Hello Mike,

>>Well over 90% of "those folks" trying to cross the border are
>>fine people.  Most of them coming here wanting to apply for asylum,
>>as the places they are from too dangerous for them to live.
>
>Odd.  I have a relative that frequently travels to one of those allegedly
>"too dangerous" places.  As a part of her job, she uses her law degree to
>go down and coach folks into what they should say and do when they are
>trying to get in.
>
>Thing is, while she is really dedicated to her job (and her politics) there
>is no way on Earth she is going somewhere that is truly "too dangerous" to
>live in.

Do the claims match the reality?  If the claims have no merit,
or no basis in fact, then why should their claim be approved?
The burden of proof is on those making the claim.  Why should
the judge believe them?

>>Yes, a small percentage (significantly less than 10%) are criminals,
>>or people with a criminal record.  And even fewer are child smugglers
>>and/or drug smugglers.  These people should not be allowed to enter,
>>except to be locked up in prison for their crimes (then deported to
>>wherever the hell they came from).
>
>If you throw the borders wide open, like several on the left want us to,
>you are going to get those 10% all mixed in, along with others who are not
>even from Central/South America but who figure out a good way to sneak in.

That is Bill Gates' solution.  Let 'em all in.  Those with skills
will find jobs.  Those with no skills will return to wherever they
came from.  No need for borders of any kind.  The problem resolves
itself.

>>Children are not criminals, although some may be victims.  Protecting
>   [...snip...]
>>What should be done with those criminals?  Lock 'em up!
>>Lock 'em all up!  And then throw away the key!
>
>That is where Gitmo would come in handy.  Lock them up somewhere off shore
>and not someplace that is more "cushy" than the jail cells back home,
>wherever that is.

Gitmo is too expansive.  Gotta pay soldiers to maintain the place.
Better to close it down so our soldiers can be sent elsewhere.

But hey.  Hawai'i has a bunch of deserted islands.  And so does
Alaska.  We could send the criminals to their own tropical paradise,
or their own ice palace.  All at the expense of US taxpayers.

>>But no.  That is not what happens.  We lock 'em up for a few
>>years, at our expense, then deport them to wherever they came from.
>>One or two months later, they sneak back in.  With more children
>>in tow.
>
>We agree here also.  I cannot fathom why we deport murderers and attempted
>murderers to places we know won't lock them up when they get there.  Gitmo!

Aleutian islands!

>> >Or are you trying to tell us that the lives of these border kids is not
>> > worth as much as US kids?
>> The criminals who attempt to smuggle children across the border
>> do not care a whit about the lives of those children.  What they
>> want is to be handsomely paid for their services.  And not get
>> caught in the process.
>
>I am not talking criminals, at least the same type you are, when I say the
>kids are being endangered.  In this case, it is the actual parents, not
>kidnappers, smugglers, etc., which are endangering them.  And, like US
>parents who endanger their own kids, they should expect to be separated from
>the kids.

Ah.  Child endangerment.  Not the same as kidnapping.  But is such
child endangerment a necessity?  If they are coming from a place too
dangerous to live, then remaining in that place was not an option.
Better to take their chances on a long trek through rough terrain so
that all, or at least some, might live.

What would I do in that situation?  Whatever I had to, regardless
of the danger.  That is what I like to think I'd do.

If I managed to get my kids to a safer place, even if it meant
spending years inside a jail cell for doing so, it would still be
worth it.  That is how I think most adults with their children
felt.

Would you steal food in order to feed your own children so they
would not starve?  Of course.  Doing nothing would be condemning
them to starvation.

So which is the bigger crime?  Saving your children, or keeping
the law?

An unjust law is no law at all.

Thou Shalt Not Steal.  Except when necessary.

>>How do countries in Europe handle this?  Do those countries
>>separate adults from children?  For example, many refugees from
>>Syria have sought to find a new home in Germany, Sweden, etc.
>>
>>Here's the short answer: Yes.
>
>So those countries do also separate them?  Interesting.  Someone needs to
>tell Hollywood that.

Hollywood?  Who will play the part?  The only Russian actor
I know is Steven Seagal.  And he's off on assignment, having
been appointed to a position by President Putin.

--Lee

-- 
Erections, That's Our Game

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb