Thursday, December 20, 2007

Documentary: Children in Jail

See the trailer for a forthcoming documentary film on the T. Don Hutto Immigration Detention Facility in Williamson County, titled "Children in Jail":

RELATED: Austinite Greg Moses has a piece about the Hutto facility in Counterpunch.


Anonymous said...

This is not the fault if the government. The parents knew the risk when they decided to break the law. Want the kids out of jail deport all of them immediately. Its is just another excuse like rush over the border have your kid in America get a free pass for the rest of your life. Be born here get no free house,free food ,free medical care just die homeless and sick. Get over yourselves if you want to support these free loaders move them into your home and pay thier way. If this is not exceptable to you then just vote in a President who will enforce the immigration laws, pass hard line employment laws and send the illegal ALIEN's not immigrants home. If they come legally then more power to them.

Anonymous said...

"This is not the fault if the government."

Right, these children jailed themselves. This is the first non-government sponsored jail in history. Give me a break!

Anonymous said...

How do you know the Parents knew the risk when they decided to......?

Lots of folks born in the US get lots of free stuff. Get over yourself! You can start by doing something about your ignorance. For example, get the facts right.

Anonymous said...

My facts are right.Every Illegal alien has broken the law by arriving unlawfully. Ask anyone of the detained and they will tell you they thought they could hide until liberal hearts like you gave them amnesty. you would bitch if they moved into your houseand expected you to pay thier way. Americans can not enter any other country without a visa same as they should have to enter and stay here. Now see how big a know it all you are I will sign my name will you ? are is that asking to much of you to stand by your crap. Angelia Youngblood ,Texan,Native American, Citizen

Gritsforbreakfast said...

Angela, first, any native american who is tired of freeloaders is welcome to go lobby for taxation on reservations, then I'll take that claim more seriously.

As for the rest, did you even watch this video? The family pictured is jailed because their plane, on its way to Canada, had to emergency stop in Puerto Rico and they were detained for deportation. The child is a Canadian citizen.

So how does incarcerating that child prove your point?

Maybe listen a little before you run your mouth. Things may not always be just as you assume.

Anonymous said...

What other options are available? Illegal passports are just that; Illegal!

Taking the children from the parents and placing them with a child protective services outfit? This has happened, many times, when US Citizens violate the law.

Releasing the child to Canadian authorities? If he is a Canadian he is Canada's responsibility, right?

Build "user-friendly" holding facilities? We have plenty of empty living areas on military bases; we could move these violators and their families there. We did that for our South-east Asian friends in the late 1970's. This is probably the best option.

I just remembered we also did it for American Citizens! Indian reservations and the Asian-American Camps during WWII. By golly if they were good enough for American citizens who did NOT violate the law they are certainly good enough for the non-Americans who violated our laws.

If our Government did not condone the illegals the volume would be reduced to allow an expeditious resolution to these cases. Now all I need to figure out the solution to this problem is to get the governemnt to make a decision.

Retired 2004

Gritsforbreakfast said...

"if they were good enough for American citizens who did NOT violate the law "

The problem with that, Retired, is that they weren't good enough. The Japanese internments were wrong, which is why Reagan apologized for them, and the seizure of Indian lands and herding them onto reservations constitutes one of this nation's most disgraceful episodes. Those are not precedents that justify any similar action.

In addition, you write, "If our Government did not condone the illegals the volume would be reduced"

That horse is out of the barn. Our government condoned immigration on behalf of employers for decades, and now wants to blame the workers for its own past policy decisions. You can't deport 12 million people, or herd them all onto old military bases, no matter loud people holler about it - it's physically, financially and logistically impossible.

Finally, Retired, why do you think this boy should be separated from his parents - just because the plane emergency landed in Puerto Rico? Listen to the clip and tell me how it's justified that this kid and his parents are locked up?

Anonymous said...

"he is a Canadian he is Canada's responsibility, right?"

No, he's his PARENTS' responsibility, and you want to take him away from them.

Anonymous said...

Grits, the problem with living in the country illegally is that you can get busted at any time. That's the risk they take.

This is a tragedy, no doubt about it. But you can't get upset at the fact that the law was enforced once they were caught.

Immigration is a touchy subject and the choices made by this set of parents and millions of other parents can result in this sort of sticky situation for the whole family. But, it's the risk they took.

I want the borders enforced and employers fined. That puts me at odds with the Democratic Party platform, but not the average Democrat. Americans want the laws enforced--be it by a wall, patrols, cameras, fines for employers, or deportations. Preferably, all of the above working in conjunction. You can say "that barn door's been opened already," but that's just an excuse not to start enforcing the laws that have been on the books for decades. Kind of like the old saying that you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Just because it wasn't enforced in the past (which would have been the perfect approach) does not mean we should not enforce it now and take increased measures to right past wrongs (the good approach). You can't say "it's too late" and ignore the problem. The only other alternative is some form of amnesty, and amnesty is one of the least popular of ideas (admittedly I do not have the stats), except by true party elites (R's for jobs and D's for votes), and people who, like you, just flat out think it's too late and that there's no justification for enforcing the law at this point.

Immigration is a tough subject. When examined one kid at a time, it can be downright tragic. But you don't blame the law for that, you have top blame the parents who knew they were here illegally and were willing to take that risk.

Gritsforbreakfast said...

"You can't say "it's too late" and ignore the problem."

Not my position. I say we admit it's too late and FIX the problem, by legalizing those who are here now and expanding annual immigration quotas from Mexico and Latin America. What you call "amnesty" I see as the same as a statute of limitations on any other offense - you just can't prosecute and deport 12 million people. It logistically can't be done.

And why can't I say "it's too late"? What if it is? Why try to enforce an unenforceable law? What's the point? That's precisely what led Ronald Reagan to pursue "amnesty" in 1987.

What if trying to enforce them makes us LESS safe in a variety of ways - more unreported crimes, less compliance with driving and other regulations, etc., why can't we make the choice that tolerating immigration is the lesser of evils? I don't buy that argument at all.

Neither do I buy the argument for jailing children literally for the sins of their fathers.

Finally, the majority of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 before we invaded Iraq. IMO the majority is as wrong on immigration as they were on that, and the populist anti-elite appeal you make, to me, rings of demagoguery that either capitalizes on people's ignorance or else participates in it. Immigration is a complex topic, and people are encouraged too often by rhetoric like yours, IMO, to think of it in extremely simplistic terms that don't help much in reaching honest, long-term stable solutions.

Anonymous said...

1. I did not say he should be separated from his parents. Those that commented noted he should not be "jailed" because of something his parents did. If his parents are jailed and he shouldn't be what is the only option? Separation.

2. Why is the "horse out of the barn"? Because our government condoned their illegal actions. If the water in the bathtub is running over the first action is to turn off the water! The second action would be to pull the plug (if you wanted to reduce the water in the tub), or sit back and wait for the water to evaporate (if you wanted to keep the tub full).

3. WWII ended in 1945; Which President apologized how many years later?

4. I watched and listened to the video. A death on the plane caused the plane to land in PR where the parents illegal activity was discovered. I think keeping the family together is the right thing to do in this case but what if they had been caught with drugs? Where would the child be in that circumstance? I use the smuggling of drugs because it is easier for people to understand; I'm not attempting to debate the drug issues on this blog.

We must start solving this problem with illegals by stopping the flow of illegals. When we accomplish that we can concentrate on the "horse running around the pasture". If we continue to allow "new horses that have escaped the barn to graze on the pature, there will no longer be any grass for them to graze".

Retired 2004

Gritsforbreakfast said...

What makes you say the bathtub is full, Retired? Texas has an extremely low unemployment rate. Latin American immigrants come here because of demand for low-wage workers in our labor market. The tub isn't full at all, the free market thinks there aren't enough workers, which is why they're coming. In fact, a more accurate analogy would be that labor shortages have created a vacuum that is drawing water into the tub.

Why is the horse out of the barn? Because you can't logistically detain and deport 12 million people. If you don't think that's possible, your comments make no sense. I doubt you do, since you're a reasonable person, yet your arguments all imply that this impossible ideal is a) achievable and b) has no external costs to liberty and safety. I think you overstate a) by a longshot and dramatically underestimate b).

Finally, are you defending the Japanese internments and saying that's a justified policy that should be replicated? If so, we'll just have to agree to disagree, just like I don't want to replicate the Cherokee Indians' Trail of Tears or Indonesian transmigration. Two historic wrongs don't make a right. best,

Anonymous said...

Scott; 12 million seems like a full tub to me.

We cannot continue to allow illegals into this country; We must stop the flow then work on the 12 million (a real scientific figure I'm sure!) that are already here.
Of course I do not justify the camps! I believe we could put the detainees (for a nice, soft, acceptable definition) into a better living condition. Living on a military post in barracks that are not being used by our military would be much better for the family than living in a prison or jail or whatever they are calling the holding facilities today. This would also put pressure on the decision-makers that are sitting on their hands to do something!

Retired 2004

Anonymous said...

Hi it's me again. Fancy you using the TRAIL OF TEARS to say let them all stay. Why couldn't my people stay where we were? Why did you kill us at Wounded Knee? Because you wanted a CHEAP way to get our land. Guess what that 12 million you want to stay are killing you and takeing your land, check what flags they are waving at there protest against sending them home. It is not the American Flag my friend. Call me anytype of person you want but I will be glad to stand at the front of the line and carry a gun AGAIN for your right to do just that. Yep I am also a veteran. Why not put homeless veteran's in those empty house's and barrack's. How about heath and mental care for the veterans at no cost as it was promised to us when we enlisted or were drafted. Now you can defend all these lawless people and give them amenisty if you want, but make sure you are the one who pays for it, because I will go to my death defending my country from this Invasion. And believe me I am not a single voice crying in the wildrness. Angelia
P.S. I really do like this site and find most of your views pretty much right on, especially when discussing TDCJ and it's good as well as bad points. Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

"Finally, the majority of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 before we invaded Iraq. IMO the majority is as wrong on immigration as they were on that, and the populist anti-elite appeal you make, to me, rings of demagoguery that either capitalizes on people's ignorance or else participates in it. "

Wow that statement says a lot about you. So democracy is a great thing as long as the majority supports your position. However, if they don't then the majority is just wrong huh?


Gritsforbreakfast said...

That's right, Todd, I'm willing to disagree with the majority.

Fancy that.

Gritsforbreakfast said...

Retired, give "amnesty," as you call it, and the day after that number is zero, not 12 million. That's semantics, a fallacy that points out that calling immigrants "illegal" is an arbitrary distinction, especially economic migrants. Somebody could have declared the tub "full" the day before your ancestors got here, but the economy can handle more people and in the big picture in this country there's plenty of room.

Personally, I'd rather everyone were signed up with the DL bureau and paid property taxes, but apparently you and many others prefer to reside in a fantasy world where we make laws based on how we wish things were instead of how they are. What's wrong with recognizing economic reality? Why not learn from our mistakes instead of repeat them over and over?

Finally, Angela, this is not an invasion. 1845 was an invasion.

Anonymous said...

Scott: I just have to disagree with you; I'll leave it at that.

Well maybe just one comment: The couldn't declare this country "full" when my ancestors arrived. They were Studebakers and this country needed them to make the wagons that would later haul the indians off their land to the reservations! Happy Holidays GFB!

Retired 2004

Anonymous said...


Fighting Terrorism Since 1492.

Ask the American Indians what happens when you don't control immigration.

Anonymous said...

"Finally, the majority of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 before we invaded Iraq." Grits, to what do you attribute that? Is that from a poll taken in 2003, or in 2007?

I don't remember anyone even pretending in 2003 that there was any known direct link between Hussein and 9/11.

This is revisionist history. Reminds me of those who claim the proceeds from the Texas lottery were supposed to go 100% to public schools. I paid attention to both issues both times, and those claims were not made.

I'm paying attention to the immigration issue, too. I've said it before, we can't deport 12 million people, but we can deport some; we can show the international community that we respect our own laws, even if they don't. We should BEGIN to deal with illegal aliens and maybe fewer will come.

I asked you once before, but I didn't get an answer -- how many are too many?

Gritsforbreakfast said...

On Saddam and 9/11, revisionist history my ass!

As for how many immigrants are too many, I'm frankly more worried from an economic standpoint about too many Californians moving to Texas compared to Mexicans. Not only do I tend to have more in common with the Mexicans and for the most part like them better as a class, but the effect on housing prices creates great instability when Californians sell a million dollar 3-bedroom in Palo Alto and move here to drive up prices. That affects most average folks more than any harm from Mexican immigrants, who anyway are the backbone of many US-citizen owned small and mid-sized business, especially the hospitality and construction industries.

Bottom line, I don't see the harm from population growth from immigration at current levels, EXCEPT from the unintended external consequences of having a large undocumented population (no DLs or car insurance,tax avoidance, etc.).

When I was on the state Bioterrorism Preparedness Planning Committee at the Department of Health, I came to understand that having a multimillion person undocumented population would be a NIGHTMARE in the event of an actual bioterror attack (since you couldn't track who had it and people would be less likely to report quickly). It also creates a class of crime victims and witnesses who are reluctant to cooperate with police or other authorities. The public safety detriments to current policies are simply far greater than any benefit from pretending to enforce an unenforceable law just for show.

Let the market decide how many workers come here, IMO. History shows it will anyway.

Anonymous said...

Grits, fun to see you work in the full contact sport that is the immigration debate. Many LOL lines in this thread.

Happy holidays,
Bill Bush

Anonymous said...

Grits do you like the Mex cans because they well not talk to the Police.Hell I like them they work for less money or $5.00 hr and a case of beer.