Mexicans provide humanitarian aid to migrant caravan

[Yukaphile]

And yet police still use it. Don't misunderstand me, I agree. I just also think if people want to preserve our laws, that's one thing. But I also think that they got desperate enough to wanna come directly here to apply is tragic and sad. Honestly, what would be the harm if we let them in to apply? Is it possible they could succeed? Let them in under heavy guard? Or something? And if not, just send them back, assuming you wanna preserve the laws. I just don't think President Obama would have handled this whole caravan situation this poorly. I will say this, though. What's always legal isn't necessarily what's moral. Those people shouldn't have had to wait this long to be denied or approved. Again, my Filipino friend has been waiting since flipping 1996... she's seen four Presidents in the time since then. Just... wow.

[LittleRaven]

My main problem is that tear gas is verboten by the geneva convention

Only in warfare. Which has a very specific definition under the Geneva Convention. It is explicitly NOT banned in police actions, and the Geneva Convention has a section explicitly allowing the use of tear gas by the military for riot control.

I realize Trump would describe last weekend's action as an invasion by a hostile power. I didn't realize you were on board with that moniker.

[Darth Wedgius]

What alternatives are there? The DoD has a pain ray type of thingy, but is that any gentler? In between lethal force and open borders (and more caravans are starting up) you have limited options. And even most on the left aren't in favor of open borders. Obama used pepper spray and tear gas at the border more than once.

[Karha of Honor]

And yet police still use it. Don't misunderstand me, I agree. I just also think if people want to preserve our laws, that's one thing. But I also think that they got desperate enough to wanna come directly here to apply is tragic and sad. Honestly, what would be the harm if we let them in to apply? Is it possible they could succeed? Let them in under heavy guard? Or something? And if not, just send them back, assuming you wanna preserve the laws. I just don't think President Obama would have handled this whole caravan situation this poorly. I will say this, though. What's always legal isn't necessarily what's moral. Those people shouldn't have had to wait this long to be denied or approved. Again, my Filipino friend has been waiting since flipping 1996... she's seen four Presidents in the time since then. Just... wow.

The media would have covered for him. He could do way more cruel, remember the drone strikes?

[Yukaphile]

What "media?" CNN and MSNBC? Don't watch them. Fox News would invent insane conspiracy theories about him, though, that were hardly representative of the real man. And yes, he's done a few questionable things. All presidents do that. I don't support the drone strikes. But I also know that's part and parcel with the job, and I'd prefer someone who's mostly good than someone who's mostly bad.

[Robovski]

My main problem is that tear gas is verboten by the geneva convention, is technically a nerve agent, and just...is not something you should spray at people who aren't trying to kill or injure you, and especially not something you should use around children and the elderly.

You know what the Geneva Convention (or the Chemical Weapons Convention) doesn't apply to for tear gas? Law enforcement, which the conventions do not apply to. The US has also long had an executive order reserving the use of chemical irritants.

https://www.archives.gov/federal-regist ... 11850.html

Unless you consider this a war, and that caravan to be an invading army under a signatory to the act, in which case this would have been very different.

[Yukaphile]

I don't consider this an invasion so much as a matter of law enforcement, so... yeah. And I'll reiterate. I'm GLAD we're not butchering them like cattle. Give me tear gas and rubber bullets and whatever else like tazers, mace spray, stun batons, whatever over... just... bloody death. No.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

You are justifying the use of chemical weapons on children.

[Yukaphile]

Well, as a matter of pure law, it's legal to use for police, not soldiers. What should we do? Ban police from using it? If we won't let soldiers use it, then logically, we shouldn't let law enforcement either, right? That's a line of reasoning I can get behind. I'm also not justifying it. I'm very sad this is taking place. I feel sorry for their situation. I think the humane thing to do would be to let them in, even temporarily, than... this. But at the same time, you got lots of uptight people who think the law is everything, the law is PARAMOUNT, and they're part of society too. We gotta include them, right? To let them in would piss off those people maybe enough they'd start a riot, especially since most of them lean right. I dunno. I also feel disgusted the bureaucratic process is taking this long to either approve or deny their application. Especially since my friends go through that. It's a hellish procedure. Is it possible the Trump administration was responsible for this through executive policies that delayed it? We all know how Trump feels about brown people...

[Darth Wedgius]

You are justifying the use of chemical weapons on children.

Yes, I am. Again, what alternatives are there, other than open borders? Send SEAL Team 6 in for a pillow fight? Have the National Guard hold up pictures of sad puppies? A big sign saying, "Sorry, we're closed?" A cowboy at the border, opening a toll booth?

Look, I understand not wanting to see people hurt. But people are bringing along those children in an attempt to storm the border. Some discomfort should be expected. If not hurting children to any degree is a hard and fast rule for you, hey, you have to be you.