It's clear, Chris, that you don't like people coming from other countries, who don't have their paperwork in order, but an isolated sexual assault isn't a strong argument for improving border security.
Well, how about this.
Or this.
Or this.
Or this.
Or this.
Your assertion that this is about a single rape of a child sexual assaults alone is just plain stupid. The situation at the border is MUCH bigger.
And my wanting of tougher border security extends to the Canadian border as well.
3 comments:
"Your assertion that this is about a single rape of a child sexual assaults alone is just plain stupid"
Well, that isn't strictly true, the comment I made was perfectly accurate in the context of your article, and the source from which you took it. You reported on an isolated case of alledged sexual assault by an 'illegal immigrant'. I'm sorry if I haven't been keeping a tally of 'imported rape' versus 'home grown rape' in America.
So before you brand my comments as 'plain stupid', you might consider my source, which in this case was you.
While the heading and the article you linked to where about a single alleged sexual assault, your article was about Washington being soft, and border security being poor, which I maintain was a poor argument.
... but thanks for the update on the context, it seems that America might have an imported crime problem (something you failed to mention in the original post)
I like how breaking the Law(actually several) by choosing to enter the USA illegally is equated with having a "Paperwork" problem.
Yes it is a problem. It's Illegal.
What should be illegal is Murphy's moral equivelency filter.
"by choosing to enter the USA illegally is equated with having a "Paperwork" problem"
A paperwork problem is what they all have in common.
See the thing is John, not all 'illegal immigrants' enter the country illegally, a good number enter legally on some short-term visa/permit (usually the richer ones), and don't leave when they should
(there are a good many Americans who have overstayed their welcome in Australia this way).
I'm not defending them, or making some grand point.
It's a simple misunderstanding, based on the fact that I read Chris' original post and concluded on the strength of what he presented, that it wasn't a good argument
(he referred to an isolated assault, as a reason to increase border security. That's a poor argument).
In light of the new information, I agree that america may have an imported crime problem.
But, instead of acknowledging that I was simply commenting on the material provided (that failed to mention this crime-wave), it's a lot more fun for you two to make out that I'm some variety of idiot.
If you want to play it that way: My argument was sound, the source was lacking
(I suspect that there's a lesson in that for me, I have to check what I'm reading here, rather than taking it on good faith. There's also some irony to the idea that the sloppy reporting that caused this misunderstanding, is being used to roast me)
...But don't let one of the few things we might agree on, get in the way of a few cheap-shots!
Post a Comment