Part of respecting individual civil rights is that government agents can't harass people without reasonable suspicion and neither one's skin color nor the lack of a warm place to sleep at night constitutes reasonable suspicion of committing a crime.

ETA: Seriously, have we really slipped back so far so fast that this has to be learned again by people who consider themselves at least reasonably intelligent?
__________________
Never let anyone forget that the American people elected a rapist to be their president. President Rapist is the only name that should be used when referring to this evil narcissist.

Last edited by Babbylonian; 17th February 2017 at 09:46 AM.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:46 AM   #59
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,633
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
And they call it "football" (probably due to their poor english skills).
I remember a story about Canadian Immigration Enforcement from back in the Vietnam War era. They were concerned about American draft dodgers who claimed to be Canadian when questioned. So Officers would ask them to say the alphabet and listen for the last letter. Americans say "zee" instead of "zed."
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:46 AM   #60
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,492
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
You didn't actually speak with them, but because they are brown and on food stamps you assume they must be illegal immigrants. Do I have that right?
What a stupid moronic statement and question. Promote racial accusations somewhere else. I observed and listened to their interactions with the cashier. That was enough to know they didn't speak English. Any adult who has been in the US for more than a few months should at least speak some English unless they only patronize ethic businesses. Why would I try to engage them in English when it was patently obvious they didn't speak enough to converse. I have a right to think what I want and in this case it was more than obvious. Next time, I'll call ICE and report back on what was discovered.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:50 AM   #61
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,633
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
If ends don't justify means, then what does?
Budget.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:50 AM   #62
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 20,800
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
How about we all agree that respecting individual civil rights is of fundamental importance and go from there?
How about you answer my question and go from there?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:52 AM   #63
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,254
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
How about you answer my question and go from there?
No. If you couldn't understand what I was talking about with regards to reasonable suspicion, then there's no help to be found.

ETA: What the heck, I'll be nice and amend: ***Just ends don't justify unjust means.***
__________________
Never let anyone forget that the American people elected a rapist to be their president. President Rapist is the only name that should be used when referring to this evil narcissist.

Last edited by Babbylonian; 17th February 2017 at 09:53 AM.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:57 AM   #64
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,603
Simple, send the people staying at the shelter out the back door in a small groups.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:57 AM   #65
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,633
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
How about we all agree that respecting individual civil rights is of fundamental importance and go from there? Part of respecting individual civil rights is that government agents can't harass people without reasonable suspicion and neither one's skin color nor the lack of a warm place to sleep at night constitutes reasonable suspicion of committing a crime.
I can certainly agree with the first part without committing to the second.

I am also willing to submit to harassment if I think it has some purpose. For example, if I have to show proof of age to buy booze, and I think that helps prevent underage drinking, I will submit to it. Maybe I'll bitch just a little, but I get the point.

This is the normal balance we strike between inconvenience and our duties to civil society. Where that point exists for checking citizenship status remains in play.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:00 AM   #66
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,171
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
Football here in the UK is called football because it is a game played with a ball that is controlled mostly by using ones foot.

What is known as football in the US should really be called something else instead, if we are basing the nomenclature on "english skills"
I know - it was a joke. I'm from England, living in the USA.

Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post

At the risk of beating a dead horse, you don't solve illegal immigration by chasing illegal immigrants and deporting them.

You solve illegal immigration by making it a "putting you out of business" violation for employers who employ them.

If they can't get work, they won't come.
Hmmm. I think that (as with most illegal activity) it is important to both:
- make the activity less attractive in the first place
- when you find someone doing the activity, you stop them

i.e. "chasing illegal immigrants and deporting them" is a valid and necessary part of any immigration policy short of 'open borders', but it shouldn't be the the only mechanism. You need to remove the carrot as well as applying the stick.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:01 AM   #67
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,492
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
You solve illegal immigration by making it a "putting you out of business" violation for employers who employ them.

If they can't get work, they won't come.
I partially agree with you, but on the other hand they frequently have Official looking Social Security Cards that are difficult to detect as fake. I can assure that most legitimate companies will not hire them, but some in obscure smaller companies will. We just recently had two not so small landscape companies near where I live that were put out of business for hiring illegals. However, if you've read the thread you'll notice a predominate support on supposedly humanitarian grounds. I hope they keep it up as they'll continue to lose elections, just like they have in the past. They are near totally out of any political power and are now lashing out without realizing why they have no political power either in Congress, the Presidency, or in States.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:07 AM   #68
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,120
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
What a stupid moronic statement and question. Promote racial accusations somewhere else. I observed and listened to their interactions with the cashier. That was enough to know they didn't speak English. Any adult who has been in the US for more than a few months should at least speak some English unless they only patronize ethic businesses. Why would I try to engage them in English when it was patently obvious they didn't speak enough to converse. I have a right to think what I want and in this case it was more than obvious. Next time, I'll call ICE and report back on what was discovered.
So because they were brown and on food stamps and weren't speaking English, you assume they didn't know English and were illegal immigrants?

You realize that speaking English is not a requirement for being an American citizen, right?
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:08 AM   #69
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 60,455
A certain core of right wingers prefer there are no services for the homeless believing that will cause them to seek survival in someone else's backyard.

A better argument for them is to consider what a waste of federal tax dollars this plan is given the vast majority of these guys are not going to have ID despite being citizens. Besides wasting money trying to identify them, deport US citizens and think of the ambulance chasing trial lawyers that the right hates making millions more of those tax dollars suing ICE for wrongful deportation. And then there are the increased emergency department costs for all the hypothermia that will ensue as people fear the shelters. Those costs are absorbed by tax dollars and everyone else's medical costs be they insurance payments or direct costs.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 17th February 2017 at 10:18 AM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:14 AM   #70
popoi
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 61
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
It's no freaking wonder we are going broke. So, if you want to support these freeloaders be my guest. But, you pay the freaking taxes to support them. I suggest you voluntarily pay an addition several hundred $$ more tax this year.
That's not how government works, but I'd say you have a deal if you also have to pay taxes to cover the costs that would result from that support not existing.
popoi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:18 AM   #71
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,492
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
How about we all agree that respecting individual civil rights is of fundamental importance and go from there? Part of respecting individual civil rights is that government agents can't harass people without reasonable suspicion and neither one's skin color nor the lack of a warm place to sleep at night constitutes reasonable suspicion of committing a crime.
Illegal immigrants have no civil rights at all. The crime is not being committed it was committed in the past. What's harassment? Is it harassment when police wait outside of a business that serves alcohol to catch Drunk Drivers? Did they seek out only the brown ones outside of this shelter? There's no evidence of that.

Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
ETA: Seriously, have we really slipped back so far so fast that this has to be learned again by people who consider themselves at least reasonably intelligent?
Well, apparently you consider only those who agree with you as intelligent. I don't agree at all and challenge you to substantiate that ridiculous statement.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:20 AM   #72
Newtons Bit
Philosopher
 
Newtons Bit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 9,886
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
For all of those opposing me on this issue, YOU pay the freaking taxes to support these illegal free loaders.

I have a Walmart near me, which I occasionally use because it's convenient. Recently, I followed a Latino family thru the Checkout line. The kids spoke some English because i spoke with them. The parents (I presume) obviously spoke very little. They had a ton of groceries, which were paid for with a fist full of food stamp type cards.

Now, in order to legally immigrate into the US, one has to prove they are financially able to support themselves. That is a requirement for legal immigration.
If you saw them using EBT cards, then they're here legally. It's virtually impossible to get on a welfare program as a non US citizen (and I'm including identify theft and fraud).

A family that mostly speaks Spanish, and not English, is absolutely not a sign that they're here illegally. I know multiple people who can trace their families arrival in North American to the 1500s. They stayed put, and the USA enveloped their land. Their rural cousins speak Spanish and not English.

Quote:
It's no freaking wonder we are going broke.
Food assistance is less than 1% of all government spending.

Quote:
So, if you want to support these freeloaders be my guest. But, you pay the freaking taxes to support them. I suggest you voluntarily pay an addition several hundred $$ more tax this year.
Paying extra taxes won't support hungry people. Instead I signed up for a $100 monthly donation to the Road Runner Food Bank. My wife and I have talked about giving money to them, so thanks for giving me the push necessary to help them out.
__________________
"Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein
Newtons Bit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:21 AM   #73
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,492
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
Simple, send the people staying at the shelter out the back door in a small groups.
Yea, just ignore the laws you don't like. Thanks Obama.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:27 AM   #74
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,633
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
A certain core of right wingers prefer there are no services for the homeless believing that will cause them to seek survival in someone else's backyard.

A better argument for them is to consider what a waste of federal tax dollars this plan is given the vast majority of these guys are not going to have ID despite being citizens. Besides wasting money trying to identify them, deport US citizens and think of the ambulance chasing trial lawyers that the right hates making millions more of those tax dollars suing ICE for wrongful deportation. And then there are the increased emergency department costs for all the hypothermia that will ensue as people fear the shelters. Those costs are absorbed by tax dollars and everyone else's medical costs be they insurance payments or direct costs.
From the story it sounds like ICE ran fingerprints at the scene and kept those who showed up as wanted in their database. No ID involved, just biometrics and positive hits. Arguably, someone who was here illegally, but who wasn't in the ICE database, would be sent on their way. That's not in the story, but my extrapolation.

IF that's what happened, it's less outrageous than I thought because my usual complaint is that you can't tell if someone is a citizen or not if they simply remain silent. There is nothing particularly "citizeny" to make the determination. But if someone is already in ICE's database as an offender, then all bets are off. This sounds like what I want - putting the onus on ICE to prove status instead of on whomever they are questioning.

The situation is different at the actual border, where ICE can make me prove my status. If I can't, they can deny me entry. Once I'm in the US however, I gain the same default status as everyone else in the US and the burden of proof shifts.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:32 AM   #75
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,120
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
From the story it sounds like ICE ran fingerprints at the scene and kept those who showed up as wanted in their database. No ID involved, just biometrics and positive hits. Arguably, someone who was here illegally, but who wasn't in the ICE database, would be sent on their way. That's not in the story, but my extrapolation.

IF that's what happened, it's less outrageous than I thought because my usual complaint is that you can't tell if someone is a citizen or not if they simply remain silent. There is nothing particularly "citizeny" to make the determination. But if someone is already in ICE's database as an offender, then all bets are off. This sounds like what I want - putting the onus on ICE to prove status instead of on whomever they are questioning.

The situation is different at the actual border, where ICE can make me prove my status. If I can't, they can deny me entry. Once I'm in the US however, I gain the same default status as everyone else in the US and the burden of proof shifts.
The outrage is about where they showed up - at a facility meant to save lives - and the chilling effect it will have on people who in the future will risk freezing to death instead.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:35 AM   #76
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,254
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
Illegal immigrants have no civil rights at all. The crime is not being committed it was committed in the past. What's harassment? Is it harassment when police wait outside of a business that serves alcohol to catch Drunk Drivers? Did they seek out only the brown ones outside of this shelter? There's no evidence of that.
I refer you back to reasonable suspicion. Depending on the methodology employed, police who harass drivers leaving a business that serves alcohol could very well be engaging in an illegal activity. It's also not generally how police officers go about identifying drunk drivers. I don't like drunk-driving checkpoints but one of the reasons they passed constitutional muster when challenged is that they tend to be equally enforced - everyone gets stopped and checked in a cursory fashion before they're subjected to more extensive testing once a reasonable suspicion or probable cause of a crime has been established.

In the case described in the linked article, the only reasonable suspicion for harassing and taking away the individuals was some combination of their appearance and where they were, neither of which would pass a court smell test for reasonable suspicion. The fact that they snagged at least one legal resident is proof enough of that.

Further, it's questionable whether you understand the issues at play beyond your casually applied racism given that being in the United States illegally isn't a past crime; it's a current/ongoing one until the person committing it is taken into custody and/or deported.
Quote:
Well, apparently you consider only those who agree with you as intelligent. I don't agree at all and challenge you to substantiate that ridiculous statement.
You may want to read what I actually said again. There's no way a reasonable person could interpret my comment in the way you describe.
__________________
Never let anyone forget that the American people elected a rapist to be their president. President Rapist is the only name that should be used when referring to this evil narcissist.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:40 AM   #77
Newtons Bit
Philosopher
 
Newtons Bit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 9,886
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
I refer you back to reasonable suspicion. Depending on the methodology employed, police who harass drivers leaving a business that serves alcohol could very well be engaging in an illegal activity. It's also not generally how police officers go about identifying drunk drivers. I don't like drunk-driving checkpoints but one of the reasons they passed constitutional muster when challenged is that they tend to be equally enforced - everyone gets stopped and checked in a cursory fashion before they're subjected to more extensive testing once a reasonable suspicion or probable cause of a crime has been established.

In the case described in the linked article, the only reasonable suspicion for harassing and taking away the individuals was some combination of their appearance and where they were, neither of which would pass a court smell test for reasonable suspicion. The fact that they snagged at least one legal resident is proof enough of that.

Further, it's questionable whether you understand the issues at play beyond your casually applied racism given that being in the United States illegally isn't a past crime; it's a current/ongoing one until the person committing it is taken into custody and/or deported.
You may want to read what I actually said again. There's no way a reasonable person could interpret my comment in the way you describe.
Thanks to our delightful Supreme Court, immigration enforcement officers automatically have reasonable suspicion against everyone within 100 miles of an international border.
__________________
"Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein
Newtons Bit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:43 AM   #78
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 5,730
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
You have to show proof of birth to obtain a Driver's License. There's more than one way to do that.
I would think one's existence would be proof of birth.

Reheat, the DL issue varies from state to state. Sometimes it is reasonable proof of citizenship; in others states, illegal immigrants can get driver's licenses so in those states the DL litmus test might fail.

Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
As I said below, they'll have a warm place to stay while they're being questioned.
Some jails have very good services for the mentally ill. But I assume these people would be taken to federal detention centers which in my experience make it seriously difficult to tell where an arrestee has been taken. The federal government literally wanted my credit card number before it would allow me access to who is being held where. For all I know detainees could be taken to Guantanamo.

It's a valid point to say their physical needs will (probably) be met in detention. I prefer to believe you said that with a kind heart and not a snootful of snark.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:47 AM   #79
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,478
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Because I read the *********** article.

They were harassed either for appearing Latino or for walking out of a church. Which option do you want to defend?
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
I'll defend getting people out who are in the US illegally. BTW, you only have one side of the story.

ETA: Serious criminals go first.
That's quite the dodge there. Care to answer the question? You say you support this. The article makes it clear they were targeted based on physical appearance or from leaving the church. Which do you support? Or is it both?

ETA: Or maybe you don't believe in rights for anyone and them stopping anyone leaving, including US citizens, with no actual cause is totally cool? Or if it's not, how do they decide who it's okay to stop without running afoul of any of the above situations?
__________________
Straw Man, Ad Hominem, Moving the Goalposts, and a massive post count are all good indicators that a poster is intellectually dishonest and not interested in real discussion.

Feeding trolls only makes them stronger, yet it is so hard to refrain.

Last edited by The_Animus; 17th February 2017 at 10:54 AM.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 10:49 AM   #80
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,254
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
Thanks to our delightful Supreme Court, immigration enforcement officers automatically have reasonable suspicion against everyone within 100 miles of an international border.
Here's the thing, though: If ICE was enforcing legal status checks against everyone without regard to physical characteristics, it would at least be fair (I'd still be against it because I have no interest in living in a police state, even one in which I'm not hassled because I'm a lily-white male). That is not, however, what they're doing, mainly because the government knows that the backlash would be huge and the practice would be stopped once they'd inconvenienced and harassed enough white people with money to raise a stink.
__________________
Never let anyone forget that the American people elected a rapist to be their president. President Rapist is the only name that should be used when referring to this evil narcissist.

Last edited by Babbylonian; 17th February 2017 at 10:50 AM.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:06 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.