Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: abuelita who wrote (79242)	6/23/2018 6:53:21 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362612

" i have heard that many were fleeing because of domestic abuse" We have a domestic version of asylum, which apparently can include transportation transportation Archives - The National Domestic Violence Hotline If staying in a domestic violence shelter is part of your safety plan, we have tips for making a safe

To: abuelita who wrote (79242)	6/23/2018 7:16:57 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362612

but i think that fleeing because they are in fear of their lives due to violence that the state is unable to protect them from does. I appreciate the principle. Not sure how practical it is to implement, though. You'd have whole countries with grounds to go somewhere else and expect asylum. Asylum, being a positive right, imposes an obligation on someone else, which deserves some weight. There's a tipping point in there somewhere, somewhere short of a critical mass hopefully. I just had a fanciful thought. Country A could invade Country B. Those in Country B, experiencing the violence of war, would have grounds for asylum in Country A. Or Country C. No need to fight back. Hmmm. Not speaking to the current situation. Just ruminating in the abstract...