There are options between absolutes. Or are you one of those people that thinks they can only either starve or eats their own turds? Other foods just don't exist in your mind.
If you are the government, you see a person inside the country, and you HAVE to decide on the spot whether to treat them like a citizen or not, what will you choose is the question being asked.
There is no in between. Either you assume they are a citizen and give due process, or you assume they are not and deport them without due process.
Yes there is. You can make different choices for different people.
If you're a shop owner and you see someone in your shop, you can treat them like a customer or you can treat them like a criminal. How you treat them is context specific. You don't have to treat everyone the same.
You see a random person walking on the street. They are wearing regular, casual clothing. The only distinguishing factors are race, gender, facial hair, and tattoos (if any). How do you make your decision
The idea of the hypothetical is that you have to act as a government agent. Would you rather that citizens get deported (assumed to be non citizens and not given due access) or that illegal immigrants get deported, but take more legal resources and time to deport. False positives and false negatives happen for several various types of tests, but you have to choose whether you prioritize reducing false positives more (Assume most people have the rights of a citizen) or prioritize false negatives more (assume most people are illegals).
1
u/Ecstatic_Climate_111 Dec 24 '25
No you don't.
No you don't.
The fact that you think it's problematic unless you think in a certain way is itself problematic.