What human cost is acceptable in controling illegal immigration?

[Flopper]

Not sure about that. Read about Portugal after 10 years of decriminalization of all drugs. With the illegal drug business estimated at 40 billion a year and growing rapidly, we will reach a point where we will have no choice. I'm not in favor of it but we're running out of options. The war on drugs was lost decades ago. There is no way we can control the growing use of illegal drugs.
Ten Years Ago Portugal Decriminalized All Drugs. What Happened Next? | The Fix

There's possibly a minor flipside to legalizing drugs.

The cartels will see their cash cow dwindle away. It is possible, likely even, that those drug wars will move across our border and we might see Americans killed in their own country if the cartels see legalization as competition.

Of course, that's conjecture. But legitimate conjecture, I think.

I remember when they were trying to get the lottery passed in our state many years ago. One of the claims was that it would stop illegal gambling and wipe out the mob. Instead, the mob started to use the new lottery numbers for their own game. They just had a better payout than the lottery and did even better.

When they pushed the issue of legalized pot in Colorado, it was claimed that it would stop the illegal sales of pot on the street. What actually happened is that pot dealers beat the price of high taxed legal weed, and they are selling more than ever.

I don't think that's a problem in Washington. The pot is legally grown mostly on local farms and in California so there couldn't be the kind of profit the mob would expect. Biggest benefit is law enforcement can devote resources to serious crimes. One thing I don't like about it being legalized is the pot shops can't accept credit cards because of federal law so it's a cash business which makes the shops a big target for robbers. There also may be some zoning restrictions because they are located in rather shabby areas. I really don't think legalizing pot has has created either the positive or negative impact that people expected.

 

[Flopper]

Court orders release of detained immigrant kids, not parents | Daily Mail Online

.

That is our wonderful justice system and Constitution, NOT LEFTISTS, CONSPIRACY NUT JOBS.

Pass a good work ID card and enforce it. And end this crap.

Why not enforce e-verify?


.

E-Verify is mostly a volunteer program. If it becomes mandatory, everyone who works, 150 million would have to be verified to get a job. If only 1% of the data is wrong, it will effect 1.5 million workers. The data for E-verify comes from 20 different databases from over a dozen different agencies so how do you get it corrected? Maybe a better question, how do you get your new employer to hold the job open while you get the E-Verify mess fixed.

Of course most people that hire undocumented immigrants, know they are undocumented and they hire them anyway.

E-verify is voluntary because commiecrats want it that way. And employers that hire illegals should be jailed and their businesses confiscated under RICO. Only a couple would need be arrested and that crap would stop.


.

I think it's voluntary because it's not accurate enough. It's one of many things that need to be changed. Many of the big farms contract with labor supplier who supposedly check immigration status, thus letting the farmer off the hook.

 

[OKTexas]

That is our wonderful justice system and Constitution, NOT LEFTISTS, CONSPIRACY NUT JOBS.

Pass a good work ID card and enforce it. And end this crap.

Why not enforce e-verify?


.

E-Verify is mostly a volunteer program. If it becomes mandatory, everyone who works, 150 million would have to be verified to get a job. If only 1% of the data is wrong, it will effect 1.5 million workers. The data for E-verify comes from 20 different databases from over a dozen different agencies so how do you get it corrected? Maybe a better question, how do you get your new employer to hold the job open while you get the E-Verify mess fixed.

Of course most people that hire undocumented immigrants, know they are undocumented and they hire them anyway.

E-verify is voluntary because commiecrats want it that way. And employers that hire illegals should be jailed and their businesses confiscated under RICO. Only a couple would need be arrested and that crap would stop.


.

I think it's voluntary because it's not accurate enough. It's one of many things that need to be changed. Many of the big farms contract with labor supplier who supposedly check immigration status, thus letting the farmer off the hook.

How hard could it be to match a name, DOB and ethnicity to a SSN?


.

 

[Flopper]

All people get to chime in here. They voted for Trump. some didn't, that's democracy. They voted on legalizing marijuana even, but not ONCE anywhere have we Americans got to VOTE on allowing the state to skirt, no, flaunt federal immigration laws. It's shocking actually. Most of us would like to get to vote on that, being that this is still a democracy and all. So why can't we vote on that? Does that threaten somebody? We can't leave this up to a rabble after all.

The only sanctuary states are:
California
Colorado
Illinois
Massachusetts
New Mexico
Oregon
Vermont

They are all blue states that would most likely vote to support the state government view on sanctuary.

With the exception of California, most of these states are not going to have any problem defending there position. For example, prohibiting law enforcement officers at the state, county or municipal level from enforcing federal immigration laws that target people based on their race or ethnic origin, when those individuals are not suspected of any criminal activities. That's a pretty safe move, telling their people not enforce immigration laws that would violate the Civil Rights Act. Since no law enforcement officers is going to make a decision as to what immigration laws might violate the Civil Rights Act, they simply won't enforce any of them.

 

[Flopper]

Pass a good work ID card and enforce it. And end this crap.

Why not enforce e-verify?


.

E-Verify is mostly a volunteer program. If it becomes mandatory, everyone who works, 150 million would have to be verified to get a job. If only 1% of the data is wrong, it will effect 1.5 million workers. The data for E-verify comes from 20 different databases from over a dozen different agencies so how do you get it corrected? Maybe a better question, how do you get your new employer to hold the job open while you get the E-Verify mess fixed.

Of course most people that hire undocumented immigrants, know they are undocumented and they hire them anyway.

E-verify is voluntary because commiecrats want it that way. And employers that hire illegals should be jailed and their businesses confiscated under RICO. Only a couple would need be arrested and that crap would stop.


.

I think it's voluntary because it's not accurate enough. It's one of many things that need to be changed. Many of the big farms contract with labor supplier who supposedly check immigration status, thus letting the farmer off the hook.

How hard could it be to match a name, DOB and ethnicity to a SSN?
.

Difficulty is not the problem. The complains are that it isn't accurate. People with work permits less than 30 days old do not appear. Also people that left the country are still on the database. That's why I say, the government can't require all employers use it.

There's another problem. If you use it and it flags some people you have to have to complete a contract and you hire them anyway, then get caught you will be in deep shit. However, if don't use E-Verify, there are a number exceptions you can use to get out of a penalty. The law and the regulations are poorly conceived.

 

[francoHFW]

Kind of humorous that when the courts discriminate, it's called discretion. Ha. I saw that term in the thread some place.

You have no evidence of such discrimination, just a kind of orange con man and Bs propaganda. Or give me a link...

 

[francoHFW]

It's pretty hard not to notice hundreds of people marching across the country headed toward the US boarder.

You don't seem to get it. It is not the responsibility of Mexico to protect our boarders. Does the US stop people headed for the Mexican boarder or the Canadian border?

You're being incredible xenophobia. You consider Honduran families fleeing from violence and seeking refuge as invaders when the problem is not of their making. You lay the blame for gangs selling drugs on immigrants when the real problem is the US huge demand for illegal drugs.

If you're really tired of this shit, then you should be supporting a plan that will actually work regardless of who is in the white house or which party is controlling congress. Trump can't possible come anywhere close to deporting 12 million undocumented immigrants during his term in office. The deportations he's doing now is barely keeping up with the inflow of immigrants. Without support from both parties, nothing is going to change.

But you're never going to get support from both parties--only one. The Democrats goal is to get as many of these immigrants into this country as possible. Why do you suppose they are fighting to keep their sanctuary cities and states? Why do you suppose they stopped Kate's Law? Why do you suppose they are really against the wall? Does this sound like a group of people wanting to stop illegal immigration?

If the US allowed a band of Mexicans to cross our country into Canada, then yes, the US is responsible for not stopping them long before they hit the Canadian border. We should have stopped them at the Mexican border.

Your prospective is clouded by extremist views. All democrat do not want to get every immigrant possible into the country and every republican doesn't want to deport 12 million people. Left leaning democrats and right leaning republican have even less stronger views and true independents tend to swing back and forth on issues. So there is plenty of middle ground.

There are several trends that indicate that the illegal immigration problem will become less of a problem in coming years. Better jobs in Mexico, better pay for farm and factory workers, and better security on our boarder has resulted in a drop in the undocumented immigration population. Pew Research estimated that the numbers have dropped several million. And there no reason to think that that the number will not continue to drop. With the right kind of legislation we can see those numbers drop even faster.

Are you going to stand by that? Okay......one more time:

Why are Democrats fighting so hard to keep their sanctuary cities and states?

Why are Democrats fighting so hard to keep the wall from being built; so strongly to the point that they even threatened to shut down the government over it?

Why did Democrats defeat Kate's Law; a law that would imprison felons who returned back to the country after deportation?

Every action they take can only be answered one way: they want as many immigrants in this country as possible. If they ever gain total control over the federal government again, they will grant citizenship to each and every one, and along with citizenship comes the right to vote.

The goal of the Democrat party is to make this country a single-party government forever.

• The primary reason people, both democrats and some republicans support their sanctuary city is they believe undocumented immigrants living in their community doing no harm should not be deported. For example, a friend of our family has had a maid, Camila who has been with them for over 10 years. Her husband has a roofing business. They both over stayed their visas many years ago. They came to the US with their 2 kids and had two more while in the states. Today, they live in terror that they will be deported breaking up their family. If deported, the guidelines required they be banned from entering the country for a minimum of 10 year to life. And what did they do to deserve such punish? Nothing. They simply overstayed their visa, a civil infraction, not even a crime. To answer your question, there are many people like Camila and her family that I would do all that I can to make sure she stays in this country. I have no problem deporting drug dealers, gang members and felons, but not people who don't deserve such harsh punishment.
• I can't answer for all Democrats but for myself, I believe there is far better solution than a 2000 mile wall. Trump has already said, he was willing to consider not putting a wall in places where there was a natural barrier such as rivers or mountains. I think he's on the right track but it needs to be expanded. We should supply the type security needed for the area whether it be a wall, fence, electronic surveillance, or increased border patrol. A 2,000 mile wall across our southern border would be a lasting symbol of American fear, hatred and isolationism.
• I'm not familiar with Kate's Law so, I can't comment.

Kate's Law was designed by the Republicans in remembrance of Kate Steinle who was shot by an illegal that was deported several times and repeatedly came back. Claiming it was an accident that he "found" a stolen police officers gun, shot it accidentally, and killed this young woman, he got off scott free.

Prior to that court decision, Kate's Law would have required that any illegal felon deported that came back and caught would face the minimum of five years in prison. Democrats stopped that law when they led the Senate. San Francisco is a SANCTUARY CITY, and after a prior infraction, ICE asked them to hold this lowlife until they could get to him. They refused.

So ask yourself, why would Democrats stop a law that banned criminals from coming back to this country? Once again, the answer is simple: they don't care about Americans, they care about getting as many foreigners into this country as they can (criminal or not) so they can create a single-party government.

This has nothing to do with your friend maid, your lawn care guy, or the illegal at the car wash. It's a smoke screen. The Democrat party became the anti-white party who's goal is to make whites a minority in this country as soon as possible. If and when they can do that, we will be a one party country forever.

Look for the man behind the curtain.

No there are no conspiracies except the greedy lying GOP 1 with BS propaganda. They love cheap easily bullied labor and only give a crap in one of their corrupt depressions...

 

[francoHFW]

Bull. What law is there that states the federal government MUST provide funds to anybody? Trump threatened to cut funds to sanctuary cities, and a commie judge forbade it.

As I said, appeal it or shut the f******.

Don't tell me what to do troll.

Be a misinformed traitor then lol... This is the Trump disgrace so far, and fox Etc making up garbage about our justice system...

LOL You called him a traitor.

That's funny. Because he's not. You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a traitor.

He can't help it. That's what trolls do.

So any evidence yet of conspiracy of FBI against Trump or whatever, in favor of Hillary I suppose. More ridiculous propaganda For doops only.

 

[OKTexas]

Why not enforce e-verify?


.

E-Verify is mostly a volunteer program. If it becomes mandatory, everyone who works, 150 million would have to be verified to get a job. If only 1% of the data is wrong, it will effect 1.5 million workers. The data for E-verify comes from 20 different databases from over a dozen different agencies so how do you get it corrected? Maybe a better question, how do you get your new employer to hold the job open while you get the E-Verify mess fixed.

Of course most people that hire undocumented immigrants, know they are undocumented and they hire them anyway.

E-verify is voluntary because commiecrats want it that way. And employers that hire illegals should be jailed and their businesses confiscated under RICO. Only a couple would need be arrested and that crap would stop.


.

I think it's voluntary because it's not accurate enough. It's one of many things that need to be changed. Many of the big farms contract with labor supplier who supposedly check immigration status, thus letting the farmer off the hook.

How hard could it be to match a name, DOB and ethnicity to a SSN?
.

Difficulty is not the problem. The complains are that it isn't accurate. People with work permits less than 30 days old do not appear. Also people that left the country are still on the database. That's why I say, the government can't require all employers use it.

There's another problem. If you use it and it flags some people you have to have to complete a contract and you hire them anyway, then get caught you will be in deep shit. However, if don't use E-Verify, there are a number exceptions you can use to get out of a penalty. The law and the regulations are poorly conceived.

People here on temp work permits would have the permit, I don't they would be issued a SSN. And why wouldn't people who have left the country be on the data base, if they were issued a SSN?

We also need to make E-verify mandatory and eliminate those loopholes.


.

 

[TemplarKormac]

As I said, appeal it or shut the f******.

Don't tell me what to do troll.

Be a misinformed traitor then lol... This is the Trump disgrace so far, and fox Etc making up garbage about our justice system...

LOL You called him a traitor.

That's funny. Because he's not. You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a traitor.

He can't help it. That's what trolls do.

So any evidence yet of conspiracy of FBI against Trump or whatever, in favor of Hillary I suppose. More ridiculous propaganda For doops only.

There must've been a moment where you just simply snapped. You rarely, if ever, have a cogent argument, only calling people dupes ("doops" in this case, that's a new one) and prattling on about irrelevant topics. In lieu of any civil discourse.

Was there ever a point in time you weren't a troll, Franco?

 

[Natural Citizen]

You have no evidence of such discrimination, just a kind of orange con man and Bs propaganda. Or give me a link...

What is it with some of you people and links? Can't you think for yourselves, or is it just that some people are limited to their own capacities and have to rely on what someone else has to say about something? Gosh. Lead once in a while instead of being a follower your whole life.

Anyway. A great example of discrimination in the name of discretion by the courts (aka the government) was that recent cake decision by the SCOTUS. The completely missed the mark with regard to property rights and went straight to the very subjective "deeply-held views" test. Who gets to decide which views are "deeply-held"? Seems discriminatory to me.

The Justice Department is extremely bigoted in what they do. Very biased and very political.

Look at what is going on with the CIA and the FBI. There's some discriminatory people right there, let me tell you.

Nixon, thee only thing anybody ever remembers is Watergate, but nobody ever remembers he used the IRS to punish his enemies.

When taxes are collected, how do they pass the money out? Discrimination. That's how.

When they print the money, who gets it? The rich people, that's who. Not us. That's discrimination. whomever or whatever they want gets it.

The government and the courts are the most discriminating entites in existence. It's the discriminatory power that the government has to control the economy, policy, and really the world, that far, far, outweighs that of anything or anyone else.

And that's a big deal. Very big.

 

[francoHFW]

Don't tell me what to do troll.

Be a misinformed traitor then lol... This is the Trump disgrace so far, and fox Etc making up garbage about our justice system...

LOL You called him a traitor.

That's funny. Because he's not. You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a traitor.

He can't help it. That's what trolls do.

So any evidence yet of conspiracy of FBI against Trump or whatever, in favor of Hillary I suppose. More ridiculous propaganda For doops only.

There must've been a moment where you just simply snapped. You rarely, if ever, have a cogent argument, only calling people dupes ("doops" in this case, that's a new one) and prattling on about irrelevant topics. In lieu of any civil discourse.

Was there ever a point in time you weren't a troll, Franco?

The production by BS propaganda of so many misinformed functional idiots is the story of our time. And no it is not a conspiracy of the F FBI or anyone else, it is just lying by your Heroes Fox and rush and on on ...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

As I said, appeal it or shut the f******.

Don't tell me what to do troll.

Be a misinformed traitor then lol... This is the Trump disgrace so far, and fox Etc making up garbage about our justice system...

LOL You called him a traitor.

That's funny. Because he's not. You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a traitor.

He can't help it. That's what trolls do.

So any evidence yet of conspiracy of FBI against Trump or whatever, in favor of Hillary I suppose. More ridiculous propaganda For doops only.

While the Dems are fighting tooth and nail to keep any evidence from getting out, this party just started. Wait and see the results from digging into this matter. McCabe is already asking for clemency and will sing like a canary about Comey.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

All people get to chime in here. They voted for Trump. some didn't, that's democracy. They voted on legalizing marijuana even, but not ONCE anywhere have we Americans got to VOTE on allowing the state to skirt, no, flaunt federal immigration laws. It's shocking actually. Most of us would like to get to vote on that, being that this is still a democracy and all. So why can't we vote on that? Does that threaten somebody? We can't leave this up to a rabble after all.

The only sanctuary states are:
California
Colorado
Illinois
Massachusetts
New Mexico
Oregon
Vermont

They are all blue states that would most likely vote to support the state government view on sanctuary.

With the exception of California, most of these states are not going to have any problem defending there position. For example, prohibiting law enforcement officers at the state, county or municipal level from enforcing federal immigration laws that target people based on their race or ethnic origin, when those individuals are not suspected of any criminal activities. That's a pretty safe move, telling their people not enforce immigration laws that would violate the Civil Rights Act. Since no law enforcement officers is going to make a decision as to what immigration laws might violate the Civil Rights Act, they simply won't enforce any of them.

What they are asking is simply that they notify the feds when an illegal is arrested and taken to jail. They won't allow their officers to do that whether they want to or not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not sure about that. Read about Portugal after 10 years of decriminalization of all drugs. With the illegal drug business estimated at 40 billion a year and growing rapidly, we will reach a point where we will have no choice. I'm not in favor of it but we're running out of options. The war on drugs was lost decades ago. There is no way we can control the growing use of illegal drugs.
Ten Years Ago Portugal Decriminalized All Drugs. What Happened Next? | The Fix

There's possibly a minor flipside to legalizing drugs.

The cartels will see their cash cow dwindle away. It is possible, likely even, that those drug wars will move across our border and we might see Americans killed in their own country if the cartels see legalization as competition.

Of course, that's conjecture. But legitimate conjecture, I think.

I remember when they were trying to get the lottery passed in our state many years ago. One of the claims was that it would stop illegal gambling and wipe out the mob. Instead, the mob started to use the new lottery numbers for their own game. They just had a better payout than the lottery and did even better.

When they pushed the issue of legalized pot in Colorado, it was claimed that it would stop the illegal sales of pot on the street. What actually happened is that pot dealers beat the price of high taxed legal weed, and they are selling more than ever.

I don't think that's a problem in Washington. The pot is legally grown mostly on local farms and in California so there couldn't be the kind of profit the mob would expect. Biggest benefit is law enforcement can devote resources to serious crimes. One thing I don't like about it being legalized is the pot shops can't accept credit cards because of federal law so it's a cash business which makes the shops a big target for robbers. There also may be some zoning restrictions because they are located in rather shabby areas. I really don't think legalizing pot has has created either the positive or negative impact that people expected.

It didn't do what they said it was going to do. I don't care if weed is no longer illegal, I just don't like pot shops and advertising where children are around. I don't think it's a good idea to suggest to them that smoking pot is fine and dandy, and going to a pot shop is like going to a candy store. On the other hand I think that it's stupid to give people tickets or even arrest somebody for pot. I didn't look into it, but I heard on the radio that teen pot smoking has increased dramatically.

 

[kaz]

Don't tell me what to do troll.

Be a misinformed traitor then lol... This is the Trump disgrace so far, and fox Etc making up garbage about our justice system...

LOL You called him a traitor.

That's funny. Because he's not. You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a traitor.

He can't help it. That's what trolls do.

So any evidence yet of conspiracy of FBI against Trump or whatever, in favor of Hillary I suppose. More ridiculous propaganda For doops only.

There must've been a moment where you just simply snapped. You rarely, if ever, have a cogent argument, only calling people dupes ("doops" in this case, that's a new one) and prattling on about irrelevant topics. In lieu of any civil discourse.

Was there ever a point in time you weren't a troll, Franco?

Franco's been on my ignore list because he attacked my mother and my sister. The other one is RightWinger who attacked my daughter. Have you noticed when leftists attack family, it's always the women they go after?

Yeah, the guy's a scum bag

 

[Kondor3]

What human cost is acceptable in controling illegal immigration?

Answer:

As many human lives and as much human misery of Illegal Aliens as it takes to reestablish border integrity and sovereignty over our own soil.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The production by BS propaganda of so many misinformed functional idiots is the story of our time.

You will NEVER inform anyone with that approach. I am not a "functional idiot". People who don't agree with you are not "functional idiots". And you are one of many reasons why the left and right don't want anything to do with each other. Too much of this. If all you do is insist on calling people names, you will not inform anyone of anything, except for how puerile and obnoxious you are.

When we don't hold the same opinions or ideas of the world as you do, it doesn't mean we're "misinformed" either.

 

[HappyJoy]

No, actually we don't.

More Unskilled Workers, Please

Unskilled Immigrants Do Not Harm Americans

The Danger From Low-Skilled Immigrants: Not Having Them

Read the articles, I could pull out quotes from them but I get the feeling I'm already wasting my time linking the articles.

Other than that treating people like cattle is inhumane no matter how you want to make excuses for it.

Sorry, I don't believe in open borders. And I don't believe in filling the country with unskilled workers. I didn't say we didn't need ANY, just not a free-for-all.

Nobody believes in open borders, can we finally kill that strawman? Like it or not, we need unskilled workers here, we don't have enough currently but you'd rather blabber about some idiotic notion that you don't believe in 'filling the country with unskilled workers', whatever that hell that means. Shit,who can argue with such a defined and well thought out position.

Then your concession is duly noted. Thank you.

Wasn't there a troll on this board who used to reply to posts just like that? Can't remember his name but when he ran out of things to say he basically took credit for a concession that was never given.

What you have given is stating that you don't give a shit about families of immigrants who even come here legally to be separated and your reason for not caring which is an influx of unskilled workers isn't even a problem and in actuality we need more of them but you ignore all of that and go on your merry way.

Coming here illegally isn't coming here legally. Now you know.

Asylum seekers who are also being separated from their children are coming here legally. It shouldn't be done with any families but especially not those that are following the rules. Please keep up.

 

[HappyJoy]

Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump:

"If you are smuggling a child then we will prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you as required by law," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Monday at a law enforcement conference in Scottsdale, Arizona. "If you don't like that, then don't smuggle children over our border."

Administration officials explained that the goal of the program is 100 percent prosecution of all who enter the U.S. illegally. When adults are prosecuted and jailed, their children will be separated from them, just as would happen for a U.S. citizen convicted and jailed.​

Anguish at Southwest border as more immigrant children are separated from parents

The Trump administration's willingness to take children from their parents has raised concerns about how far authorities should go to stem unauthorized border crossings and what human cost is acceptable in the name of border security and immigration control.

"There is something terrible happening here that Americans would not support if they understood it," said F. Scott McCown, director of the Children’s Rights Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law.​

I don't care how much you hate illegal immigrants this is EVIL. You are punishing the children. It's abhorrant and wrong and inexcusable. I hope they rot in hell for this. 700 children so far have been seperated from the only family they know and lost to our often incompetent and mismanaged child care system. I fail to see how any parent could support actions like these.

When parents are held for prosecution, their children are turned over to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, part of the Department of Health and Human Services. The children are then designated as "unaccompanied minors," and the government tries to connect them to family members who are already in the U.S. Until then, children wait in shelters or are sent to federally contracted foster homes, often without parents being told exactly where they are, immigration advocates said.

It may soon become even more difficult to place children with relatives. The Department of Homeland Security is proposing immigration checks be done on all people in a household who may take in these "unaccompanied" children, which means relatives who are undocumented may be less likely to come forward.

In the meantime, space in shelters and foster homes is limited; The Washington Post reported the administration plans to open facilities at military bases to house some of the separated children.​

Yes, this is terrible. I think I know of a solution though: If you have children, STF away from our borders.

Then it clearly is not so terrible to you. It's a human cost you find WORTH IT.

They don't see them as human.

A human would go the the Port of Entry and present their immigrant visa that they obtained at the US Consulate in Mexico City.

A ******* animal crosses anywhere they can get away with it.

So yeah, there's that aspect.

An animal? Yep, you guys love to treat other humans as 'animals'.

BTW, it's not illegal to arrive at the border and present yourself as an asylum seeker, putz.