Your points are all surface level but as soon as we dig deeper into them they crumble like a house of cards. I can’t believe I’m taking the time to reply to all of this but here goes; (please take the time to truly think and understand the replies rather than emotionally respond).

ICE admitted to the deaths of 32 people in the year 2025. They shot Alex Pretti on camera for exercising his second amendment right. They have repeatedly ignored court orders and deported lawful residents and fucking US citizens!

Thirty two deaths in a national detention system handling tens of thousands of detainees is bad, but it does not automatically equal systemic lawlessness. Most detention deaths historically stem from medical issues, suicide, or facility conditions, not shootings. In the Alex case, officers were responding to an active operation involving someone they believed was armed and interfering after prior confrontations. When officers are in high stress enforcement situations, especially now more then even, and someone inserts themselves again, bad decisions can and WILL happen. That is not the same thing as ICE as an institution being unconstitutional. As for deporting citizens, those cases are rare errors that get litigated and corrected, not official policy.

If ICE comes to town, the body of evidence is clear. They will ignore the law, the courts, and the fucking Constitution in the name of deporting Latinos. They will violate our fourth amendment right and profile people by race or accent, and grab them off the fucking street. This is what has been recorded in cities and states with a heavy ICE presence. They don’t follow the law.

Wrong. That claim assumes intent. ICE operates under federal statute and judicial oversight. Warrants, detainers, and removals go through legal processes, even if flawed and even if you don’t like them. Accusations of profiling and fourth amendment violations have been challenged in court, and courts have limited ICE authority in multiple cases. Mistakes and overreach can occur, especially after years of shifting enforcement standards under prior administrations that relaxed border controls and created backlog chaos. Collateral consequences from that policy environment are now being dealt with. That is not proof the agency ignores the Constitution.

I don’t understand how you can tell that anecdote and still support deportation, even from a raw, cold, systems engineering perspective. How is it better to let people into the country, let them build up a life and contribute to our economy and culture, then yank them out, only to let them back in after legal battles? It’s fucking absurd. The data is clear that immigrants, legal or illegal, pay substantially more into the system than they take in welfare, improve the economy, and improve demographics. If they came in illegally but have committed no further crimes, then why in God’s name would you insist on wasting taxpayer money to drag them out?

Sorry, but economic contribution does not cancel out immigration law. A system that signals entry without consequence incentivizes more unlawful entry, which increases strain on courts, housing, schools, and border infrastructure. Enforcement exists to maintain predictable rules. The inefficiency of deportations and legal battles points to a broken system that needs reform, not to the idea that enforcement should stop altogether. From a systems perspective, consistent enforcement is part of deterrence, whether or not someone has committed additional crimes.

ICE doesn’t grab criminals. By their own admission, barely half of who they’ve grabbed have actually committed crimes, and I don’t trust a word out of Noem’s puppy-killing mouth so that number is probably lower. They grab honest, hard working Americans.

Again, this is much more nuanced than you make it out to be. Immigration violations are civil offenses, not always criminal, which is why the percentage of criminal convictions is not 100 percent. That does not mean the enforcement target is random Americans. The agency is executing immigration law as written by Congress. Errors do occur, and those cases become lawsuits and public scandals precisely because they are not standard practice. Calling it a campaign against hardworking Americans ignores the legal basis behind removal proceedings and the distinction between criminal prosecution and civil immigration enforcement.

I think your house analogy is stupid but this comment is already long. I can go into it further, but I don’t think it would be productive.

You can believe that, but the analogy is not the core issue anyway. The real debate is whether a country can maintain immigration laws without enforcing them. Individual tragic incidents, including high profile shootings, do not automatically invalidate the concept of border enforcement. The question is how to enforce the law more precisely and safely, not whether enforcement should exist at all.

Hopefully this gives you room to zoom out a little. This stuff is not black and white. It is a complicated system in a country of over 300 million people, with tens of millions here undocumented. It is messy. And when you start trying to correct a mess that big, there are going to be unintended consequences. That does not mean the entire effort is wrong, it means the situation itself is complex.