WingNews logo WingNews
top | item 45879585

(no title)

focusgroup0 | 3 months ago

[flagged]

discuss

order

gwbas1c|3 months ago

I can think of many uses for "surveillance state technology" that have nothing to do with immigration: It can be used against citizens and legal residents too.

willk|3 months ago

I don’t buy that for a second. Governments always want more control, and this is just another way for them to get it.

ls612|3 months ago

But the sorts of ICE actions that are causing this controversy only have political support because the US immigration laws have been flouted for 30+ years. Regardless of what you or I think of it it’s the reality that lots of the electorate wants deportations and lots of them and that likely isn’t true in a world where the laws on the books were more strictly enforced in the past.

throitallaway|3 months ago

They'd find a need (or excuse) for it regardless of the state of our immigration system.

notepad0x90|3 months ago

on the books immigration law has been broken for decades. do you expect people across the border wait a decade to get their turn for an immigration interview only to be turned down, when they can just cross the border?

When laws become impractical, they create 11 million law breakers.

fngjdflmdflg|3 months ago

Hundreds of thousands to millions of people have come to the US legally each year for the last thirty years.[0] How is that impractical? In fact the share of immigrants in the US has increased significantly (by 3 times) in the last 50 years, and is above the level of the EU, and is at the highest level in the last 100 years in the US.[1][2] Even if legal immigration was set to zero, that shouldn't give people the right to come here illegally.

To be clear I am not making an argument that mass surveillance is needed to solve any problem.

[0] https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/green-card-holders-a...

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2024... via https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/09/27/u-s-immig...

[2] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SM.POP.TOTL.ZS?most_rec...

US vs EU vs OECD: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SM.POP.TOTL.ZS?most_rec... - I'm pretty sure the values here include illegal immigration as well, so if you factor that in the US may be lower than the EU, but again still at historically very high levels.

zahlman|3 months ago

> do you expect people across the border wait a decade to get their turn for an immigration interview only to be turned down

The backlog isn't a consequence of the law.

Is there a country that doesn't expect people to go through some kind of qualification process in order to immigrate legally? Here's what it looks like in Canada (where I live), for example: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se... It's actually quite complex, and depends on additional provincial legislation. And then there's citizenship on top of that: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se...

> when they can just cross the border?

The entire point is that they legally in fact may not do so, and have only been doing so because of the lack of enforcement GP cites.

> When laws become impractical, they create 11 million law breakers.

We don't have nearly the same scale of problem in Canada. That probably has much more to do with only sharing an unsecured land border with a rich country.

seneca|3 months ago

> on the books immigration law has been broken for decades. do you expect people across the border wait a decade to get their turn for an immigration interview only to be turned down, when they can just cross the border?

No, I don't expect that at all. However the problem with your scenario isn't that they need to wait their turn, it's that they can "just cross the border". That fact that that has been allowed was an intentional policy decision.

ahmeneeroe-v2|3 months ago

>when they can just cross the border

This is also a choice for the people in charge of the border. Enforcing a border is a solved problem for a rich, large-population nation.

Izikiel43|3 months ago

> do you expect people across the border wait a decade to get their turn for an immigration interview only to be turned down, when they can just cross the border?

Well yes, that's what following the law means. They can't complain about it, it's not their country, and they don't have a say on the rules.

In a similar vein by your logic, if you are in a hurry, why should you obey traffic laws when you can just run a red light or a stop sign right?

nailer|3 months ago

How? As a migrant to the US I have generally found the rules quite reasonable, the UX of the websites is poorer than say the UK but the rules seem fine.

rat87|3 months ago

[deleted]

add-sub-mul-div|3 months ago

[deleted]

genericone|3 months ago

Excessive speeders in the absence of speed-limit enforcement just creates neighbors that don't mind their neighborhood being consumed by speed bumps/dips, I think there's an analogy here in residential areas. And if you have a lot of children in your neighborhood, there IS a 'xx-phobia' for speeders. But speed bumps and dips are an absolute nuisance and sometimes dangerous, so just having cameras identify and a system willing to punish speeders would absolutely be the preference.