The Instigator
PhantomZyrus
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ragnar
Con (against)
Winning
28 Points

Should illegal immigrants all be shipped out of the US and border security increased?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Ragnar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/31/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 971 times Debate No: 36183
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

PhantomZyrus

Pro

I think illegal immigrants should all be done away with because they are breaking the law which is never allowable.
Ragnar

Con

Too expensive.
It costs about $12,500 to remove each one of them right now, never mind the raised cost were there a nationwide manhunt to find them all. Which in 2010 came to about $5 billion, to ship out about 4% of them [1].

So at current costs it'd take $125 billion to deport the estimated number of them.

The Law.
The same argument could easily be applied to those who employ illegal immigrants, to a much lower cost. If no one was hiring them for fear of deportation, they would leave on their own.

Yet the problem with merely pointing to the law, is there's a big difference between ideals, and what our leaders enforce.

Sources:
[1] http://seatoshiningsea.wordpress.com...;
Debate Round No. 1
PhantomZyrus

Pro

I didn't ask if it was possible. I asked if we should do it.
It is a moral question.
Ragnar

Con

Morally the US should not, because it would place an undue burden on the taxpayers.

Morally not all (the resolution is all, not some) illegal immigrants should be "done away with," as pro suggests; since some of them have American-born children who would suffer for it; placing increased burdens on American Citizens. First the suffering of those children, second in supporting said children who currently have a low cost support system of their low-class (illegal alien) parents.

Since it's widely agreed they aren't taking our jobs [2], and are vital to our agriculture crop prices; getting rid of them would mostly harm Americans.

Sources:
[2] http://www.nationaljournal.com...
Debate Round No. 2
PhantomZyrus

Pro

It wouldn't necessarily place a burden on taxpayers. Volunteers could do the work for free.

If they have American-born children who would suffer, that's their fault for coming here to have their baby in the first place. They broke the law to come here, so they have to face the consequences. If that means knowing their kids will be taken away from them, so be it. Kids shouldn't grow up around criminals anyway.

It may be widely agreed that they aren't taking our jobs but that doesn't mean it's true. You said yourself that they are vital to our agriculture meaning they are working in agriculture. They're taking our agriculture jobs. We were doing fine when legal people were farming.

These criminals deserve to be punished.
Ragnar

Con

Nice straw man. American children are what I referenced, not any pain their parents feel.
American born children bear the brunt of deportation.

"Volunteers could do the work for free"
They used that in Rwanda, the rest of the world called it genocide! Volunteers went around with machetes killing anyone who looked wrong, or did not carry proof of being in the right group.
Untrained volunteers would at best cause the biggest crime wave in US history, as they forcefully round people up, and try to ship them across the border potentially a couple thousand miles away, all without government aid.

"They're taking our agriculture jobs"
Not any skilled jobs. You're welcome to compete at picking fruit, below minimum wage.

"These criminals deserve to be punished"
Punishment is not what the law is for.


Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
Pro you really should consider raising the character limits of your debates. 750 barely allowed any sources when there was not much to reply to.
Posted by midwest 4 years ago
midwest
I would accept but I don't match your rank criterion.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
PhantomZyrusRagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: A picture is worth a thousand words. That Punisher pic was just boss, bro. I think PRO could have said "these criminals deserve to be brought to justice" and maybe avoided the baseball bat lol. Anyway, non-arguments from PRO. Rwandan volunteers, lol. CON made it interesting, I'll grant him that. That and a solid round #2 scores arguments CON.
Vote Placed by Skeptikitten 4 years ago
Skeptikitten
PhantomZyrusRagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Unbelievably poor showing from Pro. No sources, no real argument, just statements of intolerance.
Vote Placed by Ameliamk1 4 years ago
Ameliamk1
PhantomZyrusRagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con easily takes it, no effort from pro.
Vote Placed by Merrit 4 years ago
Merrit
PhantomZyrusRagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro barely had any evidence to support his claim while Con did. Con also used sources.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
PhantomZyrusRagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: pro gave hilariously bad and racist arguments and dropped many of cons arguments regarding the cost of the operation making it unfeasible and not worth it.... Arguments and sources to the con since hes the only one who used any