| ▲ | dkalola 6 days ago |
| "Systems marketed for "solving crimes" get used for immigration enforcement" What immigration enforcement are you speaking of here? Legal? Illegal? If the latter, wouldn't this system be solving crime? |
|
| ▲ | 15155 6 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes, but these are laws that "I don't agree with," therefore they can be ignored. Who will pick our crops!? |
| |
| ▲ | zer0x4d 5 days ago | parent [-] | | People love nothing more than selective application of law. In fact, to most people laws don't apple if: 1. they can get away with it, or
2. they don't agree with it. |
|
|
| ▲ | tkzed49 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I can only conclude that people in this thread are being intentionally obtuse. This isn't a question of ideals; it's addressing the uptick in illegal actions by immigration officials during the current US administration. It's addressing the selective application of the law to further conservative agendas. Yes, some immigration enforcement is legal. Congratulations. |
| |
| ▲ | 15155 6 days ago | parent [-] | | > addressing the selective application of the law to further conservative agendas Does selectively not enforcing immigration law further liberal agendas? - House seats (and therefore electoral votes) are determined by census - which includes illegal immigrant populations. - If you can waddle across the border at 8.5 months pregnant, you can birth a citizen with no further requirements. Ergo, "sanctuary cities" and other intentional lack of enforcement allow states to pump up their representation in Congress and increase government handouts. | | |
| ▲ | 3D30497420 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Based on this research, the impact of these populations on the allocation of representatives is probably not particularly large: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/07/24/how-remov... Sure, the House is almost evenly split, so a few seats here or there would have an impact. But the net result would probably be further mitigated by gerrymandering, other population shifts, and so on. One other thing I appreciated from this article is how it touches on comments about simply following the law. Just because something is legal, does not make it morally questionable (at best). From the article: > The apportionment of seats in Congress is required by the U.S. Constitution, which says that the census will be used to divide the House of Representatives “among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State,” except for enslaved people, who, until the late 1800s, were counted as three-fifths of a person, and certain American Indians. | |
| ▲ | tkzed49 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | With all due respect, we simply have different views on the morality of the issue. However, I would suggest others consider what an evil leftist, for example, could do with the same technology. | | |
| ▲ | 15155 5 days ago | parent [-] | | > would suggest others consider what an evil leftist What are some things that could they do? Right-leaning policy in 2025 typically leans towards enforcing the laws as written: in this case, immigration law is being bolstered by surveillance technology. Which laws are liberals going to theoretically now start radically enforcing that conservatives were turning a blind eye to? Flock cameras don't exactly help the IRS make the rich "pay their fair share." | | |
| ▲ | Breza 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Any political ideology could be bolstered with the heavy handed use of surveillance technology. That's why groups like the ACLU and EFF exist. They both vehemently agree that there's no such thing as a good police state. Even if your team is running it. If you want specific examples, I'd point to the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. The left wants to throw people in prison for years for protesting while the right wants to pretend it doesn't exist and allow women seeking abortions to be intimidated. I'd also point to the levels of technology deployed to catch the January 6 perpetrators. I live in DC and have a hard time doing a both-sides here since the experience of living in a city under attack is still rather raw; whatever your views, you can't describe the right's response as "enforcing the laws as written." |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | snigsnog 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [flagged] |
|
| ▲ | Verlyn139 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| average HN respose, bunch of boomers |
