Illegal Immigration Hurts … Illegal Immigrants
[Guest post by DRJ]
Illegal immigration has pros and cons but anecdotal reports suggest it can be especially dangerous for illegal immigrants. The story of 14-year-old Luis Antonio Gonsalez is one example:
“Police canceled an Amber Alert this afternoon after finding the 14-year-old boy in good health in an Austin apartment, less than 24 hours after his alleged abduction. Investigators said Santos Vasquez, 33, kidnapped Luis Antonio Gonsalez from the Shell station at U.S. 290 and Becker Road on Monday evening, while Gonsalez’s mother was left behind. Vasquez was arrested and remains in custody in San Marcos.
Authorities said Gonsalez’s mother owed money to Vasquez, a coyote, for bringing her daughter to the U.S. Investigators said Vasquez kidnapped Gonsalez and intended to hold him until his mother paid the debt.
Vasquez is being held without bail and will face kidnapping charges in Harris County. Four other suspects were arrested after being found with Gonsalez.“
Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime.
— DRJ
And your point is? It almost sounds like you’re saying that the “victim” is the kidnapper, because if there wasn’t “illegal immigration,” he wouldn’t have had a motive to do the kidnapping.
Redhand (c56853) — 12/25/2007 @ 3:01 pmThe only crime here with a victim was kidnapping.
Elliot (44d0e1) — 12/25/2007 @ 3:40 pmDJR– seems pretty clear to me.
Not really a shocker– crime begets more crime.
Foxfier (97deae) — 12/25/2007 @ 4:02 pmRedhand,
I’m sorry if it sounded that way. My point was that there is more harm from illegal immigration than we realize. Many of the people who suffer because of illegal immigration are illegals, too, and they suffer in ways we don’t always notice or think about.
The answer isn’t to ignore illegal immigration. The answer is to recognize there are consequences to illegal immigration that should make us think harder about trying to stop it. In other words, Build the Fence.
Elliott,
Paying a coyote to smuggle someone across the border is a crime. Taking money and smuggling someone in is a crime, too. Even if you don’t think the parties can be considered victims, that doesn’t make it a victimless crime.
DRJ (09f144) — 12/25/2007 @ 4:04 pmThese are the best links with the most offered in actual facts and coverage…The encyclopedia of Illegals if you will;
Numbers USA
http://www.numbersusa.com
The Heritage Foundation
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/index.cfm
The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration
http://www.usillegalaliens.com/
Americans For Sovereignty
Winghunter (6029af) — 12/25/2007 @ 4:27 pmhttp://www.americansov.org/info/about_americans_for_sovereignty.html
“My point was that there is more harm from illegal immigration than we realize.”
There’s harm from it being illegal, and there’s harm from it being immigration. I think here the harm is from the first, not second.
stef (beffb0) — 12/25/2007 @ 5:51 pmStef– thing is, if these folks weren’t violating the law simply by BEING around, then they’d not be such wonderful prey for the nasty folks who do exist. (Folks who’ve done nothing wrong are much, much, MUCH more likely to turn you in when you do crimes against them.)
Foxfier (97deae) — 12/25/2007 @ 6:39 pm“Stef– thing is, if these folks weren’t violating the law simply by BEING around, then they’d not be such wonderful prey for the nasty folks who do exist.”
I know.
stef (1c9037) — 12/25/2007 @ 7:50 pmIn other words, Build the Fence.
And ignore the fact that cutting off the demand will reduce the supply — taxpayers charged for a fence because pols don’t want to make their legal citizens obey labor and immigration laws.
Half baked strategy for a feel good sound bite.
voice of reason (b85a22) — 12/25/2007 @ 7:51 pmSo, stef, being an illegal immigrant is not harmful? Why was the illegal immigrants’ son kidnapped?
The initial act, that of the illegal immigrant hiring the coyote to violate another set of laws led to the harm to the child. Yet, we won’t see the illegal immigrant charged, will we, even though their actions, hiring a coyote, and not paying the coyote, both illegal acts, would lead to the forseeable actions of the coyote, to break even more laws and kidnap a child.
Please, enlighten me as to how these actions are not harmful….
reff (99666d) — 12/25/2007 @ 7:55 pmvor…yes, build the fence, and while we are at that, enforce the existing laws. These two acts will combine to reduce illegal immigration to a much more manageable level, reduce the crime involving illegal immigration/immigrants, and, more importantly, help to shut you up….
reff (99666d) — 12/25/2007 @ 7:57 pmReff– Exactly! Why on *earth* should we do only one thing, when there are many reasons to attack a problem from multiple directions?
With my car, I lock it, I don’t park in bad areas and I’d report to the cops if someone broke in; a three-prong attack against illegal acts against my car.
Foxfier (97deae) — 12/25/2007 @ 8:18 pmtheres only one way and one way only to stop illegal immigration, sanction employers that hire them. everything else is a fantasy.
james conrad (7cd809) — 12/25/2007 @ 8:30 pmI seem to recall AP articles telling us that many illegals are leaving on their own since laws are being enforced in the areas they come from….
Oh, and I do agree with sanctions on hiring as well….but, if they just had to have Social Security numbers, and if those numbers were verified, as the existing laws require, the problem would be solving itself because the sanctions would not have to be put on employers because they wouldn’t be breaking any laws.
reff (99666d) — 12/25/2007 @ 8:35 pmThe US already has laws against illegal immigration. Law enforcement agencies at all levels are slowly beginning to enforce those laws, primarily by identifying and deporting criminal aliens. In addition, the US has laws that sanction employers for knowingly or negligently hiring illegals. We are doing more to enforce those laws, too. I agree those programs are vital components to help deal with the immigration problem but we don’t (yet) have a fence. That’s why I say Build A Fence.
DRJ (09f144) — 12/25/2007 @ 8:51 pmThat hasn’t been the experience with the Southern California fence. There are several ways to stop it. Employer sanction is a good, effective one. But not the only one. Why use only one available tool?
Pablo (99243e) — 12/26/2007 @ 5:19 amreff, here is an article referencing self-deportation.
SPQR (26be8b) — 12/26/2007 @ 10:18 amre #16, i am not saying a fence wont help, i am saying that if employers refuse to hire illegal immigrants they will not come, simple as that.
james conrad (7cd809) — 12/26/2007 @ 10:40 amIt has to be a multi-prong attack:
1-The Fence to secure the border as much as possible and to minimize the problem in the inner areas of the country;
2-Workplace enforcement of documentation/elegibility;
3-Incarceration and deportation of aliens comitting criminal (especially violent) acts.
It is far easier to put an opponent to flight when the attack is not only at the center, but at the flanks too.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 12/26/2007 @ 11:54 amalso:
4. Increase avenues for legal immigration.
stef (fc2202) — 12/26/2007 @ 4:08 pmIn addition, the US has laws that sanction employers for knowingly or negligently hiring illegals. We are doing more to enforce those laws, too.
The employers are criminals. You consistently ignore that fact and certainly don’t focus on the employers who do.
As for the fence, the bill killed earlier this year included the fence yet the fear mongering regarding the illegal immigrants probably ensured no legislation for another five years.
The people against the bill got what they wanted – gridlock and a political plank to stir up the voters with, nothing more and nothing less.
voice of reason (4f7b8b) — 12/26/2007 @ 8:54 pmVOR,
I know employers can be criminally prosecuted for hiring illegals and I think that’s a vital part of curbing illegal immigration. I may not post about it every day (I don’t post about any one topic every day), but my use of the term “sanctions” included both civil and criminal actions against employers. Of course, one problem with prior enforcement actions against employers is that criminal sanctions were rarely used. I think that’s changing and I’ve posted about it here and here.
DRJ (09f144) — 12/26/2007 @ 9:20 pmvor….if the employers hire illegals, they are breaking the law…
If there was a fence, there would be less illegals…
If the SS Administration had an automatic policy of notifying employers when an illegal uses an invalid SS#, there’d be less illegals, since they would then be turned over to INS/Police and deported, as they should be…
If cities that give sanctuary were cited for allowing Federal Laws to be flaunted, there’d be less illegals…
Then, employers would have to either find other ways of getting the jobs done, or pay more, or scale back….which would also help to solve the illegal problem….
All you seem to want to do is put this on the employer….yes, do that….but do all the rest too….
As for the “fear mongering” you mentioned….I’m sorry to tell you that the American people want the laws enforced…we didn’t need new laws…we just needed the laws enforced….and DEMOCRATS don’t want that….so, we got nothing….they could have easily made this their goal…but they wanted something else….so we got nothing….
Thanks to people like you….
reff (99666d) — 12/26/2007 @ 9:34 pmI’ve quoted you and linked to you here.
Consul-At-Arms (9a38d4) — 12/26/2007 @ 10:15 pmEr, here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2007/12/re-illegal-immigration-hurts-illegal.html
Consul-At-Arms (9a38d4) — 12/26/2007 @ 10:15 pmReff,
72% of Americans polled wanted enforcement. This is the figure most quoted in the debate about the bill. Conveniently left out was the 58% in the same poll who felt there should be a path to citizenship.
The GOP had six years to pass a bill more to their liking which they failed to do. Once they lost the majority they cried foul, wanting a do over and showed they could only obstruct and fear monger.
As for people like me… well there are plenty who no longer feel they are welcome in a more intolerant GOP. Thanks to people like you they may just cast their vote for the Democratic candidate or sit the election out.
You keep blaming it on the illegals. It is a basic fact that you wish to ignore – dry up the jobs and the tide of illegal immigrants slows to a trickle. Significant gains among legal Hispanics who voted Republicans have been pretty much sqandered.
But as I mentioned, it is so much easier to make the illegals themselves the new enemy in a sad effort to unite the base. It will make people like you feel better but have little effect beyond that.
So go ahead and build the fence, allowances for which were in the bill killed this fall. It still won’s solve the problem.
voiceofreason (4f7b8b) — 12/27/2007 @ 12:42 amDRJ,
If as much ink and time had been spent singling out the employers instead of the illegals themselves I think the lack of prosecutions would have increased significantly.
voiceofreason (4f7b8b) — 12/27/2007 @ 12:56 amOne news link to an actual company and one post about a union action are a drop in the bucket compared to the number of stories you post about the illegals themselves.
Correction to #26
voiceofreason (4f7b8b) — 12/27/2007 @ 12:57 amShould read “the number of prosecutions would have increased significantly.”
correction to #28 should have referenced #27.
voiceofreason (4f7b8b) — 12/27/2007 @ 12:58 amTime to get some shuteye.