The article isn't about open borders or even trying to help people get into the US illegally.  It's about people trying to prevent people who do want to come to the US from dying in the desert.  That's the first goal.  The second goal is to give them the ability to make their claim for asylum.  

It would be great if we actually put more effort into making North and South America more prosperous so that there would be no desperate need to try to come to North America instead of trying to find ways to make these people die to prevent them from coming.  It's much easier to do the second then the first so that's what we do and we will find all kinds of justification for it.  At the end of the day, people are still dying.  

So if the question is, should the US have open borders to this situation, it's just a convenient excuse to ignore that this is the solution you accept so why not go the extreme. Let's put auto turrets, predators and anything else we can think of to increase the death toll, that way this would not be something people would risk their lives in order to get into the US.

"The article isn't about open borders"

i didn't say it was i asked you a question on your stance with regards to this issue

should the us have open borders?

isn't it interesting how you can't answer the question?

"The second goal is to give them the ability to make their claim for asylum."

if they are denied are you in favor of throwing them back to die?

My response is that your question is an excuse to accept the situation happening based on the article.  What does it matter if I accept open borders or not since that isn't what the article is about.  You asked a question looking to support what is happening, it really matters not if I accept open or close borders since that isn't what's at stake.  People dying trying to get into the US is what's at stake and the solutions we accept to stop it is really the question.

To answer your question so you can feel good, No I do not accept open borders, I have answered this question before in political threads.  Just because I do not support open borders does not mean I accept any means necessary to stop illegal immigration.  I definitely do not support looking for ways to cause these people to die in some hope this will deter them from trying to make a dangerous desert crossing.

Also if the person is not given Asylum, why would I be in favor of throwing them back to die.  Why does that need to be the solution.  Are you saying we need to take them back into the desert find a nice comfortable spot and leave them there or just send them back to the country they came from.  Why don't we just do what we do with anyone who seeks asylum and get denied.  We already have a process for this and it's not the solution you presented.

"What does it matter if I accept open borders or not since that isn't what the article is about"

its important because it would be a waste of time to discuss border security with someone who wants the borders to be gone right?

"To answer your question so you can feel good, No I do not accept open borders"

why not? why would you deny people access to the united states?

"Just because I do not support open borders does not mean I accept any means necessary to stop illegal immigration."

huh? any means necessary? you mean securing the border? since you do not support open borders what measures would you take to prevent people from entering the country?

"You asked a question looking to support what is happening"

it has nothing to do with whether i personally support it or not or whether the majority of americans support it or not

it is about what is law, what is in the constitution, what people far smarter than you or I have laid down as the rules to govern a particular society

"Also if the person is not given Asylum, why would I be in favor of throwing them back to die"

you just equated not being allowed into the country with death did you not?

Make America great small again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjSWm4QNTuk

Louisiana is loosing a football field worth of land area every single hour due to climate change and the rising sea level that comes with it - on top of being accelerated by the land sinking down.

Louisiana lost 1900 square miles between 1932 and 2010 alone, which is about the size of Delaware.

"Maybe if you did not waste your time trying to bring up a subject that has no meaning to the content"

this is literally a discussion about borders, what are you talking about?

"Hell, I just gave an example of doing something outside of the box which I am sure you ignored because it didn't fit your position.  Let me state it again, looking to help our neighbors increase the welfare of their countries probably would benefit more than throwing up a wall or forcing people to make dangerous crossings in the desert."

why couldn't both that and securing the border be done?

why make it into a unilateral thing where its either that borders be secured or aid is given to other countries?

are you aware of how much the us spends on foreign aid btw?

"I am more than happy to accept anyone who can support their family and increase the welfare of the US."

what about those who cannot? 

"Let me ask you a question, have you ever gone to another country and help build a school, well, housing, roads, bridges you name it.  Well, I have and guess what, I have first hand experience in how such projects changes the people."

you are truly a saint for doing that for people, if i could i would give you a gold star

"Laws have come and gone or been changed depending on who is in charge.  The constitution has amendments to update and change it. "

yes but obviously when discussing law we must acknowledge the current state of law

it was once within the law to own people and maybe things will revert back to that point again if certain people have their way

the fact of the matter is that the law right now categorises the us as a country without open borders, regardless of whether you want it to be that way or not

"Just saying "what is Law", "what is in the constitution" what does that actually mean because by itself, it means nothing."

the laws mean nothing because they may change over time?

does this mean you would be ok with me coming into your home and taking your possessions?

" Not sure how you came to that conclusion since I gave an answer exactly what I meant but more power to you."

this is how

"Yeah, we should make sure they continue to die in the desert, that will show them."

this implication here to me is that if they are not taken into the country then they will die, is that an unreasonable conclusion to make?

"Personally, I think in a perfect world, open borders is the only kind of border that makes sense.  "

what about cases where cultures are incompatible?

the us has a vastly different culture to areas in the middle east for example( this is not a value judgement just a fact )

or in this perfect world does everyone all have the same culture, beliefs etc?

"If we can improve the lives of people where they are living, they have less incentive to come here.  "

the us spends more than any other country on foreign aid as far as i know

the real problem i believe is the government has too much power and so has been allowed for decades to destabalise various regions across the world, which obviously leads to refugees

the people of the us have been negligent and so they will pay the price

"People shouldn't be dying, because we want to keep them out of the country."

if illegal aliens en masse decide to go on hunger strike because they are not being allowed in, does that mean they should automatically be allowed in ?

Some comedy gold from our friend Ben Shapiro.

And also a great example of how I like interviewers to handle political figures.

Facts don't care about Shapiro's feelings. The ending really is him ragequit the interview because he couldn't get his way in twisting the words.

Also funny how he accuses the BBC on interviewing him because he's popular and wanting to make a quick buck on him, not understanding how the BBC operates and that he's only popular globally in the US.