Ex Felons For Hire

With the 2020 presidential campaign underway and a crowded field of candidates, hopefuls on the Democratic side seek to distinguish themselves from the pack, while others find themselves justifying or explaining their past positions. One of those candidates is former Vice President Joe Biden, and the issue is the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that he championed as a member of the Senate, and which President Bill Clinton signed into law.

The bill, which Biden has called the “1994 Biden Crime Bill,” as the Washington Post notes, contained measures such as a “three strikes and you’re out” component requiring a life sentence without parole for certain repeat offenders who commit a violent offense under federal law, an abolition of federal parole, and a substantial increase in mandatory minimum sentences and less judicial discretion for federal crimes, among other provisions.

The legislation also allocated $8.7 billion to states to build more prisons, with more money promised if the states ramped up penalties. In addition, the bill banned 19 types of semiautomatic assault weapons, placed 100,000 new police officers in the streets, and authorized the death penalty for a host of new crimes. According to the Brennan Center, the bill fueled the prison boom by encouraging states to construct more correctional institutions — a 43 percent increase in prisons from 1990 to 2005 — and fill the beds.    

Nevertheless, at a recent speech in Nashua, New Hampshire, Biden denied the 1994 law had any impact on mass incarceration. “This idea that the crime bill generated mass incarceration, it did not generate mass incarceration,” he said, arguing that the 1994 measure covered federal crimes, while 90 percent of the convicted go to prison based on state charges.

The issue of mass incarceration and the 1994 crime
bill dogged Hillary Clinton during her 2016 run for the presidency, due to the emergence
of the Black Lives Matter movement and changing attitudes regarding racism in the
criminal justice system, police abuse and the need to reform “tough on crime” measures
and end mass incarceration.

When Bill Clinton left office, the U.S. had the world’s highest incarceration rate, with Black people accounting for the vast majority of imprisoned drug offenders, although they were no more likely than their white counterparts to use drugs. Mass incarceration has hit the black community hardest, creating a caste system and disrupting families, depriving people of their voting rights and perpetuating poverty.  

On the campaign trail in 2016, Hillary Clinton faced criticism for her 1996 remarks in which she by implication referred to Black and Latino youth as “super predators.” Stumping for his wife, Bill Clinton made embarrassing remarks during his confrontation with Black Lives Matter activists — defending the crime bill and Hillary’s super predator remarks, and accusing the activists of coddling criminals. However, the previous year at the 2015 NAACP convention, Bill Clinton paved the way for his wife’s 2016 run by apologizing for his role in mass incarceration, telling the crowd, “I signed a bill that made the problem worse, and I want to admit it.”

The 1994 crime bill has a complicated history that could get lost in the current debate on policing, the justice system and the Black community. For example, there are questions as to whether the bill was responsible for a drop in crime, a trend that began even before its enactment. Studies suggest the 100,000 additional police officers on the street played a role in lower crime rates, along with socioeconomic factors such as lower alcohol use and an aging population, while imprisoning more people likely had no more than a limited impact on crime.

Further, while the crime bill faces condemnation 25 years later for the racial impact of mass incarceration on the Black community, the entire leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Democratic-controlled Congress at that time supported the bill, despite present attempts to rewrite the history of its passage. Then-CBC Chair Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.) said the caucus “put our stamp on this bill” due to its anti-crime provisions and not to do Clinton a favor, while Rep. William Lacy Clay, Jr. (D-Mo.) said the CBC was primarily “concerned with the needs and concerns of the black population.”

At a time when Black America faced gang violence and the crack epidemic in their cities, many Black politicians and community activists viewed the draconian crime bill as necessary, however flawed, thereby promoting a punitive piece of legislation. Those who grow up in high-crime areas are affected by those experiences, as Michael Fortner, a professor of urban studies at the City University of New York and native of Brownsville, Brooklyn, told Slate.

“And these academic discussions, these ideological discussions about crime, completely ignore the terror in the streets. They completely ignore how crime shaped whether you went to church at night or how you felt coming home from work,” Fortner said. “Once you add that to the picture, I think crime policy becomes less suspicious. That doesn’t mean it becomes less problematic. These were dumb policies. But they begin to have a logic that is not strictly tied to racial or economic imperatives,” he added, noting that politicians responded to pleas from people in urban neighborhoods who wanted to live in safety. Black people supported these punitive anti-drug, anti-crime measures in the 1970s and 1980s, and in the 1990s Clinton sought to appeal to white working class voters who were straying from the Democratic Party with a “tough on crime” message.

While Biden refuses to take responsibility for the negative impact of the 1994 crime bill on mass incarceration, one of his rivals is taking a different stance — Sen. Bernie Sanders. Briana Blueitt, communications staffer of the Sanders campaign, told Atlanta Black Star that even before the passage of the Crime Bill, Sanders, then a member of the House, had spoken out against the mass incarceration implications of the legislation.

For example, in April 1994, Sanders said that through government neglect and “a grossly irrational set of priorities, we are dooming today tens of millions of young people to a future of bitterness, misery, hopelessness, drugs, crime, and violence.” Then-Rep. Sanders added that “all the jails in the world — and we already imprison more people per capita than any other country — and all of the executions … in the world will not make that situation right. We can either educate or electrocute. We can create meaningful jobs, rebuilding our society, or we can build more jails. Mr. Speaker, let us create a society of hope and compassion, not one of hate and vengeance.”

In other speeches on the U.S. House floor, the Sanders campaign noted, Sanders criticized the United States for having the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world and concluded the country must grapple with “the root causes of crime,” including “poverty, lack of education, lack of jobs, and lack of hope.”

Ultimately, Sanders voted for the 1994 crime bill, and announced his support because the legislation contained the Violence Against Women Act.  “I have a number of serious problems with the crime bill, but one part of it that I vigorously support is the Violence Against Women Act. We urgently need the $1.8 billion in this bill to combat the epidemic of violence against women on the streets and in the homes of America,” he said in June 1994. 

In August of that year, Sanders noted that six women in his state of Vermont had been murdered the year before, all by abusive spouses. “Perhaps most important to me, however, this crime bill will provide $8 million to Vermont to allow us to deal with the epidemic of violence against women,” he said, arguing the bill would “finally allow us to give women the protection that they have long been denied.”

Biden, by contrast, has sought to take credit for sponsoring the 1994 crime bill without taking responsibility for its role as a catalyst in mass incarceration, or acknowledging that the law played any role in the aggressive imprisonment of Black people in the name of the war on drugs.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

Readers reacted to a recent commentary by Lanita Brooks, a Wilmington mother, who lost her son to gun violence. The commentary was headlined “‘Smarter laws’ needed to curb gun violence.”

• I am sorry for this woman’s loss but restricting our 2A rights isn’t going to curb gun violence. — Rob Holley

• Criminals do not obey the law!!! Quit trying to screw with our 2nd amendment! — Jennifer Lawson

• So, gun owners, I have a question. Are you against the mentally ill and people with domestic violence convictions having legal access to firearms? Just curious. — John Anderson

• Yup and there are laws in place for that already. Yet they still manage to get them. Ever hear of guns being purchased off the street, coming from other countries and states? Happens every day all day long. Google it, we will wait right here. Ever hear of Fast and Furious? Daily occurrence in this country in every state including Delaware. — Richard Miller

• We already have universal background checks in Delaware. That law was supposed to be the solution to end shootings. — Lou Bialota

• There are enough laws on the books but they’re not enforced. The boy who pled guilty in this situation had 19 charges dropped so he could get a plea deal. So the killer will do 20 years. Neither the law-abiding citizen nor the gun is the problem. The problem is the criminals ignoring the law, and the State failing to enforce it. — Dave Johnson

• Sorry for this lady’s loss but passing more laws that only affect law abiding citizens and does nothing to address the criminals who break those laws will do absolutely nothing. With Delaware’s AG soft stance on crime and the Democratic-controlled legislature decriminalizing laws left, right, and center it’s only going to get worse for citizens.

If Delaware lawmakers want to get serious about reducing gun crime (or crime in general) then pass laws to get the gang bangers off the streets, put more police in Wilmington and Dover and actually let them do their jobs, hold schools and parents accountable if their kids are failing in school or becoming bullies and a burden, and lastly work on getting good-paying jobs and offer employers tax breaks to invest in these poorer neighborhoods and provide those jobs.

Let’s stop pretending that law-abiding gun owners are the problem. We all know the majority of gun crimes in this state are ordinary hand guns not assault weapons or rifles and the overwhelming majority of these crimes are fueled by drugs and gangs. Target the criminals, not the innocent people. — Shawn Knox

• So you know that SB 82 would save lives. Really? We already have gun laws, do the criminals follow them? Nope. Have you ever tried to purchase a firearm or get a CCDW? Guessing Nope! Firearms and training are wonderful things — please look into them. — Howard Gaines III

• Deal with criminals severely. — John P. Leech

This is your public forum. We welcome your opinions, which can be emailed to newsroom@newszap.com or posted online under the stories at www.DelawareStateNews.net.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan on Friday vetoed eight bills passed by the Democratic-majority legislature in Annapolis, including measures designed to tighten who receives permits for concealed handguns and to make it easier for people with criminal backgrounds to get jobs.

The Republican governor justified some vetoes by saying the proposed laws would have usurped his power and derided other legislation as misguided or unworkable. The General Assembly, where Democrats hold more than three-fifths of the seats in each chamber, will have an opportunity to override the vetoes when it reconvenes in January.

Hogan announced that he would let several pieces of high-profile legislation become law without his signature, including a first-in-the-nation measure to curtail rising drug prices, a ban on foam packaging and a measure allowing gender-neutral driver’s licenses. Hundreds of other bills, from allowing same-day voter registration to expanding the sale of chilled beer kegs in Montgomery County, will also be enacted without Hogan’s signature.

The governor struck down a plan to let judges — rather than a panel of political appointees — make the final decision on who can have a concealed-carry permit, saying the proposal to eliminate the panel would not reduce violent crime and “is just another in a long series of politically motivated and ill-conceived power grabs.”

He also vetoed “ban the box” legislation that would have prevented many employers from inquiring about an applicant’s criminal history until after an initial job interview. In his veto letter, the governor said employers have the right to screen applicants’ criminal histories upfront. Advocates say the bill is crucial for former inmates who struggle to find jobs.

Hogan rejected a bill that would have changed how the state manages the rebounding oyster population in the Chesapeake Bay, saying the measure would endanger long-term restoration efforts. Earlier this year, he vetoed a bill to permanently protect five oyster sanctuaries from harvest — a top priority of late House speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel). The legislature overrode that veto before it adjourned in early April.

A bill that would have expanded tuition breaks for immigrants also was vetoed, with Hogan saying it had been cast too narrowly and should benefit more students.

Another veto nixed a measure that would require $3.8 million annually from the state to develop bike lanes. Hogan wrote that the legislation was written in such a way that it created “unnecessary and costly bureaucratic hurdles, risks federal funding, and impedes our progress to improve transit services.”

Three other bills he vetoed dealt with collective bargaining, how railroads staff freight trains and processes for certain political appointments.

Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) and House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones (D-Baltimore County) said they were disappointed with the vetoes and pledged to overturn them.

“I am confident the House will take up many of these overrides in January,” Jones said in a statement.

Starting July 1, Maryland will become the first state empowered to limit what state and local government employees pay for certain prescription drugs. Policymakers consider the Prescription Drug Affordability Board an initial step to policing rising drug prices statewide and envision it as a national model to curb runaway drug costs.

An earlier attempt by the General Assembly to limit drug prices was successfully challenged in court.

“Drugs don’t work if people can’t afford them, and we are going to do all we can to make them affordable,” said Vincent DeMarco, president of the Maryland Citizen’s Health Initiative.

The drug board was among several landmark health care bills Hogan will allow to become law without his signature.

Under another measure, Maryland will extend a tax on health insurance companies, using the money to subsidize the skyrocketing premiums of insurance policies sold on the individual market.

A third health-care bill — the first of its kind in the country — would require Maryland to withdraw from a federal family planning program known as Title X if the Trump administration follows through on plans to forbid providers from referring women to abortion clinics.

Read more:

Local newsletters: Local headlines (8 a.m.) | Afternoon Buzz (4 p.m.)

Like PostLocal on Facebook | Follow @postlocal on Twitter | Latest local news

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

How are you spending Memorial Day? Ordinary people may attend parades, host cookouts, or take the long weekend to visit loved ones.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, may pardon a few war criminals.

The president recently requested the files of several accused and convicted U.S. war criminals, a possible step toward expedited pardons for individuals who’ve done unspeakable things.

There’s SEAL chief Edward Gallagher, who senselessly shot to death a teenage girl and an elderly man in Iraq. Gallagher also brutally stabbed a wounded 15-year-old to death — and then posed for photos with the body, which he texted to friends.

Trump also requested the files of Nicholas Slatten, a Blackwater contractor convicted of shooting dozens of Iraqi civilians in the notorious 2007 Nisour Square massacre, and of Mathew Golsteyn, who confessed to murdering an unarmed Afghan captive U.S. soldiers had released.

Trump has already pardoned Michael Behenna, who took an unarmed Iraqi captive into the desert, stripped him naked, and shot him in the head and chest. Behenna was supposed to be returning the man to his home village.

The president may present these pardons as a show of patriotism — his own Rambo-worshiping way of “supporting the troops.” But several veterans have objected, pointing out that many soldiers do their best to uphold the laws of war even under considerable stress.

“They should treat the civilians as they would neighbors,” combat veteran Waitman Wade Beorn recalled telling his platoon in Iraq, arguing that the cues commanders set make all the difference. Beorn, a Holocaust scholar, warned that one could draw some dark (if inexact) parallels between Trump’s cues and Hitler’s.

During the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union, he wrote, “soldiers were literally told that they would not be tried for behavior that would be a crime anywhere else in Europe.” Similarly, “when Trump champions war criminals as brave patriots … he seems to push for a climate that condones unethical and criminal behavior.”

Trump’s recent moves are plainly calibrated to encourage war crimes, not prosecute them.

Gary Solis, a retired military judge and Vietnam veteran, complained Trump was undermining the entire military justice system. “These are all extremely complicated cases that have gone through a careful system of consideration. A freewheeling pardon undermines that whole system.”

That’s likely the point. The truth is that Trump is pandering to the most atavistic segment of his base. It echoes the Vietnam years, when war supporters turned William Calley, convicted for his role in butchering hundreds of villagers at My Lai, into a folk hero.

Today, Gallagher’s cause is celebrated on “Fox and Friends,”  the president’s favorite TV show, and Trump has praised Gallagher “in honor of his past service.”

Trump’s recent moves are plainly calibrated to encourage war crimes, not prosecute them. But glorifying serial killer-type behavior most service members would find appalling is a strange way to honor them —  particularly when some have taken enormous risks to stop massacres like these.

For instance, seven of Gallagher’s own men reported him repeatedly, even after being warned by superiors it would hurt their careers. Behenna’s fellow soldiers, apparently disturbed by his behavior, testified against him as well. At My Lai, Army helicopter pilot Hugh Thompson landed his chopper in between marauding U.S. troops and cowering civilians, training his guns on his own comrades and forcing an end to the massacre.

Honoring these heroes would be more fitting, particularly in the present climate. Recent reports have documented alarming rates of U.S.-inflicted civilian casualties in Somalia, Syria and Afghanistan. In the latter case, Trump’s extremist national security adviser John Bolton made brutish threats to get the International Criminal Court to back off investigating U.S. abuses.

Meanwhile, egged on by Bolton, Trump is considering sending 120,000 or more troops into another purposeless bloodbath in the Middle East. And he’s made no plans to fill the 45,000 or so vacant VA jobs backlogging veterans’ health care.

Under these circumstances, do we suppose the troops — or loved ones who’ve lost them — will take a few pardons for war criminals as a compliment? I don’t know. But the real lesson may be that the worst war criminals wear suits, not fatigues.

Happy Memorial Day.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

There are a lot of guns in America – roughly one per person. And in Idaho, on top of high rates of ownership, gun stores, gun makers and ammunition manufacturers make up a sizeable part of the Idaho economy – two recent studies put the state as one of the top two as far as economic impact per capita from the firearms industry.

On Thursday, federal agents came to town to help those businesses stay on the right side of the law. One of the jobs of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is to keep legal weapons from falling into the wrong hands.

At the seminar, ATF officials showed local gun dealers and manufacturers strategies to keep their wares safe from burglars during a seminar at Boise City Hall.

The number of firearms reported stolen from licensed gun dealers in Idaho dropped from 30 to 1 from 2017 to 2018, according to ATF statistics. Another 142 weapons were reported lost in 2018. Those numbers might not tell the whole story, though, as not all lost weapons are reported and the ATF statistics don’t take into account guns stolen from private owners.

More than 1,400 people hold Federal Firearms Licenses in Idaho, according to the ATF. That makes it especially important to convince manufacturers to do all they can to make sure firearms are sold only to people legally allowed to purchase them, Chudy said.

“Our goal is not to impede the second amendment right for people to have firearms,” he said. “When it comes to the firearms industry, we want to make sure that they’re doing this lawfully.”

With a small staff to inspect all of those gun businesses spread across the country, the ATF hopes seminars like the one in Boise convince the gun industry to voluntarily do their part to keep guns away from criminals.

Follow Heath Druzin on Twitter @HDruzin for more local news.

Copyright 2019 Boise State Public Radio

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Prison reform issue, jobs are positive steps | Editorials  Tahlequah Daily Press

Last week, Gov. Kevin Stitt inked a new law that could help nonviolent felons find decent jobs after their release from prison. It’s a move that’s long overdue, and …

Source

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Advocates want more companies to ban the box  The Miami Times

In Florida, enfranchisement for returning citizens comes a cost. Recent legislative changes to voter-approved Amendment 4 obligate former felons, some who …

Source

President Donald Trump’s reported plan to pardon three alleged war criminals on Memorial Day is in motion, and, according to the Daily Beast, Fox & Friends host Pete Hegseth is partially to blame.

Hegseth has lobbied the president for four-and-a-half months to go easy on three military men accused of committing war crimes, the Beast reported on Monday.

The site wrote that Hegseth, an Iraq War veteran, has had multiple private conversations with Trump, advocating for several accused war criminals to be pardoned. These include Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL accused of opening fire on unarmed civilians, as well as killing a captured ISIS fighter receiving medical treatment. From the Daily Beast:

The Fox & Friends host repeatedly told Trump that the process had been “very unfair” to Gallagher, two of these sources tell The Daily Beast. Hegseth pushed the president not only to publicly help Gallagher, but since at least March has specifically advised Trump to pardon him and the other men, the sources said.

Hegseth’s characterization of men such as Gallagher just doing their jobs and getting penalized as a result couldn’t be any further from what the charges against Gallagher allege. According to Task & Purpose, Gallagher’s official charge sheet includes allegations of firing on civilians, possession of controlled substances, and obstruction of justice by attempting to dissuade his platoon from reporting his actions. Prosecutors reportedly introduced evidence of photos and text messages showing Gallagher posing next to the body of the ISIS fighter he had killed. (His lawyers say they have evidence that clears him.) He’s set to stand trial on May 28.

Hegseth has made no secret of his views. He has defended the accused war criminals on air—calling them “good guys” who made “tough calls” as recently as Sunday—and interviewed their family members. The Daily Beast reported that Hegseth never disclosed that he was advising the president on matters relating to his commentary and reporting himself.

Hegseth tweeted a celebration of the news of Trump’s potential pardoning on Saturday. On Monday night, he seemingly confirmed the Beast’s story, tweeting it along with hashtags supporting Gallagher and two others: Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, a former Green Beret accused of killing an unarmed Afghan man, and 1st Lt. Clint Lorance, convicted in 2013 for ordering the murder of two Afghan civilians.

All the while, Hegseth seems to have a completely personal stake in the matter. From the Daily Beast again, emphasis mine:

Ultimately, Hegseth said on Sunday, Trump pardoning Lorance, Gallagher, Golsteyn, and others would be “heartening for guys like me and others in the service” who want a president “defending the war fighter.”

Heartening, indeed.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement staged a four-day surge through multiple cities last week and collared more than four dozen illegal-alien criminals.

May 13 through May 16, agents from field offices in Newark, Baltimore, and New Orleans arrested 58 illegal-alien thugs facing charges or convicted of myriad violent crimes or drunk driving.

Many were previously deported, of course. ICE arrested 33 across the south, 13 in New Jersey, and 12 in Maryland.

Across the South
Agents from the Crescent City’s field office posted the biggest haul; 22 of the 33 illegals are either convicts or face criminal charges, while 23, ICE reported, were previously deported or ordered removed.

Agents collared 12 in Alabama, nine in New Orleans, eight in Arkansas, and four in Tennessee.

Of the 33 aliens arrested during this enforcement surge, 10 have prior criminal convictions and 12 are currently facing pending criminal charges. Additionally, 15 are immigration fugitives previously ordered removed from the U.S. by a federal immigration judge and 8 are illegal reentrants previously deported from the U.S. who subsequently illegally re-entered the country — illegally re-entering the U.S. after removal is a felony act under federal law and these persons could potentially face federal criminal prosecution prior to being removed again from the U.S..

Among these upstanding “undocumented immigrants” — here to do the jobs Americans won’t do, the open-borders crowd says — were a Honduran deported in 2004, 2013, and 2018. “The subject is currently facing criminal domestic violence charges pursuant to an instance in which he is accused of choking the victim,” ICE reported.

Yet another Honduran, this one caught in New Orleans, has an “outstanding removal order and an October 2015 battery conviction pursuant to his arrest for battery on a law enforcement officer. The subject also has an August 2007 conviction for violating a protective order and an April 2001 DUI conviction.”

In Little Rock, the agency reported, it apprehended a Guatemalan who was deported in 2014 after an arrest for domestic battery, while agents in Memphis nailed a Mexican illegal with DUI convictions in 2005 and 2001 and conviction for illegal entry in 2007.

New Jersey and Maryland
In New Jersey, the four-day operation netted 13 illegal-alien criminals, the agency reported.

They included a Salvadoran with a conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon/bodily injury, an Ecuadorian with a pending domestic violence charge, a Jamaican with a firearms offense, and a Mexican with a pending domestic violence charge and two DUI convictions.

ICE released little information about the operation in Maryland.

“Those targeted for arrest had been issued final orders of removal within the past five years and had criminal histories or pending criminal charges,” ICE reported. Eleven of the illegals were men. They came from the Kenya, Mexico, Zimbabwe, and the Northern Triangle.

Totals for 2018
One more good news item from ICE was the deportation of two criminal aliens.

On May 15, Enforcement and Removal Operations deported a Salvadoran wanted for aggravated homicide, conspiracy to commit homicide, and terrorist organization membership, ICE reported. “Salvadoran officials also indicated he is a documented active gang member for the Mara 18th criminal street gang.” Mara 18th is another name for the notorious 18th Street gang.

On May 14, ICE reported, it deported a Filipino illegal accused back home of “strangling to death his female ‘live in’ partner with a leather belt in March of 2003.”

ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations received a warrant for his arrest in 2011, then collared him in 2015 for “violations of federal law relating to immigration fraud.” An immigration judge ordered his removal.

In fiscal 2018, ICE reported, the agency arrested 158,581 aliens. Ninety percent of them, or about 143,000, were convicts (66 percent), facing charges (21 percent), or previously ordered removed (three percent). Arrests increased 11 percent from fiscal 2017.

As well, ERO deported 256,086 illegas, a 13-percent increase from 2017. Convicts totaled about 146,000, or about 57 percent, while 5,914, or 2.3 percent, were known to be suspected gang members or terrorists. Gang and terrorist arrests increased nine percent from 2017.

ICE recently published a Most Wanted Fugitive List. All the illegals on the list were involved in fatal automobile crashes.

Image: designer491

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

State targets ‘ban the box’ violations | Haverhill  Eagle-Tribune

BOSTON — The state is cracking down on businesses that discriminate against job applicants with criminal records, in violation of a nearly decade-old law.

Source