Guess Who’s Committing Less Crime? Yep, “Illegal” Immigrants

Bud Kennedy over at the Startlegram refers to my buddy Radley Balko‘s research at Reason Magazine to point out — hey, guess what, places where there are more illegal immigrants have less violent crime.

Exhibit A: El Paso.

The West Texas twin city to drug-riddled Juarez is about one-fourth foreign-born. Yet it’s usually ranked as the nation’s No. 2 or No. 3 safest city.

(San Antonio is No. 9. Fort Worth is No. 10.)

“It just always seemed remarkable to me that El Paso has such a low crime rate,” said Radley Balko, a Reason senior editor and writer on law enforcement and criminal-justice issues.

“All the academic evidence concludes that immigrants are much less prone to violence than the native population.”

Radley’s full piece here.

More on crime and immigration here.

What the Global Warming Fundies Really Want

Pretty much everything you need to know about the real agenda of the man-made global warming fraud is right here.

It’s not about pollution control, carbon control, emissions control, or temperature control.

global_warmingIt’s about control. And global wealth redistribution.


From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace.

A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources.

We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.

Man-made global warming is the “intelligent design” of the left — discredited pseudo-science that hides their real agenda.


Toy Gun Control for the Nerf Herd

A story today in the Dallas Morning News about police having confrontations with two people who were playing with toy guns or pellet guns.


red_ryder_adHere’s the thing — and I mentioned it first in my feature for D Magazine about the growing nanny state in Dallas — kids have always played with toy guns, and they’ve always had toy guns that look real. And yet we didn’t have this problem 20, 30 or 50 years ago of police drawing down on them, or the public freaking out when they see someone with a gun.

What’s changed?

(EDIT/CLARIFICATION: I’m speaking more here about the incidents involving kids where the kid gets shot. Happens about twice a year nationally. These two Dallas incidents in the story linked were just jumping off points for the discussion. Thanks to Keith for correcting my course.)

I think the problem is police are too quick to draw down on anyone holding a gun — which isn’t a crime in itself — and people have been programmed to automatically and irrationally fear anyone who has something that looks like a gun. Yes, officer safety is important, but not as important as the rights and lives of those they’re sworn to protect and serve. Irrational fear leads to irrational actions.

And boy, have we gotten a lot more irrational about inanimate objects.

toyguns11Oh, and for those who say that toy guns today look real where toy guns from the 1950s and 1960s didn’t look real, here’s a sampling of toy guns from the 1960s, and here’s some toy guns from the 1950s.

Awesome ad for the Dick Tracy .38 snub and Tommy Gun.

Mini-Hindenberg Crashes in Our Front Yard

We’re cooking dinner (parmesan crusted chicken, chickpea/tomato/basil salad, grilled zuchini on grilled crustini with ricotta — my cooking rules) and this lands in our front yard.


No one was hurt. And Lt. Jane Dangle was on the scene.


From Rawlins, With Love

Rawlins was estate sale shopping the other day and I got this in the mail from him. I’ve never been one for lapel pins, but this goes with everything, and I’m never leaving home without it. (Thank you, RG.)


‘Naive’ Is Believing The Words and Not the Record, Steve

The untalented flotsam at the Dallas Morning News calls gun owners “sheep.”

From what I see, they are one of the most naive, most easily manipulated political groups in the country.

Naive? Why?

There’s no evidence the Obama administration has any major shift in gun laws in mind.

Oh really?

“The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said.” ABC News Link

Mr. Obama hasn’t made any move yet to enact gun control only because he doesn’t have the votes. Even he admits this. He and Joe Biden know the losses the Democrat Party suffered when they enacted the first massive gun ban in the early 1990s.

But here’s a sampling of Mr. Obama’s past quotes and positions in favor of gun control, showing if he had the votes and could sell it, Obama would ban guns in a heartbeat.


Mr. Obama supports the proposed HR 45 bill that would enact draconian gun control.

He is in favor of “closing” the non-existent “gun show loophole” — despite the fact that every firearms dealer at any gun show must conduct a full background check on every buyer.

Mr. Obama opposes concealed carry.

“I am not in favor of concealed weapons,” Obama said. “I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations.” Link

Obama’s pro gun control position from

His attorney general, Eric Holder — who never met an anti-gun law he didn’t support — wants to re-enact the so-called “Assault Weapons” ban. Obama is on the record as supporting the ban’s renewal. Link

The ban on “armor piercing bullets” that Obama supports is a Trojan Horse.

Obama voted for an amendment by longtime ammunition ban advocate Sen. Edward Kennedy (S. Amdt. 1615 to S. 397, Vote No. 217, July 29, 2005), which would have fundamentally changed the federal “armor piercing ammunition” law (18 U.S.C. ‘ 922(a)(7)), by banning any bullet that “may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines… to be capable of penetrating body armor” that “meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.”

Federal law currently bans bullets as “armor piercing” based upon the metals used in their construction, such as those made of steel and those that have heavy jackets. (18 U.S.C. ‘ 921(a)(17)). The Kennedy amendment would have fundamentally changed the law to add a ban on bullets on the basis of whether they penetrate the “minimum” level of body armor, regardless of the bullets’ construction or the purposes for which they were designed (e.g., hunting).

Many bullets designed and intended for use in rifles (including hunting rifles) have, over the years, been used in special-purpose hunting and target handguns, thus they “may be used in a handgun.”

The “minimum” level of body armor, Type I, only protects against the lowest-powered handgun cartridges. Any center-fire rifle used for hunting, target shooting, or any other purpose, and many handguns used for the same purposes, are capable of penetrating Type I armor, regardless of the design of the bullet.

“I’m consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.”

Chicago Tribune, 4/27/04

“I think it’s a scandal that this president (Bush) did not authorize a renewal of the assault weapons ban.”

Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes, 10/21/04

“I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manufacturers lobby.”

The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, 2006

“I think that local jurisdictions have the capability to institute their own gun laws.”, 2/15/08

“There was a discussion today about a law that has just passed in California that allows micro-tracing of bullets that have been discharged in a crime so that they can immediately be traced,” he said. “This is something that California has passed over the strong objections of the NRA…That’s the kind of common sense gun law that gun owners as well as victims of gun violence can get behind.”

Baltimore Feb. 15, 2008


So what’s really naive? Worrying that a superficial man with a long track record of supporting and voting for gun control might, indeed, try to force more gun control on us while saying he won’t?

Or is naive just taking the word of a politician who says, “Trust me”?

(h/t Tom E.)

The Death of The Suburbs Has Been Greatly Exaggerated. Again.


Every time gas prices tick up or there’s some horribly written feature about how cool urban life is becoming in Dallas, the urban yokels crow about the death of the suburbs and how everyone — everyone! — will soon be living in prole-style density and walking to their creative, carbon-neutral jobs. The McMansions will be sitting empty and it’s DART cards for everyone.

The suburbanites are giving up their quiet streets and cookie-cutter houses and functioning schools and marching like war refugees back to the city center to enjoy overpriced bridges by overhyped architects, People’s Hotels, and loft living like we’re all back in college. Hallelujah, praise the Prius, and pass the Hope and Change bumper stickers!

The only problem? It’s not true.

510q7emw6pl_sl500Despite the gleeful yokel wishes, the people of The DFW are not, in fact, moving back to the city core and away from the safe, quiet, people-stay-off-my-lawns suburbs. In fact, it’s quite the opposite.

Have a look yourself.

  • From 2007 to 2008, the city of Dallas lost 18,847 people.
  • From 2007 to 2008, the ‘Burbs gained 62,022 people.
  • From 2000 to 2008, Dallas lost about 250,000 people, while the ‘Burbs gained more than 500,000.

Bottom line:

Spin can change perceptions, but not reality. People are not moving from the suburbs to the core cities. The reverse continues to be true, even in the worst of times.

I love Dallas — Dallas itself, not just The DFW — but propaganda about the death of the suburbs isn’t going to fix what’s wrong with it.

Tea Partiers Boo Perry, Cornyn

Have doubts the Tea Party protesters are for real, and protesting both the Democrats and Republicans? Have look here as they boo those two posers — Sen John Cornyn and Gov. Rick Perry. They call Cornyn “Traitor!” shout “You’re the problem!” (3:30ish) and “Sell out!”


When can we start voting from the rooftops?

(h/t Wick)



Now the Mainstream is Catching On About the TSA Brownshirts

Thanks to an alert reader, I see the Wall Street Journal is sitting up an taking notice about the TSA’s groping apes.


You tasted my venom on the subject here last week.

Also of note, it’s hard to find and not the best writing in the world — story suffers from political points, but the political points are good. Anyway, there’s a book called Black Arrow, and the high point of the book is a scene where a war vet with bad knees is humiliated by the no-class TSA brownshirts. He’s finally had enough, and he follows one into the terminal men’s room and, in a brilliantly written, gritty scene, the vet uses his bare hands to…give terminal a new meaning.

It’s heartwarming.