Are we giving sanctuary to murderers and rapists?

  1. Sanctuary city is a term given to a city in the United States or Canada that follows certain practices that protect Illegal immigration. These practices can be by law (de jure) or they can be by habit (de facto).

An illegal immigrant, using sanctuary city policy to keep from being sent back to Mexico killed a woman who was out for a walk with her father. 

This could not have come at a worse time for those objecting to Donald Trump's controversial statement that Mexico is sending us murderers and rapists.

Here's the story.

Views: 569

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

@ Heather:  "Hold on, that just makes too much sense."

This has been the thought of rational people for decades.

Yay Heather!!!

Antony Hopkins (actor) has been a big proponent of legalizing drugs and spending the money saved on policing and imprisonment, on education and drug therapy programmes.


"Frankly, I don't see an end to the domination of the cartels in Mexico short of a US invasion and "cleansing" of the country, which I suspect a lot of ordinary Mexicans would welcome."

Just like all the Iraqi's are so welcoming of their "cleansing"?

Be careful of thinking cases are similar based on superficial similarities. Anyway, what would your solution be to straighten out a country whose administration has been almost totally bought by crime gangs, where the cartels remind the public daily of their dominance by leaving their executions hanging from overpasses or lamp posts for all to see. The violence is very public there.

My solution would be to de-fund them.  Just like the bootlegging cartels and gang violence that flourished during the American prohibition on alcohol, Mexican drug cartels exists exclusively because of the 'war on drugs'.  It is this so called war on drugs that has created the war zone where bodies hang from overpasses, and a refusal to deal with reality that lets such atrocities continue.

End the war on drugs and you end the war.

I take the libertarian position that drugs should be legalized and that in the private sector discrimination against drug users by employers and landlords should be decriminalized as well. Let the chips fall where they may. If I'm a heroin user and I want to rent an apartment, I'll have to find a heroin user-friendly landlord to rent from.

@Unseen:  "Be careful of thinking cases are similar based on superficial similarities."

Invading and "cleansing" a foreign country is the same process with the same results no matter the name of the country; pain, suffering and death of it's citizens.

@Heather: "End the war on drugs and you end the war."  Unfortunately only partially true.   Today in America we are still dealing with the third and fourth generations of the Crime Family's that developed during Prohibition.  I agree with ending the War on Drugs, a very wasteful use of resources.  But expecting that action to result in your second conclusion is too simplistic.  The Cartels are in power and will not give up that power and it's benefits without  a fight.

@Greg - the crime bosses that rose to power under prohibition followed one of three paths when prohibition ended; they became legitimate businessmen, they found another prohibited product (usually drugs), or they lost their power.

I don't expect that ending the war on drugs will suddenly end all crime - but it will stop the cash flow to those controlling the narcotics black market and that will have very significant, immediate effects.


As I understand it the Kennedy family first got its start under prohibition.

The trend I see developing is that SOME drugs are becoming more acceptable, which means they'll be legalized.  I.e., pot.

But for those who continue to confuse their personal preferences with a list of what ought to be banned (they form a large voting bloc, maybe even a majority), cocaine, meth, heroin, etc. are still "OMFG-you-can't-legalize-that-or-everyone-would-turn-into-addicts!"

But, let's just say, hypothetically speaking, that we did legalize them all.  What would the next crime product be for those gangsters looking to move on to door number two?  Prostitution?  Gambling?  Those are already well-fed black markets, often by the same people, and it's hard to imagine them getting more money for them than they already do. 

Or perhaps instead of feeding a black market, they'll shift totally into terrorizing communities with things like protection rackets.  Or they could go into politics, but I repeat myself.

Gambling is already legalized in many districts - and taxed.  A good model to follow.  As prohibition ended, organized crime moved into Vegas to 'become legit'.

Prostitution is heavily driven by the prohibition of drugs - and so is the black market for guns.


Sometimes it takes an asshole to point out the obvious.

I have no problem deporting child rapists in their own pine box.


© 2020   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service