Kate's Law won't get voted on; is this a proper approach?

[SillyAmerican]

Senator Harry Reid doesn't believe Kate's Law (H.R.3011) should be allowed to be voted on by the United States Senate.

In his objection, Reid said the legislation represents an “attack on the immigrant community.”

“All we’ve seen from Republican leaders and their caucus is bills that attack immigrants and tear families apart. So I object.”

With that, the attempt to get this bill voted on in the Senate is effectively squashed.

Senator Reid failed to mention how he feels about American citizens being killed by people who enter this country illegally.

According to a Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of "Likely U.S. Voters", when asked if they favor a five-year mandatory prison sentence for illegal immigrants convicted of major felonies who return to America after being deported:

     56% favor
     27% oppose
     18% undecided

So what's wrong with having an up/down vote on the proposed law? Do you think Reid's objection is legitimate, and qualifies as enough justification to prevent such a vote?

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Reid already burned the filibuster on judges. If he's going to exploit it purely to protect his President from embarrassing vetoes, it should go away entirely.

[Taco Truck 🚚]

Kate's Law

I'm not sure I understand.  We don't even know all the facts in regard to what happened to Kate and, when we are beginning to recognize the harm mandatory minimums have caused, you are proposing sweeping Federal mandatory minimums?

Crazy knee jerk legislation is what got us into this mess in the first place and now you want to repeat that mistake?  Who's tax dollars do you propose to use to pay for your plan?

[DC Al Fine]

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding terminology, but shouldn't "major felony" carry a five year+ sentence anyway? Or does major felony cover more than rape, murder, armed robbery, etc?

[Joe Kakistocracy]

So felons should be given longer sentences if they also happen to be illegal immigrants?  Sounds pretty unnecessary and also racist.  Good job Harry; we'll miss you.

[SillyAmerican]

I'm not sure I understand.  We don't even know all the facts in regard to what happened to Kate and, when we are beginning to recognize the harm mandatory minimums have caused, you are proposing sweeping Federal mandatory minimums?

Crazy knee jerk legislation is what got us into this mess in the first place and now you want to repeat that mistake?  Who's tax dollars do you propose to use to pay for your plan?

Three questions.

(1) What facts are you missing with regard to what happened to Kate Steinle in San Francisco? (I've put down what I believe to be the salient facts of the case below).

(2) The "sweeping Federal mandatory minimums" that you refer to apply to individuals who are (a) in this country illegally and (b) have committed a serious felony. What is specifically in this proposed piece of legislation that you find to be a "crazy knee jerk" reaction?

(3) Would your feelings be different if the person that had been shot was your mother/father, a sibling, or a close personal friend?

Honestly, I don't understand why anyone wouldn't be upset about a situation in which a citizen of the United States is shot and killed by someone in the country illegally, the person in question having entered the U.S. multiple times and been convicted of multiple felonies.

As I say, the facts seem fairly clear; I don't think anything in the following description is in dispute, but if you dispute any of this, please let me know.

At 6:30 p.m. on the night of July 1, 2015, a gunman, alleged to be Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, fired three shots from a .40-caliber handgun at Pier 14, a tourist attraction area at the Embarcadero district. One of the bullets struck Kathryn Steinle, a 32-year-old Pleasanton resident, in the chest. The bullet pierced her aorta. She collapsed to the floor while asking for help from her father Jim, who was accompanying her at the pier. Jim Steinle performed CPR on her before paramedics arrived. She was taken by ambulance to San Francisco General Hospital, where she died two hours later.

The accused, Juan Sanchez, was arrested about an hour later one mile away from the pier and was booked into San Francisco County Jail on suspicion of murder. The shooting was believed by police to be random. Divers from a police boat found the gun in the bay later that night. The gun used in the shooting was confirmed by forensic crime laboratory technicians to be the same one stolen from a federal agent's car. The .40-caliber handgun had been taken from a U.S. Bureau of Land Management ranger's car that was parked in downtown San Francisco, on June 27, 2015. On finding his gun missing, the ranger in question, who was in San Francisco for an official government business trip, immediately reported the theft to San Francisco police as well as the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Crime Information Center. Police issued a citywide crime alert, but did not call in CSI technicians to examine the scene.

Mr. Sanchez is from Guanajuato, Mexico. He had been deported from the U.S. a total of five times, most recently in 2009. He was on probation in Texas during the time of the shooting. He had seven felony convictions. At the time of the shooting, Sanchez was listed as 45 years old by police, but 52 in jail records.

[Taco Truck 🚚]

Nice to see you've discovered italics and underline in addition to bold.  You know using those features throughout your post doesn't make what you are saying any more sane.

From what I understand Mr. Sanchez hasn't even been put on trial and you want to go to pieces and create millions of dollars worth of taxpayer liabilities.  That's your choice of course.  I'll wait for the facts.  Thanks.

[SillyAmerican]

So felons should be given longer sentences if they also happen to be illegal immigrants?  Sounds pretty unnecessary and also racist.  Good job Harry; we'll miss you.

No, if you commit a felony and happen to be in the country illegally, then yes, you should be given a mandatory sentence. How is this racist? This has nothing to do with race: the person in question could be from Timbuktu for all I care, it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever where the criminal comes from. Racist? Please!

[SillyAmerican]

Nice to see you've discovered italics and underline in addition to bold.  You know using those features throughout your post doesn't make what you are saying any more sane.

From what I understand Mr. Sanchez hasn't even been put on trial and you want to go to pieces and create millions of dollars worth of taxpayer liabilities.  That's your choice of course.  I'll wait for the facts.  Thanks.

Yeah, in California, we had folks lobbying against the three strikes law as well. Guess what? It has worked quite well, and I don't see the astronomical price tag that people claimed who were trying to argue against that law. Besides, if it was my sister or my daughter or my mom that had been shot? You're damn right it's worth additional taxpayer expense!

Trying to be reasonable and make a point, but you are absolutely right: all the bold / italic / underlined text in the world can't make a blind person see or an insane person wise...

[Taco Truck 🚚]

Nice to see you've discovered italics and underline in addition to bold.  You know using those features throughout your post doesn't make what you are saying any more sane.

From what I understand Mr. Sanchez hasn't even been put on trial and you want to go to pieces and create millions of dollars worth of taxpayer liabilities.  That's your choice of course.  I'll wait for the facts.  Thanks.

Yeah, in California, we had folks lobbying against the three strikes law as well. Guess what? It has worked quite well...

Wow.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

worked quite well=state of emergency

[Joe Kakistocracy]

So felons should be given longer sentences if they also happen to be illegal immigrants?  Sounds pretty unnecessary and also racist.  Good job Harry; we'll miss you.

No, if you commit a felony and happen to be in the country illegally, then yes, you should be given a mandatory sentence.

Why?

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

So felons should be given longer sentences if they also happen to be illegal immigrants?  Sounds pretty unnecessary and also racist.  Good job Harry; we'll miss you.

No, if you commit a felony and happen to be in the country illegally, then yes, you should be given a mandatory sentence.

Why?

Compounded crimes.

Regardless of the radical left's attempts to muddy the issue, illegal entry is still a crime. Any amnesty or accommodations are given out of kindness on the part of this government, not any sort of entitlement. That kindness is forfeited when you commit a felony while here illegally, and should be met with extra-harsh consequences.

[Rockefeller GOP]

So felons should be given longer sentences if they also happen to be illegal immigrants?  Sounds pretty unnecessary and also racist.  Good job Harry; we'll miss you.

No, if you commit a felony and happen to be in the country illegally, then yes, you should be given a mandatory sentence.

Why?

Compounded crimes.

Regardless of the radical left's attempts to muddy the issue, illegal entry is still a crime. Any amnesty or accommodations are given out of kindness on the part of this government, not any sort of entitlement. That kindness is forfeited when you commit a felony while here illegally, and should be met with extra-harsh consequences.

As someone who supports one-time blanket amnesty, I completely agree.

[Joe Kakistocracy]

Republicans are an excessively vengeful type.  I'd be satisfied with pursuing appropriate sentences for their individual crimes, but whatever keeps your neck veins pulsing, I guess.

[RFayette 🇻🇦]

So felons should be given longer sentences if they also happen to be illegal immigrants?  Sounds pretty unnecessary and also racist.  Good job Harry; we'll miss you.

No, if you commit a felony and happen to be in the country illegally, then yes, you should be given a mandatory sentence.

Why?

Compounded crimes.

Regardless of the radical left's attempts to muddy the issue, illegal entry is still a crime. Any amnesty or accommodations are given out of kindness on the part of this government, not any sort of entitlement. That kindness is forfeited when you commit a felony while here illegally, and should be met with extra-harsh consequences.

As someone who supports one-time blanket amnesty, I completely agree.

This.  I think illegal immigrants should get their sentences doubled or tripled up, with a 5-year-minimum for serious felonies.  Their unlawful status here dictates that their additional unlawfulness makes them very "unwelcome guests" and they ought to be treated as such.

[Joe Kakistocracy]

You guys realize that it would cost an average of $155,000 to keep such a person in prison for five years?  Who pays for that, exactly?

Maybe calm down a notch and think this one through first next time?  jao

[cinyc]

You guys realize that it would cost an average of $155,000 to keep such a person in prison for five years?  Who pays for that, exactly?

Maybe calm down a notch and think this one through first next time?  jao

And how much would it cost to bring Kate Steinle back from the dead?  It can't be done.  Her life was worth much more than $155,000.

Why do Democrats want to coddle serious felon illegal immigrants who were convicted of a felony, deported, and then re-enter the country again, illegally?  What do you want to do?  Deport them again so that they can illegally reenter again and kill or rape someone, as their criminal history has shown they have a propensity to do?  Maybe it is you Democrats should calm down a notch and think this one through first the next time.

Harry Reid should be ashamed of himself for siding with convicted felon illegals instead of the American citizens he represents.

[Blue3]

I hate laws with somebody's name in it.

[Joe Kakistocracy]

You guys realize that it would cost an average of $155,000 to keep such a person in prison for five years?  Who pays for that, exactly?

Maybe calm down a notch and think this one through first next time?  jao

And how much would it cost to bring Kate Steinle back from the dead?  It can't be done.  Her life was worth much more than $155,000.

Ah, so is one of those "increase the punishment to deter others!!" arguments, right?  Let me know how that's going with the drug war and the death penalty.

So anyway, who's paying the $155,000?  You?

[cinyc]

Ah, so is one of those "increase the punishment to deter others!!" arguments, right?  Let me know how that's going with the drug war and the death penalty.

So anyway, who's paying the $155,000?  You?

It's working just fine, thank you.  Until recently, crime rates have been lower than in a long time.  Unfortunately, it's a lesson you criminal-coddling liberals are going to force us to learn again after you stupidly release prisoners and see the crime rate skyrocket again, like in the bad old days of the 70s.  Soft-on-crime liberals never learn, though.

[Bigby]

Can January 3rd, 2017 come quicker?

[Taco Truck 🚚]

Ah, so is one of those "increase the punishment to deter others!!" arguments, right?  Let me know how that's going with the drug war and the death penalty.

So anyway, who's paying the $155,000?  You?

It's working just fine, thank you.  Until recently, crime rates have been lower than in a long time. 

[Joe Kakistocracy]

Ah, so is one of those "increase the punishment to deter others!!" arguments, right?  Let me know how that's going with the drug war and the death penalty.

So anyway, who's paying the $155,000?  You?

It's working just fine, thank you.

Oh.  Wow.  You're even worse at this than I thought.

So anyway, who's paying the $155,000?  Your mommy and daddy?

[cinyc]

So anyway, who's paying the $155,000?  Your mommy and daddy?

155,000/200,000,000 = 0.0007 - i.e. 7 hundredths of a cent per adult U.S. resident - and that's over 5 years.  I'd gladly pay less than a penny to ensure that an illegal immigrant murderer or rapist who was deported and then illegally reenters the country AGAIN doesn't murder or rape again.  Kate's life was worth far more than a tenth of a penny.

[Taco Truck 🚚]

So anyway, who's paying the $155,000?  Your mommy and daddy?

155,000/200,000,000 = 0.0007 - i.e. 7 hundredths of a cent per adult U.S. resident - and that's over 5 years.  I'd gladly pay less than a penny to ensure that an illegal immigrant murderer or rapist who was deported and then illegally reenters the country AGAIN doesn't murder or rape again.  Kate's life was worth far more than a tenth of a penny.

How do you make the leap of logic that keeping someone in prison for five years would prevent them from shooting someone?  You do realize they are going to be let out of prison in five years.  If someone has mental health issues I can't see how five years in a penitentiary is going to make them all better.

And wasn't the gun he used stolen?  Wouldn't smart guns be a more definitive solution?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/03/proponents-smart-guns-nra-obstacle/13551659/

If the objective is to keep Kate alive I don't see how pouring $155,000 down a hole accomplishes that.