Blog

For relevance to Nebraska current events, see Editor’s Note at the conclusion of this article.

From scene of fatal crash in Pennsylvania caused by an unlicensed illegal immigrant, as reported by The Patriot News (see image credits)

In October of last year I published an article entitled “Heartless or Just Lawless: Right and Wrong in a Whatever World.” In that piece, I explained the different foundational premises of modern conservatism and modern liberalism. I concluded the article with the following paragraph:

“Our legal system depends upon a clear delineation between right and wrong. Conservative political ideology acknowledges that civilized society is not possible without recognition of those absolutes. Modern liberalism is based on philosophies that either completely deny the existence of right and wrong or obfuscate the issue. Instead of justice for all before the law, moral relativism and situational ethics lead to a “pass” for certain favored groups. Selective enforcement of this nature converts our legal system to one based on the whims of man, as opposed to the stability of law.”

Although I gave what I thought was a perfect example of this type of selective enforcement in that article — which I recommend you go back and read about HERE — a faithful reader, titular head of the GiN Think Tank, and all around nice guy (Hi, Norlyn!) recently emailed me another one and, boy, is it a doozy! The title he gave his forwarding email says it all: “File Under: Too Incredible for Words.”

The Los Angeles Police Department announced recently that, as a matter of policy supported by the Chief of Police and approved by the L.A. Police Commission, L.A. officers will soon begin to IGNORE a California state law requiring police to impound cars driven by unlicensed drivers. If you’ve been licensed but had your license suspended or revoked for any reason, however, you can apparently kiss your car goodbye for the required 30 days and be prepared to pay the requisite fees to get it back, which may amount to as much as $1200.

Why? Well, you see, it’s a matter of fairness. Uh-huh. F-a-i-r-n-e-s-s. As in, “But Mo-om, that’s not FAAAIIIIR.”

The L.A. Police Chief explains it this way:

“The majority of unlicensed motorists in Los Angeles are immigrants who are in the country illegally and have low-income jobs. The LAPD says the state’s impound law is unfair because it limits their ability to get to their jobs and imposes a steep fine to get their car back.

“As long as drivers can produce some form of I.D., proof of insurance and vehicle registration, they’ll be allowed to keep their car. Police Chief Charlie Beck insists that it’s simply leveling the playing field.

“‘It’s about fairness. It’s about equal application of the law,’ Beck told a Los Angeles TV station earlier this month.”

Did I miss a memo or something?  I thought the state legislature made the laws and it was up to the police to enforce them — not just those they agreed with and not just when they felt like it, but consistently and without discrimination.  It had something to do with a few concepts called “equal protection,” “due process,” and “separation of powers.”  Chief Beck should look them up.

He’s not a playground monitor, for the love of Pete.  He’s a cop.  Justice, not fairness, should be his sole concern.  “Serve and Protect,” right?  Yet, the L.A. Chief neglects to mention that these very same unlicensed drivers are FIVE TIMES more likely to be involved in fatal crashes and OVER NINE TIMES more likely to flee the scene.

Don Rosenberg’s son was killed by an unlicensed driver who had been previously stopped for driving the wrong way on a one-way street.  The driver had neither a valid driver’s license nor insurance.  Although his car was impounded, the unlicensed driver was released and had his car back within 24 hours.  Mr. Rosenberg describes what four eyewitnesses related about the “accident” that occurred 45 days later in which Mr. Rosenberg’s son was killed:

. . .”[The unlicensed driver] struck my son while trying to beat a light making a left turn without signaling. Given the circumstances (my son’s motorcycle was nearly stopped in rush-hour traffic), it’s likely my son was alive after he was hit the first time. But instead of stopping, the unlicensed driver accelerated and drove over my son. When he couldn’t continue forward, the driver backed up and drove over my son a second time. He attempted to drive forward again, but a brave man stood in front of the motorist’s car. Unfortunately, the car stopped with its front tire on my son’s body. Five men had to lift the car off him.”

To sum it up, Mr. Rosenberg put it this way, and I couldn’t agree more:

“It’s more important that people who are in the country illegally get to drive than it is that people who are here get to live.”

Email subscribers, click HERE to view the included video.

Featured image found at The Patriot News, HERE.

EDITOR’S NOTE:

This article was written prior to events at the Nebraska Capitol this year (2012), which include obstruction of a Voter ID measure and passage of LB599, a Medicaid expansion that would provide prenatal care benefits for illegal immigrants and other women who failed in some way to meet eligibility or program guidelines. The debate over such issues is falsely portrayed as a compassionate, “pro-life” contingent versus discriminatory, heartless, or even bigoted opposition. Proponents of policies which encourage further law breaking through lack of enforcement or provision of benefits paid for by law-abiding citizens are blind to life and death consequences for all, whether it be through increased fatalities on the roads or hastening fiscal insolvency. If you have not yet read about the LB599 Medicaid expansion, click here.