• 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!

Trump Walks Out of Border Talks, Calls Them ‘Total Waste of Time’

Buzz62 said:
There isn't one in the USA...that I know of.
However when a cop pulls a person over, they'd better have a valid DL. And if that DL is...Mexican, or lets say not American, that person better be able to prove they are not in the country illegally. I think there are still cities that allow random checks too?
Click to expand...

you make no sense
you correctly acknowledge that there is no law requiring a person in the USA to carry a current valid ID card on their person

but previously you posted this:
When a cop stops a person and asks for his/her ID, and then realizes the ID is either false or non-existent, he has cause to detain the person
Click to expand...

you insist the leo can detain the person because they are not carrying a current valid ID

so, explain that disconnect. why, if there is no legal obligation to carry an ID can a leo detain a person for not carrying a current valid id
 
Exactice said:
I hope to have a fair discussion with you......

1) Trump's Zero Tolerance has NOTHING directly to do with Child Separation, BUT it is a BY-PRODUCT of breaking US immigration LAWS PERIOD. DO not unfairly correlate the enforcement of law with emotion. PARENTS that are CAUGHT illegally entering our nation, This means NO travel documents, NO VISA, NO Reciprocity Treaty. Will be detained for violation of our laws REGARDLESS if you have children with you or NOT. When a parent is detained for a crime, Misdemeanor OR Felony the child is then Safeguarded from the Parent, NO where in my experience as a PRIOR LEO did we detain a Parent with a child intow. And arrest or detain the child more so put the child in custody with the parent to include a police car or jail cell. A guardian was contacted, CPS or DHS was contacted to safeguard the child when an Adult is Detained. THIS IS STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE. Zero Tolerance has NOTHING to directly do with separating children THIS IS a common standard practice with LEO for YEARS.

2) Never in our laws did we treat first timers as criminals? Immigration act of 1965 WELL before Trump illegal immigration deemed them a misdemeanor and thus a second violation a Felony. I actual am curious. IF we were up to this point Properly documenting illegal border crossing to ESTABLISH that some people may have done it on multiple occasion to consider it a "FELONY"

3) Compassion? So Compassion Overrides LAW? So Because Im broke, Have the compassion to ROB a bank? And NOT face any penalty... THE LAW is the LAW for a reason. It intended to create continuity and a peaceful society

4) While I CAN reason with you. Not to Treat Misdemeanors as Criminals (Which regardless a misdemeanor is a crime) To take their children away is a fair consideration BUT , I WILL say this, IT IS a Standard practice that has gone on FOR YEARS..... has NOTHING to do with TRUMP per say.(IT is a by-product) BUT Child Safeguard is a COMMON practice when a PARENT Legal Citizen or ILLEGAL migrate breaks a law and a child intow. the CHILD is Safeguard released to a LEGAL Guardian while the Parent is detained OR if NO legal Guardian CPS/DHS is the in taking sponsor.


DEMS are NOT this... THE are pushing the TERM FAMILY separation. WHICH ZERO Tolerance HAS NO bearing OR GUIDANCE on the separation of Family. THE GUIDANCE is that ANYONE PERIOD that is caught illegally will be detained. HOW we comply with the detainment HAS NOT been altered by Trump's Zero Tolerance PERIOD. Show me in the letter of policy where it states that the DETAINMENT Process has been altered.
Click to expand...



Reason with this: It's more detailed that I could offer you:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...amilies-at-the-border/?utm_term=.dce617393d8e


And explain to me how Trump's zero policy is the same as Obama's.

It isn't.
 
OscarLevant said:
Reason with this: It's more detailed that I could offer you:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...amilies-at-the-border/?utm_term=.dce617393d8e


And explain to me how Trump's zero policy is the same as Obama's.

It isn't.
Click to expand...

If you do not at least have the etiquette to respond to my retorts with your own words then this is not a debate. You want to you use a partisan article to speak for yourself. The washington's post will not be able to actively respond to my points I listed above.

With that from the assumption you have NO retorts for my points. The fact of the matter was Trump and assuming THROUGH Jeff Session because in all fairness trump did NOT issue the policy nor is it CALLED Trumps policy it was issued by Jeff Session and called "MEMORANDUM FOR FEDERAL PROSECUTORS ALONG THE SOUTHWEST BORDER " Nothing about Family separation.

There Should NEVER have been a difference in Policy between Obama or Trump or Clinton or Reagan. Breaking the law is breaking the law.

Seemingly under Obama though prosecution seemed to be more lax and while zero tolerance should have never needed to written as a policy as if you break the law and caught you SHOULD face the penalties not released at the apprehending officers discretion.


So again IT SHOULD have been the same, Zero tolerance is Zero tolerance, the difference is 1 administration chose if and when to enforce at their leisure.

Again if you would like, READ again my post and feel free to debate what I stated as facts or false not use a partisan's news paper's common rhetoric. OR you have no opinion?
 
This thread appears to show the existence of an impenetrable wall. Neither side has been able to scale it. If the Democrats wish to blame it on the cost, then they're making a case for tougher enforcement of our border. Illegal entry should make legal entry much more difficult. Perhaps 1st attempt a 5 year ban from applying through legal means, 2nd attempt an additional 10 year ban, and 3rd attempt a permanent ban.
 
Somerville said:
What if the person is not driving the stopped vehicle? Should they have to show ID?
Click to expand...

If a person is not driving, or in a place that requires ID, then unless the cop has some reason to be suspicious, no, the person should not have to show ID.
 
justabubba said:
[emphasis added by bubba]

please cite the law that is being broken by local leos in sanctuary communities who do not enforce federal immigration laws
Click to expand...

Aiding and abetting criminals, IMO.
I also think Trump should make state finance conditional on compliance with the immigration laws.
Illegals in California have killed several people after having been turned loose with criminal records.
Ronil Singh's child would still have a Daddy if California followed the law.
That you put these scum ahead of the lives of American citizens...and cops no less...tells me allot about your lack of anything that even remotely resembles patriotism or morality. Thank you and have a nice life... :shock:
 
justabubba said:
you make no sense
you correctly acknowledge that there is no law requiring a person in the USA to carry a current valid ID card on their person

but previously you posted this:


you insist the leo can detain the person because they are not carrying a current valid ID

so, explain that disconnect. why, if there is no legal obligation to carry an ID can a leo detain a person for not carrying a current valid id
Click to expand...

Sure.
Right after you explain how it is you'd side with criminals and cop-killers ahead of American Citizens.

Moral superiority my ass... (Buzz spits)
 
Buzz62 said:
Aiding and abetting criminals, IMO.
Click to expand...
since local LEOs are not charged with enforcing federal immigration laws, there are no illegals to aid and abet

I also think Trump should make state finance conditional on compliance with the immigration laws.
Click to expand...
a couple of things would first have to occur:
1. change the laws to make federal immigration laws enforceable at the local level; and
2. fund the communities to perform such enforcement; otherwise the local communities wind up spending local tax dollars to fulfill the federal immigration enforcement responsibility

Illegals in California have killed several people after having been turned loose with criminal records.
Ronil Singh's child would still have a Daddy if California followed the law.
Click to expand...
as has been shared with you repeatedly, illegals engage in criminal activity at a much smaller per capita rate that non illegals. your cherry picked examples do nothing to undermine that statistical reality

That you put these scum ahead of the lives of American citizens...and cops no less...tells me allot about your lack of anything that even remotely resembles patriotism or morality.
Click to expand...
your ignorance of our nation's laws and responsibilities has been made abundantly clear by your posts. it is a badge of honor to be found a polar opposite of you politically

Thank you and have a nice life... :shock:
Click to expand...
be well and get an education ... and turn off faux news, it is not helping you
 
Buzz62 said:
Sure.
Right after you explain how it is you'd side with criminals and cop-killers ahead of American Citizens.

Moral superiority my ass... (Buzz spits)
Click to expand...

weak diversion

answer the question put to you in this debate - IF you are able
 
justabubba said:
since local LEOs are not charged with enforcing federal immigration laws, there are no illegals to aid and abet


a couple of things would first have to occur:
1. change the laws to make federal immigration laws enforceable at the local level; and
2. fund the communities to perform such enforcement; otherwise the local communities wind up spending local tax dollars to fulfill the federal immigration enforcement responsibility


as has been shared with you repeatedly, illegals engage in criminal activity at a much smaller per capita rate that non illegals. your cherry picked examples do nothing to undermine that statistical reality


your ignorance of our nation's laws and responsibilities has been made abundantly clear by your posts. it is a badge of honor to be found a polar opposite of you politically


be well and get an education ... and turn off faux news, it is not helping you
Click to expand...

Your willingness to accept the murder of Americans, over the security of Americans, tells me everything anyone needs to know about you.
And this
illegals engage in criminal activity at a much smaller per capita rate that non illegals
Click to expand...
is sickening. Illegals should not be in the USA at all, and should certainly not be repeat criminal offenders.

I question your patriotism and morality...and obvious lack of either.
 
Buzz62 said:
Your willingness to accept the murder of Americans, over the security of Americans, tells me everything anyone needs to know about you.
Click to expand...
you accept murder every day
what is the difference between us ... other than i have a better understanding of the way things work

And this

is sickening. Illegals should not be in the USA at all, and should certainly not be repeat criminal offenders.

I question your patriotism and morality...and obvious lack of either.
Click to expand...
the one point with which we agree is that our nation should control who crosses the border into our country
but the wall is not the way to solve that issue
'the wall' is a propaganda tool used by the president to persuade low IQ citizens to support his policies
so, get educated about this matter and then you will no longer be subject to tRump's tool. if not, then stock up on vaseline
 
justabubba said:
you accept murder every day
what is the difference between us ... other than i have a better understanding of the way things work
Click to expand...
I most certainly do not accept murder every day. I find it deplorable that you do with such evident ease.
The differences between you and me are numerous. For one, I don't run about proclaiming superior intellect while exhibiting low intellect.
I don't accept murder, and cannot accept repeat criminal offenders who are in the country illegally.
And I would never let my hatred of a political leader, force me to forsake my morality and side against my own people.

justabubba said:
the one point with which we agree is that our nation should control who crosses the border into our country
but the wall is not the way to solve that issue
'the wall' is a propaganda tool used by the president to persuade low IQ citizens to support his policies
so, get educated about this matter and then you will no longer be subject to tRump's tool. if not, then stock up on vaseline
Click to expand...
Vaseline...:roll: Is that your lube of choice? I'll have to ask my wife about this.
You allow your pure hatred of Trump, dictate where your loyalties lie.
Thus you are week-minded and easily lead astray. So don't come to me with arguments concerning low IQ Bubba.
This Canadian, has more concern for American citizens, than numerous Americans.
Bully for you...Bubba...
 
Somerville said:
What if the person is not driving the stopped vehicle? Should they have to show ID?
Click to expand...

During a routine stop, LEO’s can ascertain identities of all occupants of the vehicle for possible warrants. He does not have to...but he can. And if you have ever watch LIVE PD you would know that the majority of departments make that a routine part of stops.
 
Buzz62 said:
I most certainly do not accept murder every day. I find it deplorable that you do with such evident ease.
Click to expand...
of course you accept them. they occur every day and you have done nothing to prevent them

The differences between you and me are numerous.
Click to expand...
they ARE vast ... and i am quite thankful to be able to post that

For one, I don't run about proclaiming superior intellect while exhibiting low intellect.
Click to expand...
and there is an excellent reason for that
see if you can figure it out

I don't accept murder, and cannot accept repeat criminal offenders who are in the country illegally.
Click to expand...
there is no instance of murder in canada, who knew
because if there ever were a murder your statement would then be an abject lie
i suspect most readers will understand why i visualize an ostrich when seeing you insist that there are no illegals in your nation

And I would never let my hatred of a political leader, force me to forsake my morality and side against my own people.
Click to expand...
here is the difference. in your country you have a leader with a sense of morality
i refuse to defend the indefensible actions of my own president ... but there are many who do. it would appear you are among their rank

Vaseline...:roll: Is that your lube of choice? I'll have to ask my wife about this.
Click to expand...
there is a rule in this forum which prevents me from making a comment about the family of a forum member, so do with your spouse as you please as it is of no bearing within this forum

You allow your pure hatred of Trump, dictate where your loyalties lie.
Click to expand...
it is the actions of my president i find objectionable. i refuse to align myself with someone who is without character or conscience. many germans were loyal to hitler despite his evil practices; you would be wise to learn something from history

Thus you are week-minded
Click to expand...
better than to be weak-minded

... and easily lead astray.
Click to expand...
now this is the part of your argument that you have convinced me you know something about

So don't come to me with arguments concerning low IQ Bubba.
Click to expand...
i have not used that argument. some things are too obvious to require such comment

This Canadian, has more concern for American citizens, than numerous Americans.
Bully for you...Bubba...
Click to expand...
i accept your apology, buzz
 
justabubba said:
what made it even worse was having no mechanism in place to reunite those children with their parents
Click to expand...
That was actually a policy under Obama, Trump fixed it.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
 
j-mac said:
That was actually a policy under Obama, Trump fixed it.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

please offer a cite showing that it was an Obama practice that separated children from immigrant detainees without a mechanism to reunite them
 
Exactice said:
If you do not at least have the etiquette to respond to my retorts with your own words then this is not a debate. You want to you use a partisan article to speak for yourself. The washington's post will not be able to actively respond to my points I listed above.

With that from the assumption you have NO retorts for my points. The fact of the matter was Trump and assuming THROUGH Jeff Session because in all fairness trump did NOT issue the policy nor is it CALLED Trumps policy it was issued by Jeff Session and called "MEMORANDUM FOR FEDERAL PROSECUTORS ALONG THE SOUTHWEST BORDER " Nothing about Family separation.

There Should NEVER have been a difference in Policy between Obama or Trump or Clinton or Reagan. Breaking the law is breaking the law.

Seemingly under Obama though prosecution seemed to be more lax and while zero tolerance should have never needed to written as a policy as if you break the law and caught you SHOULD face the penalties not released at the apprehending officers discretion.


So again IT SHOULD have been the same, Zero tolerance is Zero tolerance, the difference is 1 administration chose if and when to enforce at their leisure.

Again if you would like, READ again my post and feel free to debate what I stated as facts or false not use a partisan's news paper's common rhetoric. OR you have no opinion?
Click to expand...



I don't have the time to get into the weeds of this argument, let's stick to the larger point:


My point is simple, Zero Tolerance policy was not Obama's, it doesn't matter whether or not it should have been or not, it was Trump & Sessions, which resulted in many more, in a much shorter period of time, parents getting separated from children to such an extent is garnered outrage by the public.

Do you dispute the numerical fact?
 
justabubba said:
please offer a cite showing that it was an Obama practice that separated children from immigrant detainees without a mechanism to reunite them
Click to expand...
"Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen*said at a June 18 press briefing: “The Obama administration, the Bush administration all separated families. … They did — their rate was less than ours, but they absolutely did do this. This is not new.”
Nielsen went on to explain that there is indeed something new, as*we wrote*in another article on this topic. Under a “zero tolerance policy” on illegal immigration announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in early April, the administration*is now referring*all illegal border crossings for criminal prosecution. By doing that, parents have been separated from their children, because children can’t be held in detention facilities for adults."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...tion-separate-families-immigration/728060002/


Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
 
j-mac said:
"Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen*said at a June 18 press briefing: “The Obama administration, the Bush administration all separated families. … They did — their rate was less than ours, but they absolutely did do this. This is not new.”
Nielsen went on to explain that there is indeed something new, as*we wrote*in another article on this topic. Under a “zero tolerance policy” on illegal immigration announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in early April, the administration*is now referring*all illegal border crossings for criminal prosecution. By doing that, parents have been separated from their children, because children can’t be held in detention facilities for adults."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...tion-separate-families-immigration/728060002/


Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

then you should now be able to see, being unable to show that the policies and practices were the same, that the separation of children methods were quite divergent between the two administrations
 
OscarLevant said:
I don't have the time to get into the weeds of this argument, let's stick to the larger point:


My point is simple, Zero Tolerance policy was not Obama's, it doesn't matter whether or not it should have been or not, it was Trump & Sessions, which resulted in many more, in a much shorter period of time, parents getting separated from children to such an extent is garnered outrage by the public.

Do you dispute the numerical fact?
Click to expand...

I see your point let me retort IN REGARDS TO ANY LAW PERIOD. It should ALWAYS BE ZERO TOLERANCE PERIOD. If a Law is broken there should not (Normally) be exceptions or conditions or discretion. WHAT is the point if you have discretion when enforcing the law. (This of course if black and white. Emotionally I can understand "personal" discretion. BUT in fairness too the law there should be NO discretion.)


So YES Obama may not have had a Zero Tolerance policy in place as there should never have been a need. YOU enter our country illegally by virtue of the immigration laws back in the 60's you are prosecuted as a misdemeanor on your first offense and a Felony on your second.

THERE is no discretion written in between. Obama's administration seemed to "Pick and Choose" if and when to apply the law.

Trump's Administration has set a policy to ensure there is NO picking and choosing and enforce the law at all times.


Now you keep saying that More children getting separated. YES because if the laws was enforced fully from 1960's we should have and known the same EXACT outrage. But again because people used discretion and even personal judgement of the law. They would DISREGARD the enforcement and either not separate them or NOT even prosecute them (Catch and Release)

Do you NOT see this as a problem? Do you not agree that if a LAW is put in place period That it should be enforced 100% of the time.

Robbing a bank is a crime. If you are CAUGHT is it Zero tolerance? That you are detained, arrested, jailed and then prosecuted.

How about shoplifting on a FEDERAL establishment like a Military Base. The Soldier or sponsor is held the the UCMJ prosecution 100% of the time.

Laws are there for reason. We have created this incentive to disregard our laws by not enforcing them to the fullest thus creating a Greater Humanitarian "crisis" at the border where it incentives people to take the chance and enter our country illegal with a child in hope to gain leniency.

a Law that is inacted should ALWAYS be Zero tolerance. The by product of breaking our law with a child in tow is "Child Safeguard policy"

Do agree that ANY law that is on the books should be enforced 100% of the time, Be it, Shoplifting, Burglary, Child Endangerment, Murder? Yes or NO?
 
Exactice said:
I see your point let me retort IN REGARDS TO ANY LAW PERIOD. It should ALWAYS BE ZERO TOLERANCE PERIOD.
Click to expand...



It's not about "zero tolerance", it's about the consequences of one party's enforcement of the law, and that of another.


no one was allowed to become a citizen or legal resident without going to normal legal channels, this has always been zero exceptions.

AFAIK.

Beyond this, all that is left is how people are treated. Sometimes, the interests of children are considered.
 
OscarLevant said:
It's not about "zero tolerance", it's about the consequences of one party's enforcement of the law, and that of another.


no one was allowed to become a citizen or legal resident without going to normal legal channels, this has always been zero exceptions.

AFAIK.

Beyond this, all that is left is how people are treated. Sometimes, the interests of children are considered.[/QUOTE]


Let me say this again..... The Separation is the BY-Product of enforcing a LAW. A parent knowingly Commit ac rime with a child in TOW must suffer consequences

Secondly there are POLICIES in place in regards to the Interest of the Child I just called "CHILD SAFEGUARD ACT" I have dictated how it works on countless occasions.

The child is released to another LEGAL Guardian. If None are available. Ten CPS and DHS intakes the child humanely and provides care and custody.

THE PARENT OF THIS CHILD COMMITTED A CRIME. If the Parent NEVER committed the crime would the Child be separated? YES OR NO?
Click to expand...
 
Exactice said:
OscarLevant said:
It's not about "zero tolerance", it's about the consequences of one party's enforcement of the law, and that of another.


no one was allowed to become a citizen or legal resident without going to normal legal channels, this has always been zero exceptions.

AFAIK.

Beyond this, all that is left is how people are treated. Sometimes, the interests of children are considered.[/QUOTE]


Let me say this again..... The Separation is the BY-Product of enforcing a LAW. A parent knowingly Commit ac rime with a child in TOW must suffer consequences

Secondly there are POLICIES in place in regards to the Interest of the Child I just called "CHILD SAFEGUARD ACT" I have dictated how it works on countless occasions.

The child is released to another LEGAL Guardian. If None are available. Ten CPS and DHS intakes the child humanely and provides care and custody.
Click to expand...
You sound like a shill for these guys. Really? Permanently taking kids away from parents, and losing contact such that they children cannot be reunited, ever, this is humane treatment?

I think not.
THE PARENT OF THIS CHILD COMMITTED A CRIME. If the Parent NEVER committed the crime would the Child be separated? YES OR NO?
Click to expand...



I"ve heard that argument, a lot, and I reject it.


Any policy which results in parents separated from children on a mere misdemeanor is a violation of the "cruel and unusual punishment" concept. NOt only this, UNNECESSARY separation of parents and child is the thing, get it? Under Trump's VERSION of zero tolerance, he's imposing the punishment of trauma on children, when, for a mere misdemeanor, NO PERSON WITH A CONSCIENCE will agree with you. Many of these parents are fleeing threats of death for them and their children, people who are faced with two choices: die at the hands of cartel, or take chances and go to America.

WHAT WOULD YOU DO, if you were in the situation? So, look me in the eye and tell me this person is a criminal.

When you consider the TRAUMA inflicted ALL concern, especially on the CHILD, you are in essence telling me you are a cruel SOB.

Say it isn't so.



Additionally...

many of the undocs do not have friends, family, in this country, so the "guardian" is a total stranger, this type of situation doesn't happen like this in America, where, when a parent commits a crime, often there are friends and family that can take the child, so with asylum applicants and undocs, it's different. and in the past, no coordination was made to give these children a chance to be reunited with their parents, there are still children out there lost in the system, and there were no records kept, we just dont' know how many children were needlessly permanently taken away from their parents. What Trump has done is very sinful.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom