Shootout On The Southwest Freeway

[PureAuteur]

http://www.click2houston.com/news/12403099/detail.html

This is a big part of what is making our city so dangerous (immigrant smuggling), besides poverty and the drug trade. They need to put these ****ers in jail. If Houston wasn't secretly in support of illegal immigration, maybe we'd have a safer SW side. By allowing illegals to stay here, you have immigrant smugglers everywhere. They store like 50 people in one house at a time as if they were animals. There's no telling how many illegals are in Houston if you can fit that many into a single house. You can't even cross the street in your own city now without being hit by stray bullets from immigrant smugglers in the middle of the day. Of course, this story will just get swept under the rug just like all the others that should be inciting people to action, but in this P.C. city, nobody seems to care. Unless our leaders and law enforcement take a stand to gut the city of illegals and immigrant smuggling, I'm moving to a city that respects the laws, national sovereignty, and human rights.

[Pumapayam]

Sounds like they were following this car and waiting for an opportunity to get them.

[houstonmacbro]

http://www.click2houston.com/news/12403099/detail.html

They need to put these ****ers in jail.

That's not the word I think it is.. is it?

[Jeebus]

That's not the word I think it is.. is it?

No, I think he meant the F word.

[houstonmacbro]

No, I think he meant the F word.

And that's better how...?

Anyhow, I agree that a lot of these cities, including Houston do this illegal immigrant dance. Not sure who's interest we are protecting, and don't want to derail this thread, so I won't go there.

[Jeebus]

And that's better how...?

Its better that its not the N word that you thought it was.

[Guest danax]

These stash houses have to be easy to spot by neighbors and so are in areas where no one says a thing.

My current house was once such a place and I know for sure some people knew what was up. One woman down the street called it "the party house" although my next door neighbor said that they all came in through the back door and only at night and kept the exterior of the house fairly clean and were quiet. Inside they let water leak etc and ruined parts of two heart pine floors in fear of having someone come by.

By allowing illegals to live here fairly easily and with upcoming amnesty, for the 2nd time, we've increased the human smuggling and related crime. Make it very hard to live here illegally and demand would drop. As said, it will be swept under the rug.

[ricco67]

http://www.click2houston.com/news/12403099/detail.html

This is a big part of what is making our city so dangerous (immigrant smuggling), besides poverty and the drug trade. They need to put these ****ers in jail. If Houston wasn't secretly in support of illegal immigration, maybe we'd have a safer SW side.

By allowing illegals to stay here, you have immigrant smugglers everywhere.

I don't really see what you mean how The City of Houston (or the surrounding municipalities) are PRO illegal Immigration. If by what you mean is the policy about police not inquiring about the legal status of every human they come across as "pro-illegal alien" stance, then I believe you're severely mistaken. I don't recall if the policy was changed for them to check while one of them was in custody because of an illegal act. If that's the case, that's VERY acceptable in my book. They break one law, check them for others (warrants, etc)

They store like 50 people in one house at a time as if they were animals. There's no telling how many illegals are in Houston if you can fit that many into a single house. You can't even cross the street in your own city now without being hit by stray bullets from immigrant smugglers in the middle of the day.

While I agree that the "coyotes" use this area as a hub before they go to other parts of the country, I wouldn't necessarily say there is a major gunfight like this EVERYDAY in the MIDDLE of the town. That's just being overly paranoid. That's just as bad as suspecting some Katrina people moving in next door means that you're having someone from the projects moving in. Get over it.

Of course, this story will just get swept under the rug just like all the others that should be inciting people to action, but in this P.C. city, nobody seems to care. Unless our leaders and law enforcement take a stand to gut the city of illegals and immigrant smuggling, I'm moving to a city that respects the laws, national sovereignty, and human rights.

While the story might disappear in time, it's up to YOU to talk to your national and local representatives so it's just not swept under the rug. It's also up to you to help point out any suspicious activities that may occur in your neighborhood. As with all illegal activities, it's up to the public (that means you) to become aware of what is going on and inform the proper authorities. It is

unrealistic to believe that law enforcement is omniscient, if you do that is just this side of paranoia or complete and utter stupidity.

It is US (meaning you too) to be vigilant of what's going on around us.

Good luck on your city search.

[MidtownCoog]

welcome to the future

"honest GOD loving Americans are armed to the teeth". (If not, KYAGB).

[PureAuteur]

That's not the word I think it is.. is it?

Let's just say that I meant "workers".

I don't really see what you mean how The City of Houston (or the surrounding municipalities) are PRO illegal Immigration. If by what you mean is the policy about police not inquiring about the legal status of every human they come across as "pro-illegal alien" stance, then I believe you're severely mistaken. I don't recall if the policy was changed for them to check while one of them was in custody because of an illegal act. If that's the case, that's VERY acceptable in my book. They break one law, check them for others (warrants, etc)

That wouldn't be what makes them "pro illegal alien", although I would expect them to inquire about the legal status. This would mean profiling, but it wouldn't bother me, because otherwise you'd have to do it with everyone and that would just feel like a police state. If this country, the state of Texas, and the city of Houston really wanted to uphold our national sovereignty and enforce our laws, they would have done something about this long ago. Clearly, there is some underlying reason for allowing all these illegals to continue to pour in and live here easily for as long as they want.

[jmancuso]

we need to control illegal immigration but 99% of them are not violent criminals. you're more apt to be killed by a fellow american than an immigrant.

[cottonmather0]

we need to control illegal immigration but 99% of them are not violent criminals. you're more apt to be killed by a fellow american than an immigrant.

That isn't the relevant percentage. The more important question is, what percentage of total violent crimes are committed by illegals or in relation to their presence here? I would venture that it's a lot greater than 1%.

I happen to agree with the OP, too. The city and it's policies are responsible for stuff like this happening, but in the end it's a federal problem. If the Feds actually protected the border and regularly deported illegals, then the city would have a responsibility for detaining these people and handing them over. But the Feds don't do their job and the city simply doesn't have the resources to do it for them.

[eduag]

---99% of percentages throw out there are made up---

Do some research! There are 300k illegal immigrants in Cali jails

Those were the ones that got caught!

[RedScare]

Make it very hard to live here illegally and demand would drop. As said, it will be swept under the rug.

Yes, we should ramp it up. This country has a very good track record of exerting its control over human tendencies. Prohibition, the War on Drugs, Vietnam, and Iraq prove that when the government puts its mind and resources toward changing human behavior, the results are spectacular. I encourage all of you to push the government to write another glorious chapter in imposing its will on human nature.

I can't wait. I'm going to Pier 1 to buy a wicker chair, so I can sit on my front porch with a glass of lemonade and watch the government during its finest hour. What do you think of this one?

[Vertigo58]

Best solution for that whole part of Houston.

[TheNiche]

By allowing illegals to live here fairly easily and with upcoming amnesty, for the 2nd time, we've increased the human smuggling and related crime. Make it very hard to live here illegally and demand would drop. As said, it will be swept under the rug.

Making it really hard for them to live here would take a lot of our own resources to accomplish. Probably more than its worth, considering that most of them (if not 99%) are here to work.

The alternate and better approach is to make it so easy to live here that the human smugglers can't make a profit. As part of that, we could just increase the number of legal immigrants we'd take per year (or eliminate the cap altogether), let them know up front what services they were and were not eligible for and how they can work toward citizenship, and ensure that they've registered their identities (at no fee) so that we can track them if they commit a crime of any sort. We obviously can't stop immigration altogether, so let's just legitimize it and reap the benefits of their labor and have a transparent immigrant tracking system that is easy to apply to criminal investigations.

[Vertigo58]

The alternate and better approach is to make it so easy to live here that the human smugglers can't make a profit. As part of that, we could just increase the number of legal immigrants we'd take per year (or eliminate the cap altogether), let them know up front what services they were and were not eligible for and how they can work toward citizenship, and ensure that they've registered their identities (at no fee) so that we can track them if they commit a crime of any sort. We obviously can't stop immigration altogether, so let's just legitimize it and reap the benefits of their labor and have a transparent immigrant tracking system that is easy to apply to criminal investigations.

I agree for the most part, however I dont think I am alone on this additonal piece.

Wait until you have to LIVE next door to them.

Imagine a 1-2 bedroom home with up to 3 families crammed in, about 10 cars in the street and on the yard, big drink & drown fiesta hell-raising parties almost every weekend, cock & pitbull fighting, smashing beer bottles all night, gun shooting in the air (I hope). I could go on.

Theres that hardcore imbedded culture that comes along with it. Theres also the hanging the goat (in the front porch) by the throat, slitting its throat, pulling out the guts then another party starts. Gotta love it

[TheNiche]

Wait until you have to LIVE next door to them.

Imagine a 1-2 bedroom home with up to 3 families crammed in, about 10 cars in the street and on the yard, big drink & drown fiesta hell-raising parties almost every weekend, cock & pitbull fighting, smashing beer bottles all night, gun shooting in the air (I hope). I could go on.

Theres that hardcore imbedded culture that comes along with it. Theres also the hanging the goat (in the front porch) by the throat, slitting its throat, pulling out the guts then another party starts. Gotta love it

I lived in McAllen for 10 years. I've had my fair share of that riff-raff too, and believe me: the first chance I got, I bailed out and came to Houston. It took my parents longer to give up hope down there, but they're about to move up here as well.

But I'll concede this: if you got cozy with the neighbors (one was an elderly recluse and the other was a corrupt cop with Mexican mafia connections), they'll let you get away with anything. I set up a shooting range in my back yard that I used for pellet rifles and .22 shorts, complete with a pully system to retreive targets, a steel backstop, and baffles. That was no big deal, though. He had his AR-15 with attached grenade launcher, a CAR-15, and an M3 'grease gun'. That puppy was fun to shoot off on holidays.

[RedScare]

Wait until you have to LIVE next door to them.

Imagine a 1-2 bedroom home with up to 3 families crammed in, about 10 cars in the street and on the yard, big drink & drown fiesta hell-raising parties almost every weekend, cock & pitbull fighting, smashing beer bottles all night, gun shooting in the air (I hope). I could go on.

Theres that hardcore imbedded culture that comes along with it. Theres also the hanging the goat (in the front porch) by the throat, slitting its throat, pulling out the guts then another party starts. Gotta love it

Reminds me of college.

Ahh...good times.

[Vertigo58]

[but I'll concede this: if you got cozy with the neighbors (one was an elderly recluse and the other was a corrupt cop with Mexican mafia connections), they'll let you get away with anything. I set up a shooting range in my back yard that I used for pellet rifles and .22 shorts, complete with a pully system to retreive targets, a steel backstop, and baffles. That was no big deal, though. He had his AR-15 with attached grenade launcher, a CAR-15, and an M3 'grease gun'. That puppy was fun to shoot off on holidays.

Love it!

The harsh reality is that no matter how hard the media and society forces us to love these people, its not going to happen. If anything it is backfiring.

Someone had made a post in another topic where these people are so hard headed and wont be budge as far as assimilating into American society. Its true. Everytime "we" long time Houstonians go fight for better/newer schools and upgrades in our neighbrhoods they benefit from it. I dont see anything wrong with a minimal amount of different cultures coming in but when the whole country is headed this way?

I remember in Jr High there were some kids that spoke no English. They started hanging around those of us that did. After a few months and years they were speaking well in English. By the time I met some of them at the HS reunion 10 years later they were speaking clear and unbroken English, most no accent. The new generation needs to get with the program. Sorry this is a straying point but, That is another reason these new immigrants get into so many fights at school and anywhere is because they wont speak English around non-Spanish speaking people. That is rude as hell. It is also very annoying to any and everyone near them. Everytime we turn around the country is caving in and doing what THEY want. The pressure cooker is on folks!

[TheNiche]

The harsh reality is that no matter how hard the media and society forces us to love these people, its not going to happen. If anything it is backfiring.

Someone had made a post in another topic where these people are so hard headed and wont be budge as far as assimilating into American society. Its true. Everytime "we" long time Houstonians go fight for better/newer schools and upgrades in our neighbrhoods they benefit from it. I dont see anything wrong with a minimal amount of different cultures coming in but when the whole country is headed this way?

I remember in Jr High there were some kids that spoke no English. They started hanging around those of us that did. After a few months and years they were speaking well in English. By the time I met some of them at the HS reunion 10 years later they were speaking clear and unbroken English, most no accent. The new generation needs to get with the program. Sorry this is a straying point but, That is another reason these new immigrants get into so many fights at school and anywhere is because they wont speak English around non-Spanish speaking people. That is rude as hell. It is also very annoying to any and everyone near them. Everytime we turn around the country is caving in and doing what THEY want. The pressure cooker is on folks!

It isn't easy, but they can assimilate. The greatest challenge seems to be 1) harsh parenting and 2) that they concentrate in mono-ethnic clusters so that they can grow up in Houston and never leave Mexico. By the time that they're 3rd generation, though, odds are that they're pretty well assimilated, or at the very least bicultural.

But this is one reason that I generally like the idea of inner city regentrification. Folks that get pushed out of existing mono-cultural enclaves often locate in at least somewhat more diverse areas.

[Guest danax]

Yes, we should ramp it up. This country has a very good track record of exerting its control over human tendencies. Prohibition, the War on Drugs, Vietnam, and Iraq prove that when the government puts its mind and resources toward changing human behavior, the results are spectacular. I encourage all of you to push the government to write another glorious chapter in imposing its will on human nature.

I can't wait. I'm going to Pier 1 to buy a wicker chair, so I can sit on my front porch with a glass of lemonade and watch the government during its finest hour. What do you think of this one?

I think an unalterable national ID (choke, gag) would make life almost too difficult to stay here illegally; no license, no benefits, no credit, a database for employers....no school (?) and then enforce curfew and loitering laws, which are supposed to be enforced anyway. Very little extra enforcement needed. Just cut off the lifelines and let the patients wither away.

I agree that the drug war etc. has created crime, but in this case, it would reduce the value of being here, whereas making drugs illegal increases their value.

What gets me most is that they will be rewarded, once again, for breaking the law and stomping on the heads of those who try to get here legally, as hard as it might be. That seems un-American to me, but America at this point is just a stupid fantasy, and maybe that's all it's ever been. Silly me.

That chair isn't wicker, Red. I've got a few real wicker chairs on my porch, however. You're invited to come to the East End and we'll sip beverages and watch America in action (I again must mention that I like living in my nabe, really, it's the principal of this issue that makes me feel naseous).

[RedScare]

That chair isn't wicker, Red. I've got a few real wicker chairs on my porch, however. You're invited to come to the East End and we'll sip beverages and watch America in action (I again must mention that I like living in my nabe, really, it's the principal of this issue that makes me feel naseous).

I wondered when someone would catch that.

I'm not real keen on having a National ID just to scare off a few illegals, especially considering I don't mind them here. I'll leave it to everyone else to fret over. Interesting that federal laws making it a crime to hire illegals, and the requirement of a valid SSN have done nothing to stem the flow of illegals working here, yet you think just ONE MORE piece of government intrusion will do the trick. If American employers do not follow the laws now, why do you think they'll start with your shiny new ID card? And, what about those who pay cash under the table anyway? And, what about the survey that showed over 50% of the employers of illegals are individual citizens like you and me, who hire them for odd jobs and landscaping? I realize that you will demand to "see their papers", but very few of the rest of us will. We just like the low priced labor.

Just like the drugs, the low wage illegal worker is addictive. You can scream national security and closed borders all you want, but I LIKE the guy that does the hard work for cheap. I think they are a net benefit, and I've not heard an argument that changed my mind, yet.

[H-Town Man]

Yes, we should ramp it up. This country has a very good track record of exerting its control over human tendencies. Prohibition, the War on Drugs, Vietnam, and Iraq prove that when the government puts its mind and resources toward changing human behavior, the results are spectacular. I encourage all of you to push the government to write another glorious chapter in imposing its will on human nature.

Interesting that federal laws making it a crime to hire illegals, and the requirement of a valid SSN have done nothing to stem the flow of illegals working here, yet you think just ONE MORE piece of government intrusion will do the trick.

Pardon me if I'm wrong, because I may have a faulty memory of your past posts, but aren't you of a somewhat leftist persuasion when it comes to economics? I only ask because it seems like someone who doubts the government's ability to impose its will on human nature would take more of a laissez-faire, free market approach.

[RedScare]

Pardon me if I'm wrong, because I may have a faulty memory of your past posts, but aren't you of a somewhat leftist persuasion when it comes to economics? I only ask because it seems like someone who doubts the government's ability to impose its will on human nature would take more of a laissez-faire, free market approach.

It took me awhile to figure out what you meant by this. At first, I thought you were just throwing a label on me, but as I read it again, I see why you made this statement. In reality, I am more of a pragmatist than anything else. However, being a pragmatist dictates that I take a laissez-faire approach to many things. As such, Prohibition and the War on Drugs could never work, as the government attempted to legislate the behavior of the people. Since the appetite for drugs and alcohol was so large, they simply found another way to satisfy their appetite.

The same thing applies to immigration. My pragmatic views far outweigh any nationalistic or xenophobic fears I may have. The fact is, people want to provide for their families, driving them north in search of jobs. American employers want cheaper labor, driving them to employ the immigrants. The government will not win this battle, especially considering that the immigrants are generally coming to work, not commit crimes (in genral, as opposed to the small percentage that resort to crime upon arriving).

I suppose my leftist persuasion comes from my proposed solutions to the problem. While a right winger (note: I use this label loosely) may advocate walls and laws and inreased police presence to combat the problem, similar to Prohibition and the War on Drugs, I believe that improving economic conditions in the country of origin is more effective AND less expensive. It is well known that these immigrants send billions of dollars back home to help their families. Most hope and plan to return someday. Many never do, simply because conditions never improve. If the government instead helped Mexico and the Central American countries improve their own economic conditions, many of these immigrants would not come to the US in the first place. It is similar to teaching them to fish in Mexico, rather than feeding them a fish in the US.

In today's supercharged political atmosphere, I don't know if pragmatism will win out. Bush at one time took a pragmatic approach. Now, apparently trying to please his dwindling base, he has taken a far more right wing stance. I can't say I blame him politically, but his pragmatic approach was a far better solution than his new hardline stance, which sounds tough, but will only end up being our next Prohibition. The worst part is that each of the other failed experiments spiked violence horribly. I fear this one will do the same.

[H-Town Man]

It took me awhile to figure out what you meant by this. At first, I thought you were just throwing a label on me, but as I read it again, I see why you made this statement. In reality, I am more of a pragmatist than anything else. However, being a pragmatist dictates that I take a laissez-faire approach to many things. As such, Prohibition and the War on Drugs could never work, as the government attempted to legislate the behavior of the people. Since the appetite for drugs and alcohol was so large, they simply found another way to satisfy their appetite.

The same thing applies to immigration. My pragmatic views far outweigh any nationalistic or xenophobic fears I may have. The fact is, people want to provide for their families, driving them north in search of jobs. American employers want cheaper labor, driving them to employ the immigrants. The government will not win this battle, especially considering that the immigrants are generally coming to work, not commit crimes (in genral, as opposed to the small percentage that resort to crime upon arriving).

I suppose my leftist persuasion comes from my proposed solutions to the problem. While a right winger (note: I use this label loosely) may advocate walls and laws and inreased police presence to combat the problem, similar to Prohibition and the War on Drugs, I believe that improving economic conditions in the country of origin is more effective AND less expensive. It is well known that these immigrants send billions of dollars back home to help their families. Most hope and plan to return someday. Many never do, simply because conditions never improve. If the government instead helped Mexico and the Central American countries improve their own economic conditions, many of these immigrants would not come to the US in the first place. It is similar to teaching them to fish in Mexico, rather than feeding them a fish in the US.

In today's supercharged political atmosphere, I don't know if pragmatism will win out. Bush at one time took a pragmatic approach. Now, apparently trying to please his dwindling base, he has taken a far more right wing stance. I can't say I blame him politically, but his pragmatic approach was a far better solution than his new hardline stance, which sounds tough, but will only end up being our next Prohibition. The worst part is that each of the other failed experiments spiked violence horribly. I fear this one will do the same.

Sounds good. I was referring mainly though to your views in other areas. Maybe the name "RedScare" has thrown me off, but don't you tend to lean somewhat towards socialism in terms of economics? Because generally people who take this approach tend to be somewhat optimistic about the government's ability to improve the market, whereas people in favor of free market capitalism usually are skeptical about government intervention, and more inclined to let "human nature" hold sway.

My point is, your strong views about "government intrusion" that I quoted above sound pretty much like what someone like Bill O'Reilly would say in a discussion about economics.

[RedScare]

I'm trying really hard not to be insulted by comparisons to Bill O'Reilly.

RedScare is a play on NC State's use of red by their sports teams, not a political statement (though, having grown up in the 70s, I was always fascinated by the Cold War).

I admit that I do not find the term Socialism to be a bad word. In a perfect world, Communism would be the perfect system, while Capitalism would be the worst. In the real world, Communism is tainted by the fact that power hungry leaders are in control. Socialism is a nod to the imperfections of humans. However, socialism, like everything else, occurs in degrees. Great Britain, Canada and the US all have varying degrees of socialism in their political system. Our 2 most popular programs, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, are the absolute definition of socialism.

Being a pragmatist above all, I do not feel constrained to be completely socialist or completely capitalist, especially since socialism relies on capitalism for funding. Lately, I have taken to describing myself as a Social Anarchist. I don't know if this is actually a term, but it describes the way I look at things. That is, I while I believe that the government should stay away from most things, including legislating morality, I believe that the government can be useful in supporting those things that improve the life of its citizens. This can and should include water and sewer systems, roads and public transit, health care, and defense (but only defense, as opposed to hegemony).

Things I think the government should stay out of include legislating personal behavior, EXCEPT where it infringes the rights of others (for example, drugs and alcohol should be legal, while DWI and assault while drunk are not), property rights (ugly houses are legal, but a landfill next door may not be), and religion (schools are for educating children, churches and homes are for spiritual education).

To compare myself to Niche, I agree with him generally on property rights and government intrusion. However, I do not go so far as to say that we should NEVER infringe on property rights. Sometimes the infringement is required. Back to immigration, I do not see the "all bad" picture that some others see. I believe there is a net benefit to immigration. Further, I see the border wall and law enforcement solution as a waste of valuable resources for little gain.

Hope that helps. If you have a better name than Social Anarchist to describe me (other than asshole), I'm all ears. It's the closest I've come up with so far.

[TheNiche]

To compare myself to Niche, I agree with him generally on property rights and government intrusion. However, I do not go so far as to say that we should NEVER infringe on property rights. Sometimes the infringement is required.

Agreed, but even so, my only beef with government intrusion on property rights (and other matters) under most scenarios is that they screw it all up. For instance, saying to a waste management company that they absolutely cannot under any circumstances place a landfill on a particular site is bad policy. Policy that is acceptable from my point of view is that they cannot place a landfill on a site without compensating the impacted persons and the government for all externalized impacts. Given that they are unlikely to find any site anywhere that they can use and not impact somebody, such policies force companies to weigh social impacts to a neighborhood against the social impacts to their customers and owners and make an efficient decision.

I'd apply the same reasoning to the Bayport Container Terminal, an LNG plant proposed on Pelican Island, or a heavily-polluting refinery. For smaller projects, I'd allow for somewhat more subjectivity as a means of abating the cost of economic impact studies. That line of thought includes matters related to historical preservation, for instance, or impact fees on new development.

But even with the above allowances towards socialism, implementation is everything. If only the City of Houston does this, it will hurt the City, hurt its constituents, hurt those who want to move there, and hurt society because the regulations would become meaningless at the city limits, and that's where people and firms would reluctantly locate with greater frequency. These kinds of policies would have to happen at the Federal level to have the optimal effect.

[TJones]

we need to control illegal immigration but 99% of them are not violent criminals. you're more apt to be killed by a fellow american than an immigrant.

...

[H-Town Man]

Would libertarian work?

Also, would you even be offended if somebody called you an asshole?