murder rate – USA Gov Policy

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government begins a two part review of the role of illegal aliens in the recent increase in violent crime.

There is evidence that the Obama Administration’s decision not to deport illegal immigrants who have broken the law is responsible for a noteworthy portion of violent crime.

As the New York Analysis of Policy and Government recently noted, the sharp downturn in violent crime since the 1990’s has started to reverse itself. Violent crime and homicide increased by about 10% in 2015.

The Brennan Center found that murder in 2015 increased by about 14 percent, with just three cities — Baltimore, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. — responsible for half that increase. The Brennan Center also projects another 13.1% increase in 2016. “Nationally, the murder rate is projected to increase 31.5 percent from 2014 to 2016 …”

Despite the positions taken by those opposed to the Second Amendment, “loose” gun laws do not appear to be a factor. WND notes that that a “common denominator” of cities where murder rose by over 13% is that they impose strict gun control laws. It has been noted by a pro Second Amendment source that “More people were murdered in strict gun-control Chicago from 2001 to 2013 than the total number of U.S. military killed in Afghanistan since 2001 or killed in Iraq since 2003.”

One factor that should not be overlooked is the role of violent illegal immigrants. According to a United Nations study, “The global average homicide rate stands at 6.2 per 100,000 population, but Southern Africa and Central America have rates over four times higher than that (above 24 victims per 100,000 population), making them the sub-regions with the highest homicide rates on record, followed by South America, Middle Africa and the Caribbean.” The wave of illegal immigrants comes heavily from Central America.

The Congressional Research Service has found that Gang-related violence has been particularly acute in El Salvador, Honduras, and urban areas in Guatemala, contributing to some of the highest homicide rates in the world. Congress has maintained an interest in the effects of gang-related crime and violence on governance, citizen security, and investment in Central America. Congress has examined the role that gang-related violence has played in fueling mixed migration flows, which have included asylum seekers, by families and unaccompanied alien children (UAC) to the United States.

According to the FBI Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, continues to expand its influence in the United States. FBI investigations reveal that it is present in almost every state and continues to grow its membership, now targeting younger recruits more than ever before.

The 2015 report of the National Gang Intelligence Center notes that “Based on survey analysis and reporting from federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement over the past two years, the NGIC provides the following assessments:

Approximately half of respondents report street gang membership and gangrelated crime increased in their jurisdictions. The most prevalent crimes street gangs commit are street-level drug trafficking, large-scale drug trafficking, assault, threats and intimidation, and robbery. Street gangs exhibit few indicators of decreasing membership or criminal activity. Neighborhood-based gangs remain the most significant threat, while national level street gangs have a moderate-to-high impact in approximately half of reporting jurisdictions.
Approximately one-third of jurisdictions report an increase in threats to law enforcement. The attacks that were carried out against law enforcement and judicial officials over the past two years were violent and brazen. However, the number of actual attacks against law enforcement remained relatively stable.
Over 68 percent of survey respondents indicate prison gang membership has increased over the past two years. The greatest threat of prison gangs lies in their nexus to street gangs and in their ability to corrupt prison officials. Corruption of prison staff threatens various prison systems by facilitating the smuggling practices of inmates. Respondents rate drugs, cell phones, and weapons as the contraband prison gangs most commonly smuggle. Prison gangs engage in a host of other crimes to further their criminal objectives. The most commonly reported crimes include smuggling of contraband, assault, racketeering, extortion, murder, robbery, witness intimidation, and prostitution. Prison gangs also exploit Freedom of Religion rights and rely on female counterparts to facilitate gang activity.
Larger OMGs have established new chapters and have attracted many new members. The surge in membership has incited clashes for geographic dominance, which has created higher levels of violence. OMGs continue to engage in all types of violent crimes to include: weapons possession, threats and intimidation, assault, arson, extortion, and drug trafficking. OMGs have a notorious reputation for their use of violence and often employ brute force to exact punishment on rival gangs and on their own members. OMGs mainly recruit motorcycle enthusiasts and members of the US biker community. Some larger OMGs require smaller motorcycle gangs or sport bike clubs to wear a support patch and demand monthly payments in exchange for the patch. OMGs rely on support clubs for recruitment purposes, financial support, and to counter rival gangs. Gangs continue to foster partnerships with MTCOs. Survey respondents identified more than 96 gangs involved in crossborder crimes. Sureños, Barrio Azteca, and Tango Blast rank as the top three most criminally active gangs along the US/Mexico Border, while the Sinaloa Cartel emerges as the MTCO with the most gang ties. Despite intelligence to support gang/ MTCO partnerships, the exact nature of these relationships remains unclear. Drug trafficking is the cross-border crime gangs most frequently commit.
Approximately 26 percent of jurisdictions and 44 percent of prison facilities report that gang members joined domestic extremist groups. A mutually beneficial arrangement, extremists use gangs to spread their doctrine, while gangs turn to extremists to increase membership and facilitate collaboration with other criminal organizations. Gangs also refer to extremist ideology to respond to perceived injustices and to enact social change.
Survey respondents indicate that over the past two years known or suspected gang members from over 100 jurisdictions have applied for positions or gained employment with the US military, law enforcement agencies, corrections facilities, and within the judiciary. Employment with the US military ranked as the most common, followed by corrections, law enforcement, and the judiciary.
Approximately 15 percent of respondents report that gangs in their jurisdiction engage in human trafficking. According to law enforcement reporting, gang involvement in sex trafficking has increased over the past two years. This is likely a significant underestimation, as sex trafficking is often underreported for two reasons: victims fail to report due to shame or fear; and misclassification of gang involved cases, where the offense is cited as prostitution, as opposed to sex trafficking. Gangs that partake in sex trafficking and prostitution crimes typically collaborate with other criminal organizations in order to maximize profit and evade detection from law enforcement.
Social media and other forms of technology play an essential role in the illicit activities of gang members. Gangs use a number of sites, applications, and platforms to recruit prospects, facilitate communication, target rivals, and to thwart law enforcement efforts. Over the past two years, gang members’ utilization of technology, social media in particular, has risen significantly, enabling gangs to more readily further their criminal objectives. Nearly all jurisdictions report gang member use of technology, most frequently citing Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter. Technology is also playing an increasingly pivotal role in police investigations and anti-gang efforts. Over 54 percent of agencies report integrating social media into their gang investigations within the past two years.”

https://pdxcommercial.com/property/740-82nd-drive-gladstone/ cialis without prescription The pharmacy, which specializes in offering generic drugs at affordable price and fast delivery is ensured. It actively probes and expels vascular deposits fat and calcium. pfizer viagra price Where these sensations occur naturally depends upon the condition and type of sexual https://pdxcommercial.com/order-6346 buy levitra line issue person suffering from. Overcoming Impotence Sildenafil Citrate is the first remedy, which almost every man purchase generic viagra thinks about while facing impotence.

The report concludes tomorrow.

Quick Analysis

Judge Juan Merchan Must Recuse Himself from Hearing the Case of Donald Trump

Judge Juan Merchan Must Recuse Himself from Hearing the Case of Donald Trump By John H. Wilson In April and May of 2023, we discussed several of the weaknesses of the criminal case brought against former President Donald Trump. In particular, we described the legal insufficiency of the indictment, which does not “asserts facts supporting every element of the offense charged and the defendant`s…commission thereof with sufficient precision to clearly apprise the defendant…of the conduct which is the subject of the accusation.” We also noted that the majority of the charges brought against Trump are most likely time-barred by New York’s Statute of Limitations. https://www.usagovpolicy.com/is-trumps-indictment-beyond-the-statute-of-limitations/ In both articles, we also noted that the Judge assigned to hear the case against the former President, Juan Merchan, had previously donated small sums to several anti-Trump organizations, and was unlikely to dismiss the charges on either of these grounds. According to the New York Post, Merchan “donated $35 to Democratic causes in 2020, including $15 to President Biden’s campaign and $10 to a group dedicated to ‘resisting … Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.’ Federal Election Commission records show Merchan made three small-dollar donations within the span of two days in July 2020 through ActBlue, the Democratic Party’s preferred online fundraising platform. The veteran judge contributed $15 earmarked for the ‘Biden for President’ campaign on July 26, 2020, and then the following day made $10 contributions to the Progressive Turnout Project and Stop Republicans” . Given the small amounts involved, no one seriously argued that Judge Merchan should be removed from the case after having made these contributions, even though “FEC records show that Merchan listed his occupation as ‘judge’ on the donation form, and his employer as the New York State Office of Court Administration.” This is, however, an issue of some seriousness. Under Rule 100.5(A)(1) of the Rules of the Chief Administrative Judge for the State of New York, “[n]either a sitting judge nor a candidate for public election to judicial office shall directly or indirectly engage in any political activity except (i) as otherwise authorized by this section or by law, (ii) to vote and to identify himself or herself as a member of a political party, and (iii) on behalf of measures to improve the law, the legal system or the administration of justice. Prohibited political activity shall include…(h) soliciting funds for, paying an assessment to, or making a contribution to a political organization or candidate. (Emphasis added.) This means that despite the modest sums donated by Judge Merchan, he is prohibited from making ANY contribution, in ANY amount, to the Biden campaign, or any other political organization. It’s not as if Judge Merchan wouldn’t be aware of these rules. According to CNN, “Merchan launched his legal career in 1994…as an assistant district attorney in the trial division in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office…[i]n 2006, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg…appointed Merchan to Family Court in the Bronx, and Democratic Gov. David Paterson appointed him to the New York State Court of Claims in 2009, the same year he began serving as an acting New York Supreme Court judge.” With more than 23 years of experience as a judge, Juan Merchan would certainly know he is prohibited from making contributions in any amount to political campaigns and organizations. But he did it anyway. Further, under Rule 100.3(E)(1) “[a] judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Making campaign contributions to the current President, and then hearing the case of that President’s opponent in this year’s election would certainly qualify as a reasonable question regarding Merchan’s impartiality. But this is only one basis under which Judge Merchan’s removal from the Trump case is both appropriate and necessary. There is more substantial basis for this matter to be taken away from Judge Merchan. Rule 100.3(E)(1) continues as follows; “[a] judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where… (d) the judge knows that the judge or the judge’s spouse, or a person known by the judge to be within the sixth degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person…(iii) has an interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding.” According to the website Living DNA, a First Degree of Relationship is a Parent to a Child, while a Sixth Degree is a second cousin. In between are Grandparents and grandchildren, great-grandparents and great-grandchildren, Aunts, Uncles, Nieces, Nephews and First Cousins. It stands to reason, then, that if Judge Merchan had a cousin, or a nephew, or a grandchild who was known to the Judge, and that person had “an interest that could be substantially affected” by a proceeding over which Judge Merchan was presiding, he would have to legally and ethically recuse himself from the handling of that matter. But what if that person is of the first degree of relationship, that is, a child of the Judge? Meet Loren Merchan, who is, according to the New York Post, “president of Authentic Campaigns, a Chicago-based progressive political consulting firm whose top clients include Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who was the lead prosecutor in Trump’s first impeachment trial, and the Senate Majority PAC, a major party fundraiser…Schiff’s campaign for US Senate scored an eye-popping $20 million in aid since he began soliciting donations off the presumptive GOP presidential front-runner’s unprecedented 34-count indictment last April, according to Federal Election Commission records…The Senate Majority political action committee, which supports Democratic Senate campaigns, pocketed $73.6 million since it also began firing off fundraising emails following the ex-president’s indictment…The super PAC has done more than $15 million in business with Authentic since 2019, including email fundraising and branding assistance, while Schiff’s Senate campaign paid Authentic more than $10 million for digital advertising and other consulting services the past year, records show.” Let us understand what the New York Post has revealed here. Loren Merchan is the president of an organization that has been paid ten million dollars by the Senate Majority PAC, which has earned the money to pay Loren’s company by fundraising that is, at least, […]

Our Latest Television Program

Weak Foreign Policy’s Dangers

Cameron Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL and Republican Congressional Candidate for Virginia’s 7th district, describes how the Biden administration’s weak leadership has promoted instability and conflict around the world. Another fascination conversation follows as author Jason Morgan describes the perilous situation in the Indo-Pacific. If your missed the program on your local TV station, watch it at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sIo2JVHjF6_hPQzr6CVrMegRF_7YxSnp/view?ts=66295e0a