Death toll at the border

[normiss 903]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Is there a difference in your mind if you:

1) Go camping and return the camping gear later because you can, not that it wasnt good camping gear, just that you didnt want to pay for it, or buy and use and don't return the gear?

2) Go to the store with the intention of getting free gum, knowing there probably isnt any free gum to have there, and leave with gum anyway?  Or Pay for the gum?

3) Go to a concert, and as you are walking to the entrance - see a side door, and duck in without a ticket?

Or, ignore the open door and get in line for the ticket booth?

It's time to step away from the bong brah.

[billvon 3,131]

8 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

If you had your kids and went into a store and robbed it, and the kid died by stray gunfire, who would be responsible?

Or another way. . . . If you hear that there is a job opportunity in South Chicago, and you and your kids load up and go there, who's responsibility would it be if the kids ended up getting sick on the way there and died in a hospital? 

Good questions.

I will answer them once you answer mine.  (If you can't answer it - ask yourself why.)

[turtlespeed 226]

On 5/17/2019 at 8:58 PM, normiss said:

Asylum isn't illegal. It's what America is.

Media sensationalizes stories, it's their job. I didn't read the NPR version anyway, so I'm not even sure what you'er referring to. When I looked up the details there were plenty of sources available.

I would expect he did actually sleep on the ground during his trip to a better life.

They did cross at a legal point of entry. The North side of the Rio Grande IS the border - our side.

Weird how rivers are just that in SOOOOO many places.

It's not shitty writing, it's a shitty approach to immigration.

Much like my European ancestors.

Welcome to America.

Now back to your fear mongering hatred.

Wow - you defend illegality like its your bread and butter.

Asylum is fine - if you do it legally.

That's what law says.

Maybe you don't get the reality of legal vs non-legal - Or Illegal.

So I'll show you some examples so that, hopefully, you aren't confused anymore.

This is legal:

And so it this:

 

THIS: Is not legal - 

And assuming the the shore they are going toward is the north side of the Rio Grand THIS ISN'T EITHER:

 

SO - despite the hatred you have for US laws, my statement stands.

It is STILL the fault of the parents and not the US government that the kid died.

It is also STILL obvious to me, that the OP didn't want facts to be given, just sensationalism.

The OP wanted to be able to criticize the current administration's border policies - and completely disregarded the truth.

It reminds me of those pesky deniers that you all keep complaining about.  Yet - no one but Rick and I can seem to point that out?  Why do you think that is?   

 

 

[normiss 903]

Also legal:

On April 8, the child and mother were provided an NTA, or "notice to appear" in court documents, the official said, and the family was released on their own recognizance at the hospital, meaning they were no longer in border patrol custody.

 

The picture of the kid sleeping on the ground is not part of the story of the deceased kid - it's just an example of the environment they face making the trek to the border.

Reading comprehension is a handy skill, for some.

Edited May 20, 2019 by normiss

[billvon 3,131]

Quote

despite the hatred you have for US laws . . . the OP didn't want facts to be given, just sensationalism.

So despite all your attempts to get some personal attacks in "under the radar" you still can't answer the simple question I asked.

Your inability to answer it is very telling.

[turtlespeed 226]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

So despite all your attempts to get some personal attacks in "under the radar" you still can't answer the simple question I asked.

Your inability to answer it is very telling.

I am sure you don't mean the questions under the quoted text where I asked you direct questions?

The ones you didn't answer.  Surely, you don't mean those questions do you?

ETA : I higlighted the questions so you could find them without effort.

Edited May 20, 2019 by turtlespeed
Added previous quoted text for reference.

[billvon 3,131]

9 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I am sure you don't mean the questions under the quoted text where I asked you direct questions?

The ones you didn't answer. 

I will be happy to answer your questions once you answer mine.

This is the third time I've asked you.  I think you are unable to answer it, because even the effort would cause you some very severe cognitive dissonance.  It looks like you are unable to put yourself in someone else's shoes, even for a moment.

[Coreece 190]

14 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Dude, please tell me that you didn't print that out and physically highlight it.

[normiss 903]

Looks like the highlighter function to me.

[Coreece 190]

Ya, it's a bit too clean.  But it's still funny to think about.

[turtlespeed 226]

19 minutes ago, billvon said:

I will be happy to answer your questions once you answer mine.

This is the third time I've asked you.  I think you are unable to answer it, because even the effort would cause you some very severe cognitive dissonance.  It looks like you are unable to put yourself in someone else's shoes, even for a moment.

Let me see if I have this straight - 

1) I ask you two questions that can be verified.

2) You ignore them and ask some of your own.

3) You won't answer my questions because you are waiting for me to answer yours.

It seems a LOT more telling that you are giving push back on this.

I can hear a song in my head as fight against this - 

I think its the theme song for Barnum and Bailey.

Edited May 20, 2019 by turtlespeed

[turtlespeed 226]

12 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Dude, please tell me that you didn't print that out and physically highlight it.

Technology 

[billvon 3,131]

8 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Let me see if I have this straight - 

1) I ask you two questions that can be verified.

2) You ignore them and ask some of your own.

OK, so you refuse to answer the question.  So be it.  I'll be happy to return the favor.

 

 

[turtlespeed 226]

On 5/17/2019 at 10:52 AM, billvon said:

If the US allowed them in, gave them a court date, and then released them with their kids, then their parents are, and would remain, responsible for the health of their children.

Yes - That is correct.

On 5/17/2019 at 10:52 AM, billvon said:

If DHS takes their kids from them and puts the kids in a cage, then DHS is responsible for the health of those children.

Correct again.

On 5/17/2019 at 10:52 AM, billvon said:

Pretty simple really.

I agree.

On 5/17/2019 at 10:52 AM, billvon said:

Let's ask this in a more familiar setting.  Let's say you were pulled over for speeding.  CPS came and took your kids away.  No one would tell you where they were.  A week later you found out they had died in custody.  Would you be guilty of felony murder?  And would you blame yourself?  Or CPS?

Yes.  Since it was my decision to endanger the child - I would hope that I would be held to task.

On 5/17/2019 at 10:52 AM, billvon said:

  On 5/16/2019 at 5:32 PM, turtlespeed said:

Can you definitively prove that he wasn't sick and dying already when he got there? 

Was he refused medical service or treatment?

 

This is just me . . . but it sounds like his parents may be the main culprits here.

Your turn.

[turtlespeed 226]

2 minutes ago, billvon said:

OK, so you refuse to answer the question.  So be it.  I'll be happy to return the favor.

 

 

Your turn.

[billvon 3,131]

Just now, turtlespeed said:

Yes.  Since it was my decision to endanger the child - I would hope that I would be held to task.

OK.  Thank you for answering the question.  I don't really believe that you would hold the government blameless if they took your child away and held them against your (and their) will, and then had them die - given your constant railing against the government's "nanny state" mentality and their incompetence.  I doubt you have suddenly decided they would make better, or even adequate, caretakers compared to you.

That being said - 

Was the child sick when he was taken away? - We don't know. We can't prove things either way.

Did he receive medical treatment?  - Yes, after he became sick.

[turtlespeed 226]

2 minutes ago, billvon said:

OK.  Thank you for answering the question.  I don't really believe that you would hold the government blameless if they took your child away and held them against your (and their) will, and then had them die - given your constant railing against the government's "nanny state" mentality and their incompetence.  I doubt you have suddenly decided they would make better, or even adequate, caretakers compared to you.

That being said - 

Was the child sick when he was taken away? - We don't know. We can't prove things either way.

>>>Actually we pretty much do.

Did he receive medical treatment?  - Yes, after he became sick.

>>>It would be silly to receive treatment before.

OK - The NPR story said he had a High Fever when they were apprehended on the north side of the rio grande.

I'm not sure, but a High Fever is indicative of illness.

 

They were then given a court date and the child was admitted to the hospital.

(This is from NPR) 

What wasn't mentioned is that they were on the floor of a cage.

I didn't see that anywhere in the article - 

I searched - but I also couldn't find any reference to that kid being anywhere but on the banks of the rio grande and the hospital.  I did see where they were released from custody

[Rick 67]

On 5/17/2019 at 9:58 PM, normiss said:

They did cross at a legal point of entry. The North side of the Rio Grande IS the border - our side.

not according to the article 

"after he and his mother crossed the southwest border and were apprehended, according to the Guatemalan consul in Del Rio, Texas"

"They were apprehended on April 3 on the north bank of the Rio Grande in central El Paso, Texas,"

maybe they slept on the ground on there way here but what does that have to do with 

 

"Photos show children sleeping on ground at Texas Border Patrol station"

 

not sure where you are getting they went to a border check point??

 

[normiss 903]

"the north bank of the Rio Grande in central El Paso, Texas"  - Well that IS where the legal point of entry is.

Then add that they were given court dates...tells me they were entering legally, otherwise they would have been separated into different areas - doubtful they would allow them to go to the hospital together either, as they would be in custody for illegal entry.

 

 

The "photos" part is NOT from the original story about the dead kid.

 

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

 

Was the child sick when he was taken away? - We don't know. We can't prove things either way.

Did he receive medical treatment?  - Yes, after he became sick.

From what I've read, yes. He was already sick when they were taken into custody.
My understanding is that he went pretty much straight to the hospital.

Pneumonia can be a real bugger. The symptoms aren't all that severe. You feel like crap, you have a bit of congestion and breathing is harder than normal (but not truly 'labored'). By the time the symptoms get 'bad'. it's late in the game, often too late. 
And once you reach a certain point, all the medical care in the world can't save you. Jim Henson (of Muppet fame) died that way. By the time he reached the hospital, it was too late.
Personally, I had it back in 05. I had the flu and kept not getting better. After a about a week and a half, I started coughing up just a bit of blood and went to the doctor. He told me another day or two and I would have ended up hospitalized, another day or two after that and I would likely have not survived. He also mentioned how Henson died.

Purely speculation, but I'll guess the kid got sick on the way north. Not much the parents could do. He likely would have died if they had turned back, stayed put or moved on.
I also won't put a lot of blame on DHS/CBP. If the kid was already sick and they got medical care as soon as practical, they did as much as they could.
There's a LOT of stuff I'll hold them accountable for (or would like to see them held accountable for), but this isn't one.

[turtlespeed 226]

10 minutes ago, normiss said:

"the north bank of the Rio Grande in central El Paso, Texas"  - Well that IS where the legal point of entry is.

Really?  I have been across that bridge, I kid you not, over a thousand times.

I lived in El Paso for about 15 years. 
There is no Bank on that bridge

bank¹

/baNGk/

noun

noun: bank; plural noun: banks

1. 1.

   the land alongside or sloping down to a river or lake.

   "willows lined the bank"

   synonyms:

   edge, side, embankment, levee, border, verge, boundary, margin, rim, fringe, fringes, flank, brink, perimeter, circumference, extremity, periphery, limit, outer limit, limits, bound, bounds; More

2. 2.

   a slope, mass, or mound of a particular substance.

   "a bank of snow"

   synonyms:

   slope, rise, incline, gradient, ramp, acclivity, tump; More

   10 minutes ago, normiss said:

   Then add that they were given court dates...tells me they were entering legally, otherwise they would have been separated into different areas - doubtful they would allow them to go to the hospital together either, as they would be in custody for illegal entry.

    

   Sounds a LOT more like they were sneakin across and got caught, or asked for help.

   Then as soon as they determined that the child was sick - they transported both to the hospital, released them, and went on their way.

   That seems pretty humane - unlike how the OP was trying to spin it.

    

   21 minutes ago, normiss said:

   The "photos" part is NOT from the original story about the dead kid.

   Right - But it was associated to it by these words - "Why is this happening?  Perhaps this could be part of the reason:"

   That is pretty clear that there was an attempt to tie the Mc Allen pictures to the story in El Paso. 

   Here is the original post for comparison to my questions, what have debunked and what the original intent of the OP was.

    

   Posted Thursday at 03:42 PM

   More and more children are dying in US custody.  The latest:

   ==============================================

   Toddler apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border dies after weeks in hospital

   By Maria Sacchetti

   May 15 at 9:22 PM

   A 2½-year-old Guatemalan boy apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border died Tuesday night in El Paso after several weeks in the hospital, according to the Guatemalan Consulate and another person with direct knowledge of the case.

   The boy, who was not identified, arrived at the border with his mother days after now-acting homeland security secretary Kevin McAleenanheld a news conference near a crowded holding facility in El Paso on March 27 to warn that a surge of Central Americans was pushing the system to the “breaking point.”

   The boy is the fourth migrant child to die since December after being apprehended at the southern border and taken to the hospital. All have been from Guatemala, a Central American nation experiencing severe drought and poverty, and where smugglers have been offering discounted trips to families traveling to the United States.

   =================================================

   Why is this happening?  Perhaps this could be part of the reason:

   =================================================

   Photos show children sleeping on ground at Texas Border Patrol station

   BY ZACK BUDRYK - 05/14/19

   The Hill

   Photos obtained by CNN of migrants at a Border Patrol station in McAllen, Texas, show many, including children, sleeping on the ground on rocks or with Mylar blankets.

   In one photo, a child sleeps outside on dirt next to a baby bottle full of milk. Others show migrants walking around the facility, which has four open sided tents set up to accommodate an influx of migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, according to the news outlet.

   "Nobody, no matter who you are, where you are from should spend an hour like this. This is the United States of America. Not in our country," the source of the photos told the network.

   ====================================================

[normiss 903]

The more I look for this story to seek details, the more stock photo type content crap is overly confusing.

I've seen pics of kids sleeping on the ground on some hill, in a cage, in a facility in a cage, in a caged tunnel....none of them clearly state and reference to THE kid the story is about.

Now given another one just died, while in custody, this will get more confusing.

Maybe we really should go back to the previous process we were using...it was at the least making improvements in the process and the illegals numbers were dropping.

Now it appears we classify ALL humans that show up at the border as "illegal".

I'm gonna need beer soon at this rate.

 

[billvon 3,131]

8 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

 

1. That is pretty clear that there was an attempt to tie the Mc Allen pictures to the story in El Paso. 

   Here is the original post for comparison to my questions, what have debunked and what the original intent of the OP was.=========================

Nope.  Absolutely no suggestion that that was a picture of the kid in question.

Kids being forced to sleep on the ground may lead to them getting sick.  Given that kids are forced to sleep on the ground, and that they are put in freezing cold cages inside, how we treat them may well lead to them getting sick - and dying.

Again, let's take an example.

Let's say Pecos Parachute School has several student fatalities where students have random equipment failures - premature main releases, no-pulls and harness failures.  Someone posts a picture of several Pecos Parachute School student rigs taken shortly before the fatalities.  In the pictures, the pin protector covers are missing, the white loops on the risers are worn almost through and the main lift webs show several broken yarns. They are out of date and have no AAD's.  What would the Turtle conclusion be?

1) There's NO PROOF that those were the same rigs that those students used!  The picture means nothing.  Agenda.  Hysteria.  Fearmongering.

2) That picture shows that they don't maintain their gear; it's likely that was a factor in the fatalities.

[turtlespeed 226]

18 minutes ago, billvon said:

Nope.  Absolutely no suggestion that that was a picture of the kid in question.

Kids being forced to sleep on the ground may lead to them getting sick.  Given that kids are forced to sleep on the ground, and that they are put in freezing cold cages inside, how we treat them may well lead to them getting sick - and dying.

Again, let's take an example.

Let's say Pecos Parachute School has several student fatalities where students have random equipment failures - premature main releases, no-pulls and harness failures.  Someone posts a picture of several Pecos Parachute School student rigs taken shortly before the fatalities.  In the pictures, the pin protector covers are missing, the white loops on the risers are worn almost through and the main lift webs show several broken yarns. They are out of date and have no AAD's.  What would the Turtle conclusion be?

1) There's NO PROOF that those were the same rigs that those students used!  The picture means nothing.  Agenda.  Hysteria.  Fearmongering.

2) That picture shows that they don't maintain their gear; it's likely that was a factor in the fatalities.

By your example the Rigs would hav e had to come from XYZ parachuting in Alabama, and the student in the article would have been in SD Somewhere else.  The story would have to glaze over the facts.  Someone would have to speculate (I wonder who that someone was) about the reasons for the Somewhere else student dying - tying them together with a very flimsy thread.

Why can't you admit that you posted sensationalized media BS, and get on with your day?

Why can't you admit that you were helping to propagate fear mongering?

The facts didn't line up with the story you put forth - 

Now you are backpedaling, and acting like a climate change denier.

[normiss 903]

6 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

By your example the Rigs would hav e had to come from XYZ parachuting in Alabama, and the student in the article would have been in SD Somewhere else.  The story would have to glaze over the facts.  Someone would have to speculate (I wonder who that someone was) about the reasons for the Somewhere else student dying - tying them together with a very flimsy thread.

Why can't you admit that you posted sensationalized media BS, and get on with your day?

Why can't you admit that you were helping to propagate fear mongering?

The facts didn't line up with the story you put forth - 

Now you are backpedaling, and acting like a climate change denier.

It's odd that you now consider stock photos to simply be media sensationalized BS.

It's been used as far back as printed media goes.

Maybe pay closer attention to the details in articles posted??