The great illegal immigration dilemma: Should we do what's lawful, or what's humane?

[rangerrebew]

The great illegal immigration dilemma: Should we do what's lawful, or what's humane?
 

To the editor: Herein lies the conundrum of illegal immigration in the state of California, the central focus of Gustavo Arellano's Jan. 24 column, "'Felons, Illegals and MS-13 Welcome!'"

On the one hand, you have federal law, which makes clear that it is unlawful for anyone to enter the United States with documentation or without going through the proper channels, period. That's the law, and it does not imply that as long as one does not get caught entering illegally and does not commit any crimes, one is free to stay.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-ol-le-illegal-immigration-dilemma-20180127-story.html

[rangerrebew]

I think Americans should be able to ignore any law we don't like, any law we don't understand, any law that isn't humane (as we understand it, of course), that takes money away from our pockets, that "offends" us, that makes us follow other laws, that restricts our unfettered fun or pleasure, that keeps us from stealing things we want but can't afford,   which keeps us from murdering people we don't like, and burning down newspapers who lie.  There, L.A. Times, this is the response you wanted, isn't it?  This is more "humane" than following laws.

[roamer_1]

I think Americans should be able to ignore any law we don't like, any law we don't understand, any law that isn't humane (as we understand it, of course), that takes money away from our pockets, that "offends" us, that makes us follow other laws, that restricts our unfettered fun or pleasure, that keeps us from stealing things we want but can't afford,   which keeps us from murdering people we don't like, and burning down newspapers who lie.  There, L.A. Times, this is the response you wanted, isn't it?  This is more "humane" than following laws.

That was very well put, and in a sarcastic way.
 

[Sanguine]

Who is defining "humane"?