Hacker News Reader

Comment by irishcoffee | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Crossing the border illegally (for now) is a civil misdemeanor and seeking asylum is legal under US and international law.

> Does the country they are fleeing have no culpability?

The US definitely has some culpability for making other places harder to live in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...

> Why are they leaving?

They're not doing it just for funsies.

> The US definitely has some culpability for making other places harder to live in.

You didn’t answer my question. :)

I don't understand your question TBH. What would these countries do?

Oh. Maybe make a country people want to live in instead of flee. I didn't realize it came across as a riddle.

Yeah and I'm saying you're doing a bit of victim blaming. For one the US fucked up those countries and their economies making it desirable to flee to the US. Maybe the US should stop meddling and we'd have fewer people coming here.

A man runs out of a burning building. You shoot him. Dang, that building really should have had more culpability.

I was not aware that Mexico or Canada were in a state that requires their citizens to flee.

You're circling around saying something without saying it. Spit it out.

What are the chances that it's deployed at the Canadian border?

With winter temperatures in Canada, people could actually enjoy it.

Extremely low I don't think Canada or Mexico could be considered as dangerous as a burning building.

Canada has a border issue?

Not as far as I was aware of but Canada and Mexico are the only countries that share a land border with the United States.

Then you don't know anything about Mexico, do you? The US president is saying it's a shithole. Do people flee shitholes?

Is Trump right about it being a shit hole? I figured he was just being a jackass I didn't realize Mexico was in a state where it's citizens need to flee.

>> People already risk death to cross the border

> At what percentage would you say?

Why do you ask? If it was the lowest figure you mentioned, or halfway between the lowest and highest, would one of those make it better?

Is the argument that this new tech will only kill n people on top of those that already die, so whether we fry less than 1% or a far higher figure, that one of those is better?

Focusing on the specific death rate doesn't change that crossing the border is risky, and some people will take their chances with or without the heat ray. It's one more variable in the calculation.

Wikipedia is available if specific mortality rates matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migrant_deaths_along_the_Mexic...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com