The story of the illegal immigrant who killed a Phoenix police officer earlier this week took a strange twist. It turns out that Erik Jovani Martinez was "Dream Baby."
Martinez was brought to the United States as an infant and lived his whole life here. Clearly, he also was a career criminal, racking up a dozen arrests before he turned 18 and continuing to have brushes with the law afterward.
The media like to portray Dream Babies as victims. These kids are all would-be Rhodes Scholars whose efforts to cure cancer have been stymied by Russell Peace and his cruel band of Xenophobic zealots.
Some of these kids, of course,are really good kids, but some of them are career thugs.
Congress and the media are working to carve out exceptions for immigrants who were brought here illegally while they were children. These exemptions would provide a path to citizenship for immigrants who could provide: Proof of having arrived in the United States before reaching 16 years of age; Proof of residence in the United States for a least five (5) consecutive years since their date of arrival. Having graduated from an American High School, or obtained a GED. "Good moral character," essentially defined as the absence of a significant criminal record (or any drug charges whatsoever).
Martinez was a career thug who obviously wouldn't have qualified under the act. But perhaps there should be a "Nightmare Baby" component of the Dream Act. Immediate deportation for illegal immigrants who have become adults and have a record of thuggery.
Indeed, Maritinez was deported initially, but returned immediately. At that point my compassion ends.
If you are here illegally, cause trouble, get deported and get caught in the country again, then we are talking about lengthy prison terms.
The catch and release policy makes the US a laughingstock. Dream Act advocates would have a lot more credibility if in addition to advocating compassion for the Dream Babies, they were willing to advocate discipline for the Nightmare Babies.
Yeah. Let's punish and condemn all the hard-working kids who were brought here as infants, grew up here, and want to become tax-paying contributors to society.
They deserve it because one dirt bag killed a cop. After all, native-born Americans never commit crimes.
Posted by: SonoranSam | September 20, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Sam: I must have missed the part of Greg's post where he proposed to "punish and condemn all the hard-working kids who were brought here as infants, grew up here, and want to become tax-paying contributors to society."
Perhaps you could point it out to me.
Posted by: BobH | September 20, 2007 at 01:19 PM
Sam...did you read the post? Try again; you didn't get it at all.
I am so, so tired of this! So tired of such defense for those who would choose to break our laws, destroy our cities, and our culture, and then blame us because we didn't grant to them all they think should be theirs!
Send your spouse, child, brother, or sister onto the streets everyday in a job that requires a bullet proof vest. Then listen to someone speak of the rights of the killers who have absolutely no concern about the sanctity of any life other than their own. I will never understand how this lower than low scum bag was ever released when arrested AFTER being deported!
Part of me wonders if whoever authorized the release should be tried as an accessory to murder of a police officer. And anyone who sees these evil incarnate individuals as victims needs to take a day and spend it with a cop on the streets in the line of fire.
Posted by: Ann | September 20, 2007 at 04:42 PM
Greg immediate deportation of the Nightmare babies is obviously not the answer -- this guy was deported once and just came right back. Immediate incarceration, THEN deportation after serving their sentence is what is needed.
Posted by: Walter | September 20, 2007 at 05:12 PM
Secure the borders and uphold the laws we have! How did he come back across? Drive thru at Rocky Point and tell them he had no fruit or cheap Viagra? If they asked for ID, I'm sure he could have shown them his AZ issued driver's license.
Then once arrested again, he should have never been released. Swiss cheese.
The one that fell thru the holes just cut short the life of someone who was dedicated to making our communities better and made a widow and orphan of what was once a lovely family.
Posted by: Ann | September 20, 2007 at 08:09 PM
I heard on the news that Officer Erfle was a recent cancer survivor. What a shame that the justice system stole what an insidious disease could not.
Posted by: Travis | September 20, 2007 at 10:43 PM
He had returned from a second bout with testicular cancer and would not accept light duty.
Posted by: Ann | September 21, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Sam
Perhaps you like police regulation 1.4
Dont ask, dont tell
Posted by: NICK | September 21, 2007 at 01:03 PM
Ann said: "...destroying our cities, and our culture..."
Whenever I'm out and about, I usually see these people building our cities and adding to our culture. What the hell are you taking? Must be one crazy trip...
Posted by: Tim W. | September 21, 2007 at 03:25 PM
It's not the culprit's immigration status that we should be focused on if we truly care about the safety of our brave police officers ... it's the guns!
Posted by: muckraker | September 21, 2007 at 05:45 PM
Tim,
Do not try to clump this evil person with those that would come here for the right reasons, even if in the wrong way. And do not try to excuse his behavior because not all illegals are bad. That is the problem with the immigration debate, the all or nothing attitude. They are either criminals with no good purpose or they are all hard working, honest citizens just trying to find a way in the world.
This guy was a hardened, career criminal. He didn’t just wake up one day and decide to be a cop killer. He came from a culture that defied the law and he perpetuated that into a career of abuse and destruction. If they will not follow our laws, learn the language, and abide by our systems and government then they are attempting to destroy our culture.
Posted by: Ann | September 21, 2007 at 08:20 PM
Muckraker-
The gun did not kill the officer by itself, the person pulling the trigger did. Are you saying lets ban guns so only the criminals and police officers have them? How would that have changed this story? He was a criminal, he wouldn't care if there was a law telling him he wasn't allowed to own it.
Posted by: az native | September 21, 2007 at 11:03 PM
It's pretty clear that the cops' first priority would be to get the guns off the streets -- did you notice how they blocked Seibert's stupid idea to sell the confiscated guns (so they can end up back on the streets) to raise money for the Secret Witness program? Just for once can set aside that NRA BS and think about the safety of our police officers. I'm sure you are one of those big law and order guys at the podium, but law and order starts with protecting our police officers.
Posted by: muckraker | September 22, 2007 at 01:33 PM
Muckraker,
I am all for protecting our police officers, but not if it means infringing on our 2nd Amendment rights. And if you think gun control will take guns out of the hands of criminals, you are pretty naive (see war on drugs and prohibition). If the gun control chronies want to change the constitution, which is what they are really doing when they take guns away from law-abiding citizens, be up front about it and do it the right way (amendment).
Posted by: Mesa Republican George | September 22, 2007 at 03:34 PM
Sorry to disappoint you but I am not one of those law and order guys at the podium, heck, I'm not even a guy and never have been in front of a podium. I am related to many police officers and absolutely want protection for them, but you have not answered my question. How does making a law banning guns change this story? The killer was a criminal and criminals are going to get guns with or without a ban on guns. Before you start assuming again, I DON'T like guns and don't own one. I know many people that hunt, are we to take away their right to bear arms?
Posted by: az native | September 22, 2007 at 09:51 PM
Greg,
I read the article. Martinez isn't labeled a 'dream baby' in the article. So I can assume he was only a 'dream baby in your mind.
The "Dream Act' is focused on addressing those who have benefited from our educational system, have used it for its intended purpose and have demonstrated a desire to continue their education and become productive a citizen.
Martinez is a 'nightmare baby' (as you correctly note) and those who I know who support the 'Dream Act' are all in favor of strict laws and enforcement of the laws as it relates to criminal activity.
Posted by: ron | September 23, 2007 at 12:32 AM