Someone pls explain why Democrats don't want ICE contacted if illegal aliens attempt to buy guns

[Foxi4]

No. Sorry. This won't work. I didn't read the second part of your reply because you're completely misreading what I said, drawing a wrong conclusion from it and then assuming that's what I meant. So I'm truly sorry if I explained it in a way that confused you (and perhaps others), but it's not what I said.

I'm saying that ICE has other problems to solve right now. I'm very willing to discuss the usefulness on whether or not ICE should or shouldn't be involved in illegal immigrants attempting to buy firearms, but NOT RIGHT NOW.

It's a simple matter of priorities. Making sure that corruption is within accessible limits trumps adding extra tasks. Just like "evacuating the building when it's on fire" trumps any task you and me might have while working anywhere indoors.

Does this convey my intended message better?

ICE does not have other problems to worry about. The agency was established exclusively to deal with immigration and customs, deporting immigrants is literally their job. You don't have to be sorry, I'm merely explaining to you the consequences of what you're saying. I don't care if they're understaffed and underfunded, they're supposed to step in when an illegal immigrant is apprehended, for *whatever reason*, that's the sole reason for their existence.

 

[SG854]

Relevant

They are now going to be notified.

The 26 Democrats Who Voted To Pass ICE Amendment In New Gun Bill

 

[Foxi4]

Relevant

They are now going to be notified.

The 26 Democrats Who Voted To Pass ICE Amendment In New Gun Bill

Good. There's no reason why law enforcement shouldn't work together, it makes perfect sense and I don't understand why it's in any way controversial.

 

[SG854]

Good. There's no reason why law enforcement shouldn't work together, it makes perfect sense and I don't understand why it's in any way controversial.

I don’t get it either why it’s up for debate. It’s common sense.

I don’t get the Democratic Party. They hate ICE, but the were largely responsible for the creation of ICE. They were against illegal immigration, now they are for it.

They support for ending ICE but when given the opportunity they voted no on ending ICE. Make up your damn mind.

 

[Foxi4]

I don’t get it either why it’s up for debate. It’s common sense.

I don’t get the Democratic Party. They hate ICE, but the were largely responsible for the creation of ICE. They were against illegal immigration, now they are for it.

They support for ending ICE but when given the opportunity they voted no on ending ICE. Make up your damn mind.

It's all optics, nobody in their right mind would just get rid of their own border, that's asinine. ICE is a necessary evil required to enforce immigration law, the Democrats know this, they're just posturing for naive voters who don't follow the actual activities in Congress.

 

[SG854]

It's all optics, nobody in their right mind would just get rid of their own border, that's asinine. ICE is a necessary evil required to enforce immigration law, the Democrats know this, they're just posturing for naive voters who don't follow the actual activities in Congress.

That’s exactly what they are doing. They are just fishing for votes.

Being against Illegal immigration is a non issue in the majority of countries but they turned a non issue into an issue just so they can paint themselves as the good guy and get people to vote for their side. It’s manipulation. And it’s clearly obvious.

 

[Xzi]

"Some law enforcement officers are bad apples, plus they're busy, so let's just not call them" - solid logic.

I've seen the cops make situations worse several times, and I'm white. I'd definitely never call them if I was any darker.

ICE is a necessary evil required to enforce immigration law, the Democrats know this, they're just posturing for naive voters who don't follow the actual activities in Congress.

ICE was only just established in 2003. Funny how easy it was to live without that "necessity" for over a century. If they're going to keep operating, then there are going to have to be a lot of reforms and a lot more oversight going forward. And if they won't accept that, then it's time to abolish the agency. Leaving open a revolving door for pedos is not okay, no matter what your opinion on the immigration debate.

 

[Foxi4]

I've seen the cops make situations worse several times, and I'm white. I'd definitely never call them if I was any darker.

It's that kind of ridiculous caricaturisation of law enforcement that allows crime to fester, particularly in ethnic or low-income neighbourhoods.

ICE was only just established in 2003. Funny how easy it was to live without that "necessity" for over a century.

You're being disingenuous. Before ICE, immigration was handled by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, directly under the auspices of the DOJ. Pretending that the issue wasn't handled before is just silly, the government simply established that it is more sensible to let the executive handle obvious law enforcement matters as opposed to leaving it to the judiciary. There has always been a need for immigration law enforcement.

EDIT: I made a small boo-boo here - the phrasing implies that the DOJ is part of the judiciary branch when it is a part of the executive - this was unintentional, and although it didn't cause confusion, I felt the need to correct it for future readers.

 

[Steena]

I've seen the cops make situations worse several times, and I'm white. I'd definitely never call them if I was any darker.

dumbest statement i've heard in 9 years of gbatemp
probably why i should not click on the politics tab of a softmod console portal, i am the one to blame, but, jesus christ, get a grip.

 

[Xzi]

It's that kind of ridiculous caricaturisation of law enforcement that allows crime to fester, particularly in ethnic or low-income neighbourhoods.

They have to improve their own reputation in low-income neighborhoods, and they can start by addressing all the unarmed people they shoot in those neighborhoods on a yearly basis. Why would you call the cops on an innocuous drug deal when the odds are that they're gonna turn it violent when they show up?

You're being disingenuous. Before ICE, immigration was handled by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, directly under the hospices of the DOJ. Pretending that the issue wasn't handled before is just silly, the government simply established that it is more sensible to let the executive handle obvious law enforcement matters as opposed to leaving it to the judiciary. There has always been a need for immigration law enforcement.

The question is: did the previous agency also have zero oversight and allow the same amount of criminality in their ranks? If not, then we should abolish ICE and go back to the previous system. If it was just as bad, we need a whole new set of rules and laws governing ICE.

dumbest statement i've heard in 9 years of gbatemp

I'm glad you find my personal experiences to be dumb. Not sure what I'm supposed to with that info, however, as I can't go back in time and change them. C'est la vie.

 

[Foxi4]

They have to improve their own reputation in low-income neighborhoods, and they can start by addressing all the unarmed people they shoot in those neighborhoods on a yearly basis. Why would you call the cops on an innocuous drug deal when the odds are that they're gonna turn it violent when they show up?


The question is: did the previous agency also have zero oversight and allow the same amount of criminality in their ranks? If not, then we should abolish ICE and go back to the previous system. If it was just as bad, we need a whole new set of rules and laws governing ICE.


I'm glad you find my personal experiences to be dumb. Not sure what I'm supposed to with that info, however, as I can't go back in time and change them. C'est la vie.

His point is that you're projecting your personal experience on the rest of law enforcement, it's the definition of a subjective point of view. If you replace "the police" with any other group, you would rightfully call it an -ism of some kind. Surely you can see this inconsistency in your worldview.

 

[Xzi]

His point is that you're projecting your personal experience on the rest of law enforcement, it's the definition of a subjective point of view. If you replace "the police" with any other group, you would rightfully call it an -ism of some kind. Surely you can see this inconsistency in your worldview.

I'm not sure what this is even supposed to mean. Police are a race now? And yeah, it's my opinion, that's why I'm the one stating it. Not suggesting anybody else has to share my opinion, but it's not exactly a secret that people in low-income neighborhoods try to avoid getting police involved whenever possible. They have their own reasons for that, far be it for anyone outside that situation to say it's wrong.

 

[SG854]

I've seen the cops make situations worse several times, and I'm white. I'd definitely never call them if I was any darker.


ICE was only just established in 2003. Funny how easy it was to live without that "necessity" for over a century. If they're going to keep operating, then there are going to have to be a lot of reforms and a lot more oversight going forward. And if they won't accept that, then it's time to abolish the agency. Leaving open a revolving door for pedos is not okay, no matter what your opinion on the immigration debate.

I’m darker then you and I never had problems with law enforcement whenever I got pulled over. They were always nice. You would have to be paranoid of cops if you think they are after black and brown people.

 

[Xzi]

You would have to be paranoid of cops if you think they are after black and brown people.

Really? You don't think the statistics for unarmed civilians shot by police annually might have something to say contrary to that?

Remember the case where the black security guard stopped a shooting, then when the cops showed up they shot and killed the security guard? It happened not that long ago:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/us/police-officer-shoots-security-guard-chicago.html

It's that type of thing that really shakes the foundation of trust in police nationwide, not only in low-income neighborhoods.

 

[Foxi4]

I'm not sure what this is even supposed to mean. Police are a race now? And yeah, it's my opinion, that's why I'm the one stating it. Not suggesting anybody else has to share my opinion, but it's not exactly a secret that people in low-income neighborhoods try to avoid getting police involved whenever possible. They have their own reasons for that, far be it for anyone outside that situation to say it's wrong.

If I apply your logic I can just as easily say that if I had one bad experience with an illegal immigrant, all illegal immigrants mustn't be trusted. "Immigrant" is not a race, they come from all over the world, right? Bowl-of-Skittles thinking through and through. As for people in low income neighbourhoods "having their own reasons" not to call the police, I absolutely can and do criticise that. You can't keep complaing that your neighbourhood is crime-ridden and the police "isn't doing anything" while simultaneously refusing to report crimes that you've witnessed with your own eyes, or even been a victim of. What are *you* doing to clean up your neighbourhood? Because if it's "nothing", you're part of the problem. You've waived your right to complain when you chose not to act.

 

[SG854]

Really? You don't think the statistics for unarmed civilians shot by police annually might have something to say contrary to that?

Remember the case where the black security guard stopped a shooting, then when the cops showed up they shot and killed the security guard? It happened not that long ago:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/us/police-officer-shoots-security-guard-chicago.html

It's that type of thing that really shakes the foundation of trust in police nationwide, not only in low-income neighborhoods.

I could bring up a whole bunch of statistics on how it’s just not true and why people are misinterpreting those statistics. There are books on this subject by Heather Mac Donald that shows why cops are not out to get darker people.

 

[Foxi4]

I could bring up a whole bunch of statistics on how it’s just not true and why people are misinterpreting those statistics. There are books on this subject by Heather Mac Donald that shows why cops are not out to get darker people.

There's actually a confirmed reverse bias in terms of police interventions. Police officers are much more likely to use lethal force when dealing with white suspects because nobody is going to kick up a fuss on a national scale when a white drug dealer gets shot. Black people on the other hand are more likely to face violence of the "stop resisting" variety because police departments are afraid of being branded racist. There's recently been a study on this subject which confirms as much.

 

[SG854]

There's actually a confirmed reverse bias in terms of police interventions. Police officers are much more likely to use lethal force when dealing with white suspects because nobody is going to kick up a fuss on a national scale when a white drug dealer gets shot. Black people on the other hand are more likely to face violence of the "stop resisting" variety because police departments are afraid of being branded racist. There's recently been a study on this subject which confirms as much.

There are debates where Heather Mac Donald’s made those exact points you made.

The problem is people take a few cases and use it as if it’s representative of the entire police force.

We are already seeing the negative consequences of cops being afraid of doing their job because of being accused of being racist. The Ferguson Effect.

 

[Xzi]

If I apply your logic I can just as easily say that if I had one bad experience with an illegal immigrant, all illegal immigrants mustn't be trusted. "Immigrant" is not a race, they come from all over the world, right? Bowl-of-Skittles thinking through and through.

"Immigrant" is not a unified, institutionalized group getting paid to do a specific job. I'm not going to entertain this fallacy that words can mean whatever we want them to. Being wary of police doesn't make you racist or xenophobic, especially when you've had experiences that made you wary in the first place.

As for people in low income neighbourhoods "having their own reasons" not to call the police, I absolutely can and do criticise that. You can't keep complaing that your neighbourhood is crime-ridden and the police "isn't doing anything" while simultaneously refusing to report crimes that you've witnessed with your own eyes, or even been a victim of.

The police are the ones who ruined their own reputation in these neighborhoods. So if they want to fix it, they have to be the ones to actively repair their reputation bit by bit. They can't just say, "don't worry we won't shoot you when you call us from now on," and have that be the end of it. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[SG854]

"Immigrant" is not a unified, institutionalized group getting paid to do a specific job. I'm not going to entertain this fallacy that words can mean whatever we want them to. Being wary of police doesn't make you racist or xenophobic, especially when you've had experiences that made you wary in the first place.


The police are the ones who ruined their own reputation in these neighborhoods. So if they want to fix it, they have to be the ones to actively repair their reputation bit by bit. They can't just say, "don't worry we won't shoot you when you call us from now on," and have that be the end of it. Actions speak louder than words.

If you pay attention to what the people in these neighborhoods are saying, and not how news depicts them, they are begging cops to come in and help them.

But cops are afraid of coming in because they don’t want to be branded racist and make national news. They actually have huge respect for cops for keeping them safe.

Some have to sleep in bathtubs so they won’t be hit by stray bullets from gang violence at night. This is how bad it is.