• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

29A said:
It doesn't really say that they must be released.
Click to expand...

What it does say is >"In making such placements, the Secretary may consider danger to self, danger to the community, and risk of flight."<

Considering that over 90% of the illegal aliens who have been released while given a date to show up in front of an immigration judge don't show up, it's pretty clear that all illegal aliens should be considered a flight risk.

Then you have the less than 10% who do show up in court and are ordered to be deported are again released into society to take care of business before leaving the country but again 90% don't leave the country and go in to hiding.
 
APACHERAT said:
What it does say is >"In making such placements, the Secretary may consider danger to self, danger to the community, and risk of flight."<

Considering that over 90% of the illegal aliens who have been released while given a date to show up in front of an immigration judge don't show up, it's pretty clear that all illegal aliens should be considered a flight risk.

Then you have the less than 10% who do show up in court and are ordered to be deported are again released into society to take care of business before leaving the country but again 90% don't leave the country and go in to hiding.
Click to expand...

Risk of flight refers to fleeing from the placement, not failing to show up for court and does not permit the govt to detain the child as the following sentence clearly states
. A child shall not be placed in a secure facility absent a determination that the child poses a danger to self or others or has been charged with having committed a criminal offense.
Click to expand...
 
sangha said:
Risk of flight refers to fleeing from the placement, not failing to show up for court and does not permit the govt to detain the child as the following sentence clearly states
Click to expand...

You're former bail bondsman would disagree with you.

Flight Risk Law & Legal Definition

>"Flight risk is a term that is used by a court to describe a person or defendant who is likely to flee the country/state/area to avoid criminal prosecution. Courts consider the flight risk factor while deciding whether or not to grant bond to a defendant. This factor is considered while deciding the bond amount also. Courts have the discretion to set higher bail amount for flight risks."<

Flight Risk Law & Legal Definition
 
APACHERAT said:
What it does say is >"In making such placements, the Secretary may consider danger to self, danger to the community, and risk of flight."<

Considering that over 90% of the illegal aliens who have been released while given a date to show up in front of an immigration judge don't show up, it's pretty clear that all illegal aliens should be considered a flight risk.

Then you have the less than 10% who do show up in court and are ordered to be deported are again released into society to take care of business before leaving the country but again 90% don't leave the country and go in to hiding.
Click to expand...

Does anyone but me find it strange that people who sneak in here illegally are really expected to show up at some later court date before an immigration judge? :2rofll:

Greetings, APACHRAT. :2wave:
 
polgara said:
Does anyone but me find it strange that people who sneak in here illegally are really expected to show up at some later court date before an immigration judge? :2rofll:

Greetings, APACHRAT. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Probably those who actually have a legitimate asylum argument.
But instead of traveling over a thousand miles why not start the procedure back in their own home country and going to the U.S. Embassy ???
Probably because they don't have a legitimate case.

This invasion surge is Obama's own doing. First he refused to enforce our immigration laws.
Then he refused to secure our borders but lied to Congress and the American people declaring that our borders were secured.

Then he ignored the law that only Congress can write our immigration laws and misused his Executive powers and created his own "Dream Act" which set off the surge from Central America to El Norte with the message that once you make it across the border, Obama will see that you are not deported.

Now Obama wants me, you and those Americans who actually pay taxes to fork out 3.7 billion dollars so these illegals can be fed Gringo burritos, be given new underware and be released in to society and the taxpayers will pay for their transportation to where ever they want to go.

Sarah Palin is right, time for articles of impeachment.

Obama just isn't incompetent but is derelict in his duties of POTUS and CnC.

A ****ing community organizer as POTUS ???
 
clownboy said:
No, we don't. Most of us want illegals deported and for us immigration reform means a tighter ship.
Click to expand...
Guess again.

2-27-2014_03.png


P-P-2014-06-26-typology-4-02.png



Immigration law, as it exists now IS humane. Otherwise there would be no provisions as there are for asylum, refugees or humanitarian efforts (see Haiti for one).
Click to expand...
Detention facilities have been underfunded for years. People are dying in the deserts trying to get into the US. Limits on immigration are arbitrary and poorly designed.

Oh, and that asylum/refugee/humanitarian reasons? That's the stuff conservatives are howling about. A huge swath of this year's immigrants are fleeing disastrous conditions in Honduras and El Salvador, which are trying to escape horrendous crime rates (Honduras has the #1 murder rate in the world) and gang violence.


When he talks of letting them walk, yes, yes he is. "Detainees" in this context means DETAINED UNTIL DEPORTATION.
Click to expand...
Obama isn't talking of "letting them walk." The OP is kvetching about ICE moving people to "destinations" -- which are ICE holding facilities -- per the way the law is actually written. He asked Congress for $2 billion in additional funding to deal with this situation. And of course, blaming any single political leader for something this complex and long-term is sheer partisan nonsense.
 
Visbek said:
Guess again.

2-27-2014_03.png


P-P-2014-06-26-typology-4-02.png
Click to expand...

Dream on. It's lying by poll plain and simple.

Visbek said:
Detention facilities have been underfunded for years. People are dying in the deserts trying to get into the US. Limits on immigration are arbitrary and poorly designed.
Click to expand...

That's too damn bad. As to that last, absolute rubbish.

Visbek said:
Oh, and that asylum/refugee/humanitarian reasons? That's the stuff conservatives are howling about. A huge swath of this year's immigrants are fleeing disastrous conditions in Honduras and El Salvador, which are trying to escape horrendous crime rates (Honduras has the #1 murder rate in the world) and gang violence.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. The last bit about El Salvador is, it does not qualify for humanitarian aid. This is not anyone's fault but their very own that their country is in this position. They are the architects of their own situation.

Visbek said:
Obama isn't talking of "letting them walk." The OP is kvetching about ICE moving people to "destinations" -- which are ICE holding facilities -- per the way the law is actually written. He asked Congress for $2 billion in additional funding to deal with this situation. And of course, blaming any single political leader for something this complex and long-term is sheer partisan nonsense.
Click to expand...

Bull**** plain and simple. Obama has indeed been trying to let them walk, even under Bush, who was very weak where it came to illegals they'd have all been returned by now. And yes, I can blame THIS president for what he does/does not do.

Congress should tell him no and make it clear the bill is about human trafficking, and this isn't that.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
You do realize how hard that will be, expensive, and inhumane?
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter, they are in-violation of the law. As a country of laws, they must be followed.
 
Last edited:
TheDemSocialist said:
A country cannot. If a country sanctioned whole countries because of free moving citizens....
Click to expand...

A sovereign country can sanction another sovereign country for any reason it want to.
 
clownboy said:
Dream on. It's lying by poll plain and simple.
Click to expand...
Right. So, any poll whose results you don't like is a "lie." I should try that line some time. ;)


That's too damn bad. As to that last, absolute rubbish.
Click to expand...
Oh? So you can articulate why the number of legal immigrants is 0.22% of the total US population? Why the total number of refugees and asylees is 70,000 a year? Why no single nation can exceed 7% of the total in a given year?


No, it's not. The last bit about El Salvador is, it does not qualify for humanitarian aid. This is not anyone's fault but their very own that their country is in this position. They are the architects of their own situation.
Click to expand...
So much for the humanitarian aspect of immigration. You do know that Honduras and El Salvador have been trading the #1 position for the past 10 years, right?


Bull**** plain and simple. Obama has indeed been trying to let them walk....
Click to expand...
He's shifted immigration policy to removals, which means that there's an actual process for those who get caught, and they cannot apply for citizenship for up to 10 years after getting kicked out. In contrast, previous administrations just did a "return," where they basically turned people around at the border with no process and no consequences -- which is basically inviting them to turn around and try again.

And again: Obama has not instructed ICE to "let them walk." There are these funny things called "laws" which determine how immigrants are handled when they're caught. Many of these illegal immigrants are literally crossing the border and waiting for ICE agents to pick them up, so they can apply for asylum. No one can wave a hand and send them packing.
 
clownboy said:
Once again, those are about trafficking, not at all applicable.
Click to expand...

I disagree, it is about human trafficking.

Some of these children are being brought here by human traffickers hired by family members already in the U.S.

Otherwise how would a Federal Judge in Texas accuse the Obama Administration of

“completing the criminal mission” of human traffickers “who are violating the border security of the United States” and assisting a “criminal conspiracy in achieving its illegal goals.”

Federal Judge: The Obama Administration Aids and Abets Human Trafficking | National Review Online

Here we have Brit Hume on Fox News defending the President

Brit Hume on Border Crisis: Obama Is Following The Law | Video | RealClearPolitics
 
APACHERAT said:
You're former bail bondsman would disagree with you.

Flight Risk Law & Legal Definition

>"Flight risk is a term that is used by a court to describe a person or defendant who is likely to flee the country/state/area to avoid criminal prosecution. Courts consider the flight risk factor while deciding whether or not to grant bond to a defendant. This factor is considered while deciding the bond amount also. Courts have the discretion to set higher bail amount for flight risks."<

Flight Risk Law & Legal Definition
Click to expand...

We're not talking about people who are out on bail.
 
clownboy said:
Once again, those are about trafficking, not at all applicable.
Click to expand...

I know, I know!!

"The polls are lies" "The laws are lies"

Everything's a lie, even if it's documented.

Even republicans are admitting that the law does not allow them to be immediately deported

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...border_crisis_obama_is_following_the_law.html

Republican Congressman Raul Labrador of Idaho said on Sunday TV that the Obama administration should deport these children immediately. Later in the interview, he conceded the law does not permit that.
Click to expand...

And guess what law he was referring to -
The law in question is called the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008.
Click to expand...

You know that law! It's the one you said doesn't say that even though even a republican admits that it does!! :lamo
 
APACHERAT said:
That's right, why aren't these people posting a bond like all Americans have to do when they are given a court day be it for J-walking or DUI ?
Click to expand...

Because they're children and I have had several court dates and never had to post bond.
 
MMC said:
Why wouldn't Mexico be held responsible for allowing mass migration of people to trapse thru their country? With no food and some with barely any clothing. Now kids with no parents or adults. Then with how many dying and speading whatever virus' or diseases they do. Stealing and affecting any communities already struggling inside Mexico? Why wouldn't this be a problem again?

Do you think by giving them a clearer path to the US prevents what they have to deal with? Especially knowing what US law is concerning Immigrants coming into its country.
Click to expand...
Mexico has become an enemy country. WE need to prevent Americans from visiting, from spending money in Mexico, and from doing any further business with Mexico.

We need to give them one, and only one warning, then mass military forces on the border and invade. Push the Mexicans south and create a new, shorter, straight border.
 
sangha said:
Because they're children and I have had several court dates and never had to post bond.
Click to expand...

You brought it up, what kind of crimes were you involved in when you were a juvenile delinquent ?

By any chance were you released into the custody of your parents ?
 
CalGun said:
We used a swat team to do it to a small Cuban boy once and I seem to recall the left was in complete favor of it. The cost? We should sue the child's nation and recover the cost. They can take it out on the criminals who sent their children away for abounding them.



And BTW if one of those children bears a communicable disease leading to a single death in America it should be a high crime for the dictator to be deposed.
Click to expand...

Way to misrepresent a completely different situation and failed weak attempt at comparison. Elian Gonzalez was being held by relatives in the United States against the will of the father who legally had every right to the child. Not even close Calgun.....try again.
 
APACHERAT said:
You brought it up, what kind of crimes were you involved in when you were a juvenile delinquent ?

By any chance were you released into the custody of your parents ?
Click to expand...

When I was a juvenile delinquent, and I *was* a juvenile delinquent, I was involved in a variety of crimes, including at least one felony and I was always released into the custody of my parents.
 
disneydude said:
Way to misrepresent a completely different situation and failed weak attempt at comparison. Elian Gonzalez was being held by relatives in the United States against the will of the father who legally had every right to the child. Not even close Calgun.....try again.
Click to expand...

I also don't remember "the left" being in lockstep favor of sending Elian back to Cuba, but hey, it's CalGun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom