Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Police say 'protect and serve' extends to illegal immigrants
Reuters via Boston Globe ^ | December 30, 2001 | Deborah Tedford

Posted on 12/30/2001 8:01:34 AM PST by sarcasm

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:07:13 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: sarcasm
How about "protect and serve" Americans from the extreme DUI and uninsured-driving rate among illegals - by deporting them!

Is it too much to ask the politicians-with-badges called "police chiefs" to "protect and serve" the vast majority of the taxpayers paying them - native-born Americans?

IMMIGRATION resource library: public-health facts, court decisions, local INS numbers!

21 posted on 12/30/2001 10:59:33 AM PST by glc1173@aol.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle; sarcasm
“It's not our job to deport anyone, or report them to INS,'' said Assistant Police Chief Rudy Landeros.

Basically, identical statement was made to me by Montgomery County (MD) Police Chief Dr. Charles Moose. He said it was a federal issue, and his job was to serve all residents equally.

Moose was imported from the Left Coast after the Hispanic community complained that the police were picking on them, and basically threatened to riot, like they had done in DC a few years earlier.

Who says violence - or the threat of violence - never solved anything?

22 posted on 12/30/2001 11:50:15 AM PST by Arleigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: HangFire; AnnaZ; abigail2; NewDestiny; rebuildus; Cortez; brat; MissAmericanPie; miss print...
San Francisco...Orange County...now Austin...

...The New M.C. Card...don't invade your neighbors without it!

23 posted on 12/30/2001 12:59:48 PM PST by Mercuria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercuria
Looks like it time for an Austin freep, but who knows if anyone is interested. I would like them to explain why it is not their job to deport.
24 posted on 12/30/2001 1:02:38 PM PST by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sarcasm
''San Francisco is a city built by immigrants,'' Johnston said

By immigrants who came here to make a living rather than live it up on the public dole, to assimiliate themselves as Americans rather than spit on America, to obey the laws rather than break them.

25 posted on 12/30/2001 1:32:39 PM PST by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wai-ming
If I were living in a foreign country, say Korea, I would expect the same sort of police protection and service as given to Korean nationals.

Food for thought.

Truth be told, most of the countries I've visited have some sort of fine for visa overstays. Nothing onerous - and certainly not automatic deportation - but usually it works out to a fine of perhaps twice the normal visa fee for that same period.

The other truth is that visas aren't automatically the first thing a doctor, policeman, or bureaucrat seeks to examine in any foreign country I've visited. Usually people want to attend to the matter at hand, not to one's visa status (at least where I have traveled). Most recently, I traveled from the U.S. to Paris to the Netherlands and back, and showed my passport exactly two times: once (a very cursory flick) upon checking-in for the Netherlands, and the second time before boarding the return flight to the U.S.

During a recent period when I lived overseas for more than a year, I was never - not once - asked to produce my passport or visa except at border crossings.

Something to ponder.

26 posted on 12/30/2001 1:47:18 PM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator

To: Crabcake
Adopting Sec. 133 of the 1996 Immigration Reform Act would seem to lead us down the road to Federalizing the local police. Illegal aliens are criminals and have no right to be here in the first place. Protecting them as if they were not criminals themselves is uncalled for.

Agreed that illegal aliens have no right to be here, but a crime against a criminal is still a crime.

This bull about renegade departments like this one enforcing only enforcing laws they agree with endangers everybody in the country.

Agreed, except that I don't know that I'd use the word "renegade" in this particular instance, at least not yet.

The problem is that this thread discusses putting a bandaid on the cut finger of a hand attached to a wrist that has been slit.

If we can stop the influx of illegal aliens, this kind of thing won't be much of a problem. The security of our national borders should not be a major responsibility of local LEOs or local government. (I don't mean that they should not care at all, just that they have other concerns.) It is a national concen. In time of war, as now, it is military matter, not a law enforcement matter.

Looking at it from a different aspect, as a nation we need to do things to make being an illegal alien in the US less desirable than it is now. Among other things, that would mean drying up the job market for illegal aliens.

28 posted on 12/30/2001 4:47:58 PM PST by KrisKrinkle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: Crabcake
Federalizing local police? What does that mean?

Carried to it's end, it means that the local police would be under the command authority of someone in Washington--not your local elected officials.

Arresting employers would certainly help dry up the job market.

Asset forfeiture is contemptable, at least as currently implemented. I'm unwilling to expand it's use.

On the other hand, if you want to have the military (regular, reserve, National Guard or other well regulated militia (not a bunch of yahoos)) patrol the border and handle illegal crossers in a military manner, including shooting them if necessary, I could probably go along with that.

30 posted on 12/30/2001 8:18:26 PM PST by KrisKrinkle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: madrussian
No, I hadn't.

Thanks for the ping.

31 posted on 12/31/2001 12:09:51 AM PST by bulldog905
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: KrisKrinkle
It certainly is a complex issue. One luckily we dont have to face. The closest land mass to us is Australia, and we have open borders with them.

Although, we do get boatpeople who reckon its their right as 'citizens of the world' to live here on welfare. Who knows what the answer is there.

Happy New Year by the way.

33 posted on 12/31/2001 8:00:03 AM PST by klee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson