"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

It is NOT a crime to be in the U.S. without the country's permission,
i.e., a proper visa. The only "penalty" for such a situation is expulsion,
which is handled civilly. CRIMINAL charges against "illegal" aliens are
brought when some other aggravating circumstance exists, such as
transporting narcotics.

Oh, really?

Then why do The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines list a variety of sentences that
can be imposed for various forms of Unlawfully Entering Or Remaining In The
United States? Committing felonies rapidly adds to the sentences available,
but it remains that being in the country illegally is an offense in itself.
That the nation often chooses to deport rather than add to the prison
population doesn't mean there is no offense.

Who said anything about "rounded up?"

I first used the phrase in reference to Japanese-Americans during WWII. You
then repeated the phrase:

"Your point is well-taken, but you forget that individuals can be "rounded
up" and placed in detention/jail without being crimnals. Here are a few:
* Juveniles"

So if you didn't mean "rounded up" then your choice of words was poor.

I've busted teen-agers for murder, armed robbery, burglary, car theft, and
the entire gamut of crimes visited upon adults. These little snowflakes
are put away.

Which brings us back to Japanese-Americans who were not individually
arrested for specific crimes, but because of who their parents were. Can
you describe any cases in which you arrested underage American citizens for
the offense of being the children of someone unpopular?

Oh, fudge! Change the goalposts, why don't you? You were the one who said
"In the end either everyone has the same rights or nobody's rights are
safe."

Oh get real, nobody not suffering oxygen deprivation thought I meant that
someone with an overdue library book has the same set of rights as someone
accused of murder.

All I'm pointing out is that not everyone has the same rights, even though
the consequences might be the same (locked away for the duration plus six
months or something similar).

Everyone does have the same rights, i.e. everyone picked up by the cops for
a 72 hour psych eval has the same rights, everyone accused of murder has the
same rights to remain silent etc., everyone entering the juvenile justice
system has the same rights and so on. Nobody claimed that juveniles have
the same rights as adults, obviously a ten-year-old can't vote but that is
because the law sets the age at which citizens can vote and everyone of that
age has the same right unless they have lost it via due process. But all
citizens have the same right to vote subject to the same conditions, that is
the equality the law demands. Yet the law would not allow citizens of
Japanese ancestry to be denied the right to vote based on their
heritage--see the difference?