The Wall

[MadMojoMonkey]

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that the government can prioritize which societal afflictions it will treat based on the monetary risk/reward. In other words, you would like the government to recognize that it is more expensive to enforce drug laws than it is to treat drug addicts, and act accordingly.

So....what's the risk/reward....in dollars please....of admitting a Syrian refugee?

Yes, pretty much. Except I'd like to clarify this much:

I'm not saying the gov't should recognize anything but the cost per inmate to imprison someone and the number of inmates in American prisons. We're really off the charts for the rate at which we incarcerate our own citizens in the USA. It's another sad, but true fact.

I'm mostly asking if there is a cheaper way to handle this. I'm asking if we're adult enough to admit that we can't fix this, as it's an ugly part of humanity, and our efforts to deter it by criminalizing it have been expensive in taxes and in the difficulties faces by families of non-violent criminals.

So....what's the risk/reward....in dollars please....of admitting a Syrian refugee?

Well, I'm certain neither of us knows, and I don't see how this question is relevant.

I'd guess that the number of terrorists in Syrian refugees is non-0, but also the number of terrorists who leave Syria then don't commit acts of terror is also non-0, and the number who would have done something but were thwarted by law enforcement would also be non-0. So prob a whole ton of innocent people to help for each potential threat, and not all threats will do actual harm... IDK.

I'd rather help people when they ask for help and punish people when they break laws than to make presumptions about what people will do in the future and discriminate against them.