Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Final-Fan said:
Like I edited the previous post: the IIRAIRA provides for training and authorization of local/state law enforcement to pursue immigration crimes they encounter in the course of their duties. What reason do you have to believe that anyone was negligent in this case? Was there such an authorized person involved in this case who failed in his duty? Should there have been such a person?
Geraldo said in response to O'Reilly asking why he wasn't deported, "because he didn't commit a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude". In what way is this answer insufficient?
And you are saying that Geraldo was wrong to accuse O'Reilly of falsely accusing this mayor and town of letting immigrants run out of control and commit crimes all over the place, correct? O'Reilly, from what I gather (not having seen the episode in question), intimated that there is an unusually grave public danger posed by illegal immigrant criminals. So the issue is actually a general one. If you're not broadening the issue, you're changing the subject. |
Even if you want to look at it from that angle.
Illegal Immigrants are people who don't deserve to be in this country. They don't "replace" regular people... and even if they comit crimes at a lower rate then regular people they are only adding to the crime rate.
Anyone here illegally who comits a crime is adding to the crime rate and should be deported. (Though everyone here illegally should be... since they are here illegally.)
People can be deported for any misdemeanor anyway. Moral terpitude doesn't need to be involved.
Also drunk driving is infact a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude.
|
Wikipedia says you're wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_turpitude
Agreed that the illegal immigrant crime rate is more than zero, but why should anyone concentrate on going after people who commit FEWER crimes than the national average?
And why would Geraldo bring up that point about the severity of the crime if it didn't matter? I don't know. But it might have to do with deportation being more a function of the executive branch than the judicial. (sez Wikipedia) Do you know why he might say that if it didn't matter?
|
Drunk Driving would fall under Gross Indeceny.
|
Really? Not just "drunk or reckless driving"? Why the double coverage? What's your source? Remember this has to be true where he WAS, not California or whatever.
|
Crimes all the time have double coverages... infact people who get a DUI can also be charged with Reckless endangerment.
Though I was wrong on that... had it confused with something else.
I still don't remember moral terpitude being in there at all.
However drunk driving without a liscense is a moral turpitude...in some areas atleast. Once again that's around California so i'd have to double check virginia. It may have never come to court around Virginia in which case i'm not sure how it works legally.
