I’ve been on each side of parole. Not as an offender, but as an officer and as a parent. From each standpoint, I believe that parole is a huge joke. They work for the state of Texas. I get it. It is a good paying job. I guess. Are they really working for their clients? I don’t think they are. Warrants. Lock up. Half way houses. Prison. There is nothing there to say that the parole officer works for the client. They don’t care. It’s a paycheck no matter what they do. Who cares? They get their bills paid. But they honestly don’t give a damn about the offenders they are certified to work for. Send them to prison. Who cares? The parents. The family. The client themselves. I have seen the clients work their their tails off to live a normal life except parole is the entity that continues to hold their lives. They control each individual. Isn’t their job to re-entry each person into society as a law-abiding citizen? Yet they don’t. They do whatever they want to do each day and then go home at 5pm. This is a subject to be continued.
Criminals rely on money laundering to profit from many crimes, including weapons and drugs. This destroys thousands of lives around the world and in the UK. But to make good on their bad deeds, criminals must use reputable firms to turn dirty money into something they can spend.
Money laundering often works by splitting large funds into smaller amounts and disseminating them through multiple payments that are less likely to raise alarm by either professional services firms such as accountancies, or the state.
While almost every solicitor or accountant is fully versed in their firm’s due diligence measures cunning criminals and complacency can lead to cases slipping through the net.
Money laundering is not a victimless crime, and seemingly harmless transactions can have ripple effects which end up destroying professional reputations, as well as lives.
It’s essential that whenever a professional has doubts about a client engaging their firm, he or she reports the matter to their money laundering reporting officer, who will determine whether or not to file a suspicious activity report with the National Crime Agency. This will assist law enforcement to gather valuable intelligence and, where necessary, recover assets and bring criminals to justice.
Know the risks from money launderers. The UK’s professional services companies are being targeted by money launderers, who use legitimate firms to bring the proceeds of serious and organised crime into the economy, investing it further into criminality and undermining the integrity of UK financial institutions and markets.
The Home Office is working with professional services firms through its Flag It Up! campaign to help honest enterprises avoid becoming enablers of crime.
Sorry I haven’t been on in a while. I can see the finish line for this school year. Grad school is still busy and takes a lot of time. It will be well worth it. I’ll try to be on more and thanks for the support. You can also check out my page at Facebook: Criminal Justice Diaries
At 7:53am on the morning of December 7, 1941, Japan launched a wave of 183 planes as a strike force against Pearl Harbor. They had variety, or pre-selected, targets. Pilots began to attack Ford Island. Other planes bombed the Army’s Hickam Field airbase. Just after 8:00am Wheeler Field was destroyed and a few minutes later, Battleship Row was the target with six battleships anchored along the pier.
A strategically placed bomb set off the USS Arizona’s forward ammunition magazine. The ship was lifted from the water and trapped almost 1,200 sailors inside as she sank. A second wave was less than an hour behind to continue the assault. More than 18 ships were damaged or sank with 65 aircraft destroyed (Anderson, 2002). In total, more than 18 ships were sunk or damaged, 165 aircraft were destroyed, and more than 2,400 Americans were killed (Anderson, 2002). It was an utter defeat for the United States.
The attack could have been prevented and should have been prevented. The United States and Japanese had a deteriorating relationship for some time. The attack was a complete shock to many citizens. America was an isolationist country. In retrospect, the war between the United States and Japan was going to happen. America was certainly preoccupied with the war in Europe and obviously, Britain’s continued existence. Washington had placed economic sanctions on Japan. Japan had almost complete addiction to imported American oil (Record, 2012).
The attack was launched on an unsuspecting nation. Japan was desperate to escape the choice America had imposed on her by the embargo (Howard, 1963). It was an economic asphyxiation for Japan. From 1935-1940 Japan was heavily reliant upon United States exports of scrap metal, copper, cotton, machine tools, and ferroalloys (Tucker, n.d). Washington was wondering how they could maneuver itself without committing any aggressive action or allowing extensive danger to America. Roosevelt needed a declaration of war, but the Japanese needed to attack, and it needed to appear malicious (Kaplan, 2000). Japan could no longer be in this position.
Roosevelt also felt that a change of command was in order. Admiral Richardson refused to place a vulnerable capital fleet at the base. He was subsequently removed and replaced with Admiral Husband Kimmel (Kaplan, 2000). There were factors that are interesting to note. First, Pearl Harbor was indicated as a point of Japanese attack in intelligence. Second, placing battleships along the pier would be a tempting target. Third, more modern vessels were, such as carriers, were removed and sent to sea. Finally, torpedoes were believed to be ineffective in such shallow waters (Kaplan, 2000). These base behaviors should be noted for reference.
Intelligence reports also allude to the prospect that Pearl Harbor could have prevented such attack. America could not have predicted Japanese behavior even though Washington made a very tempting target for them to attack. The United States has a history of intelligence failures beyond Pearl Harbor: Chinese intervention in the Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the Tet Offensive (Gustafson, 2015). The events of 9/11 could also be included in these intelligence failures. In the book, Intelligence and Surprise Attack: Failure and Success from Pearl Harbor to 9/11 and Beyond, Eric Dahl explains, “If policymakers are not psychologically receptive toward a particular threat, then warnings, no matter how specific, will not cause them to take preventative action against a surprise attack” (Gustafson, 2015, p. 329). The base may have been prepared for a lesser attack, such as sabotage (Howard, 1963). There is no guarantee against surprise attack.
Suggestion that Roosevelt may have had a specific plan to involve the instigation of the Japanese military. Also, there may have been a lapse in intelligence. There were also communication lapses before the attack. As stated before, Admiral Kimmel was now the Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet. At this time, Lieutenant General Walter Short was the Commander of the Army Hawaiian Department. Each of them were declared in dereliction of duty by the Roberts Commission between November 27, 1941 and December 7, 1941 (Burtness & Ober, n.d). The War Department and Navy Department had sent warnings regarding the danger of war with Japan and the appropriate measures of defense required. Yet, neither consulted with the other about the intent of the letters (Burtness & Ober, n.d). Roosevelt also knew on December 6 that the incoming message to the Japanese Embassy was a declaration of war. The Japanese were in striking distance of Pearl Harbor (Kaplan, 2000). This warning was not given to Kimmel or Short in time for proper measures to be taken. The person to give this message to them, General George Marshall, did nothing that evening and went about normal duties the following morning (Kaplan, 2000). This lapse of communication was damning.
Implementing a red team in the days, weeks, or months prior to December 7, 1941 may have prevented the attack. It has already been established by facts that Roosevelt had political motives to let the attack happen and lead America into war. Red teaming may have shown the commanders and base vulnerabilities and how to correct them. If the boss (Roosevelt) did not buy into the method (Zenko, 2015), it would not have made a difference the outcome. Roosevelt would not have approved the red team if he had other intentions.
Anderson, D. J. (2002). The Pearl Harbor attack was just one of Japan’s surprises. World War II, 16(5), 92.
Burtness, P., & Ober, W. (n.d). COMMUNICATION LAPSES LEADING TO THE PEARL HARBOR DISASTER. Historian, 75(4), 740-759.
Gustafson, K. (2015). You Can’t Yell Loud Enough: Intelligence and Warning. International Studies Review, 17(2), 329-331.
Howard, M. (1963). Military Intelligence and Surprise Attack: The ‘Lessons” of Pearl Harbor. World Politics, (4). 701.
Kaplan, M. A. (2000). WHY ROOSEVELT WANTED JAPAN TO ATTACK PEARL HARBOR. World & I, 15(10), 288.
Record, J. (2012). The mystery of Pearl Harbor: why did Japan attack the United States Pacific Fleet and start a war it could not win?. Military History, (5). 28.
Tucker, D. (n.d). Bankrupting the Enemy: The US Financial Siege of Japan before Pearl Harbor. Journal of Asian Studies, 68(4), 1293-1296.
Zenko, M. (2015). Red team: How to succeed by thinking like the enemy. New York, NY: Basic Books.
I agree with Andrews & Bonta (2010) with the five risk factors as marital distress, alcohol/drug abuse, depressive symptomatology, age, and income. Although, these factors do not associate with these specialized offenders. Mental disordered offenders (MDOs) are not normally an offender, but the fact that they have some sort of mental disorder leaves them out of this specialization in my opinion. The MDO may not even recognize they are committing a crime depending on the disorder.
Sex offenders and the person that stalks are very specialized in the crimes they commit, yet they cannot be compared to the general offender. It is true that these offenders may commit other crimes for adventure purposes, yet it is not their priority or specialization. The sex offender chooses a specific type of victim on most occasions. Their MO is often the same. To predict future crimes, authorities look more closely at victimology. Some of the risk factors may fit the profile, but not all of them. At this point I sound like an episode of “Criminal Minds.” A stalker usually has one victim in mind throughout the commission of their crime. They will allow themselves to be identified many times by the victim.
Male batterers also have a chosen victim or victims. The adult victim often has difficulty choosing to continue with charges against their abuser for a variety of reason ranging from intimate feelings for the perpetrator to fear of the perpetrator. Once convicted, the batterer often attends domestic violence counseling or batterer intervention programs. Also, the perpetrator is normally financially responsible for these programs. In my experience, the success rate was below 50%. There is also a connection between physical aggression by a perpetrator and intoxication (Fals-Stewart, 2003). More recently, there has been a study done that links not only alcohol to male batterers, but also gambling behavior (Brasfield et al., 2012). I can understand from an addictive standpoint, that drinking can lead to gambling and gambling can lead to more drinking. If physical abuse is the pattern for a perpetrator with those addictions, the pattern would continue until the cycle is broken.
Andrews, D., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Brasfield, H., Febres, J., Shorey, R., Strong, D., Bucossi, M., Schonbrun, Y. C., … Stuart, G. L. (2012). Male batterers’ alcohol use and gambling behavior. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28, 77-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10899-011-9246-0
Fals-Stewart, W. (2003). The occurrence of partner physical aggression on days of alcohol consumption: A longitudinal diary study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71(1), 41-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.71.41
There is no “cookie-cutter” format for predicting criminal behavior. Rehabilitation programs are used locally for probation resources as well as using them in the prison. Deterrence is the goal for preventing any future criminal behavior. The sanction of incarceration alone does not appear to affect any future criminal behavior. Andrews & Bonta (2010) have noted that incarceration using treatment along with incarceration have less recidivism rates. While an offender is on community supervision, there are often local resources utilized that are specific to everyone. Out-patient drug rehabilitation, group therapy, anger management, parenting classes, or any other type of local resources.
There are standard terms of probation for each offender and then there are terms tailored for each offender. Many of these terms are in place for specific deterrence. For example, offenders are not allowed to allowed to have associates on probation or prior incarceration. We know that many times offenders will re-offend while associating with other offenders. They share the same attitudes toward law enforcement, those attitudes are negative.
America has attempted the “get tough” and “nothing works” mantra since the rehabilitation era. As mentioned before, specific sanctions are placed on each offender. One specialized offender is the sex offender. Obviously, the goal is for the sex offender to not commit additional crime. Therefore, specialized treatment intervention has caused a less recidivism rate among sex offenders (Mancini & Budd, 2016).
Treatment for juveniles is also worth noting. Specifically, attempting to provide the appropriate treatment for the violent juvenile offender. The general juvenile offender is placed on juvenile probation. Local resources are required for each probationer. Treatment for the offender could be in the form of placement to receive specialized therapy. Juvenile offenders often have the same crimes as adults, but because of their maturity they must be treated differently. There is no jail-time initially. A formal risk and needs assessment is completed, and a supervision level and treatment setting are evaluated to decrease the risks of reoffending (Ryan, Hunter, & Murrie, 2012). There is difficulty for the parole officer, probation officer, and caseworker working for each individual offender and developing case plans and treatments explicitly for each offender.
Andrews, D., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Mancini, C., & Budd, K. M. (2016). Is the public convinced that ‘nothing works?’: Predictors of treatment support for sex offenders among Americans. Crime & Delinquency, 62(6), 777-799. doi: 10.0044/0011128715597693
Ryan, E. P., Hunter, J. A., & Murrie, D. C. (2012). Juvenile sex offenders: A guide to evaluation and treatment for mental health professionals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Johnny Frank Garrett’s
Last Word Gets Cover Art & New Release Date (3/14) #horrorStarring:
Sean Flanery, Erin Cummings, Mike Doyle
Based on an incredible true story, Johnny Frank Garrett’s Last Word is a terrifying tale of vengeance from beyond the grave. On Halloween night 1981, a Catholic nun is savagely murdered. In a haze of fear, the authorities in Amarillo, Texas feel compelled to solve the case quickly amidst widespread panic and lynch mob anger.
Soon a suspect emerges as 18-year-old Johnny Frank Garrett is arrested and put on trial. Overlooking evidence that could have cleared his name, the jury passes swift judgment and Garrett is convicted and sentenced to death.
But from the moment of his arrest until his last breath Garrett professes his innocence, and following his execution a letter is found in his cell written in a voice driven by a dark force, promising retribution and cursing the souls of anyone connected with his demise.
Within weeks of his execution, Johnny’s terrifying prophecy is unleashed as a series of unexplained deaths strike down those involved in the cover-up.
Andrea Yates was charged with the killing of her five children in 2001. At the time of the killing the subject of infanticide was rare in the United States. Infanticide is the crime of killing of a child within a year of birth or the killing of an infant by their own parent. The law demands retribution. Some researchers claim that the perpetrator may be a victim as well. Andrea Yates had years of pregnancies, postpartum depression, psychosis, medication, and possibly emotional abuse or neglect by her husband, Rusty Yates. America would be horrified by the murders that were systematically performed by the mother of her five children. She was convicted of those crimes and sentenced to life in prison. Her conviction was overturned in 2006 and she has been in a state mental hospital since that time. Andrea Yates has been the center of scrutiny and hate by society for her actions. There was an uncommon mix of psychosis and hyper-religious beliefs fueled by the post-natal disorders that lead her to not be herself. There are accusations that Rusty ignored her symptoms of depression. Her mental illness and post-natal disorders had spiraled out of control.
Andrea Pia Kennedy was born July 2, 1064, in Hallsville, Texas. She was born to the parents of Andrew Kennedy and Jutta Karin (Koehler) Kennedy. There is no noted domestic violence or parental abuse. There were no drugs or criminal activity noted in the family household. She is the youngest of five children: Michelle Freeman, Brian Kennedy, Andrew Kennedy, and Patrick Kennedy.
She graduated valedictorian of Houston Milby High School in 1982. She was the captain of the swim team and an officer in the National Honor Society. Yates completed a two-year pre-nursing program at the University of Houston and graduated from the University of Texas School of Nursing in 1986. Until 1994, she worked as a registered nurse at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.
Her intelligence and cognitive functioning was obviously at a high level. Criminally, she had no behaviors as an adolescent or an adult. There is no history of criminal activity by Andrea and no antisocial personalities or attitudes. Biologically, there were signs of depression throughout the family. Although, there may be a hereditary factor for her criminal behavior (Foxe, 1945). Foxe also states, “Over the past fifty years there have been psychiatrists, psychologists, and sociologists study early childhood environment in the formation of adult illnesses.” Her early childhood is suggestive of her adult psychosis and criminal behavior.
Andrea married Russell “Rusty” Yates on April 17, 1993. They had five children together: Noah (February 26, 1994 – June 20, 2001); John (December 15 – June 20, 2001); Paul (September 13, 1997 – June 20, 2001); Luke (February 15, 1999 – June 20, 2001); and Mary (November 30, 2000 – June 20, 2001).
The family dynamics was very complicated and filled with children, mental illness, and frenzied religious beliefs. Fragmented clinical care and inadequate insurance also played a significant role the family tragedy (McLellan, 2006). Andrea was home-schooling the children. This obviously meant she was at home daily, with the stress of keeping a house, taking care of the children, and the education of the children. Rusty worked at NASA and was gone during the weekdays. Andrea’s best friend, Deborah Holmes, reported in an interview that “Andrea talked to Rusty about her mental illness… but instead of seeking treatment for her… Rusty bolstered Andrea’s belief that she was probably being influenced by demons” (Gesalman, 2002, p. 139).
There were several medications and admissions to hospitals over the years to help Andrea. Mental illness was always in the foreground, including post-partum depression. After the birth of her first child she began hallucinating that involved stabbing. After the birth of her fourth child, she attempted suicide. She overdosed on Trazodone and was admitted to Methodist Hospital psychiatric unit and diagnosed with major depressive disorder. In July, she was admitted to Memorial Spring Shadows Glen for psychiatric treatment and tried to kill herself with a knife. She was treated as a patient and later as an outpatient. She was also prescribed Haldol and Andrea believed she was given “truth serum” that caused her to lose control of herself (McLellan, 2006). In 2001, she was admitted twice to Devereux Texas Treatment Network for her mental illness. There she was prescribed strong anti-psychotic medications.
A post-natal disorder can range from a short-term feeling called “baby blues” to long-term depression to psychosis. Depression affects 10%-15% of women after childbirth while psychosis affects 1 to 2 women per 1000 new mothers (McLellan, 2006). Eileen Meier (2002) noted that postpartum depression can be genetic. Infanticide is closely associated with postpartum psychotic episodes followed by commands to kill the infant. This could occur with or without delusions or hallucinations. Meier (2002) states, “If a woman has a postpartum episode with psychotic features, her risk of recurrence is 30%-50% with each delivery.
Andrea and Rusty had some unorthodox religious beliefs. She was raised Catholic and he was raised Methodist. They were not members of any local church, yet they hosted a Bible study group in the home three nights a week (McLellan, 2006). They had an encounter and became followers of a preacher named Michael Woroniecki. His rhetoric included proclamations that the parents were responsible for the salvation of their children or they should “perish in hellfire.” He also spoke of parents committing suicide rather than cause their children to go to hell. This type of expression, associated with her mental illness and postpartum depression may have led to the crime.
Crime and Trial
On June 20, 2001, Andrea drowned all five of her children. She was indicted for capital murder. Her trial began seven months later in February. She pled not guilty by reason of insanity at her trial (A New Trial, 2005). In March, 2002, a jury convicted her of capital murder and sentenced her to life in prison. Her sentence was overturned on appeal after finding that a witness for the prosecution provided false testimony in the original trial (Newman, 2006). She was found not guilty by reason of insanity in 2006. She was initially committed to North Texas State Hospital-Vernon Campus, a maximum-security hospital. She was later sent to Kerrville State Hospital in Kerrville, Texas.
This case does not appear to be one where the offender, Andrea Yates, has or previously had, any of the traits a life-course criminal holds. She does not appear to be psychopathic or have any antisocial personality traits. There were no substance abuse or alcohol abuse associated with her illness. Due to her mental illness and postpartum psychosis, she believed there was a reward for her conduct; her mental illness allowed her to complete the act because the children would be safe from Satan. The couple did not receive any type of conventional therapy or counseling.
Heredity and genetics may have been significant in her mental health. An unsupportive marriage, postpartum depression and psychosis, improper medication or lack of medication, and improper religious beliefs are important factors in her crime. Any interventions applied to her mental illness were inadequate or non-existent. There appeared to be a parent-child bond leading up to the crime. There was no interruption between Andrea and the children that would disrupt the relationship.
A New Trial for Andrea Yates. (2005). People, 64(22), 247.
Foxe, A. N. (1945). HEREDITY AND CRIME. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (08852731), 36(1), 11-16.
Gesalman, A. (2002). Spreading the blame in the Yates case. Newsweek, 139(13), 6.
McLellan, F. (2006). Mental health and justice: The case of Andrea Yates. Lancet, 368(9551), 1951-1954. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69789-4.
Meier, E. (2002). Andrea Yates: Where Did We Go Wrong?. Pediatric Nursing, 28(3), 296-299.
Newman, M. (2006, July 26). Yates found not guilty by reason of insanity. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/26/us/26cnd-yates.html
Posted: Mar 02, 2017 05:14 PM CST
Updated: Mar 02, 2017 11:19 PM CST
Amarillo Police uncover what’s believed to be an online sex trafficking operation.
Now, the feds are involved.
It’s a case that goes back nearly a year.
Police arrested a man this past July for soliciting a minor for sex through Facebook.
Undercover agents with the Department of Homeland Security and Amarillo Police teamed up to arrest a local man they believe was involved in recruiting minors for a sex operation.
Billy Kid Cain was arrested last summer for allegedly trying to meet with a previous victim.He’s charged with online solicitation of a minor.
Federal court documents say Cain was working with another man through Facebook to entice underage girls into a prostitution business.
The undercover agent was portraying an underage teenaged girl during conversations with both Cain and the other man identified as Mario Vogel.
Before allowing the girls to be employed in the sex trade, Cain allegedly tried to get them to pass a so-called tryout.
Some of the online exchanges between Cain’s alleged partner and the undercover agent allegedly asked for nude photos of the girl.
Vogel would ask questions like – “U like sex?”
And, the girl was repeatedly asked to meet with Cain.
Officer Jeb Hilton says these types of questions should be red flags for the victims and their parents.
Amarillo Police Department Ofc. Jeb Hilton said, “It’s easy for them to fall victim to something like this. if parents will educate their children, let know that yes, there are bad people out there. There are people that would want to hurt you and just let your kids know what to look out for. let them know that it’s okay for them to say no. They do have the right to say no.”
During the course of the investigation, Cain allegedly did meet with another underage girl and police say sexual activity did occur.
Afterward, an undercover officer, pretending to be the victim, allegedly set up another meeting. That’s when Cain was arrested.
Now, the feds are seeking a search warrant to search the Facebook archives of Cain and Vogel.
Cain was released on bond shortly after his arrest in July but, he was arrested again in December on a charge of Sexual Assault of a Child.
Aboard US’s latest aircraft carrier, Trump pushes for ‘major expansion’ of Navy
By AFP | Updated: 04 Mar, 2017, 0135 hrs IST
Trump in January signed an executive order to begin increasing the size of the US military, promising new aircraft, naval ships and more resources for the Pentagon.
NEWPORT NEWS, UNITED STATES: President Donald Trump announced from the deck of America’s newest aircraft carrier Thursday that he had spoken with maritime leaders to discuss plans for a “major expansion” of the Navy.
Trump spoke against the military backdrop as he pushes for a hike in defense spending that is likely to meet with stiff opposition in Congress.
“In these troubled times, our Navy is the smallest it’s been since World War I,” Trump told sailors aboard the Gerald R. Ford.
Reiterating a goal of Navy officials, he said the force should maintain a fleet of 12 aircraft carriers.
Currently, the Navy comprises 10 aircraft carriers, the oldest of which dates back to 1975.
The soon-to-be-commissioned, $12.9-billion Ford will become America’s 11th carrier and another ship, the John F. Kennedy, is under construction.
But with the Navy’s oldest carrier due to be retired in about 2025, the Navy wants to ensure a replacement is in the pipes ahead of that date.
“I just spoke with Navy and industry leaders and discussed my plans to undertake a major expansion of our entire Navy fleet, including having the 12-carrier Navy we need,” said Trump, who was wearing a blue baseball cap and a green military jacket.
Trump in January signed an executive order to begin increasing the size of the US military, promising new aircraft, naval ships and more resources for the Pentagon.
And this week he outlined a goal to hike American military spending by $54 billion, about 10 percent, swelling the defense budget to more than $600 billion.
Trump has offered few specifics but has said he envisioned a naval fleet of 350 vessels, up from the Navy’s current 274 and more than its 310-vessel target.
One limit on defense spending is a legal budget cap, known as sequestration, that was implemented under president Barack Obama.
Trump on Thursday called for an end to the cap.
“By eliminating the sequester and the uncertainty it creates, we will make it easier for the Navy to plan for the future and thus, to control costs and get the best deals for the taxpayer which of course is very important, right?”
Army to help personnel buy houses without hassles
HomeMarketsNewsIndustrySmall BizPoliticsWealthMFTechJobsOpinionBlogsNRIMagazinesSlideshowsET NOWPortfolio
View Full Site »
Copyright © 2016 Bennett Coleman & Co. All rights reserved. Powered by Indiatimes.
Immigration is at the top of the priorities list for the United States. Many people citizens have protested and made it clear they believe we should allow all immigrants into the country. I’m all for that. Except that immigrant should be a law-abiding, productive citizen, and legal. The term “illegal” means they have entered the U.S. without the proper documentation. That in itself is a crime according to our government.
Our CBP (Customs & Border Patrol) have almost any resource available to them to catch illegal immigrants. Helicopters, vehicle patrol, high powered radios, ground sensors, un-manned aircraft, sensitive cameras, education & training, and weapons. CBP does not stumble on illegal immigrants, but some of these people are armed and drug smugglers or ‘mules’ – moving drugs from Mexico into the U.S.
Americans can and often are injured or even killed by illegal immigrants. Most are good people, but only here illegally. Americans are at risk of more drugs and possible terrorism against us each day. Be cautious. Stay alert. God Bless America
I saw this on television news again today. I see it on Facebook almost every day. People that create a road block hinder other people from their daily lives. Their right to protest does not give them the right to step on my rights to make a living. I’ve also heard that they prevent emergency vehicles to pass. This is insane to me. Our emergency services attempting to help others in need and protesters think they should stop that. My question is, should these people be arrested? Absolutely they should be arrested. This is not peaceably protesting. This is creating riot of sorts and when they prevent emergency responders from doing their job it becomes a crime. This is only my opinion. Would like to hear from you.