Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The city will be held liable for her death and will be on the hook for millions of dollars. I'd say that they should also be charged for accessory to murder.
Sen. Mitch McConnell is going to introduce legislation that would be called Kate's law. Kate Steinle was the woman killed by a man that had been deported back to Mexico 5 times.
Kate's Law would mandate prison time for 5 years for those caught back in this country after being deported.
The Mitch McConnell website is taking signatures for the required petition.
I hate knee jerk reactions. This may be a good law, it might not but time should be taken to consider and properly craft a law.
McConnell is like the president in subscribing to the following adage. I think the saying is "Never let a good tragedy go to waste."
How about a mandatory 5 year sentence for business owners and/ or CEO who directly or indirectly, via sub contractors, hire undocumented workers
Only 4 states have mandatory e- Verify Laws. Why is this? Of the former and current governors competing for the GOP nomination in 2016, have used their muscle to make e-Verify the law in their state? Why is this?
Does that include the guy who goes to the 7-11 and picks up four hard working guys for a day of landscaping in his yard and doesn't bother to verify citizenship?
I would't say they have ill intentions. Just wanting to work, even if it's illegal, isn't immoral in any measurable way. Remember, just because a crime doesn't mean it's a wrongful action. Many crimes are simply crimes because they disrupt the usual flow of society. Like speeding. You get a ticket instead of being sent to prison, but it's still a crime.
And anything can be argued victimless besides the obvious crimes. Speeding is selfish because it endangers others, encourages others to speed and thus become criminals, who according to pretty much everyone when they make grandiose statements about crimes, makes them the embodiment of evil.
But I'm not a statist....
And the ones who do commit ID theft, yes, that's a problem. The ones who commit SS fraud, yes, that's a problem, albeit less than the former as SS is something of a scam anyway. But that doesn't mean they have ill intentions. Ill intentions are defined as doing wrongful things for the wrong reasons. These are, at best, doing ethically questionably things for sensible reasons. As I said, unless a serious crime is committed, let's not over exaggerate what they've done.
I believe that some herein are struggling for the right words in differentiating one type of ‘crime’ versus another type of ‘crime’.
While a person crossing our border illegally is committing a‘crime’, I do not believe it to be a ‘crime of moral turpitude’.
“Crimes of moral turpitude” is a term, handed down from oldEnglish law, that seeks to divide such ‘crimes’ (such as murder) from other crimes (the parking ticket).
One Court defined the term as referring ‘generally to conduct that shocks the public conscience as being inherently base, vile, ordepraved, contrary to the rules of morality and the duties owned between manand man, either one’s fellow man or society in general’.
Crimes of moral turpitude can involve burglary, theft, kidnapping, assault, and a host of other such acts. Many states have laws defining the term.
A Texas Attorney General (not the present one) defined crimes of moral turpitude as one that denotes: ‘shameful wickedness – so extreme a departure from ordinary standards of honesty, good morals, justice, or ethics as to be shocking to the moral sense of the community. It has also been defined as an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which one person owes to another, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between people’.
Thus, I believe, in general, that simply crossing the border is not a 'crime of moral turpitude'. Of course, said person may go on to commit such crimes.
I wish I had a solution to the problem. I doubt anyone will ever seriously propose that CEO's and such go to prison for the hiring of illegals, for they contribute a lot of money to politicians. Many also object to the costs of building and maintaining prisons. I have noted in older threads the difficulty of building a 'fence' to keep out illegals along a 2,000 mile border (of which 700 miles have been built to date, with, apparenlty, little effect even where the fence is up).
I do, however, disagree with the principle of sanctuary cities, as it seems to intrude upon the Federal jurisdication. However, I recognize that some of this cities do not want to waste precious resources (money and manpower) over trying to hunt down illegals to turn over to the Feds. Yet, to proclaim 'sanctuary' for them seems nutty to me.
How about a mandatory 5 year sentence for business owners and/ or CEO who directly or indirectly, via sub contractors, hire undocumented workers
Trump would have to arrest himself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
Only 4 states have mandatory e- Verify Laws. Why is this? Of the former and current governors competing for the GOP nomination in 2016, have used their muscle to make e-Verify the law in their state? Why is this?
Their big money corporate donors wouldn't like it. They would stop filling the coffers of any politician who dared such a thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
Yet, it seems that everyone wants to build a fence/ wall and employ thousands to guard the wall at $ 90,000 a year, and then complain about big government.
In the meantime, employers of undocumented workers get a pass.
Yep. When Trump or any right winger comes out with a platform that states that every employer who hires illegals faces a mandatory prison term then I will believe they are serious about trying to stem the flow of immigrants into this country. Until then, they are simply blowing the dog whistle that never fails to excite a certain segment of the population, but they have no real intention of doing anything about it.
If you live in San Fran (my condolences) head over to the magistrate and swear out a warrant against any elected official who voted for the "sanctuary" status for accessory manslaughter.
The scary thing is there are many more sanctuary cities, and states.
It's the most outright defiance of U.S. law I know of right now.
And the Bush and Obama administrations did/do nothing about it. Neither will Hillary.
We need action on this issue.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
