Proponents argue that this strategy would bolster national security by minimizing the risk of potential terrorists entering the country. Enhanced screening processes, once implemented, would provide a more thorough assessment of applicants, reducing the likelihood of malicious actors gaining entry. Critics argue that such a policy might inadvertently promote discrimination by broadly categorizing individuals based on their nation of origin rather than specific, credible threat intelligence. It may strain diplomatic relations with the affected countries and potentially harm the perception of the nation enacting the ban, being seen as hostile or prejudiced towards certain international communities. Additionally, genuine refugees fleeing terrorism or persecution in their home countries might be unjustly denied safe haven.
59% Yes |
41% No |
59% Yes |
41% No |
See how support for each position on “High Risk Immigrant Ban” has changed over time for 511 Canada voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “High Risk Immigrant Ban” has changed over time for 511 Canada voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Canada users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9JXW8SV2mos2MO
instead of being banned, i think we should run intense background checks of the individuals who are entering the country.
@9JXR49B2mos2MO
They should not be banned, but there should be thorough investigation before they are allowed in.
@9JXFQRR 2mos2MO
Yes, but refuges should still be allowed to enter.
@9JWWFBK3mos3MO
We should speed up the improvement in screening - banning has too many negative impacts
@9JQ8T5J3mos3MO
No, but ensure they pass the background checks & do not have a history of committing serious crimes.
@9JJJ7GS3mos3MO
not banned. could be people wanting to flee those conditions. However special vetting is needed to ensure they are not going to be a national thereat
Explore other topics that are important to Canada voters.