Officer Smith is a police transport officer. She’s standing at the county jail’s booking desk. She’s got two car thieves in custody for booking: Tom and Ishmael. They don’t know it yet, but today is Ishmael’s lucky day. Too bad, so sad, for Tom. Officer Smith is booking the two thieves in the order in which the arresting officers had taken them into custody. Why does this matter?
The jail booking staff informs Officer Smith that they can accept suspect Tom but not suspect Ishmael. They explain the county Democrat administration has capped booking car theives to five per day. Fortunately for Ishmael, he was the sixth person arrested for stealing a car. So, Ishmael gets a Mulligan for today’s round of criminality.
Unfortunately for suspect Tom, he’s on the hook. Just under the limit, the cops won’t throw poor ol’ Tom back. He’s off to the grey bar motel. Just imagine the ingenuity here. The residents in this city will now suffer no more than seven car thefts per day because of the neo-Dems’ genius. Hallelujah!
Now, on what did my fictional city administration base their new law? On the non-fictional neo-Democrat Party’s recent attempts to arbitrarily limit the number of detentions ICE can make of illegal aliens who commit crimes. It seems the only difference is…in the neo-Dems’ non-fictional instance the criminals are illegal aliens and in the other fictional example the criminals are Americans.
As Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity said, “Suppose we cap ICE detentions at 16,500, and No. 16,501 turns out to be a murderer, a rapist or member of a drug cartel. Are Democrats really saying to let that person walk?” It seems they are, indeed. And if they’re willing to let illegal alien criminals walk at the federal level why not American criminals at the state and local levels?
I used car theft as an example, but this limitation could apply to any crime. Shoplift, purse snatch, sexual assault, burglary, or murder. Pardon the pun, but where’s the limit? If we put a cap on how many illegal alien criminal suspects federal law enforcement can detain, why not put limits on all cops and all crimes? And what would we call this approach? Oh, right. I almost forgot. The neo-Dems already have a name for it: Social justice.
Wait…this may be brilliant, after all. Talk about a way to reduce crime stats. If cops can only arrest a limited number of criminals, the crime statistics will reflect a decrease in arrests, right? It’s like rent-control but for crime. When a landlord’s costs go up it doesn’t matter, rents stay the same. As it would be for crime. Criminals would still commit crimes, but arrests would stay the same. Therefore, and so obviously, the community will benefit from a decrease in crime—well, on paper, anyway. Makes perfect sense, right? How could I not see it? It’s so clear.
Okay, here’s a little clue before you contemplate this at home: whatever you do, don’t go getting all bogged down with logic. If you use logic and reason, this exercise will not work. Yes, of course people would continue to steal cars. But hey, if the neo-Dems can do away with air travel, eliminate fossil fuels, provide free health care and education, eco-remodel every single building in America, and even pay a salary to people who are not willing to work—and do it within 12 years, then the neo-Dems can do anything, right? This time, they’ll get socialism right!
Remember, like I said, leave logic the hell out of it.
