Containing threats

Throughout history people have mitigated potential threats by channeling them through monitored checkpoints to give them a chance to avoid at least the worst of the threat’s potential harm. We do it with water, we call them dams. Same with wildlife when we use the increasingly more popular over/underpasses to keep cars and animals in their own lanes. We even use it in our justice system when we select an impartial jury from a pool of potential members.

Whether the perceived threats are logs and debris behind a dam, highway collisions between drivers and animals, or bigoted or unstable jurors, we use these methods to give us the best chance of reducing the undesirable outcomes. The fact is, the great majority of water, animals and jurors are fine and pass right through the process.

Why is it that when we try to do the same with immigration it is inhumane, racist and just plain mean? The same methods we apply to other potential dangers should be used with the flow of immigrants entering our country. The outcome will be the same: the great majority will be given access, but the potentially bad elements with be winnowed out, or better yet, won’t even try to slip through. Just a thought.

Dave Knecht

Spokane