Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

ARIZONA RULES THE NATION ON ILLEGALS


Recommended Posts

Checked this out on a couple a news agencies and CONGRATULATIONS ARIZONA GOVERNMENT. Laws passed for the removal of illegals and at long last CRIMINALIZATION!!! Removes the real problem from the economy.1-anyone who does not respect the countries laws on immigration should not be here in the first place. 2- 26 million jobs for real americans. 3- Many trillions in welfare medical and socioecinomic ramifications instantly removed 4-frees up many cops for enforcement and reduces crime by at least half 5-stops the insane drain on our economyof having 26000000 folks sending their cash HOME and leaving us high and dry. Just look at western unions latest tax info as to cash being raped from our country on a daily basis and on and on and on--KUDOS ARIZONA--to LL with amenisty=instant voters but death to american economy-John

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

AZ is a shining example to all States!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, a state has decided to do what our federal government refuses to do. It is too abd that this effort will ony direct teh flow to states that do not believe that there is a border.

It is chaos here. 40,000 wealthy illegal Mexican drug dealers have poplated NE El Paso and are running their businesses from this side of the border with full protection from police and the El Paso elected officials. The Sinaloa cartel, with the help of the Mexican Government has defeated the Jaurez cartel and is now in control. Federal troops have moved back and police who are aligned with Chapo Guzman own the border. The local gangs are lining up for war on this side and any US gangster that does not swear allegiance to the "Nuevo Gente" will be killed.

The Aztecas have put out contracts on all El Paso police officers and the police responded by hiding from them. There have been several shootings in S. New Mexico between police and gangsters in the last week. Most honest Mexican police have been killed or fled to teh US months ago. Even the mayor of Juarez lives in El Paso. Each child in the Valley of Juarez has to pay $5000 to the gangs or be killed. Families that dont have the money to pay flee to Ft.Hancock, Texas and are given asylum. Over 100,000 people have fled into the US and over 1,000,000 have fled Juarez.

We ignored it for many years and both parties have the blood on their hands and the drug money in their pockets. Now Mexico is by anyone's definition a terrorist state as well as many local governments on our side. It goes all the way to the top of DEA, ICE and CBP where Azteca gang members hold high positions. No one is innocent and none have tried to stop the problem i any way.

Now our plan is to throw down our guns, open the borders, and pee down our legs while the Nuevo Gente buy all of the officials on this side that they have not already and fight for control of drug trade routes on the US side.

That is the new plan...Just ask Hillary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are going to be next to allow medical marijuana too...California style! As close to complete legalization as you can imagine. Thyat will make a clean sweep for all western states engaging in some type of meaningful drug policy reform despite the counterproductive efforts of our federal government.

The drug dealers, gangsters, and the cartels are going to suffer more from this type of move than anything else we can do. More than 50% of their business is at risk if adult Americans were allowed to grow and use responsibly.

Again, it is our illustrious federal government that has been dragging its feet for the last 15 years and keeping the price of drugs high and the profit margins large by insisting on prohibition while maintaining large holes in the border. Nothing like cornering the market and creating a monopoly to rake in those frogskins!

Prohibition creates a big black market for guns going south and drugs coming north. Eliminate the prohibition and the profits for their two largest commodities goes away. If marijuana was controlled in some fashion it would also be a lot more difficult for our children to get their hands on. As it is now it is much more available to kids than cigarettes or alcohol because it is entirely uncontrolled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While Bedrock is on the right track about the drug legalization and the deterring affect it has on drug cartels and dealers, it is a very very small affect. Marijuana is 2 things:

1. A large part of the poundage that comes across the border.

2. A smaller part of the value that comes across.

A pound of coke has much more value than a pound of Marijuana. As our Government will never legalize Cocaine (and should not), there will always be smuggling of higher value drugs(coke, meth, heroin) across the border, if we do not

form an impenatrable border that allows nothing to come through, that is not accounted for and needed.

Also please understand that while Bedrock has stated in the past that Mexicans are basically conservative, it is also to the benefit of the current administration and the Socialist/Marxist portion of our Government, to allow as many illegals in as possible, to further strengthen their voter base.

To an illegal, who will be given amnesty and voting rights, who do you think they will vote for, at least initially? But on one last Political note, if I may...

This issue, seems to reflect the division that has been occuring, not only between the individual states, but between the states and the Federal Government. It will be interesting to watch as Obama provides amnesty for all the illegals that are already here (and still arriving), while the great western states (California excluded) fight to keep our borders secure to the benefit of all real Americans. I myself, sit along the border and watch, waiting for the next move and who will make it.

My brother did much, fighting illegal immigration in Arizona and posted here about it many times. He was published in many of the Southern Arizona newspapers, standing for American rights against illegal immigration. While I do not have his gift for gab, I do have his passion for what is right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While Bedrock is on the right track about the drug legalization and the deterring affect it has on drug cartels and dealers, it is a very very small affect. Marijuana is 2 things:

1. A large part of the poundage that comes across the border.

2. A smaller part of the value that comes across.

A pound of coke has much more value than a pound of Marijuana. As our Government will never legalize Cocaine (and should not), there will always be smuggling of higher value drugs(coke, meth, heroin) across the border, if we do not

form an impenatrable border that allows nothing to come through, that is not accounted for and needed.

Also please understand that while Bedrock has stated in the past that Mexicans are basically conservative, it is also to the benefit of the current administration and the Socialist/Marxist portion of our Government, to allow as many illegals in as possible, to further strengthen their voter base.

To an illegal, who will be given amnesty and voting rights, who do you think they will vote for, at least initially? But on one last Political note, if I may...

This issue, seems to reflect the division that has been occuring, not only between the individual states, but between the states and the Federal Government. It will be interesting to watch as Obama provides amnesty for all the illegals that are already here (and still arriving), while the great western states (California excluded) fight to keep our borders secure to the benefit of all real Americans. I myself, sit along the border and watch, waiting for the next move and who will make it.

My brother did much, fighting illegal immigration in Arizona and posted here about it many times. He was published in many of the Southern Arizona newspapers, standing for American rights against illegal immigration. While I do not have his gift for gab, I do have his passion for what is right.

The DEA estimates that 60% of the cartel's profit comes from marijuana. Other than that I agree completely with what you are saying. I do not support legalization at all, rather decriminalization and the use of medical mj.

..but legalization would be much better than waging a war on our own people and doing littel or nothing to quell the flow of illegal drugs. It is destabilizing Mexico, corrupting our own law enforcemetn, and ruining people's lives. After years and trillions of dollars drugs are more available than ever and control has completely slipped throughy our fingers.

Yes, Mexicans are conservative. That is NOT a political definition, but rather a social one. Mecicans are fleeing their country by the droves because they dont want to fight a battle that has already been lost. They will vote for welfare, handouts and gifts. That is what the US means to them becasue that is what the US policy has taught them. They are only doing what is allowed by us and what they have been doing for two generations (if not many more). No policies have been put in place to elict any other response from them.

An mpenetrable border means more than not letting drugs come across. It also means that money does not flow south. THAT is the key. Sure they will smuggle other drugs, sell children and women, adn any other illegal activity that America demands. Our vices are their favorite business. But if the money did not flow south MUCH easier than the contraband flows north, there would be a quick end to the problem.

We PAY THEM WELL. Low estimates say $56 Billion per year. Realistic estimates are more like $125 Billion US dollars a year. With that kind of funding supporting the illicit activity it will take more a few bucks to stop it. And when we give the govt of Mexico a dollar to fight the cartel we are giving the money to train and arm the cartels second line of defense. We train the cartels FIRST LINE OF DEFENSE right here in the good old USA along side our DEA and Customs agents. They shoot the finest American made weapons and use the finest American made equipment too, courtesey of the funding for the "war on drugs".

One of my high school buddies was just found in Praxadis, Chih with $20,000 dollars in his stomach. He tried to rip them off and they made him eat it and then shot him. His body was found with no arms and legs. This is what is in store for us on this side unless someone forces our government to come clean and defend our country from this invasion.

All the illegal aliens and all the money they send back, and all the damage they do to our economy is 1/100 of the damage that the drug industry does in direct costs. Griping about the illegal aliens in like getting shot at and griping about the noise. We seem to be completely ignoring the real issue that we are loosing a shooting battle with a well armed terrorist organization that owns the country to our south, and we are supporting this war by giving the enemy in excess of $100 BILLION A YEAR to kill us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the border needs to be impenetrable....both ways. I do not trust the DEA estimates, but the point is not worth arguing, because it doesnt matter whether its 60%, 90% or 10%, They will simply find other "vices" as you put it to make the money. I do totally agree with stopping the money flowing south and there are ways of doing that. None of which our Federal Government, is interested in doing. My time in other countries was spent fighting against people that had an ideology, that differed from America's. Until we convince our Government that it is the same type of fight, against a 3rd world country that is just across the border, this discussion will never end and ranchers will continue to be in danger. Its a war and I dont mean "Drug War". Its a war, where our own Government is allowing us to be invaded, making us all already behind enemy lines.

Hooray for Arizona taking a stand, but as Jan Brewer has yet to sign it and even if she does, will the State of Arizona, have the resolve to do what is needed? That remains to be seen and to date, no form of Government has had that resolve...

On a side note, as we have really good monitors on this forum now, I would like to see this forum have another chance at a "Political" section. So many issues cross over from just mining/prospecting....especially as I am always having to go armed on my own claims, so I do not become yet another statistic. :twocents:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the border needs to be impenetrable....both ways. I do not trust the DEA estimates, but the point is not worth arguing, because it doesnt matter whether its 60%, 90% or 10%, They will simply find other "vices" as you put it to make the money. I do totally agree with stopping the money flowing south and there are ways of doing that. None of which our Federal Government, is interested in doing. My time in other countries was spent fighting against people that had an ideology, that differed from America's. Until we convince our Government that it is the same type of fight, against a 3rd world country that is just across the border, this discussion will never end and ranchers will continue to be in danger. Its a war and I dont mean "Drug War". Its a war, where our own Government is allowing us to be invaded, making us all already behind enemy lines.

Hooray for Arizona taking a stand, but as Jan Brewer has yet to sign it and even if she does, will the State of Arizona, have the resolve to do what is needed? That remains to be seen and to date, no form of Government has had that resolve...

On a side note, as we have really good monitors on this forum now, I would like to see this forum have another chance at a "Political" section. So many issues cross over from just mining/prospecting....especially as I am always having to go armed on my own claims, so I do not become yet another statistic. :twocents:

Agreed 110%. Drug policy reform is not about damaging the cartels, it is about realistic and workable policy for America. It will certainly affect their bottom line for a while, but is not a substitute for sound policy and border enforcement. It is all about addressing our drug addiction problems. When used in conjunction with SOME darn BORDER ENFORCEMENT it spells safety for folks living in the war zone. This is NOT about MEXICO. This is about US.

The largest "hole" in the fence is a political nightmare caused by an ex BP chief who is now a politician in EL Paso and involved heavily with the Juarez cartel. He single handedly kept the most coveted smuggling route barrier free. This is exactly the spot where Compean and Ramos lost 15 rounds at a man running away, where the Mexican children pay ransom to be safe, and where the largest flow of drugs is flowing into the US daily. Ft. Hancock, San Ellie, Fabens, etc.

Despite the opponents of the fence, where there is a hole, there is a war...It must be good for something! Now there is a hole with a war, and American politicians are falling over each other to keep that hole open. There have been 2,500 murders reported so far this year, and officials say that only a fraction of deaths are reported becasue families dont want to be involved and just drag their dead inside and bury them when no one is looking. We are only about 120 days into the year, so our precious "hole" has cost an average of 21 murders a day.

Now you know exactly how much a life is worth to an elected official on the border. A mile of fence will be worth about 5,000 lives in 2 years, or a couple million dollars a body. They are still saying that fencing the hole is a bad idea becasue "it will not stop violence in Mexico". This from a man born in Mexico, elected to office in Texas, Appointed head of the Border Patrol for his career, and now serving as a Texas state representative. Why is this ex BP chief so concerned about Mexico and so apathetic toward US security?

No clearer case for corruption could possibly be indicated. There are DOZENS just like him. Precisely the reason that the border is porous.

Two week sago our Governor "toured the border" (he took off from Santa Fe, had lunch with the Gov of Arizona over Rodeo, and flew to Phoenix). He "sent the National Guard" to the rescue. This freed up $75,000 to spend at his discretion. He had them patrolat night for 5 days "to find the smuggling routes" and then had them report back to the Border Patrol. END OF MISSION. At least the BP knows where those smuggling routes are now!

God help us! Our leadership is corrupt, we are being led to slaughter, and everyone is disorganized and sitting on their hands. Their answer is "vote 'em out in November"! and vote the ones who did it to us before back in so they can do it to us some more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now there will be another problem. Read in a magizine how the Audobon will be fighting the fence because of the migration of animals. They will probably find a spreckled frog or some weird animal that the fence would block its migration. Maybe the coyote can`t make it to their breeding grounds.

What a mess and people think the government can fix it????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its great Arizona is taking the lead :whoope: I feel within this next decade or two, there is going to be something very catastrophic, and world changing. There is just to much corruption happening right now. 99% of everyone I talk to believe our country cannot go on the way it has been, and are pissed with the way it has been going. What is that old saying " go with your gut feeling". Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check this out!

Quite the Opposite.

UK’s Bedfordshire Police’s rules regarding terrorists and dangerous criminals

If they’re non-Muslim

• Consider the most opportune time of day to be able to arrest suspects with minimum resistance

• Apply all necessary force to enter the premises and arrest suspects accordingly.

If they’re Muslim:

• Community leaders must be consulted before raids into Muslim houses.

• Officers must not search occupied bedrooms and bathrooms before dawn.

• Use of police dogs will be considered serious desecration of the premises.

• Cameras and camcorders should not be used in case capturing women in inappropriate dress.

• If people are praying at home officers should stand aside and not disrupt the prayer. They should be allowed the opportunity to finish.

• Officers should take their shoes off before raiding a Muslim house.

• The reasons for pre-dawn raids on Muslim houses needs to be clear and transparent.

• Officers must not touch holy books or religious artefacts without permission.

• Muslim prisoners should be allowed to take additional clothing to the station.

With this continuing appeasement, no wonder it’s now predicted that

Britain will become an Islamic state by 2070.

(Time to think about your children.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well AZ is now under fire from everyone it seems. Its a shame that there is only one state that will stand up for itself, when the real culprits are the Federal Government, for not protecting its citizens and their rights. I do believe that if the Federal Government (oh yeah and I am talking about the last 5 administrations too), had done its job and closed our borders to ALL illegal immigrants, AZ would not have had to even consider a bill such as this.

But still the illegals and drug mules run past my RV and the Black Hawks take pictures. But they did build a very pretty check point, just north of Tubac and spent more of out tax dollars doing it. I simply love driving through it and proclaiming my citizenship. So if I as a German/American have to proclaim my citizenship, I fail to understand why the Mexican/Americans have a problem doing it also?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ronald Reagan fought hard for the Immigration Reform act of 1986 and that is what has given hundreds of thousands of them amnesty and protection. It is the law that is in effect today and it was proposed by republicans and had bi-partisan support. It was advertised as a way to keep employers from hiring illegals but actually made it impossible to track them by allowing subcontractors to hire anyone they want.

This blatantly crippled our ablity to deny illegals work and was introduced and supported by the best president ever. No one should fool themselves into thinking that opening the borders and giving away American jobs was a the fault or design of one party. All politicians haev a vested interest in the illegal alien and have the blood and sweat of the American worker on their hands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ronald Reagan fought hard for the Immigration Reform act of 1986 and that is what has given hundreds of thousands of them amnesty and protection. It is the law that is in effect today and it was proposed by republicans and had bi-partisan support. It was advertised as a way to keep employers from hiring illegals but actually made it impossible to track them by allowing subcontractors to hire anyone they want.

This blatantly crippled our ablity to deny illegals work and was introduced and supported by the best president ever. No one should fool themselves into thinking that opening the borders and giving away American jobs was a the fault or design of one party. All politicians haev a vested interest in the illegal alien and have the blood and sweat of the American worker on their hands.

boy... the gold & prospecting rule was quickly forgotten. wtf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article. Illegals just cost us a lot no matter what.

Print this story | ShareThis| Comment (1 comment(s)) | Rate | Text Size

Factory justice? Illegal immigrants pushed through the system

By Evan Pellegrino, Special to the Green Valley News

Published: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 9:17 PM MST

The noise from rattling chains resonated into the hallway on the second floor of the Evo A. DeConcini U.S. District Courthouse in Tucson.

In the Special Proceedings Courtroom, one of the largest courtrooms in Arizona, 70 prisoners sat in shackles in nearly every available seat on the defendants’ side of the room, filling the jury box and six rows of the gallery.

“Just another day in Streamline,” a U.S. marshal said as he directed a line of eight men wearing weathered clothes who were being moved from a holding cell in the basement into the courtroom.

Without speaking, the prisoners moved to an empty bench in the back of the courtroom and waited until they were called one by one by their attorney to prepare for a hearing later in the day.

This scene has become a daily routine in Tucson and other district courts along the U.S.-Mexico border, where migrants apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol are increasingly being prosecuted for illegal entry or re-entry into the United States.

The program is called “Operation Streamline,” and through it, the Border Patrol began to significantly raise the number of migrants convicted in court during a 2005 pilot program in the Del Rio sector of Texas. The operation has since expanded east to Laredo, Texas, and west to Yuma and Tucson.

Questioning the process

Streamline is a change in direction for the Border Patrol from the past half-decade, away from its catch-and-release policy.

Now, instead of immediately deporting people apprehended by the Border Patrol, the federal government is changing its approach by establishing criminal records for some illegal immigrants and sending repeat offenders to prison.

The costly method is intended to discourage illegal immigration from Latin America, but parts of the process have recently been ruled unlawful, and critics question its effectiveness.

Heather Williams, First Assistant Federal Public Defender in Tucson, said the program is “a huge strain on the system, and it’s just not working.”

The increase in cases during two years has meant that federal public defenders and others who work at border courthouses have less time and resources for non-immigration cases.

“It’s draining our time. The attention for more serious cases is greatly reduced,” Williams said. “Time to resolve those cases now takes longer.”

In 2008, Operation Streamline’s first year at the federal court in Tucson, other types of cases in the district dropped. According to data provided by the court’s clerk, marijuana cases dropped 26 percent; firearms and explosives, 21 percent; violent offenses, 17 percent; forgery and counterfeiting, 63 percent; and larceny and theft, 28 percent.

Williams has testified before the U.S House of Representatives Subcommittee of Commercial and Administrative Law, which oversees the Executive Office of the U.S. Attorney, about the effects of Streamline, calling it “one of the least-successful but most costly and time-consuming ways of discouraging entries and re-entries (into the United States).”

How it works

Each weekday in the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector, agents transport 70 migrants to downtown Tucson apprehended near the border to prosecute them on charges of illegal entry or combined re-entry into the United States. That’s about 4 percent of the sector’s apprehensions.

The number of migrants prosecuted in 2009 exceeded 15,000 in the Tucson sector alone. Including cases from Border Patrol’s Yuma Sector, the number of cases in Arizona is nearing 30,000 annually.

In one day, each of the 70 defendants meets with a lawyer for 15 to 30 minutes, decide whether to plead guilty or go to trial, and are seen by a judge for change of plea and sentencing.

At 9:30 a.m., a day or two after being apprehended by Border Patrol, the defendants are moved up from a basement-holding cell and wait in the packed courtroom until they are called by one of the court-appointed attorneys spread throughout the room.

Of the 12 to 19 lawyers who represent four or five Streamline defendants each day, two or three are federal public defenders. The others are provided through the Criminal Justice Act Panel, a panel of 130 lawyers from Tucson who are hired through the court for $125 per hour, costing taxpayers more than $2 million per year.

The attorneys lead their clients to wherever there is available space to meet in the courtroom. Some of the defendants look relieved to speak with someone who understands the process of U.S. courts. Others are visibly distressed and tearfully cite as their reasons for coming across the border the need to care for dependent children or for food and medicine.

“They usually don’t have a defense, but I try to help explain their tragic circumstances to the judge, and to help them understand the legal reality they face when they enter this country without permission.” said Joel Parris, a federal public defender in Tucson for 17 years. “It’s challenging because often they have poor little or no education and sometimes there’s a linguistic barrier if they’re coming from somewhere other than Mexico. Even among those from Mexico, we are daunted by many migrants who speak one of dozens of indigenous languages from the Sierra Madre and remote southern jungle areas. These individuals comprehend little Spanish and typically have no experience with modern governmental or legal institutions, making it all the more difficult to explain our legal system to them.”

After a short meeting with their lawyer, those who are facing prison may meet with a representative from the Mexican consulate who will contact their family back home.

They are all moved in groups back down to the crowded holding cell until 1:30 p.m., when the defendants are moved back up to the courtroom for a hearing.

One by one, their names and case numbers are called, and one by one they respond with, “Presente.”

Each lawyer representing a handful of cases is asked by the judge if they have had significant time to meet with their clients on an individual basis and are asked if all of their clients will be pleading guilty. All said the have and will.

The judge then formally explains the charges, rights and consequences for a guilty plea through a series of statements, translated through headphones worn by each defendant. After each statement they are asked to stand if any of them do not understand.

Some look around at each other confused, but no one stands.

Prior to a decision made in December by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, to streamline the high number of cases, the defendants were asked further questions en masse, pleading in groups, speaking in unisons of “Si,” or “No.”

Although this method was effective at prosecuting a large number of cases, the recent decision said the shortcuts don’t comply with procedural rules.

Dennis Burke, U.S. attorney for the District of Arizona and the person responsible for prosecution of Streamline cases, said that while the decision by the appellate court would mean adjustments, the hearings would continue.

“While changes will have to be made to some change-of-plea proceedings to comply with the Ninth Circuit’s decision, we are confident that the decision will not adversely impact our ability to prosecute individuals who violate the laws of the United States,” he said.

To comply with the decision, after group questioning, small groups of defendants and their lawyers are now called to five microphones set up in front of the bench.

Each defendant are now asked by the judge again if they understand that they are giving up their rights to a trail and are pleading guilty by their free will.

Although some are hesitate and whisper first with their lawyer, they all respond with “Si.”

Then the judge also asks each lawyer if they felt their clients were competent enough for trial. At a recent trial, each said they felt they were.

But Williams said also she has concerns about the state of some of the Streamline clients, most of whom were apprehended while traveling through the desert, usually with limited basic resources.

“Legally, someone has to be competent during a hearing. They have to know what they understand and volunteering give up rights. If someone is dehydrated and famished, they may not be thinking clearly,” Williams said. “Our concern is that they might not always be competent whether it be due to medical conditions or the lack of rest food and water.”

Williams said she still believes defendants are also often too afraid to speak up at that point in the hearing.

Parris said he also has concerns.

“In order for a defendant to plead guilty in our courts, they first must answer questions designed to assure that they understand our system of laws. When the judge asks a defendant if she understands her rights - to remain silent, to have legal counsel, etc - these questions are intended to assure that a plea of guilty is not ill-advised, under coercion, etc. but to a Huichol or Tarahumara field laborer, these concepts are often completely incomprehensible,” he said.

Still, at a recent hearing, each stated a plea of “culpable,” Spanish for guilty.

After pleading, the judge explained to them the philosophy behind Streamline.

“You didn’t have a criminal record before today. Now you do,” said the judge, warning those who have been prosecuted for the first time of the consequences they may face if caught again in the future.

Second offense

Roughly two-thirds of Streamline cases are considered first attempts of illegal re-entry, which means the migrants have no official criminal record of a previous illegal entry. For them, time in custody since their arrest is considered time served. They are taken back to Mexico shortly after their hearing with an established criminal record in the United States. However, although some have been through the hearings before, the potential consequences didn’t keep them from returning to the United States illegally.

At a recent trial, numerous men from Mexico and Guatemala, caught by Border Patrol near Douglas, were back in court after pleading guilty in the same courtroom room months earlier. Cases such as theirs occur each day during the hearings.

Defendants such as them, previously convicted and deported in the past are charged with a “flip-flop,” a felony re-entry after deportation, punishable by two to 20 years in prison as well as the illegal entry charge. Because of the high volume of arrest numbers, most flip-flop cases are offered and accept a plea offer. They plead guilty to the lesser illegal entry charge, and their sentences range from 30 days to six months in prison.

Housing of those convicted in Streamline costs taxpayers an estimated $7 million to $10 million per month, according to data from the U.S. Department of Justice.

Although the procedure may be costly and procedures have been questioned in court, Border Patrol says the program is working.

From 2007 to 2008 apprehensions by Border Patrol in the Tucson Sector dropped by 60,543, or 16 percent.

“The success is due to more manpower, infrastructure, technology and several impact programs one of them being Operation Streamline,” said Mario Escalante, Border Patrol Public Information Officer for the Tucson Sector, which apprehends more migrants per year along its 260-mile stretch of border than any other sector.

“It is a layered approach to successfully placing the needed resources in the areas where the traffic patterns shift to.”

Williams disagreed.

She said Streamline is not discouraging people from coming in.

“The economy has been doing that,” Williams said.

“When any of us is in law school, we get into thinking we’re actually going make a difference. Now, two days every two weeks, each of us is stuck in factory justice. It’s draining to prosecute people coming here to work because they can’t pay a medical bill pay or pay for a meal other than tortilla and corn.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ariz. governor signs immigration bill into law

Measure Obama called 'misguided' has raised concern of civil rights backers

AP

updated 42 minutes ago

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a new state immigration bill that President Barack Obama called "misguided" hours earlier.

Brewer, saying that the state had been "more than patient waiting for Washington to act" on the issue of illegal immigration, said that the bill would protect Arizona citizens without violating individuals' constitutional rights.

The sweeping legislation makes it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. It also requires local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants.

The Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund said the bill before Brewer is unconstitutional because regulation of immigration is a federal responsibility.

And they have followed through with that responsibility when? :hahaha:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...