Jun 12 2007
Am I A Criminal For Speeding?
Thomas Sowell comes out with a ridiculous ‘holier than thou’ canard about how illegal immigration is a path to hard crimes. It is another one of those hyperventilating exaggerations the far right is so fond of trotting out on the immigration issue. Basically he says if you break the law to get here you will break the laws here. Well, not true. A lot of people break the law entering in hopes their hard work will give them an opportunity. Many naively think if they prove themselves or stay employed it will be OK. And 20+ years of lax enforcement has allowed that mythology to become somewhat real.
But Sowell’s premise is wrong and shows the twisted logic of the immigration hypochondriacs. The new bill would add all sorts of mechanisms to track and check and verify workers who are here to do some work. From the guest worker program and z-visas to the tamper proof IDs we would finally have the tools to verify these people only crossed the border illegally. Otherwise they are out. We would have the tools to stop the madness Sowell rails against – so he opposes the solutions at hand (in hope of some mythical perfect solution which is not coming)
But I find Sowell’s tone insulting and condoning. I break the law. I admit it. I speed on the beltway (with the rest of the non-criminal drivers). I have been late with my tax deposits – cash flow in a small company is a pain. I have paid fines when caught. I have paid back taxes and fines (amazing how the IRS can screw up and you pay for it!). So, does this mean I am on a path to hard crime? It is this kind of truly simple minded thinking that drives the far right away from the rest of the country. A process crime is not an automatic path to murder. There are about 200 million adults in this country who will testify to that – if they are being honest with themselves.
Everything Sowell lists in his diatribe (and he has some good, but marginal, points) is what he has gadly left in place. There is no solution by listening to the far right on immigration. They cannot produce one, and it is high time we stop letting them block them all.
No, you’re not.
And neither is Paris.
Funny though, the irony of giving a free pass to 12 million
illegal immigrants, whilst insisting that little Paris must be
taught “a lesson”.
Can’t help but notice that old equal justice thing.
I am still waiting for the police to round up all those women with illegal vibrators and toss them in prison for breaking the law. You know, because a law is a law and what is the sense of having them if they aren’t enforced and all that.
Sowell has another Op_Ed in National Review today. It asks: WHERE’S THE FENCE?
AJ,
Really! You deride Sowell for poor logic, only then to fomulate an argument yourself that involves a comparison between to acts that cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be seen as even remotley comparable; not in their act, not in their genesis, not in their intent, not in their goal, and certainly not in its legal ramifications as regards to their consequenses. There has always been, and will always be, a gradation in laws; both in natural law (in a Lockian sense), and in societies laws. It is fine if you have a problem with Sowell, but my goodness man; to compare illegally entering a country, and all the ramifications that has towards a nation, with speeding is simply too much!
AJ, I love the analogy of Speeding being the \”gateway offense\” to . . . a life of crime. It\’s probably true – virtually every serial killer ever found has at one point or another in his life been guilty of speeding.
J0hn Wayne Gacy? Speeder.
Jeffrey Dahmer? Speeder.
As for \”illegal aliens\” – there\’s a reason that \”undocumented aliens\” is a better name. Illegal aliens implies criminal behavior — and as I posted last week, being an undocumented alien is not a crime – it is an administrative violation.
If being undocumented was a \”crime\” then due process and the rules of criminal procedure would attach, and USICS/ICE would find themselves having to Mirandize suspects, provide them with legal counsel if they could not afford it, and prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a trier fact (judge or jury) that the alien was \”illegal\”.
Immigration reform needs to be done on a bi-partisan rational basis – its important that we do it fast – and we do it right.
And inflammatory rhetoric from either side is not going to git \’er done.
As for speeding – my M3 is a little old – but it\’ll still do at least 2x the speed limit.
Sooth,
“If being undocumented was a “crime†then due process and the rules of criminal procedure would attach, and USICS/ICE would find themselves having to Mirandize suspects, provide them with legal counsel if they could not afford it, and prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a trier fact (judge or jury) that the alien was “illegalâ€.”
These are requirements to be met in the act of arresting American citizens. These normal law enforcement procedures do not apply to those who are in the country illegaly. Remember, we have been fighting against the Left, in regards to known terrorist, to allow the Pres. to suspend Habeas Corpus rights from terrorists. Our legal system is not uniform for everyone in the world.
Dear Weight of Glory:
You are 100% WRONG. The majority of the Bill of Rights applies to anyone in the US. Including undocumented aliens. The requirements of arrest and due process at trial apply to ANYONE in our criminal justice system. Do yourself a favor and LEARN a little about how our country works before making a fool of yourself.
What is your source for the myth that the bill of rights applies only to citizens?? Source please.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution secured rights for former slaves, including the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. Proposed on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 28, 1868, it is now regarded as one of the most important components of the Constitution.
The amendment provides a broad definition of national citizenship, and requires the states to provide equal protection under the law to all persons (not only to citizens) within their jurisdictions.
“But the problem is, the bill with the resources and tools and tightened up laws to expedite these cases, is lying in the Senate tied down…” AJ
I agree that the situation you present is a serious problem, but the answer to that problem is not to propose a flawed bill that essentially flaunts our immigration laws while only addressing the need for greater enforcement. It’s kind of the reverse of the story that Pres. Reagan liked to tell about the little boy gleefully searching for a pony in a room full of sh_t. The difference is that to get the pony (“tightened up laws to expedite these cases” – minus the funding to make greater enforcement possible, BTW) we have to accept the rest of the current bill which contains elements that insult the intelligence and the will of the American public.
The passage of a bill that resembles some sort of senatorial witches’ brew concocted in secret and shoved down the throats of an unwilling public is antithetical to everything that this Republic stands for. Break the bill down into its component parts and bring each forward for a vote AFTER appropriate hearings and public input. Provide realistic cost estimates as well as the funding necessary to carry out each new requirement as well as all of the promises for greater enforcement contained in each proposal. Set public hearings with testimony from all points of view and examine all of the issues involved. Then we’ll talk about the passage of immigration reform.
Italics off
I posted a response to this – but it disappeared into the ether. If the previous post appears – my apologies for double posting.
Weight- you make a fool out of yourself with such an ill-informed posting – you need to read your Constitution again. It says “Persons” – not citizens, and while it may be commonly understood that the Constitution applies only to citizens – that common understanding is 100% WRONG.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution secured rights for former slaves, including the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. Proposed on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 28, 1868, it is now regarded as one of the most important components of the Constitution.
The amendment provides a broad definition of national citizenship, and requires the states to provide equal protection under the law to all persons (not only to citizens) within their jurisdictions, including but not limited to Miranda rights, right to counsel, right to confront and cross-examine accusers, protection from unlawful search and seizure, right to habeas corpus (this is why the Military Commissions Act had to move to strip habeas rights from those persons deemed “unlawful alien combatants”).
The rights of undocumented aliens are esssentially the same as those of citizens. Sorry to burst your bubble.
arrowhead,
there are only two options now: the bill (which is more progress than flaws) and nothing. We don’t need another GOP goose egg
This is ridiculous. How many of us had ancestors who came here and all they had to do to be legal was get off a boat. Were they all criminals?
Illegal entry is not a crime. It just is not. That is not even what the law says and even it were true then all of us including this sanctimonious twit Sowell aided in committing the crime.
This is just so melodramatic and ridiculous.
There are more Americans smoking weed in this country{which is illegal} than there are undocumented aliens.