The Political & Philosophy Thread

[crimsonfloyd]

So once I complete breaking and entering into your domicile, I'm an otherwise law abiding citizen as I lounge on your couch. You're a genius.

I'm not gonna debate a clear legal classification with you. Unlawful presence isn't a crime, regardless of how either of us feel about it. If you want to make an ass of yourself by pretending that it isn't the case, go right ahead.

 

[Dak]

I'm not gonna debate a clear legal classification with you. Unlawful presence isn't a crime, regardless of how either of us feel about it. If you want to make an ass of yourself by pretending that it isn't the case, go right ahead.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm pointing out that the reason illegal immigrants are a problem for many people is because they *stay*, not because of the single moment when they crossed the border.

 

[The Ozzman]

Unlawful presence isn't a crime

If it's against the law, how is it not a crime?

 

[crimsonfloyd]

Oh okay, so unlawful presence isn't a crime if you were born to illegal immigrant parents or the conditions of your stay are violated (Visa ran out, dropped out of school, etc).

This suggests that roughly half of all illegal immigrants are engaging in unlawful presence though, as it claims that roughly half of all illegal immigrants didn't enter legally.

Not quite. Whether you entered legally or illegally, you can engage in unlawful presence.

A helpful way to think about it is illegal entry is a discrete act that occurs at a definitive moment, whereas a unlawful presence is a continuous state. The former is a crime. The later is not.

Unlawful presence (ULP) is defined as presence after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Department of Homeland Security, or any presence without being admitted or paroled.

The first clause addresses those who entered legally; the second clause is broader and would include those who entered illegally.

However, while minors can have undocumented status, they cannot engage in undocumented presence and thus are not at risk for facing the consequences (i.e. 3-10 year ban). There are other exceptions, (i.e. Temporary Protected Status) but the minor exemption is the most common one.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

If it's against the law, how is it not a crime?

I'm not a lawyer, so take this with grain of salt, but I'm pretty sure the distinction is this: a crime violates a specific law, while something unlawful is not explicitly authorized.

Crossing the boarder without authorization is a crime as it breaks a specific law; existing in the US when your visa is expired is unlawful but not a crime, as there is no law criminalizing it. Repiblicans tried to get a law passed in 2005 that would have made unlawful presence a crime. The house voted yes, but the senate voted no.

 

[Einherjar86]

Okay, I actually wasn't implying that. I was trying to say that if allowing illegal immigrants to stay once they're in America because ethics, what actual justification do you offer for border policies even existing in the first place? Surely the more that enter and stay, the more you're achieving ethical milestones?

That makes sense, and it's a fair point.

My response would be what we've already said we agree on, basically. Yes, I do think there's an ethical imperative to letting in those fleeing from oppressive or violent conditions, but I also think there are regulatory means and practical limits to doing so. My problem lies with this absolute ban on certain countries, from which many innocent people who are living in dangerous conditions are trying to flee. The ban, I'm suggesting, is an unethical move because I think it hurts those abroad more than allowing them in hurts American citizens.

Hopefully that's clearer.

Why? Because it's a media company now with assumed presidential power behind it and all the assumed conflicts of interest implied therein or because you/those eyebrows don't like Breitbart for political differences?

Both - I can't admit that I don't find Breitbart appalling. But the former takes precedence, since it's a platform for what I see as conspiratorial and misinformed ideological obsessions.

Is he a writer? I actually didn't know that. Any examples specifically of what is propaganda by him?

He's produced, written, and directed films, mainly about the righteousness of American conservative values.

 

[CiG]

I don't really have a response to any of this. I do think Breitbart has become an unhinged media outlet since Andrew Breitbart died (in fact it seems they've become aggressively antithetical to everything Andrew stood for) and I also agree that it's cretinous that Breitbart and the Whitehouse have become entangled. Faint whiff of Orwell to say the least.

As to cf, I think I misread your link so thanks for the correction on what unlawful presence is and how it relates to the laws. I read it as saying 45% of illegal immigrants are in a continuous state of breaking the law due to overstaying Visas or violating terms of their stay by dropping out of school or being unemployed.

It's a rather confusing issue honestly. I am not even sure how it works here.

He's produced, written, and directed films, mainly about the righteousness of American conservative values.

Well, writing in a way that flatters your own ideology is not some extreme, fringe concept. I've never read a book by a feminist that doesn't argue in support of feminism etc.

Anyway I'm not going to check out any of his stuff. He's a boring ladder climbing power grabber. I guess we'll see what he does eventually.

 

[arg]

America is the only country for whom the DEFAULT POSITION is expected by the world to be accepting 10s of thousands of refugees. And they get outraged if we don't. That's wrong.

The default position, for any country, should be doing nothing. If we do let some in, it should be IF and WHEN and WHO we want, because WE ARE SPENDING FOR IT.

Look at Japan. They don't have a refugee ban. Their default position is simply not doing anything, and if they want, they take in 2 or 3. It's what everyone expects. Nobody is mad at Japan. That's how it should be for America.

 

[J.]

But, but we are a nation of immigrants and diversity is our strength and yada yada yada

 

[rms]

America is the only country for whom the DEFAULT POSITION is expected by the world to be accepting 10s of thousands of refugees. And they get outraged if we don't. That's wrong.

that is why America is different and has been different than any Western/European nation. It's important to understand this as well as understanding the global image the U.S. has

Look at Japan. They don't have a refugee ban.

this is basically untrue

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...graphic-says-japan-keeps-out-radical-islam-t/

Japan is also going to desperately attempt to salvage their birth rate, which European nations do by adding immigrants, mostly poor which generally tends to be brown. Japan will likely do this via SE Asia but the only difference is because of geographical position rather than inherent interests

But, but we are a nation of immigrants and diversity is our strength and yada yada yada

we are, and that strength is derived in attaining the highest GDP possible. But we see politicians time and time again move from a free market system to instead a more nationalist based system that favors political capital more than economic capital.

'rust' belt, 'fossil' fuel and near-immigrant laborers really are quite snowflake and un-adaptable people. It's a real sham they aren't called out on it or at least expected to shift their region's recent employment history.

 

[arg]

that is why America is different and has been different than any Western/European nation. It's important to understand this as well as understanding the global image the U.S. has



this is basically untrue

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...graphic-says-japan-keeps-out-radical-islam-t/

Japan is also going to desperately attempt to salvage their birth rate, which European nations do by adding immigrants, mostly poor which generally tends to be brown. Japan will likely do this via SE Asia but the only difference is because of geographical position rather than inherent interests



we are, and that strength is derived in attaining the highest GDP possible. But we see politicians time and time again move from a free market system to instead a more nationalist based system that favors political capital more than economic capital.

'rust' belt, 'fossil' fuel and near immigration labor forces really are quite snowflake and un-adaptable people. It's a real sham they aren't called out on it or at least expected to shift their region's recent employment history.

Lol read your own fucking article in the end they rated it false

There's no ban. They just don't actively ship them there

 

[rms]

didn't say they were out right banned, just super selective. no first world nation is going to ban any ethnic group with receiving public outcry

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/communi...rveillance-looms-japans-muslims/#.WJI-5PkrKUk

 

[arg]

So where's the outrage at Japan?

 

[CiG]

The left in the west preserve any outrage they might have over how non-white countries are run and instead aim it all at the west.

 

[arg]

i think Trump should not have labeled it a "ban"

he should've just quietly dismantled the refugee program / dissolved its offices / "reassigned" its staff

and discreetly increased visa requirements to an extreme level + lessened the numbers granted

and not detained green card holders.

that's how i wouldve done it. i should be his adviser. i mean i agree with the ban... but he's gotta do shit in a less blatant way lol

 

[CiG]

Few green card holders being inconvenienced for relatively short periods of time is not so bad, all things considered.

His first actual fuck up seems to be this first raid on an ISIS base in Yemen.

The U.S. military said on Wednesday it was looking into whether more civilians were killed in a raid on al Qaeda in Yemen on the weekend, in the first operation authorized by President Donald Trump as commander in chief.

U.S. Navy SEAL William “Ryan” Owens was killed in the raid on a branch of al Qaeda, also known as AQAP, in al Bayda province, which the Pentagon said also killed 14 militants. However, medics at the scene said about 30 people, including 10 women and children, were killed.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15G5RX

 

[Funerary_Doom]

Not to say Americans are dumb because that's not true at all. However, I have noticed a lot of immigrants in graduate level programs. Moreover, there is a ton of truth to this. A strength of America is definitely importing talented immigrants.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Americans probably are dumb tbh if you think about it. All those Irish peons starving to death coming over here because they couldn't hack it in their home country? Certainly not the pick of the litter, and they came by the millions. Great to work the fields or mines with, but unnecessary today. Thankfully we're more selective today and get smart people from all over the world to raise our national IQ.

 

[CiG]

A strength of America is definitely importing talented immigrants.

Most Americans don't seem to see the irony in saying their country's strength is basically the exact same as what every other major western nation says about itself.

However, I have noticed a lot of immigrants in graduate level programs.

I think this might have a lot to do with the fact that America is the land of opportunity and people from worse off countries fundamentally understand the value of uninhibited opportunity, whereas the native populace of America are happy with their 76 different flavours of doughnut or spend the whole time complaining about being oppressed.

 

[arg]

High skilled immigrants are good to have, but we don't need diversity to be a global superpower. America is great with or without them.

We certainly don't want to import uneducated parasites with 5 kids though