Jamiel’s Law
April 10th, 2008 at 09:47am Mark Noonan
A potential powder keg in the immigration debate, and the fall election - from Michelle Malkin:
Law-abiding citizens of all colors are uniting against the targeting of innocent black residents of Los Angeles by illegal alien gangs. The parents of murdered high school student Jamiel Shaw met with L.A. public officials yesterday, urging them to rescind the city’s notorious Special Order 40–one of the nation’s oldest illegal alien sanctuary laws. Enough is enough:
The parents of Jamiel Shaw Jr., a high school football star who was gunned down by a reputed gang member just blocks from his home, urged Los Angeles city leaders today to go after criminals who are in the country illegally.
Pedro Espinoza, 19, allegedly shot and killed the 17-year-old Los Angeles High School student on March 2 in the 2100 block of Fifth Avenue, not far from the Shaw family’s Arlington Heights home. According to police, the shooting occurred one day after Espinoza was released from county jail, where he was serving time for assault with a deadly weapon.
U.S. immigration officials believe Espinoza, a member of the 18th Street gang, may have been in the country illegally.
“We have a problem with the system. My son was murdered by someone that was here illegally. No matter how you look at it, that’s what happened,” Jamiel Shaw Sr. told reporters before entering the Los Angeles City Council chamber.
Authorities do not know why Espinoza was not detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement upon his release from the county jail.
This is just the sort of cut-and-dried, issue which can drive an issue into the fall campaign. All it takes from this point is for people to start asking pointed questions about this to the three candidates - and while McCain has his weaknesses in the immigration debate, he’s rock solid compared to Obama and Hillary, who are both deathly afraid of declaring themselves firmly on the issue. Democrats want very much to use immigration as a means of securing Hispanic votes in the fall - but they want to do it on the sly, off the main public radar using scare tactics in the Hispanic community (you know, McCain will send you back to Mexico, so vote Democrat!)…the last thing the Democrats want is to take a position on whether or not local law enforcement should check the immigration status of people detained for crimes.
This could change a huge amount of the election dynamic - so, lets just watch and see what happens.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Immigration, Republicans
49 Comments
1. bagni | April 10th, 2008 at 11:23 am
mark-gration
as usual, us jovian jabbernowls are bewildered
first…we get all jiggy when you start talking about aliens, illegal or not.
luckily my cosmic crew? we all have green cards!
second….after reading your opinions it appears you’re implying the u.s. administration/mccain (who seem to be barely capable of running this country) would be able to successfully execute a program to check on or deport 10mm illegal alien types?????
sorry for our darkstar denseness……confused….
2. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
“Pointed questions” about this situation would be easy to deflect using the tried-and-true White House Method ™. “I can’t comment on a pending court case.” However, the answer is easy.
Local law enforcement enforces local laws. Municipal police officers and county sheriff’s deputies have no authority to enforce federal law. Even if they did, to say that they should “check immigration status” on prisoners is more than simply asking questions or looking at Resident Alien cards. They don’t have the resources to do the work of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and ICE isn’t interested in having local law enforcement even try because to do so entails calling on them for time and resources.
So, the easy answer is that, “I [the candidate] support giving Immigration and Customs Enforcement the tools they need to do their job. If there was a failure in this case, I trust that they will ascertain what the failure was and take appropriate steps to prevent its recurrence.”
3. js | April 10th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Sen. Clinton voted against the Bingaman Amendment (SA 4131) to to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. The Bingaman Amendment would cap the number of employment-based visas for workers, spouses and children at 650,000. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation estimates that the Bingaman Amendment would reduce employment-based visas available under S. 2611 by about 150,000 a year. The Bingaman Amendment passed by a vote of 51 to 47.
Sen. Clinton voted in favor of a motion to table the Kyl amdendment (SA 3969) to S. 2611. The Kyl amendment would have removed provisions allowing guestworkers admitted under S. 2611 to adjust status to that of lawful permanent resident on the basis of their status as a guestworker. This would have prevented 200,000 guestworkers a year from gaining greencards, resulting in 2 million less greencards over a decade. The motion to table the Kyl amendment passed by a vote of 58 to 35, effectively killing the amendment.
Sen. Clinton voted against the Cornyn Amendment (SA 3691, proposed for Sen. Isakson) to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 . The Cornyn Amendment would prohibit DHS from implementing any guestworker program or granting amnesty as proposed by the bill unless the agency has certified that this bill’s border security measures and increases in Federal detention space have been completed and are fully operational. The Cornyn Amendment failed by a vote of 40-55.
Sen. Clinton voted against the Cornyn amendment (SA 3965) to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 . The Cornyn amendment (submitted for himself and Sen. Grassley) would offer modest protections for American workers from being displaced by a foreign worker by prohibiting H-2C visas for employers unless they attest that they will employ an alien in the offered job position and DHS certifies that there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are able, willing, qualified, and available to fill the position. The Cornyn amendment passed by a vote of 50 to 48.
Sen. Clinton voted in favor of the Kennedy amendment (SA 4066) to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 . The Kennedy amendment weakens Sen. Cornyn’s amendment (SA 3965) by not requiring Federal certification of the employer’s need to import foreign workers. The Kennedy amendment passed by a vote of 56 to 43.
Sen. Clinton voted against the Byrd Amendment to S. 1932, the Budget Reconciliation bill. The amendment, introduced by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), would have stripped ALL immigration increases from the Budget Reconciliation bill and replaced the increase with a provision to impose a $1,500 fee on employers who hire certain non-immigrants. The immigration increase was added to the Budget Reconciliation bill by the Senate Judiciary Committee as a result of an 14-2 vote in favor of an amendment introduced by Senator Arlen Specter. The Specter plan would increase permanent, employment-based immigration by nearly tripling the number of foreign workers who can enter the U.S. each year. As well, it exempts workers’ families from the 140,000-visa cap on employment-based immigration. It also raises the cap on employment-based permanent immigration by adding each year the lesser of 90,000 visas or any “unused” employment-based visas from any prior year. Altogether, these provisions could generate a net increase in permanent immigration of 366,000 aliens, or about one-third of current, annual legal immigration. Senator Byrd’s amendment was cosponsored by Sens. Sessions (R-AL) and Durbin (D-IL). It was also supported by the AFL-CIO. The Byrd Amendment failed by a vote of 14 to 85.
looks like clinton is all for increased immigration
4. js | April 10th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
you cant really dis obama on immigration, he voted to protect us workers and reduce worker immigration over the last few years, short record, short leash
5. js | April 10th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
looks like obama’s record on immigration is about the same as mccains, except its longer, longer leash for a longer record
who would you trust?
certainly not the billary
the obama record only goes for a partial term, during which he has show intent to run for president, so its superficial with out a historical representation…..going back to the illinois legislature, we do find obama in favor of protections for illegal immigrants, effectively giving them motivation to stay illegals….
maccain is the only real choice with a solid history
6. The js | April 10th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
McCain is the only real Flip Flopper with a history of flip flopping.
7. Diane Tomlinson | April 10th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I don’t get any of this. Spanish is such a pretty language. Have any of you ever heard the Star Spangled banner sung en espanol?
Now really can any ‘winger worth his salt tell me that this issue isn’t about a decrease in the voting/economic/all other kinds of power of the white majority in the Estadios Unidos Americanos?
Didn’t the Stones do a song about your 19th nervous breakdown?
8. Kahn | April 10th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Diana,
Better check on that. Think the Police would step in to stop a bank robbery or a kidnapping? Think the Feds might help the locals with a serial murderer?
But I’m Muslim and your remarks offend me.
9. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Kahn,
In all 50 states robbing banks and kidnapping people are listed as offenses in each state’s criminal code so local law enforcement is not enforcing federal law. No states have immigration law as that is the responsibility of the federal government. Try again.
10. Crisscross | April 10th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
“Authorities do not know why Espinoza was not detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement upon his release from the county jail.”
I’ll tell you why; Republican incompetence of leadership at U.S. Immigration. My guess is their computers and databases are 2001 vintage and money for new ones was needed for Iraq.
Mark got it right for a change when he said, “This is just the sort of cut-and-dried, issue which can drive an issue into the fall campaign”
11. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Not to mention the fact that the head of ICE is the grotesquely unqualified Julie L. Myers whose recess appointment even the execrable Michelle Malkin had to attack in a 2005 column entitled, “No more cronyism: Bush DHS nominee doesn’t deserve the job.”
12. FmrMarine | April 10th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
cris;
>>>I’ll tell you why; Republican incompetence of leadership<<<
BUT BUT BUT !!!! ……
I thought the donks were in charge of BOTH houses!
In 2005:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.
Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!
——————————————————————————–
13. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
FmrMarine,
You most certainly can not have it both ways.
Why was President Bush so great when the economy was doing better than it currently is (you know all those posts on this and Blogs for Bush about the 50 straight weeks of job growth and the record stock market, etc), but it is all the Congress’s fault when it tanks?
14. Crisscross | April 10th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
FmrMarine | April 10th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Good try, but most Americans know real change will not take place in Iraq until their is a Democrat in the W.H. and there will be little or no change in the domestic agenda until their is a 60 vote margin in the Senate.
Anyway you provide a good list of issues the Democrats will need to tackle. I must say you are starting to catch onto what the upcoming election is about. Simple Republican stories of there will be terroists under your bed if you elect Democrats will not play like they did in 2004. Americans want solutions for real problems.
15. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
The immigration issue has been a problem for decades. To place the “blame” squarely on one party’s shoulders is ridiculous.
We need to put a system in place so that when someone enters jail or prison, immigration is contacted to see whether or not that person is illegal or not. If they are illegal, ship him/her out and let their government deal with it.
Espinoza spent four months (not long enough for the crime, IMHO) in jail. That was plenty of time to check to see if he was illegal or not.
We also need to build a fence on both sides of the border … yesterday. Both Obama and Clinton are against building a fence when a majority of Americans want it.
God bless Jamiel Shaw and his family. May He comfort them in their time of sorrow.
16. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Kahn,
That’s the typical liberal misdirection at work; the issue is not enforcement of federal law by local constabulary, the issue is ascertaining the status of the individual in custody and communicating with Federal Agencies for disposition. Your analogy is correct; if LAPD has in custody a knucklehead for assault with a deadly weapon they may determine that said knucklehead is wanted by “the feds” on federal or interstate jurisdictional charges or investigations.
DHS maintains the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), which is a resource that local cops can and do use to determine if a suspect in one crime is wanted on a federal charge, or wanted for questioning.
Oddly, liberals expect business owners to determine immigration status of applicants, but excuse cops from identifying criminals is a clear case of It’s not my job on the flimsy excuse that the immigrant population won’t report crime for fear of deportation. Here’s a solution, don’t break the law in the first place.
Legislation like H.R.3137 The Clear Act or H.R.3494 Norwood CLEAR Act 2007 would have immigration violators listed with NCIC but languish because reconquista politicians live and die by political correctness. Except it’s the innocents, like Jamiel Shaw Jr. that die.
17. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
k4v, if you build a 20 foot fence, I can guarantee someone will build a 21 foot ladder.
The money needs to be there for border agents. The money needs to be there for other ideas. A fence isn’t going to do much.
But instead we blow $12billion a month 6000 miles away.
18. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
I hope the moderators of this site will delete the conversations about Iraq, the economy, Bush and Republican computer conspiracy theories from this thread. These things have no place in this discussion, and they are an insult to the commentators. These loony-left rants, undeterred have cost this site readership.
I’ve noticed on many threads here at B4V a swarm of dozens of liberals’ snarky hate-filled conspiracy filled rants, discussing among themselves their latest lies, misinformation and sophomoric pontifications. D. Powe alone has posted more than fifty times in various threads that McCain doesn’t know Sunni from Shiite. This incessant repetition isn’t done to engage conversation or further debate; it’s done because these little minds are incapable of dispassionately engaging in reasoned debate and lack even the most basic forensic skills.
19. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
As another example, Joe chimes in with $12.0 b /month and ignores the two million dollars each day we spend on incarcerating illegal alians. He couldn’t care less about the money; he wants to discuss Iraq.
20. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
NCIC is maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation not the Department of Homeland Security (which sounds like something from the former USSR). NCIC records do include those who are the subject of arrest warrants but do not include records on anyone “wanted for questioning”. NCIC also does not contain records on the immigration status of anyone except for records of previously deported felons.
Local law enforcement officers have no authority or funding to enforce federal immigration law. It’s just that simple.
21. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
We have the best technology in the world, and yet, we can’t build a fence that will stop illegals/terrorists from coming into our country? Crazy!
Both Clinton and Obama voted on the border fence bill but backtracked when they were campaigning in Texas.
I agree. We need more border agents too.
22. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Legislation has passed the House that would have DHS expand the use of NCIC to include immigration enforcement. The ACLU has written extensively about it and is planning litigation should the bill pass the Senate. The National Council of La Raza is preparing an amicus brief in support of the ACLU suit. I’m surprised you’re so uninformed.
Local law enforcement are not currently using the database of previously deported felons to report detention of these felons; that’s what this thread is about, not about local law enforcement enforcing immigration law; about sanctuary cities and legislation preventing police from doing their job and protecting the citizen.
23. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
You are so right, Herkimer!!
24. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
I do know it’s difficult for Mark and Matt to keep track of all the posts because they both have full-time jobs. I commend them on the number of threads they are able to post each day!
It would be a great help to them if we would ignore any of the lefty posts that go off topic.
25. FmrMarine | April 10th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
joeBlow
>>>k4v, if you build a 20 foot fence, I can guarantee someone will build a 21 foot ladder.<<<
A truly STUPID statement, by someone who has NO concept of what a “border fence” is.
26. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
If you keep repeating erroneous statements such as the Department of Homeland Security is going to do anything with NCIC or that NCIC holds records for people “wanted for questioning” then you’re not doing yourself any favors in the credibility department. The fact that there is potential legislation to try to put immigration status information on the FBI-operated NCIC system means nothing in regard to what can be done now, which is that ICE probably needs a competent department head and more funding.
27. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Kimberly,
I’d like to have reasoned discussions, but to do so we’d have to slog through the usual suspects’ barrage of misdirection. Some of those with contra-opinions are capable of such a debate, DBM most recently, but the tone and tenor of this blog, because anything and everything is acceptable has created coarseness in even the most reasoned discussion. DBM starts defensive lately and I don’t wish to engage; Powe plays the same tune over-and-over with sanctimonious aplomb. Still others have never authored a thought worth response.
28. FmrMarine | April 10th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
HXA;
>>>Law-abiding citizens of all colors are uniting against the targeting of innocent black residents of Los Angeles by illegal alien gangs. The parents of murdered high school student Jamiel Shaw met with L.A. public officials yesterday, urging them to rescind the city’s notorious Special Order 40–one of the nation’s oldest illegal alien sanctuary laws. Enough is enough:<<<
I have wondered why it has taken the “black community” so long to speak up against ILLEGAL
“immigration”.
It seems they are losing the most jobs, education, and entitlements to ILLEGAL’s.
WE whites can be shouted down and cowered by the screams of “racism” if we oppose ILLEGAL’s
entering of our nation.
Blacks would be immune to that tactic.
Maybe they are beginning to wake up to the problem we conservative taxpayers have been shouting about for YEARS.
29. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Ah, yes. The “coarseness” of failing to see the inherent wisdom of Herkimer X. Arbuthnot’s pronouncements. How beastly.
30. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Powe,
Then I’ll quote from the ACLU’s Toolkit for Advocates,
Are you going to address the subject of the thread or continue misdirection on ancillary subjects?
31. congressive | April 10th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Oh, I thought it said “broder security” so I thought I’d chime in.
The last thing Democrats want law enforcement to do is NOT enforce the law. We’ve had years of Bush not enforcing immigration laws, especially as they apply to employers. Can’t blame Dems for that problem. McCain is turning a blind eye to the problem.
Progressives believe in equal protection under the law, not favors for millionaire cronies. Democrats in power sometimes forget that and must be taken to task when they do. The millionaire’s club on capital hill will often protect their buddies on either side of the aisle. But this is NOT a progressive platform, as it is under the “Reagan’s first rule” — never speak ill of a fellow Republican.
And a law unenforced is a direct punishment to those who choose to abide by the law.
32. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Marine,
You have a valid (although disturbing) point; all citizens should be upset at the state of immigration today. Politicians play cynical games of voter calculation while law enforcement seeks ways to skirt their responsibility. Political correctness dictates that only specified protected classes may comment of the state of affairs while all are being damaged by the lack of real debate on the subject.
I recall when Jack Kemp came to California to campaign against the proposition which sought to deny illegal’s state services; although he agreed that the cause was correct, he understood that it was political suicide to support it. Several African-American statesmen have sounded similar alarms, only to be shouted down as unauthentic enough (at being BLACK). Which leaves us with this query; other than the hapless victims noted at the beginning of the thread, where do we find the heroes of color that can affect a change? Heroes willing to take the body-blows that will surely follow.
33. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
congressive,
Other than your opinion can you be specific about progressives wanting to enforce immigration law?
I posted above regarding progressives wanting enforcement of immigration law to be the domain of employers and not cops; you have re-enforced that statement. But, if reporting persons in the US illegally is not possible because cps are underfunded, what makes you believe that employers have the wherewithal to accomplish this?
34. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Herkimer X. Arbuthnot,
So, in the “future” something may happen. I see.
You’re quite sanguine about how simple it is to determine a person’s immigration status. Employers have to comply with the requirements of the I-9 form which requires potential employees to appear with documents. However, barring some new form of American police state, people are not required to carry around documents to prove their citizenship in this country.
35. FmrMarine | April 10th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
cong;
Lets be HONEST here!
>>>We?ve had years of Bush not enforcing immigration laws, especially as they apply to employers. Can?t blame Dems for that problem. McCain is turning a blind eye to the problem.<<<
We?ve had years of kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Karter, Reagan, Bush, Klinton, Bush, McCain, earbama, Hitlery, not enforcing immigration laws, especially as they apply to the borders and employers. We blame Dems & repubs for that problem.
36. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Powe,
A person in custody must by law establish identity. A jail is, by definition a police state.
I don’t suppose you’re going to discuss this in an intelligent manner. And I’m not going to engage in your game; come back when you can contribute something of value.
Kimberly,
Is this what you mean by ignoring them?
37. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Herkimer X. Arbuthnot,
Unlike you, apparently, I’ve spent decades playing “the name game” with people who have been detained or arrested. Yes, a jail is a police state, but how many people plan on going to jail? People who can’t establish their identities sufficiently to justify release on state charges are simply held until trial.
38. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Powe,
Pedro Espinoza was in custody, his identity was established.
Are you slow?
Seriously, if I knew you were mentally challenged I wouldn’t have taken advantage.
39. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
And, after the fact, “U.S. immigration officials believe Espinoza, a member of the 18th Street gang, may have been in the country illegally.” What? Don’t they know? Why didn’t they ask the Los Angeles County jail? After all, it’s the jail’s responsibility to figure that out for them.
But, nice job of being patronizing. It’s very flattering on you.
40. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 10th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
This is the problem with trying to debate the ill-equipped; through constant and continual effort to divert the subject these people are unable to defend or assail a position; this creates a moving target of idiocy forcing reasoned people to chase around an illusive incongruity.
You still have nothing to offer the debate. I suggest you read up on police procedures, incarceration, and law enforcement procedures. If you’re still confused as to the chain of custody, you might ask your brother; he seems an intelligent fellow.
41. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
No, not really, Herkimer. I’m not going to answer any of their off-topic posts/comments in the future.
“You still have nothing to offer the debate.” I’m sure she’s off to get her encyclopedia of left-wing talking points, er … facts, right this minute!
42. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Herkimer X. Arbutnot,
I rather doubt that you know any of my brothers. However, I’m the only one of my siblings who has had a career as a police officer. How about you? How many years did you spend in a police uniform?
43. js | April 10th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
geez, more of the same liberal apathy
give it a break
immigration went to hell in a basket during the clinton administration
he pushed oh so hard on cutting the federal budget, reducing the funds needed, generating a feeling of uselessness in the INS, sponsoring lax bills to promote his FTA with Mexico and half the world after that
thats what Bush inherited, a crumbling house and not much could be done to fix it without voiding US Treaties signed by the Clinton Administration….
what kind of fumblefarts are you liberals? cant you take responsibility for a change instead of lying about every tom hooligan in the GOP?
wake up fools, coffee’s perkin!!
44. Cobb | April 10th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
I’m fairly fresh to the controversy but it’s rather high on my list of priorities to discuss. Herk, thanks for taking this to the next level. I was on the radio today (on short notice) and was unable to get past the jurisdictional stonewalling presented by the LAPD’s deputy chief. It’s still not clear to me whose head should roll, but you’re giving me a clue.
There’s a rising silent majority of middle class blackfolks who are on point with this. Anybody who knows blacks in the Armed Services or in police uniform knows how poorly they are served by the old guard of political hacks representing ‘black’ interests. But many of us persist and it won’t be long until the new voices become recognizable.
In the meantime, keep up the good fight. Criminal Mexican nationals are going to get what’s coming to them…
45. Mark Noonan | April 11th, 2008 at 2:11 am
Cobb,
I can’t see any reason why making nice with illegals should include allowing them to kill innocent Americans - it is basic logic that if the police pick up someone who doesn’t appear American-born that they should check his immigration status and if illegal, deport him if there’s no other crime to charge him with.
46. florida lawyer&hellip | April 11th, 2008 at 4:12 am
florida lawyer
Central Florida Personal Injury Lawyer Gibsonton Woman Dies in Car Crash E- mail this Article Print this Article Text Size:
47. DM | April 11th, 2008 at 9:33 am
”I hope the moderators of this site will delete the conversations about Iraq, the economy, Bush and Republican computer conspiracy theories from this thread. These things have no place in this discussion, and they are an insult to the commentators. These loony-left rants, undeterred have cost this site readership
I’ve noticed on many threads here at B4V a swarm of dozens of liberals’ snarky hate-filled conspiracy filled rants, discussing among themselves their latest lies, misinformation and sophomoric pontifications..” - Herkimer X. Arbuthnot
I second that motion. I’ve noticed even more than ever there are several posts that are neck deep with liberal rants with hardly any conservative response.
This situation is in a downward spiral. In my opinion some of those who post here are in fact “plants” determined to damage the success this blog established, especially for the upcoming election. Mark / Matt as much as you want this blog to be an open discussion forum and want to avoid the kind of heavy control found on most leftwing sites, I suggest you start banning a few of the consistent offenders. Otherwise your good intentions and hard work will be but a memory.
We’ve already read post from many conservative minded persons who “use” to post on a regular basis. Many of them, my self included have left this site for a while to get away from the crap. While we enjoy debate, much of what you have here is not. Unfortunately just restating your blog policy won’t remedy the situation.
A spreading cancer needs to be firmly dealt with. Please save this blog for all the good it provides.
48. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | April 11th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Cobb,
If I’m not mistaken the LA County Sheriff maintains the jail where this individual was incarcerated. In spite of the lame excuses we’ve been subjected to by law enforcement, the fact remains that Espinoza was in custody, his identity known to LA law enforcement, and in spite of the fact that his legal right to be in the United States could not have been in question, he was not reported to ICE upon his release. The City of Los Angeles is complacent in the murder of this young man; Jamiel.
As to the nonsense that law enforcement officers don’t have the funding or competence to determine the legal status of a person or persons in their custody; just turn them over to the manager of the Jack-in-the-Box on Slauson; apparently any employer in the United States can ascertain their legal status better than the police can.
49. Freedom1 | April 11th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
How many Americans have to be murdered by illegal immigrants before US authorities actually do their duty and DEFEND AMERICAN CITIZENS?!
Pass Jamiel’s Law!