(10-31-2018 10:04 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:25 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 08:46 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 08:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-27-2018 03:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  If you get a chance, take a look at the people in the caravan and ask yourself how many you think have a skill or the education to make it here. Seems to be mostly young men 15-25 and mothers with toddlers. I doubt there are any engineers or dentists walking that road.

But this gets back to the real problem. We don't have a comprehensive legal immigration policy. We need one. It needs to be compassionate but realistic. Since Trudeau has been so vocal about condemning us, we could even start with Canada's, although I don't agree with them on anchor babies.

Since these caravans are attempting to reach the US to claim asylum, what would a good solution be? Instead of making asylum seekers request asylum at a port of entry, allow them to do so at a consulate? Completely remove asylum from our immigration policy? Allow people to apply online?

This one is a tricky subject if one feels that the US has a responsibility to offer asylum seekers refuge.

From the interviews with people in the caravan, most are coming looking for jobs. A bad economy is not grounds for asylum. One man said he was coming because he hoped to get a pardon for attempted murder.

Online? I see nobody carrying laptops.

Yes, allow them to apply a consulate or whatever, but they still have to be vetted at the border. The word has spread about the right things to say to be admitted.

My point is that this caravan is actually attempting to do something legally - applying for asylum as a US port of entry. The validity of the claims is not really germane to that conversation.

They're obviously not trying to enter the country illegally - if they were, arriving in a 1,000+ person caravan isn't exactly the best way to slip into the country undetected.

So if we want to stop the caravan(s) we need to adjust our policies on asylum and how you apply for it.

Do you know how the vetting at the border for asylum seekers works? I don't, but it sounds like you're saying there is no vetting at the border or after it. Is that the case?

Yes, there is vetting, and a howl every time an "asylum seeker" is rejected.

I am sure the people in the caravan have learned(maybe from those activists?) the best way to be accepted into the US is to claim to need asylum, even though the interviews on all sorts of media show that most of them are traveling for economic reasons.

Asylum from war is one thing; asylum from poverty another.

"They want to kill me" is a good asylum statement. "I want to be an electrician" is not. I bet that by the time they reach the border, that kid's story will have changed from the latter to the former.

It's only legal if they tell the truth about why they are applying for asylum, and it fits what we are willing to grant asylum for. Otherwise, it is just lying.