posted
I did a search on this and didn't see anything, but I may have missed it. If it has been discussed elsewhere, please let me know.
This new law was passed in December of last year. It did not get very much, if any, news coverage. I believe that it is very important and deserving of discussion and debate among the citizens of the U.S.A. as well as its leaders (and anyone and everyone outside of the US as well).
Among the sections that I found the most noteworthy were the following:
quote:Denies admission to the nationals of a country that refuses or delays acceptance of its nationals ordered removed from the United States.
quote:impose on smugglers the same sentences that the aliens they have smuggled would receive
In reference to the first quote: I feel like this is unfairly remonstrating people for the actions of their government. I think we all know that sometimes our governments act in ways that we do not agree with or support. I don't believe that any individual should be punished for the actions of others, and that is what this section of HR-4437 seems to do.
As for the second quote: While they use the negatively connoted word "smugglers," this sounds to me as if it could/would include family members or charitable organizations that offer aid to suffering people. I do not think that it is right to punish a person for the equivalant of a felony crime for not turning one of their family members or loved ones in to be persecuted for illegal entry into the US.
There are many aspects to this bill that are worthy of discussion, but I will not bring them all to attention here. I have come across articles elsewhere that are extremely vilifying in their portrayal of this law. I am trying not to be inflammatory regarding this bill or the people who made it law.
In general, I feel that this bill equates illegal aliens to terrorists, and seeks to treat them with the same disregard that the Homeland Security Act enables "potential terrorists" to be treated. Furthermore, it is my considered opinion that the egregious amount of money that would be spent in accords with this bill could and should be spent on the many social institutions in this country that lack sufficient funding.
It is my intention to bring this discussion to the board for intelligent debate, with many contrasting opinions, not insults and condescension. If I am incorrect in anything here posted, or if anyone is incorrect in further posts, please make your corrections in a manner befitting mature adult conversation.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
