Skip to content

AMNESTY FOR PARIS

June 29, 2007

jeffreysewell.jpgAmnesty for Paris

by Jeffrey Sewell

Paris Hilton might be illegally blonde. She might have driven on a suspended license. However, was it necessary to waste tens of thousands of tax payer dollars to lock her up for nearly a month? If that’s the standard, let’s lock up people equally, including those who are illegally entered our borders, stole identities, falsified documents including drivers licenses, and continue to live underground – paying zero in taxes and abusing social services. If we did that, we would solve part of our immigration crisis. No, we wouldn’t have sealed the border, but we would have documented all 12-20 million illegal aliens and found out who they all were.

Throwing all 12-20 million in jail isn’t feasible, not because we can’t round them all up, but because our prisons are overcrowded with mandatory minimum drug sentences. Currently, we are releasing violent criminals back onto the streets before they have served partial sentences, while a kid who got caught with a gram or two of cocaine withers away behind bars because of a mandatory minimum sentence. This line of thinking is the same being applied to immigration.

Right now, folks in Washington are ramming the Kennedy-McCain Amnesty plan down our throats. This legislation makes absolutely no sense and sets a horrible precedent – let’s punish people who pay their taxes and merely drove on a suspended license by throwing them in jail and let’s reward people who don’t pay their taxes, broke into our country and operated motor vehicles with fake licenses by granting them citizenship.

Personally, I’m a bit worried about making all these folks legal. I am not xenophobic nor do I fear for my job security. I am worried because we have no idea who these people are. If we don’t know who they are, how do we know there are 12-20 million illegal aliens here? Supposedly, four million of them are here on expired visas, but we no clue who the other 8-16 million are.

We know that among those 8-16 million are drug dealers and the members of violent gangs such as MS-13. MS-13 is the cop killing gang, comprised of illegal aliens with Central American ties and known for their tattoos and penchant for violence. Google MS-13 and reports from Newsweek, National Geographic, and MSNBC pop up, calling MS-13, “The Most Dangerous Gang in America.”

Instead of reporting on MS-13 and immigration irregularities, the media prefers to fly helicopters over Rodeo Boulevard in order to showcase every angle of Paris Hilton’s transport to and from jail. Better yet, imagine if Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos were household names too.

Who are Compean and Ramos?

Compean and Ramos are the two border patrol agents who are serving over 10 years in prison for doing their jobs and shooting an illegal drug smuggling suspect in the behind.

Instead of pondering post-prison Paris, let’s think about the fact that taxpayers who live in Washington, DC lack a voting representation in Congress, while the are a handful of voting members of Congress, whose constituency is made up primarily of illegal aliens. This makes about as much sense as what the folks in Washington are trying to with the immigration bill. They want to give amnesty first, then worry about border security.

When the kitchen is flooding because you left faucet running, do you start mopping the floor with the water running? No, you turn off the faucet then clean up the mess. Well, that’s the exact approach we need in Washington, turn of the water and clean up the mess.

That mess is going to take a lot of effort – so is securing the border. However, there is no reason that we cannot do both. To do so, it might help if we had the same standards for fake blondes who drive illegally, as illegal aliens who drive with false identification and invalid licenses.

Mr. Sewell is the principal consultant of Sewell Consultancy, a political consulting firm in Lexington County. He is also co-owner of www.SCHotline.com

Advertisements
12 Comments leave one →
  1. Randy Newmund permalink
    June 29, 2007 7:36 PM

    “She might have driven on a suspended license. However, was it necessary to waste tens of thousands of tax payer dollars to lock her up for nearly a month? If that’s the standard, let’s lock up people equally, including those who are illegally entered our borders…”

    Wasn’t she caught driving on a suspended license TWICE stemming from a DUI conviction? Are you really saying that seeking a better life while harming NOBODY is “equal” to committing three driving-related crimes which endangered numerous lives?

    And weren’t those “taxpayer dollars” California taxpayer dollars? Since when do you care about how California spends its money?

  2. Robert Seigworth permalink
    June 29, 2007 9:32 PM

    Excellent! I agree with you 100%! One other reason I believe the borders are not being closed is that too many members of Congress or lobbyists are part of the smuggling. Just like the drug problems still in America, you stop the flow of drug money to the leaders of our corporations and governments and the illegal drugs will stop. In another approach, how many of those who voted for the immigration bill are connected to the problem?

  3. Neil Derrick permalink
    June 30, 2007 12:20 AM

    I totally agree!! The last time I looked up the word illegal the definition I saw had something to do with breaking the law. That would apply to those who are in this country illegally. Yet a bunch of idiots in Washington seem to want to “reward” those who are here illegally. They don’t have enough sense to realize that gangs and terrorists as well as other scum walk across our borders and pose great danger to our country. I’m in favor of building a fence and to totally close off our borders…..let’s do it soon and then toss those same idiots in Wash. who voted for this bill across the fence and keep them out too.

  4. Finley Peter Dunne permalink
    June 30, 2007 2:10 PM

    Mr. Sewell does a marvelous job of pondering his navel, not that anyone should give a hoot. Everyone, except American Indians from whom the country was stolen, should be escorted back across the borders. That should quell all the partisan babble and cure the bleached blonde problem, too.

  5. kfish permalink
    June 30, 2007 2:37 PM

    If you are an illegal alien and you want to file taxes the IRS will give you a number, even if you do not have a social security number. If you are from Mexico and you are illegal or legal, you can claim every family member that you send money to, even if they do not have a social security number or do not live in the United States. No other illegal or legal immigrant is allowed to do this. Is the IRS operating without oversight or under the control of the Congress? If you do not believe this check who is allowed to be a dependant in IRS documents or Turbo Tax. Even if they do pay taxes, they pay no taxes at all due to this special provision in the tax code.

    Most hard working immigrants are here working to support many families who are stuck in countries with corrupt governments, who make most of their income from taxing funds sent to families from overseas workers.

    How will these countries ever improve if their hardest working people are off working somewhere else, instead of fighting to change things in their own country?

    In their country they get no: education, healthcare, and welfare. No wonder they come here. No wonder education and healthcare have the highest inflation in our country.

    A Mexican crashed into the back of my car. He was going to leave the scene of the accident and spoke to me in English. The police appeared and he would not speak English, refused to give name, address, had no insurance, no drivers license, and was taken to jail. I had to go to court and of course the illegal did not appear. They only kept him overnight at the jail because the Federal Government would not pay for detaining him. They said that they are not responsible or required to turn the illegal over to the Immigration Service. What ever happened to working in jail to pay for you debts or your deportation?

    This problem needs to be solved now. How can we have millions of illegals amoung us with out corrupting our own citizens who are paying them and not withholding taxes to the IRS. How can we have 1/3 of a nation operating illegally and still maintain any kind of respect for the law?

  6. June 30, 2007 5:17 PM

    Just why did Paris go to jail?

    With all the flap about Paris Hilton and her jail stay, we tend to overlook reason and side with her sentence. Granted, she is a spoiled rotten little rich girl who missed quite a few much-needed spankings as a child growing up, and now a certain innate feeling of our own sense of justice is gratified when she gets what obviously appears to be her comeuppance. But put aside those feelings for a minute so that we can reason analytically about just what has happened to her and what happens to most of us every day in this “free country.”

    Young Miss Hilton was locked up for the offence of violating her probation in a reckless driving case. Hang onto each of those terms, for we shall return to them. A little review is in order first.

    There are four levels of law, in the following hierarchical order:

    At the top is God’s law, which both John Locke and William Blackstone – on whose voluminous writings on law America’s Founders relied heavily – equated with Natural law. These are laws that cannot be broken; they are absolute, and we know them almost without having to be taught them. We understand that if we step off the back porch without using the steps, the law of gravity will control our sudden and sure descent. We know that it is wrong to murder another human being or to steal his stuff. We also understand intuitively that there are sure consequences that will befall us if we violate these laws. And, they are beyond manipulation by man.

    The second level of law, the highest form that may be made by man, is the law of contracts. It is the law that governs human relationships and interactions. It commands us to keep our agreements and to honor our contracts. God speaks often of this kind of law, as for example in Ecclesiastes 5:4 – “When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for He hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed.” The Bible records 275 uses of the word “covenant,” 65 of “promise,” 81 of “swear,” 80 of “vow,” 60 of “oath,” and 26 of “pledge.” Clearly, keeping one’s agreements is important to the Author of the highest law. It was also important to the authors of the Constitution for the united States of America, who identified private contracts as superior to the Constitution itself when they wrote, “No state … shall pass any … Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts” (Article I, Section 10), and “All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” (Article VI)

    The third level of law is Common law. This is where the people apply the first two levels of law to a given situation to determine if a violation has occurred. It is also Biblical, as Deuteronomy 19:15 tells us: “One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.” The Bible also tells us of cities of refuge to which a man could flee if he killed a neighbor accidentally so he would not be executed for murder by those overly zealous to apply God’s law. Common law is best seen in our modern jury system, where a jury of one’s peers examine the facts in evidence and decide whether a killing qualifies as murder or as something less severe and deserving of less or no punishment, thus applying “common sense” to sort out what higher law applies. It, too, is found in the Constitution for the united States of America: “No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act” (Article III, Section 3) and “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.” (Amendment Seven.)

    The last level of law has been aptly called “vulgar law.” It is law that is made by legislative bodies that get together and vote to say that it will now be illegal to drive 56 miles per hour or to operate a motor vehicle without a seatbelt fastened or to grow a certain herbal substance in one’s backyard (without a license.) It is at this level of law that we run into problems, and it is certainly what has Miss Hilton incarcerated. Consider:

    She committed an “offence.” An offence is simply “an act punishable by law” and is not necessarily a violation of God’s law, natural law, contract law or common law. She “violated her probation” – again, an offence against a legislatively-created law. Specifically, she was charged with “reckless driving.” We could spend a lot of time on those two words alone, each of which has a specific legal meaning (though often very subjectively applied by police and prosecutors alike), but “driving” alone means, legally, “operating a motor vehicle for hire.” Now unless Miss Hilton had paying passengers with her, she was not “driving,” but, of course, her possession of a state-issued license created the presumption that she was, in fact, “driving,” for why else would she have a license to drive? Legally, words mean things.

    Folks, we get hung up in fourth level law and forget all about our rights which exist at higher, superior levels of law. In point of fact, we have a common law right to travel, freely, in an automobile, because our inherent freedoms (from God, per the Declaration of Independence) certainly include the right to travel about from one place to another, shy only of trespassing on the private space of another. “Driving” may well be a privilege, a commercial activity rightly regulated by the state (one of the reason why we formed states to begin with was to create a mechanism whereby to regulate commerce amongst ourselves and with other states), but travel is not. Sure, getting and keeping a license is a privilege, but does the fact that a license is “legally required,” especially if for an activity that is our right according to a higher level of law than that which requires the license, make its absence from our pocket or our violation of requirements for license-holders a true crime, especially one for which we should be incarcerated or otherwise punished?

    But do we not agree together, you may be thinking, in some “social compact,” to be regulated by the state for our own personal and group safety? Good question, one that “our schools” teach us is presumptively true, but where exactly is that contract and to what exactly did we agree? Do you remember signing it – signing your rights away to some legislative body that is now tasked to think for you and to spank you when you violate their “laws”? Oh, it is unwritten, just understood? Tell that to Miss Hilton, who sat in jail for three weeks, because you may well be the next one there – deprived of your right to move about and dress as you please (other than in an orange jumpsuit) … because of an unwritten contract.

    But the government said…

    I rest my case.

    We must know the law and be well-disposed to use it.

  7. gerald permalink
    July 1, 2007 3:17 AM

    I agree that we should secure the border first. I just do not understand why Lindsey Graham is so determined to give these lawbreakers amnesty. He has been in Washington too long and has forgotten us in SC. Will you please consider running against him?

  8. July 1, 2007 5:18 PM

    Well I can tell you that there are several folks considering a run. One would need to be able to throw in a mil to kick it off with a serious degree of credability. If u r that person feel free to call me.

  9. Peter Leventis permalink
    July 1, 2007 5:48 PM

    “Compean and Ramos are the two border patrol agents who are serving over 10 years in prison for doing their jobs and shooting an illegal drug smuggling suspect in the behind.”

    Mr. Sewell, these boarder patrol agents illegally and in direct contravention of numerous rules of engagement used deadly force and failed to report an incident of lethal force to their supervisors and intentionally tried to cover it up – these are exactly the kind of people we don’t need in law enforcement or positions of authority in general. The ability and authority to use deadly force at a moments notice is one of the most awesome and perhaps the highest amount of authority the U.S. government can place in one individual, yet with that authority comes a distinct and immeasurably high responsibility to use it with utmost prudence. These to two individuals failed miserably in egregiously breeching that authority in numerous ways, and were correctly held to a higher standard than rest of society based on the responsibility vested in them. They were not maliciously prosecuted nor were they incorrectly sentenced. I say this formerly having served this country in the capacity of a Special Agent for the United States Treasury and the Department of Homeland Security who has reviewed the facts and conspiracy theories surrounding this case. I also agree we need stronger boarder security and disagreed with the most recent version of the immigration reform bill, which had already been defeated in the Senate at the time of your posting this article. However, don’t let the strong emotions of this issue conflate into other issues to create sympathies for lawlessness; particularly on the part of those individuals who are sworn to uphold the law.

  10. July 1, 2007 6:23 PM

    Peter,

    Thank you for comment, with all due respect I will defer to Congreessman Hunter on the issue of the agents. It would seem to some their biggest mistake was that they did not finish the job.

  11. July 1, 2007 7:42 PM

    Please forgive the typos as I attempt to blog from my Treo at the pool, one-handed of course…

  12. August 17, 2010 3:58 PM

    I like Paris a lot, but I think it was kinda mean 2 just like, throw away Nicole Richie.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: