Posted on 01/30/2017 4:20:41 AM PST by SMGFan
New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio told CNN's Jake Tapper that it is OK to shield undocumented immigrants who drive drunk from federal authorities if it does not "lead to any other negative outcome."
Tapper asked the Democratic mayor on Sunday's "State of the Union" if he would comply with federal authorities following President Trump's executive order to halt funding to cities that do not cooperate with immigration officials by presenting a specific scenario. "Jake, there are 170 offenses in that law that are listed as serious and violent crimes that lead to automatic cooperation between the city of New York and our federal partners,” DeBlasio replied. “So any serious and violent crime, we’re going to work with them.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Are you talking about Deblazio, or illegals? I vote for both...just sayin’.
lol
Snake Yapper and CNN (Criminal News Network) are giving this POS politician DeBlaBla a platform to pledge his allegiance with criminals? Is there a recall avenue for the mayor or do the honest, legal, hard-working citizens of New York have Stockholm Syndrome?
Revolutionary War 2.0 ALERT!
As my New York friends say, “ whatta mamaluke “.
I’ve got news for you—taking their drivers licenses away will have zero impact on how much driving they do.
We lived in a SoCal sanctuary city for many years and I can assure you, people coming from Mexico bring with them very cavalier attitudes about driving laws. In Mexico, drunk driving is no big deal, as long as you can pay la mordida.
Drunk driving is a *very* serious problem in sanctuary cities. It’s rampant and it’s deadly. Illegals at least have to get insurance if they bother to get licenses.
CA has mandatory uninsured motorist coverage because of the illegals and it’s expensive.
But, it’s laughable to think that not having a license will stop an illegal from driving.
Wonder what Red Billy would do if they caught an illegal carrying a handgun? Would they look the other way then as well?
Yes, it's serious. But from a legal standpoint there is no distinction between drunk driving and making a right turn without using your signal.
Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you said they couldn’t drive a *car* or Uber.
Although there is a thriving market in SoCal making and selling fake drivers licenses.
That's why the Giuliani administration implemented what was probably the most effective measure to deal with people who would drive without licenses in NYC. They'd simply impound the cars.
The whole measure was thrown out in court years later because of legitimate constitutional concerns, but there's no doubt that it was effective -- and there's no reason to worry about constitutional matters in a Marxist police state like New York City that isn't really part of America anyway.
No kidding high rates, I hit the roof every time I notice how much I have to carry as “uninsured motorist” coverage just in case one of these guest drunk drivers decides to take me or someone driving my cars out. IOW, I am forced to pay for their insurance because if I do not have it, I face a financial disaster.
If they were only prosecuting black offenders, there would be a civil rights case.
If they are only prosecuting legal Americans, there should be a civil rights case.
Wouldn't surprise me. The undocumented -- i.e., invader -- should not be subject to any of our laws because...humanity. Rights without responsibilities, what a concept.
Now if we could just bring back exile as punishment for citizens, we could all enjoy invader privilege. Break a law, get exiled, invade, run amok.
Who says they’re only prosecuting legal Americans?
It happens, I’ve seen them cut loose drivers. Had someone else take the wheel.
Just another reason we’re gonna escape from New York, state that is, ASAP. Albany and NYC’s mayor can do a lot to screw law-abiding, taxpaying citizens. But they can’t make us stay.
It’s at least a misdemeanor in all states, and can be a felony depending on circumstances. More like shoplifting or simple assault than a speeding ticket.
If drunk driving is a crime, then anyone charged with it can demand to be tried by a jury. I’ve never heard of anyone tried by a jury in a drunk driving case unless it involved other charges — vehicular homicide, for example.
OK — thank you for posting that. I stand corrected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.