[10-Ring]

Friday, a Burbank Police officer was killed & today I hear in the news that the big concern now is that his killer has fled to Mexico because Mexico doesn't extradite murder suspects...total BS!! :cuss: :fire: :banghead: :scrutiny:

[4v50 Gary]

And if he's snuffed in Mexico, would we care?

[cordex]

And if he's snuffed in Mexico, would we care?
In that case, this reporter would have sweet, sweet dreams of baddie felons roasting away.

[sm]

Many times accidents occur in Mexico we never hear about...so I've heard anyway. Never Vacationed or been there, but also heard new folks ain't always welcomed...

[Preacherman]

Would somebody please post a link to the story?

[4570Rick]

http://www.insidevc.com/vcs/sv/article/0,1375,VCS_239_2437137,00.html

Ventura County Star


Slain Burbank officer Simi Valley graduate By From staff and wire reportsNovember 18, 2003 The Burbank police officer shot and killed over the weekend graduated from Simi Valley High School, where he was on the wrestling team, and later finished as a top cadet at the Ventura County Police and Sheriff's Reserve Academy. Matthew Pavelka, 26, is the first law enforcement officer killed in the 82-year history of the Burbank Police Department, authorities said. The rookie officer, on the force less than a year, died Saturday after he was shot while responding as backup for a traffic stop. At the Burbank Police Station on Monday, spokesman Sgt. William Berry said officers are working around the clock to find the man who killed Pavelka and wounded Officer Gregory Campbell, 41, who is hospitalized in stable condition with wounds to his abdomen and neck. "We're definitely going to set off fireworks and have a parade when we catch the guy," Berry said. Authorities are searching for David A. Garcia, 19. He is described as 6 feet 1 inches tall, about 220 pounds, with a shaved head and brown eyes. Another man in his car, Ramon Aranda, 25, was killed during the Saturday night shootout with the officers near Burbank Airport. News of Pavelka's death shocked educators at Simi Valley High School. Pavelka graduated in 1996. Guy Greene, now in his 26th year as wrestling coach, said he received the news from Principal Jan Britz shortly after school started Monday. He recalled that during Pavelka's sophomore year, the aspiring wrestler declared he would win the state championship. "It's sad to hear a police officer has been killed, but it's a shock when you hear it's someone you know," Greene said. "It's going to be a loss to everyone." At the time Pavelka attended Simi Valley High, Superintendent Kathy Scroggin was the principal. On Monday, she remembered him as a well-liked athlete. "I can see his face," Scroggin said. "He was very involved in school through wrestling and was a nice young man." In January, Pavelka graduated from the Ventura County police academy in Camarillo 15th out of 46 cadets. Nineteen years earlier, Campbell had graduated from the same academy before going to work at the Santa Paula Police Department. He later transferred to Burbank. Pavelka, whose father is a veteran Los Angeles police detective, had chosen the Burbank department because he wanted to be his own man, police said. That was fine with Mike Pavelka, who felt his son might be safer in the relatively quiet community. "I felt the odds were in his favor," his father said. After graduating from Simi Valley High, Pavelka joined the Air Force and worked as a military police officer. In his free time, he liked skydiving, motorcycles and watching San Francisco 49ers football games. "Matt was the greatest son a father could have," Mike Pavelka said. "I talked to him every single day." Anyone with information is asked to call the Burbank Police Department at 1-818-238-3000 or 1-818-239-3130.
Copyright 2003, Ventura County Star. All Rights Reserved.

[10-Ring]

Ofc. Pavelka's killer (if he has really made it to Mexico) isn't the only one to find sactuary there. Los Angeles Sheriff's Dep. David March's killer has been there too. His location is well known to the deputies family as well as county, state & federal officials....very frustrating when the criminals we want in America, Mexican officals aren't willing to give up! :banghead: :cuss: :fire:

http://www.deputydavidmarch.com/

[MoreTEN]

Mayby beacuse the US does the same with Mexicans, who are in prison in the states and are not given their rights...?

[10-Ring]

What rights are those? :scrutiny:

[tcdrennen]

Indeed, MoreTEN - exactly what rights is a Mexican national in US prison denied? In general, he has more rights IN a US prison than he'd have in Mexico PERIOD.

Unless you believe "rights" mean All Criminals Are Just Misunderstood And Should Be Pampered And Forgiven, which does seem to be Accepted Wisdom in much of Europe these days.

Don't worry, there a a lot of bliss ninnies here in the US who agree with you. Fortunately, outside of Academia and the new York Times, they're considered tolerable Village Idiots in most of America, amusing at times but generally just nuisances.

:banghead: :fire: :banghead: :fire: :rolleyes: :neener:

[MoreTEN]

For starters you can read this...

http://www.law.nyu.edu/kingsburyb/fall01/intl_law/unit1/foreignnatl.html

and second, you dont amuse me with your lame humor...

[Black92LX]

fled to Mexico because Mexico doesn't extradite murder suspects...total BS!!

isn't that where scott peterson was. and the family hired a Bounty Hunter what was that guys name?? The Road Dog or something like that. maybe someone could start a fund to pay for him to go back and catch another bad guy.

[tcdrennen]

Okay, MoreTEN, I read it. I did mention that our Academia has plenty of bliss ninnies.

But your original point appeared to be that Mexican nationals were denied rights compared to US citizens. That is not true. If you think they should have MORE rights than US citizens, well, you're entitled to your opinion.

And I'll still say they get better (and fairer) treatment here than they (or a US citizen!) would in a Mexican court & prison.

If you don't like the death penalty, fine, it's an arguable position. I disagree, and can defend mine.

But this is not the forum for that discussion.

[Airboss]

It is just about time to Start a program:
Step one Mine and barb wire the border make it like the border between East and West Germany.(when there was a East and West Germany)
Step two If you are an illegal alien you have 10 days to get out of the country-any found here after 11 days are shot after the first 20 or so get shot there would be a stampede to the border.
Or if that is to strong for everyone lets just load them all on boats and take them to Norway and dump them I am sure More Ten would be down at the beach along with all the other Euro-Wennies to give them a big hug.
I am so sick of the UN,EU and any other 2nd rate excuse for a country telling us how to run this country.:fire:

[MoreTEN]

"Okay, MoreTEN, I read it. I did mention that our Academia has plenty of bliss ninnies.

But your original point appeared to be that Mexican nationals were denied rights compared to US citizens. That is not true. If you think they should have MORE rights than US citizens, well, you're entitled to your opinion.

And I'll still say they get better (and fairer) treatment here than they (or a US citizen!) would in a Mexican court & prison.

If you don't like the death penalty, fine, it's an arguable position. I disagree, and can defend mine.

But this is not the forum for that discussion."

My original point was to compare the two. Read the original thread.

These people are not given the rights set by laws of the world, like the human rights. Im not saying that they have to get MORE rights, just the same rights. They dont get that.

These should be abeal to get in contact with their home countries, and in these cases they dont.

[Augustwest]

Step two If you are an illegal alien you have 10 days to get out of the country-any found here after 11 days are shot after the first 20 or so get shot there would be a stampede to the border. Or if that is to strong for everyone lets just load them all on boats and take them to Norway and dump them I am sure More Ten would be down at the beach along with all the other Euro-Wennies to give them a big hug.

Be interesting to see what happens to the U.S. economy when either of those happens...

[Black92LX]

Mayby beacuse the US does the same with Mexicans, who are in prison in the states and are not given their rights...?


Mexicans WHO ARE IN PRISION!!!!!!!!!!!! is the point there they did something wrong here in the US and are being punished for it.

[Airboss]

The U.S. Economy is the largest in the World and what would happen would be the wailing and nashing of teeth as the rest of the world lined up to trade with us.The NY times,La Times, and the three major networks along with the EU/UN Blissninnies all would cry and say how really bad evil less than civilized we were.
Any country that tried to start a trade war with the U.S. would lose as a counrty that tried to start a shooting war.
During the cold war the left wing in this country always was worried "what happens if we make the Russian,Chinese,fill in ________ mad.Well we see what happened to the USSR and the rest of Eastern Europe it went belly up.
The policy of ths country should be:
We will trade with you and treat you fairly;untill you try to screw with us,at the point where you do try to screw with the U.S.be prepared as we(the U.S.)will stomp a mud hole in you either with trade or with the Military.Your choice.Play nice and we all win,try to screw us be prepared as the United States will no longer be triffled with.
Think you can take us?Bring it on.

[eoR]

MoreTEN you said:

"My original point was to compare the two. Read the original thread. "

but your original point was not to compare; it was to troll. I suggest YOU read the original thread. Agree with it or not the point being made was that the Mexican Govt. harbors criminals fleeing from US justice. In your "comparison" you chimed in with:

"Mayby beacuse the US does the same with Mexicans, who are in prison in the states and are not given their rights...?"

which has nothing to do with one country harboring fugitives from another country. You then later followed with a link to a page that also had NOTHING to do with one country harboring fugitives from another country. But... it DID however mention prisoners... and foreign countries... and was critical of the US... Close Enough!!! Never mind that it was two totally different issues that there was no comparison of the two, it was another chance to take a shot at the US and stir people up so you took it.

[Henry]

Condolences and prayers for the family of Officer Matthew Pavelka, and speedy recovery to Officer Gregory Campbell. If Mexico in fact refuses to extradite the scumbag that is responsible for this crime, our government should take appropriate measures to punish them.

[tyme]

Would it be possible to name threads like these more appropriately in the future? You know... something containing "extradition" or "Mexico" or "cop killer" or "murder suspect." I'm not picky. I just think the current title is lacking in quality.

[10-Ring]

I did not intend for the thread to take the turn it did...sorry if the QC in the title was lacking.

If you don't like the death penalty & you want to live/reside in the US, wouldn't it be easier to just obey the laws & not kill anyone? If the laws in the US are too much to take, then move! (Moving to a better location is a solution to a lot of things on this forum)

[greyhound]

These people are not given the rights set by laws of the world

While all human beings have basic rights, unless we are go under the governance of the UN (shudder:barf: ), there is nothing like the "laws of the world".

Now, I know some would like there to be (ICC), but I'm pretty sure we (the USA) aren't going to go along with them, since it basically would exist just to reign us in.

I can't even see raging leftists like Howard Dean or John Kerry putting us under that jurisdiction....

[w4rma]

greyhound, raging leftists? IMHO, you're incorrect.

No George McGovern

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld recently did his best to justify the war in Iraq, and he expounded a bit on the role of American power in the world. Here are some excerpts of what he said: "The war against Saddam Hussein was right. . . . He is a vicious dictator and a documented deceiver. He . . . invaded his neighbors, used chemical arms and failed to account for all the chemical and biological weapons he had before the Gulf War. And he . . . tried to build a nuclear bomb. . . . I think we're going to find weapons of mass destruction. I'm convinced that these weapons were there and that they could have found their way into the hands of terrorists and found their way to the United States, and that's what we had to stop. . . . A nation always preserves the right to take preemptive action in defense of our security and our freedom. . . . We have a chance to show the world that we were in fact in Iraq for the right reasons, that we were there for the purpose of liberating the Iraqi people, that this was not about the expansion of American power, that this was not about oil. . . . I think the commander in chief has to be tough. I appreciate the fact that we have a strong military in this country. . . . I think the world has proven, and we have proven, that there is a rationale for our containing the most powerful military on the face of the planet. To win the war on terror, we must be prepared to use the iron fist of our superb military."

Okay, I lied. Rumsfeld didn't say any of that. The above quotation is a composite of statements made over recent months by John Kerry, Dick Gephardt, Joseph Lieberman, John Edwards and Howard Dean. (The lines about Hussein's chemical, biological and nuclear weapons are Dean's, as are the "strong military" and "iron fist" lines.)

It has been said that the United States is polarized these days. Maybe so. But on foreign policy questions, where the country is presumably most polarized, the poles are a little hard to define. The fact remains that a majority of the Democratic Party's most plausible candidates supported the war in Iraq and have not, with the exception of Wes Clark, tried to claim otherwise. Howard Dean is the preeminent antiwar candidate, but aside from his dissent on Iraq, does he really offer a fundamentally different vision of American foreign policy? Will the 2004 election, in other words, be a national referendum on the fundamental principles of American foreign policy in the post-Cold War, post-Sept. 11, 2001, world? At this moment, it seems unlikely, even if the matchup is Bush vs. Dean.

Dean has been portrayed, especially by Republicans, as the new George McGovern. But judging by Dean's public statements at least, there is a big difference between the nature of his antiwar critique and the anti-Vietnam critique offered by McGovern and his followers three decades ago.

At the heart of the anti-Vietnam critique was a wholesale rejection of anti-communist containment, the reigning American foreign policy paradigm in those years. Vietnam was not just "the wrong war at the wrong time." It was, McGovernites believed, the logical culmination of two decades of misguided and immoral Cold War strategy. The problem was not just Richard Nixon but the whole foreign policy "establishment," Democrats and Republicans alike, from Dean Acheson through McGeorge Bundy, all of whom who had taken America down the wrong path. And the answer was not just withdrawal from Vietnam but a complete reorientation of American foreign and defense policy. America was on the wrong side of history; its power and influence in the world were a source not of good but of evil. In the McGovernite view, any war was the wrong war. Americans needed to "come home" both to save themselves and all who suffered from their nation's oppressive global influence.

In this respect, at least, Howard Dean is no George McGovern. He opposed the Iraq war, he says, because it was "the wrong war at the wrong time," not because it was emblematic of a fundamentally misguided American foreign policy. Dean has not, in fact, challenged the reigning foreign policy paradigms of the post-9/11 era: the war on terrorism and the nexus between terrorism and rogue states with weapons of mass destruction. "I support the president's war on terrorism," he told Tim Russert this summer. He supported the war in Afghanistan. He even supported Israel's strike against a terrorist camp in Syria because Israel, like the United States, has the "right" to defend itself. (European Deanophiles take note.) Dean does not call for a reduction in American military power but talks about using the "iron fist" of our "superb military." He talks tough about North Korea and at times appears to be criticizing the Bush administration for not addressing that "imminent" threat more seriously. And he especially enjoys lacerating Bush for not taking the fight more effectively to al Qaeda, a bit like John F. Kennedy criticizing Eisenhower in 1960 for not being tough enough on communism.

Of course, all this tough talk could be hot air. Maybe Dean is doing a great job controlling and hiding his inner peacenik. If so, that in itself tells you something about the current state of the foreign policy debate. Even Mr. Speak-My-Mind thinks he has to talk tough. George McGovern didn't.

Another possibility is that Dean's opposition to the Iraq war has been over-interpreted by his supporters on the Democratic left. They think he rejects the overall course of American foreign policy, just as they do. But maybe he doesn't. They think he's one of them, but his views may not be all that different from those of today's Democratic centrist establishment. When Dean criticizes Bush's foreign policy "unilateralism," he sounds like a policy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, not a radical. "There are two groups of people who support me because of the war," Dean told Mara Liasson a few months ago. "One are the people who always oppose every war, and in the end I think I probably won't get all of those people." The other group, Dean figures, simply "appreciates the fact" that he "stood up early" and spoke his mind and opposed Bush while other Democrats were cowed. Dean may not be offering a stark alternative to Bush's foreign policy, therefore, so much as he is simply offering Democrats a compelling and combative alternative to Bush himself. The Iraq war provided the occasion to prove his mettle.

If so, that has two implications, one small and one big. The small one concerns the general election: The Bushies are planning to run against a dovish McGovern, but there's a remote possibility they could find themselves running against a hawkish Kennedy. The bigger implication, which the rest of the world should note well, is that the general course of American foreign policy is fairly stable and won't be soon toppled -- not even by Howard Dean.

The writer, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment, writes a monthly column for The Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50126-2003Nov16.html

[ojibweindian]

Must think twice, post once.

Withering comment concerning European opinion of our country expunged from cranium.

[Standing Wolf]

Cheap labor is the most expensive of all. It's just that every tax payer in the nation picks up the tab rather than employers.

[grampster]

MoreTEN,

I'm having a hard time trying to grasp why an ILLEGAL ALIEN who commits another crime deserves the same consideration or rights given a citizen or legal immigrant. On the other hand, I have never heard of that actually being the case. It seems we bend over backwards to see that Illegals get the benefit of our providence, perhaps even more so than our own citizens.
Given the monumental freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution and Bill of Rights, the like of which is unique in the world, your "so called" laws of the world are inconsequential to me as most of them are hostile to individual freedom and are oppressive.

Apparently you believe only what you read not what you have actually seen or experienced. I would hazard a guess that you have never set foot in America. If you had, I think your opinions would be different.

[MoreTEN]

Dear grampster


No, I have never been in America. But that is not the point regarding human rights, which is well documented thru various good organisations. I belive in human rights as one of the fundaments of democracy.

The human rights are a law of the world, you will find them all over the world, they are the first steps in creating democracy. Human rights are also one of the few common laws of war.

[MoreTEN]

tcdrenner wrote this:

"Unless you believe "rights" mean All Criminals Are Just Misunderstood And Should Be Pampered And Forgiven, which does seem to be Accepted Wisdom in much of Europe these days."

Talk about BS, take a look at your own country. The USA being one of few countries that still have the deathpenalty, which does not work at all. In recent years theres been a hugh roll-up of bad cases, where innocent people have been convicted, these are large numbers. If you compare them to other countires, youll find that what Bush calls terrorist states, or countries like China where human rights and justice is not respected as it should have been.

[tcdrennen]

MoreTEN:

Again, this is not the forum for this discussion. I am certain both your facts and conclusions are in error, from my own long and specific study. I will not respond further - this is not firearms related.

Cordially,

Tara

PS: It's tcdrennen, not tcdrenner. Precision is the hallmark of accuracy - in thought as well as deed. :)

[MoreTEN]

Dear tcdrennen:

"Again, this is not the forum for this discussion. I am certain both your facts and conclusions are in error, from my own long and specific study. I will not respond further - this is not firearms related."

I know this is firearms related, but I cant see any firearm relations in the original thread, or in your thread.


"PS: It's tcdrennen, not tcdrenner. Precision is the hallmark of accuracy - in thought as well as deed."

Respect respect respect respect...

[cordex]

The USA being one of few countries that still have the deathpenalty, which does not work at all.
*laughs* Doesn't work?
Care to quote the relative recidivism rates between the death penalty and ... say ... 20 years in prison?

[USGuns]

Mayby beacuse the US does the same with Mexicans, who are in prison in the states and are not given their rights...?

You cannot be informed by naively believing propaganda on the internet from 8000 miles away. Come here and live in the US communities now being overrun by illegal immigration THEN make a decision.
This is just thinly disguised typical Euro anti-Americanism.

[gunsmith]

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/
illegal aliens have a license to rape children and kill their moms
thanks to dirtbags in both parties

[gunsmith]

you need to read this
http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/
they flee to mex to avoid serving their time for their crime.
then come back and rape children.
is this ok with you? if so please appeal to your gov't to take them away from us!

[Ryder]

MoreTEN - There is no pure connection between Mexico's refusal to capture fugitives for us and our punishing their citizens for crimes committed in this country.

Payoffs get our people released from their prisons but there is no reciprocity in this regard and that's what all this human rights noise is about. Bribery is standard operating procedure down there but is is against US law.

Mexico would probably hunt down these fugitives and return them to us if we could pay for it.