by It seems that Jose Carranza, suspected of being one of the Newark killers, is an illegal alien already known to the justice system and had been indicted for the sexual assault of a 13 year old.
(Carranza turned himself in, causing Mayor Booker to say that he thought he’d be safer in prison.)
Do I really need to rant about this? I just wrote about a similar case in Washington state last month, yet here we are again. As I said in reference to Nathan Tabor’s article:
Every crime of this sort is sickening, but Tabor is exactly right when he says that fact that it was apparently committed by an illegal who is a sex criminal – a man who would have been deported by any competent law enforcement agency – makes it that much harder to bear.
Incompetence particularly excruciating when it results in tragedy. It demands correction, doesn’t it?
The question I’m asking myself is this: Exactly what does a scumbag have to do in order to get kicked out of this country? Or, at the very least, be held pending trial and deportation?
Carranza had already been indicted for “sexually assaulting and threatening to kill a 13-year-old” and “an array of assault and weapons offenses”.
So why was he roaming around the streets of Newark with a gun?
If I exhibited one one-thousandth of the level of incompetence consistently displayed by the justice system at my place of employment I would be out on the sidewalk wondering if I’d ever see my personal effects again in a heartbeat
Due process? Innocent until proven guilty? It’s hardly a question of that. Rather, it’s a need to do what is right. We’ve got an illegal alien not only charged with but also indicted for the sexual assault of a minor and weapons possession – let’s hold him. Simple.
If I were the lawyer who got Carranza sprung on bail I’d be thinking about a new line of work, at the least.
Besides being a sociologist’s Utopian wish list, the major problem with this article is the complete failure to reconcile, and hardy even acknowledge, the disconnect between adding one million more residents to the area with a desire for a reduced human impact on the environment i.e., more green space, less air pollution, better quality water, and few additional roads. The 2006 Census estimates Harris county population at 3.89 million, and thus another million people is an increase of over 25%. To get some perspective, this is approximately equivalent to injecting the population of St Louis, MO. county into Harris county. If the concept of economic growth is inexorably linked to population growth then a resulting decline in “quality of life” indicators will be inevitable; unless the basic notion of the American dream of single family suburban living is radically altered. Perhaps this is exactly what the proponents of the survey wish to achieve. But if that is the case, then a “general plan to guide Houston’s future growth” is likely to fall far short of their goal.
Please ignore my post above, I mean to post this:
I was watching ABC evening news on Sunday, and one of the featured stories was about these Newark shootings. There has no mention of the ethnicity or immigration status of the shooters, which might not have mattered much except that one of the main thrusts of the piece was the supposition that the Bush administration may not be doing enough to promote non-terrorist related crime prevention. Yet the news segment then also failed to make any note of potential beneficial impacts which may occur as a result of the recent initiative to crack down on illegal immigration as announced by Homeland Security’s Chertoff. And there was certainly no mention of the shooter’s previous criminal history. Of course, editorial newsroom bias may be helpful toward electing a Democratic President, but it fails miserably in actually helping crime ridden distressed communities when it will not provide a realistic picture of root causes of the problem.