Analysis: Travel bans are no solution to terrorism-related deaths

first_imgWould any ban have prevented this? No. He emigrated from Uzbekistan.Several incidents might (might) have been prevented — but no one was killed in those incidents.So, on Wednesday, no discussion of the travel ban and, instead, a look at vetting.But there’s cold water to be dumped on that, too.According to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Saipov was radicalized only after arriving in America — meaning that no vetting, no matter how extreme, is likely to have filtered him out upon his arrival in the country.Philip Bump is a correspondent for The Washington Post based in New York City.More from The Daily Gazette:EDITORIAL: Thruway tax unfair to working motoristsEDITORIAL: Beware of voter intimidationEDITORIAL: Urgent: Today is the last day to complete the censusEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homesFoss: Should main downtown branch of the Schenectady County Public Library reopen? July 2006. A man opens fire at a Jewish organization in Seattle. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen, born in the United States.June 2009. A man opens fire at a military recruiting center in Little Rock, Arkansas. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen, born in the United States.November 2009. The shooting at Fort Hood, Texas. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen, born in the United States.December 2009. A Nigerian-born man attempts to detonate a bomb on a flight to Detroit. Would any ban have prevented this? No. Nigeria isn’t on the list.May 2011. Two Iraqi nationals are arrested in Bowling Green, Kentucky, for aiding terrorist attacks outside the United States. Would any ban have prevented this?Yes. The initial version of the ban included Iraq.April 2013. Two bombs are detonated at the Boston Marathon. Would any ban have prevented this? No. The Tsarnaev brothers were born in the Soviet Union and Kyrgyzstan. One was a naturalized citizen, the other a green-card holder.April-June 2014. A man in Washington murders several people in separate incidents. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen, born in the United States. October 2014. A man in Queens attacks police officers with a hatchet. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen, born in the United States.May 2015. Two men attempt to attack an event in Garland, Texas. Would any ban have prevented this? No. Both were citizens, born in the United States.July 2015. A man opens fire at military installations in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a naturalized citizen from Kuwait.December 2015. A married couple attack a holiday party in San Bernardino, California. Would any ban have prevented this? No. One was a citizen, born in the United States, and the other was a native of Pakistan, not included in the ban.January 2016. A man shoots a police officer in Philadelphia. Would any ban have prevented this? No. The shooter appears to have been a native-born citizen.February 2016. A man attacks diners at a restaurant in Ohio with a machete. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a native of Guinea and held a green card.June 2016. A man open fire at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, killing 49 people. Would any ban have prevented this? No. The shooter was born in Queens. Categories: Editorial, OpinionPresident Donald Trump’s response to terrorist attacks is fairly predictable. Shortly after the attacks occur — assuming they’re presumed to have been committed by individuals who might be linked to the Islamic State — Trump will tweet out something about how the incident bolsters his call for new restrictions on immigration.It has happened so often that we can point to compilations of examples, instead of just individual occurrences.After the attack in New York on Tuesday, though, there was a slight shift in the pitch that Trump was making.Normally, he argues that the incident necessitates the implementation of his travel ban — as he did after a failed bombing on a train in London this year.Trump tweeted in September:“The travel ban into the United States should be far larger, tougher and more specific-but stupidly, that would not be politically correct!”After Tuesday, though, Trump’s pitch was not for the travel ban, but for new extra-extreme vetting of immigrants. Here’s that list, with two changes: the addition of Saipov and consideration of whether any of the bans would have prevented the incidents.August 1997. Two men with Jordanian passports are arrested in New York before they could bomb public transit in the city. Would any ban have prevented this? No. Jordan isn’t on the list.December 1999. A man from Algeria is arrested after entering the United States in Washington. His car is loaded with explosives; he planned to attack Los Angeles International Airport. Would any ban have prevented this? No, and he was detained at the border anyway.September 2001. The coordinated attacks in New York and the Washington area, committed by 19 individuals from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon. Would any ban have prevented this? No. None of those countries is on the list.December 2001. Richard Reid, a British citizen, attempts to light a shoe bomb on a plane to Miami. Would any ban have prevented this? No, Britain is not on the list.July 2002. A shooter from Egypt opens fire at an El Al counter at LAX. Would any ban have prevented this? No, Egypt is not on the list.March 2006. An Iran-born U.S. citizen drives an SUV into people at the University of North Carolina, injuring nine. Would any ban have prevented this?Possibly. He came to the country at age 2 before being naturalized. It’s not clear whether his parents had family in the country at the time. September 2016. A man stabbed people at a mall in Minnesota, injuring several. Would any ban have prevented this? No. The attacker was born in Kenya and moved to the United States when he was 3 months old.September 2016. A bomb is detonated in Manhattan. Would any ban have prevented this? No. The attacker was born in Afghanistan and was a naturalized citizen.November 2016. A student at Ohio State University drives his car into a crowd, injuring 11. Would any ban have prevented this?Possibly. The attacker was born in Somalia and had been living in Pakistan when he immigrated in 2014.January 2017. A man opens fire at the Fort Lauderdale, Florida,  airport. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen, born in the United States.January 2017. A man fatally shoots a transit worker in Denver. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen, born in the United States.June 2017. A man stabs a police office at an airport in Flint, Michigan. Would any ban have prevented this? No. He was a citizen of Canada and Tunisia.November 2017. Saipov allegedly drives down a bike path in New York City, killing eight. “I have just ordered Homeland Security to step up our already Extreme Vetting Program. Being politically correct is fine, but not for this!” he tweeted Wednesday.And also: “We are fighting hard for Merit Based immigration, no more Democrat Lottery Systems. We must get MUCH tougher (and smarter).” Why the difference?Perhaps in part because Trump’s travel ban, now in its third iteration, wouldn’t have prevented the entry of Sayfullo Saipov, the suspect in the New York attack.Saipov moved to the United States seven years ago from Uzbekistan, a country that hasn’t been included in any version of Trump’s ban.(The countries currently included in the ban — which was blocked by a federal court — are Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Iran, North Korea, Chad and Venezuela. Sudan and Iraq have been removed after appearing on earlier iterations.)In June, we noted that Trump’s travel ban(s) wouldn’t have actually prevented any terrorism-related deaths in the United States over the past 20 years, listing out all of the relevant examples.last_img read more

Read More →

Taking away guns isn’t the answer

first_imgDemocrats are using despicable tactics to strip Second Amendment rights from the American people. The recent tactic of using the Parkland children to advance their oppressive agenda is just the latest example of their shamelessness. Bad as you might feel for what happened to these kids, the fact remains is that they’re kids, with very little life experience or knowledge of human nature. They’re the last people you want making decisions for you.Additionally, we currently have a media that will only report on guns if it furthers the left’s agenda. They don’t report on legal firearm owners who use their weapons to prevent crime, despite some studies estimating up to 2.5 million crimes a year are prevented by legal gun owners. You rarely hear of instances when civilian gun owners or armed security guards stop mass shooters, because those shootings didn’t happen or were stopped early. As far as the media is concerned, these stories don’t fit a leftist agenda, so we hear nothing.The left and their media allies also don’t seem to realize that trying to take guns away from law-abiding Americans would lead to violence unlike anything this country has seen. There are 300 million legal guns in the United States, owned overwhelmingly by people who recognize that their natural rights aren’t optional. Trying to disarm these people would lead to violence on the order of magnitude greater than any school shooting, and the citizens wouldn’t be wrong in defending their freedoms. You want to make schools safe? Put an armed security guard in each school, or allow teachers to conceal carry. Anything else is an un-serious distraction.David WelchScotiaMore from The Daily Gazette:EDITORIAL: Urgent: Today is the last day to complete the censusEDITORIAL: Thruway tax unfair to working motoristsEDITORIAL: Beware of voter intimidationEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homesFoss: Should main downtown branch of the Schenectady County Public Library reopen? Categories: Letters to the Editor, Opinionlast_img read more

Read More →

Letters to the Editor for Friday, August 2

first_imgCategories: Letters to the Editor, OpinionCat-clawing bill was not well thought out I have had many cats over the years and all but one have been declawed. Only one took to the scratch post, so I left his claws alone.When I had my cats declawed, I paid to have them stay a few extra nights at the vets to be monitored and given any pain meds.They came home and felt fine. They still run around, jump and play. They jump off the windowsills.If the declawing procedure was so horrible, don’t you think they’d cry when they hit the floor? Not once have I seen them limping or crying.Of course, I took them to a reputable veterinarian, not some student learning at a vet school. Linda Rosenthal, the Manhattan Democrat who sponsored the bill outlawing declawing should have spent more time fighting the new abortion law that our governor signed.He’s absolutely horrified to hear of declawing, but can sleep at night after signing the abortion bill. Oh, and what about docking a dog’s tail and ears? Now that’s pretty barbaric.This procedure is done for looks, not because the animal is ruining furniture. How about banning that procedure? The bottom line is that more cats will be brought back to the shelters and euthanized or not adopted at all. Or even worse, they’ll be dumped along a back road left to fend for themselves. Lorraine VanDerWerkenSchenectadyMake debates more accessible to votersMillions of Americans who are eligible to vote don’t vote.  Millions of Americans who are eligible to vote don’t have access to cable-TV. Yet the July 30 and 31 Democratic primary debates among nearly two dozen men and women vying to be the party’s standard-bearer in the 2020 presidential election were aired solely by CNN, a cable-TV outlet. That’s hardly a way to strengthen the sinews of our American electoral democracy. Score one for Donald Trump and his Republican minions.Alvin MagidNiskayunaMore from The Daily Gazette:EDITORIAL: Urgent: Today is the last day to complete the censusGov. Andrew Cuomo’s press conference for Sunday, Oct. 18EDITORIAL: Thruway tax unfair to working motoristsEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homesFoss: Should main downtown branch of the Schenectady County Public Library reopen?last_img read more

Read More →

Foss: Downtown parking in Schenectady merits study

first_imgIn recent years, urban planners have come to view parking minimums as a hindrance that drives up the cost of development, making housing less affordable. They maintain that cities actually have an abundance of parking, and that requiring developers to create new spaces fills cities up with underused parking lots.“There is nothing wrong with a business opting to provide parking for its customers, or a residential building providing it for its residents,” the non-profit organization Strong Towns, which advocates for the abolition of parking minimums, states on its website.“But those businesses are perfectly capable of assessing their own need for parking, and weighing it against the other, potentially more valuable things they might do with the same land. Only when parking is not mandated can we do that weighing, decide what it’s actually worth to us, and price it accordingly.”All of which sounds perfectly reasonable.But I still have a lot of questions.And until a parking study provides answers, I won’t be able to offer a more enthusiastic endorsement of eliminating Schenectady’s parking minimum.More from The Daily Gazette:Controversial solar project goes before Clifton Park Planning BoardEDITORIAL: Beware of voter intimidationSchenectady, Saratoga casinos say reopening has gone well; revenue down 30%Schenectady High School senior class leaders look to salvage sense of normalcyEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homes Categories: News, Opinion, Schenectady CountyCall me a tentative supporter of eliminating Schenectady’s parking requirements for downtown apartments.If I say tentative, it’s because I agree with the idea in principle, but have concerns about how it might work in practice.From an environmental and planning perspective, eliminating parking minimums makes sense, which is why more cities are doing it.What I’m concerned with is whether the city of Schenectady is capable of enacting such a sweeping change without creating more headaches for businesses and residents.Just last week, one local business owner spoke to me at length about the lack of on-street parking for customers due to downtown workers occupying metered spots all day long.How would eliminating parking minimums impact him and other business owners? How would it impact people who live downtown? How would it impact people visiting downtown for a show at Proctors or fun event, such as the Soup Stroll?These are the kinds of questions the city needs to ask if it’s serious about scrapping its longstanding mandate of 1.5 parking spots per apartment. Which is why it’s encouraging to hear city Planning Commission Chair Mary Moore Wallinger, who recently expressed support for eliminating the regulation, say that the city must conduct a strategic parking study before making a decision.A strategic parking study of downtown is sorely needed.Frankly, it’s astonishing that the city doesn’t already have one, given all the development that’s occurred over the past decade. Over 1,000 apartment units have been built downtown since 2013. How many of the people who live in these units have cars? Where do they park? I’ve heard a lot of different complaints about downtown parking, and while that’s hardly surprising, it does suggest that the subject might benefit from deeper analysis.  A parking study would provide data on who parks downtown, where they park, peak parking times and lots/spaces that are underused. It would examine the needs of business owners, but also of residents and visitors. It would tell us whether the city has too much parking, just enough or too little.And it would help shape future parking policies and practices, providing insight into whether the city’s parking minimum is an outdated and unnecessary requirement.Parking minimums force developers to provide a certain number of off-street parking spaces – a mandate that seems sensible, because it ensures that people can find a spot to park when they need one, but is actually quite costly.last_img read more

Read More →

Agents search as rents keep on rising

first_imgTo access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week. Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletterslast_img

Read More →

Bristol offices: Bristol’s second wind

first_imgWould you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.last_img

Read More →

Speculating on Guildford

first_imgWould you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.last_img

Read More →

Sheffield student digs are investment treasures

first_imgWould you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.last_img

Read More →

Local knowledge

first_imgTo access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week. Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletterslast_img

Read More →

Battle for £700m Industrious begins

first_imgTo access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week. Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletterslast_img

Read More →