SURVEY: Should children brought to a country as a child be allowed to remain?

[ChouDoufu]

if momma snuck her kids in the back door at

the movie theatre, when discovered, does

mommy get evicted yet the kids can stay?

 

[ChouDoufu]

if they have been in the country "their whole lives"

why haven't they become legal?  it would be possible

to leave the country to their native land and get in

line and apply like law-abiding applicants.

 

if they are now adults, how are they now functioning?

do they have valid SSN's or using forgeries? 

did they register with selective service (by law illegal

immigrants are required to register)?

[Bluespunk]

If you are raised from childhood/born in a another country, then, illegal or not, you should be allowed to stay there.

[Dumbastheycome]

Not  really valid  as limited  survey  questions.

If the  parents  are  legitimate  immigrants  obviously  yes.

If the  parents  are  not  legitimate  then  nor  are  any  children.

 

[Kieran00001]

3 hours ago, ThaiWai said:

There are too many people applying through the correct channels to be ignored. People that illegally cut the queue deserve nothing. Rules are rules. We live in a world that has borders for good or bad. It is unfortunate that some were born in less fortunate circumstances but no one country can absorb the fleeing masses of all the others combined. 

 

Yet the question is referring specifically to people who have already been in the US for a long time, those who have grown up there and are now adults, there is no arguement that these people who have already been absorbed cannot be absorbed, and they are not fleeing masses, they are American adults who were born abroad, try to stick to the question.

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, ChouDoufu said:

if momma snuck her kids in the back door at

the movie theatre, when discovered, does

mommy get evicted yet the kids can stay?

 

 

If the kids remained undetected in that theatre until they were adults then not only would they get to remain but they would be able to claim ownership of the theatre, that is how the law works.

[Kieran00001]

45 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Not  really valid  as limited  survey  questions.

If the  parents  are  legitimate  immigrants  obviously  yes.

If the  parents  are  not  legitimate  then  nor  are  any  children.

 

 

The question is about adults who arrived illegally as children, the parents become irrelevant once their children become adults, try again.

[Scott]

At the core of the situation is the question of whether children should be held responsible for events that were out of their control.   Most children do not get a vote if the parents decide to move and many children will not even be aware of their immigration status.  

 

Although DACA is the main focus, the survey does apply in general to other countries.   For example, some time ago there was a story about a Farang man who moved to Thailand with his two children, when they were very young.   He married a Thai lady and then he died and she cared (and to the best of my knowledge) still cares for the children.   The children attended school in Thailand and spoke only Thai.   Should they be deported?

 

 

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, ChouDoufu said:

if they have been in the country "their whole lives"

why haven't they become legal?  it would be possible

to leave the country to their native land and get in

line and apply like law-abiding applicants.

 

if they are now adults, how are they now functioning?

do they have valid SSN's or using forgeries? 

did they register with selective service (by law illegal

immigrants are required to register)?

 

They have not become legal because the question is regarding the US and they have had some terrible policies over the years that have resulted in so many of these people living in limbo, allowed to stay but not granted citizenship.

[Scott]

I should also add that in the situation in the US, the parents could be legal, but that would not extend to children who are of age.    If you are in the US and illegal there is no method to legalize your situation.  

 

 

[Credo]

They should be allowed to stay.   Kids shouldn't be held responsible for events that were beyond their control.   

 

[ChouDoufu]

26 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

They have not become legal because the question is regarding the US and they have had some terrible policies over the years that have resulted in so many of these people living in limbo, allowed to stay but not granted citizenship.

in that case trump did the right thing by rescinding the executive order.

it's congress' responsibility to craft legislation to resolve the problem.

pretty simple really....congress must decide if they will be deported, or devise

some method to attain citizenship. 

[USPatriot]

No they should go back with their parents. You are either a legal citizen or not.

[joecoolfrog]

Obviously illegal immigrants should be used as cheap labour by wealthy ' law abiding ' citizens. When it then becomes poltically expedient to do so they should be thrown out with the trash , along with their kids , pets and accumulated belongings.

Edited September 17, 2017 by joecoolfrog

[halloween]

Under new Oz legislation, even legal long term residents can have their visa cancelled if convicted of an offence carrying a 12 month jail term, and that includes driving offences. People with over 40 years residence are being given their marching orders.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-24/convicted-criminals-have-visas-cancelled/6254120

[starky]

8 minutes ago, halloween said:

Under new Oz legislation, even legal long term residents can have their visa cancelled if convicted of an offence carrying a 12 month jail term, and that includes driving offences. People with over 40 years residence are being given their marching orders.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-24/convicted-criminals-have-visas-cancelled/6254120

Number one most of them are Kiwis so sending them back to New Zealand is hardly displacing them. Number 2 I'm not sure how revoking a visa is at anyway at all relevant to the OP. 

[Grumpy Duck]

I believe the survey was flawed in its design. 

I have mixed feelings in this regard. First, I believe if children were brought here illegally, and lived under the radar through adolescence and even into young adulthood with no criminal violations, let them stay, some even volunteer to serve in our military.  But I do not believe in giving them educational preferences. 

Reagan issued a blanket amnesty, it was supposed to legalize the millions of illegal immigrants, and be followed with future rigorous immigration enforcement. It wasn't done. 

Rather than going after children I would prefer to see existing laws enforced against illegal employers & illegal slumlords. The law provides a mandatory fine of $5000 for each illegal employee. Imagine if this was enforced. No jobs, no illegals. But of course republicans will protect their donors. 

 

[inThailand]

No.

They were illegal immigrants when they came in and now as adults they still are. Why should this group get special treatment? That's why DACA is rightfully being repealed. Their stay of deportation is coming to an end.

 

[greatwhitenorth]

Another title for this thread could have been "Trump ... Right or Wrong"

My vote is for YES.  I don t believe that children should be punished for the actions of their parents.  

How many seven year olds can say to Mom and Dad "Sorry, Ill stay here while you both go to America?' 

Edited September 17, 2017 by greatwhitenorth
SPELLING

[Kiwiken]

I guess if you came in illegally as a child and have never committed serious crime you should be entitled to a review and a chance if you pleaded your case.

However if you have committed serious crime back you go. Blend and learn

The same should apply to Legal immigrants. If you are a good citizen you are welcome. If you want to be a criminal then deportation should be immediate after incarceration.

Why have a harsher attitude to Immigrants than those born in your Country?

Because they choose to move to your Country and you extend them the Privileges of living there.

Those born in Your Country belong and we must accept the good with the bad. 

[mania]

If a normal member brought this topic into the Thai news section it would be locked & blocked

 

The US/Trump whining has been allowed to go way too far on TV IMHO This topic has no place in Thai news period...... That is if I am allowed to comment have an opinion on this threads existence?

 

That aside of course they should be deported or the game becomes..smuggle children in keep them hidden in the hopes of a citizenship reward.

[Credo]

1 hour ago, mania said:

If a normal member brought this topic into the Thai news section it would be locked & blocked

 

The US/Trump whining has been allowed to go way too far on TV IMHO This topic has no place in Thai news period...... That is if I am allowed to comment have an opinion on this threads existence?

 

That aside of course they should be deported or the game becomes..smuggle children in keep them hidden in the hopes of a citizenship reward.

Your being a bit defensive.   Trump has basically said he does not plan on deporting the Dreamers.   He's simply put it back in the hands of Congress to get it sorted out.   

 

Many of the Dreamers are serving in the US Military.   Since the early 2000 there have been about 100,000 foreigners serving in the Military.   They are given an expedited path to citizenship.   The Dreamers serving in the military can't.   They is no path to citizenship for them.   

[sirineou]

1 hour ago, mania said:

If a normal member brought this topic into the Thai news section it would be locked & blocked

 

The US/Trump whining has been allowed to go way too far on TV IMHO This topic has no place in Thai news period...... That is if I am allowed to comment have an opinion on this threads existence?

 

That aside of course they should be deported or the game becomes..smuggle children in keep them hidden in the hopes of a citizenship reward.

I think you might have a point about  the placement of the thread and IMO a right to comment on it,  but you are certainly wrong in questioning it's existence.,

[thesetat2013]

 Webster  short "not according to or authorized by law :unlawful, illicit; also :not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)"

what difference does it make if they are an asset or not. If their parents entered illegally then their offspring is illegal as well. the law doesn't have a special condition for choosing which class or who is most educated to apply for them! Make a baby in thailand with your farang spouse and see if they become citizens of thailand.. it will not happen.
especially if you entered thailand illegally.
i sympathise for the offspring, but ultimately it is their parents problem because they initially broke the immigration laws

[Scott]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

I think you might have a point about  the placement of the thread and IMO a right to comment on it,  but you are certainly wrong in questioning it's existence.,

There have been several comments about it being placed in Thailand News Section.   I will move it to World News.  

[hawker9000]

If still minors, then their parents should take them back to their home countries.   If now adults, they must take responsibility for THEMSELVES and return to their home country, GET IN LINE to immigrate if they so desire (like everyone else who wants to come), and if they have an issue with that, they can take it up with the parents who broke the law and illegally smuggled them to the U.S. in the first place.  I'm not sure some case can't be made for human trafficking against these parents, since smuggling children into the states was essentially a self-serving tactic for helping to enlist sympathy and ensuring their being able to remain.   And most of the existing "sympathy" is really just dems wanting, no needing, to recruit new voters.

 

Edited September 18, 2017 by hawker9000

[ThaiWai]

11 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Yet the question is referring specifically to people who have already been in the US for a long time, those who have grown up there and are now adults, there is no arguement that these people who have already been absorbed cannot be absorbed, and they are not fleeing masses, they are American adults who were born abroad, try to stick to the question.

They way I read "children who arrived illegally" meant to me children who arrived illegally.  Not sure how you missed that. Seems fairly straight forward for an average English reader. Maybe you are the one who needs to reread the OP to help YOU stay focused on the question asked. I don't see why you are adding in some sort statute of limitation based on time in country.  Just because illegal immigrants have been sapping resources from their host for an extended period of time it by no means means they should be allowed to continue to do so.  As far as you splitting hairs over the past or present tense of someone being part of a "fleeing mass" thats just baby talk that I won't engage in.  You calling a foreign criminal living in the US an "American" proves that you suffer from a very serious misguided perspective.  

[sirineou]

1 hour ago, Scott said:

There have been several comments about it being placed in Thailand News Section.   I will move it to World News.  

Personally I don't  care , I appreciate the threads you start regardless of what section they are, they stimulate, thought provoking and entertaining conversation.

 

[realenglish1]

13 hours ago, ELVIS123456 said:

I totally disagree with your solution to what was said at the time would happen.  However I do see the obvious problem, and that is why Trump has handed the can of worms back to Congress/Senate and given them 6 months to fix it.  

 

The reason for no is very clear - the law of unintended consequences from setting a precedent. If you allow people to break the law (illegally enter) and them give them citizenship/rights (and/or their children), how do you legally stop everyone else in the world doing the same in the future.  That is the dilemma that Trump has handed back to Congress/Senate.  How do you make such an exception without also making a precedent. 

Good point Trump did do the right thing by handing it back to the legislators Lets see what happens although we all know what the outcome will be

[inThailand]

3 minutes ago, realenglish1 said:

Good point Trump did do the right thing by handing it back to the legislators Lets see what happens although we all know what the outcome will be

Congress and the Senate would not pass DACA so Obama signed into law. Its should be theirs and they should repeal it. But, its a hot political potato,  so is the right outcome assured?