I read articles like this and I think that one's opinion on this is directly correlated with whether one thinks that immigration laws should be enforced. I don't think most people are calling for immigration laws to be eliminated and anyone who manages to make it here should be allowed to stay indefinitely.
What I don't get is the whole selective enforcement of laws thing. If someone somehow managed to get across the border that gets the person some sort of award for sneaking past the border patrol and thus a right to stay here for being a particularly sneaky lawbreaker? The legal reasoning behind all this just strikes me as ridiculously convoluted.
I feel like there are two types of people, those who respect property rights and those who don't.
You might say that one type of person wants everyone to be like docker containers, not interfering with one-another and another type of person wants to be like a monolithic application where anyone's problem becomes everyone's problem, but free resources are to be shared.
> one's opinion on this is directly correlated with whether one thinks that immigration laws should be enforced.
Oh, absolutely. If someone doesn’t like the surveillance state, this is just another datapoint on an ever-increasing list. Still disappointing, but not uniquely so.
The people so civically unengaged that they actively champion the increased surveillance of modern life right up to the point it’s used against their pet causes disgust me.
What I don't get is the whole selective enforcement of laws thing. If someone somehow managed to get across the border that gets the person some sort of award for sneaking past the border patrol and thus a right to stay here for being a particularly sneaky lawbreaker? The legal reasoning behind all this just strikes me as ridiculously convoluted.