The Political Thread

[Smart Marx]

I think we agree here lol. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be border security. Im just saying the SPECIFIC narrative of the majority of illegals coming here to commit crime is false. The reality is that the majority of illegals are law abiding citizens who are coming here for a better life. Again, there absolutely should be a process but having a process and accurately describing their intentions are two different things.

I don’t like when politicians lie to the public to stir the pot.

Then yes, we agree.

Although I’m still not a fan of anyone coming into this country illegally, even if they don’t commit crimes. A lot of people want to come in and they go through the process. At the very least just come in and tell them you’re seeking asylum because at least until your case is heard you’re allowed to stay.

 

[Comrade Khan]

I mean, yeah, any crime that is committed by anyone is a problem, but until we’ve invented some way of determining when a crime will happen ahead of time, there’s nothing we can really do about people that are here legally, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give up on stopping people that shouldn’t even be here.

Tom Cruise told us its too sketch to predict crimes

 

[Grimoire Lenin]

So let’s do absolutely nothing about the crime that we can actually do something about just by making sure those people aren’t even here and then we’ll just continue to let the other crime happen because it has nothing to do with his other issue. Sounds like a winning plan.

Counterpoint, it's unrealistic to attempt to push for harsher recriminations against illegal immigration but then say "we can't do anything about crimes committed by American Citizens" (when yes, we absolutely can, there's hundreds of solutions, the problem is people don't want to help the lower class, homeless population, and veterans who invariably end up in the former categories), particularly when The Marshall Project, The New York Times, NPR, The National Bureau of Economic Research, The CATO Institute, and other organizations found that illegal immigrants are far less likely to commit crimes compared to citizens. Sure, we can "do something" about crime committed by illegal immigrants, but the question is if it's even sustainable? Mass deporting a bunch of people costs a shit ton of money and clogs up the courts, who cannot even keep up with the current rate of immigration cases; it's also a federal lawsuit waiting to happen upon the incident that a bunch of legal immigrants get caught up in the conflagration and are deported without a fair trial.

We can actually do something about crimes committed by citizens, but we're never going to remove crime entirely. People who wanna commit crimes will commit crimes regardless what laws or shit we put into place, that doesn't mean we can't try remedying the situations that influence people to committing more crime (poverty, homelessness, drugs, etc.)

 

[Smart Marx]

Tom Cruise told us its too sketch to predict crimes

Funnilt enough you actually understood the reference cause that’s what I was going for lol

 

[Comrade Khan]

Funnilt enough you actually understood the reference cause that’s what I was going for lol

its prob my favorite tom cruise movie, its legit good

 

[Smart Marx]

Counterpoint, it's unrealistic to attempt to push for harsher recriminations against illegal immigration but then say "we can't do anything about crimes committed by American Citizens" (when yes, we absolutely can, there's hundreds of solutions, the problem is people don't want to help the lower class, homeless population, and veterans who invariably end up in the former categories), particularly when The Marshall Project, The New York Times, NPR, The National Bureau of Economic Research, The CATO Institute, and other organizations found that illegal immigrants are far less likely to commit crimes compared to citizens. Sure, we can "do something" about crime committed by illegal immigrants, but the question is if it's even sustainable? Mass deporting a bunch of people costs a shit ton of money and clogs up the courts, who cannot even keep up with the current rate of immigration cases; it's also a federal lawsuit waiting to happen upon the incident that a bunch of legal immigrants get caught up in the conflagration and are deported without a fair trial.

We can actually do something about crimes committed by citizens, but we're never going to remove crime entirely. People who wanna commit crimes will commit crimes regardless what laws or shit we put into place, that doesn't mean we can't try remedying the situations that influence people to committing more crime (poverty, homelessness, drugs, etc.)

That last line of your was my entire point. You cannot eliminate crime by legal citizens entirely. We can, however, severely limit illegal immigrant crime to almost 0.

Read my last response to sabertooth for the rest of it because I never said we couldn’t do ANYTHING but the other crime, but it doesn’t need to come at the expense of doing some thing about illegal immigrant crime. We can do both.

Also, I’m not even talking about deportation. I’m talking about doing some thing to stop more people from coming in today. I have conflicting thoughts on what to do about the people that are already here.

My main issue isn’t even just the statistically low offense by illegal immigrates. It’s the entire border issue I’m more concerned with. Just don’t agree with the it’s only 100 murders so we shouldn’t worry about it stuff.

 

[Grimoire Lenin]

I also have a pretty big problem with conservatives who on one hand want a much smaller government and less government spending, but then advocate for mass deportation and higher spending on the border.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Maintaining a border patrol costs a fuck ton of money and has consistently proven ineffective at actually stopping illegal immigration.

 

[Smart Marx]

I also have a pretty big problem with conservatives who on one hand want a much smaller government and less government spending, but then advocate for mass deportation and higher spending on the border.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Maintaining a border patrol costs a fuck ton of money and has consistently proven ineffective at actually stopping illegal immigration.

I think you misunderstand what we mean by smaller government. When we say that we mean the government should be limited to the thing the government is supposed to. Enforce its laws, defend its citizens and handle international disputes. Securing the border and national security are like one of the few things we believe the government is responsible for.

That being said, not necessarily in favor of mass deportations either. Just secure the border today and then we can figure out what to do.

 

[Smart Marx]

Also, not true on that it’s ineffective. Anytime the border has attempted to be secured. Rates of immigration, across-the-board, or have drastically gone down. We’re actually in one of the record highs.

 

[Brandon Blaze]

Then yes, we agree.

Although I’m still not a fan of anyone coming into this country illegally, even if they don’t commit crimes. A lot of people want to come in and they go through the process. At the very least just come in and tell them you’re seeking asylum because at least until your case is heard you’re allowed to stay.

Ahh. Then this covers what I want done then cause that’s always been one of my main concerns is helping keep people safe who are trying to escape for a better life and future.

 

[Smart Marx]

Ahh. Then this covers what I want done then cause that’s always been one of my main concerns is helping keep people safe who are trying to escape for a better life and future.

Oh for sure we have legal asylum cases that we allow a certain number in. The problem is a lot of these people don’t actually ask for asylum until the already caught and sometimes that’ll be like a month or two later. But yeah, we have many legal ports of entry they can just go to and be like yo we’re here seeking asylum and they would be let right in. The main issue is knowing who’s here. If they seek legal asylum, we have their documentation we know who they are. They know where they are. If people are trying to say human Traffic, they are definitely not going to seek asylum unless they get caught.

 

[Brandon Blaze]

Oh for sure we have legal asylum cases that we allow a certain number in. The problem is a lot of these people don’t actually ask for asylum until the already caught and sometimes that’ll be like a month or two later. But yeah, we have many legal ports of entry they can just go to and be like yo we’re here seeking asylum and they would be let right in. The main issue is knowing who’s here. If they seek legal asylum, we have their documentation we know who they are. They know where they are. If people are trying to say human Traffic, they are definitely not going to seek asylum unless they get caught.

Oh the people I care about are ones who I would hope would be able to get approved for it, and not like human trafficking and all the drugs and shit. I’m more talking about families, women, and children trying to escape from the horrible life they have to endure.

 

[Smart Marx]

Oh the people I care about are ones who I would hope would be able to get approved for it, and not like human trafficking and all the drugs and shit. I’m more talking about families, women, and children trying to escape from the horrible life they have to endure.

The problem is the way that we have the system set up right now is a human trafficker could get caught with a victim but if they claim asylum, they can’t do much about it until the hearing and sometimes that’s like years away. Like Grim was even talking about there’s a severe backlog.

Which again, even as a smaller government conservative I would be all for funding more immigration judges, and lawyers and courts to help speed that along.

Funnily enough, this is actually where that whole separating kids thing came from that was actually started by Obama, but continued under Trump that so many people scrutinized. And the reason why they separated adults and children was so that way they could verify the relationship between the children and the adults, but that was stopped once Biden took office.

 

[Smart Marx]

Oh the people I care about are ones who I would hope would be able to get approved for it, and not like human trafficking and all the drugs and shit. I’m more talking about families, women, and children trying to escape from the horrible life they have to endure.

But yeah, absolutely all for families escaping war-torn countries and civil strife. Just please go to a legal port of entry and declare yourself.

 

[Brandon Blaze]

The problem is the way that we have the system set up right now is a human trafficker could get caught with a victim but if they claim asylum, they can’t do much about it until the hearing and sometimes that’s like years away. Like Grim was even talking about there’s a severe backlog.

Which again, even as a smaller government conservative I would be all for funding more immigration judges, and lawyers and courts to help speed that along.

Funnily enough, this is actually where that whole separating kids thing came from that was actually started by Obama, but continued under Trump that so many people scrutinized. And the reason why they separated adults and children was so that way they could verify the relationship between the children and the adults, but that was stopped once Biden took office.

Well hopefully we can get to a point where things get better. Cause if we could do what you mentioned in the middle there, then that would probably help out plenty.

But yeah, absolutely all for families escaping war-torn countries and civil strife. Just please go to a legal port of entry and declare yourself.

yes. Agreed, go about it that way!