Thread: Deport California's illegal immigrant prisoners

Chuck Norris- Posted: June 06, 2011
1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

In the classic movie, "The Great Escape," a cluster of Hollywood manly men from yesteryear (including my friend Steve McQueen) played Allied POWs who escape from a German camp during World War II.

Today, the great escape may be played out by more than 33,000 incarcerated inmates in California who don't escape the state's 33 prisons but are released by a computer error and the U.S. Supreme Court itself.

Many today say prisoners have too many rights and too many creature comforts while doing time and paying the penalty for their crimes. But the U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld the ruling of a district court panel that California prisons are sub-par environments for inmates. A 5-4 majority demanded that Golden State officials grant 33,000 of its 143,335 prisoners golden tickets to freedom because severe overcrowding has led to inadequate medical care.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, "This extensive and ongoing constitutional violation requires a remedy, and a remedy will not be achieved without a reduction in overcrowding."

Really?? No remedy is possible without letting prisoners go free? No solution is possible without essentially expunging incarcerated criminals' crimes and penalties and releasing them into society?

It must be great to be an inmate in California, not only because the U.S. Supreme Court will fight for your medical welfare but essentially also pardon you from your crimes!

On the flipside, the Supreme Court's four conservative justices were concerned that forcing the state to release 33,000 inmates could endanger the public.

You think?

Justice Alito was correct when he warned that the mass release of inmates would be "gambling with the safety of the people of California. … I fear that today's decision, like prior prisoner release orders, will lead to a grim roster of victims. I hope that I am wrong. In a few years we will see." Alito added, "The prisoner release ordered in this case is unprecedented, improvident, and contrary" to federal law."

The fact is that, while five U.S. justices fight for the constitutional rights of California inmates, they abandon theirs and the states' governmental responsibility, as outlined even in both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, to protect the life, liberty and property of its citizens.

Does the U.S. Supreme court really believe that California officials can discern 33,000 non-violent, non-repeat offenders? And shall we assume California's liberal judicial system and sanctuary cities won't further coddle these criminals?

Ironically, or should I say tragically, just two days later after the U.S. Supreme Court's edict to release 33,000 California inmates, the Los Angeles Times reported that a computer glitch prompted California prison officials to mistakenly release about 450 inmates with "a high risk for violence." To add insult to injury, more than 1,000 additional prisoners who possess a high risk of committing drug crimes, property crimes and other offenses were also released. No efforts have been made to return any of these criminals behind bars.

While overcrowding and fiscal shortfalls prompt state lawmakers across the country to compromise harsher laws for criminals, I believe only strictly enforcing law and order will promote deterrence and reduce crimes (and hence incarceration numbers). America's prisons, like our borders, need more reinforcement, not more laxity – a fact that leads me to pose a possible better solution than the U.S. Supreme Court's allowance of inmate release back into California cities.

Could it be merely coincidental that over the past two decades of California's liberal approach to border control that the state's prison population and economic status has gone down the tubes?

Here are a couple statistics that should be entered into this debate:

In 2005, Heather Mac Donald, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims that nearly 25 percent of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally. If that's true, that number alone exceeds 30,000 illegals in our California prison system.

Moreover, a 2004 report from the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, concluded that the education, health care and incarceration of illegal aliens cost Californians $10.5 billion per year (that's $1183 annually for every household).

(And who can doubt that all these figures have significantly increased in the last seven years since these reports originated?)

So my question is this: What would be the effects on California's economy and prison population, immediately and in the future years, if the illegal immigrants (Mexican and others) were actually deported? Why can't that "solution" be considered as at least a remedy for the Golden State's economic and incarceration problems?

And if you assume that deportation costs would surpass costs of prisoner release within the state, consider the price of a plethora of one-way bus and plane trips of illegal immigrants compared to the years of continual costs to human life, property and our courts brought about by 30,000 criminals released on California streets and repeat offenders being re-incarcerated.

To me, it looks like Californians have a big battle and choice on their hands, which I believe will cross state lines into similar struggles in other states: Do Californians want 33,000 criminals back on California streets or roughly the same number of prisoners who are illegal immigrants deported back to their own country?

Contact your local representatives and tell them your answer.


Read more: Deport California's illegal immigrant prisoners http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.vi ... z1OWDqb4Nu

RELATED

California won't free criminals to ease prison crowding
Matthew Cate, secretary of California's Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, said plans to shift low-level offenders to county jails and other facilities would ease the persistent crowding in state prisons that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday causes "needless suffering and death" and amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-238964.html

Yes. . .of course!!! Deport the illegals!! But first put them to work picking lettuce for free and also put them to work buliding the border fence and more detention camps for illegals along the border!!

FENCE YES!

FOOD NO WAY IN HECK!

Originally Posted by Achilles

Yes. . .of course!!! Deport the illegals!! But first put them to work picking lettuce for free and also put them to work buliding the border fence and more detention camps for illegals along the border!!

Do you really want your food handled by people who are being forced to work?
Think of the things they could do to your food when no one was looking.