2963
Comments (318)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
krzyzowiec 1 point ago +1 / -0

You're missing my point, which was not to compare gang violence between Mexico and the US. Someone claiming asylum, a refugee, was supposed to be a person who was persecuted on account of their race, religion, nationality, political affiliation, etc. It was not meant to address poverty or crime.

If you think that gangs with weapons is a legit reason to claim asylum, then what person in what country in the third world WOULDN'T qualify? We would be importing millions and millions of people. The reality is the definition has been expanded because the point is to flood the US with people from Central and South America until we are indistinguishable from them and we can be merged into the AU (American Union).

1
FedhmannKassad 1 point ago +1 / -0

That is a fair criticism, but I would argue that Cartels do in-fact persecute on account of political affiliation, 64 politicians have been killed since the start of the year (as of 4th of march), just ahead of the elections that's nearly 1 a day. anyone who dares to support a candidate who might actually crackdown on the cartels does so while risking the lives of their family and friends.

1
krzyzowiec 1 point ago +1 / -0

Cartels kill anyone who doesn't follow them or take their bribes. They don't care what your political affiliation is.

1
FedhmannKassad 1 point ago +1 / -0

They do if you support anti-corruption politicians, or make an attempt to create local town militia.