A group of "immigration advocates" (choke, spit) are having a meeting with New Hampshire's Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (fresh from maternity leave -- a New Hampshire first for an AG) to discuss the matter of two NH police chiefs using "criminal trespass" charges to arrest illegal aliens.
Using the incredibly disgusting tactic of lumping those who have obeyed the law and those who are violating it, they want to "express their concern" about this move, and state that being undocumented is not a criminal offense.
In general, they're right. But in the particular cases involved so far, all the illegal aliens arrested weren't merely "undocumented." They were all pulled over for motor vehicle violations when their "undocumented" status was uncovered. And they were driving motor vehicles while "undocumented," which IS illegal for citizens, legal aliens,and illegal aliens alike.
In their letter to AG Ayotte, they said that "Without a formal position from you, other law enforcement agencies may decide to use the criminal trespass law to target those they believe may be undocumented immigrants. We ask you to act without delay to issue a statement in opposition of this practice."
That's right. Because others MIGHT abuse this, we have to prevent EVERYONE from doing it. That's the same logic (so to speak) that is behind gun-control laws. It's behind one Massachusetts congressman's efforts to make Oxycontin illegal. The idea of simply stopping those abuses AS they happen, IF they happen, seems a bit (if I dare say it) foreign to them.
But back to their basic tactic: combining legal visitors to our shores with those who violate the law. This is one of the things I find most contemptible and disgusting. I know that coming to the United States legally can be a truly difficult task, but every year millions DO obey the laws, show respect for our nation, and go through that process. They've put a lot of time and effort into doing things the right way, and it's a grotesque insult to them and their labors to lump them together with those who lie and sneak their way across the border.
I'd call on the legal immigrant community to rise up and denounce the swine who lump them in with the criminals, but most of them are too busy working, studying, and in general being tremendous assets to us as a nation. So I'll take it on myself to be outraged on their behalf.
There are rules, and those rules are there for a reason. As a society, we don't like people who cut in line. People have been beaten up for such things. The idea that we should make no distinction between those who achieve things honestly and those who cheat to get to the same place is repugnant to us.
You know, I think there are a few things I'd like to discuss with AG Ayotte. For one, I'd like to get her opinion of the move to seize Supreme Court David Souter's home by eminent domain and build a hotel. But getting an appointment to see her is pretty difficult. Maybe I'll just show up when they have their appointment and cut ahead of them. After all, we're both part of the "want to see the AG" community. They shouldn't discriminate against me just because my appointment isn't documented.
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Justice
Comments (8)
I am a Hispanic man who "fo... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Faith+1 | June 30, 2005 6:54 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I am a Hispanic man who "followed the rules". I hold two citizenships. I've even served in the US military.
I am sickened by these so called "rights activists" arguing for continuing violation of the laws. If the put half that effort into getting rules changes put in place that would provide effective means of immigration and/or work permits they would solve a lot of issues.
I've jumped through the hoops. They are a pain. A great many of them aren't designed to "weed out" unwanted immigrants. Most of the hoops are just there to protect beuracratic empires and serve no real purpose. Clean those up first and you won't have to waste time chasing after two peace officers just trying to do their job.
1. Posted by Faith+1 | June 30, 2005 6:54 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 06:54
2. Posted by goddessoftheclassroom | June 30, 2005 8:57 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
My husband became a citizen in January, after 10 years as a legal resident. Contrary to popular belief, marriage to a US citizen is NOT an automatic green card; there are many hopes through which to jump.
I have NO sympathy whatever for illegals. If someone is in dire straits, he or she can claim refugee status, which is still a legal proess.
If our laws are to mean anything and are to be respected, they must be enforced. No illegal alien has ANY right to be here; deport them for visa violation. It's a matter of security as well.
2. Posted by goddessoftheclassroom | June 30, 2005 8:57 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 08:57
3. Posted by epador | June 30, 2005 9:18 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Interesting food for thought:
Shortly after our Constitution was written, my great, great, great, great, great grandfather showed up in the mountains of North Carolina. No documentation (we still can't find any legal evidence of passage or entry into the new United States, nor legal departure from England or his purported home country, Sweden). So I come from a long line of illegals. Please, please, send me back from whence my family came, as long as you do the same for everyone else in my predicament.
Just imagine what would happen to Sweden if it had to take back all the descendants of its illegal emmigrants. Now americanized, they might be a voting block that could significantly alter the pacifist/socialist bent of it society and government, and bring back the great imperialistic and war-like glories of the good ol' days (when my ancestor fled the country).
3. Posted by epador | June 30, 2005 9:18 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 09:18
4. Posted by epador | June 30, 2005 9:21 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Just don't beat me up for my ancestor having "jumped" in line.
4. Posted by epador | June 30, 2005 9:21 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 09:21
5. Posted by meep | June 30, 2005 10:00 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Wow, there were legal immigration limits and controls in the 18th century in America?
Oh, no there weren't. The barrier to entry at that time was that it was physically tough to get here, and really tough to stay (alive). No nice hospitals that had to take care of you whether or not you could pay. No government welfare systems. No interstate highways and motor vehicles to make it easy to get around...
If one doesn't like the immigration laws, work to get the laws changed. Don't work to undermine the laws. There used to be some pretty awful immigration laws (say, no immigrants from those "non-white, non-Christian" nations)... and those no longer exist. Because the laws got changed.
5. Posted by meep | June 30, 2005 10:00 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 10:00
6. Posted by McGehee | June 30, 2005 1:05 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Shortly after our Constitution was written...
Latecomer. ;-)
6. Posted by McGehee | June 30, 2005 1:05 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 13:05
7. Posted by fatman | June 30, 2005 6:37 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'm (allegedly) the descendant of an Irish stowaway aboard the Mayflower. Does that make me an illegal alien?
7. Posted by fatman | June 30, 2005 6:37 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 18:37
8. Posted by Giacomo | June 30, 2005 9:10 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
One minor point, Jay Tea. Oxycontin is a little different at this point, in that making it legal and readily available has resulted in increased abuse and dependancy. On the other hand, more liberal gun laws and concealed carry laws tend to decrease criminal activity.
8. Posted by Giacomo | June 30, 2005 9:10 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 30, 2005 21:10