Actually, Trump has been the one trying to fix that (children being separated), but nobody wants to admit that he's doing something good even by their standards. Also, ICE is a part of DHS, so I'm not sure what you're really trying to get at
Not really sure what you're saying in the first sentence either, but technically all illegal immigrants commit crimes, so their crime rate is 100%, if that's what you're talking about.
You suck at facts
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-says-he-is-considering-a-new-famil...
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/30/upshot/crime-immigration-myth.htm...
I know, I know, "The liberal media!!!!!!" Cuz why think when you can shout nonsense
Wow what a take, "this class of people are illegal because we've arbitrarily decided to make it that way even though up until the 90's it wasn't actually a crime."
If we don't factor in that semantic bullshit, immigrants are far less likely to commit crimes (because, y'know, they have a lot more to lose for even minor offenses no one cares about). If they weren't being persecuted, they might do things like join unions and demand higher wages. The persecution of immigrants is kind of why pay sucks for some jobs, because businesses can exploit those workers and threaten to turn them in if they complain.
It's almost as if companies who are paying undocumented immigrants below minimum wage are manufacturing a situation to make the lives of their workers hell so that they can keep their wages low. It's almost as though your own life, personally, would be improved if we didn't spend an absurd amount of resources putting migrants into labor camps and instead reformed our immigration policy so that these people could legally exist in the US and have a path to citizenship.
Of course, you better not have smoked any fucking pot or broken any laws yourself if you're going to be calling people criminals for trying to work for a living.
First of all, why are you saying we "arbitrarily" decided to make undocumented immigration illegal? Simply letting in anyone who felt like it in the modern day would most likely ruin the economy, and homeless/unemployed rates would skyrocket as the ratio of people to jobs became even more unbalanced. Having open borders would also be a huge security risk, as many immigrants (especially ones who can't get in legally) come from countries that have more violence/gang violence, crime, and terrorism than other countries. This could easily act as a disguise for the people who would do such things. Another reason is that it would offset the voting/political party balance, which is around 50/50 at the moment I believe. Since democrats want to let them in, when they get in, they would vote democrat, in order to keep the ones in power who are keeping them in the country. In the same way, democrats would vote to keep the immigrants in, which would help keep them in power. I know that's not a problem to you, but if you look at it without either of our political biases, it still offsets the balance and would most likely drastically change America, for better or for worse.
I agree with you about it being immoral of companies to take advantage of them, but again, they sort of brought it upon themselves by immigrating here illegally. We shouldn't have to take in everyone who needs refuge just because we feel bad for them. It's not our place to help everyone in the entire world. Shouldn't their own governments be working to better themselves and help out their own population?
And in response to you aggressively saying I better not have committed any crimes, otherwise no, I haven't. I'm not even 15 yet. Yeah, go ahead, make fun of me, but it's true. You probably won't believe me, and even if you do, you probably have almost no chance of listening to anything I say, but I'm just putting that out there.
>I'm not even 15 yet.
And that, right there, is why I'm stepping in and asking you both to chill.
Plasma, I say this with all possible compassion as someone who used to work as a game moderator for children and teens: This isn't the place for you and I think you know it.
You have a good head on your shoulders and you're going to be a force to reckon with when you get to adulthood, that's very clear from your posts. I wish I had been as good of a writer when I was 14! But there are things you aren't considering and all of this is very out of proportion for a single mention of ICE in a text game.
I've been following your comments from the beginning -- I get notifications every time there's a new comment on my game's page -- and that's twice now you've brought up that you're a minor, as though that should excuse gaps in your knowledge. It might explain those gaps, but "explain" and "excuse" are two very different things. Your age doesn't mean others are required to go easier on you when they push back on your arguments.
This was a game written by and for adults. Most of the people you'll find discussing it online are also adults. I think on some level you're aware of this, or you wouldn't bring up your age like you do. While I don't want to discourage you from learning more about these issues, the other commenters here also aren't obligated to educate you. You need to find a more appropriate space with people your own age and adults who have the right training and experience to guide you. Maybe that's a classroom and teacher, or a cool librarian, or a forum or youtube channel geared toward students of history or ethics -- there are a lot of resources out there! But I guarantee they'll all have more meaningful takeaways for you than the comments on an itchio thread.
To Helmic: I'm not sure if you were aware of the other thread before this where Plasma mentioned they were a minor, but now that that fact's been established, I hope you'll heed this warning to disengage as well. All told, you were both good at keeping things fairly civil, but like I've told Plasma already, this isn't the right setting for this.
We good here?
Thanks, I've been trying to wrap it up for a while, but I do admit that I was kinda using my age as an excuse the first time, but the second time I was just using it to help back up that I hadn't committed any crimes. Sometimes I just find arguing with people fun, and my original post was a little over aggressive. I'm just glad (almost) everyone was civil when they commented.
Also just realized how many dislikes I got on my comments, not too sure what I expected on this site but I'm surprised that many people even cared what I said
And for the other article, I guess I was wrong, that's it. I heard somewhere Trump was fixing that problem (which I think Obama put into place, again, not sure since I don't keep up with politics enough) But I do think Trumps right that illegal immigrant families can use children to sort of cheat the system. I think there was another way to do that but I forget. Personally I just think we should send the whole family back where they came from, with this new law in place it'll be the immigrant's fault for crossing illegally. They knew the risks and decided to take them
Well, I have the impression that your sources of information are influencing you a lot and that they are pretty biased. For instance, wrt Trump fixing a problem put in place by Obama, it is true that some legislation allowing separating children from their parent was there before Trump, but it was under his administration that much more separations occurred, on a very different basis, because of new policies. Saying “We should separate children from abusive parents” and “We should separate children from their parents as a mean to punish them” are very different things.
