Thursday, May 27, 2010
It’s All about Prioritizing
This, of course, is getting some prominent play: U.S. police chiefs say Arizona immigration law will increase crime
“Arizona's law will intimidate crime victims and witnesses who are illegal immigrants and divert police from investigating more serious crimes, chiefs from Los Angeles, Houston and Philadelphia said before meeting with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to discuss the measure. Counterparts from Phoenix, Tucson, San Jose and Montgomery County [sigh], among others, joined them.”
Of course, just by being here illegally, illegal immigrants increase crime…you know, because their very presence is a crime…hence the adjective “illegal”…is any of this registering?
As to illegal immigrant crime victims, well, one way to reduce crimes against them is for them not to be here. More generally, do we want to make this a de facto policy of the State? How far should we extend absolution on criminal behavior to victims and witnesses? As a defense attorney, you can damn well bet that if I am aware that a witness against my client is here illegally, I’m going to try to get that fact out (just as I would try to discredit any witness of whose criminal behavior I am aware)...no matter how pious our politically-appointed police chiefs are on the matter.
Finally, did these police chiefs really claim the law would “divert police from investigating more serious crimes”? Really?
First, that is just plain ignorance of the law as it clearly reads that a check on immigration status can only happen AFTER being lawfully stopped on a different matter. [Ed. Note: It does seem the most serious flaw of this law is the need that it be read.]
But secondly, I revert back to…Really? They’re making that claim now? They are worried about diverting police from “more serious crimes” NOW???
Do they mean “more serious crimes” like this?
“The "Click It or Ticket" campaign is set to run from May 24 through June 6, 2010. The mobilization, expected to involve more than 10,000 police agencies, is supported by $8 million in national advertising funded through Congress and coordinated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The ads, which will air in English and Spanish, generate awareness of the increased enforcement efforts and the increased chance of getting a ticket if you are not buckled up. Ads will be aired on television, radio, and online.” U.S. DOT Targets 45 Million Americans Still Not Buckling Up
“Arizona's law will intimidate crime victims and witnesses who are illegal immigrants and divert police from investigating more serious crimes, chiefs from Los Angeles, Houston and Philadelphia said before meeting with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to discuss the measure. Counterparts from Phoenix, Tucson, San Jose and Montgomery County [sigh], among others, joined them.”
Of course, just by being here illegally, illegal immigrants increase crime…you know, because their very presence is a crime…hence the adjective “illegal”…is any of this registering?
As to illegal immigrant crime victims, well, one way to reduce crimes against them is for them not to be here. More generally, do we want to make this a de facto policy of the State? How far should we extend absolution on criminal behavior to victims and witnesses? As a defense attorney, you can damn well bet that if I am aware that a witness against my client is here illegally, I’m going to try to get that fact out (just as I would try to discredit any witness of whose criminal behavior I am aware)...no matter how pious our politically-appointed police chiefs are on the matter.
Finally, did these police chiefs really claim the law would “divert police from investigating more serious crimes”? Really?
First, that is just plain ignorance of the law as it clearly reads that a check on immigration status can only happen AFTER being lawfully stopped on a different matter. [Ed. Note: It does seem the most serious flaw of this law is the need that it be read.]
But secondly, I revert back to…Really? They’re making that claim now? They are worried about diverting police from “more serious crimes” NOW???
Do they mean “more serious crimes” like this?
“The "Click It or Ticket" campaign is set to run from May 24 through June 6, 2010. The mobilization, expected to involve more than 10,000 police agencies, is supported by $8 million in national advertising funded through Congress and coordinated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The ads, which will air in English and Spanish, generate awareness of the increased enforcement efforts and the increased chance of getting a ticket if you are not buckled up. Ads will be aired on television, radio, and online.” U.S. DOT Targets 45 Million Americans Still Not Buckling Up
Comments:
<< Home
The presence of undocumented workers/illegal immigrants is not a crime; indeed that was one of the changes that the Arizona law wanted to enact. Many things are illegal that are not also crimes; it's illegal to charge 30% interest on a loan but it's not a crime to do so, only a civil tort. Failing to pay workers on time is illegal, but not a crime (though I think it should be in willful cases.)
I submit that the biggest flaw in this law is that police will fear underpolicing (and the concomitant civil suits from citizens acting qui tam) and overpolicing (civil rights suits), and will do the latter, rousting up Mexican-Americans whose great-grandmothers had been citizens while leaving Irish-, Polish-, German-, Italian-Americans alone. This sort of rousting is better suited for happily-defunct socialist oppressor states like I encountered briefly in my youth in the DDR, and perhaps you encountered in Poland or elsewhere in your many travels.
I submit that the biggest flaw in this law is that police will fear underpolicing (and the concomitant civil suits from citizens acting qui tam) and overpolicing (civil rights suits), and will do the latter, rousting up Mexican-Americans whose great-grandmothers had been citizens while leaving Irish-, Polish-, German-, Italian-Americans alone. This sort of rousting is better suited for happily-defunct socialist oppressor states like I encountered briefly in my youth in the DDR, and perhaps you encountered in Poland or elsewhere in your many travels.
C'mon Bruce - illegal entry is a Crime - punishable by imprisonment. If you came in illegally, you're act to enter was criminal.
...and no rousting should be involved because the stop will already have been made. And if the illegal populace in Arizona is at all involving the various European nationalitues you listed, I would think the open-border clan would have been all over that.
Just wait until all the illegals resort to stereotype as Catholics and start showing up at future Marches for Life...heh, heh - the Left will set up a caravan to ship their illegal what-have-you's back to Mexico or wherever.
...and no rousting should be involved because the stop will already have been made. And if the illegal populace in Arizona is at all involving the various European nationalitues you listed, I would think the open-border clan would have been all over that.
Just wait until all the illegals resort to stereotype as Catholics and start showing up at future Marches for Life...heh, heh - the Left will set up a caravan to ship their illegal what-have-you's back to Mexico or wherever.
re: Israel's attack on the Turkish flotilla in international waters.
What about illegal don't you understand?
Post a Comment
What about illegal don't you understand?
# posted by 
: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 10:44:00 PM
: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 10:44:00 PM << Home
