I could see customs, but immigration? Honestly the more I think about it the more I conclude that the entire concept of immigration enforcement and a distinction between citizens and noncitizens is unethical
Virtually every single thing the immigrant fear-mongerers bring up to justify cracking down on “illegal immigrants” is already against the law and has existing enforcement. And since being here illegally is, for all intents and purposes, an administrative issue, it makes zero sense at all to expend extra resources specifically to go after them. Especially since the data shows that they commit crimes at lower rates than US citizens.
If you arrest someone for DUI, and find they are not authorized to be in the US, then OK there’s at least a case for taking action on the immigration issue. Otherwise, the only point is giving hateful rubes someone to punch down on.
I can see having immigration enforcement to facilitate the deportations. But I strongly don’t believe they should have presence or any authority on the streets. But someone for local municipalities to partner with should an illegal immigrant be arrested for something by local authorities.
I don’t think they should have the power to initiate arrests or apprehend anyone.
Things are a lot different than they were 100 years ago, when my grandparents came over on a boat. Back then, the country needed as many people as it could get, and jobs were plentiful. People also didn’t have to pay income taxes, and could get paid without the government getting all in their business.
Modern society is different, for better or worse, and it makes no sense to just throw open the gates and have anyone come in. So I don’t mind reserving certain things for citizens. But we should still treat non-citizens with human dignity, which is a thing that the current administration does not value.
The problem with saying stuff like “abolish ICE” is that it plays right into the hands of immigration hardliners, who argue that their opposition wants free, unfettered immigration. But in reality, they just want to abolish the ICE mentality and replace it with a new mentality that preserves the humanity if these people.
Modern society is different, for better or worse, and it makes no sense to just throw open the gates and have anyone come in.
Do you have evidence for this claim?
“What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” – Hitchens’ Raxor
I don’t mind reserving certain things for citizens.
The vast majority of benefits or restrictions we have The State provide or enforce should be for all individuals.
In any case, citizenship can be queried at the point of receipt of those rare things, if for some reason we do need to restrict those things to citizens.
Were it really true that letting people move between countries unrestricted causes some kind of serious problem, one might expect a similar kind of issue to arise from internal migration within a particularly large country like the US, and yet, one can freely move between states without it causing some kind of government failure. I don’t really believe modern society actually is different in a manner that makes larger populations disadvantageous, since demand for goods and services increases with population size, having more people in an economy should organically increase the number of jobs required to meet their needs, it’s not like we dig jobs out of the ground like oil such that a given place has a fixed number.
I do get that unrestricted immigration isn’t as popular with, say, the democrats or such, as anti-immigrant people like to claim. However, I am in favor of unrestricted immigration. For me to say that I want ICE abolished isn’t to misrepresent my stance on that matter; I can only truly speak for myself and whenever I say that I desire that organization dismantled, I mean it entirely literally.
I could see customs, but immigration? Honestly the more I think about it the more I conclude that the entire concept of immigration enforcement and a distinction between citizens and noncitizens is unethical
Virtually every single thing the immigrant fear-mongerers bring up to justify cracking down on “illegal immigrants” is already against the law and has existing enforcement. And since being here illegally is, for all intents and purposes, an administrative issue, it makes zero sense at all to expend extra resources specifically to go after them. Especially since the data shows that they commit crimes at lower rates than US citizens.
If you arrest someone for DUI, and find they are not authorized to be in the US, then OK there’s at least a case for taking action on the immigration issue. Otherwise, the only point is giving hateful rubes someone to punch down on.
I can see having immigration enforcement to facilitate the deportations. But I strongly don’t believe they should have presence or any authority on the streets. But someone for local municipalities to partner with should an illegal immigrant be arrested for something by local authorities.
I don’t think they should have the power to initiate arrests or apprehend anyone.
Things are a lot different than they were 100 years ago, when my grandparents came over on a boat. Back then, the country needed as many people as it could get, and jobs were plentiful. People also didn’t have to pay income taxes, and could get paid without the government getting all in their business.
Modern society is different, for better or worse, and it makes no sense to just throw open the gates and have anyone come in. So I don’t mind reserving certain things for citizens. But we should still treat non-citizens with human dignity, which is a thing that the current administration does not value.
The problem with saying stuff like “abolish ICE” is that it plays right into the hands of immigration hardliners, who argue that their opposition wants free, unfettered immigration. But in reality, they just want to abolish the ICE mentality and replace it with a new mentality that preserves the humanity if these people.
Do you have evidence for this claim?
“What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” – Hitchens’ Raxor
The vast majority of benefits or restrictions we have The State provide or enforce should be for all individuals.
In any case, citizenship can be queried at the point of receipt of those rare things, if for some reason we do need to restrict those things to citizens.
Were it really true that letting people move between countries unrestricted causes some kind of serious problem, one might expect a similar kind of issue to arise from internal migration within a particularly large country like the US, and yet, one can freely move between states without it causing some kind of government failure. I don’t really believe modern society actually is different in a manner that makes larger populations disadvantageous, since demand for goods and services increases with population size, having more people in an economy should organically increase the number of jobs required to meet their needs, it’s not like we dig jobs out of the ground like oil such that a given place has a fixed number.
I do get that unrestricted immigration isn’t as popular with, say, the democrats or such, as anti-immigrant people like to claim. However, I am in favor of unrestricted immigration. For me to say that I want ICE abolished isn’t to misrepresent my stance on that matter; I can only truly speak for myself and whenever I say that I desire that organization dismantled, I mean it entirely literally.