In 2007, Prince William County Supervisors passed the “Immigration Resolution” which stated in part that “illegal immigration has been determined to cause economic hardship and lawlessness.” Has our outcome supported the assertion that ‘more illegals cause more crime and worse economic conditions’ with the converse being ‘less illegals therefore less crime and a better economy’?

According to the Prince William County Crime Report for 2008, crime now, one year after the resolution’s passage crime is slightly increased. This effectively ends our 5 year decreasing crime rate trend which obviously must have existed during our “influx of illegals.”

In financial terms, can we state that our economic hardships have lessened since the introduction of the resolution? Prince William County now leads the state and ranks top in the nation in foreclosures, and our home values have dropped 32%. The neighborhood issues that existed prior to the passage of the resolution are resurfacing as foreclosed homes bought by real estate investors are turned into rental properties. And our County budget is facing deep cuts this year with an equally dismal prospect for next.

Many predicted dire consequences but Supervisors refused to heed their warnings. Probably nobody said it better than Oklahoma Republican State Representative Shane Jett, who opposed similar legislation in his state, when he stated:

“[the passage of these types of legislations] will be the single most destructive economic disaster since the Dust Bowl,”

Now with almost one full year of crime figures, foreclosure numbers, home values, and tax revenue numbers compiled can we definitively state that the assertions in the resolution were completely unfounded?  Strictly speaking, we had lower crime rates and a better economy when the ‘illegals’ were here.  Will the status quo remain, as Stewart continues to assert that the resolution is working well?

Obviously this issue has been the single most divisive issue to happen here.  Will Supervisors heed Dr. Fuller’s advice, and change course?  Or, are they content with allowing Chairman Stewart to continue down this path hoping that voters will only hold him responsible?

71 Thoughts to “Fewer Illegals, More Crime”



    That is exactly what I am not clear on. WHY would NRA members howl like stuck pigs about bans on assault rifles? Who, in the United States, actually needs to have one? And why do they need it? I totally understand gun sales for sport and that some people feel they need a revolver for personal protection, but who really needs to have an assault rifle?

  2. El Guapo

    I’m fortunate to have a little teenage friend who from time to time sends me emails asking me to bequeath my wisdom to her. A couple of years ago she said that some students were discussing whether or not there was proof of a supreme being.

    I told her that scholars write books on the subject and engage in lengthy debates and that the issue wasn’t likely to be settled amongst some 14 year olds. I told her that the existence of a supreme being can’t be “proven” but through the gathering of evidence best one can do is form an opinion. I told her that in the God/No God debate kids would usually START with a conclusion and then seek evidence that supports their pre-drawn conclusion in order to convince an audience.

    I was talking about 14 year olds. I realize now that the tactic doesn’t change much among adults.

  3. Moon-howler

    Thanks for sharing your wisdom, El Guapo. I am going to consider that a parable that I need to think about much more that a cursory glance.

    Twinad, I have had a lot of 2nd amendment rights friends over the years. They seem to feel that the Constitution gives them an unfettered right to own any firearm they want. They also feel that any restrictions on gun ownership is a gradual whittling away of their rights.

    Now, I do not agree with them. I am a moderate about this also. I don’t see why anyone needs an assault rifle but I am not a die hard 2nd amendment person.

    I am sure no fewer than 50 people are going to come along and try to grind me into little bitty pieces over my interpretation of their feelings. Oh well…just trying to understand someone else’s point of view.

  4. Moon-howler

    As an aside, Virginia used to be a bigger gun running state than it is now. We supplied New York City with a huge number of weapons, all illegal and smuggled. VA Governor Doug Wilder signed the 12 handguns a year law into law (around 1990). Many people I knew howled like stuck pigs over that law. I felt it was reasonable, especially if it helped to curtail gun smuggling.

  5. D. Bornstein

    You said,”My friend doesn’t know any better as far as being PC is concerned…I don’t think that a name necessarily designates that someone is racist.” The point is, if this same friend became an active contributor to a blog that frequently discusses racial issues and randomly adopted the blogger name “Step’n fetch it,” what would you think? Or if you’re too young to know who Step’n Fetch it was, how about Archie Bunker? I understand your point about your provincial friend, but quit giving the bigotry you see here a pass.

  6. Moon-howler

    D. Bornstein, that might be YOUR point but it wasn’t mine. I was specifically speaking to the monikers that were chosen by 2 of our regular contributors. I don’t judge books by their covers. I also do not think their names are racist.

    I wouldn’t care if someone came on as Archie Bunker. Who cares. Step’n Fetch it? What difference does it make. It is their actions, not their name that I would evaluate. Come to think of it, I actually try to hear everyone’s point of view. As most here will tell you, I rarely call people ‘racists.’ It has to be real overt for me to use those words. Why? Because I don’t know what is in their hearts.

    Second Alamo and Slowpoke are regular contributors here. They keep us from preaching to the choir.

  7. Chris

    I don’t find their names to be offensive either, MH. They are just names. The bottom line is the word racist get thrown around entirely too much these days. It’s actually getting real old at this point. I believe there are many in our community that have very strong feelings one way or the other, but I certainly don’t think that makes them racists.

    I’ve been called a racist myself, and on more than one occassion. The funny thing is some of those very people apologized for thinking and/or calling me a racist. They saw beyond the words they’d seen me write on blogs, or speak at Citizens’ Time. They saw I had legitimate concerns that they too would have about their community.

    D Bornstein,
    The most bigtory stuff around here comes from one Mr. Mackie, and there’s not a soul that comes close to holding a candle to him. There are others that make some over the top comments from time to time to but not with constitancy Mr. Mackie does. As you visit this blog more you will see what I mean. Or you might align your thoughts more with his. Time will tell.

  8. D. Bornstein

    Thanks for the profile on Mackie. Although I seldom write, I watch the threads often and I’m fairly familiar with the personalities here.There isn’t a person alive without some sort of prejudice in them, but we must recognize it for what it is and try to be fair.

  9. Chris

    D. Bornstein,
    I’ve been doing more reading then writing lately. I agree we all have prejudices. With that being said it’s important to remember some are better at hiding those prejudices than others.

  10. Moon-howler

    D.Bornstein, you need to know that I don’t give anyone or anything a pass. it isn’t mine to give. There are people contributing on this blog from all political niches. What is it that you would like for me to do that I am not doing?

  11. D. Bornstein

    It doesn’t matter what I would like you or anybody else to do. Do what you think is right. Do whatever makes you happy. Fulfill your own agenda.

  12. michael

    Moonhowler, you are right, I apologize if anyone was offended that I believe loving “illegal” immigrants is a stupid idea. Nor do I really wish for people to rot with their own stupidity, but sometimes my anger at the never ending one-sided defense of all “illegal” immigration ideas and concepts as being GOOD FOR AMERICA, can leave even the most tolerant person of others ideas like myself a little frustrated evough to say “forget you, I give up, there is no sanity in any of this”.

  13. michael

    Chris, D. Bornstein and Conservadore are all right to point out the blending of “prejudices”, race and bigotry with the “legal” and “illegal” issues of immigration and the detrimental effects of such. It is an impossible and hopeless entanglement that few can unravel enough to make intelligent decisions.

    On one hand we as a nation cannot allow bigotry and hatred to rule the day. On the other hand we cannot also allow “illegal” activities and “illegal” immigrants to destroy our economy, our security, our society, our community and our laws.

    It seems when these concepts are blended, people think of them as the same issue, and take either one side exclusively or the other, with NO middle ground thinking at all. You are either for “illegal” immigrants or you are against them however, and there is no middle ground.

    The truth is you can be able to NOT be prejudiced or preferrential toward “legal” citizens, legal visa holders and “legal” immigrants, and be VERY JUSTIFIED in demanding law enforcement toward “illegal” immigrants and be VERY AWARE of the NEGATIVE IMPACT on economics, crime, social services, and LAW that “illegal” immigration into the US over the past 25-30 years has caused.

    The root cause of ALL of these BAD things that happen are a result of “illegal” immigration and are not a result of “LEGAL” immigration.

    To believe they are the same is what I define as “STUPID”.
    Both legal and illegal immigrants need to be held up to the SAME LAW. If a person is legal, then it is ZONING LAWS, Fair hiring practices, and Loitering laws applied to ALL citizens in order to maintain healthy and prosperous neighborhoods that is the issue. In the case of some people in our neighborhoods they are not following these laws.

    If a person is “illegal” then the problem is far more complex, far more devastating and far more long term in its eventual effects. The worst effect of “illegal” immigration is overcrowding, over-population, a decrease in median family income, document fraud, mortgage fraud, an increase in poverty, illegal driving, illegal tax evasion and a general attitude of ignoring and evading community law and law enforcement.

    Justifying such activity as “common” to all immigrant communities in the past historically” and then defending it, just because you think stopping it is prejudicial, or an action of bigotry or you see SOME people actually act like bigots by directing their anger at specific ethnicities that represent the greatest number of “illegal people” or by targeting race, gender, religion and ethnicity in their debates and personal prejudices, instead of targeting the proper “lawless behavior” or “lawful” behavior. People’s inability to do this is ALSO why I get frustrated at people’s apparent stupidity of belief and social concepts.

    Because they themselves can only think of this issue in terns of ethnicity (ON BOTH ENDS OF THE DEBATE ALL THE TIME AS EVIDENCED BY MANY OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS), They cannot and will not take the proper actions to enforce the law, and will remain mypoic to the truth of the eventual destruction to the community standard of living and the decline in ethics and safety of the neighboorhood that exists in all neighborhoods where “illegal” immigrants are present in overwhelming numbers as a result of lack of law enforcement to prevent it.

    I consider such “behaviors and beliefs” (not the persons themselves) self-inflicted with insane stupidity and naive ignorance of the eventual detrimental outcome that comes from supporting it rather than stopping it. The most devasting result if it was globally devastating mortgage debaucle caused by 25 years of “illegal” immigration and illegal over-population and the resulting WORLD-wide collapse of a global economy and loss of 4.5 million jobs per year. I think that is just one of several devastating problems with allowing “illegal” immigrants to remain in the US (all 12 million of them), because they cannot and will not be able as “illegal” immigrants to create the necessary “legal” jobs to increase our GDP/GNP using innovative science and internationally competitive small business advanced world product production. They will only undermine US labor rates, and increase social services and benefits dependency that lowers GDP/GNP.

    The sad thing is the stimulus packages of the TARP and ARRA acts (see WILL NOT preserve or increase jobs that create “new wealth” and new competitive products, but will only benefit SOME 4.5 MILLION poor PEOPLE (MOST OF WHICH ARE ALREADY part of 12 MILLION illegals), AND WILL NOT HELP sustain ECONOMIC GROWTH, BUT ONLY PROVIDE TEMPORARY RELIEF TO TARGETED and “Preferred & PRIVILIGED” MINORITIES IDENTIFIED BY HUD 8A, that will economically vaporize in two years. Like Venezuela who’s socialites and elites squandered oil profits we will squander economic bailouts that benefit only the upper 1% and the lowest 10% poverty levels using ethnicially targeted 8A programs, that WILL NOT provide innovation money to the “smartest” of Americans usually in the upper middle income levels to create “new industries”, but will only provide “life support” rather than life saving to the 12 million “illegal” immigrants who make up the bulk of the nation’s impoverished who will not create new high tech industries. This is a sad reality that “illegal” immigration support has created for the entire nation by allowing 45 million people into our borders in the lowest income levels over the past 25 years, because SOME people (specifically people of bigoted ethnicity preferences) or individual ethnicity bigoted family members felt sorry for only their ethnicity, former countrymen, or same race.

    We will suffer terribly for this lack of wisdom and pervasiveness of ignorance.

  14. Moon-howler

    Michel, I do not think people here favor illegal immigration. I think that people here want it solved differently than it has been solved.

    I think most people here would call for immigration reform. One of our contributors has been trying to have her spouse’s status adjusted for the past 8 years. Another person involved with this blog as the opposite situation. Their spouse’s status was adjusted without much ado, but it was many years ago. Why should the ‘when’ have so much to do with a person’s status? If one is married to an American citizen, why can’t steps be taken to make the spouse ‘legal?’ How long did it take you to get this matter taken care of?

  15. michael

    Moonhowler, the issue of resolving “illegal” immigration is that it is “illegal”. That means in most cases that a law was broken, and when you break a law there is usually a consequence, or sentance issued by a judge when you get caught. As in any other crime, the crime of “illegal” immigration has had a huge devastating impact on a LOT of innocent people harmed by the breaking of that law. They will demand that a judge hold these people accountable for the crime they have committed. It is a crime to be “illegal”, to harbor illegals or to transport illegals and the consequences of those crimes are the economic collapse of our entire economy. The American people are not going to forgive that without some form of compensating punishment on all individuals who committed the crime of entering the country “illegally”.

    If people would just understand this, come into the country ONLY on legal documentation and follow the law, we would not have to punish them for the crimes they have committed against us (document fraud, tax evasion, illegal harboring, zoning violations, driving illegally, voting illegally, filing fraudulent mortgage documentation, fruadulent business documentation and not paying proper employment insurance, as well as the more serious crimes committed that never had to happen in this country in the first place that devastate peoples lives through rape, robbery and death).
    This cannot be forgiven and solved with a “different solution” (make them citizens or reward them with what they want) that does not punish them seriously enough for what they have committed, and serious punishment enough to discourage all future people from doing it again.

  16. michael

    My spouse came into the country legally, but overstayed her visa, and that made a difference in our ability to get approval for a temporary residency card. It is still temporary and can be revoked if she commits any other crime other than being here as a former “illegal”.

    We are paying ecomomic penalties for her “illegal” behavior above the requirement to process an out of country green card, and the US views marriage as the right of the citizen to have a better stable life, but not the right of the “illegal” immigrant. In Twinad’s case, I feel sorry for her. She will likely be allowed to eventually pay some form of penalty equiivalent to the damage caused by “illegal” immigration. Those who do not marry there way into the US will be required to return to their native countries and wait their turn.

  17. michael

    If this is all that happens to them they will get of easy, compared to the devastation they have causeed in this country. Eventually I believe there will be jail time for this crime as people and judges assess the vast extent of the “DAMAGE” they have caused on innocent civilians.

  18. Moon-howler

    Michael, will her status ever be changed to permanent legal resident? I don’t know how that works. I don’t think the law deals with people on equitably, from what I can see.

  19. michael

    The law should be equal Moonhowler, and it approaches equity as much as possible, although judges vary in opinion as do all people, yet they hold themselves to a higher standard.

    I don’t know, that permanent status has not yet been decided, because the details of her case have not yet been completely investigated. A lot depends on what the agency believes is the extent of the crime she committed, and my honesty and proof of the reasons I gave for why I wanted to marry her.

  20. michael

    A green card is not an automatic right, or solution for “illegal” behavior, that much I do know about the process.

  21. Moon-howler

    Michael, you must live with great conflict, feeling as you do about illegal immigration and yet being married to someone who was illegal.

    Do you see a person differently who has overstayed a visa as opposed to crossing illegally?

Comments are closed.