if there is no due process, there is no need to prove that you "go around causing disruption in society".

do you seriously not understand this? if you can be deported without your guilt being proven in a court of law, then anyone can be deported, including citizens born here, including law abiding people.

you said: "If you follow the laws, rules and regulations, then you have nothing to worry about."

I said: "if there is no due process, there is no need to prove that you "go around causing disruption in society". "

Your claim is wrong. Even law abiding people should worry, because there is now no need to prove that you broke any law before you get detained by """police""" with no uniform, no identification, to proof they are police, without stating what crime did you commit, without reading you your rights, you can be inprisoned, transfered to other prisons around the country, and deported.

In all the replies to did to me, you presented no good arguments against my rebuttal of your premise, that law abiding people need not worry.

One by one:

you said: "The OP is a visa holder. There are 12.7 million visa holders in the USA. What percent of visa holders have been deported by Trump?"

Being a visa holder is irrelevant. There is no guarantee that they will check the visa, there is no guarantee of your rights being upheld.

The percentage of visa holders being deported being low, is somewhat relevant. If it's one in a million, might as well worry about being hit by a car. However, I don't find this argument compelling at all, because

1: OP would be a new visa entering, so their % chance of having trouble is much higher than the % chance affecting the hundreds of millions of PAST VISA HOLDERS. most visa holders interact with officers once, when entering. of course they have a very low chance of having trouble. that is not a good indication of the chance of trouble for new visa holders.

2: in 1~2 months, we went from "if you are not illegal, nothing to worry" to "anyone, citizens, legal visa holders, Canadians, can be locked up by the secret police and transfered around for weeks without legal representation". The fact that very very few people were affected out of millions, is more of an indication of how recently this happened, not how unlikely it is. If this continues for years, the % would get much higher.

After I dismissed your argument that very few people were affected, in another comment you brought up a new argument:

"What country in the world is the exception?"

first, this argument implies that morality is relative. That if all other countries in the world do this, then it's okay. If there is a parallel world where all countries do this, guess what? It is equally bad of an action. Equally. Zero fucking difference in the morality of it. Cunt.

More over, did I ever claim there is a country that does not do this for you to make this question? No, I didn't. You were the first to bring other countries into the conversation for no reason at all. You are derailing the conversation. This is a absolutely awful, shitty argument. You would be destroyed by a 12yo in middle school debate club.

"This has happened in virtually every country in the world on a minor scale since the beginning of time."

No it has fucking not. You are weaselling your way in this argument, by using "this" in "this has happened" without specifying what is "this". You see, I stated that due process is not being followed, which is bad. That is what I was reffering to as "this". You on the other hand, maliciously changed the subject to be "enforcing the border". This is a strawman argument. That means you are attacking things I never said, like fighting a strawman and then pretending you won a fight against me, in case you don't know what that fallacy is.

You then proceeded to completely misunderstand my reply to you, lacking the intelligence to understand this exchange:

"This has happened in virtually every country in the world on a minor scale since the beginning of time."

implying it's okay because others did it

"hold my country, and the country i live in, and any country with claim to being a first world developed nation, to a much higher standard than "This has happened in virtually every country in the world on a minor scale since the beginning of time". [...] Certainly deporting people without even proving they committed a crime by following due process does not meet my standard."

which is me saying: if other countries did this, that's bad, it doesn't make american good for doing this bad thing.

there, I wrote it like explaining to a 5 year old.

Somehow, you understood this to mean that I'm okay with some countries enforcing their borders and others not. It is impossible to understand that from my statements, but you did it. because you are brain dead.