Trump administration 2024-2028

[Oldgateboatdriver]

However, the LAPD is a notoriously left-wing institution that generally sides with enabling and encouraging violent protest and disruption, so…

My experience in the US is that there are Law Enforcement Agencies where the "local" cops are quite right wing and still racists that will support the Ku-Klux-Klan whenever possible but that most other Agencies, and especially the large ones in big cities (like LA), are simply much more neutral on their approach to policing and have adopted for the most part the community policing approach.

If you consider such an approach as "enabling and encouraging" violence, I think it says more about your political bias than that of the LA police force (whom I have never heard anyone else call "notoriously left-wing").

 

[brihard]

My experience in the US is that there are Law Enforcement Agencies where the "local" cops are quite right wing and still racists that will support the Ku-Klux-Klan whenever possible but that most other Agencies, and especially the large ones in big cities (like LA), are simply much more neutral on their approach to policing and have adopted for the most part the community policing approach.

If you consider such an approach as "enabling and encouraging" violence, I think it says more about your political bias than that of the LA police force (whom I have never heard anyone else call "notoriously left-wing").

My good man, feed a cup of strong coffee to your sarcasm detector.

I know I’ve been pretty open about my views of public order policing and the (mis)use of military forces in a civil capacity in my years on this website.

 

[Jarnhamar]

It sort of feels like western countries have this unique thing where non-citizens believe they have the right to live there based solely on wanting to.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

My good man, feed a cup of strong coffee to your sarcasm detector.

I know I’ve been pretty open about my views of public order policing and the (mis)use of military forces in a civil capacity in my years on this website.

Sorry for missing the sarcasm. Many strong cups of coffee taken, thank you.

 

[PrairieFella]

It sort of feels like western countries have this unique thing where non-citizens believe they have the right to live there based solely on wanting to.

People in the West generally have the right to due process and not being disappeared, illegal or not.

 

[brihard]

It sort of feels like western countries have this unique thing where non-citizens believe they have the right to live there based solely on wanting to.

No, but America like most other western countries has established a fair bit of due process for making those decisions about who does and doesn’t get to, and how people get kicked out.

The current strife over immigration is partly over immigration, but more than anything in the context of the flagrant abuses of due process happening in immigration enforcement- disappearing people on overnight flights to a Salvadoran terrorism prison, or to South Sudan, and resisting judicial oversight (although most lately the executive seems to have blinked on bucking the Supreme Court).

This issue has become a lightning rod for protest against the current administration for abuse of due process more generaly, because we’re also seeing them doing it to law firms, universities, states and municipalities.

All of this remains completely in the realm of law and law enforcement, and quite frankly the disorder has been relatively minor all things considered. I just haven’t seen anything remotely close to exceeding the capacity of civilian law enforcement to deal with. The deployment of armed infantry in the streets of LA is an escalatory flex of muscle by the federal executive. It’s pouring gas on what has a lot of potential to be a fire.

 

[FJAG]

It’s pouring gas on what has a lot of potential to be a fire.

I think its worse than that. They've deliberately set the fire in order for them to have something to pour gas onto in order to excite their political base.

That would ordinarily lose them much of the centre that they had this last election cycle but, and I'm spit balling here, my guess is that in the White House the feeling is that there are already enough conservative governments in enough states to control the election cycles in their favour for a long time to come. Considering the narrow majorities in both houses, that's a risky game.

 

[Jarnhamar]

No, but America like most other western countries has established a fair bit of due process for making those decisions about who does and doesn’t get to, and how people get kicked out.

And we see Trump is changing that due process.

It's unfortunate innocent peaceful people are getting jammed up along with people like this. Maybe the US economy will suffer because of all the deportations and they'll see a reserve in policy.

 

[Eaglelord17]

It sort of feels like western countries have this unique thing where non-citizens believe they have the right to live there based solely on wanting to.

Why should citizens believe they have the right to live where they do? Just because they were accidentally born there? The only people who have earned the right to live anywhere are those who have gone through a citizenship process, everyone else it was handed to them by accident. Illegals have generally done more to earn their place in the US than someone born and raised there.

Considering the US has profited and encouraged illegal immigration for several decades it isn’t surprising that sentiment has become more common.

Both sides of the isle did nothing because they benefited from it, cheap labour which didn’t get the same rights as a American citizen, essentially replacing slave labour and allowing the US to compete economically with many 2nd and 3rd world nations in labour costs.

They literally had illegals paying taxes which meant they couldn’t receive the benefits of said taxes but were paying into the system.

Those citizens rioting/protesting don’t see them as illegals, they see them as neighbours, friends, family. In many cases they have lived/worked with them for decades. Why would they want them deported?

 

[FJAG]

And we see Trump is changing that due process.

It's unfortunate innocent peaceful people are getting jammed up along with people like this. Maybe the US economy will suffer because of all the deportations and they'll see a reserve in policy.

And it's really not that hard to create a proper due process that gets rid of the undesirables.

Simply monitor arrests for criminal offences. At whatever level a bail application is made, determine the individual's citizenship/immigration status and, if the individual is illegally in the country, add on a federal immigration process whereby the individual is detained while his criminal case proceeds and, if found guilty of the crime, or if the individual has previously been found guilty of any crime, the immigration process is automatically completed via deportation.

Add in trigger points for a level of offence where the process kicks in even for those non-citizens legally in the country.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Why should citizens believe they have the right to live where they do? Just because they were accidentally born there? The only people who have earned the right to live anywhere are those who have gone through a citizenship process, everyone else it was handed to them by accident. Illegals have generally done more to earn their place in the US than someone born and raised there.

Robert Heinlein approach to citizenship. 100% behind that.

Both sides of the isle did nothing because they benefited from it, cheap labour which didn’t get the same rights as a American citizen, essentially replacing slave labour and allowing the US to compete economically with many 2nd and 3rd world nations in labour costs.

You're right. Very capitalist.

They literally had illegals paying taxes which meant they couldn’t receive the benefits of said taxes but were paying into the system.

Living in the US is a huge benefit compared to countries they come from. There's obvious reasons why people die trying to get into the country.

Yeah they're paying taxes. They're not not receiving anything in return.

Those citizens rioting/protesting don’t see them as illegals, they see them as neighbours, friends, family. In many cases they have lived/worked with them for decades. Why would they want them deported?

That's nice they don't see them as illegals. They're still illegals.

There's consequences to confronting heavily armed ICE agents and setting things on fire. If they're willing to pay then thats cool.

 

[brihard]

And we see Trump is changing that due process.

It's unfortunate innocent peaceful people are getting jammed up along with people like this. Maybe the US economy will suffer because of all the deportations and they'll see a reserve in policy.

No, he has little real power to change that due process, as it’s mostly defined by the legislative branch and reinforced by the judiciary through case law. Trump is trying to piquet and bypass due process by getting public consent to ignore it in the cases he and his administration can bring forward as the most extreme and the most unsympathetic. Ignoring the law isn’t changing it, and the courts are calling the administration out on that.

 

[Jarnhamar]

And it's really not that hard to create a proper due process that gets rid of the undesirables.

Simply monitor arrests for criminal offences. At whatever level a bail application is made, determine the individual's citizenship/immigration status and, if the individual is illegally in the country, add on a federal immigration process whereby the individual is detained while his criminal case proceeds and, if found guilty of the crime, or if the individual has previously been found guilty of any crime, the immigration process is automatically completed via deportation.

Add in trigger points for a level of offence where the process kicks in even for those non-citizens legally in the country.

That seems like a way better approach than what's currently happening.

Concentrate on violent criminals.

 

[PrairieFella]

And it's really not that hard to create a proper due process that gets rid of the undesirables.

Simply monitor arrests for criminal offences. At whatever level a bail application is made, determine the individual's citizenship/immigration status and, if the individual is illegally in the country, add on a federal immigration process whereby the individual is detained while his criminal case proceeds and, if found guilty of the crime, or if the individual has previously been found guilty of any crime, the immigration process is automatically completed via deportation.

Add in trigger points for a level of offence where the process kicks in even for those non-citizens legally in the country.

Which is literally what we do here.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

But the reason is extremely obvious in 1965 and it wasn’t for LE usage

No, no, I believe it was actually to protect some people from local law enforcement forces.

 

[Jarnhamar]

No, he has little real power to change that due process

A man can remake the world if he doesn't let facts get in the way.

I'm sure you're right. But there's a lot of stuff Trump isn't allowed to do, which he's doing. Being allowed to do.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Which is literally what we do here.

Not exactly .

if found guilty of the crime, or if the individual has previously been found guilty of any crime, the immigration process is automatically completed via deportation.

Convicted criminals in Canada can avoid being deported by a number of means like record suspensions, rehabilitation, appeals, or them being in danger of persecution based on race, religion, political opinion, nationality, or membership in a particular social group, including 2SLGBTQI+.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Do you seriously think it's justified to call out the military into the streets because of protests? Mind you these protesters are mainly protesting against masked ICE (masks for me but not for thee) jumping iut of unmarked vans with unmarked uniforms, grabbing people and them getting gulaged in El Salvador. No one has been killed, no one has been injured beyond protesters getting shot with rubber bullets or tear gas inhalation and there has been minor property damage. It's an obvious escalation on the part of the Federal government to provoke protesters into even more rage.

Peaceful protests, no. Torched vehicles and property destruction and the local authorities aren't stopping it, yes. There is not really an acceptable level of that, so someone has to stop it. Incapacity or abdication invites higher intervention.

Masks are a way of avoiding identification/doxxing. Should LEOs or other agents of government be subject to that risk?

No-one has been killed or injured right up to the point at which someone is. Then the recriminations begin: "if only someone had...".

On the subject of "obvious", it's "obvious" that plenty of people who oppose the administration in general have also been goading people to rage. What's the concensus on goading people into violent protest and interfering with lawful authority?

 

[brihard]

Just saw some live video of engagement between protesters and a combination of what looked like DHS Police and National Guard in a crowd control role. Pepper balls we’re being fired, not sure by which agency.

 

[quadrapiper]

Masks are a way of avoiding identification/doxxing. Should LEOs or other agents of government be subject to that risk?

As default, agents of the government must be subject to that risk.

What's the concensus on goading people into violent protest and interfering with lawful authority?

As a desirable/undesirable in Canada, or in another country?

To offer a straightforward example, a violent uprising in Moscow complete with FSB agents falling out of windows has no notable downsides.