2007 March 11 Sunday
Hundreds Of Deportable Gang Members In SoCal Prisons

The feds are starting to get serious about deporting illegal criminals who are doing jail time.

A spot check by federal agents has identified 59 street gang members in Southern California jails who are illegal immigrants subject to deportation, sparking a debate about the role of border enforcement in the region's battle against violent gangs.

The initial identification of deportable gang members came during a first-of-its-kind screening of a portion of jail inmates last month.

The review will continue, and officials expect during the first year to identify 700 to 800 gang members who are illegal immigrants, according to Jim Hayes, director of the Los Angeles field office for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The pressure on the federal government from popular outrage over immigration has gotten high enough that the US government is doing "first-of-its-kind screening" on jail inmates. These are people in jail. In other words, they are criminals. Yet doing a screening on them to identify illegal alien gang members for deportation is a "first-of-its-kind" event now in the year 2007. That shows how bad things got and how far we still have to go on immigration law enforcement.

Arrests and criminal charges along a section of the Texas-Mexico border have drastically cut down illegal alien crossings. We need the same policy along the rest of the border. Our supporters of open borders for years argued it is futile to control the borders. They wanted us to to give in to feelings of helplessness and passivity. Instead we got angry, yelled at the gub'mint and they did something about it while trying not to. Now we have more narcotics getting seized because the reduction in the flow of illegals frees up more Border Patrol time to go after smugglers. Border law enforcement works, the border is controllable, and illegal crossings can be brought down to a small trickle.

Border Patrol commanders argue the slackening flow of migrants belies the conventional wisdom that it is impossible to stem illegal migration along a 2,000 mile, or 3,200 kilometer, border. Many veteran officers in the force are now beginning to believe that with sufficient resources, it can be controlled.

We need a wall. We need more monitoring gadgets. We need more Border Patrol agents. We also need prosecution of illegal crossers along the entire length of the border. Plus, we need more interior enforcement of immigration laws.

Update: Bush thinks a big border crackdown will help him get a big amnesty and guest worker program through Congress.

Despite its spartan conditions, the facility in Willacy County, 260 miles south of Austin, is a key to President Bush's drive to create a channel for temporary foreign workers and a path toward legalization for as many as 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States.

To do so, the government must convince skeptics that it can credibly enforce laws aimed at illegal immigrants and their employers, and can hold and deport those caught by the U.S. Border Patrol. At the same time, the administration and its allies argue that even additional detention beds will be overwhelmed without new channels for legal immigration. Accordingly, the United States has embarked on a huge prison building and contracting campaign, increasing the number of illegal immigrants detained from 19,718 a day in 2005 to about 26,500 now, and a projected 32,000 this summer.

We could deport at least 300,000 illegals who are criminals if we just identified them as illegals and made sure they do not get released at the end of their prison terms.

The Border Patrol made 1.1 million apprehensions last year -- mostly Mexicans who were promptly returned across the border -- but estimates 500,000 people evaded capture or entered legally and then overstayed visas.

An additional 630,000 are at large, ignoring deportation orders, and 300,000 more who entered state and local prisons for committing crimes are to be deported but will probably slip through the cracks after completing their sentences.

Bush wants to end illegal immigration as part of a drive to drastically ramp up legal immigration. Will he get away with it? As the supply of illegals dry up the businesses that make use of cheaper labor will complain about the need to pay more. But any temporary worker permit program will ramp up both legal and illegal immigration.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2007 March 11 04:09 PM  Immigration Law Enforcement


Comments
Anon said at March 11, 2007 4:48 PM:

Internment camps out in the desert for these "undocumented" soon to be hard-working Americans who will do jobs we won't would be a great way to keep them out of our cities and jails and also scare anyone else thinking of jumping the border into staying home. Who wants to spend 4 weeks in a tent in the desert before being shipped back to Guatemala? If we kept these people isolated, then there is less chance that they will disappear in the US and drive down my street in stupid cars with loud mufflers (not like it is hard to find illegals though, just call up a landscaping company this spring and see who shows up). The usual suspects can be relied on to call these compounds "concentration camps" but they bitch about anything that tries to stem the tide of the 3rd world. In any event, we have plenty of actual American citizens who belong in those cells. Of course all this depends on our gov't actually being serious about illegal immigration. Can somebody remind me where our president was this past week?

John S Bolton said at March 12, 2007 1:13 AM:

The government has to be pressed really hard on these points, just as they were on crime in general.
They will try to give you 'rehabilitation' of criminals, like paths to citizenship, legalization, regularization.
The people know that these are deceptions, just as pretenses of rehabilitation were.
When an illegal is deported, though, he no longer affects us, so long as he stays out.
Officials will, between them, try almost anything to get more freedom for aggression.
This is why any proposal from them must be considered guilty until proven innocent.
It was said that nothing much could be done about crime, unless one wanted to have a fascist
despotism;
but now we have millions in prison and there is not a dictatorship, and we're somewhat farther from a dictator's takeover, since we don't have people suffering from the minority crime wave in the same degree as before.
Immigration law enforcement will, in the same way, keep us more secure from fascism,since we'll have fewer aggrieved parties needing relief however they can get it.

birch barlow said at March 12, 2007 12:59 PM:

Total insanity. If we can barely get rid of illegal alien gang members *already in jail*, the prospects for controlling legal unskilled immigration do not look good. Our whole immigration system is completely backwards. Deporting illegals already in jail should be a no-brainer--what really needs to happen is an end to unskilled immigration, and better regulation of skilled immigration (e.g., replacing the market-distorting H1-B system with one that allows skilled immigrants to have more options [thus demanding higher salaries and better working conditions] and a clear path to citizenship and long-term net-taxpayer status).

Of course, even skilled immigration is not perfect. Many of the attitudes of skilled immigrants and their children, such as ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, and an obsession with status, are not terribly healthy for a free polity. There should be an all-out drive to crush ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, and status-obsession, both amongst immigrants and natives*. For starters, judging perspective university students or employees based on factors such as extracurricular activities or participation in non-paid internships (the ultimate racket) should be illegal. University curricula should be focused on teaching information useful for employment, rather than attempting to "weed out" students who don't like spending 60 hours a week on busy work.

*I understand that there are Darwinian imperatives towards ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, and status obsession, but this is all the more reason to take strong action to minimize such attitudes, or at least minimize their destructiveness (as the Founding Fathers attempted to do).

tommy said at March 12, 2007 1:06 PM:

If we can barely get rid of illegal alien gang members *already in jail*, the prospects for controlling legal unskilled immigration do not look good.

Lets not confuse what we can do with what we are doing. We could easily deport these immigrant gangsters and we could easily crack down on unskilled illegal immigration if our politicians made it a priority. They don't.

tommy said at March 12, 2007 1:27 PM:

There should be an all-out drive to crush ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, and status-obsession, both amongst immigrants and natives*.

How does anything you advocate change the long-term problems of Hispanics being substantially more likely to be dependent on government programs, remaining academically unsuccessful generation after generation, having a nearly 50% (and increasing) rate of illegitimacy, and having several times the white incarceration rate for violent crimes?

Your solution is akin to saying, "Let us not talk about the problems. Let us force everyone to shut up and pretend the problems don't exist."

birch barlow said at March 12, 2007 3:43 PM:

Tommy--

I think you misunderstand me. When I was speaking of initiatives to control the darker side of human nature (thus reducing any harm from both immigrants and natives), I was talking about *skilled* immigrants, which the great majority of U.S. Hispanics/Latinos/Latin-Amerinds are not. By keeping out low-skill, low-IQ immigrants of all ethnicities, the problems of low economic performance, low academic performance, and high rates of incarceration can be avoided.

I advocate a merit-based immigration policy, which would mean primarily East Asian and South Asian immigration, with a Latin-Amerind, elite African, and European minority (the exact proportions would depend on the precise standards used, as well as relative immigration pressure from different regions of the world).

tommy said at March 12, 2007 8:20 PM:

I advocate a merit-based immigration policy, which would mean primarily East Asian and South Asian immigration, with a Latin-Amerind, elite African, and European minority (the exact proportions would depend on the precise standards used, as well as relative immigration pressure from different regions of the world).

OK. I understand. Fair enough.

John S Bolton said at March 13, 2007 2:36 AM:

One way to work against ethno-bloc formation among immigrants is not to allow in any who are not in the top few percentiles of English-language abilites as shown in standardized testing, and no visas for relatives at all.
Then, if they're to be settlers and raise families, it would have to be with the existing population.
Today we tolerate criminal enclaves which tend towards secessionism;
clearing out the jails and prisons of illegals and undesirable greencard holders, could break up a lot of the omerta and terrorization which flourish in such enclaves.
Since the government fails to do these obvious sensible, counter-aggressional actions;
it has to be assumed that they want the consequences, such as drift towards civil war, which would result from continuing on the tolerance-of-aggression course consistently.

Irish Savant said at March 14, 2007 2:05 PM:

In Sweden for the last 3 days. So sad. See http://irishsavant.blogspot.com/2007/03/sweden-descends.html


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright