Who on the board disagrees with Trump's plan to deport all criminal (felony) illegal aliens?
- Thread starter WVPATX
- Start date
Is there a point?
President Obama directed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to focus on criminals, not families, during his November 2014 executive action on immigration.
According to their website, "ICE has continued to increase its focus on identifying, arresting, and removing convicted criminals in prisons and jails, and also at-large arrests in the interior."
In fiscal year 2015, 91 percent of people removed from inside the U.S. were previously convicted of a crime.
The administration made the first priority "threats to national security, border security, and public safety." That includes gang members, convicted felons or charged with "aggravated felony" and anyone apprehended at the border trying to enter the country illegally.
In 2015, 81 percent, or 113,385, of the removals were the priority one removals.
Priority two includes "misdemeanants and new immigration violators."
That includes "aliens convicted of three or more misdemeanor offenses, other than minor traffic" violations, as well as those convicted of domestic violence, sexual abuse, burglary, DUIs or drug trafficking.
President Obama directed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to focus on criminals, not families, during his November 2014 executive action on immigration.
According to their website, "ICE has continued to increase its focus on identifying, arresting, and removing convicted criminals in prisons and jails, and also at-large arrests in the interior."
In fiscal year 2015, 91 percent of people removed from inside the U.S. were previously convicted of a crime.
The administration made the first priority "threats to national security, border security, and public safety." That includes gang members, convicted felons or charged with "aggravated felony" and anyone apprehended at the border trying to enter the country illegally.
In 2015, 81 percent, or 113,385, of the removals were the priority one removals.
Priority two includes "misdemeanants and new immigration violators."
That includes "aliens convicted of three or more misdemeanor offenses, other than minor traffic" violations, as well as those convicted of domestic violence, sexual abuse, burglary, DUIs or drug trafficking.
It's all about priorities and enforcement and yes "terms" used to beef up deportation numbers. The deportation numbers are slanted.
From Politifact:
"To me, the thing that really stands out with the lower number of returns is fewer number of people are getting apprehended at the border in the first place," said Matt Graham, a Bipartisan Policy Center immigration analyst. "(Obama) has fewer opportunities to return people."
Removals are highest on an annual basis under Obama, says Theresa Brown, Bipartisan Policy Center director of immigration policy. But if you factor in returns, Bush indeed outpaces Obama.
"If you want to say that he’s removed more people than any other administration, then that’s true," Brown said. "If you want to say he hasn’t actually expelled more people than any other president, that might also be true."
People should be more precise so we know exactly what they mean by "deportation," Brown said. "It’s the difference between getting off with a warning and going to court."
Trump has committed to deporting 3,000,000 felony aliens. This will do little good without a secure border that does as much as possible to ensure they can't cross again. Kate Steinle's killer was deported 6 times and still found his way to safe harbor in San Francisco. Defunding sanctuary cities is also a must. These cities must follow federal law and not shield criminal aliens from the Feds and deportation. It's also about the numbers of enforcement officers dedicated to this function.
But I take it you are in favor of permanent removing illegal aliens who commit felonies?
Depends on total costs. I'm also all for fining the f**k out of companies/individuals that hire illegals. Let those fines help pay for the costs
I'm with you. I support e-verify. But frankly, the cost of not getting rid of the criminal alien (felons) is extremely high. The cost of incarceration. The cost of crime. The cost of trials and our jury system. The cost in lost lives. The cost of addicts. Simply enormous costs.
My approach:
1. Seal the border (we will never get 100%, but get to at least 90%)
2. Deport criminal aliens as fast as possible
3. Offer Green Cards to those that remain if they apply and receive approval within one year:
a. They pay a fine
b. They have no felony record
c. They speak English
d. No pathway to citizenship
e. Have proof they have been in the U.S. for 3 years
f. They have a job
g. They are not using our social services systems
4. Any illegal caught in the country after this period expires, is automatically deported.
5. Defund sanctuary cities/states/counties
My plan, I guess, is amnesty but with conditions. I think very reasonable conditions.
I think most reasonable conservatives agree that we can't deport 11M people. The best we can do is secure the border, kick out the bad people, register the remainder and begin to collect taxes. After this grace period, deport anyone caught in the country illegally.
Daunting task but I think everyone, not just conservatives, would want that. I don't think there is any room at the Inn for someone who repeatedly steals the towels, so to speak.
I support that. However, my landscaper and house cleaner are I'm pretty sure illegal. He is from Mexico and I know she is from Peru.
It's interesting. My grounds keeper is from El Salvador. He's legal. He started his own business and just HATES Mexican illegals. He thinks they are destroying his ability to be successful with their absurdly low prices. And hate for him is not too strong a word.
Meh. Get them some real-enough looking papers and you'd be fine. Just plead ignorance.
I think we would agree on everything but #1. And I agree with #1, just bet we would differ on how to accomplish #1.
And #5 is silly imo. We're not going to cut funding to NYC, so stop even posturing.
I believe you will see sessions, trump and Congress do everything they possibly can to defund sanctuary cities. They could actually make it part of reconciliation so that it only requires 51 votes in the Senate.. Whether it will work or not, I have no idea. Perhaps New York City and San Francisco don't need the money. I read an article just a few days ago that said some cities are already caving.
I live in Texas, and the state is cutting off funds to the city of Austin. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
The federal gov't has too many assets in NYC to strip them of their money. I'm sure other big cities are the same. Why not focus on things most Americans agree with and work from there? How hard is that?
It's not a complete stripping of Fed money if I recall correctly. I might be wrong.
Personally, I think they should get in line and enforce policy. I would support bringing them to heel.
I'm not sure where you get your news, but Americans are overwhelmingly in favor of getting rid of sanctuary cities. And the money that is being taken away from them deals with law-enforcement. If They have the revenue to make up that lost federal funding, good for them.
I believe the only money that can be legally withheld deals with law enforcement issues.
Actually, I think it probably is a good idea. Local police departments need funded. Citizens hate crime. If federal dollars are taken away, the cities would be stupid not to fully fund their police departments. Imagine the outcry from the citizens if they learn that sanctuary cities are kept in place while crime goes up because their police forces are underfunded.
U
They ALL committed misdemeanor charges when they crawled in..that's one strike with just that..
I know, right? Talk about playing with dynamite. JFC. Something tells me though, we're gonna get to watch it play out with Trump in the chair. Luckily, I live in Baltimore. It's already like Fallujah here.