Low Level Offender Released from Jail, Killed by Police in Shoot Out

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by dvinman, Jul 22, 2010.

  1. dvinman
    Offline

    dvinman VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    458
    Thanks Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +65
    California is planning to release 40,000 criminals. They don’t need to. They could slash welfare. They could lay off swarms of bureaucrats. Most of all, they could DEPORT some of the millions of illegal aliens weighing down the California economy like an anchor. But the Democrats don’t like any of those options.

    In 2009, California with its majority non-White population issued IOUs to vendors and employees. Some banks refused to accept these IOUs. One news article notes “California state lawmakers now grappling with a $40 billion budget deficit were advised five years ago of the mounting costs of illegal immigration in the state. In 2004, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) issued a study of the fiscal cost of illegal immigration to Californians. At that time, the cost to the state’s taxpayers was $10.54 billion a year. That estimate included the cost of educating the children of illegal aliens both those illegally in the country and those born here in K-12 public schools, emergency medical care, and incarceration of criminal aliens. While these annual costs for illegal immigration have been steadily draining California’s budget year after year, the costs have risen and are placing an even greater strain on the state’s resources in 2009. The original 2004 cost estimate was based on an illegal alien population estimated at 2,900,000. Today, FAIR estimates California’s illegal alien population has grown to 3,200,000, a 10.3 percent increase. As a result of both the continued growth in the illegal alien population and the higher cost of governmental services, the current fiscal cost outlays for the illegal alien population in California are now approaching $13.1 billion annually more than half the projected shortfall for next year.”

    If the Democrats in the California legislature won’t do the most sensible thing and deport illegal aliens, what will they do? The Democrats are seriously planning on releasing 40,000 criminals, whom they claim are “low-level” offenders. Why are the Democrats doing that: Seriously, they are PUNISHING the voters of California, opening the doors of the prisons, the same way someone might sic his dogs on a trespasser.

    The Democrats of course will never admit this. A few Democrats are sufficiently delusional and out of touch to believe their own propaganda. Most Democrats know that there will be a big increase in petty crimes and that some women will be raped and some innocent people will be killed, but of course they lie to the public and tell them everything will be fine.

    The prisons in California have been overcrowded for a long time, and prosecutors frequently make deals with gang members plea bargaining down felonies to misdemeanors, just move the vast number of cases along quickly. The truth is that anyone who is in prison in California did something pretty bad to get there and should serve out their full sentence (if not more). One of the very first “safe” criminals they released, tried to rape a woman within hours of being released as reported on the John and Ken show.

    This initial release of 6,500 prisoners (out of a planned 40,000) has already gone bad. In the latest incident, another “low level offender” fresh out of prison opened fired on two police officers. One article reports “The Los Angeles Police Department has asked the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to investigate how a parolee who fired nearly a dozen gunshots at two LAPD officers over the weekend in the San Fernando Valley was able to gain early release and why he was classified as a low-level offender. In the letter to Corrections Secretary Matthew Cate, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck expressed concern that Javier Joseph Rueda, 28, of Panorama City was placed on ‘non-revocable parole’ in May after serving just two years of a 10-year prison sentence. A new law that went into effect this year aimed to cut the state inmate population by about 6,500. The reductions, targeting low-level offenders, are achieved in part through good-behavior credits but also by revising parole rules to stop police agencies from returning nonviolent offenders to prison for minor parole violations.”

    Now what made the authorities think Javier Rueda was a low-level offender? According to a second article, Rueda was originally arrested for:

    * evading an officer,
    * car theft,
    * possession of a silencer,
    * possession of a controlled substance and
    * being armed.

    Rueda served a little over two years out of a ten year sentence before getting a “non-revocable parole”.

    FAIR: California Budget Meltdown Would be Lessened by Combating Increases in Illegal Immigration
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2010
  2. chanel
    Offline

    chanel Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    12,130
    Thanks Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    People's Republic of NJ
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    I had this conversation with a woman who works in the prosecutor's office just the other day. Someone was saying how our prisons are filled with low-level offenders who were just caught with a little weed. She said if we legalized marijuana, we could save zillions on incarceration.

    The truth is that here in NJ - NO ONE is incarcerated for just a "little weed". Most drug convictions are associated with other crimes and most offenders have lengthy priors. We can argue that the "three strikes rule" might be overcrowding our prisons; but not drug possession in and of itself.
     
  3. Douger
    Offline

    Douger BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    12,323
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Not fucking there !
    Ratings:
    +915
    BIG TOBACCO, who funds those whores you call congresscritters, will NEVER allow that to happen.
    Here is the end result.
    Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work? - TIME
    I mean. If it was legit where would al CIA duh get their funds ?
     
  4. topspin
    Offline

    topspin BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Messages:
    4,149
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +196
    why don't we deport?
    It would help unemployment!!!
    but republicans wouldn't get the slave labor and dems wouldn't get the latino vote locked up. IMO
     

Share This Page