{"id":45975,"date":"2021-10-26T16:55:22","date_gmt":"2021-10-26T16:55:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/essays.homeworkacetutors.com\/2021\/10\/arguments-for-and-against-us-immigration-policies\/"},"modified":"2021-10-26T16:55:22","modified_gmt":"2021-10-26T16:55:22","slug":"arguments-for-and-against-us-immigration-policies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/arguments-for-and-against-us-immigration-policies\/","title":{"rendered":"Arguments For and Against US Immigration Policies"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Every day thousands of refugees flee the war torn country of Syria. With the fear of terrorism on the rise, a nation built on the ideals of immigrants, started to shift to a paranoid state. This led to the immigration policy<\/a>, a controversial topic that still resonates fear into many. Many say it is wrong and that America welcome the refugees with open arms. And there those who believe in a secure structured nation, that defends against the growing correlation between terrorism and immigration.<\/p>\n

Immigration, a word that holds the keys to a new life and a new beginning. Immigration for some is not only a beginning, but it\u2019s an end to their lives that they once knew. Immigration is often a second chance, but this can be overshadowed by the looming threat of terrorism. In recent years terrorist groups like Issis, have used immigration as a gateway to America. Isis used the refugees to infiltrate a nation still feeling the effects of terror. This alarming realization caused the U.S to respond with the immigration ban on Syrian refugees. This sparked great controversy, that led to a divided nation on an issue that needed unity. The immigration ban was a solution devised by President Donald J. Trump it opted for a complete ban of refugees coming from Syria. Many were outraged, but with this surreal decision there is truth to this madness. In recent a study compiled by a senate committee in 2016, \u201crevealed that seventy-two individuals with terroristic backgrounds\u201d (creating a threat 72). These seventy-two individuals were from the seven countries covered by President Trump\u2019s executive order, making the ban justifiable. <\/p>\n

In order understand this hidden threat,
\nwe must first know the process of how the U.S deals with terrorism. Terrorism
\nis a very wide scale problem that correlates heavily with immigration. It should
\nby all means, be dealt with as soon as possible. President Bush took actions in
\n2002 by creating Homeland Security, the main department that deals with
\nterrorism. Their motive and main job is to search and identify people to get
\nvarious clues on certain pertaining threats on the United States. Terrorism is
\ntaken very serious by this department. One of the members stated the severity
\nof terrorism and how there are endless threats that people usually ignore. He said,
\n\u201cThe threat of terrorism and the threat of extremist ideologies has not been
\ndealt, this threat has not evaporated, and we can\u2019t turn the page on it\u201d
\n(Sullivan 23). It is very true; people shouldn\u2019t turn their backs on terrorism.
\nIt would be devastating to have our country go through a turmoil like 9\/11 again.
\nSince the moment that this program has been in progress, the United States has
\nbeen able to capture and kill America\u2019s most wanted terrorist through many
\ncountries and continents.<\/p>\n

A new problem arises, with immigrants and terrorisms blending. The lines of immigrant and civilian has been blurred. \u00a0This has led to some controversial means by the government, to address the hidden threat imbedded in our system. The process of protecting citizens from the extremity of terrorism also includes a set of government guidelines to follow. The United States government adopted a set of laws in order to control a terrorist situation in a more orderly fashion. One of the most important bills that came out of congress was right after the 9\/11 attack. This bill was called the USA Patriot Act (2001). Simply, this bill gives permission to the government to search any individual personnel of suspected threat to the United States. The results of passing such a bill helped to identify and eliminate
\nmany Issis extremists. Without this permission by the government, these people
\ncould have done some serious damage while not paying attention. In a time
\nperiod of 10 years (up to the present day), this bill has gone under various
\nrenovations. In 2001, there were immediate amendments that were added onto this
\nbill. For example, an amendment having to deal with foreign intelligence and
\nillegal immigration turned out to be a main focus for Homeland Security. A
\nlocal online article supplies the amendments of the first renovated copy of the
\nPatriot Act. It states: \u201cWhen the matters involve foreign intelligence or
\ncounterintelligence, or foreign immigration, to any Federal law enforcement,
\nintelligence, protective, immigration, national defense or national security
\nofficial, there must be supplied assistance of the official information in the
\nperformance of his official duties\u201d (Ashcroft). The initiative that government
\nofficials have to take now are a lot more prestigious and uphold a lot more
\nresponsibility in their roll. In 2005, they readopted this bill in order to
\nhave the right to search the internet to prevent cyber terrorism of any sort
\nfrom occurring. They also were given the right to search a person\u2019s home
\nwithout a liable search warrant. This really upset citizens because, as stated
\nbefore, they were being violated of their personal privacy. Although there were
\nriots against the fact that their democracy wasn\u2019t being called for, the
\ngovernment could not comply because they haven\u2019t been more successful in
\nobtaining evidence of terrorist threats. Later, in 2011, when Obama was
\npresident, he authorized the most recent renovation of the bill with an
\nextension of the same laws until 2013. He created a controlled system of search
\nwarranting that would have no effect on terrorist identification
\nand it would also put people at ease. Some of the regulations to the bill are
\nas follows: \u201cModifies reporting requirements for national security letters to
\nrequire a breakdown of the
\ntypes of persons targeted and whether such persons are subjects of authorized national
\nsecurity investigations this changes the federal criminal code to reduce from
\n30 to 7 days the period for giving delayed notice of the execution of a search
\nwarrant in a criminal investigation when the warrant permits the giving of such
\ndelayed notice\u201d (Conyers). The law states that it is required to have a
\nnational security letter in order to take further actions in pursuing a suspect
\nof possible terrorism. In other words, it\u2019s a more structured version of a
\nwarrant. The second part of the law states that an individual can only hold onto
\na record for seven days until it is unreliable, whereas before this improved
\nlaw, thirty days could have given a terrorist enough time to plot out a
\nstrategy and followed through with it. These actions taken by the government
\nare overall taking a great effect on citizens, but is worth the case of
\npreventing terrorism. <\/p>\n

Ever since 9\/11, Terrorism has a major concern for the country since many individuals were directly affected by the destruction of such a devastating event. The government has been trying new ways to improve their ways of finding data towards possible threats to the harm and safety of others. The government\u2019s actions have left both positive and negative effects on citizens and their personal privacy. Without the help of such a beneficial system of terrorist searching, the United States would be in terrible danger and risk of having another 9\/11 event occur. <\/p>\n

The first counter-argument
\nstates that a nation cannot label migrants as terrorist. Many people want to
\nlook past the hate and accept each and every immigrant. Many nations want to openly accept migrants and offer them safe haven. But the
\nreality is terrorism is like a cobra. If we let our guard down it can strike
\nwith such ferocity that leads more separation between the U.S and immigrants.
\nLabeling an entirety of immigrants, leads to the effect of fear that the
\nterrorist wanted to instill in each nation. But how can a nation combat an
\nenemy if one can\u2019t identify it first, people need to acknowledge the fact that
\nimmigration is the window of opportunity for terrorism. <\/p>\n

This problem was addressed
\nfamously by Ronald Reagan who quoted \u201cA nation that cannot control its border
\nis not a nation.\u201d This quote embodies the dream of a secure unified nation. If
\nwe look at the current state of our borders, they are withered like the
\npolicies that created them. It is time to re-engineer a system based on
\nsecurity and opportunity. An example that helps envision the problem faced
\ntoday, is the object of a door. Imagine the past border policy, as an open door
\nundermining our security. With this new policy, we have closed that door
\nleading to more awareness of rising threats. But with every action there are consequences.
\nThis means the ban of migrants; each nation has to come terms with every
\npositive action has negative consequences. Why are people willing to sacrifice
\nour national security for migrants?\u00a0 Yes,
\nAmerica is a nation built on immigrants, but where is the line drawn between
\nsecurity and acceptance?<\/p>\n

The second counter argument
\nis that the United States should be involved more with immigration. Many people
\nwant to admit as many possible refugees. Refugees flee from the chaos caused by
\nthe war broken countries like Syria. People feel a certain personal
\nresponsibility, to help everyone in need. But the cost to maintain immigration
\neach year is quite staggering, in an article by Washington times<\/em> \u201cMass immigration costs government 296 billion a
\nyear.\u201d That number continues to rise with each new country we accept in, we
\ncannot sustain a working country with an outflow of money like that. We are
\nalready a nation in deep debt, yet we try to continue to take on new expanding costly
\nproblems. Picture this problem this way, the U.S is a ship being sunk down by
\ndebt. And when we add immigration, sooner or later, the money attributed will
\nbring us to rock bottom. We need to prioritize the needs of U.S first, and once
\nwe are at a stable self-efficient level, then we can start to provide the
\nnecessary care the migrants need. <\/p>\n

Fear, a word that repels a
\nfeeling of safety and creates a world based on paranoia. This fear of terror
\nstarted on the day the nation stood still. September 11th<\/sup> \u201ca series
\nof suicide attacks committed by 19 militants associated with Islamic
\nextremists, led the deadliest attack on American soil\u201d. This feeling of fear
\nstill resonates with us today, the terrorist wants to create a sense of
\nparanoia in such a vast country. These attacks are what fuel the hate, and
\nmodern day stereotypes of today\u2019s immigrants. We need to remove this fear,
\nbecause when we convey fear it only strengthens the terrorist to act. In an
\narticle Washington Times<\/em> polled
\nAmericans if they feel safe, \u201c42 percent of Americans say they are less safe
\nfrom terrorism The physiological scars left by 911 are irreversible, but we can
\nstart to dismantle this fear if we acknowledge the threat and work for a secure
\nnation.\u201d<\/p>\n

The third counter argument,
\nis that immigration does not create fear. Being a nation that has a long record
\nof welcoming refugees and immigrants, they say there is no cause for concern.
\nBut the truth is we need to become aware and more knowledgeable about the
\npeople we let in.\u00a0 <\/p>\n

The factor of not knowing who these people are, creates this
\nfear in each U.S citizen. This sense of breach of security, has a ripple effect
\nin the U.S. As addressed before, many view immigration as a threat. If we
\naddress this dividing issue and start to dismantle stereotypes, we can create a
\nnation not driven by fear. But a nation driven by the strengthen and sense of
\nsecurity, which redefines and unifies the country. <\/p>\n

Immigration poses a threat to a nation\u2019s security and is a hidden that that divides a country already on the edge. The balance of security and acceptance needs to be addressed. This will ultimately create a structured nation. The hidden threat needs to be addressed, creating a nation not driven by fear, but rather of strength. The U.S should reevaluate the policies but the U.S needs to still maintain the core ideals built from immigration. Immigration is here to say, it\u2019s a matter of how well the U.S can adapt to this ever-changing problem. <\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/h2>\n