• 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!

When deportation is a death sentence

Fledermaus said:
WTF are you rambling about?

Reread the Fifth Amendment.
Click to expand...

Let's take a look at it together:

[h=3]Amendment V[/h][FONT=&quot]No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Think about the bolded part. Think about asset forfeiture laws. Now think about summary deportations when the deportee is likely to be killed as a result. Think about how many people are stopped and turned around to face deadly enemies without any process of law at all. Perhaps the case could be made that illegal entry is not an "infamous" crime, or maybe it is. If it is not, then why treat people who have committed that crime, and their children as infamous criminals?
 
Dittohead not! said:
Let's take a look at it together:



Think about the bolded part. Think about asset forfeiture laws. Now think about summary deportations when the deportee is likely to be killed as a result. Think about how many people are stopped and turned around to face deadly enemies without any process of law at all. Perhaps the case could be made that illegal entry is not an "infamous" crime, or maybe it is. If it is not, then why treat people who have committed that crime, and their children as infamous criminals?
Click to expand...

Read the first part...
 
Dittohead not! said:
Please do tell specifically how you think the first part negates the second part.
Click to expand...

She was deported. She wasn't deprived of anything noted by the deportation itself. She was not charged with capitol crime nor infamous crime nor was she subject to a grand jury.
 
Fledermaus said:
She was deported. She wasn't deprived of anything noted by the deportation itself. She was not charged with capitol crime nor infamous crime nor was she subject to a grand jury.
Click to expand...

Good to know that you don't think attempting to stay in the US illegally instead of going home to face a killer is an infamous crime.
 
Mr Person said:
As usual with those who pretend that making a big show of how little they care about their fellow human, I think we all know you'd be signing a completely different tune if, say, the police were found to have wrongly released someone and that person tortured one of your family members to death.

We all know you wouldn't be sitting there going "well, shucks, can't put any blame on them. That was all the bad man's fault."




I suppose that's the benefit of being Libertarian or Far Right. You only have to own your principles so long as other people are paying for them.
Click to expand...

The blame is on the man who killed her and her own government for not protecting her against that man.Her deportation is irrelevant to that.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Let's take a look at it together:



Think about the bolded part. Think about asset forfeiture laws. Now think about summary deportations when the deportee is likely to be killed as a result. Think about how many people are stopped and turned around to face deadly enemies without any process of law at all. Perhaps the case could be made that illegal entry is not an "infamous" crime, or maybe it is. If it is not, then why treat people who have committed that crime, and their children as infamous criminals?
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) depends on who is doing the life threatening (foreign government agents vs. common criminals). Obviously, many could claim to be in fear of crime but far fewer could claim a fear of either their own government agent's action or foreign invaders. If we let each and every potential crime victim in the world claim US asylum status then chaos would certainly ensue.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) depends on who is doing the life threatening (foreign government agents vs. common criminals). Obviously, many could claim to be in fear of crime but far fewer could claim a fear of either their own government agent's action or foreign invaders. If we let each and every potential crime victim in the world claim US asylum status then chaos would certainly ensue.
Click to expand...

Seems to me that being killed by a hostile ex spouse, a violent gang, or government goons has the same end result: The victim is just as dead either way.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Yes, that is generally true.

Which still doesn't make it OK to send people to their deaths at the hands of criminals and gangs, but it happens every day.
Click to expand...

Crime happens every day in this country as well - claiming many victims. Less so if we were to allow folks to drive without licenses and/or insurance - that, by definition, would reduce crime but would not enhance public safety.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Crime happens every day in this country as well - claiming many victims. Less so if we were to allow folks to drive without licenses and/or insurance - that, by definition, would reduce crime but would not enhance public safety.
Click to expand...

People do drive without licenses and/or insurance. Making that legal wouldn't accomplish anything. Some of the people who do have driver's licenses are scary enough on the highway.

Should the MS 13 or a similar gang take over the country, then we'd have the same sort of situation that exists in El Salvador. If a Salvadoran is crosswise with the gangs, he/she is dead meat without being able to escape. Some few do escape, make their way across hostile international borders, only to be turned back to die.

That is not who we are as a nation.
 
Dittohead not! said:
People do drive without licenses and/or insurance. Making that legal wouldn't accomplish anything. Some of the people who do have driver's licenses are scary enough on the highway.

Should the MS 13 or a similar gang take over the country, then we'd have the same sort of situation that exists in El Salvador. If a Salvadoran is crosswise with the gangs, he/she is dead meat without being able to escape. Some few do escape, make their way across hostile international borders, only to be turned back to die.

That is not who we are as a nation.
Click to expand...

Yep, and that (bolded above) criminal activity is good cause to deport foreign nationals that view US laws as mere suggestions which may be ignored for personal financial gain or convenience.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, and that (bolded above) criminal activity is good cause to deport foreign nationals that view US laws as mere suggestions which may be ignored for personal financial gain or convenience.
Click to expand...

We should deport people back to a violent death because some people drive without licenses? Somehow, I fail to see the connection.
 
Dittohead not! said:
We should deport people back to a violent death because some people drive without licenses? Somehow, I fail to see the connection.
Click to expand...

No, we deport them back for BEING HERE ILLEGALLY.... Driving ILLEGALLY merely exposed the fact they are HERE ILLEGALLY.

You really don't appear to understand how all this works.
 
Fledermaus said:
No, we deport them back for BEING HERE ILLEGALLY.... Driving ILLEGALLY merely exposed the fact they are HERE ILLEGALLY.

You really don't appear to understand how all this works.
Click to expand...

Oh. So, driving illegally, being in the US illegally, we should just kill them all. Am I getting it now?
 
Dittohead not! said:
Oh. So, driving illegally, being in the US illegally, we should just kill them all. Am I getting it now?
Click to expand...

Completely not getting it. Intentionally so.

By driving illegally, being in the US illegally, one earns DEPORTATION.

Who said anything about killing anyone? Oh, that's your illogical take on the situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom