Trump says he won't sign legislation banning separation of children from parents

[ok doser]

And as to 'worry about the law later,' this was in the context of accused domestic abusers

context?

context?


Barbie don't need no steenkin' context!

People should avoid entering into intimate relationships with murderers and rapists.

seems advisable

[The Barbarian]

The end game for Democrats is repealing the Second Amendment

Given that the only major politician of either party who has advocated removing the 2nd Amendement is Donald Trump, I'd say you were way off base. Yes, I know you're telling us "he didn't mean it", and you're also telling us that the democrats don't mean it when they support the 2nd Amendment. But there is something about the reality we actually have, that makes it worth considering.

And every right is subject to "reasonable regulation." If you can be arrested for inciting a riot with inflammatory speech, why would it be surprising that you can be denied a weapon if you are a criminal or have a mental illness?

Indeed, the NRA, before it became radicalized, supported such legislation.

[Idolater]

Given that the only major politician of either party who has advocated removing the 2nd Amendement is Donald Trump, I'd say you were way off base.

Where'd he say that? I've heard him say the opposite. But as I've mentioned, the only people who really champion the right are those who promote easier access to guns, and freer carrying of them---repealing current infringements iow.

Yes, I know you're telling us "he didn't mean it"

Show me where he said it.
I won't say 'he didn't mean it.'

, and you're also telling us that the democrats don't mean it when they support the 2nd Amendment.

Because Democrats are in support of current infringements, and want to add to the list of infringements.

But there is something about the reality we actually have, that makes it worth considering.

I'll thoughtfully consider whatever you have which shows President Trump saying he wants to repeal the Second Amendment. I have not heard or read that.

And every right is subject to "reasonable regulation."

Inalienable rights are not.

If you can be arrested for inciting a riot with inflammatory speech

Inciting a riot is not free speech, but a crime, as is slander and libel, and perjury. Just because you can say it or write it, does not mean that it's free speech.

, why would it be surprising that you can be denied a weapon if you are a criminal

I don't have a problem with disarming prison inmates, but once they're deemed safe enough to reenter society, then why would their inalienable right to keep and bear arms be infringed?

or have a mental illness?

Why would victims of mental illness forfeit their inalienable right to keep and bear arms?

Indeed, the NRA, before it became radicalized, supported such legislation.

Wrongly.

[The Barbarian]

“The only buffer you have is a parent. Take that away, and everything falls apart.”
Adversity in general is bad for kids. Things like poverty, racism, abuse, exposure to violence abuse can all produce what neuroscientists and development experts call toxic stress. Those issues do not have simple solutions. But the forcible, sudden separation of children from their parents is entirely avoidable.

“Here we have taken away what science has said is the most potent protector of children in the face of any adversity—the stability of the parent-child relationship,” says Jack Shonkoff, director of the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University.

“This is not a scientific issue—it’s a fundamental, moral disaster.”
Why family separations are so devastating

When children are forcibly, abruptly separated from a parent or trusted caregiver, stress hormones like adrenaline and cortisol flood their systems. Over time, those hormones can start killing off neurons, causing both short- and long-term consequences that may cause learning and behavioral problems and/or physical and mental health issues, Shonkoff explains.

Children’s stress response systems, if persistently triggered over more than a brief encounter, can affect the immune system, the cardiovascular system, the metabolic system—and even alter the physical structure of the brain. The longer the separation, the worse the impact of the stress is likely to be.

“Every day that goes by that they remain separated from their parents is producing continuing activation of their stress responses, which is having a wear and tear effect on their developing brain and all of their biological systems,” Shonkoff says.

According to the attachment theory, developed in 1958 by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, young children’s sense of security is rooted in their relationships with caregivers. That in turn shapes their social, cognitive, and emotional regulation skills. Separating a child from the caregiver puts the child’s long-term development at risk.

“The effect is catastrophic,” Charles Nelson, a pediatrics professor at Harvard Medical School, told the Washington Post. “There’s so much research on this that if people paid attention at all to the science, they would never do this.”
https://qz.com/1310749/the-fundament...y-separations/

And now we find, contradicting Trump's statements, that he has been planning this for over a year, as a way to discourage asylum applications.

[ok doser]

Adversity in general is bad for kids. Things like poverty, racism, abuse, exposure to violence abuse ...

things like dragging them through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night?

[The Barbarian]

things like dragging them through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night?

According to the attachment theory, developed in 1958 by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, young children’s sense of security is rooted in their relationships with caregivers. That in turn shapes their social, cognitive, and emotional regulation skills. Separating a child from the caregiver puts the child’s long-term development at risk.

“The effect is catastrophic,” Charles Nelson, a pediatrics professor at Harvard Medical School, told the Washington Post. “There’s so much research on this that if people paid attention at all to the science, they would never do this.”

It's almost as though someone did some research into the worst possible thing they could to to kids, to get even with their parents for applying for asylum.

As you know, that was the plan, separating families to discourage asylum applications.

[ok doser]

Barbie claims:

Adversity in general is bad for kids. Things like poverty, racism, abuse, exposure to violence abuse ...

dozer asks:

things like dragging them through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night?

crickets

how about it?

is dragging children through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night bad for kids?

[The Barbarian]

As you know,these parents were fleeing violence-prone places, trying to get asylum in America. This is why Trump's people dreamed up something even worse to do to them to discourage them from applying for asymlum.

young children’s sense of security is rooted in their relationships with caregivers. That in turn shapes their social, cognitive, and emotional regulation skills. Separating a child from the caregiver puts the child’s long-term development at risk.

“The effect is catastrophic,” Charles Nelson, a pediatrics professor at Harvard Medical School, told the Washington Post. “There’s so much research on this that if people paid attention at all to the science, they would never do this.”

It's almost as though someone did some research into the worst possible thing they could to to kids, to get even with their parents for applying for asylum.

As you know, that was the plan, separating families to discourage asylum applications.

[Sherman]

​How about legal immigration? The whole illegal activity they are doing isn't good for the kids. Granted legal immigration should be more accessible.

[Rusha]

As you know,these parents were fleeing violence-prone places, trying to get asylum in America.

This is what any *loving* parent would do to protect their child. They made the mistake of not understanding that the leadership in the USA has not valued (all) children since January 2017.

Insofar as *legal* immigration ... that won't happen until there is a majority of Dems in the house because the majority of the GOP doesn't want them here.

[ok doser]

As you know,these parents were fleeing violence-prone places....

all of them?


and you still haven't answered my question:

is dragging children through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night bad for kids?

[ok doser]

The whole illegal activity they are doing isn't good for the kids.

seems intuitive, doesn't it?

but you'll never get barbie to admit it

[ok doser]

... the leadership in the USA has not valued (all) children since January 2017.

shouldn't the leadership of a country place its emphasis on the children of its own citizens and those of immigrant parents who follow the legal process?

[Sherman]

I am not keen on separating the kids from their parents if it is true. Just send the whole family back where they came from. You have the issue of 'anchor' babies. Just send the entire family back to its home country or they can begin the process of legal immigration if they want to be here.

[Rusha]

It's almost as though someone did some research into the worst possible thing they could to to kids, to get even with their parents for applying for asylum.

As you know, that was the plan, separating families to discourage asylum applications.

Well, the biggest vulnerability every decent parent has is the love for their children. I would expect a parent to flee their home with their children were it to catch on fire. Outside of the uncertainly of when the fire would spark, this is no different.