Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The mundane activity of voting on rules to outline a formal legal process isn't what I'm talking about.

What I'm rejecting is the idea in the parent comment that democracies can vote directly on expelling entire classes of people. There's a long history of such political expulsions and none of them are periods to look back on fondly. The expulsion of Germans from the Sudetenland killed tens of thousands, and the expulsions of native americans speak for themselves, as does the legacy of operation wetback.

And for what it's worth, I've had the distinct pleasure of being interrogated by the Mexican military at gunpoint while hiking because they thought I was a coyote. I've also been held in the small rooms on the US side. I'm extremely familiar with both sides of that particular border.





It's very clear there is a large contingent of people who are here illegally. That isn't exclusively Central/South Americans, but they make up a very large portion.

You can't say "Well enforcing the rules doesn't impact everyone equally so you can't enforce them!"

If you entered illegally, you need to be sent home. End of logic. Any other variation allows the system to be gamed trivially.

Most of the people who have entered illegally did so because they are prohibited - due to criminal record - for entering legally. They also harm the legal immigrants in their community too.

You can not allow asylum cases and also permit the criminals who created those conditions those legal immigrants fled. You are damning everyone when you do.


> Most of the people who have entered illegally did so because they are prohibited - due to criminal record - for entering legally.

That is almost certainly false, especially given the number of people and the more likely alternative hypothesis - they enter illegally because the US limits legal immigration. Can you provide evidence?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: