posted on Apr, 23 2007 @ 01:53 AM
Ok ok. Let's try and find some middle ground here, before we start throwing chairs. We all need to agree on some points of fact.
1. The person committing the crime was an illegal alien.
2. The crime committed was just one out of dozens in the state in the past year. No one made a big deal on the news about any of the others. Why?
3. Whether he was an illegal alien or not has no bearing on his conscious decision to go get drunk, and then drive afterwards.
Now, if we take all of these into account, one can see that this has the makings of a very muddled mess of a debate. We need to separate the points
into bits that can be better understood on a point-by-point basis, rather than resorting to the same tactics used by the aforementioned journalists.
What follows is a point-by-point breakdown of the case, imho.
1. Yes, the man in question is an illegal alien. However, that fact isn't exactly pertinent to the case since I can show statistics that prove
that the majority of illegals in this country are decent, upstanding citizens, aside from their little dark secret of being illegal. Do I think that
he should be deported? Yes I do, because he's breaking the law. Do I think that he should first stand trial for what he did? Yes I do, then he needs
to serve his sentence in a US jail, where the US prison population will initiate him into the American Justice System, and then when he's done
serving his sentence, return him to the other side of the border.
All of that being said, his legal status has no bearing on the cause of the accident. To debate all of the "what if's" of the situation serves no
other purpose than to further divide the American populace against each other. "A divided house cannot stand", to use an old expression.
2. Why don't we hear about all of the other drunk driving accidents that happen nationwide everyday? I think it's because that would be too boring,
and it wouldn't serve the beer manufacturer's purposes much for the news to be littered with the refuse of their own making. They directly
contribute to the situation by making the stuff that gets all of these people killed everyday. Why aren't we holding them responsible for at least
manslaughter in each of these cases?
What you see in this past paragraph is just one example of how this can be taken off into a case of a slippery slope. There's nothing that we can do
about what's already happened. We just need to try to prevent it from happening again. I call the above paragraph cherry-picking because I've taken
one select case, and overblown it to emphasize a problem that I see.
3. Now, while that's a good tactic to capture the attentions of the more emotional audience, it fails to make any valid points, such as the fact that
he CHOSE to drive drunk. The beer manufacturers didn't make him do it. His being an illegal alien had no bearing on whether or not he was going to do
that, because countless American citizens do it everyday. This is just one more case where someone wanted something to complain about, and they chose
this one case as the one to give a lengthy diatribe on.
To close, this is just a bad deal all the way around. Could it have been prevented? Sure. Is it all because he was an illegal alien? No, that had no
bearing on this at all, aside from his being the one that committed the act. Sometimes, an accident is just that, an accident.