An Illegal Immigrant Murdered His Three Children and California's Sanctuary State Has Blood on Its H

Let's remember that with the current immigration policies that are in place, America is not exactly getting Mexico's best and brightest.

Think about it. Are the outstanding citizens the ones who are sneaking across the border in violation of another country's laws? What type of segment in society would be the ones most likely to do this?

Now I'm not saying "all illegal aliens are criminals", but there is going to be an overall general proclivity for them to be, statistically.

I don't have the link right now but I think there was even one Right-leaning Mexican President who, when asked about it, said his country was glad to be getting rid of them. Even in Mexico there was a perception that Mexico was able to unload its "trash" onto the US (sort of Latin American revenge on the Anglos for taking their territory in past history during the Mexican-American War).

 

Per the law, if an alien is overstayed, EWI for the First Time, or violates the visa requirments, their violation is a civil offense, not criminal. It would be like arguing that anytime a restaurant violates the health code such as not keeping certain perishable items above the floor for instance, then that owner of the business committed a crime. The problem is that the immigration code is outdated based on 1950s migration issues. It needs to be updated to reflect modern migration movements. This is not to say to give any illegal alien a citizenship, but we need to address the issues in realistic terms, not ideological terms.

Illegal immigration is a complex issue that CANNOT be simplified as "they are violating the law.: Of course, if you want to continue your argument, then anytime you go above the speed limit in your vehicle, then you too are a criminal. Right?

 

In my personal experience, he overstayed, met someone, fell in love, and began the legalization process through his significant other. Visa overstays and certan nonimmmigrant visa violations can be resolved through USCIS without going back to their home country first. At least, that is what the law says.

 

It's sad that this happened in a Church.

To be fair, we shouldn't underestimate the pressures and emotion that can be involved in a child custody dispute, when government takes someone's children.

It is likely that he harbored anger against the mother, and viewed this as a final act of getting back at the mother. (Which is of course very sad when anger against a former spouse outweighs love for one's children)

 

Thanks for the heads-up. Yes, I felt there was more to the story. I did note he was estranged from his wife.

But also noted he’d been arrested for assaulting an officer, domestic violence, DUI, and assaulting medical staff - but it didn't say anything further.

the trouble with these right wing rags is that they cherry pick the story to suit their narrative. The left just ignores it.

 

I don't understand why not just say that from the get-go why the knee jerk reaction would be to try to make excuses?

That's like if your house is on fire the last thing you need to do is have somebody say well it's already on fire we could use some more lighters over here.


We know very well what the rationale was here this is completely on Democrats who make sanctuary City policies that allow people to remain that should have been deported several times over.

Now the issue of illegals all together is on both parties but Democrats 100% own sanctuary City policies.

 

I read a bit further beyond the headline and the conversation changed to this individual - rather than illegals.

If he was charged with violent assaults he should have been arrested and deported. - regardless of jurisdictional issues.

 

Edit: I see it's already been pointed out how meaningless this statement is.

It should be noted though that pointing out this crime is in no way applying it to a whole demographic.

 

Nothing more to discuss, then. Deport zem all!!

 

I think I'll just add this because so many on the left tend to like to forget this little thing right here if you cross the border illegally the second time it is a felony

 

And Steve remember ... The whole "if it saves just one life" thing, well that.... That only applies to guns.

All of the lives were equal but some of the lives were more equal than others

 

Yes, and then maybe people would get the message that you need to go through the proper legal process of immigrating here.

 

I think the main reason is because it feels easier for them to blame inanimate objects than viewing humans as having to be responsible (in the negative sense of the word) for their own actions.
(And if you think about it, this is also the reason they don't think "if it saves just one life" applies to abortions, because then somebody would have to be responsible for their actions, exercise more self-control, society would have to be instilled to have more restraint)

 

It is only when convenient.

In the United States of America there is roughly the same number of annual deaths with automobiles as there is with firearms which is to say about 30,000.

If they wanted to be intellectually consistent with their argument, they would also seek to get rid of automobiles if those lives were that important...

After all the majority of human existence happened without automobiles.

 

Yes, blatantly convenient double standards are prevalent. No underlying fixed moral principles. Anything goes, truth does not matter, any means justifies the desired ends.

 

It reminds me, what did Trump say about them? So and so, ... and some are good people.

Really, some people are just naturally, irredeemably violent and will one day kill someone. And, to any who know them, it's no secret when it happens.

 

And what they won't admit to: a faction of them DO want to get rid of automobiles! "bad for the environment", you know.

Not so long ago there was actually a serious movement to want to force society to use public transportation. That quickly came to an end with the Covid pandemic hysteria.

 

Or prosecute.

 

I will expect you to start all stories on massacres committed by natural born US citizens with US citizen commits mass murder.

All peoples have their crazies, some more than others, but illegal immigrants have amongst the fewest and they try to be invisible as much as possible.

 

All illegal aliens are criminals. By nature of them being illegal aliens. They aren't all murderers they aren't even all thieves.

 

The trouble is some of the extremist (on both sides) cherry pick what they post as a dog whistle to others to solidify their confirmation basis and pat each other on the back. It's NEVER about open discussion or even concern for a specific issue. It's all just "look at what this pos <we don't like for no real reason> did. let's blame everything on them>.

The OP regularly ignores anything that disproves his positions and continues to repeat the same lie knowing it's a lie. They've even sided with the criminals at the Capitol riot and ignored the 5 dead and hundreds of injured Capitol police officers and that many of our elected officials have had to go to trauma counseling because of that riot? Those "criminals" are excused. Any and every other criminal that doesn't look, love and/or worship like them is lumped in a group and everyone within that demographic is sad to be no good. That's bizarre from a self-proclaimed "Law and Order" (now former) POTUS or the people that cheer when the cops kill minorities.

 

It's not the state's job nor even right to deport someone, that is strictly a Fed job. A state can not legally deport someone. California arrests for a crime, tries, incarcerates, informs the Feds and releases when the court ordered penalty is paid. The fault is 100% the Fed's if the person is not deported. States may, and some do, round up illegals for the feds, California does not elect to use their funds to do the Fed's job for them.

 

We have seen many examples of liberal states and municipalities actually obstructing and refusing to cooperate with immigration officials

 

And rip the country in 2. Why not?

Clearly the right doesn't understand nuance

 

Only in your imagination. Not assisting is not obstruction.

The state is never required to do the Fed's job. It's like if you come upon a bank robber fleeing the police. You could jump out and try to tackle the armed robber or you could step out of the way. You may think trying to tackle the robber is the right thing to do and some would try but you are under no obligation legally to try. It's the same with illegals. The state can try and pay to hold illegals for the Fed's but it has nothing forcing it to do so.