Arizona bill 1070

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See, this is the problem. These experiences give us something you lack: empathy. We know it actually happens to people, no matter what some idiot commentator told us.

Well, it happens I guess, but I don't think it happens with the vast majority of police officers. Most of them want to do their job in good faith and go home at the end of the day.

I think the kind of racial profiling, forced interrogations, widespread harassment is a thing of the distant past. Ever since the professional policing wave, police departments have been some of the people most concerned with racial profiling and harassment of citizens in general.

Many police agencies are against the Arizona law because they feel that it will lead to profiling and will erode trust within the hispanic community, which they need to solve crimes. Drugs, guns and kidnappings have exploded in Phoenix and other Arizona cities, but the police know this law is not how to handle it. For one, most illegal immigrants are otherwise law abiding. Like all crime, the cartel violence is caused by a small minority wreaking a large majority of the havoc.

This bill will most definitely lead to profiling because it says "reasonable suspicion" of being in the country illegally is grounds for a stop. What constitutes reasonable suspicion? No one knows, but the most accepted answer is "looking Mexican." So under this bill, someone who came here legally in 1983 and got citizenship in 1992 could be pulled over in 2010, in compliance with all traffic/vehicle maintenance laws, merely because they suspect he may be in the country illegally. Why? He is Hispanic and is near a construction site, for example. This is why the Feds are taking issue with the bill, and why many police departments are taking issue with the bill. They understand the climate of mistrust it could create with law abiding citizens and legal aliens.

I don't think the Justice department would be challenging this law if it simply instructed officers who pull over or stop people for other legitimate violations to check a little more thoroughly than normal for legitimate identification as a US citizen or legal alien. "Pretext stops" have been upheld by liberals and conservatives in our court system as well within the bounds of the constitution.

Don't get me wrong, I have very little sympathy for those who illegally cross the border when so many others in the same circumstances get in line for legal immigration, residency and citizenship. If this law in Arizona leads to the arrest and deportation of 100 illegals the 1st day it is implemented, I will not particularly care or feel bad for them. Where my concern is is with the almost 100% chance that this will negatively impact many more innocent, law abiding citizens than it will illegal aliens. Just like with Bush's surveillance abuses, I care not that they wiretapped and caught some terrorist(which they could have done anyway, without violating the law) I care that they wiretapped a bunch of innocent Americans.

Either way, I hope both sides can agree that it is not the "nazi cops" who are responsible for the negative impacts of this Arizona law. They are just enforcing what the politicians passed, and many departments will undoubtedly not comply at all due to the negative implications mentioned or make it their lowest priority. I know a lot of cops and they are for the most part either very moderate Republicans or very moderate Democrats. They realize the situation on the ground in states like Arizona, and they have no use for politicians playing up the "fear the Mexican" card every election year while doing nothing in the interim.

Again, if we'd passed McCain-Kennedy in 06 or 07, we would have had better border control, more police units focused on drug cartels, kidnapping and gunrunning, and higher fines on employers of illegal immigrants.
 
I'll ask this again:

For the last several days I keep hearing from talk radio that this law "only enforces the existing federal law", if that is the case then why not just execute a state memorandum?

Can some of you supporters explain this to me? And what precautions or wording is put in place so that this doesn't give free reign on racial profiling?

What do you honestly think will be gained by this law?

Here's the problem with this law:

I hear all the Tea Partiers commenting on Obama's 'if the family went out for ice cream' quote, and they all say this scenario is false, but have you read the law?

Everyone keeps saying the police won't ask for papers unless they are breaking the law, but this isn't true. The law states unless they are suspected of breaking a law. As of now a cop can approach a young looking 21 year old if they are drinking a beer and ask for ID if they suspect they are underage. What's from stopping the police from approaching someone who looks like they might be illegal? So what is the real point of this law? You conservatives have it all wrong if you think this is just about "upholding the already in place federal law".
 
I hear all the Tea Partiers commenting on Obama's 'if the family went out for ice cream' quote, and they all say this scenario is false, but have you read the law?

The Obama comment was only "false" to the extent that it applied to legal aliens, who are supposed to have their green cards on them.

Suppose the large subset of Hispanic US Citizens in Arizona were walking down the street to get ice cream, not an action that requires having your license with you, and they were stopped?

All of a sudden, the President's reasoning becomes sound.

You are 100% right, though, the people who get stopped because of this do not have to be committing any crime of any nature, the law allows stops just based on reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegally.

I do not know of one cop or lawyer(and I talk to quite a few, I work in the same complex that houses the MA State Police headquarters and many law firms) who could come up with a set of criteria for "reasonable suspicion of illegal status" besides "they look Hispanic."

Contrast that to crack dealers. Yes, they are usually black, but the police officer stopping them has come to reasonable suspicion based on them leaving a known drug house, driving down a street and exchanging something for money, etc. They don't just say "black in the city, he's probably a crack dealer, lets pull him over."

Contrast that to prostitutes. Yes, they are almost always women, but the police officer stopping them has come to reasonable suspicion based on them hanging out on a known "street walker" corner or going in and out of a different truck at a truck stop every 15 minutes. They don't just say "girl on the corner with short skirt, she's a hooker, lets stop her."

Contrast that to pot smokers. Yes, a lot of the times they are 22 yr old college kids who listen to DMB, but the cop comes to reasonable suspicion based on seeing them light something up in the car, smelling something funny or seeing the kid reach under the seat repeatedly as he approaches the car. He doesn't say "DMB listening college kid, Janis Joplin listening hippie, Jerry Garcia clone, he's a stoner, pull his ass over."

I could go on and on, but I, like you, BVS, hope the Tea Party can see the difference by now.
 
Thank you :)

And what about those states that don't require "legal presence" for a DL?

eta:
AZ driver licensing requirements identify 5 states "that do not verify lawful presence" in the U.S.: HI, IL, NM, UT, and WA (WA verifies only for credentials labeled as "enhanced").

from: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8230616&mesg_id=8230711

So Cori, when you go to Grand Canyon? Take your passport.
 
So hospitals, clinics, insurance companies, government aid agencies, pharmacies and doctors can ask for your "papers"... but not policemen in the coarse of their normal duties.
:eyebrow:




why do you love the government so much and give it so much power?
 
Government just needs to stay out of white people's lives. If you're not white, you need to prove you're truly an American citizen.
 
Of course not. But it does happen. Darryl Gates just died. Anybody who lived in SoCal during his tenure knows what can happen.

Sure. Not disagreeing.

It was my point that it was a lot more common years ago- say right around the long, long tenure of Daryl Gates as LA Police Commissioner.(late 70s, 80s, early 90s, correct?)
 
So hospitals, clinics, insurance companies, government aid agencies, pharmacies and doctors can ask for your "papers"... but not policemen in the course of their normal duties.
:eyebrow:

:yes: ...Airlines, rental car companies, liquor stores, the DMV, the Royal Canadian Mounties, etc, etc.

I'm personally offended when these institutions ask for my papers.
 
:yes: ...Airlines, rental car companies, liquor stores, the DMV, the Royal Canadian Mounties, etc, etc.

I'm personally offended when these institutions ask for my papers.

So, you equate undertaking some kind of business transaction where money is changing hands to the right to walk down the street without someone questioning your right to be there ?

I haven't read every page of this thread but the hypocrisy is astounding, I mean this country was founded upon the principle of illegal immigration
 
:yes: ...Airlines, rental car companies, liquor stores, the DMV, the Royal Canadian Mounties, etc, etc.

I'm personally offended when these institutions ask for my papers.

Are you going this path full time now?

This issue has been answered, a DL is not the same, and you don't need legality to get a DL(and Bush was a proponent of this)...

:doh::doh::doh:

I'm personally offended by this ignorance, and I don't even know anymore if it's willful or not.
 
Arizona Immigration Law Could Cost State Major League Baseball's All-Star Game; Some Push Boycotts - ABC News

Arizona's passage of a controversial anti-immigration law could cost the state Major League Baseball's All-Star Game, potentially depriving an already battered economy of millions of dollars.

A New York congressman who called for the league to move the 2011 game from Phoenix is the latest person to push for an economic boycott against the state in protest of the new law. Companies have been pulling conferences out of Arizona resorts while others have suggested consumers shun companies, such as US Airways, that are based in the state and have yet to condemn the the law.

"I think that when people, states, localities make decisions this monumental, they should know the full consequence of that decision," Rep. José E. Serrano, D-N.Y., said. "I think Major League Baseball, with 40 percent Latino ballplayers at all levels, should make a statement that it will not hold its All-Star Game in a state that discriminates against 40 percent of their people."

The 40 percent figure could not be independently confirmed and a spokesman for Major League Baseball said the league had no comment at this time.

The 2009 game generated an estimated $60 million for St. Louis, according to the St. Louis Regional Chamber & Growth Association. New York's economy generated an estimated $150 million the year before, according to New York City's Economic Development Corp.
 
:yes: ...Airlines, rental car companies, liquor stores, the DMV, the Royal Canadian Mounties, etc, etc.

I'm personally offended when these institutions ask for my papers.

Indiana is one of the few states that requires a state issued picture ID to vote.

And yes, that was called unconstitutional (until it was upheld).

And yes, it was called racist by Democrats and the professional victim industry. But no surprise there.
 
Indiana is one of the few states that requires a state issued picture ID to vote.

And yes, that was called unconstitutional (until it was upheld).

And yes, it was called racist by Democrats and the professional victim industry. But no surprise there.
so because another state did something not remotely similar, this is ok?



this wasn't a bad debate until the clowns got sent in.
 
Indiana is one of the few states that requires a state issued picture ID to vote.

Yes, and this is similar to the Arizona law how?

I am not questioning the constitutionality of voter ID laws, I really never have.

The question I have always asked is "what, practically, is this attempting to solve?"

In most states, you already have to show 2 forms of identification to register to vote in the first place.

Its a solution in search of a problem.

Find me an objective source that says illegal aliens are voting in any significant numbers. If they're afraid to report crimes(which can be done anonymously) then they are not about to go in and try and vote with a false name.
 
Government just needs to stay out of white people's lives. If you're not white, you need to prove you're truly an American citizen.

Post like this are uninformed along Irvine's opening post.

You guys don't live here in Az-I do.

Illegal is beholden to no race.

We just arrested a French Canadian with 3 outstanding warrants w ICE.

We deported him. He was pulled over during a routine traffic stop and could not produce a DL, which led to further questioning-which led to his deportation. As I stated earlier: Illegal is beholden to no race.

Also, Az. being next to Mexico which has a porous border, Phx. is the ranked 3rd in the world for kidnapping, we've pleaded w the Fed Govt to do something for years and they haven't, therefore-we were forced to do something.

Further 3 policeman have been killed recently by illegal aliens, have you thought about the families of the policemen?

Also, a rancher in So. Az was killed by a drug cartel member from Mexico recently- where the rancher was only trying to provide water for the suspect.

We are pro immigration here: Legal Immigration.

So, I suggest we quit w/the vitriol here and calmly reason w one another-civilly.

Interestingly other states are starting to adopt similar legislation to Az.

There is nothing wrong w law and order and civility. Lastly, understand that the law enforcement in Az. are very professional, and sensitive to the issues. I am friends w several prosecutors in this state and law enforcement professionals as well.

If you're here illegally, work on ways making yourself legal-it's just that simple.

<>
 
Back
Top Bottom