Exactly. I think it's reasonable (although perhaps naive) for people to have a sunny view of law enforcement. Especially when, like me, they're white men from middle-class backgrounds; I've never had a bad experience with law enforcement, despite having done some stupendously dumb-ass things.

But even though I'm predisposed to view cops favorably, the stuff with ICE is shocking to me. America has a big chunk of history [1] where ethnic cleansing was common and ignored or even supported by police [2]. It's hard for me not to see ICE's aggressive dehumanization of non-white migrants as a resurgence of that. So I'm not surprised that even at Palantir people are objecting.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadir_of_American_race_relatio...

[2] See, e.g., https://www.amazon.com/Sundown-Towns-Hidden-Dimension-Americ...

Over 50% of Border Patrol officers are Hispanic; 20% of all ICE employees are Hispanic, with much higher percentage (e.g. 40%) in subsets such as field agents in Southern California.

Since it's perfectly well established at this point that one can be part of a given identity class while still supporting or actively enforcing behavior that's discriminatory towards the same identity class (not to mention inhumane in other ways), this is pretty much a red herring.

I'm sorry to hear you may have experienced this.

But is it really fair to call it "Mexican" heroin? Is that a bonafide statement or an assumption? Lethal drugs don't explicitly come from outside the US, and in the presence of stronger border security the supply-demand curve would just re-balance itself with an all domestic supply.

Heroin has always been illegal. Illegally crossing the border has always been illegal. I view the "Mexican" claim as a scapegoat. One could easily make the argument that spending $5b on privatized drug rehab programs (instead of privatized-incarceration) would have the same or greater positive effects on the drug epidemic than a $5b wall. Or $5b in aide to regular police departments along the border (not ICE). Or $5b in aide to Mexican towns right over the border.

There are a million ways to skin a cat. If reducing domestic drug deaths is the goal, demonizing immigration is not the answer. Education and treatment are the answer. Mexicans are just a convenient target.

> Heroin has always been illegal.

Not wanting to stamp on any of your other arguments, but the quoted statement ignores historical facts.

Heroin was sold, and actively marketed, as a medication to calm overly active children.[0] Mommy reaching for a bottle of gin to calm her nerves is tame, compared to mommy handing out heroin to the little monster just so the darn creature would give her a bit of rest.

0: https://www.businessinsider.com/yes-bayer-promoted-heroin-fo...

Demonizing immigration?

How about simply enforcing the law against coming or staying here illegally while others wait in line?

I was responding to a specific comment where the OP insinuated that overdose deaths were caused by "Mexican" heroin as reasoning to support strict immigration enforcement.

I was simply pointing out that it is highly unlikely that he actually knows where the drugs came from and therefore it is an unfair assumption to blame Mexico (and Mexicans) for something that could have just as easily come from Spokane Washington.

Using the death of a loved one who killed themselves presumably by accident to pass any kind of law that isn't relevant to the circumstances surrounding the death is disingenuous. It's like if Mothers Against Drunk Driving wanted to close the Canadian border because someone might drink Molson beer and crash their car.

As I understand it, the laws of this country (US) do allow for people to come here (without a visa, etc) and ask for asylum. There's nothing illegal about that. The question is, while you are processing the asylum requests, how do you deal with the people waiting?

The current administration has decided to build detention centers/concentration camps/etc and keep people there and some of the press is pointing out to be rampant with abuse/inhumane conditions. In many cases children are separated from their parents while being held.

What does the one have to do with the other???

Undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers are fleeing terrible conditions in their home countries and trying to make a better living for their family here.

They're not the same at all as the criminal gangs that smuggle in drugs via a large variety of methods.

No border advocates can't pass a law ending borders so they try to demonize the people enforcing our rules.

Advocate for unlimited visas for anyone who can code. Need to drive down wages for developers.

Heroin has killed people I know. I still don’t think separating and caging families is moral.

I highly recommend the book Dreamland for more on this topic: https://www.amazon.com/Dreamland-True-Americas-Opiate-Epidem...

Personal attacks will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong or annoying some other comment is. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here?

Thanks dang, sorry about that. You’re right.

It is unfortunate that this has actually happened to you.

It's not illegal to seek asylum.

Likewise, it's not illegal to enforce the law, as created by Congress.

It is when you do it in the middle of the desert instead of a lawful port of entry.

Enforcing the rules that people have to obey to get and stay in the country. That isn't ethnic cleansing.

Plenty of people who are not white people come to the country legally every year.

ICE and CBP are targeting legal residents and even U.S. citizens, and attempting to deport them, if they are Hispanic. See for example:

https://www.gq.com/story/border-patrol-incarcerated-citizen

ICE and CBP have repeatedly violated U.S. law in their treatment of children, including violating the Flores Settlement (which carries the force of U.S. law), violating Constitutional due process and equal protection rights (ruled in Ms. L case), and violated the civil rights guaranteed under U.S. and international law, for example by refusing to provide hygiene materials and medicine.

If you are unable to see how recent rhetoric around immigrants fits historical patterns, I'm not sure how I can help you. Also, you talk about "the rules" as if they had nothing to do with America's history of racism, but historically it's pretty clear they do.

It is true that plenty of non-white people come legally to the US. But that doesn't mean that there aren't problems with how those people are treated, or that there isn't bias against those people involved.

>actively pushing back against a DoJ settlement so they can hold children in detention indefinitely, etc.

So they're horrible abusers if they separate children and now that they are trying to rectify that by keeping children together with family by removing the detention limit they too are abusers. What would make you happy then? The only alternative is open borders which is a non starter.

> If you're a citizen and you commit certain crimes you are separated from your children

The overwhelming majority of these cases are people coming to the border and requesting asylum. They passed a credible fear interview administered by CBP, and have been granted entry into the US pending their hearing. They have not committed a crime.

An interview that is easily gamed. If people self deported after getting all their hearing and being determined not to qualify for asylum there would not be as much of a problem.

Most of the people claiming asylum do not qualify for asylum, but once they are in the country it is hard and costly to find them.

So how do you propose to handle this in a humane and practical way? (separating children from their parents because the parents failed their asylum application is not humane, just to be clear)

A wall would ensure that far fewer economic migrants are backing up the court system that asylum cases must also go through, and resolve the facility overcrowding issue. The problem is not with the facilities (which are on par with other developed countries), it is with the overcrowding causing medical cases being unseen and abuse between detainees.

After conducting blood tests, up to 1/3 of migrant children were found to not be related to the adults claiming to be their family. It is for humane anti-trafficking reasons that the separation rule was instituted in the first place.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-s...