"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
Pitch in with the Prince William Young Republicans and help defeat Obama in 2012!
WashPo Covers For The Do-Nothing Crowd
By Greg L | 8 December 2008 | Illegal Aliens, Crime | 36 Comments
The Washington Post has a fascinating editorial in today’s edition where they acknowledge some of the horrific crimes committed by illegal aliens in Maryland in recent months as well as the need for local authorities to respond in some way. Is this the beginning of a change of heart for the Washington Post’s editorial board?
A14-YEAR-OLD shot on a county bus. An elderly woman burned alive in her house. A waiter stabbed to death. These are some of the horrific murders allegedly committed by undocumented immigrants in Montgomery County in recent months. County officials are considering whether to take a more aggressive role in determining whether criminal suspects are in the county illegally. This would be an appropriate response to the outbreak of violence, but any new policy must be carefully balanced.
Lest anyone think this actually represents a change of heart in the face of undeniable evidence that the policies advocated by the Post have resulted in mayhem and death for area residents, the editorial ends with a hint of what is really going on here. Now that local officials in Montgomery are facing an outcry by enraged constituents, they need to at least appear to be addressing the issue, and the Post dutifully queues up some political cover:
But in response to the killings, law enforcement officials say they are looking to revise county policy to target perpetrators of violent crimes who may be in the country illegally. Officers may be given latitude to look into the immigration status of a suspect who was born in another country, for example. The county is expected to announce any policy revisions by the end of the month.
Montgomery authorities shouldn’t waste tax dollars on a witch hunt for illegal immigrants. Giving police officers more authority while limiting their scope is the right approach.
How generous a response for the citizens concerned that illegal aliens are being shielded by local officials from the consequences of their actions, and having their unlawful presence actually subsidized by county and state government. Montgomery County apparently is considering halting their policy, which is prohibited by federal law, of preventing law enforcement officers from inquiring about the immigration status of suspects they encounter during the normal course of their duties. What a response. They’re going to stop violating federal law while protecting illegal aliens.
It’s only now that the Washington Post expresses much concerns about the victims of illegal alien crime, including 83 year old women who are burned alive after being defrauded of thousands of dollars. Actually doing anything at all to hold illegal aliens to account for their crimes might be considered a “witch hunt” instead of what it actually is: protecting American citizens from being raped, murdered, defrauded, kidnapped, having their identities stolen, or a host of other crimes by persons who wouldn’t be in this country if only the law was enforced. When illegal aliens are released on bail for carrying concealed weapons and later murder fourteen year old children on a public bus, what the Post and their liberal allies think is an appropriate response is allowing local police officers to exercise the discretion they already have under public law. How completely underwhelming.
It should be interesting to see how the public reacts to this tiny band-aid approach to a huge problem that is costing American citizens their lives. Will Maryland officials get away with cosmetic responses to this critical issue? Hopefully not.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
36 Comments
Views: 1020
Loading ...
Seems like the post’s editors have done a 180. It’s ok if Montgomery County tries to address criminal illegal aliens but when PWC did it they were acting like racists, according to the post.
The Post position is sensible. If an illegal alien is taken into custody for a crime, and his status is clearly established to be that of an uninspected entrant, make sure the federal authorities act on it. My own view is that I prefer they serve sentences here, because there is no certainty that if they are deported before their sentences, they will serve an adequate term for the offense. The federal government should compensate state and local governments for the costs of these incarcerations.
That’s a huge difference from saying that local law enforcement officers should have authority to make stops to inquire into status. Law and order depends on local police being able to keep the peace in ethnic communities without suspicion that they are running immigration raids for the feds.
Nova,
Law and order depends on keeping the peace in every neighborhood, regardless of the ethnic makeup. Part of law enforcement is running immigration raids. I see immigration raids being just like drunk check points. One should not have a problem with either if they are not either illegal or drunk.
Of course the compost takes it easy on Maryland, liberals stick together.
NoVa, I have noticed a contrarian attitude in all of your posts here of late. It’s like you have to disagree with every post Greg puts up. Now we have your wisdom regarding the illegal alien issue.
Ok NoVa (in spanish your handle means “No Go”), you keep hanging on to the “sensible approach” to this issue. That is the same approach that “human rights advocates” hold regarding interogating terror suspects. These illegals are the “ticking bomb” in our community. The PD should be free to go a little “Jack Bauer” in response to the threat. We trust our LEO’s to exercise professional judgement, within the bounds of the US Constitution. Let’s trust their judgement regarding how to deal with illegals. I’m not talking about the politicos wearing police uniforms that run the departments. Let’s trust the beat cops, the men and women on the street.
NoVa, you used to be a reasoned, sensible person. Lately, you have become a picker of nits. Take some advice from Ronaldus Maximus: If you agree with me 80% of the time, you are my friend. Try applying that here.
Uninspected Entrant. Oh……..My………Gawd.
At least the conspiracy of silence in the local media might be ending.
Nova is just trying to come up with as many silly names as possible to discribe people he supports like the illegal who raped the ten year old.
CoM:
Immigration raids are performed pending approval of a federal warrant. Sobriety checkpoints utilize no such judicial oversight. So some of us still believe there is problem with sobriety checkpoints, drunk or no.
“Uninspected Entrant”
Obviously a lawyer or a journalist came up with that term.
Rob,
That might be the case, but the point is that either can take place at anytime or any place, and the ethnicity make up of a particular area should not be a factor of when or where either takes place.
CoM:
Agreed.
Help Save Maryland hosted a community meeting at the Rockville library last night to discuss the recent wave of murders. It was attended by over 100 people. Guest speakers were Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins and Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. Surprisingly no MoCo officials attended!
Sheriff Jenkins talked about the success of the 287 G prorgam in FredCo. So far he has identified 261 illegals under the program, inluding 8 MS-13 gang members, numerous drug dealers from California and Florida peddling their wares in Maryland, a host of pedophiles, and one Nicaraguan sniper. That is progress.
A growing number of people in MoCo are upset. We had stacks of new membership forms that people filled out. The savagery of the crimes has finally woken people up.
The Washington Joke’s editorial was typical namby-pamby liberal double speak. But it does indicate a change in the political wind. Of course the only viable alternative for MoCo is full adoption of 287 G coupled with no non-sense enforcement like PWC and Frederick County are doing. But they will never go that far in moCo, and the Joke would never advocate for this.
If nothing else, MoCo should withold all future tax funding to CASA of Maryland. They should use this money instead to build a memorial for all of the slain MoCo residents at the hands of illegal aliens.
MdMan, anything in the Post about your meeting?
I have a friend who lives in College Park (PG County) and he
has had it too. Its to the point that he is afraid to go outside
his house walking after dark in his own neighborhood. Can
PG County be far behind? I graduated from the U of Md and its
shameful to see what the illegals have done to CP. Off campus
housing is very hard to find now and its not safe for anyone
to walk alone anywhere. Hopefully, other locations will take heed.
Any predictions on Takoma Park? Its a mess too but they
seem to welcome this kind of nonsense.
Rob,
It is too bad that not everyone sees it that way.
Uninspected Entry is the correct legal term. It’s a misdemeanor offense punishable by a civil fine. If you don’t believe me, check the regs. I’m kind of particular about correct terminology.
Constitutionally, the local police can’t “go a little Jack Bauer” to enforce federal immigration laws. It’s strictly a federal province. All you radical liberals who think otherwise will eventually have to yield to conservative principles on this point. But, as I have said many times, there’s certainly no constitutional problems with local authorities checking status of convicts and informing federal authorities of their presence. Deportation is not required for uninspected entrants (or illegal aliens or whatever one feels like calling them), but it’s a durned good idea (in my way of thinking, the only good idea) for convicted criminals, assuming they have served their sentence.
Getting back to the point, does anyone NOT think the Post’s position was sensible? I see a lot of Pavlovian reactions, but no analytical critique of the idea that local officials should be able to send convicts back if they entered illegally (or even if they entered legally and then committed a crime).
Nova,
Illegal alien is the correct, check it out in the regs.
Tell me exactly how breaking the law and benefiting from it is a conservative value? Wow, did you just contradict yourself? You have said you are for the deportation of illegals, now you say you are only in favor of deporting the criminals. So, what would you do with the illegals that in your opinion are not criminals?
You sure do parse the words, my friend, but you still end up supporting the folks who rape and murder children.
I continue my courageous stand against child rape and child murder, whether by citizens or non-citizens, CoM.
Ineffective laws are anathema to us Conservatives. You’re kind of a broken record on this perpetual inquiry about how breaking the law is a conservative value. Depends on the law, I guess. Set a speed limit too low and a lot of people, including conservatives will break it. Try to overturn the laws of physics or economics, and a lot of people, including conservatives, will break it. Conservatives favor laws that promote economic efficiency and the mobility of capital and labor. Current immigration policy and law fail, in part, because we’ve got too much malum prohibitum and have not clearly defined malum in se. Conservatives prefer minimalist, but effective and predictable legal structures based on the latter. Knee-jerk liberals and heavy-handed regulators favor the former.
The law prescribes a civil monetary penalty for uninspected entry. I have no problem with that. I also have no problem with discretionary deportation by federal authorities. That’s the law. Deportation is not required, but it’s an available option. In cases of convictions for crimes, I support a default setting of deportation after serving the sentence. I think I’ve been plenty consistent on that point over the last several years.
Nova,
So, you would simply allow people who steal or buy Ids, drive without insurance, or licenses, to simply go free? Exactly how would you go about trying to sort the “good” illegals from the bad ones? I’m sure there are plenty of people who want to get rid of laws against murder. Would that be good for the Country? Going with your minimalist theme, the less laws we have the better. Hell, lets just get rid of all laws while we are at it. That way, we can be truly free.
The only liberal around here is you, you support taking jobs away from Americans and providing them to illegals. You support the importation of criminals that do not respect the rule of law, do not support this Country, do not support the American Culture. You support people who blame America for the terrorist attacks on 09/11/01. You support people who think nothing of raping and murdering kids.
The reason why you can’t answer the question of “is breaking the law and benefiting from it a conservative value” is because it is not a conservative value. It is a liberal value, and as a liberal that is something you can believe in.
Not quite. Uninspected entry is a criminal misdemeanor under 8 USC 1325.
You have poor reading skills, CoM, and you combine that fault with a chronic tendency to distort. Not a good combination. I just said 41 minutes before your comment that I was opposed to child rape and murder regardless of the perp’s immigration status. Only on this site would that be a position that anyone would have to state or one which others would have trouble accepting. As far as I know, laws against murder are generally salutary.
I’n pretty enthusiastic about the American Culture, and regard a lot of the rants here as completely contrary to it. I have no truck with whackos who blame America for 9/11 and doubt that there are many who sincerely believe that.
I’m a pretty hard-core conservative with the campaign ribbons to prove it. The conservative response to immigration is strong control at borders, streamlined and efficient screening of entrants (to ensure that backlog and bureaucratic delay don’t become incentives for going around border security), encouragement of citizenship and assimilative programs, and clear status requirements that crowd out all the black market, subterranean economy issues that you gripe about. As I’ve said before, a characteristic of winning national and regional economies in the 21st Century will be ones that are competitive for immigrant labor at all levels, particularly at the top end in the scientific and medical areas. You can’t encourage those people to come here in large numbers and stay as citizens if the culture tolerates red-in-the-face, voluble nonsense about immigrants being an undifferentiated mass of child rapists and murderers and those who advocate immigration reform as being of the same stripe.
Not as much fun as baying at the moon, but a rational policy choice consistent with conservative political and economic principles.
Nova,
What do you consider someone who has overstayed their Visa?
Did you see the recent poll that was taken in a number of Counties that asked the question of who was responsible for the attacks on Sept 11, 2001?
The majority of those asked in Mexico felt our own Government was responsible, the majority of the illegals we have come from Mexico. Therefore, you support people who think our own Government attacked the Pentagon and the World Trade Center Towers. You support giving them jobs over giving an American a job. I thought your support of child rapists and killers was bad, but this may be worse.
You simply are a liberal who is in denial of being one.
Maureen - Pam Constable from the Joke covered the meeting along with reporters from the Gazette and Sentinel. But I have not seen any articles yet.
“particularly at the top end in the scientific and medical areas”
Obviously that guy who thought “homo sapien” was an insult to his sexual orientation isn’t the sort of rocket scientist we need to be importing.
“You simply are a liberal who is in denial of being one.”
Rockefeller Republicans.
By the way, Nova, I did a Google search for “uninspected entrant” and the only pages that come up are on this blog with posts by you.
That phrase is found nowhere else on the Internet, so I can only surmise that it is a product of your rich imagination.
I even searched LegalTrac for uninspected entrant and it comes up with nothing.
Nova, while I have no doubt that your usage of the term “uninspected entrant” to refer to one of your clients in a court of law deems it a “legal term”, it is pretty obvious that nobody else uses it.
Now here’s something that Google DID find:
§ 1325. Improper entry by alien
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who
(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or
(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or
(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of—
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.
“shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.”
Up to 6 months in prison for the first offense and/or a fine.
“Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.”
That’s self explanatory.
An “Uninspected Entrant” is the legal term that is used for a person being civilly punished for entering the United States without presenting themselves to a federal officer for inspection. The penalty is $5,000 for a first offense, plus immediate removal for non residents.
In my best Benson-Hurst accent:
“I got yer uninspected entrant right ova heeere”
“That’s a huge difference from saying that local law enforcement officers should have authority to make stops to inquire into status.”
Who said that, Strawman?
“An “Uninspected Entrant” is the legal term that is used for a person being civilly punished for entering the United States without presenting themselves to a federal officer for inspection.”
I cannot find any evidence of that. The correct legal term appears to be “illegal alien”.
CoM: Liberals include people who don’t know much about the Constitution or don’t care about it. You fit the bill. My immigration policy positions have been consistently compatible with conservative economic and conservative political philosophy.
Here’s my list of the presidential candidates I’ve supported either through active campaigning, campaign contributions and/or at the ballot box (for the ones I was old enough to vote for) since 1960:
Richard Nixon
Barry Goldwater
Richard Nixon
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford (supported Reagan at the convention)
Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan
George H.W. Bush
George H.W. Bush
Robert Dole
John McCain
George W. Bush
John McCain
You sure do have a way of sniffing out liberals. I admit to not having supported W in 2000. I still think that was the right call.
Nova,
Sorry, but anyone who wants to reward law breakers is not a conservative. You, my friend, want to reward law breakers. That makes you a liberal not a conservative.