Largest mass shooting in US history, atleast 50 dead 53 injured

Is that a new thing? That must be a new thing because I don't recall being told to turn out my diary at the gate.

Those are follow-up questions, you still haven't answered my initial question: "How could you possibly enforce it? How would you check whether someone's Muslim or not?"

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

Would it be fairer to call it a Killing Spree?

This simply isn't true. The immigration system, far from being "open the floodgates," is a bureaucratic labyrinth. Check out that PDF and tell me if you're not surprised by some of the screening times.

You're not seeing lots of illegal immigration because the system is open; that's the exact opposite of how this works. You see more illegal immigration when you make legal immigration too difficult. It's the same as any black market item. It doesn't work with drugs, or guns, or migration.

There are a couple of big picture problems here.

The first is feasibility: I don't think this would be hard to get around. Remember, you're proposing a counterfactual, so you can't just take this new process, superimpose it on current situations, and start tallying all the obvious people (like the killer's father) this would catch. A world in which this is the policy is a world in which his father is probably smart enough not to say those things in the first place. So all you've done is make them be a little more careful, which is arguably worse in the long run.

The second problem is precedent: I think you know full well that the government doesn't give up power lightly, so once you break this seal, there's no going back. At that point you've decided the President can use any sufficiently traumatic public event to just start suspending normal rules of operation. It's easy to say "Temporary," but how about a version of this that at least has some Congressional oversight?

I'm not sure what to say to "dump their problems here" and "take more money away from the country's citizens." Are you saying "problems" as a synonym for people? Are we not doing that whole huddled masses thing any more? Because we should probably change that statue.

I'd dispute the second part on factual grounds, though. I'd like to go over the hard factual evidence of this pervasive idea that immigrants are, in any meaningful number, soaking up welfare dollars.

I appreciate the response, yes. Thank you.

That's ****in' great. *saved*

Yeah, I dunno where people get these preconceptions about immigration. Just politicians demagoguing it? Assuming that if they're saying it so often, you can just assume it's true and not look into it? I dunno.

Never forget that any politician describing a problem is going to describe it in a way that that leads you towards their proposed solution. So don't just question the solution, question their framing and description of the problem itself.

It may start with that, but it spreads to the news and like anything in the news people whom it hardly affects get really passionate about it.

Then it goes to social media, then it becomes a social movement, and then we reach the zenith of pandemonium: Hashtag wars.

It feeds the media and the cycle repeats until it boils over, someone gets hurt, or it just runs out of steam.

As far as general misconceptions about how the government actually handles things: simply being uninformed. It's sleight of hand. Misdirection. All sources telling you what the book's about before you actually open it.

The one way indictment. It's so hard to figure out why we are all misinformed/uninformed/angry.

__________________
Letterboxd

Do you even know what a right is? Where do you get that immigrants get the right to privacy?

I'm not trying to dodge this question, but it's so f*cking basic and such an empty question it's not worth writing out a response. Sure some could bleed through, but with some pretty basic security measures (which we already have) it wouldn't be that hard to see who's Muslim and not.

Since you love pulling the Hitler card, weren't Germans fairly effective at it 70 years ago?

__________________

The liberal babies in congress can't even grasp that this is a terrorism issue and not a gun issue. The scare tactics and rhetoric I've seen Obama use to pass his anti-gun crap, is comparable to cold war era politics. Good on the house republicans for not bending.

LOL, Birthers on the bottom panel? Looks like the cartoonist has some wrong priorities as well

This thread does make me miss the negative rep option

I think the Germans were only good at it because most of the Jewish people they interned had already been living in Germany for a number of years. They had census forms and tax records going back years before the Jewish community suspected they would one day have to hide their religion. Neighbours and rival business owners could inform on them, and the government was often able to question a suspected Jewish person's friends and family because they also lived in Germany.

Their methods would not really work for screening immigrants from the Middle East into the US.

Where do you get that immigrants have to turn over everything they own for inspection?

How?

Jews are also an ethnicity, not just a religion.

Also that.

I'm actually getting a headache from this. You literally turn over what you posses when a US Citizen is flying in America, if the TSA asks. People who are immigrating to this country don't have the same constitutional as those who are here, what's so hard about this to grasp? Do you think they have more rights than an American flying from one state to another?


By working with the religious leaders from Christian and Yazidi communities to bring in refugees from other faiths? Just like a job, you may need to come with a reference. These are really elementary ideas, and I'm sure there's more complex screening.

And I'm not saying use Hitlers methods, I'm just saying profiling is effective

The German government's methods of detecting Jewish people weren't really that bad. It's what they did with those people after identification that's the problem, and I don't think anyone thought you were implying to do the exact same thing as the Nazis.

The problem is that you would need to let all the immigrants live in the US for a number of years without any fear of religious discrimination before their methods of identification would really work.

I see what you're saying, but my counter argument would betrusted references for those in other religious communities. But I'm sure there are even more sophisticated ways