Not what i said. Straw-man much?

More like a governmental agency's predatory tracking and snatching of the exploited who are just trying to work as opposed to going after the corporations that are turning a blind eye to the status of their employees and are unwilling to pay competitive wages is ... Wroonnngg.

> About 4.5 million of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, or 42 percent of the total undocumented population, overstayed visas, according to the report. [1]

You're right, they are just people trying to work, and there needs to be better handling of the entire situation. However almost half of them made an agreement with the government and then reneged. People should abide by the agreements they make.

[1] https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/border-illegal-immigr...

Under this criteria, all Marijuana users in the US are guilty of at least Misdemeanors and probably Felony drug possession.

Under this criteria, every person who has ever driven over the speed limit, and especially a large amount over the speed limit, is Guilty.

Do you see what the problem is with your reasoning.

If you're caught for these things you face the associated consequences

So the question is what are the appropriate consequences? This is a reasonable point of debate.

On the one hand the consequences probably shouldn't be nothing. On the other they probably shouldn't be irrevocably tearing apart their family, deporting the adults abroad sometimes to the wrong country and then losing track of their young children in the social services system, as a terror tactic to try and scare other visa violators into line.

A legislative debate, which is my entire point. People aren't showing anywhere near the level of vitriol that ICE receives towards the local police for enforcing laws that are IMO far more ridiculous. Currently in many states people are torn from their families to be placed in cages and children are dumped into facilities because their parents possessed a benign plant which happens to be legal in a plurality of states -- there's no outrage because there's not the full force of the zeitgeist beaming it through the telescreens as a crisis for political purposes. I don't agree with any of it personally but just have to scoff at the hypocrisy.

It would be hypocrisy if the same people that approved of tearing families apart in one case disapproved of it in the other. That tends not to be the case though, generally speaking the people who disapprove of one also disapprove of the other. The level of agitation about them is mainly a matter of pragmatism, not hypocrisy.

As for the people who generally approve of both, they may not be hypocrites, unless they also profess to be pro family and traditional values in which case yes very, very much, but that would be one of the mildest terms I'd use for them if it were applicable.

I'm sure that argument holds up when you're before a judge on a few counts of possession.

So you would agree then that someone caught with a gram of marijuana deserves over a decade in prison?

Or are we just going to argue that the law itself is moral and just, while ignoring the uneven application of said laws? Which is really the point here.

To be fair, the jails are filled with people who were found in possession of marijuana. There may be a lot of issues with that, but they still get arrested.

What-about-isms always gloss over tons of context. Even drug legalization involves plenty of law and order.

It's not just with ICE. They help cops do a lot of big data citizen tracking and spying. If america had a social credit system like China,palantir would run it.

In the movie "Den of thieves" the actors studied real police so well they even included palantir in their dialogue.