NYC courts continue to “shakedown” legal gun owners at airports
Only in New York City could three separate law enforcement agencies obfuscate responsibility for upholding gun laws and resort to finger pointing as their defense shamelessly robbing the public under color of the “rule of law.” Not surprisingly, the Second Amendment receives an inordinate amount of attention, but not much legal scrutiny from self-serving New Yorkers and the entities they represent.
New York authorities rely on the honesty of air travelers transiting through the state with lawfully owned firearms, who become victims upon disclosure under Federal law of their weapon possession, to create a well-oiled, gun-eating, revenue-raising machine. New York City’s Mayor Bloomberg’s interpretation of the Second Amendment nabs unsuspecting airline passengers (hundreds have been ensnared the past few years) jails and fines them.
New York City is a gun-free zone, and one requires permission from Bloomberg’s administration to carry a weapon within the city– and that permission rarely happens. For security purposes the City often relies on the service of off-duty or retired NYPD to keep the peace in the bustling metropolis of the Big Apple. However, unsuspecting travelers at area airports are apprehended for simply passing through this City to their final destination where it is lawful to have a firearm in their possession.
Combine these heavy-handed tactics with the Department of Justice (DOJ) policy of suing states for laws it favors and Americans have a new recipe for dictatorial leadership. Lately, Attorney General Eric Holder has been in the business of suing individual states for allegedly trumping federal law, most notably illegal immigration and voting laws. While the DOJ picks and chooses its causes, they have chosen to let New York’s Port Authority Police seize lawfully owned firearms from travelers at its airports.
After 9/11, the U.S. government set up a number of safety measures to protect air travelers, and as a result they created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as the federal overseer of airport security. TSA is in charge of security at most major U.S. airports—except New York, which has hijacked control from local TSA agents.
New York City’s firearms interdiction and enforcement interferes with the airport security chain of command. It is here the finger pointing starts and the doubletalk reigns supreme.
The responsibility and non- responsibility approach
This reporter’s recent visit to TSA’s Washington DC headquarters seeking a resolution of this jurisdictional conflict yielded no answers. A phone conversation in the lobby went something like this; “Hi, I’m the reporter from California who has been talking to you via the phone regarding the security measures at LaGuardia Airport and wanted to clarify a few things. Do you have a minute?”
TSA spokesperson Greg Soule then replies; “Sure.”
This reporter answers; “Great, I’m in the lobby can you come down and meet me, I only need 5 minutes?”
Mr. Soule replies; “Aaa… well… actually I can’t come down, but I can refer you to our website.”
Wow, it’s an interesting strategy the TSA employs at their DC headquarters. Another phone call to TSA spokesperson Mike McCarthy confirms TSA is indeed in charge of airport security. Great news. Finally someone can explain why New York City’s Port Authority Police shows up at the ticket counter and arrests travelers when they attempt to check in their TSA-approved locked and unloaded firearm’s cases into checked baggage. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and Mr. McCarthy says there must be a “special agreement” to supersede TSA’s authority.
A “special agreement” explanation leads to the New York Port Authority Police. A call to Port Authority’s Press Officer Al Della Fave yields a similar response, and he explains the officers at the airports are only doing what they are told. And it is Mr. Della Fave’s understanding that Port Authority Police have some sort of “special agreement” with New York’s legal community (Bloomberg and/or District Attorneys) and Port Authority officers are only following orders.
Fair enough, rank-and-file officers are pretty good about following orders, and there is no indication that this case is any different in New York.
The next phone call is to the Queen’s County District Attorneys office that prosecutes the lawful firearm owners, travelling with their guns locked up and stored as per federal law and TSA requirements.
So far, the common denominator with all the agencies is the explicit “special agreement” and if there were a document out there, surely the District Attorney’s office would have a copy of the document.
“I have checked with our executive staff and there is no Memorandum of Understanding between the District Attorney’s Office and either the TSA or Port Authority Police Department,” said Kevin R. Ryan, director of communications for the Queens County District Attorney’s office.
So, the DA is admits that there is no “memo” or “special agreement” between the Queen’s County District Attorney’s office, New York Port Authority Police and the TSA that justifies Port Authority Police supersede federal law at their airports. Normally, Federal law requires some sort of Memo of Understanding (MOU) between states and municipalities as currently TSA regulates the interstate transportation of firearms.
Knowing New York City has the nation’s toughest gun laws (after a ton of research) it appears New York City is serious about keeping the city a gun-free zone. Again, fair enough, but if New Yorkers are so concerned about firearms entering their jurisdiction, then why aren’t they apprehending the lawful gun owners as they leave the airport with their firearms in their luggage? TSA keeps a record of all firearms that passengers carry in their “checked” luggage. One would assume law enforcement wouldn’t want those firearms on the city sidewalks, right?
“While I cannot speak on behalf of the TSA, I can tell you that we have never been notified by the TSA of somebody traveling to New York with a weapon. The most likely reason is that the TSA would not be aware of the person’s licensing status in New York,” Ryan went on to explain.
However, TSA confirms they keep a record of all firearms and haven’t been asked by the DA’s office for notification.
The frustration continues, and nobody is taking responsibility or providing constructive answers for those who travel through New York.
Determined to get to the bottom of this issue this reporter called the airline ticket counter at LaGuardia Airport to set the record straight. The call goes something like; “Hi there I’m calling to find out what process I can expect when I get to the airport today. I left California and traveled to New Jersey through LaGuardia with my firearm, which I’m licensed to carry and is stored in the TSA-approved case. I’m headed back later today and wanted to know if there was anything I should be aware of or if I need extra time at the ticket counter?” The American Airline representative, Ty (no last name, security she says), replies; “Nope, it’s the same process in all airports.”
Except it’s not. Had a lawful gun owner followed that due diligence they’d be facing felony gun charges in the City of New York. It seems odd that the airline employees don’t know the rules because once a traveler presents a locked-up firearm at an airport ticket counter in New York for check in, as required by TSA, LaGuardia airline personnel call Port Authority NOT TSA, who immediately arrests the unsuspecting traveler.
Ryan explains that his boss, District Attorney Richard Brown; “has called upon the airlines to warn travelers of their responsibility to check local gun laws. Many airlines when asked by a passenger about transporting a weapon will only inform them of federal regulations with no mention of the need to check local laws. It is therefore incumbent upon passengers to acquaint themselves with the weapon laws of the jurisdiction that they are visiting and to comply with any and all legal requirements if they choose to travel with a weapon.”
Yet, nobody this reporter called mentioned anything about arresting travelers as they try to leave from a New York airport. It’s also worth noting that there is nothing mentioned on the airlines or TSA’s websites indicating that if travelers pass through New York they need to make alternate plans for checking in a firearm upon departure.
Consequences of due diligence
For the hundreds of passengers ensnared in New York City’s harsh firearm rules, there is little recourse for an individual. However, several attorneys, including Dick Heller (who was successful in taking on the Washington DC politicos and eventually won a Supreme Court case regarding the right to own a firearm) said at a Washington DC dinner that a class-action lawsuit might be in order to reign in New York’s firearm laws.
As far as the New York legal community is concerned, the law is the law, and until somebody challenges the legal standing, the arrests will continue to take place at the airports.
Ryan explained the law in a matter-of-fact tone that “when a visitor to our city is arrested, particularly at our airports, for possessing a weapon, there are several factors we consider in fashioning an appropriate disposition — including, but not limited to, was the weapon legally obtained, does the individual possess a valid permit in their home state, the duration of their stay in our city and, in airport cases, whether the individual voluntarily disclosed the weapon to authorities. In adjudicating such cases, there must be a balance between our obligation to protect our citizens and an individual’s error in judgment. Over the years, we have struck that balance well in ensuring that justice is served and maintaining our state’s tough, successful gun laws.”
Fairness in New York requires the defendant to pay a fine, court fees and let authorities destroy their legally owned firearm. If defendants follow this sage advice, the judge’s gavel will fall, and they will not serve any jail time. For the court’s trouble, the defendants will pay approximately $10-15 thousand in fees/fines.
One last fact for New Yorkers to consider with their so-called successful “tough gun laws.” is that while New York City’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his District Attorney offices praise their “toughest in the nation” firearm laws, firearm crime statistics portray a different picture.
According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the most recent handgun crime statistics indicates New York has witnessed an increase of firearm related crimes despite the state’s tougher laws.
Keeping this in mind 2nd Amendment groups, like Calguns, say New York may be infringing on gun rights. “Look if you are staying in New York City, gun owners must comply with the cities gun laws, but if you are simply passing through it would seem NYC is over-stepping the Second Amendment,” Jason Davis an attorney for Calguns said.
Davis along with other citizens who have been charged with felonies, suffered the wrath of New York’s tough gun laws, contend the entire process is nothing more than a money-making business for the Port Authority Police, New York courts and area lawyers that represent those ensnared at airport ticket counters.
Criminal-defense lawyer Martin D. Kane points out on Lawyers.com; “What New York does is not helping matters. It’s pretty unreasonable, and it’s great fuel.” He goes on to explain that attorneys should not try to ‘defend’ these cases and claims there is a legal process in place.
Nevertheless, Kane claims the specific law is clear and there is no room for negotiation (18 USC §926A Interstate Transportation of Firearms, notwithstanding the clear conflict between NYC and TSA regulations regarding the transportation of weapons.
Other NYC gun-related cases
Two more NYC gun cases settled this week involving a medical student, Meredith Graves of Tennessee and a retired U.S. Marine Ryan Jerome of Indiana.
Graves attorney, Daniel Horwitz spoke to media after he successfully reduced the felony gun charge to a misdemeanor. “She’s happy that this ordeal is over, and she’s looking forward to getting on with her life and her career as a doctor,” he told The New York Post.
The former Marine, Jerome’s case also settled this week. After his arrest, Jerome decided to fight the Manhattan District Attorney’s office and beat the felony gun charge, but changed his mind midway through the battle and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor weapons-possession charge in an effort to avoid a three and a half year jail sentence, according to a New York Times story.
While New York City continues to enforce its over-reaching gun laws, it’s up to gun owners to follow the rules, recognize a problem exists in NYC and use legal channels afforded to them to change the Big Apple’s anti-Second Amendment seizures. When a state impedes on Constitutional rights, it has a chilling effect on law-abiding citizens and the last resort necessary is for Lady Justice (Supreme Court) to return the rights’ to the people, just as the founders intended.
To read three other NYC gun-related stories link here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/unwitting-airline-passengers-robbed-of-their-second-amendment-rights-nyc
And here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nypd-frisks-searches-and-violates-civil-liberties-daily
And here; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/new-york-city-1-us-constitution-0-nyc-profits-from-seizures-of-legal-guns
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com NYC courts continue to “shakedown” legal gun owners at airports – National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/nyc-continues-to-shakedown-legal-gun-owners#ixzz1q34Zfm00
Unwitting airline passengers robbed of their Second Amendment rights’ in NYC
The legality of owning firearms resides firmly in the founding fathers’ crafting of the Second Amendment, but a patchwork of state and municipal gun laws threaten to undermine a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms.
Nowhere is the assault on the Second Amendment more evident than in New York City where unsuspecting airline passengers are winding-up in jail after running afoul of Mayor Bloomberg’s interpretation of the Second Amendment. The NY mayor’s dislike of firearms is well known, and he even formed an “anti-gun” taskforce. The three-term Mayor even tried to peddle his anti-gun program to Arizona, after a psychologically unstable person shot Rep. Gabriel Gifford’s. Perhaps, most recently readers may remember Bloomberg’s anti-gun commercial that aired during this years’ Super Bowl.
Bloomberg’s law or tourist trap, recently ensnared Mark Meckler, Tea Party co-founder, who was arrested at LaGuardia airport along with another 700 hundred other airline passengers over the last few years. Meckler informed the ticket agent of his locked-up firearm (as required by federal law) and was promptly arrested by Port Authority officers and charged with felony gun possession and thrown in jail. This revenue generating scam works flawlessly at New York’s LaGuardia airport.
Sounds reasonable, right?
This reporter investigated the guidelines from TSA and the airlines for transporting firearms. An American Airline employee described the outbound (LaGuardia) procedure for transporting a firearm commenced with a call to TSA to confirm the legality of the passenger’s firearm paperwork; TSA would ensure the firearm was locked in a hard case with no ammunition in the chamber; and finally TSA inspectors would store the firearm in the owner’s checked luggage in a TSA-approved, locked firearm case, and it’s off to New York.
This reporter decided to take it a step further and asked what the procedure would be for boarding the plane on the return flight back to sunny California. The agent replied, “The exact same process would be implemented at LaGuardia Airport.”
This due diligence concurred with the instructions at the TSA and airline websites.
Knowing LaGuardia was the destination, the agent did not mention “you had better checkout New York law, otherwise you risk losing your gun, being placed under arrest at the ticket counter, and thrown into jail, which, in addition to spending a few days in jail, will cost you thousands of dollars in penalties, legal fees, fines and additional travel expenses.
The “special treatment” New York City imposes on in-transit visitors legally carrying a firearm sparked a number of questions.
Phone call number two went to the New York Port Authority Police Department querying why the Port Authority Police get the first call when a passenger attempts to check in at the airline ticket counter? Other airports follow TSA rules and guidelines under the interstate firearm transportation section (18 USC §926A Interstate Transportation of Firearms), which stipulates that it is perfectly legal to travel by air with a firearm, as long as the passenger can lawfully possess a firearm at their FINAL destination.
A follow-up call to the San Diego Port Authority confirmed they had nothing to do with checking firearms for airlines. In fact, they said, “We are only called when TSA finds a firearm that is either undeclared or stored improperly.”
So why is the process of transporting a firearm not followed in New York? A New York Port Authority spokesperson explained that officers follow the protocol set by the NYC District Attorney.
“In New York City, it is illegal to possess a firearm at any time, unless there is special permission given by the city authorities,” said Al Della Fave of the Port Authority.
There it is, NYC officials claim to have worked-out an “arrangement” with TSA, the airlines and the Port Authority. They will relieve lawful gun owners of their Second Amendment right when they attempt to leave the city. (Of course their firearm is already in a locked TSA-approved and inspected case.)
New York’s draconian handgun laws take it a step further by granting the courts or police departments the power to confiscate an air traveler’s firearm, and perhaps more alarming, is the fact that law enforcement can and does destroy the weapon.
As it turns out New York City is a gun-free zone! Only permission granted by Mayor Bloomberg’s office can waive the strict firearms prohibition. This is something hundreds of travelers to or through New York City have learned the hard way. Many of these unfortunate gun owners have traveled through hundreds of airports declaring their weapons without arrest, but in New York City, they are arrested, charged with several felonies and thrown in the clink. The tab for the incarceration exceeds thousands of dollars.
However, if New York is truly interested in strict adherence to the city’s handgun law, why aren’t they arresting passengers lawfully carrying their firearm when they collect their luggage and try to leave the airport? TSA keeps a record on file alerting airline personnel to the fact a firearm is stored in checked luggage.
Neither the Port Authority Police nor District Attorney spokespeople could answer that question.
A career choice landed this guy in jail
There are plenty of careers that require possession of a firearm. Providing private security for high-profile clients is one such career.
Take Kain Guercci for example, he is the director of operations for Talon Executive Services, a company that provides security details for a wide variety of high-profile clients.
Like hundreds of other law abiding travelers, Guercci passed through New York’s LaGuardia airport without staying in the city, but declared his firearm at the ticket counter as he has done hundreds of times in the past. However, this time the airline ticket agent notified the Port Authority Police, instead of TSA, and Guercci spent 72 hours behind bars.
Guercci knew the strict New York rules and traveled via taxi to LaGuardia airport from Connecticut. He thought he was following the in-transit law. “There is no asterisk or notation that the (TSA) rules apply everywhere except New York City, where I did not spend the night,” he explained.
Thinking this was just a misunderstanding, “I called my boss, a former and well-respected Secret Service agent, who explained it must have been a mistake, sit tight, and I’d be out soon,” Guercci said.
His three-day nightmare included jail time with criminals who were arrested during a nighttime drug sweep. A visit by Secret Service associates of his boss to clear the “confusion” further fueled the preverbal fire when Guercci’s Queen’s jailers took cash from his wallet and handed it to him in front of his felony-drug dealer cellmates. “Let’s just say I had to use my survival skills to protect myself from those criminals.”
Authorities wasted no time and charged Guercci with a class C violent felony, which carries a 3 1/2 to 15 years sentence, ensuring jail time.
Guercci said his three-day stint behind bars left him “shocked and utterly dismayed” with the New York legal entanglement. “I’ve never been arrested before.” After Guercci made it back to California, he was forced to notify the Orange County Sheriff of the incident and had his conceal carry permit temporarily revoked. “Luckily, I’m in good standing with the Sheriff and he was sympathetic to my New York ordeal.”
Fortunately, Guercci’s boss paid the considerable legal expenses and his conceal carry firearm permit was returned once all the court appearances and fines were paid. Guercci refers to the 72-hour ordeal as contrived and believes the New York firearm anomaly is “some sort of money-making racket for the New York’s law enforcement community.”
Criminal-defense lawyer Martin D. Kane points out on Lawyers.com; “What New York does is not helping matters. It’s pretty unreasonable, and it’s great fuel.” He goes on to explain that attorneys should not try to ‘defend’ these cases.
Kane said the specific law is clear and there is no room for negotiation (18 USC §926A Interstate Transportation of Firearms.
“The mistake some defendants and defense lawyers make is in fighting the charge and taking it to the point of indictment—and once they’re indicted, it’s impossible to workout a type of disposition that will have no consequence.” Kane concludes that it’s best to take a plea deal, pay the legal fees and fines, and never bring another firearm to New York.
While that may be sage advice, it has left many lawful gun owners tarnished as well as angry. Some legal experts suggest New York could face a legal entanglement of their own, by those who were wrongly arrested and their firearms destroyed.
The New York City’s DA declined to comment on cases involving Port Authority Police and lawful gun owners transporting firearms.
**Breaking–Stay tuned; Former White House party crasher, Michaele Salahi’s bodyguard, Richard Surrency, was nabbed at LaGuardia airport yesterday for possession of a firearm that was locked and stored in checked in luggage. According to TMZ.com, Surrency had a permit to lawfully carry a firearm when he was ensnared in Mayor Bloomberg’s anti-Second Amendment airport zone.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved
Obama plays partisan politics with illegal immigration at American University
On a seasonably warm day in the nation’s capitol, the Dean of American University’s School of Public Affairs, William LeoGrande’s welcomed Obama’s speech on immigration reform. “We are very lucky the White House staff chose our university,” he said. The Dean and the country expected to hear how the president was going to lead the country forward on the embattled immigration issue. However Obama chose to use old rhetoric and gave no specifics on how to make immigration reform a reality while delivering a lackluster immigration speech.
“Despite the forces of the status quo, despite the polarization and the frequent pettiness of our politics, we are confronting the great challenges of our times. And while this work isn’t easy, and the changes we seek won’t always happen overnight, what we’ve made clear is that this administration will not just kick the can down the road,” said Obama during the 45-minute speech.
The administration alluded to the fact that the topic received fresh status thanks to the new law passed in Arizona. “The passage of a controversial law in Arizona and the heated reactions we’ve seen across America” has given the administration some much needed ammunition. “Some have rallied behind this new policy. Others have protested and launched boycotts of the state. And everywhere, people have expressed frustration with a system that seems fundamentally broken.”
President Obama has made no bones about it, he subscribes to the globalist vision for America and open borders are a prerequisite. The only problem with open borders is the majority of American’s would rather continue with the country’s 234 years of tradition.
There is no doubt the U.S. was built with the sweat equity of legal immigrants. The key word is legal. In the past most immigrants passed through Ellis Island on their way to the promise land. For the most part they followed the law, kept their heads down and worked hard in order to give their children a better life.
When looking at the illegal-immigration prism the small Central American country of Honduras has at least 500 Hondurans leaving daily for the U.S. looking for the “American dream.” The commissioner of the regional Human Rights Commission organization said that “monthly, about 15,000 leave the country in search of jobs in the U.S.”
The president rightly said immigrants have “allowed us to adapt and thrive in the face of technological and societal change. To this day, America reaps incredible economic rewards because we remain a magnet for the best and brightest from across the globe.”
He further described a naturalization ceremony that took place in April at the White House for members of the armed forces. “Even though they were not yet citizens, they had enlisted. One of them was a woman named Perla Ramos — born and raised in Mexico, came to the United States shortly after 9/11, and she eventually joined the Navy. And she said, ‘I take pride in our flag and the history that forged this great nation and the history we write day by day.’”
The beauty of America is anyone can write the next great chapter in the country’s storied history.
Obama contends there is too much politics involved with who is and isn’t allowed into the country and says the issue has always been contentious. “It’s made worse by a failure of those of us in Washington to fix a broken immigration system.”
Everyone can agree that the borders remain porous. While the Northern border has plenty of openings, it is the Southern border that presents the greatest problem. In fact, the U.S. doesn’t do a very good job of tracking who enters and exits the country as visitors or students- many simply overstay their visas to get a shot at the better life.
Those who have entered the country legally say the process to become Americans is fraught with lengthy backlogs and bureaucracy. The current process often means years of waiting.
The president complained about the legal immigration process and said families often had to spend time apart during the naturalization process. However, residents of Southern states are not fooled by this rhetoric. Keeping families together really means bringing the entire family to the U.S. and that means 20 million illegals currently in the country could double or triple if they are granted amnesty.
Obama also contends that high fees and the need for lawyers can exclude worthy applicants. “While we provide students from around the world visas to get engineering and computer science degrees at our top universities, our laws discourage them from using those skills to start a business or power a new industry right here in the United States. Instead of training entrepreneurs to create jobs on our shores, we train our competition.”
The President points to the many worthy immigrants who may not have the ability to become American citizens, however in a time of extreme economic crisis, perhaps the country should focus on training American children to be the future leaders of industry, policy making and even legislators.
The system is broken and most Americans know it.
“Unfortunately, reform has been held hostage to political posturing and special-interest wrangling- and to the pervasive sentiment in Washington that tackling such a thorny and emotional issue is inherently bad politics. And now, under the pressures of partisanship and election-year politics, many of the 11 Republican senators who voted for reform in the past have now backed away from their previous support,” Obama explained.
Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-CA) couldn’t disagree more with the president. Bilbray’s district lies just north of the U.S./Mexican border and he really understands the immigration issue. As a leader of the Immigration Reform Caucus, Bilbray says if the President took amnesty out of the legislation the Congress could pass immigration reform today. “But the president is insisting on amnesty.”
“Currently there is a bill sitting in Congress with more than 230 votes that would start the process of securing the borders and streamlining the immigration process,” Bilbray said. “The name of the bill is Shuler bill. In late 2008, Congressman Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) introduced a bill that would increase border security measures, add new Border Patrol agents and mandate that employers verify if their workers are here legally.”
However the bill doesn’t include a mass amnesty and that is a deal breaker for the president and most liberal-progressive Democrats.
The persistent issue of amnesty has been the kryptonite to immigration reform and has sent states like Arizona through the state-legislative process in order to solve the out-of-control crime and financial liabilities illegal immigrants bring to the table.
According to a recent story by Fox News, Arizona’s budget deficit of $2.7 billion and it is directly related to illegal immigration. “Given the levels of frustration across the country, this is understandable (trying to take illegal immigration issues into their own hands),” Obama said. “But it is also ill conceived.”
As such the Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton let the cat out of the bag last month regarding the federal government’s intention to file a lawsuit to block Arizona’s SB1070 law that mirrors the current U.S. immigration enforcement policy.
“Our task then is to make our national laws actually work – to shape a system that reflects our values as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.”
“Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship,” he continues. “And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable.”
Yet a majority of the country doesn’t want amnesty. To be fair Americans also realize deporting more than 10 million illegal immigrants is nearly impossible. “If the majority of Americans are skeptical of a blanket amnesty,” Obama said. “They are also skeptical that it is possible to round up and deport 11 million people.”
Moreover the President claims a mass deportation” would tear at the very fabric of this nation – because immigrants who are here illegally are now intricately woven into that fabric. Many have children who are American citizens.”
Obama also admits the government has the responsibility to secure the country’s borders. “That’s why I directed my Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, former Arizona governor, to improve our enforcement policy without having to wait for a new law.”
But this statement rings hollow for those living along the Southern border. The White House said weeks ago they would send 1,200 National Guard troops to the border, however, those same troops would be carrying unloaded guns and come nowhere near the number of National Guard troops needed to protect the borders from the ever-increasing violence plaguing the border region.
When former President George W. Bush sent 6,000 National Guard members to the border, states saw a reduction in violence and a slowing of human smuggling. However, in the end President Bush continued the failure of meaningful immigration reform.
President Obama subscribes to the open-borders/amnesty theory as a way to increase a huge voting block. “There are those who argue that we should not move forward with any other elements of reform until we have fully sealed our borders. But our borders are just too vast for us to be able to solve the problem only with fences and border patrols. It won’t work. Our borders will not be secure as long as our limited resources are devoted to not only stopping gangs and potential terrorists, but also the hundreds of thousands who attempt to cross each year simply to find work.”
Additional focus needs to be placed on businesses who hire illegal workers, they need be held accountable, especially if business owners break the immigration law deliberately.
During the 45-minute speech, Obama made blanket statements that law enforcement agencies are not wanting to take on a job the federal government refuses to implement.
However law enforcement agencies throughout the state of Arizona say the federal government isn’t doing enough regarding interior immigration enforcement. As such, there has been a growing population of sanctuary cities that have made enforcing illegal immigration more difficult.
States like California are the poster child for renegade sanctuary cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego. The three largest cities continue to quash interior apprehensions. In the Golden State’s case, the $20 billion revenue shortfall can be directly tied to illegal immigrants.
Nevertheless Obama contends that those in the country illegally are to be given a free pass if they; “Admit that they broke the law.” After the admission, “they should be required to register, pay their taxes, pay a fine, and learn English.”
“Our laws should respect families following the rules- instead of splitting them apart. We need to provide farms a legal way to hire the workers they rely on, and a path for those workers to earn legal status,” Obama said. “We should stop punishing innocent young people for the actions of their parents by denying them the chance to stay here and earn an education and contribute their talents to build the country where they’ve grown up. The DREAM Act (this act gives illegal immigrants the right to apply and receive scholarships for college… and that’s why I supported this bill as a state legislator and as a U.S. senator – and why I continue to support it as president.”
“I’ve spoken with representatives from a growing coalition of labor unions and business groups, immigrant advocates and community organizations, law enforcement, local government – all recognize the importance of immigration reform.”
Further attesting how out of touch the president is with middleclass America is New York Mayor Bloomberg. After the president’s immigration reform speech Mayor Bloomberg made a statement to the media. The twist was Bloomberg spoke in Spanish. Then he went on to say for those of you who do not understand this is the way of the future.
Bloomberg never translated the speech.
Moving forward the president says; “The majority of Democrats are ready to move forward; and I believe the majority of Americans are ready to move forward. But the fact is, without bipartisan support, as we had just a few years ago, we cannot solve this problem. Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes.”
However, for the better part of 18 months the White House held large majorities in the House as well as a Senate and they failed to pass any immigration legislation. Now Obama says the political theater makes passing legislation a “mathematical impossibility.”
The Democrats certainly have a full plate with two wars, the largest environmental disaster in the Gulf and millions of illegal immigrants pushing for amnesty. The midterm elections will certainly set a referendum one way or another.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner