America - The Official Thread

[Pako]

If you can't see how it associates race with crime then quite frankly I'm amazed.

You do know that its estimated that 80% of the illegal population of the US is from Mexico, Central or South America?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigrant_population_of_the_United_States

I really do hope it all works out OK for the US, but with each passing day I personally am less and less convinced that will be the case.

And your point? Maybe that's why we are strenthing our southern border. You want to live in America, be American. That starts with following our laws and being a contribution. We are not a free meal ticket, you are expected to earn your way here but there's this romantic idea that America is here to coddle you and take care of your every need. There is great opportunity here but that opportunity doesn't mean a free ride. You want to jump to the front of the line and cry about getting deported back to your country? Well, here's a tissue. Just because someone doesn't like a law, doesn't give them the right to ignore it.

 

[Scaff]

What would "not okay" look like? Civil war? Secession of California?

Well to be fair an extreme element of Trumps base have been calling for the former for a long time and the LA times has said that one pool is showing an increase in desire for the second.

However both would be at the very extreme end of the scale of 'not OK', plenty exists before that.

 

[xyloscissor]

If you can't see how it associates race with crime then quite frankly I'm amazed.

Well for many many years now our official government websites have been breaking down crime rates by race anyway, you can go to the FBI or DOJ.

 

[Scaff]

And your point? Maybe that's why we are strenthing our southern border. You want to live in America, be American. That starts with following our laws and being a contribution. We are not a free meal ticket, you are expected to earn your way here but there's this romantic idea that America is here to coddle you and take care of your every need. There is great opportunity here but that opportunity does mean a free ride. You want to jump to the front of the line and cry about getting deported back to your country? Well, here's a tissue. Just because someone doesn't like a law, doesn't give them the right to ignore it.

At what point have I said it does?

I didn't. what I said was if this report simply list crimes committed by aliens then is overly simplistic, as I have already explained in detail. Many other factors make up why people commit crimes and even the nature of the crimes they commit. If the report is absent that kind of detail then its open to misinterpretation and abuse.

 

[xyloscissor]

I really do hope it all works out OK for the US, but with each passing day I personally am less and less convinced that will be the case.

That's like a Christian telling atheists "I'll pray for you"

@prisonermonkeys

Do you consider this something that promotes hate? They use this tricky deal where the top of the picture is not actually in the picture so here is the text above the pic.

Figure 1: Apprehension reports and discrete persons apprehended for a violent offence by Indigenous status, Western Australia 2005 and South Australia 2006 (rates per 1,000 relevant population 10 years and over)

It comes from an official site of your government.
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current series/rpp/100-120/rpp105/05.html

Come to think of it, that graph might show in fact the immigrants are way less violent lol.

 

[Pako]

Think of it this way @Scaff , if aliens aren't committing crimes, then it will be a short list. If it's a short list, then we have nothing to worry about now do we? It lets all parties involved know that, "we are watching" so behave. If you don't like it, your welcome to pack up and go somewhere else.

 

[Scaff]

Well for many many years now our official government websites have been breaking down crime rates by race anyway, you can go to the FBI or DOJ.

Its not the only factor they report on however is it, and if this new report does limit it then its not the same.

Think of it this way @Scaff , if aliens aren't committing crimes, then it will be a short list. If it's a short list, then we have nothing to worry about now do we? It lets all parties involved know that, "we are watching" so behave. If you don't like it, your welcome to pack up and go somewhere else.

Short list is comparison to what?

The reports are limited to only certain areas and certain groups, as such you don't have a comparison value at all.

 

[Pako]

Its not the only factor they report on however is it, and if this new report does limit it then its not the same.


Short list is comparison to what?

The reports are limited to only certain areas and certain groups, as such you don't have a comparison value at all.

Oh, I don't know......a comparison of the rest of us that aren't committing Crimes.

 

[xyloscissor]

It's not the only factor they report on however is it, and if this new report does limit it then it's not the same.

That is most likely true, I forget exactly what is on the report, those types of reports have been made for years also they just have not been made public. I guess we'll have to see what is shown when one comes out.

It still doesn't matter to me because I don't see it as a tool to promote hate, I see it as a tool to educate the people in those specific cities as to what they are supporting. If they choose to continue supporting illegal immigration that is their choice, they'll pay for it for one thing and when they complain about crime they'll know a good place to start.

I'm guessing at some point down the road the host state of these cities is going to crack down as well.

 

[Touring Mars]

Like several other issues, Trump has somehow managed to make headline news out of something that was pretty much already going on - Obama also pledged to deport migrants with criminal convictions and has deported more people than any other US president. Trump wants to go one better and 'widen the net' - but arguably the basic principles behind Trump's clampdown on illegal immigrants and migrants who have been or are currently involved in crime are essentially the same as Obama's. One key difference is that Trump seems to want to widen the net to include much more minor misdemeanours and even include those who are suspected of criminal activity (e.g. gang members, suspected drug dealers) etc., and that should give cause for some concern.

 

[Dotini]

Like several other issues, Trump has somehow managed to make headline news out of something that was pretty much already going on - Obama also pledged to deport migrants with criminal convictions and has deported more people than any other US president. Trump wants to go one better and 'widen the net' - but arguably the basic principles behind Trump's clampdown on illegal immigrants and migrants who have been or are currently involved in crime are essentially the same as Obama's. One key difference is that Trump seems to want to widen the net to include much more minor misdemeanours and even include those who are suspected of criminal activity (e.g. gang members, suspected drug dealers) etc., and that should give cause for some concern.

Supposedly Duterte in the Philippines has extrajudicially killed thousands of suspected drug dealers. Nary a peep of protest in the west, it seems. Supposedly he is backed by his people and the drug dealers are Chinese gangsters, so it must be okay?

 

[xyloscissor]

and that should give cause for some concern.

I don't see why tbh, they are still illegal aliens. There is much discretion being given to the service officers in those instances and that is something I am in favor of and I'll tell you why. Just as when the police in our country used to have these same discretionary freedoms, non troublemakers were generally left alone rather than getting caught up in the system over minor infractions.

===

I'm expecting to see more of these sorts of cases coming up in these safe haven cities in the future.
https://www.fbi.gov/@@search?SearchableText=immigration&pageSize=20&page=1

 

[prousonhairy]

To me, if they aren't here legally they shouldn't be here. There has to be some sort of system and process followed, or they will just keep on coming.

The whole "born into citizenship" law needs to be :censored:canned as well. That's a part of the problem too.

I know they are fleeing Mexico and South American countries that are pretty bad places in areas, but that doesn't mean we should just let them flock here and give them a free pass. Look at the Syrian refugee crisis, and the huge increases in crime that's now documented to that.

 

[Dotini]

Whether we like it or approve it or not, it's happening now. Nothing can be done to stop it. The federal government is merely enforcing its own longstanding laws which have been defied for a very long time. The question and the problem is now for the citizens and governments of the affected cities and states to bear the financial pain and social discord of further defiance. WTF happens next if it escalates is beyond knowing at this time.

 

[xyloscissor]

WTF happens next if it escalates is beyond knowing at this time.

You live in a hot zone that's for sure, we demand you give us progress reports and updates.

 

[Scaff]

Oh, I don't know......a comparison of the rest of us that aren't committing Crimes.

Which would show nothing of value at all.

A valid comparison would be fro he same data set and statistic from non-sanctuary locations of as close a demographic match as you can get.

That would allow the claim that sanctuary cities are allowing criminal activity to thrive to be actually measured.

That is most likely true, I forget exactly what is on the report, those types of reports have been made for years also they just have not been made public. I guess we'll have to see what is shown when one comes out.

It still doesn't matter to me because I don't see it as a tool to promote hate, I see it as a tool to educate the people in those specific cities as to what they are supporting. If they choose to continue supporting illegal immigration that is their choice, they'll pay for it for one thing and when they complain about crime they'll know a good place to start.

I'm guessing at some point down the road the host state of these cities is going to crack down as well.

You may not use it for that, others certainly will.

And if this just about illegal immigration then why does the wording state the report will include all crimes committed by aliens! That would include legal and non-legal immigration.

 

[xyloscissor]

You may not use it for that, others certainly will.

Citation?

And if this just about illegal immigration then why does the wording state the report will include all crimes committed by aliens! That would include legal and non-legal immigration.

Because legal immigrants are citizens. There are also those on visas etc. who are not citizens but they are not aliens either.

 

[Scaff]

Citation?

You really don't believe that elements of the far right and neo-nazis will not use any stats that can be used to even suggest a racial characteristic to crime in a way that will encourage hate?

You seriously want a citation that the KKK think non-whi

Because legal immigrants are citizens. There are also those on visas etc. who are not citizens but they are not aliens either.

Sorry but that's simply not correct.

The legal definition in the US is (and I have already posted this so will quote myself):

"Now it simply states 'aliens', which are defined by US law as: ....any person not a citizen or national of the United States.
Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101"

So anyone who was not born in the US and has not become a citizen is an alien. If I were to travel to the US for work or a holiday I would be an alien.

 

[Pako]

Which would show nothing of value at all.

A valid comparison would be fro he same data set and statistic from non-sanctuary locations of as close a demographic match as you can get.

That would allow the claim that sanctuary cities are allowing criminal activity to thrive to be actually measured.



You may not use it for that, others certainly will.

And if this just about illegal immigration then why does the wording state the report will include all crimes committed by aliens! That would include legal and non-legal immigration.

You bet it has value! It provides support when our government ships criminal aliens back to their home country. What it says to the American populous is that these criminals will not be a burden on the US any longer. Their countries can have them back. It says, if you want to come to America we welcome you but if you can't follow our laws, you will get a swift boot right back where you came from.

 

[Biggles]

Supposedly Duterte in the Philippines has extrajudicially killed thousands of suspected drug dealers. Nary a peep of protest in the west, it seems. Supposedly he is backed by his people and the drug dealers are Chinese gangsters, so it must be okay?

In reality ... there were plenty of protests from the Obama administration & others in the international community. From the Trump administration, not so much:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...d296534b31e_story.html?utm_term=.76c772b1235a

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Think of it this way @Scaff , if aliens aren't committing crimes, then it will be a short list. If it's a short list, then we have nothing to worry about now do we? It lets all parties involved know that, "we are watching" so behave. If you don't like it, your welcome to pack up and go somewhere else.

I can't be alone in getting a serious Big Brother vibe from this right? I'm not arguing that illegal immigrants shouldn't be deported: I'm saying this whole "if you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't mind us watching you" way of thinking could just as easily start applying to US citizens if Trump decides something isn't acceptable. Like, oh I dunno, climate change or abortion.

...

In possibly the least-surprising bit of news, Mexico says it won't pay for the wall:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38753826

Wondering how the people who kept insisting Trump's wall plan wasn't meant to be taken literally are going to twist this.

 

[xyloscissor]

You really don't believe that elements of the far right and neo-nazis will not use any stats that can be used to even suggest a racial characteristic to crime in a way that will encourage hate?

You seriously want a citation that the KKK think non-whi

They already have the hate, no statistic on aliens will change that.

Sorry but that's simply not correct.

The legal definition in the US is (and I have already posted this so will quote myself):

"Now it simply states 'aliens', which are defined by US law as: ....any person not a citizen or national of the United States.
Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101"

So anyone who was not born in the US and has not become a citizen is an alien. If I were to travel to the US for work or a holiday I would be an alien.

How is it simply not correct, you just stated how it is correct, legal immigrants are citizens. That is why I made the point about people on visas etc. as they are not the target and not considered aliens. You can fear that to a point but until the word is used to widen the scope of the laws intent I will disagree.

Legal immigrants are u.s. citizens not aliens. They even take an oath, imagine that.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Trump's sanctuary city funding threat could cost NY $7Billion:
http://nypost.com/2017/01/26/trumps-sanctuary-city-funding-threat-could-cost-nyc-7b/

 

[Pako]

I can't be alone in getting a serious Big Brother vibe from this right? I'm not arguing that illegal immigrants shouldn't be deported: I'm saying this whole "if you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't mind us watching you" way of thinking could just as easily start applying to US citizens if Trump decides something isn't acceptable. Like, oh I dunno, climate change or abortion.

...

In possibly the least-surprising bit of news, Mexico says it won't pay for the wall:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38753826

Wondering how the people who kept insisting Trump's wall plan wasn't meant to be taken literally are going to twist this.

Just to note, our local paper has a "Round up" section that, on a daily basis, lists all the arrests including names and crimes they've committed. It provides public awareness as to what's going on.

 

[xyloscissor]

Trump's sanctuary city funding threat could cost NY $7Billion:
http://nypost.com/2017/01/26/trumps-sanctuary-city-funding-threat-could-cost-nyc-7b/

GOOD. Here is why for those who are still confused about aliens and so forth.

Policies differ from city to city, but New York allows undocumented immigrants to use social services without having to disclose their legal status and does not generally cooperate with federal immigration authorities in their deportation efforts.

The NYPD also doesn’t notify the feds about the release of undocumented immigrants who have been arrested and released from custody for minor crimes.

And here is a list of potential funding lost, which are all social programs. it's worth posting the whole thing so I won't quote it.

• There are currently more than 39,000 households who benefit from Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers, which are fully funded by the Federal government. If Federal funding ended, the City would either have to cover the $482 million line item, or tens of thousands of New Yorkers might be without a home at a time when the City is already facing a record homelessness crisis.

• The New York City Police Department receives 61 percent of its $380 million Intelligence and Counter-terrorism budget from the Federal government, providing equipment and training to continue to keep our City safe from terrorism.

• Public Assistance Grants through the Human Resource Administration serve more than 600,000 New Yorkers. Of the $1.5 billion in grants, 38 percent is covered by the Federal government.

• Child Protective Services, delivered by the Administration for Children’s Services, could see almost half of its $247 million budget slashed should Federal aid end tomorrow. That would put society’s most vulnerable children at even greater risk of abuse, neglect, and mistreatment.

• The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene’s HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment program – with a more than $194 million budget – is funded almost entirely by the Federal government. Eighty-six percent of patients enrolled in Ryan White-funded City programs receive an antiretroviral (ARV) prescription.

https://comptroller.nyc.gov/newsroo...s-initial-analysis-of-federal-funding-to-nyc/

 

[Scaff]

They already have the hate, no statistic on aliens will change that.

Of course new material they could use would be of no use to them at all would it?

How is it simply not correct, you just stated how it is correct, legal immigrants are citizens. That is why I made the point about people on visas etc. as they are not the target and not considered aliens. You can fear that to a point but until the word is used to widen the scope of the laws intent I will disagree.

They are considered aliens by legal definition of the word in the US (and that's what has to be used in this case given that it is a legal document), as such they very much are in the scope of this Exec Order as it makes no distinction.

It clearly states in the section on the report that its Alien, no mention of a more narrow distinction.

Legal immigrants are u.s. citizens not aliens. They even take an oath, imagine that.

I know, but anyone who was not born in the US or become a citizen is an alien.

The order cites section 1101 of title 8, United States Code for definitions and guess what that says? The exact same as the Cornell Law source I cited.

Here's the US government as a source in case you don't believe me:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/pagedetails.action?collectionCode=USCODE&searchPath=Title+8&granuleId=USCODE-2011-title8-chap12-subchapI-sec1101&packageId=USCODE-2011-title8&oldPath=Title+8/Chapter+12/Subchapter+I/Sec.+1101&fromPageDetails=true&collapse=false&ycord=2800

As such yes it does cover those who have legally entered the US. The only exemptions are those who were born in the US and those who have obtained citizenship.

The Exec Order is quite clear on this, of course you can disprove what I am saying by citing exactly where in the Exec Order it states it only applies to Illegal Aliens.


On a related note, Trump says he may cancel talks with Mexico if they don't agree to pay for the wall.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38761384

Which I can't help but have a mental picture of Eric Cartman in response to.

 

[xyloscissor]

@Scaff

Think that all you want, the two orders are in direct response to illegal immigrants not college students or workers on visas, and surely not tourists lol. I guess you will just have to see when the reports start coming out.

 

[Scaff]

@Scaff

Think that all you want, the two orders are in direct response to illegal immigrants not college students or workers on visas, and surely not tourists lol. I guess you will just have to see when the reports start coming out.

Its got nothing to do with what I think. That is how the Exec Order is written. Have you actually read it?



Update on Trump saying he may not meet with Mexico unless they agree to pay for the wall is Mexico calling his bluff:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38760671

Visit cancelled by Mexico. I predict a twitter storm.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Just to note, our local paper has a "Round up" section that, on a daily basis, lists all the arrests including names and crimes they've committed. It provides public awareness as to what's going on.

Nothing promotes compassion and trust within a community like a public name-and-shame every day.*

* - To be clear, I most certainly believe the public should be made aware of certain arrests and crimes committed. But I don't really believe its necessary for every single one.

 

[Blitz24]

Just to note, our local paper has a "Round up" section that, on a daily basis, lists all the arrests including names and crimes they've committed. It provides public awareness as to what's going on.

The problem is that it doesn't work for a large city. If the New York Times did that they would be wasting paper and people would be behooved to sue for defamation (sue first, ask questions later).