Melvin offers second defenseless defense

by David Safier

Yesterday I posted about Melvin's response to a takedown in the Republic criticizing his proposal to spend $200,000 in state funds to put vigilantes militia a Volunteer Security Force on the border to replace Melvin's beloved but defunct Minutemen.

Melvin, I wrote, defended himself by saying we have an immigration problem. He didn't mention his proposed band of vigilantes.

This morning, he's done it again in the Star.

A few days ago, the Star wrote an editorial, Volunteer force on border is a dangerous idea. Note the emphasis of the headline: the volunteer force is a bad idea.

Here's the first paragraph:

A measure to establish a Minuteman-like "volunteer security force" under the Cochise County Sheriff's Office is dangerous, rooted in emotion and too hastily conceived. It must not be passed by the Legislature.

Once again, it's all about that volunteer security force.

And once again, Melvin's letter in response doesn't mention the volunteers.

Arizona citizens near the border live in fear as the drug cartels have become more ruthless and deadly.

My No. 1 priority is the safety of the citizens of my district and the state. It is becoming clear that the federal government is not moving fast enough to control our border.

And so on.

Does Melvin believe his idea is so indefensible, the only way to defend it is to evade it?

I don't expect Melvin or his campaign staff to enter the debate here in enemy territory. But one of them might post on a friendly site to address the concerns about his "volunteer security force" which have been expressed here, in the Republic and the Star, instead of repeating the "we have problems on the border" dodge ad infinitum.