—> ICE / Immigration / Nation grapples with ICE killings

[superrific]

We have laws that address immigration. They aren't being followed. States that don't follow them aren't autonomous and don't have the right to dismiss them. An entire election has been largely conducted in part on immigration philosophy. I think I do have a good hold on the wheat vs chaff.

Seriously, dude, you don't have a good hold on anything. What you wrote about immigration laws -- pretty much everything you've ever written on the subject -- is flat wrong. Nobody is dismissing immigration laws. That's not how our system works. Why don't you read a few things that are actually informative, instead of listening to talking heads who lie to you.

 

[WaynetheDrain]

Hell yeah. Slap a rainbow background and a handful of pronouns on that bad boy and let's fucking ride!

Don't Tread on They/Them.

 

[ZenMode]

I would much rather a country where people are overzealous in peacefully "intervening" in police actions they believe are unjust than one where the population is oppressed by unjust police actions and no one does anything about it.

You would? So, in the drug/gang riddled inner cities, you want citizens "peacefully" intervening when they "feel" cops are in the wrong?

 

[ZenMode]

No. Absolutely nobody is saying that. You're not even remotely close to capturing anything anyone said.

Ok. What did I get wrong? From what I've read, multiple posters are condoning legalizing citizen intervention based on their subjective view of what is happening....and the Justice system will just sort it out afterward.

 

[1moretimeagain]

He should be checked for internal bleeding after that one.

 

[4thgenheel]

yeah, no.

what he said is 100000% correct.

 

[Zoo_View]

From what I can find there are estimated to be around 5,000 undocumented immigrants in Maine. Why are they going there?

Relatively large Somali populations in Lewiston-Auburn and Portland.

 

[IH8dook]

I bet Miller’s own mother wish she had an abortion

Anyone taking bets on whether or not Trump gives Bovino some made up award in an elaborate ceremony filled with show of power. ..

 

[altmin]

ICE wants to buy Pattison building to use for ‘holding and processing’

The United States Department of Homeland Security says it wants to buy a building owned by the property arm of Vancouver-based conglomerate Jim Pattison Group to use as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement “processing facility.”

www.ctvnews.ca

The United States Department of Homeland Security is planning to buy a building owned by the property arm of Vancouver-based conglomerate Jim Pattison Group to use as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement “processing facility.”

The department sent a letter to the Hanover County planning department in Hanover, Va., last Wednesday, sharing its intent to “purchase, occupy and rehabilitate” the warehouse property.

Property records show Jim Pattison Developments bought the building for roughly C$10.4 million in 2022 and the site is expected to be valued at around C$69 million this year, following improvements.

The Jim Pattison Group and Jim Pattison Developments did not immediately return requests for comment.

An archived web page from the latter shows the company advertised the 43.5-acre site with a 550,000-square-foot industrial warehouse facility for lease in 2024.

In its letter, the U.S. department said it intended to make modifications to the property that include construction, equipment and security upgrades.

“The interior of the structure may be renovated or rebuilt to support ICE operational requirements, which may include but are not limited to construction of holding and processing spaces, office space, public-facing visitor spaces, and installation of amenities, such as cafeterias, bathrooms, and health-care spaces,” it said.

Other additions could include “tentage and a guard shack,” the letter said.

 

[altmin]

Man acquitted of Bovino murder plot taken into ICE custody

Juan Espinoza Martinez now faces deportation despite the courtroom victory Thursday by his attorneys.

www.wbez.org

 

[thebruinbleedstarheelblue]

You would? So, in the drug/gang riddled inner cities, you want citizens "peacefully" intervening when they "feel" cops are in the wrong?

What do drugs or gangs have to do with this? when have we ever had protests to stop the policing of gang violence?

 

[ZenMode]

What do drugs or gangs have to do with this? when have we ever had protests to stop the policing of gang violence?

I stand by my question.

 

[thebruinbleedstarheelblue]

I stand by my question.

Its an irrelevant tangent. But yes, they should be able to do that without getting shot in the face.

if you see a police officer kicking five year old girls in the face, one by one down a row...like hard in the have and coming back a stomping them again.

Do you not say anything?

 

[Callatoroy]

Why do we need to round up non criminal, non violent illegal immigrants? I get that we need a secure border. I agree. I don’t get we need to have a special force dedicated to rounding up non violent immigrants that are not doing harm.

Because they are here illegally. It’s ok that they are here illegally but not people at the border who aren’t legal? How do you deport them and not the guy in Minnesota that is here illegally. Who gets to pick and choose? Again, what it boils down to is the left (in general) doesn’t want to deport anyone who isn’t a violent criminal.

 

[ZenMode]

if you see a police officer kicking five year old girls in the face

When you are making up things that never happen to use as your example, you clearly aren't taking the question seriously.

 

[superrific]

Ok. What did I get wrong? From what I've read, multiple posters are condoning legalizing citizen intervention based on their subjective view of what is happening....and the Justice system will just sort it out afterward.

1. You said it was legally allowed. It is not. Nobody says that it is.

2. The justice system sorting it out afterward is exactly why we have a justice system. Like, literally, that's what it is for. And it's the law about everything.

Someone steals your car? You can't shoot them, nor can the cops. You let the Justice system sort it out. Someone embezzles money? Justice system sorts it out.

3. If you shoot the officer raping or beating someone, it likely will not go well for you unless the police officer is inflicting death or serious bodily injury. It's no different than the law as applied to any citizens. If the officer is inflicting death, then it's not a problem, is it.

4. Once again, you would be helped so much by even a basic understanding of law. You have AI at your disposal. Use it before bringing stupidity here.

 

[ZenMode]

1. You said it was legally allowed. It is not. Nobody says that it is.

2. The justice system sorting it out afterward is exactly why we have a justice system. Like, literally, that's what it is for. And it's the law about everything.

Someone steals your car? You can't shoot them, nor can the cops. You let the Justice system sort it out. Someone embezzles money? Justice system sorts it out.

3. If you shoot the officer raping or beating someone, it likely will not go well for you unless the police officer is inflicting death or serious bodily injury. It's no different than the law as applied to any citizens. If the officer is inflicting death, then it's not a problem, is it.

4. Once again, you would be helped so much by even a basic understanding of law. You have AI at your disposal. Use it before bringing stupidity here.

Ok, so you want things to be exactly as they are now. Got it.

We agree.

 

[finesse]

1. You said it was legally allowed. It is not. Nobody says that it is.

2. The justice system sorting it out afterward is exactly why we have a justice system. Like, literally, that's what it is for. And it's the law about everything.

Someone steals your car? You can't shoot them, nor can the cops. You let the Justice system sort it out. Someone embezzles money? Justice system sorts it out.

3. If you shoot the officer raping or beating someone, it likely will not go well for you unless the police officer is inflicting death or serious bodily injury. It's no different than the law as applied to any citizens. If the officer is inflicting death, then it's not a problem, is it.

4. Once again, you would be helped so much by even a basic understanding of law. You have AI at your disposal. Use it before bringing stupidity here.

I thought you were supposed to lead with your strengths.

 

[thebruinbleedstarheelblue]

When you are making up things that never happen to use as your example, you clearly aren't taking the question seriously.

that's how stupid your question was.

You could actually just talk about the current situation instead of trying to make up these scenarios.

You are making excuses for shooting people in the face for physically blocking police. All of your Wild scenarios do not justify this and you are looking for some example to come up with the absolute answer.

Well your answer is to always obey police and to not intervene in police activity... so I gave you an absolute scenario.

 

[Callatoroy]

I would much rather a country where people are overzealous in peacefully "intervening" in police actions they believe are unjust than one where the population is oppressed by unjust police actions and no one does anything about it.

Define peaceful. If you support intervening then you have to be at peace if a few get hurt. There is no reason to intervene. You can protest and record without intervening. As Homen said, there would be much less risk if ice could just pick up illegals at the jail when there. What logical reason would there be for why local pad’s wouldn’t cooperate with that?