IMMIGRATION thread

[Montmorency]

I know that it was implemented after one of the worst terror attacks in recent times on European soil. I know that there is not widespread complaint about abuse, and I know that the kill count has fallen dramatically after the steps were implemented. But sure, we can keep crying about Qurans on the floor, how many lives is that worth?

A common rhetorical formula, but not an interesting argument with pertinent details or sound judgements. The basic question is the same as was asked in 2001 America regarding civil liberties vis-a-vis government emergency powers, whether the focus is on the efficacy, the legitimacy, the ethical stakes, or what-have-you. Your comment would be simplistic even by the standards of the 2001-contemporary discussion, but I'll break it down:

I know that it was implemented after one of the worst terror attacks in recent times on European soil.

What does that have to do with the specific conditions, obligations, and policies involved with such decisions?

I know that there is not widespread complaint about abuse

Do you? And whether or not there has been widespread complaint, or what even constitutes "widespread" is still tangential to the fundamental issue of specific powers and conditions involved, which is ultimately what we care about.

and I know that the kill count has fallen dramatically after the steps were implemented

The kill count? Well, if there is violence at a sporting event, and 12 hours later there is no longer violence, is it that the immediate police or security response to the disturbance is to be pointed at - and so there should henceforth be a strong security presence at sporting events - or is it that 12 hours after the event, everyone had already gone home?

But sure, we can keep crying about Qurans on the floor, how many lives is that worth?

That's not the question at hand.