@OracleOutlook's banner p

OracleOutlook

Fiat justitia ruat caelum

5 followers   follows 2 users  
joined 2022 September 05 01:56:25 UTC

				

User ID: 359

OracleOutlook

Fiat justitia ruat caelum

5 followers   follows 2 users   joined 2022 September 05 01:56:25 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 359

I am related to an above average number of police officers and security personnel and ICE agents have not earned that "don't behave anything like normal police officers" comment. They seem normal to me. You are going to have to be more specific in your derision.

Yes, that is true, but the innocence of the ICE agent does not hinge on any of those details.

Honestly the driver looks at the ICE agent for a millisecond. I don't think she registered the ICE agent was in her path. She is a bad driver and sometimes bad driving kills someone, but I don't think this video proves that she was gunning for the agent.

That said, the thing that keeps getting missed in this discussion is that Good is dead. She's not on trial here. Her mens rea doesn't matter, except for the normal human response to tragedy is to speculate, "That could never happen to me, I would never do the thing which lead to that."

Legally speaking and physically speaking, it is entirely possible for Good to have normal intentions and still pose a serious and immanent threat to the ICE agent.

It would probably be best to do several iterations of a mock election using this method before actually putting it in an amendment. I would be curious to see how it goes.

There are huge bottlenecks for the Federal Government w/r/t deportation. It takes years to get the final order of removal for everyone. If they want to achieve their goal of reducing illegal immigration, they need to try to create strong disincentives for illegal immigration outside the normal process.

So they set up ways to soften the blow of self-deporting. Just use an app, we'll set up a flight anywhere you want to go and give you cash.

And if you don't self-deport, here is the consequence. Swift arrest without being able to settle your affairs.

An estimated 1.9 million people self-deported this year, with or without the app. Far more people are leaving on their own than are being removed by ICE.

More importantly, this signals to others not to make the attempt. Even when the US goes back under control of the Dems, there will always be this hesitancy for an entire generation of people. "Do I really want to go to the US, set up a life, just to risk the Americans electing another Trump and losing everything I built?" Now it seems possible in a way it didn't before.

ICE will never deport a tenth as many people as it can disincentivize from staying.

That is the proper, traditional Riot. What is muddying it is the conflation of "riots" where a group of people go to a protest looking for trouble ahead of time, armed and armored. Jan 6 seems like a traditional riot. BLM and Anti-ICE protests have been something else, but called a protest/riot for some reason.

Edit: Kids these days, can't even riot properly! SMH.

I think the key maneuver he's relying on here is the secret ballot nomination,

I think the key maneuver is actually the veto ability combined with the Condorcet method. Condorcet by itself selects for moderate candidates.

I do like the idea of limiting candidates to other members of the body that is electing the State's Senator. I wonder if that was just an oversight to exclude that requirement here.

can remember videos of 9/11 where people are repeating, without full awareness, "oh my god" again and again. That kind of honest emotional reaction actually still hits me hard because, well, it's coming from somewhere genuine, isn't performative, and uses a vocabulary (religious) that really is mostly reserved - when earnest - for "big" moments. Turning "what the actual fuck" into a kind of emotional war cry cheapened the whole thing from the get go.

I was thinking the same thing, though not as articulately. I wondered, "What would 18th century Americans say if they were present at a similar event?" "Oh my God" is a good one. But the F-bomb becoming as common as "um" has not been a good turn of events. It feels very unserious.

But in that case, why do you believe the government when it says "do not resist when police arrest you, if it's all a big mistake you will be released within a couple days at the most?" But then don't apply that same trust to it when it says, "Same applies to ICE?" It's the same source. If the problem is federal/local, substitute being arrested by the FBI, would you have the same response to being arrested by the FBI as you do to ICE?

Instead, I have seen a large online campaign to paint ICE as unusual with zero jurisdiction on anything, operating under no rules, with no training. When really, they get the normal amount of training (ICE agents train at FLETC for about 3–5 months, then complete on-the-job probation before being considered field-ready, which is a comparable amount to the FBI.) They have jurisdiction to arrest people, even American citizens, over crimes committed in their presence. And the people they arrest can only be held for so long before a judge approves the detainment. And the people they send out of the country all have final orders of removal from an immigration judge.

Oh sorry I linked to the wrong article, here is Two Amendments on the Senate, where he tries to fix up his amendment so that it does not rely on FORTRAN at least: https://decivitate.jamesjheaney.com/p/two-amendments-on-the-senate @stuckinbathroom so you see it.

Maybe I will write a top level post so everyone sees it. Not really culture war in itself but maybe I can find an angle to give it a personal spin.

A Senate, If You Can Keep It and Two Amendments on the Senate would be a good read for you if you have not seen it yet.

This kind of misinformation will get more people killed.

Q: Aren’t people in ICE custody routinely “disappeared”?
No. Like most (not all) law enforcement agencies in the modern era, ICE has a detainee registry and an online portal where you can search for them. They have a website listing their locations and describing visiting hours, lawyer hours, and ways to send gifts to detainees.
Also, of course, unlike most prisoners, people detained for immigration violations usually have the option to leave, in fairly short order, by accepting voluntary departure to their home country.

Thankfully, someone made a helpful FAQ:

Q: Is ICE abducting people?
No. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is a federal law enforcement agency. It was established in 2003, but its predecessors date back to the Immigration Act of 1891. Every Congress has voted to fund ICE, every year, since its creation.
As a law enforcement agency, ICE has the authority to detain and arrest people for legitimate law enforcement purposes, if consistent with the Fourth Amendment.

Q: Wait, is entering the country illegally a crime? I thought it was just a civil offense, like a traffic ticket.
Illegal entry into the United States is a federal offense under 8 USC 1325, carrying a maximum prison sentence of up to six months on the first offense (higher on subsequent offenses). That makes it a Class B misdemeanor (18 USC 3559), which means it is alternatively punishable by a fine of up to $5,000 plus an additional civil penalty of up to $250. That’s quite a bit more than my worst traffic ticket.
ICE frequently declines to prosecute suspects under this statute, because it is a criminal charge that requires a jury trial, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and all the bells and whistles. It’s much easier (and cheaper) to just send them home. Basically, ICE is willing to pretend a foreigner ended up in America by some elaborate and hilarious mistake (“Whoopsie! Musta takin’ a wrong turn at Albuquerque!”), because ICE thinks it’s better to just send people home instead of punishing them plus sending them home.
That last part seems to be where people get the idea that it’s all just a civil offense. ICE frequently shuts its eyes to the criminal offense because it’s too much of a bother. Illegal entry is a civil offense only as an act of mercy.
Even then, the U.S. prosecutes this crime tens of thousands of times every year.
(That said, worth noting: overstaying a visa is not a crime. However, ICE can still remove anyone who overstays a visa from the country.)

Q: Wow. Oof. Alright. What happens once someone is in removal proceedings?
In a removal proceeding, the individual is brought, “without unnecessary delay,” before a federal official called an “immigration judge” (not a real judge) whose job is to hear ICE’s evidence, the suspect’s defense, and issue a ruling. ICE can arrest and initiate removal proceedings with relatively little evidence (probable cause), but, by this hearing stage, ICE must show proof (clear and convincing evidence) that the individual is not legally present in the United States.
If this federal official agrees with ICE, he issues an order of removal. The suspect may appeal this decision until it gets to a real judge, and can potentially go all the way to the Supreme Court. Once appeals are exhausted, the order becomes final and ICE may return the individual to his nation of citizenship, or to another nation that agrees to take him.

Q: Can ICE arrest anyone else?
Congress has granted ICE broad authority to arrest people, including citizens, if ICE has probable cause to believe they have committed other crimes, especially crimes committed in the presence of ICE officers. (8 USC 1357(5))
This is not an unusual power. Many law enforcement agencies can arrest someone, even without a warrant, especially when that person commits a crime in their presence. Of course, they still have to make a probable-cause showing to a judge within a couple of days, at most. This creates a ton of drama in police procedurals: “I know you think he’ll kill again, Higgins, but if you can’t convince a judge he’s the murderer in the next sixteen hours, the chief says we have to cut him loose!”
When ICE arrests a person for a non-immigration crime, those rules apply. They must have probable cause at the arrest. They must show that cause to a judge to continue holding that person for more than a very short while. They must find another law enforcement agency willing to deal with it and turn the person over to them, because ICE is only equipped to prosecute immigration violations. The accused must be convicted by a jury of her peers with proof beyond a reasonable doubt in order to be punished.

There is a ton of misinformation going around right now - that ICE has no real authority, that they can't touch a US Citizen, etc etc. It's all lies, and these lies possibly contributed to this woman's death. People are acting reckless with ICE because they don't think ICE can react the same way police can. They can and will.

It's too bad he's been burned for life and never got a chance to go in the military or police.

I think the irony is:

Scenario 1: Protestor stands in front of a car. Stunning and brave. Not escalating in itself to deadly violence. Does not deserve to be run over. The protestor's cause of the week is more important than the driver getting to where they want to go.

Scenario 2: Cop stands in front of a car. Boo, hiss, they must want someone to be killed. What right do they have to escalate a situation like that?

This does not seem like a consistent worldview, but I suspect that swap the roles and Conservatives would have similar responses. So what's up? I think liberals trust protestors more than cops and conservatives trust cops more than protestors.

I don't think shooting was "the right move," in that by the time the shot was actually fired the danger had already passed. But that's a skill issue - the decision to shoot initially was 100% justified, as is backed by countless cases.

This was my first thought as well, but my second thought is, "in the split second, if you think this person is willing to run you over, just because they missed the first time doesn't mean they won't run someone else over." If the deceased hit another ICE agent on the way out, everyone would be asking why this guy didn't take his shot.

Yeah, there's negligence and then there's normal and then there's overbearing. God forbid I pretend to be the arbiter of normal, but what I think is normal and what works for my family (ages 2 through 7) is this:

  1. When there's food to cook, I'm cooking it in the kitchen with the kids upstairs. If there's something really finicky about the food and the kids have been rowdy, I might put on TV.

  2. Next priority - house cleaning/maintenance. Do the chores while the kids play. Get interrupted every ten minutes to kiss a boo boo or settle a dispute.

  3. When there's nothing to cook or clean or I just want to sit, pull out some knitting to work on in the same room as the kids. Sometimes I get looped into a conversation with them for a few minutes, sometimes they just want me to look at them or what they're doing. I make appreciative comments.

  4. A few times a week, do a family activity together. Take them to a playground, take them to the library, etc. At home, play Go Fish for 20 minutes. Or set up two forts and throw stuffed animals at each other. This is really only the "concentrated play with kids" time and it's not even every day.

  5. Help kids with school work, make sure they're reading, and then read to them for 40ish minutes (we read a story to the younger two before bed, which the older two are able to listen in on if they wish, then a chapter book to the older two after.)

There is no "play with kids for hours at a time." There is sometimes "shepherd kids around a children's museum for hours at a time" which is different. And it's always work, it's not fun. The enjoyment is in watching the slow growth of the children. The fun is that moment when a kid shares a toy on their own and you think to yourself, "I taught them that." But why would anyone feel guilty about not having as much fun as their child when playing a game for four year olds?

I considered running a private daycare when I started motherhood but I didn't own my own home. Also the initial expenses to meet all regulations. Also 3k per kid seems off to me. Admittedly it was a few years ago but back then it was more like 2k per kid under 2 and 1k per kid above three.

Though looking at these numbers, it does sound like those would have been surmountable barriers. But I suspect there's some scamming to get to the 5k/month number.

In the comment above this you said, "The US is scary." Now you are saying the US doesn't use it's Navy. This seems like a contradiction.

The US doesn't have to shoot things in order for the Navy to be used. The Navy is used by projecting power. Every time a country wants to do something that may have geopolitical implications, they have to think, "But what about the Americans?"

The Americans don't want to have to deal with China the same way the rest of the wold has to deal with us. On some level it's sheer pragmatic selfishness, on another we believe our Christian/Liberal morals are superior to all others and so if there must be a Hegemon, it is best if it's us. But either way there's no contradiction here.

I agree with you that the US is scary. Building a fleet is an intention to use it. The US built a fleet and intends to use it, as shown by them using it all the time. I don't see the contradiction here.

Well, no. The US obviously uses our fleet to maintain its hegemony. Most of the time our fleet keeps shipping safe and reliable. But more than that, we maintain our military dominance to prevent another World War. A tactic which has been successful for 80 years, we shall see if that can continue.

China building a rival fleet is obviously threatening to the US. I do not comment on the relative morality of it. They have as much of a right to it as the US. Though there is something to be said about China not showing as much of an interest in keeping shipping lanes safe.

If he detects an threat to the US (which is a term left almost entirely to the executive's discretion) he has 60 days to do whatever he wants before Congressional approval is required.

Anyone who tells you they understand what's going on is probably an idiot. It seems likely to me that it all makes the most sense if you have classified intelligence at your fingertips. But what I have noticed is that over the past decade or so China has been influencing a lot of current events in a plausibly deniable way.

China pushes on Iran and Russia to stir up regional trouble. Iran pushes on Hamas and Hezbollah to create Oct 7th. Venezuelan oil goes to Cuba and China to be refined (because they mismanaged their oil industry enough that they no longer have the ability to refine it locally.) Russia and Cuba have soldiers stationed in Venezuela. Russia supplied Venezuela with the Buk-M2E air defense system that the US completely stomped on last night.

These countries are all tangled with each other. You can't really have a foreign policy for one without taking the others into account. And a good proportion of the US political class is terrified of China. China has been building up a fleet and industrial capacity that can utterly dominate the US Navy. And no country goes through the enormous expense of building up a fleet without intending to use it.

It's not a coincidence that China sent an envoy to Venezuela yesterday, where they reportedly spoke with Maduro for 3 hours.

It's also not a coincidence that China has fleets of ships around South America, ostensibly to deplete the fish around the coast (which is bad enough.) But consider how many drones can fit in a shipping container. Consider how the Ukraine pulled off one of their more successful attacks against Russia. It doesn't take a lot for China to turn their annoying and environmentally damaging fishing fleet into a drone kill fleet, right at America's south.

If you want to understand what is going on, you need to start seeing the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Iranian water riots, China firing missiles and practicing live fire drills while surrounding Taiwan, and the US capture of Maduro as all different angles of the same problem.

One reason why I think the US pulled on this thread of the knot is because we have a True Democratically Elected leader of Venezuela safely tucked away, who can potentially take the reigns. That's the harder part to pull off and what will probably determine if this was actually a successful operation.

Everyone's first posts are censored, it's something due to the code the website is based off of and the mods can't turn it off. They have to manually approve all comments until the user gets over a certain amount of karma. If they could turn it off, they would. They generally approve most posts but sometimes don't notice one is in the queue.

Do I get to collect and battle politicians? Maybe a Pokemon Go type game for canvassing.