> Nonviolent crowd control does not seem to be a core competence of these federal forces.
Why is crowd control even needed?
ICE existed for many, many years before now, and them doing their job never caused crowds previously (under both R and D administrations), so what (rhetorically) changed?
Oh this is easy: a gigantic funding increase is being used to massively expand workforce with minimal training, then that workforce is being deployed with an ambiguous mission and apparent arrest quotas, while also being told they’re immune from any criminal liability for their actions (they’re not), including internal memos telling them they’re allowed to enter private homes without judicial warrants (they’re not), and a SCOTUS decision that is being represented to mean that racial profiling is legal now (it's not)
Deploying literal hordes of poorly trained, well-armed men onto American streets with explicit guidance that runs directly contrary to the US Constitution's plain text can, will, and SHOULD attract crowds in opposition.
It's completely intentional choice by the Miller/Noem wing of the admin to create media drama and "own the libs", overriding the Homan wing which was pushing for easy wins rounding up known criminal offenders in custody / in red states / etc.
There's a big difference between seeing an immigration raid where you know whoever gets picked up is going to have access to a lawyer, be subject to proper due process, and at worst be sent back to their home country. We knew - or at least believed - that if they detained someone who was a citizen, that person would be released.
Now, when we see ICE grabbing someone, we know that person probably won't have access to legal representation even if they are here legally, even if they're a citizen. We know they might be sent to a concentration camp in a foreign country they aren't from, and we know they might even get murdered in the street. It's a very different dynamic.
Exactly. Comply with the armed men and you won't die. Compliance is required for a healthy society. Just comply and you won't be hurt. Compliance is required for a functioning society. Comply and purge society of undesirables. Even if your rights are violated, comply or you will be hurt. Remember America's slogans: land of the free, home of the brave if you comply with the masked mens' orders. Remember the hacker ethos: compliance with the government is required for your safety. Otherwise, you are engaging in domestic terrorism and will be dealt with swiftly by anonymous agents of the state.
Truly ridiculous. I briefly wondered if you actually believe this rhetoric, but then I saw your three-day-old account.
Not going to debate with someone who doesn't have the courage to stand behind their convictions. Your account is a throwaway and only exists to launder white supremacist talking points. Best of luck with your new American government, we all know it ended well for the leaders of Italy and Germany.
The only lunatics in this scenario are the ones executing people in the street and dragging children out of their homes and into concentration camps as well as the people who think that's all reasonable. It's entirely reasonable, and right, to resist them.
"They are actively committing a crime against the citizens of the US."
What crime? You are confused if you think being an undocumented immigrant is a crime in it of itself. It's not, despite the right's attempts to paint them as "illegal." And, even if it were a crime, that doesn't suddenly make it "evil" or something that victimizes the "citizens of the US." The law is not the arbiter of good and evil, and very often it's on the side of evil. Miscegenation was a crime. Sodomy was a crime. Those acts were no more evil then than they are now.
So next time when they arrest you, thinking you’re an illegals immigrant, put you in jail for 2-4 weeks, without access to a lawyer or even a phone call, and then release, will you be stretching your neck to make it more comfortable for them to tread on it?
lol, "your people." I've seen enough of you guys in real life to know what lies behind the bold Nazi larp online. Meek, resentful, small men. You may piss your pants at the sight of a non-white person, but 99% of people don't. Nothing you hope for or think is going to happen will happen. The world you yearn for never existed and never will. Much like every other fascist movement in history, the current one will only be remembered as a pathetic failure.
Huh? We have no reason to believe e.g. Kilmar Abrego Garcia was non-compliant in any way with anything, and he was sent to a foreign torture prison without access to a lawyer, without being charged with a crime, without being afforded basic rights that everyone (citizen or not) has under the US Constitution.
We have numerous examples of people who have followed all legal procedures and have legal status in the US who were likewise denied basic Constitutional protections.
As Timothy Snyder (an historian of Central and Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and the Holocaust) observed last year:
> If you accept that non-citizens have no right to due process, you are accepting that citizens have no right to due process. All the government has to do is claim that you are not a citizen; without due process you have no chance to prove the contrary.
Because ICE has gone way beyond arresting illegals. In Boston, for example, they stopped a naturalization ceremony literally minutes before people were to become citizens. Do you support that?
Before now, ICE was primarily paperwork police. Border patrol and occasional visits to round up undocumented immigrants at factories still existed, but the vast majority of their job was related to like customs and visa forms. It's like hiring 10x the postal workers and giving them guns and "qualified immunity" -- you're going to get some new problems.
Nope. While there was a large increase in immigrant inflows, there is no evidence their enforcement decisions were significantly different than e.g. Trump 1.
What the statistics actually show is that the United States was a far more attractive destination for immigrants under Biden, but that enforcement policies were largely the same. That makes sense since enforcement policy is mostly set by Congress and not by POTUS.
The increased appeal of the US is entirely explained by the fact that the US economy was excelling far beyond any country in the world, and especially any country in the western hemisphere. At the same time, Central and South America were getting hit by successive political and economic shocks amplified by COVID.
The significant reduction in immigrants towards the tail end of Biden is not because they suddenly decided to "follow the law" and "close the border." It's that they decided NOT to follow the law anymore and to unilaterally ignore the asylum laws that Congress actually sets.
So really what you're seeing is the difference between the US being a desirable place to come to versus an undesirable one. I'm sympathetic to the argument that there's moral hazard involved in making the US appear to be highly desirable to people who we don't want to accept, but I'm not sympathetic at all to the view that that means the executive can simply ignore whatever laws they want, or they can turn the US into such a dystopian hellhole that only the most desperate immigrants around would bother attempting entry.
Exactly. There should be no crowd control, because they shouldn't be interacting with the American public except as fellow citizens. If someone commits a crime against them, they can turn the details over to the local police for enforcement of assault, etc.
At this point after how they've been operating, they shouldn't even be allowed to carry weapons. No guns, no grenades, no pepper spray, no masks to escape accountability. These are supposed to be public servants, they should be accountable to the public. If someone they're trying to apprehend reacts violently then they can escalate the situation to the local police or maybe the FBI after the federal agencies have done the work of regaining the public trust.
Didn't ICE and predecessor organizations do workplace raids? Maybe that's not as big of a crowd, but it's still a crowd. I think they would tend to do workplace raids in concert with the FBI.
Surely, you're not saying that the feds are saying things that are counter to what's actually happening on the ground, are you? /s
At this point, you just have to assume the truth is exactly the opposite of what the feds are saying. How do you know a fed is lying...their mouth is moving.
This is beyond naive at this point. The objective is to hurt people. Republican voters have repeatedly explicitly asked for it. There's a reason they flocked to Trump. Cruelty is the point. It's astounding the number of people still so credulous wrt what is happening in this country. You have "Christian" preachers talking about empathy being a sin for fucks sake. Like how can people maintain this sort of ignorance into 2026?
And I don't mean this towards you necessarily. I get some people are still entertaining folks who will never participate in a conversation in good faith because it might influence ignorant observers who stumble across the conversation. But does that ever actually play out? How much time is wasted on people of obvious bad faith? How much time has been wasted on the Shapiros, the Kirks, the Tuckers of the world? The random HN commenter who drops obvious bullshit before disappearing to never be heard from again? You cannot out earnest people flooding the zone with bullshit.
Well, if local police is not cooperating then it's as designed by the constitution (states have the authority to police), to not give federal government powers to make the country a police state. Feature, not a bug. Federals should discuss and persuade the state and their police.
Nobody said the police are not policing. They have their own jobs and not there to do the bidding of the federal government. You're saying this like the local authorities are meant to drop what they are doing at the drop of dime because the feds have a request. These are not dangerous criminals that require a timely response before causing more harm. These are people trying to live their lives and it will not harm the rest of the citizens by doing immigration enforcement at a slower pace.
Your reply to deepsun made no sense as reply to deepsun. You said You're saying this like the local authorities are meant to drop what they are doing at the drop of dime because the feds have a request. But deepsun said the opposite almost.
I mean yeah, they're not "for" it but you can see how deploying the PD would be helpful as they're more inclined to be non-violent and also I'd reckon they have far more experience than ICE considering the mass requirements which results in many many ICE officers being pretty much just militarized citizens with lacking experience put into stressful situations.
They should augment deployed enforcement with those who have such expertise.