PDA

View Full Version : OT: San Francisco boycotting Arizona?


Pages : 1 [2] 3

epicSocialism4tw
04-28-2010, 11:07 PM
Draconian, meaning particularly harsh law or rule.

Yeah, I know what it means. So I studied greek history, what's it to you?

Because your "Draconian" reference is about the most overdramatic, inaccurate representation of that law that one could possibly make. Its like saying that someone is a Nazi...unless that person is actually a Nazi, by mentioning the Nazi's you only make yourself look desperate to try to appeal to someone's emotions by using an unreasonable and cheap tactic. That's why I asked if you knew what it meant, because I didnt want to assume that you were that type of person. But you have confirmed it.

Why are the Canadians channelling Draco here? I mean, if Canada really was concerned about social justice and the rights of the illegal Mexican immigrants, they would send a ship down, pick them all up, and bring them to Canada. Why are they being so particularly cruel and inhumane not to spend their peoples resources to do something for these people?

Canada: the New Home of Draco.

ghwk
04-28-2010, 11:09 PM
Because your "Draconian" reference is about the most overdramatic, inaccurate representation of that law that one could possibly make. Its like saying that someone is a Nazi...unless that person is actually a Nazi, by mentioning the Nazi's you only make yourself look desperate to try to appeal to someone's emotions by using an unreasonable and cheap tactic. That's why I asked if you knew what it meant, because I didnt want to assume that you were that type of person. But you have confirmed it.

Why are the Canadians channelling Draco here? I mean, if Canada really was concerned about social justice and the rights of the illegal Mexican immigrants, they would send a ship down, pick them all up, and bring them to Canada. Why are they being so particularly cruel and inhumane not to spend their peoples resources to do something for these people?

Canada: the New Home of Draco.

LOL This coming from the dramallama

Tombstone RJ
04-28-2010, 11:16 PM
Seriously, a Canadian should STFU. I bet Killericon would be singing a different toon if we bussed all the illegals up to Nova Scotia or Quebec or Montreal or Toronto.

Let's poor half a million illegals into Montreal and see how the goody two shoes, lilly white North feels about it. The french phuuuks would have a cow.

mkporter
04-28-2010, 11:17 PM
Ok, whatever. I'm sure you know all about lost dignity.

Wow. Huge burn on me. Nice argument. The point is that when you wrongly detain someone, $25 an hour ain't always gonna cut it. And when it doesn't, there will be lawsuits, costing the state lots of $$.

Tombstone RJ
04-28-2010, 11:20 PM
Wow. Huge burn on me. Nice argument. The point is that when you wrongly detain someone, $25 an hour ain't always gonna cut it. And when it doesn't, there will be lawsuits, costing the state lots of $$.

Fine, let there be lawsuits. But do something.

broncocalijohn
04-28-2010, 11:29 PM
Wow. Easily the most overlooked part of this story.



So, they were already having success...Yet still needed to resort to draconian measures?

do you realize how many are still there and how many criminals are in that hundreds of thousands? This law was pushed through by last months murder of a rancher near the border of Mexico. The residents have seen a huge increase in crime and just the amount of illegals in the area. These arent draconian measures. This is a law that is being (finally) put into action. This law is nothing compared to what Mexico does to protect their country. There is a reason why only 30% of Arizonians disapprove of the measure. They live through the mess.

broncocalijohn
04-28-2010, 11:39 PM
Wow. Huge burn on me. Nice argument. The point is that when you wrongly detain someone, $25 an hour ain't always gonna cut it. And when it doesn't, there will be lawsuits, costing the state lots of $$.

there is no way someone is going to take $25 an hour for a major mistake. This is why law enforcement better be sure they follow the law to the more on the conservative side. No need to go criminal crazy.

Jason in LA
04-28-2010, 11:40 PM
Well I haven't read the 11 pages of this thread, so I really don't know what directions you all have taken this issue.

As for the original topic, it's more than just San Francisco talking about boycotting Arizona. A lot of companies and organizations will be boycotting that state as well.

My fraternity is scheduled to hold our national convention in Phoenix in July, and brothers are wanting to move it to another state in protest. Well, I've pointed out several times that it's a smart move. Two years ago a number of us wanted it moved from Phoenix, because who wants to go to Phoenix in July. But contracts had already been signed and backing out would cost the fraternity $180,000. That was two years ago. That number has probably gone up. And brothers are still talking about canceling the event.

I don't like the bill, but $180,000 to protest is just silly. Brothers are talking about not spending money in Az, but by backing out we'd be spending money in Az.

I'm wondering how many organizations are pulling their events out of Az because of this bill.

Killericon
04-28-2010, 11:46 PM
Because your "Draconian" reference is about the most overdramatic, inaccurate representation of that law that one could possibly make. Its like saying that someone is a Nazi...unless that person is actually a Nazi, by mentioning the Nazi's you only make yourself look desperate to try to appeal to someone's emotions by using an unreasonable and cheap tactic. That's why I asked if you knew what it meant, because I didnt want to assume that you were that type of person. But you have confirmed it.

Why are the Canadians channelling Draco here? I mean, if Canada really was concerned about social justice and the rights of the illegal Mexican immigrants, they would send a ship down, pick them all up, and bring them to Canada. Why are they being so particularly cruel and inhumane not to spend their peoples resources to do something for these people?

Canada: the New Home of Draco.

It's a message board, man. Sorry if I used colourful language. IMO, it violates a constitutional right. That seems pretty harsh. Also, I didn't mention the Nazis, you did, and you were making me into a straw man while you were doing it. I don't think this is anything like that, and the comparison is silly. I wasn't comparing the law to Draco, I was using a colourful adjective. Your comparison of Draco to the Nazis is pretty overly dramatic, while we're at it.

Anyways, I apologize if my language gave the impression that I think this law is equivalent to the Nazis, or if I gave the impression that I was trying to appeal to people's emotions. I'm not. I'm just opposed to the law, and find it to go to extreme lengths.

Seriously, a Canadian should STFU. I bet Killericon would be singing a different toon if we bussed all the illegals up to Nova Scotia or Quebec or Montreal or Toronto.

Let's poor half a million illegals into Montreal and see how the goody two shoes, lilly white North feels about it. The french phuuuks would have a cow.

That's a pretty fair thing to say. This is not my debate. I've admitted in the thread multiple times that this is all academic to me, and that I don't really have an opinion on what should be done in terms of long term solutions for the illegal immigration issue. My point is that you don't have to trample the 4th amendment while you're doing it. Furthermore, I'm well aware that as a white kid from Calgary going to school in Nova Scotia, I'm about as far removed from any REAL conflict as any being has ever been since the dawn of time. Again, it's all academic to me, so I'm sorry if I come across as a snide, uninformed know-it-all college douchebag who thinks his 2 years of liberal arts studies has given him all the answers. I'm surrounded by those people, I pray I'm not one of them.

Is deportation the answer? If it is, then it can be done without violating people's rights. If it can't, well, there's that, but I don't think that's the case, or all other options have yet to be exhausted. Close the border, first.

I mentioned to my hyper-partisan democrat friend from Albuquerque that I was opposed to this law, and she instantly dropped the Nazi comparison. Good god. Poles apart.

The way I look at it? Being in the thick of it hasn't helped any of you guys form a cohesive opinion, so I might as well hop in an OT thread about a current event. Canadian Politics are boring as ****.

I'm gonna leave the thread now, but to summarize: I think the law violates the 4th Amendment, unless you think racial profiling is 'reasonable'. I don't mean to compare this to ANY historic event, or to give the impression that I have an opinion on the overall issue at hand(what to do with illegal immigrants). I just think the law is unconstitutional.

P.S.

Just because one Canadian expressed an opinion doesn't mean we all did.

broncocalijohn
04-29-2010, 12:56 AM
Jason, companies are backing out but I guarantee you that once Arizona industries fell the crunch, citizens will vacation there. In fact, If this keeps up, there should be some really great deals for the Broncos vs Cardinals in Phoenix. Maybe people sick of illegals end up moving there. Individuals will fill in for those companies that think they need to make a stand. I just hope they are not on an island and other states like Utah and Texas try at it. We tried Prop 187 which seemed much more tough on them personally. You never know if California follows with their own proposition. $180k to cancel? I am amazed how many blacks dont back up anti- illegal alien bills since many of them steal jobs from them. Last time I looked, blacks worked many of the same jobs that whites do ie. construction. It isnt a color thing but an American thing. Maybe your brothers are all white collar big shots and need them for work around their mansions. It works for Graham and Bush.

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 06:36 AM
The state of Arizona is fully within it's rights to defend itself economically. There is nothing illegal about this law or what they are doing.

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 06:41 AM
Ahh your brothers are being stupid. This law protects them and well as all Citizens.

Well I haven't read the 11 pages of this thread, so I really don't know what directions you all have taken this issue.

As for the original topic, it's more than just San Francisco talking about boycotting Arizona. A lot of companies and organizations will be boycotting that state as well.

My fraternity is scheduled to hold our national convention in Phoenix in July, and brothers are wanting to move it to another state in protest. Well, I've pointed out several times that it's a smart move. Two years ago a number of us wanted it moved from Phoenix, because who wants to go to Phoenix in July. But contracts had already been signed and backing out would cost the fraternity $180,000. That was two years ago. That number has probably gone up. And brothers are still talking about canceling the event.

I don't like the bill, but $180,000 to protest is just silly. Brothers are talking about not spending money in Az, but by backing out we'd be spending money in Az.

I'm wondering how many organizations are pulling their events out of Az because of this bill.

brother love
04-29-2010, 07:06 AM
The state of Arizona is fully within it's rights to defend itself economically. There is nothing illegal about this law or what they are doing.

Dead on my man!

If the federal government would do what they are supposed to do Arizona wouldn't have had to do this. As an american I would have no problem showing my ID if someone asked for it if I knew it would help keep illegals out of the country. As the law is written they can't stop you and request ID unless a crime is being committed.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 08:53 AM
The state of Arizona is fully within it's rights to defend itself economically. There is nothing illegal about this law or what they are doing.

My bet is that the supreme court disagrees.

Meck77
04-29-2010, 08:55 AM
Well I haven't read the 11 pages of this thread, so I really don't know what directions you all have taken this issue.

As for the original topic, it's more than just San Francisco talking about boycotting Arizona. A lot of companies and organizations will be boycotting that state as well.

My fraternity is scheduled to hold our national convention in Phoenix in July, and brothers are wanting to move it to another state in protest. Well, I've pointed out several times that it's a smart move. Two years ago a number of us wanted it moved from Phoenix, because who wants to go to Phoenix in July. But contracts had already been signed and backing out would cost the fraternity $180,000. That was two years ago. That number has probably gone up. And brothers are still talking about canceling the event.

I don't like the bill, but $180,000 to protest is just silly. Brothers are talking about not spending money in Az, but by backing out we'd be spending money in Az.

I'm wondering how many organizations are pulling their events out of Az because of this bill.

Jason if you guys to move your meeting just be sure you don't move it to a state that is following AZ's footsteps. Missouri is next. I heard several others are considering it. My gut says there are going to be a wave of states following suit over the next few years.

http://www.nbcactionnews.com/news/local/story/Arizonas-immigration-law-could-come-to-Missouri/RoWR4ajCa0eRjIESnteUQw.cspx

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 09:21 AM
I'm actually surprised how many proponents for this law there are on this board. Personally as the law is designed now, I do believe it will be found unconstitutional as a violation of rights of privacy as well as civil rights. I think that if the law clearly provided stops should occur under reasonable suspicion on all illegal immigrants (i.e. Canadian, Irish, Egyptian, etc...) then it would have more chance of standing up under constitutional scrutiny. However, the very purpose of the law is to identify one class of people based solely on skin color and how they speak and actual US citizens and Residents are going to be affected in the process.

I don't necessarily think the law is bad, but I just don't see it holding up. I do worry that if I am absolutely wrong, and this law is held up in the courts or never challenged, and many other states follow (Scott McInnis claims he will do the same in CO if elected)... I see it being a slippery slope opening the door for law enforcement to stretch the definition of reasonable suspicion. In essence allowing them stops and detentions of any citizen for practically any reason.

I once suggested the best solution to the "Mexico" problem (since thats where the illegals flow from), is simply invade, conquer, incorporate. I don't disagree with that position either, seeing where Mexico appears to be headed as of late. However, I'm sure I'd have some moral and ethical qualms about that as well if it were actually a real possibility.

And by the way, a wall is never going to be a permanent solution. Maybe a tunnel to Canada?

MrPeepers
04-29-2010, 09:38 AM
-- i live in arizona

i think this law leans in the right direction, it is a national defense priority that is neglected and the state gave up on the federal government to establish protection on the border and within the center of the state.

the only issues I really have with the law are
1. it will be expensive to taxpayers, where are you going to keep everyone that is found to be illegal, and where will the money come from to train police officers in questioning people. (I feel most people are chiming in and have read nothing or understand little on this bill, especially those far from Arizona that get their news via TV)



2. the police must be 100% consistant in asking if everyone is a citizen or we will have frivilous lawsuits. I think everyone police talk to, must be asked this to avoid the profiling aspect. Get the drivers license or state id for any lawbreaker, or do the background search for those without. I think this is fair to everyone, eventually this state will be tough on it and illegals will go somewhere else.

After the rancher was killed on the border this was the last straw. Obama, looking down his nose on any state that asserts itself is ridiculous. Napalatino has ignored requests from everyone to get tough on the border. People in AZ approve the bill 70% to 30%. A country that can't secure it's borders will degenrate. Arizona can boycott California too, I don't think that is a mature answer.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 09:57 AM
Fact is, the federal government has forced the Southern border states backs against the wall. It has done nothing but ignore the issue for decades and due to the violence of the drug trade coming out of Mexico, AZ feels like it has to do something.

The fed government is a joke and continually steps on state's rights. California should back the fug off. It's a joke of a state that can't do anything right. I wonder how all the Cali idiots will feel when the fed gov arrests people for growing marijuana even though it's legal in California.

California = Fail

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 09:57 AM
My bet is that the supreme court disagrees.

Please. I would love to hear this legal argument.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 09:58 AM
The federal gov's drug policy = fail

Archer81
04-29-2010, 09:59 AM
Fact is, the federal government has forced the Southern border states backs against the wall. It has done nothing but ignore the issue for decades and due to the violence of the drug trade coming out of Mexico, AZ feels like it has to do something.

The fed government is a joke and continually steps on state's rights. California should back the fug off. It's a joke of a state that can't do anything right. I wonder how all the Cali idiots will feel when the fed gov arrests people for growing marijuana even though it's legal in California.

California = Fail


When someone called for boycotting Arizona Tea, I nearly lost it...its bottled in New York...

:Broncos:

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 10:14 AM
Please. I would love to hear this legal argument.

Garcia - that sounds Hispanic. This creates a reasonable suspicion that you may not be here legally. I think you need to provide ID and proof legal citizenship to the Omane.

ColoradoDarin
04-29-2010, 10:20 AM
Garcia - that sounds Hispanic. This creates a reasonable suspicion that you may not be here legally. I think you need to provide ID and proof legal citizenship to the Omane.

You too Ireland boy :D


I see your really pasty skin and red hair and think, he must be illegal ROFL!

bronco militia
04-29-2010, 10:21 AM
the Hippies in San Fran are pissed because they are going to have to foot the bill for the illegals not living in Arizona anymore

bronco militia
04-29-2010, 10:22 AM
You too Ireland boy :D


I see your really pasty skin and red hair and think, he must be illegal ROFL!

is it kick a Ginger day yet? :haw!:

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 10:22 AM
Garcia - that sounds Hispanic. This creates a reasonable suspicion that you may not be here legally. I think you need to provide ID and proof legal citizenship to the Omane.

What happens when a Latino police officer asks Spanish speaking immigrant for proof of citizenship? There's a huge population of Latinos citizens in America and I'd like to get there opinion on the AZ situation.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 10:29 AM
What happens when a Latino police officer asks Spanish speaking immigrant for proof of citizenship? There's a huge population of Latinos citizens in America and I'd like to get there opinion on the AZ situation.

70% of Arizonans are OK with the bill...I doubt that 70% is completely lilywhite.


:Broncos:

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 10:30 AM
What happens when a Latino police officer asks Spanish speaking immigrant for proof of citizenship? There's a huge population of Latinos citizens in America and I'd like to get there opinion on the AZ situation.

You already got one on this board earlier, he was in full support. You also have a bunch of people arguing that other people don't know what the law even says, even though I posted a link to it earlier.

For the most part, I have no problem with getting proper ID from ANYONE when any law has been violated, including Jay Walking or minor traffic violations. I do have a problem with the slippery slope of reasonable suspicion when no laws are violated. That's my only issue with this law.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 10:31 AM
You already got one on this board earlier, he was in full support. You also have a bunch of people arguing that other people don't know what the law even says, even though I posted a link to it earlier.

For the most part, I have no problem with getting proper ID from ANYONE when any law has been violated, including Jay Walking or minor traffic violations. I do have a problem with the slippery slope of reasonable suspicion when no laws are violated. That's my only issue with this law.


Its my understanding that they can't just stop you and demand your ID. You have to be doing something a cop would stop you for in the first place. Like a seatbelt. They cant pull you over for not wearing one, but for speeding or a busted tail light they can, and then they can cite you for not wearing a seatbelt. Same deal.

:Broncos:

Meck77
04-29-2010, 10:37 AM
I do have a problem with the slippery slope of reasonable suspicion when no laws are violated. That's my only issue with this law.

I asked the question early . Have any of you driven around Mexico before? Getting pulled over for being white is the norm. Having your car searched and told you have to pay the police money for no reason is also the norm. It's just the way it is down there. Maybe if more of you have had that experience you'd think differently about our police force in the states checking IDs.

What's funny is many of you are arguing that "rights" will be lost with this new law. Talk to some ranchers down in AZ who've lived in fear for decades on their own mother ****ing land! Some rancher friends of mine have been working land on the border for several generations. They can't even check on their own cattle on their own land in AMERICA without a confrontation of some sort.

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 10:45 AM
This, from 2004:

A report that found that illegal immigrants in the United States cost the federal government more than $10 billion a year -- a sum it estimated would almost triple if they were given amnesty -- has drawn criticism from immigration advocacy groups.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33783-2004Aug25.html

The response cracks me up:
"There is a growing consensus in both political parties that our immigration system needs to be comprehensively reformed," Sharry said. "Our current system of haphazard laws, spotty enforcement, border chaos and unfair restrictions needs to be replaced by a regulatory regime that makes immigration safe, legal and orderly."

Did it occur to Mr. Sharry that we have a regulatory regime that tries to make immigration safe, legal and orderly, but illegal aliens are bypassing the system by breaking the law and making immigration unsafe, illegal and disorderly? Ha!

El Guapo
04-29-2010, 10:45 AM
Well, its working for Arizona, but they'll just come to Texas.

That's why all the border states need to be unified with a common legislation.

I read this morning that Texas is working on enacting something very similiar here soon!

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 10:47 AM
Garcia - that sounds Hispanic. This creates a reasonable suspicion that you may not be here legally. I think you need to provide ID and proof legal citizenship to the Omane.

No problem.

This law only enforces the Federal Law. Nor can anyone be stopped for being "Brown". However if they do stop you for a primary offense then you must provide your green card, which is federal law. This is a secondary offense. If the argument is to bring alive the 10th amendment please do so. Any ruling against this law will be awesome for many other things the Feds stick their nose in

mkporter
04-29-2010, 10:57 AM
Please. I would love to hear this legal argument.

For starters, the law likely conflicts with the supremacy clause of the constitution. The constitution grants the federal government power to regulate out borders, and the supremacy clause maintains that state laws that conflict with federal laws are unconstitutional.

The law, as written, also likely opens the door to 4th amendment violations, which is why a lot of people don't like the law.

From the text of the law:
FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

The fourth amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The problem is in the application of what is "reasonable suspicion." The Arizona law allows people to be detained for no other reason than their race. Given that about 1/3 of Arizona is Hispanic, this allow creates a very real possibility that large numbers of people will be wrongfully detained, in violation of their 4th amendment rights.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:04 AM
Its my understanding that they can't just stop you and demand your ID. You have to be doing something a cop would stop you for in the first place. Like a seatbelt. They cant pull you over for not wearing one, but for speeding or a busted tail light they can, and then they can cite you for not wearing a seatbelt. Same deal.

:Broncos:

The law allows for a cop to determine your immigration status for any "Lawful contact." This is the slippery slope. The interpretation here is that any contact with an officer that is not "unlawful," such as a cop kicking down the door of your house without a warrant, is good enough. It is "lawful" for a cop to stop and talk with you casually on the street. But now he can ask for your papers (which is NOT just your driver license, either). This is where I have issue with the law.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:05 AM
I asked the question early . Have any of you driven around Mexico before? Getting pulled over for being white is the norm. Having your car searched and told you have to pay the police money for no reason is also the norm. It's just the way it is down there. Maybe if more of you have had that experience you'd think differently about our police force in the states checking IDs.

Yeah, lets be like Mexico, 'cause they've got it all figured out.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:05 AM
For starters, the law likely conflicts with the supremacy clause of the constitution. The constitution grants the federal government power to regulate out borders, and the supremacy clause maintains that state laws that conflict with federal laws are unconstitutional.



The Arizona law pulls directly from federal immigration law.


:Broncos:

Meck77
04-29-2010, 11:09 AM
Yeah, lets be like Mexico, 'cause they've got it all figured out.

Many Americans including myself have stopped traveling to Mexico as a result. Problem solved Amigo!

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:09 AM
No problem.

This law only enforces the Federal Law. Nor can anyone be stopped for being "Brown". However if they do stop you for a primary offense then you must provide your green card, which is federal law. This is a secondary offense. If the argument is to bring alive the 10th amendment please do so. Any ruling against this law will be awesome for many other things the Feds stick their nose in

Under this law, you can be stopped for any "reasonable suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant. There does NOT need to be any other primary offense. The law does nothing to say that being brown isn't good enough.

Here's the relevant text:
B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:11 AM
The law allows for a cop to determine your immigration status for any "Lawful contact." This is the slippery slope. The interpretation here is that any contact with an officer that is not "unlawful," such as a cop kicking down the door of your house without a warrant, is good enough. It is "lawful" for a cop to stop and talk with you casually on the street. But now he can ask for your papers (which is NOT just your driver license, either). This is where I have issue with the law.


The cop cannot just stop you and ask for your ID. You have to be engaging in something a cop will stop and ask you about.

:Broncos:

ElwayMD
04-29-2010, 11:13 AM
70% of Arizonans are OK with the bill...I doubt that 70% is completely lilywhite.


:Broncos:

Most immigrants who went through the proper channels to become US citizens are 100% in support of cracking down on illegals. It's not a shocker to me.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:15 AM
The cop cannot just stop you and ask for your ID. You have to be engaging in something a cop will stop and ask you about.

:Broncos:

A lot of people disagree with this view. The law only states "lawful contact". It was previously okay for a cop to check your immigration status if you were suspected of committing another crime. This law makes the only qualification "reasonable suspicion" of being in the country illegally.

ElwayMD
04-29-2010, 11:16 AM
The cop cannot just stop you and ask for your ID. You have to be engaging in something a cop will stop and ask you about.

:Broncos:

This.

Yet people would have you believe that Arizona cops will be driving around just chomping at the bit to question everyone in the state. They will do their job just like they always do and when a situation arises where someone engaged in unlawful behavior or suspicious behavior cannot provide Id, or behaves in a suspicious manner they can be questioned. Oh the horror of it all!!!

WolfpackGuy
04-29-2010, 11:19 AM
The cop cannot just stop you and ask for your ID. You have to be engaging in something a cop will stop and ask you about.

:Broncos:

Funny how the opposition is refusing to bring this up.

You have to be committing an unlawful act. (i.e. speeding, drugs, murder...)

It's not like the fuzz can just roll up on you for being Hispanic or whatever on a Tuesday night.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:19 AM
A lot of people disagree with this view. The law only states "lawful contact". It was previously okay for a cop to check your immigration status if you were suspected of committing another crime. This law makes the only qualification "reasonable suspicion" of being in the country illegally.


A cop can arrest you on "reasonable suspicion" for drunk driving. Asking for ID is standard. It sounds like existing law has been augmented to include immigration status.

:Broncos:

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:20 AM
Many Americans including myself have stopped traveling to Mexico as a result. Problem solved Amigo!


You are missing the point. You are advocating that this law is fine, because Mexico does the same thing, and then some. I have no problem with Mexican citizens being detained and booted. I have a problem with US citizens being wrongfully detained. Seems like most people here are okay with that, which is unfortunate. But it won't happen to you or me so no big deal.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:22 AM
Funny how the opposition is refusing to bring this up.

You have to be committing an unlawful act. (i.e. speeding, drugs, murder...)

It's not like the fuzz can just roll up on you for being Hispanic or whatever on a Tuesday night.

Dude. Not true. You do NOT have to be committing an unlawful act. Checking immigration status when suspected of a criminal violation was allowed BEFORE this law.

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 11:24 AM
Isn't it odd that the movement to support and defend illegal immigration uses the U.S. Constitution to defend the right of these people to violate our immigration laws?

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 11:28 AM
A lot of people disagree with this view. The law only states "lawful contact". It was previously okay for a cop to check your immigration status if you were suspected of committing another crime. This law makes the only qualification "reasonable suspicion" of being in the country illegally.

If a police officer is attempting to question an adult and discovers that adult is unable to speak English, would it be biased, or prejudiced of him to assume that person might not be in the country legally?

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:29 AM
A cop can arrest you on "reasonable suspicion" for drunk driving. Asking for ID is standard. It sounds like existing law has been augmented to include immigration status.

:Broncos:

Very true. An arrest for most crimes is almost always made on "reasonable suspicion". And what are the signs of drunk driving? Swerving, erratic behavior, etc. What are the signs of being an illegal? Being brown?

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:32 AM
Isn't it odd that the movement to support and defend illegal immigration uses the U.S. Constitution to defend the right of these people to violate our immigration laws?

I, for one, am not trying to defend illegal immigration. I'm more for defending the constitutional rights of our own citizens. Just like those who have issues with warrantless wiretapping aren't trying to protect terrorists.

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 11:32 AM
Its my understanding that they can't just stop you and demand your ID. You have to be doing something a cop would stop you for in the first place. Like a seatbelt. They cant pull you over for not wearing one, but for speeding or a busted tail light they can, and then they can cite you for not wearing a seatbelt. Same deal.

:Broncos:

Dead wrong. I've said this 904 times now, but once more:

AN OFFICER CAN STOP YOU IN AZ UNDER THE NEW LAW AND DEMAND TO SEE YOUR PROOF OF RESIDENCY/CITIZENSHIP IF:

1) HE HAS REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE LEGALLY IN THE COUNTRY; or

2) YOU ARE IN A TRAFFIC STOP FOR SOME VIOLATION.

This means a person can be stopped walking down the street, working on a construction project, buying jeans at the mall, etc... Read the law.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:33 AM
Very true. An arrest for most crimes is almost always made on "reasonable suspicion". And what are the signs of drunk driving? Swerving, erratic behavior, etc. What are the signs of being an illegal? Being brown?


Unless asking for a greencard/DL/whatever is a standard question...which it probably will be. If the person being questioned does not have that proof, they get arrested. Which is not any different than driving without a license in the first place.

Also, you do realize hispanics are technically caucasians?


:Broncos:

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 11:34 AM
Very true. An arrest for most crimes is almost always made on "reasonable suspicion". And what are the signs of drunk driving? Swerving, erratic behavior, etc. What are the signs of being an illegal? Being brown?

Clothing? (Say, a "Jets" hat and a "Niners" shirt). Inability to speak English? Hanging out at a place that is a known day labor pick up spot?

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:34 AM
Dead wrong. I've said this 904 times now, but once more:

AN OFFICER CAN STOP YOU IN AZ UNDER THE NEW LAW AND DEMAND TO SEE YOUR PROOF OF RESIDENCY/CITIZENSHIP IF:

1) HE HAS REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE LEGALLY IN THE COUNTRY; or

2) YOU ARE IN A TRAFFIC STOP FOR SOME VIOLATION.

This means a person can be stopped walking down the street, working on a construction project, buying jeans at the mall, etc... Read the law.


No, that is not what it means, and that is not what the law says...I POSTED the law in this thread yesterday. You have to be doing something a cop will stop and talk to you for anyway. Which you admitted with point #2. The rest is hysterics.

:Broncos:

WolfpackGuy
04-29-2010, 11:35 AM
Clothing? (Say, a "Jets" hat and a "Niners" shirt). Inability to speak English? Hanging out at a place that is a known day labor pick up spot?

Houses with about 10-15 DirecTV/Dish Network dishes...

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:38 AM
Houses with about 10-15 DirecTV/Dish Network dishes...


Colorful curled toe cowboy boots and jordache jean jackets.


:Broncos:

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 11:39 AM
I, for one, am not trying to defend illegal immigration. I'm more for defending the constitutional rights of our own citizens. Just like those who have issues with warrantless wiretapping aren't trying to protect terrorists.

This.

What people do not seem to get is that if we take away constitutional protections for the lowest of the low, the criminals, the illegals, the terrorist suspects... we have already violated the constitution which offers its protections to all within this country, not just citizens. Eventually we will be taking those rights away from decent hard working Americans, because there is a "reasonable suspicion" that they may be doing something illegal, even if there is no proof. You do not need any evidence to have a reasonable suspicion. Under this law, being brown or speaking broken English can be enough of a reasonable suspicion.

It is a slippery slope.

- MECK, I feel for those farmers in Texas and I am not trying to protect illegals. Like mkporter, my concern is for the constitution and long term protection of the people of the United States of America. You bend and break little pieces of the constitution here and there, your country loses its identity and can fall into a slide.

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 11:40 AM
No, that is not what it means, and that is not what the law says...I POSTED the law in this thread yesterday. You have to be doing something a cop will stop and talk to you for anyway. Which you admitted with point #2. The rest is hysterics.

:Broncos:

I posted it too.

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 11:41 AM
I, for one, am not trying to defend illegal immigration. I'm more for defending the constitutional rights of our own citizens. Just like those who have issues with warrantless wiretapping aren't trying to protect terrorists.

I agree that we must block any law that would lead to unreasonable searches and seizures, just like the Constitution says. Now, we must decide on what "reasonable" means. I would say it is not unreasonable to only search bearded Arabic young men at airports as they are far more likely to be a terrorist threat, but there are those who say that's discrimination, and we need to also frisk some old grandma with blue hair from Des Moines. I fail to see where "reason" enters the picture.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:42 AM
If a police officer is attempting to questoin an adult and discovers that adult is unable to speak English, would it be biased, or prejudiced of him to assume that person might not be in the country legally?

That's a good question. There is a lot of gray area here. What if they just have a think accent? What if they are just brown and distrust cops? I know a lot of people that could get targeted by cops under this law if it were passed here, and to me, that isn't the kind of state that I want to live in. Find a better solution.

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 11:44 AM
I asked the question early . Have any of you driven around Mexico before? Getting pulled over for being white is the norm. Having your car searched and told you have to pay the police money for no reason is also the norm. It's just the way it is down there. Maybe if more of you have had that experience you'd think differently about our police force in the states checking IDs.

What's funny is many of you are arguing that "rights" will be lost with this new law. Talk to some ranchers down in AZ who've lived in fear for decades on their own mother ****ing land! Some rancher friends of mine have been working land on the border for several generations. They can't even check on their own cattle on their own land in AMERICA without a confrontation of some sort.

What happens in Mexico sucks. I have been jacked in Mexico by cops for about $300, so that I could go back to my rental car. I understand. But that is Mexico, that is not here. I thought that in the USA we tried to hold ourselves up to a higher moral standard?

I think we have a very very serious border and illegal immigration problem and I think we need to come up with good solutions to protect our legal citizens. I just worry that this law expands too much on reasonable suspicion, that it has a very high likelihood of affecting legals as well as illegals.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:48 AM
This.

What people do not seem to get is that if we take away constitutional protections for the lowest of the low, the criminals, the illegals, the terrorist suspects... we have already violated the constitution which offers its protections to all within this country, not just citizens. Eventually we will be taking those rights away from decent hard working Americans, because there is a "reasonable suspicion" that they may be doing something illegal, even if there is no proof. You do not need any evidence to have a reasonable suspicion. Under this law, being brown or speaking broken English can be enough of a reasonable suspicion.

It is a slippery slope.

- MECK, I feel for those farmers in Texas and I am not trying to protect illegals. Like mkporter, my concern is for the constitution and long term protection of the people of the United States of America. You bend and break little pieces of the constitution here and there, your country loses its identity and can fall into a slide.

The constitution confers civil rights on American citizens, not illegals, not terrorists (creators of man made disasters). In the case of illegals, why do we continually grant people American civil liberties or rights when they dont care enough to respect the laws of the country they are pillaging in the first place?

The slippery slope is ignoring existing law because "them mexicans have it tough in mexico"...well that sucks for them, but breaking American law in the first place is a slippery slope. To get work, they either get paid cash, and send most of it back to mexico, or they have to purchase stolen identities in case the employers check their status, which is a felony.

Long term, coddling illegal citizens IS destroying the constitution because federal and state governments refuse to obey civil law and turn a blind eye while American citizens get butchered in their own homes.

:Broncos:

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:52 AM
Unless asking for a greencard/DL/whatever is a standard question...which it probably will be. If the person being questioned does not have that proof, they get arrested. Which is not any different than driving without a license in the first place.

Also, you do realize hispanics are technically caucasians?


:Broncos:

It is different because, under this law, police can target specific people to request their papers, for no other reason than suspicion of being in the country illegally. No other pretext is necessary.

Thanks for the etymology lesson. Hispanics are technically people "of or pertaining to Spain." Not caucasian. Modern day usage of the term refers to people from Spanish speaking cultures. But you knew that.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 11:54 AM
The constitution confers civil rights on American citizens, not illegals, not terrorists (creators of man made disasters). In the case of illegals, why do we continually grant people American civil liberties or rights when they dont care enough to respect the laws of the country they are :

Exactly. We have issues with how the law impacts US citizens. Not illegals.

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 11:55 AM
The biggest issue in this law is it gives a cop a right to essentially a free search and seizure on REASONABLE SUSPICION. The prior law of the land was that a cop needed PROBABLE CAUSE or a warrant to start a search and seizure, or a search incident to arrest.

Probable cause is an attempt to be as objective in determining the validity of a search and seizure as the law can be. Probable cause means there is some decent modicum of evidence that it is more likely than not a crime is or just has been committed. Alcohol on breath and blood shot eyes are probable cause one has been drinking; marijuana smelling smoke drifting from a car, etc...

Reasonable suspicion is much more subjective to the officers perspective than probable cause. Reasonable suspicion allows an officer to stop a person and question them, but they cannot detain that person or search them, without probable cause. Reasonable suspicion might be raised if you see a person exit a head shop with a new bong, or come out of a bar and trip. Neither gives you the probable cause to fully detain and search.

This law bypasses probable cause and allows an officer to detain, search, seize, and arrest with only reasonable suspicion. What would give an officer reasonable suspicion that one may be an illegal? Hearing them speak in Spanish? See them walking in front of Home Depot? Well, likely being brown will be the first step to suspecting them.

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 11:57 AM
The constitution confers civil rights on American citizens, not illegals, not terrorists (creators of man made disasters).




No. It confers its protections onto everyone within this country. If they are here illegally, they still have the same protections under the constitution, but they will be prosecuted as criminals, or to save money, just dumped back into Mexico.

However, lets say your right, we want constitutional protections for Americans right? Does this law do that? If an American gets searched for id and proof of birth because a cop suspected he was an illegal, aren't his constitutional protections also violated?

Archer81
04-29-2010, 11:57 AM
It is different because, under this law, police can target specific people to request their papers, for no other reason than suspicion of being in the country illegally. No other pretext is necessary.

Thanks for the etymology lesson. Hispanics are technically people "of or pertaining to Spain." Not caucasian. Modern day usage of the term refers to people from Spanish speaking cultures. But you knew that.


The first section is incorrect. They cannot simply stop you because you happen to look hispanic.

The 2nd section is also wrong. Hispanics are caucasian. Unless you do not consider Spaniards caucasian?

:Broncos:

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 11:57 AM
Very true. An arrest for most crimes is almost always made on "reasonable suspicion". And what are the signs of drunk driving? Swerving, erratic behavior, etc. What are the signs of being an illegal? Being brown?

You keep talking in circles. You have no good ideas. You just want to bitch and moan about AZ's approach.

Hey, how about a better plan instead of circle jerking the same argument?

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 11:58 AM
I think people are making a bigger deal out of this than it's going to be. Cops are not going to suspect every single Mexican looking individual they see. They'll do it if they truly believe they are illegal.

If they speak with impeccable English and next to no accent... guess what? Doubt it's going to be a problem.

If they can barely speak English at all then odds are they're going to get asked for ID. Many illegal adults can hardly speak English.

There are warning signs, so pretty easy to spot an illegal.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 12:00 PM
This.

What people do not seem to get is that if we take away constitutional protections for the lowest of the low, the criminals, the illegals, the terrorist suspects... we have already violated the constitution which offers its protections to all within this country, not just citizens. Eventually we will be taking those rights away from decent hard working Americans, because there is a "reasonable suspicion" that they may be doing something illegal, even if there is no proof. You do not need any evidence to have a reasonable suspicion. Under this law, being brown or speaking broken English can be enough of a reasonable suspicion.

It is a slippery slope.

- MECK, I feel for those farmers in Texas and I am not trying to protect illegals. Like mkporter, my concern is for the constitution and long term protection of the people of the United States of America. You bend and break little pieces of the constitution here and there, your country loses its identity and can fall into a slide.

Yet, you offer no solution. Thanks for nothing.

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 12:02 PM
There's a fine line here. On the one hand we must uphold the Constitution, and on the other, we must stop what amounts to an illegal invasion that is adversely affecting the lives of our citizens and adding to the bankruptcy of many of our states (and anybody who doesn't think 10 million (a conservative estimate) doesn't represent an "invasion" please tell us what would, IYO?). My sister in law works as a teacher in a Colorado school and instructs an entire classroom of illegal immigrant children who don't speak English. By law, the state had to provide separate teachers and rooms just for these kids because our laws guarantee people who are breaking our laws a free education. Well, it's not free to taxpayers. They also get to come to our ERs and receive treatment, by law. That's not "free" either, though they can't pay for it.

Is the Constitution so unwieldy and foolish that it allows the law to be used (by those who are violating the law by their very presence) as a weapon against the interests of the citizens who are the rightful heirs of that law? In other words, people from another country can enter our country illegally, and then use our own laws against us? What is this, Wonderland?

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 12:02 PM
I think people are making a bigger deal out of this than it's going to be. Cops are not going to suspect every single Mexican looking individual they see. They'll do it if they truly believe they are illegal.



Look, I hope you are right. And I also like to put a lot of faith in the good of people.

I really think this law could be re-tooled and restructured to be perfectly acceptable. As it stands, I'm willing to put $100 that it will be overturned eventually.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 12:02 PM
That's a good question. There is a lot of gray area here. What if they just have a think accent? What if they are just brown and distrust cops? I know a lot of people that could get targeted by cops under this law if it were passed here, and to me, that isn't the kind of state that I want to live in. Find a better solution.

What if, what if?

Hey, offer up a better solution! :thumbsup:

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 12:03 PM
http://www.noob.us/humor/the-amazing-racist-home-depot

Even this dude found a ton of illegals easily.

I have no issue with people wanting to come here to get work. Just do it the right way.

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 12:03 PM
The biggest issue in this law is it gives a cop a right to essentially a free search and seizure on REASONABLE SUSPICION. The prior law of the land was that a cop needed PROBABLE CAUSE or a warrant to start a search and seizure, or a search incident to arrest.

Probable cause is an attempt to be as objective in determining the validity of a search and seizure as the law can be. Probable cause means there is some decent modicum of evidence that it is more likely than not a crime is or just has been committed. Alcohol on breath and blood shot eyes are probable cause one has been drinking; marijuana smelling smoke drifting from a car, etc...

Reasonable suspicion is much more subjective to the officers perspective than probable cause. Reasonable suspicion allows an officer to stop a person and question them, but they cannot detain that person or search them, without probable cause. Reasonable suspicion might be raised if you see a person exit a head shop with a new bong, or come out of a bar and trip. Neither gives you the probable cause to fully detain and search.

This law bypasses probable cause and allows an officer to detain, search, seize, and arrest with only reasonable suspicion. What would give an officer reasonable suspicion that one may be an illegal? Hearing them speak in Spanish? See them walking in front of Home Depot? Well, likely being brown will be the first step to suspecting them.

Do you accept that coming into this country illegally is a crime?

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 12:04 PM
Is the Constitution so unwieldy and foolish that it allows the law to be used (by those who are violating the law by their very presence) as a weapon against the interests of the citizens who are the rightful heirs of that law? In other words, people from another country can enter our country illegally, and then use our own laws against us? What is this, Wonderland?

No. Those who are here illegally, and are found to be so, get what protections that convicted criminals get, which is not much.

The issue is when a non-criminal, legal American gets dicked over under this law. Or even a legal American who is committing a petty crime (weed in his glove box, etc...). Thats where the problem lies.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 12:05 PM
You keep talking in circles. You have no good ideas. You just want to b**** and moan about AZ's approach.

Hey, how about a better plan instead of circle jerking the same argument?

No, I just want to bitch and moan about the erosion of constitutional rights. Feel free to not participate if you don't like it. I previously discussed what I thought a better approach was. I like the approach as outlined by Schumer and Graham in the US senate.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 12:05 PM
Look, I hope you are right. And I also like to put a lot of faith in the good of people.

I really think this law could be re-tooled and restructured to be perfectly acceptable. As it stands, I'm willing to put $100 that it will be overturned eventually.

There will be a few dumb cops. There always is. But in large part I think this will do far more good than bad.

It's all politics man. You got the poliricians siding with current illegals largely and trying to get them citizenship so when it comes to voting they can say "you owe us." It's pathetic.

gunns
04-29-2010, 12:05 PM
Dead wrong. I've said this 904 times now, but once more:

AN OFFICER CAN STOP YOU IN AZ UNDER THE NEW LAW AND DEMAND TO SEE YOUR PROOF OF RESIDENCY/CITIZENSHIP IF:

1) HE HAS REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE LEGALLY IN THE COUNTRY; or

2) YOU ARE IN A TRAFFIC STOP FOR SOME VIOLATION.

This means a person can be stopped walking down the street, working on a construction project, buying jeans at the mall, etc... Read the law.

#1 gives the police license to do anything they want. They may think you are a Canadian. It isn't all about brown skin. It's about how that police officer is feeling that day.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 12:07 PM
There's a fine line here. On the one hand we must uphold the Constitution, and on the other, we must stop what amounts to an illegal invasion that is adversely affecting the lives of our citizens and adding to the bankruptcy of many of our states (and anybody who doesn't think 10 million (a conservative estimate) doesn't represent an "invasion" please tell us what would, IYO?). My sister in law works as a teacher in a Colorado school and instructs an entire classroom of illegal immigrant children who don't speak English. By law, the state had to provide separate teachers and rooms just for these kids because our laws guarantee people who are breaking our laws a free education. Well, it's not free to taxpayers. They also get to come to our ERs and receive treatment, by law. That's not "free" either, though they can't pay for it.

Is the Constitution so unwieldy and foolish that it allows the law to be used (by those who are violating the law by their very presence) as a weapon against the interests of the citizens who are the rightful heirs of that law? In other words, people from another country can enter our country illegally, and then use our own laws against us? What is this, Wonderland?

QFT

I've offered a solution. What is your's?

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 12:08 PM
Do you accept that coming into this country illegally is a crime?

Yes. Its not the illegals I care about protecting. If I haven't made that clear then I'm going to get out of this thread permanently.

I do think we have a "Mexico" problem. I said so before. And I have shared a few ideas on re-tooling the system.

My concern here is the same concern I had when parts of our constitution were superseded under the patriot act. I understand why, and I almost agree with the reasoning... but I feel it is our duty as Americans, no matter how much we get crapped on by illegals and criminals, that we do not give up our own legal rights... and every time some new law like this comes in, we give up our own rights at the behest of protecting ourselves from criminals. We just don't see what full impact this will have on us and our country down the road. I worry that in 100 years, if more law like these keep going through, that the US will not be the place it is supposed to be and people will no longer have any right to privacy.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 12:08 PM
No, I just want to b**** and moan about the erosion of constitutional rights. Feel free to not participate if you don't like it. I previously discussed what I thought a better approach was. I like the approach as outlined by Schumer and Graham in the US senate.

Please enlighten everyone.

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 12:10 PM
Hmmmm, this is interesting-

By Michelle Malkin • April 28, 2010 12:36 AM

My syndicated column today responds to Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s demagoguery on Arizona’s immigration enforcement law. Calderon has a long history of bashing the U.S. — and then getting rewarded for it with billions of dollars in foreign aid (see here, here, and here).
I reported on Calderon’s aggressive meddling on behalf of illegal aliens through his government consulate offices in America here. Heather Mac Donald published a thorough investigation of the Mexican government meddle-crats here. Allan Wall has reported on it for years. Mike Sweeney, an Arizona Republic letter-writer underscores my column theme today:
“Having traveled into Mexico last year to various cities on the Baja Peninsula, a distance of more than 1,000 miles round-trip, we were stopped more than 20 times at various checkpoints. At most of those stops, we were told to exit the vehicle and we were subjected to rigorous inspections. Where does Mexican President Felipe Calderón get off with his hypocritical outrage at our Senate Bill 1070?”
Where indeed?
***
How Mexico treats illegal aliens
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010
Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south.
The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?
– The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?
– If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome.
-Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.– \
-Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment.
-Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).
– Law enforcement officials at all levels — by national mandate — must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.
– Ready to show your papers? Mexico’s National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens’ identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.
All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico’s Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. There’s been no public clamor for “comprehensive immigration reform” in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.
Consider: Open-borders protesters marched freely at the Capitol building in Arizona, comparing GOP Gov. Jan Brewer to Hitler, waving Mexican flags, advocating that demonstrators “Smash the State,” and holding signs that proclaimed “No human is illegal” and “We have rights.”
But under the Mexican constitution, such political speech by foreigners is banned. Noncitizens cannot “in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.” In fact, a plethora of Mexican statutes enacted by its congress limit the participation of foreign nationals and companies in everything from investment, education, mining and civil aviation to electric energy and firearms. Foreigners have severely limited private property and employment rights (if any).
As for abuse, the Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of Central American illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico’s southern border. The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn’t respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtain illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun.
Meanwhile, Mexican consular offices in the United States have coordinated with left-wing social justice groups and the Catholic Church leadership to demand a moratorium on all deportations and a freeze on all employment raids across America.
Mexico is doing the job Arizona is now doing — a job the U.S. government has failed miserably to do: putting its people first. Here’s the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands:
Hipócritas.


http://michellemalkin.com/2010/04/28/police-state-how-mexico-treats-illegal-aliens/

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 12:13 PM
QFT

I've offered a solution. What is your's?

My most realistic solution is to create a more friendly immigration system from our southern border. Demand all illegals currently here, check into the system immediately, allow them to stay for 5 years while tracking them 2 times a year, force employers to report all workers, with EXTREME FINES for those who dont. Collect their taxes, their medicare and social security payments. At the end of 5 years, maybe we grant them a 2 year extension if they apply and pay a fee. At the end of 7 years, we demand they go back for at least a year before reapplying.

Anyone in violation of this process should either be locked up for a good period of time or deported - though deportation only gives them a 2nd chance to come back.

EDIT: By Friendly system, I mean, easier to get in, but much much stiffer penalties for violations.

WolfpackGuy
04-29-2010, 12:13 PM
I don't understand why Mexico has an issue.

You would think they would want people to leave to come work illegally and remit money back to the motherland.

My main issue with the illegals is their children are getting a FREE ride in this country.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 12:14 PM
Mexico is such a hypocritical joke of a country. They are laughing at the US.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 12:14 PM
What do we need to do?

No more illegals in our prisons. They can go to a Mexican jail or run around free in that country. Same with our hospitals. They can go to a Mexican one.

We need to build a giant ass wall across the border... complete with seismic monitoring to detect tunnels, as well as gulf monitoring for those who hitch a ride on the east or west.

The wall will take care of the most though. Also, we need to deport ALL illegals back to Mexico. However, I think exceptions can be made for those who have made exceptional contributions to society.

For instance. Your parents are illegal and you made it through the public school system and have been accepted to a college on a scholarship. I think people like that deserve citizenship, and assuming the parents are upstanding individuals and not leaches on society... they can have it to.

Manual labor and all of that is stuff we can provide ourselves... and stuff that Americans used to do and should be doing again.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 12:14 PM
The first section is incorrect. They cannot simply stop you because you happen to look hispanic.

The 2nd section is also wrong. Hispanics are caucasian. Unless you do not consider Spaniards caucasian?

:Broncos:

What prevents them from stopping someone for looking Hispanic exactly?

The word Hispanic means, "of, or pertaining to Spain." Spaniards are from Spain. There are black Spaniards. Mexicans are "pertaining to Spain." The origin of the word does not imply race either way. The current meaning obviously does.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 12:15 PM
My most realistic solution is to create a more friendly immigration system from our southern border. Demand all illegals currently here, check into the system immediately, allow them to stay for 5 years while tracking them 2 times a year, force employers to report all workers, with EXTREME FINES for those who dont. Collect their taxes, their medicare and social security payments. At the end of 5 years, maybe we grant them a 2 year extension if they apply and pay a fee. At the end of 7 years, we demand they go back for at least a year before reapplying.

Anyone in violation of this process should either be locked up for a good period of time or deported - though deportation only gives them a 2nd chance to come back.

And, what about their kids? If they are born in the US aren't they US citizens? Um yah, try again.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 12:19 PM
Please enlighten everyone.

Been there. Read the thread.

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 12:19 PM
And, what about their kids? If they are born in the US aren't they US citizens? Um yah, try again.

yes, I have considered that. I see the issues that may arise there, but they seem to be minor. When entering this country, the parents should agree that they will care for any children then existing or to be born, which includes raising them when their time is up, back in their own country. And if something like this won't fly, so what? Give something better before telling me to try again. I still think my idea is better than yours, which is?

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 12:20 PM
Dude. Not true. You do NOT have to be committing an unlawful act. Checking immigration status when suspected of a criminal violation was allowed BEFORE this law.

Yes you do. Good grief.

DBroncos4life
04-29-2010, 12:22 PM
My friend just lost his managers job at Jared's because of a illegal immigrant. The illegal was trying to get credit and couldn't. Someone asked how you can get a illegal credit and my friend said you don't you deport them. Apparently the truth is discrimination.

The only problem I see is them having the same rights of American citizens. Hell I would rather be a illegal, same rights and don't have to pay taxes. lol

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 12:24 PM
Yes. Its not the illegals I care about protecting. If I haven't made that clear then I'm going to get out of this thread permanently.

I do think we have a "Mexico" problem. I said so before. And I have shared a few ideas on re-tooling the system.

My concern here is the same concern I had when parts of our constitution were superseded under the patriot act. I understand why, and I almost agree with the reasoning... but I feel it is our duty as Americans, no matter how much we get crapped on by illegals and criminals, that we do not give up our own legal rights... and every time some new law like this comes in, we give up our own rights at the behest of protecting ourselves from criminals. We just don't see what full impact this will have on us and our country down the road. I worry that in 100 years, if more law like these keep going through, that the US will not be the place it is supposed to be and people will no longer have any right to privacy.

Fair enough. I also worry that our definition of what "reasonable" means could become so radicalized as to be meaningless, which is the other side of the equation. This law will probably get tossed. It is written poorly. We should also realize there are organizations of lawyers out there who will work to toss any and every law that seeks to end illegal immigration or to enforce our immigration laws in any way. There are also numerous, powerful special interests who support the status quo. The bankruptcy of states does not affect their bottom lines. There's a reason we haven't been able to do anything about illegal immigration from Mexico for fifty years.

Given the murder of this rancher, I'm guessing that many of the people of Arizona feel helpless and abandoned by their government. That, IMO, is the genesis of this law. Not racism, but fear. Those who live along the border states have been reading the headlines from Mexico and they are, justifiably, terrified. Maybe this law is wrong, but if government doesn't step up and do its job pretty soon, a lot of Americans in the SW are going to start deciding that it's time for them to take matters into their own hands. That's what failure of government is all about.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 12:25 PM
My friend just lost his managers job at Jared's because of a illegal immigrant. The illegal was trying to get credit and couldn't. Someone asked how you can get a illegal credit and my friend said you don't you deport them. Apparently the truth is discrimination.

The only problem I see is them having the same rights of American citizens. Hell I would rather be a illegal, same rights and don't have to pay taxes. lol

That's seriously ****ed up.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 12:27 PM
Yes you do. Good grief.

No, you don't. Here is the exact text of the relevant section of the law. Read carefully.

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Where does it say a person must be suspected of any other unlawful act?

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 12:27 PM
My most realistic solution is to create a more friendly immigration system from our southern border. Demand all illegals currently here, check into the system immediately, allow them to stay for 5 years while tracking them 2 times a year, force employers to report all workers, with EXTREME FINES for those who dont. Collect their taxes, their medicare and social security payments. At the end of 5 years, maybe we grant them a 2 year extension if they apply and pay a fee. At the end of 7 years, we demand they go back for at least a year before reapplying.

Anyone in violation of this process should either be locked up for a good period of time or deported - though deportation only gives them a 2nd chance to come back.

EDIT: By Friendly system, I mean, easier to get in, but much much stiffer penalties for violations.

That sounds to me like a gross violation of their rights. Why should they be treated differently from anybody else?

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 12:29 PM
No, you don't. Here is the exact text of the relevant section of the law. Read carefully.

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Where does it say a person must be suspected of any other unlawful act?

You posted the answer do your own question. Doesn't a lawful contact imply that? When you speed and an officer stops you that's a lawful contact. Hence... get caught doing something bad by an officer and then they can ask for papers if they deem it to be something worth going after.

DBroncos4life
04-29-2010, 12:30 PM
That's seriously ****ed up.

I agree. It's a sad time we live in.

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 12:31 PM
No, you don't. Here is the exact text of the relevant section of the law. Read carefully.

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Where does it say a person must be suspected of any other unlawful act?

"Lawful contact" presumes probable cause.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 12:35 PM
Doesn't a lawful contact imply that? When you speed and an officer stops you that's a lawful contact. Hence... get caught doing something bad by an officer and then they can ask for papers if they deem it to be something worth perusing.

Yes, your example would be lawful contact. Lawful contact is any contact that isn't "unlawful," or illegal. Lawful contact also can include casually talking to a person on the street. There is nothing illegal about that. Previous law allowed cops to check immigration status when you were suspected of committing another crime. I don't think they could previously do it for a traffic violation though.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 12:39 PM
"Lawful contact" presumes probable cause.

My understanding of "Lawful contact" is that it does not presume probable cause of a primary offense. My understanding is that contact with a police officer in public is "lawful contact."

If "Lawful contact" does presume probable cause, then there isn't any point to the law except to maybe include traffic violations a pretext for requesting papers. Previous law allowed for immigration checks on those suspected of a crime.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 12:40 PM
Yes, your example would be lawful contact. Lawful contact is any contact that isn't "unlawful," or illegal. Lawful contact also can include casually talking to a person on the street. There is nothing illegal about that. Previous law allowed cops to check immigration status when you were suspected of committing another crime. I don't think they could previously do it for a traffic violation though.

Lawful contact as stated equals probable cause. Just talking to someone doesn't mean that. The cop would need to suspect the person of doing something illegal before the immigration thing can even come up. You've been getting worked up more than you should be. It's not that bad. It's going to get rid of more illegals than nothing at all. You're not going to see an SS running around inspecting every Mexican they see. It's being blown out of proportion.

Rigs11
04-29-2010, 12:40 PM
http://www.noob.us/humor/the-amazing-racist-home-depot

Even this dude found a ton of illegals easily.

I have no issue with people wanting to come here to get work. Just do it the right way.

gotta love all the simple solutions around here. Do you know what the waiting line is to come here legally?If your kids were starving would you follow the law?These people come here looking for a better way of life.They present a vital part of the US economy. They perform alot of jobs that americans will not do.At the same time they have to deal with low pay, crime, and racism.What is the big issue with making the ones working here with no criminal records legal? people complain that they don't pay taxes and cost us money, yet they don't want to give them citizenship. reminds me of the idiots that complain about the deficit and don't want to pay taxes.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 12:41 PM
gotta love all the simple solutions around here. Do you know what the waiting line is to come here legally?If your kids were starving would you follow the law?These people come here looking for a better way of life.They present a vital part of the US economy. They perform alot of jobs that americans will not do.At the same time they have to deal with low pay, crime, and racism.What is the big issue with making the ones working here with no criminal records legal? people complain that they don't pay taxes and cost us money, yet they don't want to give them citizenship. reminds me of the idiots that complain about the deficit and don't want to pay taxes.

The reason the line is that big is BECAUSE OF THE ILLEGALS. The illegals are the ones ****ing over the ones doing things right. Jobs Americans will not do is bull****. Look at our unemployment. We used to do their jobs too. That's the most overused stupid ****ing excuse in the book.

HAY GUYS. ILLEGALS ARE GOOD FOR ECONOMY! LETS LET THEM BREAK LAW AND EXPLOIT. HAR HAR HAR!

mkporter
04-29-2010, 12:45 PM
Lawful contact as stated equals probable cause. Just talking to someone doesn't mean that. The cop would need to suspect the person of doing something illegal before the immigration thing can even come up. You've been getting worked up more than you should be. It's not that bad. It's going to get rid of more illegals than nothing at all. You're not going to see an SS running around inspecting every Mexican they see. It's being blown out of proportion.

Lawful contact is a vague, undefined term. It does not mean probable cause. It is open to interpretation. If they meant probable cause, then they should specify probable cause, but they didn't. It was already legal for a cop to check your immigration status if you suspected of a crime.

epicSocialism4tw
04-29-2010, 01:00 PM
Given the murder of this rancher, I'm guessing that many of the people of Arizona feel helpless and abandoned by their government. That, IMO, is the genesis of this law. Not racism, but fear. Those who live along the border states have been reading the headlines from Mexico and they are, justifiably, terrified. Maybe this law is wrong, but if government doesn't step up and do its job pretty soon, a lot of Americans in the SW are going to start deciding that it's time for them to take matters into their own hands. That's what failure of government is all about.

These hell holes just across the border are some of the most dangerous places in the world. Why are they so dangerous? Its because they are the ports of crime where the criminal transactions take place for their criminal activity in America. Juarez, Mexico sits on the edge of my state. Violence and crime flows from there like a glacial river and has for years.

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 01:06 PM
Further in this bill those detianed are tuned over to ICE.

Rigs11
04-29-2010, 01:11 PM
The reason the line is that big is BECAUSE OF THE ILLEGALS. The illegals are the ones ****ing over the ones doing things right. Jobs Americans will not do is bull****. Look at our unemployment. We used to do their jobs too. That's the most overused stupid ****ing excuse in the book.

HAY GUYS. ILLEGALS ARE GOOD FOR ECONOMY! LETS LET THEM BREAK LAW AND EXPLOIT. HAR HAR HAR!

Where do you come up with this crap?Tom Trancedo?the visas are just as long for immigrants from other countries.I will post an article from right here in colorado about americans workers applying to pick fruits and then quitting.What jobs did we americans used to do?pick vegetables for 8 bucks an hour?Do you think that you pay less for meat and produce because of good ol american workers?Do you think you can get a $1 dollar cheeseburger because of american workers?

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 01:12 PM
The bill clearly states that it must comply with the 4th amendment. No seems to have problem with DUI checkpoints. It's part of the contract to get a DL in any state. This law is legal.

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 01:13 PM
gotta love all the simple solutions around here. Do you know what the waiting line is to come here legally?If your kids were starving would you follow the law?These people come here looking for a better way of life.They present a vital part of the US economy. They perform alot of jobs that americans will not do.At the same time they have to deal with low pay, crime, and racism.What is the big issue with making the ones working here with no criminal records legal? people complain that they don't pay taxes and cost us money, yet they don't want to give them citizenship. reminds me of the idiots that complain about the deficit and don't want to pay taxes.

What they should be doing is agitating for change in Mexico. As long as the U.S. remains the handy-dandy relief valve for poverty and the criminal classism of Mexico, then they will never have the revolution they should have had long ago. They can just continue to send the detritus of their injustice to El Norte.

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 01:15 PM
The expressly says that peace officers may not act on the basis of gender, race, or ethnicity.

Meck77
04-29-2010, 01:16 PM
They perform alot of jobs that americans will not do.

That just isn't true anymore. I don't know where you live but the ranches out here use to have illegals working them. Since the economy turned all the illegals have been replaced with AMERICANS. :USA: In fact you'd be hard pressed to even see an illegal in the valley anymore. They use to stand on the corners by the dozen waiting to be picked up by someone. Maybe they moved to your town but my county took a stand. :)

Rigs11
04-29-2010, 01:25 PM
What they should be doing is agitating for change in Mexico. As long as the U.S. remains the handy-dandy relief valve for poverty and the criminal classism of Mexico, then they will never have the revolution they should have had long ago. They can just continue to send the detritus of their injustice to El Norte.

exactly. people complain about the crime spilling over to the US, but they don't look at the fact that the drug cartels main customers are americans.Just like kicking them all out is simple idea and no one looks at the ramifications of this.

Rigs11
04-29-2010, 01:29 PM
Denver schools ban employee travel to Arizona

DENVER - The Denver Public School District is prohibiting employees from taking work-related trips to Arizona due to the state's crackdown on illegal immigration.

A written statement released by the district Thursday morning said DPS is forming a Citizens Advisory Committee to study the issue further.

DPS Superintendent Tom Boasberg is expected to make a public statement on the travel ban Thursday afternoon.

District spokeswoman Kristy Armstrong said Boasberg's order had the support of the board of education and was being done "in protest" of the illegal immigration law.

Armstrong said the district didn't want to "subject employees to search."


The Arizona law requires police officers who have made "lawful contact" with a person to "make a reasonable attempt" to determine that person's immigration status if there is a "reasonable suspicion" that person is an illegal immigrant.

Proponents of the bill say a driver's license or other government-issued ID provided to a police officer would be sufficient.

Armstrong said all DPS employees should have such identification but the district objects to them being asked to provide it.

Armstrong said every DPS employee undergoes a background check that includes legal residency. She said the district is "very confident" that it does not have employees who are in the United States illegally.

The Arizona law has sparked protests by a wide coalition of interest groups across the United States and in Mexico.

Published reports indicate travel bans similar to the DPS action have been enacted by the cities of San Francisco, Calif., and St. Paul, Minn. Newspaper accounts suggest similar bans are being considered by the cities of Los Angeles and Oakland.

When asked by a reporter, Armstrong could not immediately name another school district that has enacted a travel ban.

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=137832&catid=339

Rigs11
04-29-2010, 01:31 PM
That just isn't true anymore. I don't know where you live but the ranches out here use to have illegals working them. Since the economy turned all the illegals have been replaced with AMERICANS. :USA: In fact you'd be hard pressed to even see an illegal in the valley anymore. They use to stand on the corners by the dozen waiting to be picked up by someone. Maybe they moved to your town but my county took a stand. :)

Really? What did your county do? What kind of work on the ranches? how has it affected prices? Serious questions, I'm not posting these sarcastically.

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 01:53 PM
Really? What did your county do? What kind of work on the ranches? how has it affected prices? Serious questions, I'm not posting these sarcastically.

Rigs,

You opened the Door here-let me ask you a question-just how much do you know about Agriculture?

Meck77
04-29-2010, 01:55 PM
Really? What did your county do? What kind of work on the ranches? how has it affected prices? Serious questions, I'm not posting these sarcastically.


The free market took care of plenty of them. As the economy turned more and more locals were willing to do the jobs the illegals once did. I didn't personally witness it but I heard there was a good ole fashion round up of the illegals that were left. Simply put they were hauled off and deported. This area is primarily hay and cattle ranches. The illegals were doing basic ranch work, fixing fence, good ole fashion American Cowboy work!

The wages for ranch work has certainly declined but so has the cost of living in the area. There was a time a LEGAL ranch hand could make $17.00/hr. That wage is around $12.00/hr now.

There was a time illegals would pull into my place asking for any type of work. Haven't had one pull in in more than a year. These days skilled American guys with trucks and tools pull in asking for work. This is just my an example of my local economy I have no doubt that more and more Americans are taking illegal jobs back!

If the federal government would take a hard stand like AZ has done I think we'd have millions of jobs open up all at once.

I'm just beside myself with all this crying about rights being violated. Our economy is in the toilet and the illegals are costing this country BILLIONS. It's going to take a little pain to clean it up. I salute you AZ to start things off!^5

azbroncfan
04-29-2010, 02:05 PM
Arizona should boycott San Fran and the rest of California and send all the illegals there. California is a perfect example of how liberal system works. 20 billion in debt.

RaiderH8r
04-29-2010, 02:16 PM
It seems to me if the illegals were to boycott AZ that would pretty much solve this problem.

I also look forward to detractors of this law to rise up against the random "sobriety" checkpoints that litter the road ways. It is time for the MADDness to cease. These check points are more of an affront to civil liberty than the AZ law.

My last point before I go, the argument that illegals being in the US illegally shouldn't matter because they're willing to do jobs Americans won't do is BS. It's like coming home to an intruder who says they should get to live in your house because they do the chores you don't like to do, cleaning, dishes, yard work, etc. Doesn't change the fact that they broke the law and live in your house illegally.

Rigs11
04-29-2010, 02:16 PM
Rigs,

You opened the Door here-let me ask you a question-just how much do you know about Agriculture?

Not much honestly. why do you ask?

mkporter
04-29-2010, 02:21 PM
The expressly says that peace officers may not act on the basis of gender, race, or ethnicity.

That's not in the text of the law: http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

The only mention of race is the section that discusses the procedure people can follow to report employers of illegal immigrants. In this section it states the Attorney general cannot investigate claims based solely on race. The law does not mention police officers not being able to do so. I'm sure that since it is expressly stated, you'll be able to cut and paste the section for me though..

ColoradoDarin
04-29-2010, 02:24 PM
No, you don't. Here is the exact text of the relevant section of the law. Read carefully.

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Where does it say a person must be suspected of any other unlawful act?


You really need to just stop. You have no idea what the phrase "lawful contact" means. In the meantime, keep embarrassing yourself :thumbs:

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 02:26 PM
There was a time illegals would pull into my place asking for any type of work. Haven't had one pull in in more than a year. These days skilled American guys with trucks and tools pull in asking for work. This is just my an example of my local economy I have no doubt that more and more Americans are taking illegal jobs back!

.....

I'm just beside myself with all this crying about rights being violated. Our economy is in the toilet and the illegals are costing this country BILLIONS. It's going to take a little pain to clean it up. I salute you AZ to start things off!^5

1) Not seeing as many Spanish speaking latino-type people around Grand Junction any more either. More people who are more clearly from this country are working at the local fast food joints and chipotles. The orchards and vineyards are being stocked with American employees because there are not as many illegals around. Tight times have weeded out a lot of what I perceived as illegal immigrants (my reasonable suspicion).

2) I am probably one of those that appears to be crying about rights being violated. You know whose rights I worry about? Mine. I worry about the rights of other Americans. And I hate to see law abiding citizens and legal residents getting their rights f'ed over because we have this problem. I want to eliminate the problem as much as the next guy, but I do not want to do it where my kids or grandkids will have a weaker US Constitution and bill of rights protecting them. The Constitution is an extremely unique document, and it needs to be respected. You start disrespecting it in any way to where it becomes ok to ignore parts of it, then it just doesn't mean that much to you anymore. Eventually, over time if is feasible that no one will respect it (not just the illegals) and it will have no meaning at all, which in turn means that no one is really protected under it.

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 02:33 PM
You really need to just stop. You have no idea what the phrase "lawful contact" means. In the meantime, keep embarrassing yourself :thumbs:

And neither do you because it has not yet been defined in law. And thus there is a debate on whether it means contact after reasonable suspicion or any contact that is not illegal.

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 02:34 PM
Not much honestly. why do you ask?

Well, the reason is that at least twice now (in two different Threads) you have brought up the Farm/Labor issue, and I don't think you understand what has changed in that arena, and how it has affected Farmers/Growers/Ranchers-for one, you asked Meck how the change in Farm Labor has affected "prices"-it does not-it affects margins, or in some cases, the amount of help a producer has. In situations where there is a lot of hand labor (read:vegetables, fruit, etc.), in the past I've seen Fields not get harvested due to labor issues, although now it has subsided to a great degree due to unemployment-in a nutshell, they can now find help easier-I can explain further if needed-

Now, back to your regularly scheduled Program-:thanku:

mkporter
04-29-2010, 02:35 PM
You really need to just stop. You have no idea what the phrase "lawful contact" means. In the meantime, keep embarrassing yourself :thumbs:

Wow. Awesome contribution. Thanks for stopping by.

azbroncfan
04-29-2010, 02:36 PM
70 percent of Arizona residents voted for the bill.

All they need to do is have a vote

Option A I vote against illegal immigration

Option B I vote to allow illegal immigration

If you vote Option B you can be taxed an extra 15 percent to pay for the illegals. They can run the vote out of the privacy of your own home.

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 02:39 PM
Someone here said it best (and simply)-they are here "illegally"

Archer81
04-29-2010, 02:41 PM
California enacts tougher immigration stances and practically builds a concrete wall along their border with Mexico. This forces the drugs and human trafficking east. When Arizona attempts to secure their border and give their police forces the tools to combat it, California calls for a boycott of Arizona...anyone else get the impression California is the asshole neighbor who has all night parties with ridiculously loud music but complains because your cat is meowing in your yard during the day?

:Broncos:

ColoradoDarin
04-29-2010, 02:42 PM
Wow. Awesome contribution. Thanks for stopping by.

You're welcome. Glad I could help.

ColoradoDarin
04-29-2010, 02:42 PM
And neither do you because it has not yet been defined in law. And thus there is a debate on whether it means contact after reasonable suspicion or any contact that is not illegal.

I'm still waiting for your papers, ginger. :strong:

mkporter
04-29-2010, 02:50 PM
California enacts tougher immigration stances and practically builds a concrete wall along their border with Mexico. This forces the drugs and human trafficking east. When Arizona attempts to secure their border and give their police forces the tools to combat it, California calls for a boycott of Arizona...anyone else get the impression California is the a-hole neighbor who has all night parties with ridiculously loud music but complains because your cat is meowing in your yard during the day?

:Broncos:

California being more competent at something? Seems like a stretch. An a-hole neighbor? Not so much of a stretch. I think the boycott is silly. Let the courts sort it out. The lawsuits have already been filed.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 02:54 PM
California enacts tougher immigration stances and practically builds a concrete wall along their border with Mexico. This forces the drugs and human trafficking east. When Arizona attempts to secure their border and give their police forces the tools to combat it, California calls for a boycott of Arizona...anyone else get the impression California is the a-hole neighbor who has all night parties with ridiculously loud music but complains because your cat is meowing in your yard during the day?

:Broncos:

California against racial profiling and a country where if your latino you get stopped and asked for your papers. Anyone who is for that doesn't IMO realize what it means. I have too many great Latino friends to support this. It's not fair for them to not be able to go outside without the govt asking them from ID.

How can people not see this is wrong?

Archer81
04-29-2010, 02:54 PM
California being more competent at something? Seems like a stretch. An a-hole neighbor? Not so much of a stretch. I think the boycott is silly. Let the courts sort it out. The lawsuits have already been filed.


We have millions of people out of work, and some dickheads in places NOT in Arizona are advocating economic harm on a sister state during tough economic times.

Way to be, California.

:Broncos:

epicSocialism4tw
04-29-2010, 02:55 PM
California against racial profiling and a country where if your latino you get stopped and asked for your papers. Anyone who is for that doesn't IMO realize what it means. I have too many great Latino friends to support this. It's not fair for them to not be able to go outside without the govt asking them from ID.

How can people not see this is wrong?

Some of my Latino friends are the loudest supporters of full-scale deportation.

My illegal friends...not so much.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 02:55 PM
California against racial profiling and a country where if your latino you get stopped and asked for your papers. Anyone who is for that doesn't IMO realize what it means. I have too many great Latino friends to support this. It's not fair for them to not be able to go outside without the govt asking them from ID.

How can people not see this is wrong?


Because what you posted is not the law in Arizona.


:Broncos:

Rohirrim
04-29-2010, 02:58 PM
1) Not seeing as many Spanish speaking latino-type people around Grand Junction any more either. More people who are more clearly from this country are working at the local fast food joints and chipotles. The orchards and vineyards are being stocked with American employees because there are not as many illegals around. Tight times have weeded out a lot of what I perceived as illegal immigrants (my reasonable suspicion).

2) I am probably one of those that appears to be crying about rights being violated. You know whose rights I worry about? Mine. I worry about the rights of other Americans. And I hate to see law abiding citizens and legal residents getting their rights f'ed over because we have this problem. I want to eliminate the problem as much as the next guy, but I do not want to do it where my kids or grandkids will have a weaker US Constitution and bill of rights protecting them. The Constitution is an extremely unique document, and it needs to be respected. You start disrespecting it in any way to where it becomes ok to ignore parts of it, then it just doesn't mean that much to you anymore. Eventually, over time if is feasible that no one will respect it (not just the illegals) and it will have no meaning at all, which in turn means that no one is really protected under it.

You're absolutely right, of course. I'm still surprised Obama hasn't taken a hatchet to much of the so-called Patriot Act. But regarding this particular law, I wonder at the reality behind the reaction? The law itself is questionable, but I would not call it radical. The courts will iron that out, no doubt. What I wonder at is the almost hysterical reaction in the media and the immediate, massive response against this law across the country.

The same thing happened last time this nation simply took up the discussion of enforcing existing law or reforming immigration law. Methinks there is more to this than meets the eye. The hyperbole and the hysteria do not match the perceived danger, which leads me to believe there are forces out there primed and ready to go on the attack when the subject of border control or immigration law enforcement is merely mentioned. I believe there are organizations in this country who want no enforcement at all, who believe in open borders, and will fight any effort, not just this one, to enforce our immigration laws.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 03:00 PM
You're absolutely right, of course. I'm still surprised Obama hasn't taken a hatchet to much of the so-called Patriot Act. But regarding this particular law, I wonder at the reality behind the reaction? The law itself is questionable, but I would not call it radical. The courts will iron that out, no doubt. What I wonder at is the almost hysterical reaction in the media and the immediate, massive response against this law across the country.

The same thing happened last time this nation simply took up the discussion of enforcing existing law or reforming immigration law. Methinks there is more to this than meets the eye. The hyperbole and the hysteria does not match the perceived danger, which leads me to believe there are forces out there primed and ready to go on the attack when the subject of border control or immigration law enforcement is merely mentioned. I believe there are organizations in this country who want no enforcement at all, who believe in open borders, and will fight any effort, not just this one, to enforce our immigration laws.


La Raza and the Mexican government.

:Broncos:

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 03:03 PM
La Raza and the Mexican government.

:Broncos:

Remember the Alamo!

Archer81
04-29-2010, 03:05 PM
Remember the Alamo!



That sir, is racist.

Clearly you did not learn that The Alamo was where our courageous and oppressed Mexican brothers overthrew white imperialism led by the nefarious Davey Crockett...


:Broncos:

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 03:08 PM
That sir, is racist.

Clearly you did not learn that The Alamo was where our courageous and oppressed Mexican brothers overthrew white imperialism led by the nefarious Davey Crockett...


:Broncos:

I had a Mexican American (I'm being PC here) Employee who I really liked (by the way he was legal!), and he would yell that at me any time I one-upped him-:rofl:

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 03:11 PM
I'm still waiting for your papers, ginger. :strong:

And I am waiting for yours manpirate darin.

Alright guys, I think I'm too much of a moderate to be involved in this discussion anymore.

I think illegal immigration needs to be cracked down on.

I think this law is just one more that chips away at all legal Americans' rights.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 03:12 PM
Some of my Latino friends are the loudest supporters of full-scale deportation.

My illegal friends...not so much.

I am all for a deportation. What I am not for is a country that has no balls. That because we won't handle the problem we will just pass a law that screws the Latinos here legally.

No right, not America, not going to happen. The people have spoken and its only a matter of time before the feds show Arizona who the boss is.

I believe in States rights, but not like this. This is America, people here travel freely when they are American or visitors to our great country. You show ID when you get on a plane, when you buy something with credit, when you go in certain buildings etc etc, not just because you are walking dog in the park, or taking kids to school, or going to church on Sundays.

People have died in fields, valleys, hills, oceans for us so that we are free. So that we can walk around without a govt asking us for our papers.


This could be next people.

Because its too much work for police to ask for ID and check everyone, we have decided to make all legal mexicans where a blue triangle on clothes. If you don't have the blue triangle, you must be illegal, out you go. if you do have the blue triangle, we will stop and ask you for your papers proving the triangle is legit.

Sound good to you?

This isn't right people. Wake up and let's take our country back. Do we need to get rid of the illegals? Yes we do. But you do it by tackling why they are here....Jobs. Take the jobs away and its all over with. No services unless you are legal, no school for kids, no medical care, no free clinics.

Fine the companies and people who hire them. Secure the border. Make the punishment for entering the USA illegally 1 yr in a medium labor prison. Build them in agricultural area and put them to work.

You would have about 60-70% reduction in illegals within first 2 yrs I bet. They would all start the move home.

Then come up with a guest worker program that legally let's in say 5 million mexican workers at a time. Maybe have a visa like that last 3 yrs, if you have kids they are mexican nationals not Americans.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 03:15 PM
Because what you posted is not the law in Arizona.


:Broncos:

What is probably cause to believe you might be illegal? IMO it's looking like you are from Mexico, and maybe don't have money?

Please explain where this law doesn't mean latinos will be asked to prove they are American. If you can say that not one legal american will be asked to show his ID only because he is Mexican then I have no problem with the law.

Otherwise this is a stupid law, not American, won't solve the problem because Ariz is a state and we need federal intervention.

Obama sucks and is the worst President we have ever had.This guy is a friggin disaster. I agree that Bush was pretty bad, but Dems trying to act like this guy knows what he is doing is a joke.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 03:16 PM
what is probably cause to believe you might be illegal?

You can't ****ing speak English? If you're an adult and you can't speak English or are barely able to, that sets off the illegal alarms. That will be the #1 reason to ask for papers, BY FAR.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 03:19 PM
You can't ****ing speak English?

What you can't spot a typo and take out the y so it's probable cause? What are you an idiot? I mean typos on a message board are part of the internet.

So take your dictionary, grab your gay English teacher boyfriend and **** off.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 03:20 PM
I believe in States rights, but not like this. This is America, people here travel freely when they are American or visitors to our great country. You show ID when you get on a plane, when you buy something with credit, when you go in certain buildings etc etc, not just because you are walking dog in the park, or taking kids to school, or going to church on Sundays.

People have died in fields, valleys, hills, oceans for us so that we are free. So that we can walk around without a govt asking us for our papers.


This could be next people.

Because its too much work for police to ask for ID and check everyone, we have decided to make all legal mexicans where a blue triangle on clothes. If you don't have the blue triangle, you must be illegal, out you go. if you do have the blue triangle, we will stop and ask you for your papers proving the triangle is legit.

Sound good to you?

This isn't right people. Wake up and let's take our country back. Do we need to get rid of the illegals? Yes we do. But you do it by tackling why they are here....Jobs. Take the jobs away and its all over with. No services unless you are legal, no school for kids, no medical care, no free clinics.


I nominate this as hysterical post for the month of April.

Nowhere in the Arizona law does it state that Mexicans specifically must be seperated out and harassed.

No where in the Arizona law does it state a damn thing about "papers". In fact, it does not add any further requirements for proof of citizenship that the federal government would ask for.

No where does this law state the police can stop you anywhere at anytime for anything.

I agree with the jobs angle, but its a single strategy in a situation that requires multiple modes of attack.

:Broncos:

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 03:20 PM
What you can't spot a typo and take out the y so it's probable cause? What are you an idiot? I mean typos on a message board are part of the internet.

So take your dictionary, grab your gay English teacher boyfriend and **** off.

Holy **** did you completely miss the boat. I was talking about illegals not you... you know... what the thread is about?

epicSocialism4tw
04-29-2010, 03:22 PM
What is probably cause to believe you might be illegal? IMO it's looking like you are from Mexico, and maybe don't have money?

Please explain where this law doesn't mean latinos will be asked to prove they are American. If you can say that not one legal american will be asked to show his ID only because he is Mexican then I have no problem with the law.

Otherwise this is a stupid law, not American, won't solve the problem because Ariz is a state and we need federal intervention.

Obama sucks and is the worst President we have ever had.This guy is a friggin disaster. I agree that Bush was pretty bad, but Dems trying to act like this guy knows what he is doing is a joke.

Arizona is doing us all a favor and forcing the Fed's hand here.

Expect New Mexico and Texas to join them soon.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 03:23 PM
What you can't spot a typo and take out the y so it's probable cause? What are you an idiot? I mean typos on a message board are part of the internet.

So take your dictionary, grab your gay English teacher boyfriend and **** off.


Does the English teacher have papers?

Otherwise...his ass goes back to merry ole england where he can enjoy blood pudding and men with cracked out teeth.

:Broncos:

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 03:25 PM
Does the English teacher have papers?

Otherwise...his ass goes back to merry ole england where he can enjoy blood pudding and men with cracked out teeth.

:Broncos:

He's offline now. Christ did he explode over absolutely nothing, lol.

Rigs11
04-29-2010, 03:25 PM
Well, the reason is that at least twice now (in two different Threads) you have brought up the Farm/Labor issue, and I don't think you understand what has changed in that arena, and how it has affected Farmers/Growers/Ranchers-for one, you asked Meck how the change in Farm Labor has affected "prices"-it does not-it affects margins, or in some cases, the amount of help a producer has. In situations where there is a lot of hand labor (read:vegetables, fruit, etc.), in the past I've seen Fields not get harvested due to labor issues, although now it has subsided to a great degree due to unemployment-in a nutshell, they can now find help easier-I can explain further if needed-

Now, back to your regularly scheduled Program-:thanku:
makes sense. So are you saying that our produsce and meat prices wont go up if we have to pay americans more to do those jobs?Agriculture by the way is only one slice of it.i view this as those busineses that export jobs to other countries to save money , the same way that the businesses here in the US hire illegals to save money.It seems that the corporations are always being defended around here.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 03:28 PM
Arizona is doing us all a favor and forcing the Fed's hand here.

Expect New Mexico and Texas to join them soon.

Now that i can agree with. You are 100% correct in that some good can come of it. IMO this law will never get implemented in Ariz. I heard they will get enough signatures for a referendum on it. That stalls in until 2012 I guess.

So yeah it makes it go national, onto to the media, and will force our govt to do something. The scary thing is they may do an amnesty which I am not for.

Trust me I can't stand illegals being in the country. Read some of my other threads i want them gone. I want American HS and youth mowing lawns and working in food service. You know like it used to be. Labor jobs in construction are for Americans that maybe aren't too smart.

Right now all we do is let our kids be lazy and our older lazy Americans get services from govt. It's going to kill our way of life.

I just can't go along with.......CAN I SEE YOUR PAPERS!! just for walking along a road and looking foreign.

Sure they say probable cause, but I don't trust the police.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 03:31 PM
makes sense. So are you saying that our produsce and meat prices wont go up if we have to pay americans more to do those jobs?Agriculture by the way is only one slice of it.i view this as those busineses that export jobs to other countries to save money , the same way that the businesses here in the US hire illegals to save money.It seems that the corporations are always being defended around here.

Watch out Rigs11 we have a English teacher on the loose. He's correcting grammar and spelling with a number 2 pencil that is also his IQ.

The liberals are right. You go after this by going after the people who pay them money. The conservatives are wrong you can't do it building a fence, making people show papers, putting people in prison. The liberals though are giving lip service, what you really want, well maybe not you but what IMO Obama will want, what the politicians will want, is a watered down system of amnesty.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 03:33 PM
Watch out Rigs11 we have a English teacher on the loose. He's correcting grammar and spelling with a number 2 pencil that is also his IQ.

The liberals are right. You go after this by going after the people who pay them money. The conservatives are wrong you can't do it building a fence, making people show papers, putting people in prison. The liberals though are giving lip service, what you really want, well maybe not you but what IMO Obama will want, what the politicians will want, is a watered down system of amnesty.

DUDE... LEARN TO ****ING READ. I SAID IT WASN'T ABOUT YOU...

Go back to page 16 and ****ing read what I wrote. You didn't even QUOTE everything.

Your insults about my intelligence are making you look foolish.

Christ.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 03:34 PM
Watch out Rigs11 we have a English teacher on the loose. He's correcting grammar and spelling with a number 2 pencil that is also his IQ.

The liberals are right. You go after this by going after the people who pay them money. The conservatives are wrong you can't do it building a fence, making people show papers, putting people in prison. The liberals though are giving lip service, what you really want, well maybe not you but what IMO Obama will want, what the politicians will want, is a watered down system of amnesty.


I believe the gist of the previous convo was a sure way to develop probable cause was talking to someone and they are unable to speak English...

Liberals are never right.

Get it? HAHAHAHAHA

:Broncos:

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 03:35 PM
makes sense. So are you saying that our produsce and meat prices wont go up if we have to pay americans more to do those jobs?Agriculture by the way is only one slice of it.i view this as those busineses that export jobs to other countries to save money , the same way that the businesses here in the US hire illegals to save money.It seems that the corporations are always being defended around here.

Not sure but I think he could mean that they already sort of charge what they can for the stuff. As in if they raised prices people would probably just not buy a strawberry, instead go to something that had not gone up? That instead if the margin of profit not enough they just let harvest rot because paying to get it to market doesn't make enough?

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 03:39 PM
You can't ****ing speak English? If you're an adult and you can't speak English or are barely able to, that sets off the illegal alarms. That will be the #1 reason to ask for papers, BY FAR.

I think everyone though you were trying to make fun of a typo at my expense. My bad I get it now.

I just don't think local police should be the ones to sit around and say, hmmm hes dressed like an illegal, he speaks spanish...not great english.....oh yeah lets go check him out.

I think police abuse power and they can't be the ones doing this.

This may be good for igniting a firestorm to get something real done, but I think Ariz too stupid to actually come up with something that solves the problem.

These are the guys who refused daylight savings remember, who refused MLK day? I mean who cares about a stupid holiday enough to make a stink? Arizona thats who.

mkporter
04-29-2010, 03:41 PM
Arizona is doing us all a favor and forcing the Fed's hand here.

Expect New Mexico and Texas to join them soon.

I actually agree with you here. If the Arizona law ends up getting the Feds to pass real comprehensive reform then kudos to AZ. The fact that the law is so divisive and probably unconstitutional helps.

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 03:42 PM
I think everyone though you were trying to make fun of a typo at my expense. My bad I get it now.

I just don't think local police should be the ones to sit around and say, hmmm hes dressed like an illegal, he speaks spanish...not great english.....oh yeah lets go check him out.

I think police abuse power and they can't be the ones doing this.

This may be good for igniting a firestorm to get something real done, but I think Ariz too stupid to actually come up with something that solves the problem.

These are the guys who refused daylight savings remember, who refused MLK day? I mean who cares about a stupid holiday enough to make a stink? Arizona thats who.

What needs to happen is a giant ****ing wall across our state lines to the south. It will cost a **** ton but considering the costs illegals are creating it will actually save money.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 03:44 PM
I think everyone though you were trying to make fun of a typo at my expense. My bad I get it now.

I just don't think local police should be the ones to sit around and say, hmmm hes dressed like an illegal, he speaks spanish...not great english.....oh yeah lets go check him out.

I think police abuse power and they can't be the ones doing this.

This may be good for igniting a firestorm to get something real done, but I think Ariz too stupid to actually come up with something that solves the problem.

These are the guys who refused daylight savings remember, who refused MLK day? I mean who cares about a stupid holiday enough to make a stink? Arizona thats who.


The new law in Az does not allow the police to just stop random people on the street and ask for their identification. You are stopped if you are doing something they can stop you for...like a traffic stop.

States do not have to fall into lockstep with one another over every little thing. You dont see Arizona wanting to boycott Ca for allowing medicinal weed or Co suing Utah because they dont sell real beer.

:Broncos:

UberBroncoMan
04-29-2010, 03:47 PM
The new law in Az does not allow the police to just stop random people on the street and ask for their identification. You are stopped if you are doing something they can stop you for...like a traffic stop.

States do not have to fall into lockstep with one another over every little thing. You dont see Arizona wanting to boycott Ca for allowing medicinal weed or Co suing Utah because they dont sell real beer.

:Broncos:

A lot of people as of late have forgotten that this is the United "States" of America not the Federal Government of America. States are supposed to be part of the checks and balanced that can prevent a federal leadership from becoming too powerful. The Federal Government has been ****ing horrific btw. So damn lazy. Always putting the issues that relate to votes and power over the needs of the citizens.

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 03:54 PM
makes sense. So are you saying that our produsce and meat prices wont go up if we have to pay americans more to do those jobs?Agriculture by the way is only one slice of it.i view this as those busineses that export jobs to other countries to save money , the same way that the businesses here in the US hire illegals to save money.It seems that the corporations are always being defended around here.

Correct, the Prices do not go up to the end user, the profit margins go down to the producer. If you are, say, a Grain Farmer, you can contract your Crop (bet on the come) before the season gets there. Problem with that is that the price might go up due to a shortage or whatever, so you are gambling that it won't (if it does you lost money). On the other hand, if you don't contract and wait until you Harvest your Crop (say Wheat), you can take it to the Grain Elevator only to find that the price has dropped due to over-supply (too many Farmers had a good Crop)-there are many in's and outs (test weight, shriveling, cleanliness,etc.). I salute all of the American Farmers/Rancers/Growers for having the balls to gamble-I could not handle the stress-

My apologies to everyone for the hi-jack-

Irish Stout
04-29-2010, 03:57 PM
The new law in Az does not allow the police to just stop random people on the street and ask for their identification. You are stopped if you are doing something they can stop you for...like a traffic stop.
:Broncos:

I'm back, I wish I weren't... I'm pathetic.

Dude we covered this on like page 4, 11, and 15, and some in between. The law says they can stop you (when you are not in a car) on reasonable suspicion that you're illegal. They can also demand papers on traffic stops. Please quit saying that they have to have something else to stop you.

I think everyone agrees, if you break any law, no matter how minor (i.e. failure to use turn signal) and you get stopped for that, you should probably have to show that you have the legal right to break that specific law in this country. If you're here illegally, then you had no right to break that law and you should get tossed for it.

Archer81
04-29-2010, 03:59 PM
I'm back, I wish I weren't... I'm pathetic.

Dude we covered this on like page 4, 11, and 15, and some in between. The law says they can stop you (when you are not in a car) on reasonable suspicion that you're illegal. They can also demand papers on traffic stops. Please quit saying that they have to have something else to stop you.

I think everyone agrees, if you break any law, no matter how minor (i.e. failure to use turn signal) and you get stopped for that, you should probably have to show that you have the legal right to break that specific law in this country. If you're here illegally, then you had no right to break that law and you should get tossed for it.


...Telling me what you think the law means is not the same as that is what the law actually says.

So we are arguing over the words lawful contact.

"Papers" is a ridiculous term, because the state law does not require more then federal law would in the same instance.

We agree on the tossing out of illegals. They broke a law in the first place...so why should they get a pass and be allowed to go on their way?

:Broncos:

bronclvr
04-29-2010, 04:00 PM
That instead if the margin of profit not enough they just let harvest rot because paying to get it to market doesn't make enough?

Actually, they can get paid more sometimes by letting it rot (Government subsidy)-

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 04:01 PM
I'm back, I wish I weren't... I'm pathetic.

Dude we covered this on like page 4, 11, and 15, and some in between. The law says they can stop you (when you are not in a car) on reasonable suspicion that you're illegal. They can also demand papers on traffic stops. Please quit saying that they have to have something else to stop you.

I think everyone agrees, if you break any law, no matter how minor (i.e. failure to use turn signal) and you get stopped for that, you should probably have to show that you have the legal right to break that specific law in this country. If you're here illegally, then you had no right to break that law and you should get tossed for it.

This is correct. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with it:

Meck77
04-29-2010, 04:02 PM
McStout...How do you feel about this?

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4000446n

Pregnant Mexican women are literally swimming across the Rio Grand river and running into a border hospital to pop out "Americans".

You mean to tell me that our Federal government can't put a stop to this BS????

The guy they interview on this clip said the women are literally still wet from crossing the border!!!

It's estimated each year 300,000 babies are born to illegals in America each year. Unreal.

brother love
04-29-2010, 04:45 PM
Construction jobs are hit hard by this. I worked on a job last year where a drywall company had illegals working for them. 20 mexicans that spoke no english, 1 mexican foreman that spoke a little english. They get paid very little but its all under the table. The drywall company can out bid most other companies because there labor is so cheap. Therefore costing americans jobs and not paying income tax on top of hit. I ran into this on about 7 different jobs last year and I live and work in Pennsylvania.
The Mexicans would get shuttled in every week from North Carolina. When INS comes to one of the sites you should see them run for the hills!

GoBroncos DownUnder
04-29-2010, 06:59 PM
I paid about approximately $2000, and spent WEEKS filling out my paperwork and getting together the necessary papers, to LEGALLY immigrate to the USA.

I did the right thing by RESPECTING the laws of the United States of America, why the hell should illegal immigrants who flaunt the law, get a free ride!?

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 07:09 PM
I paid about approximately $2000, and spent WEEKS filling out my paperwork and getting together the necessary papers, to LEGALLY immigrate to the USA.

I did the right thing by RESPECTING the laws of the United States of America, why the hell should illegal immigrants who flaunt the law, get a free ride!?

Damn right.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 07:11 PM
I paid about approximately $2000, and spent WEEKS filling out my paperwork and getting together the necessary papers, to LEGALLY immigrate to the USA.

I did the right thing by RESPECTING the laws of the United States of America, why the hell should illegal immigrants who flaunt the law, get a free ride!?

Welcome to America. That's how it supposed to be. If we let Mexicans just come over and sap the system, then we can't be a country people can immigrate to. You can't compete with people that don't follow the law.

It's true a lot of us Americans are spoiled, we take our country for granted, we are luckier them most to have been born here, but that doesn't mean we can't expect those not to follow the law and embrace the American ideal if you want to live here.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 07:13 PM
Good to see you escaped that horrid place Australia where there are no great beaches, girls, or anything........err wait a minute.. Why they hell did you leave the Land Down Under. That's one of the countries that I most want to go see.

Garcia Bronco
04-29-2010, 07:14 PM
Welcome to America. That's how it supposed to be. If we let Mexicans just come over and sap the system, then we can't be a country people can immigrate to. You can't compete with people that don't follow the law.

It's true a lot of us Americans are spoiled, we take our country for granted, we are luckier them most to have been born here, but that doesn't mean we can't expect those not to follow the law and embrace the American ideal if you want to live here.

It's not luck we are born here. It happens bacause of a very certain process.

cutthemdown
04-29-2010, 07:18 PM
The new law in Az does not allow the police to just stop random people on the street and ask for their identification. You are stopped if you are doing something they can stop you for...like a traffic stop.

States do not have to fall into lockstep with one another over every little thing. You dont see Arizona wanting to boycott Ca for allowing medicinal weed or Co suing Utah because they dont sell real beer.

:Broncos:

Good points. I have no problem with rounding up illegals as the fall into hands of the system.

For instance you go to emergency room, we patch you up, but your illegal, you go to jail the deportation.

You get pulled over for a traffic stop, not legal, deported.

Fine people who hire them whatever.

If I am wrong and this law doesn't allow the police to ask someone to prove they are American at random, then I am all for it. If its only when they do something else then its ok.

I just don't want a Latino walking to movies, have a cop stop and ask him for ID etc etc. That would be wrong I don't want that for my Latino American brothers. Cops accidently shoot about what 20-30 people a yr probably. You don't want to even be around them, they are often skittish and mean.

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 09:29 PM
1) Not seeing as many Spanish speaking latino-type people around Grand Junction any more either. More people who are more clearly from this country are working at the local fast food joints and chipotles. The orchards and vineyards are being stocked with American employees because there are not as many illegals around. Tight times have weeded out a lot of what I perceived as illegal immigrants (my reasonable suspicion).

2) I am probably one of those that appears to be crying about rights being violated. You know whose rights I worry about? Mine. I worry about the rights of other Americans. And I hate to see law abiding citizens and legal residents getting their rights f'ed over because we have this problem. I want to eliminate the problem as much as the next guy, but I do not want to do it where my kids or grandkids will have a weaker US Constitution and bill of rights protecting them. The Constitution is an extremely unique document, and it needs to be respected. You start disrespecting it in any way to where it becomes ok to ignore parts of it, then it just doesn't mean that much to you anymore. Eventually, over time if is feasible that no one will respect it (not just the illegals) and it will have no meaning at all, which in turn means that no one is really protected under it.

where's the pulpit?

Taco John
04-29-2010, 09:32 PM
This thread:
http://i.imgur.com/4dNrj.gif

bronco militia
04-29-2010, 09:35 PM
This thread:
http://i.imgur.com/4dNrj.gif

/end thread Ha!

Tombstone RJ
04-29-2010, 09:37 PM
This thread:
http://i.imgur.com/4dNrj.gif

Bingo

baja
04-29-2010, 09:52 PM
No. But if our esteemed Federal Government does not actually do something about illegals, we may all want to learn spanish.


:Broncos:

That's right dude we are going to screw our way into power.

Make love (and babies) not war.

GoBroncos DownUnder
04-29-2010, 11:47 PM
Good to see you escaped that horrid place Australia where there are no great beaches, girls, or anything........err wait a minute.. Why they hell did you leave the Land Down Under. That's one of the countries that I most want to go see.
We all want a change sometimes right? With that change I got a smokin' hot wife, who understands that football is a way of life!
Give me 17 Sunday's a year to go to the bar, tack on a MNF game, and a few Saturdays here and there to watch college football ... it's a great life, I love this country!

(FYI - in the last 3 months I have met quite a few Brits and Irishmen here, they love it too and don't want to go back either! It's funny, but we all seem to hate our countries fascination with tall poppy syndrome, which is much less prevalent here!):notworthy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome

epicSocialism4tw
04-30-2010, 12:04 AM
We all want a change sometimes right? With that change I got a smokin' hot wife, who understands that football is a way of life!
Give me 17 Sunday's a year to go to the bar, tack on a MNF game, and a few Saturdays here and there to watch college football ... it's a great life, I love this country!

(FYI - in the last 3 months I have met quite a few Brits and Irishmen here, they love it too and don't want to go back either! It's funny, but we all seem to hate our countries fascination with tall poppy syndrome, which is much less prevalent here!):notworthy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome

I have had a couple of American friends who went to Australia, were treated like kings because they were American, and immediately tried to move to Australia! They said that the grade of woman the attracted was better than what they got in the states, and that they never had to buy their own beer.

Hilarious!

broncocalijohn
04-30-2010, 01:02 AM
Now that i can agree with. You are 100% correct in that some good can come of it. IMO this law will never get implemented in Ariz. I heard they will get enough signatures for a referendum on it. That stalls in until 2012 I guess.

So yeah it makes it go national, onto to the media, and will force our govt to do something. The scary thing is they may do an amnesty which I am not for.

Trust me I can't stand illegals being in the country. Read some of my other threads i want them gone. I want American HS and youth mowing lawns and working in food service. You know like it used to be. Labor jobs in construction are for Americans that maybe aren't too smart.

Right now all we do is let our kids be lazy and our older lazy Americans get services from govt. It's going to kill our way of life.

I just can't go along with.......CAN I SEE YOUR PAPERS!! just for walking along a road and looking foreign.

Sure they say probable cause, but I don't trust the police.

Just come out and say it and I wish those that think this law violates the 4th amendment would do the same. If you are against it, tell us how you never trust the police for doing there job! it would be more believable than people like the mayor of LA telling everyone they can arrest without a warrant. No kidding? You mean when someone gets arrested, the cop always has a warrant like a drunk driving arrest? People, this law is what the Fed law has on the books. If you are a legal resident and not a citizen, you need paper work on your body at all times. When was this law enacted? In the 1940s! The hysterical notion that everything will turn into Germany circa 1942 is insane.

cutthemdown
04-30-2010, 02:44 AM
We all want a change sometimes right? With that change I got a smokin' hot wife, who understands that football is a way of life!
Give me 17 Sunday's a year to go to the bar, tack on a MNF game, and a few Saturdays here and there to watch college football ... it's a great life, I love this country!

(FYI - in the last 3 months I have met quite a few Brits and Irishmen here, they love it too and don't want to go back either! It's funny, but we all seem to hate our countries fascination with tall poppy syndrome, which is much less prevalent here!):notworthy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome

It's all good brotha...you had me at hot wife!!!

Takes some balls to move countries I applaud your spirit of adventure.

I think all Americans love the fact other peoples can come live here without being super educated or special like other western countries. German not to bad getting into, but some of the ones with a lot of socialistic services are pretty hard. We just want it to be a process open to all people from all countries. I don't think having all our new Americans, or a large majority of them from one country is good. We only can bring in so many a yr and I think it should be a mix from all over the world not 90% mexican.

How hard is it for Americans to go live in Australia or New Zeleand?

Also I have some friends from the UK who live in San Diego and they also love it here. Not that they don't still love merry ole England but they say the weather stinks there.

Also is AC/DC huge in Australia or does America love them more. Seen them like 4-5 times they remind me of being a kid again. Was just thinking concerts in Australia for them are probably pretty big. Maybe not though?

cutthemdown
04-30-2010, 02:55 AM
Just come out and say it and I wish those that think this law violates the 4th amendment would do the same. If you are against it, tell us how you never trust the police for doing there job! it would be more believable than people like the mayor of LA telling everyone they can arrest without a warrant. No kidding? You mean when someone gets arrested, the cop always has a warrant like a drunk driving arrest? People, this law is what the Fed law has on the books. If you are a legal resident and not a citizen, you need paper work on your body at all times. When was this law enacted? In the 1940s! The hysterical notion that everything will turn into Germany circa 1942 is insane.

It's an exaggeration to say it could get, or would be anything as bad as the Nazis or Soviets. It's just more I think the law is beyond what states should be doing. I don't mind laws that keep them from schools, services, etc etc.

I just think the states going this route, on there own is a recipe for disaster. Chances are the law will never take effect because it's beyond what states should be responsible for.

Let's hope it forces the feds into a real solution. it's going to have to be a combo of some who have good jobs, pay taxes, get to stay and become Americans. I would think a lot of these people are ones we would welcome as Americans.

We can find room in America for some of the 20 million right. I think the send them all home is a joke and not right. I think the give them all amnesty likewise not right and a not a good idea.

There has to be a middle ground. Ones that want to leave can go home. Ones that want to try and be Americans can apply. Somehow we choose what ones get to stay.

We have to close the border though. Otherwise any solution just has more illegals here in 15 yrs.

I agree with you though on this problem. I just don't like the law in Arizona. I have too many Latino friends who like you say don't like illegals and many of the ways they don't embrace America, but laws like this worry them brother. Hard for me to support states making laws to stem immigration that go beyond denying them services, or fining businesses that hire them.

I'd rather see Ariz make a law that states if you get caught working and your illegal, we seize all your money and any property you have. If you hire illegals you pay a huge fine. Seems to me that would either raise a lot of cash, or they go home. Either way its good for the state.

Garcia Bronco
04-30-2010, 06:16 AM
Beyond what the states should be responsible for? Seriously? They aren't doing this for ****s and giggles. They are doing this becuase their legal state is being torn away a d the entity that is supposed to handle it is ineffective. What are they supposed to do? Nothing?that's crazy.

Meck77
04-30-2010, 07:28 AM
If I entered Mexico or Canada illegally and break the law don't you think that the authorities might ask where the hell I came from? Do you really think they are going to offer me free health care while I'm there? Hell no! They'd kick my ass out of the country!

What are you people crying about?

TheReverend
04-30-2010, 07:35 AM
If I entered Mexico or Canada illegally and break the law don't you think that the authorities might ask where the hell I came from? Do you really think they are going to offer me free health care while I'm there? Hell no! They'd kick my ass out of the country!

What are you people crying about?

It's not sad for you because you're not poor and brown.

Meck77
04-30-2010, 07:44 AM
It's not sad for you because you're not poor and brown.

It's not sad for me because I'm here legally.
:welcome: Same goes for my friends and family. Those that are crying the loudest obviously have something to lose.

I guess they realize their free lunch is coming to and end. One state at a time.^5

oubronco
04-30-2010, 07:48 AM
It's not sad for me because I'm here legally.
:welcome: Same goes for my friends and family. Those that are crying the loudest obviously have something to lose.

I guess they realize their free lunch is coming to and end. One state at a time.^5

Yep truth hurts

WolfpackGuy
04-30-2010, 07:53 AM
Actually, it's Guatemalans, not Mexicans who are over burdening the system in my area.

But Perdue and Tyson will never let a bill like Arizona's see the light of day here.

TheReverend
04-30-2010, 07:55 AM
It's not sad for me because I'm here legally.
:welcome: Same goes for my friends and family. Those that are crying the loudest obviously have something to lose.

I guess they realize their free lunch is coming to and end. One state at a time.^5

Idk. I think a lot of people crying loudly just genuinely care for other members of humanity without any ulterior motives. We absolutely are lucky to be born here... the majority of the world is a really ugly place, and I can respect doing whatever it takes legally or illegally to try and provide a better future for your kids. That being said, we need to take a really hard look at our immigration system because it's broken, and Mexico needs to take a harder look at themselves and get their **** together.

As for your previous post: If you snuck into Canada illegally, you would get free healthcare.

Irish Stout
04-30-2010, 08:42 AM
Just come out and say it and I wish those that think this law violates the 4th amendment would do the same. If you are against it, tell us how you never trust the police for doing there job! it would be more believable than people like the mayor of LA telling everyone they can arrest without a warrant. No kidding? You mean when someone gets arrested, the cop always has a warrant like a drunk driving arrest? People, this law is what the Fed law has on the books. If you are a legal resident and not a citizen, you need paper work on your body at all times. When was this law enacted? In the 1940s! The hysterical notion that everything will turn into Germany circa 1942 is insane.

This is not what the Feds have on the books. The Feds cannot demand papers on reasonable suspicion, which this law allows cops in AZ to do. Don't believe me? Call up the your local bureau of the FBI or call up a Criminal Attorney in the yellow pages or call a law professor and just ask if the Feds can demand you to produce anything to them without probable cause or after you've been arrested for breaking the law.

The new law states that will work with the Feds laws on illegal immigration, but it is a major departure from those.

Some of you people think we're crying about the poor illegals, which is not the case. If this gets illegals, fine. But it is also going to hurt legals in the process because this law expands A LOT on where when and how a cop can "search and seize" and individual.

You people who keep arguing that it only hurts illegals and thats what we're whining about don't get it. The very language of this law is a departure from the Constitution, the 4th amendment, and all criminal law precedent. It give the cops more power than they had before. It isn't a matter of trusting cops to act correctly, its a matter of taking away Probable Cause as a means for search and seizure. If we allow them to search anyone that may or may not be an immigrant for documents, whats the next thing we're going to let them search on reasonable suspicion alone?

Irish Stout
04-30-2010, 08:48 AM
It's not sad for me because I'm here legally.
:welcome: Same goes for my friends and family. Those that are crying the loudest obviously have something to lose.

I guess they realize their free lunch is coming to and end. One state at a time.^5

Meck, I've PMed you and told you my position. But like I told you, its not sad for you now, but my concern is when does a law like this expand police power to a point where it does affect you and your friends and family? Then will it matter to you?

As the law stands now I have nothing to lose, unless a cop pulled me over on suspicion that I was an illegal cause I speak pretty well in Spanish, though I look your typical beer swilling American. A cop only need to hear me speaking Spanish to say to himself: "huh, he speaks spanish pretty well for a gringo, wonder if he really is from here? Well, I suppose I am now reasonably suspicious that he may not be what he appears, better check his documents to be sure." Like I told you Meck, I probably couldn't produce my birth certificate and my passport just expired. I could be detained until I got someone in my family to produce the necessary documentation for me...

Sound far fetched? Maybe it is, but it could happen under this law the way it is written.

ColoradoDarin
04-30-2010, 08:51 AM
Meck, I've PMed you and told you my position. But like I told you, its not sad for you now, but my concern is when does a law like this expand police power to a point where it does affect you and your friends and family? Then will it matter to you?

As the law stands now I have nothing to lose, unless a cop pulled me over on suspicion that I was an illegal cause I speak pretty well in Spanish, though I look your typical beer swilling American. A cop only need to hear me speaking Spanish to say to himself: "huh, he speaks spanish pretty well for a gringo, wonder if he really is from here? Well, I suppose I am now reasonably suspicious that he may not be what he appears, better check his documents to be sure." Like I told you Meck, I probably couldn't produce my birth certificate and my passport just expired. I could be detained until I got someone in my family to produce the necessary documentation for me...

Sound far fetched? Maybe it is, but it could happen under this law the way it is written.

And they've already made changes to the bill (http://www.abc15.com/content/news/phoenixmetro/central/story/Arizona-lawmakers-OK-several-changes-to/qNpxW7Jonkm9shejhnkiSQ.cspx) (bill itself and these changes don't take effect for some time anyways). They've basically tightened up some of the language about lawful contact and the role race can and cannot play.

OABB
04-30-2010, 09:06 AM
I think we should send all the illegals to Afghanistan And iraq to fight. If they prove themselves heroic and worthy they can stay In America. Than you bring the real soldiers home. The Iraq war budget would he cut in half, soldiers would be home And there would be no illegals to worry about here.

Irish Stout
04-30-2010, 09:13 AM
And they've already made changes to the bill (http://www.abc15.com/content/news/phoenixmetro/central/story/Arizona-lawmakers-OK-several-changes-to/qNpxW7Jonkm9shejhnkiSQ.cspx) (bill itself and these changes don't take effect for some time anyways). They've basically tightened up some of the language about lawful contact and the role race can and cannot play.

Haven't seen them. I know the law won't go into effect for like 80 more days (90 since bill was signed), so hopefully it will all be resolved by then.

Thanks for pointing this out to me.

Irish Stout
04-30-2010, 09:17 AM
I think we should send all the illegals to Afghanistan And iraq to fight. If they prove themselves heroic and worthy they can stay In America. Than you bring the real soldiers home. The Iraq war budget would he cut in half, soldiers would be home And there would be no illegals to worry about here.

Not a bad idea. But you'd have to have a pretty thorough screening and vetting process.

RaiderH8r
04-30-2010, 09:45 AM
Meck, I've PMed you and told you my position. But like I told you, its not sad for you now, but my concern is when does a law like this expand police power to a point where it does affect you and your friends and family? Then will it matter to you?

As the law stands now I have nothing to lose, unless a cop pulled me over on suspicion that I was an illegal cause I speak pretty well in Spanish, though I look your typical beer swilling American. A cop only need to hear me speaking Spanish to say to himself: "huh, he speaks spanish pretty well for a gringo, wonder if he really is from here? Well, I suppose I am now reasonably suspicious that he may not be what he appears, better check his documents to be sure." Like I told you Meck, I probably couldn't produce my birth certificate and my passport just expired. I could be detained until I got someone in my family to produce the necessary documentation for me...

Sound far fetched? Maybe it is, but it could happen under this law the way it is written.

When a person gets pulled over the officer checks for a number of indicators of other crimes. You know, observation. Christ, the first thing a cop asks for when a person gets pulled over is identification. Legal immigrants are already required to "Carry proof of your permanent resident status at all times." ( http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/M-618.pdf pg. 8).

This is no different than enforcing DUI laws. Christ, DUI sobriety checkpoints are more of an infringement on civil liberties than this law. And yes, the Supreme Court has found sobriety checkpoints Constitutional.

Rohirrim
04-30-2010, 09:52 AM
I noticed all the usual suspects got on TV last night screaming "rascism" and trying to remind everybody that this country was built on immigration, etc etc etc. Yeah, same old ****. Illegal immigrants are just the same as all the other immigrants, so when we're talking about illegal immigrants what we are actually talking about, in our secret language, is all immigrants, blah blah blah.

It's tedious to watch this all unfold again. Now the politicians all come to the mics and pontificate about what a "crucial issue" this is and how they're going to solve it by giving amnesty to the 10 or 12 million who are already here and then really, really, really (and we mean "really" this time) we are going to close the border.

And then, in ten more years, we can all meet to discuss how we are really going to get tough on illegal immigration this time, and after we give the 10 million illegals now living here illegally, we're really going to get tough on this... ad infinitum.

broncocalijohn
04-30-2010, 01:04 PM
Haven't seen them. I know the law won't go into effect for like 80 more days (90 since bill was signed), so hopefully it will all be resolved by then.

Thanks for pointing this out to me.

Maybe check out our imigration laws from the 40s where it is mandatory for non citizens to keep on themselves paperwork showing they belong in the country. Even your family from Ireland needs to show paperwork (size of a parking ticket) if asked while visiting America. Maybe you should really look at the bill. People are supposed to come here legally and we can monitor the amount of people from each country. We would know their sicknesses and any criminal activity before and then fingerprints for after. Right now, we dont get any of that. Gangs from El Salvador (13) murders at will.

Meck77
04-30-2010, 10:01 PM
Meanwhile reality.

AZ deputy shot by illegal. Suspects shoot at helicopter.......

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2010/04/30/arizona-sheriffs-deputy-shot-suspects-reportedly-shoot-at-helicopter/

Video.

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/centralsouthernarizona/casagrande/story/Deputy-shot-by-undocumented-immigrant-in-desert/rDJhd9J-y0WJKamEzMc3Sg.cspx

UberBroncoMan
04-30-2010, 10:19 PM
Meanwhile reality.

AZ deputy shot by illegal. Suspects shoot at helicopter.......

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2010/04/30/arizona-sheriffs-deputy-shot-suspects-reportedly-shoot-at-helicopter/

Video.

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/centralsouthernarizona/casagrande/story/Deputy-shot-by-undocumented-immigrant-in-desert/rDJhd9J-y0WJKamEzMc3Sg.cspx

Yep. Our borders sure are secure... yep.

Tombstone RJ
04-30-2010, 10:26 PM
Yah know, if the feds had any kind of brains at all, they could use this border violence from drug crime to spend a lot of money on securing the southern border. Between the DEA and Homeland Security they could wratchet up the border tighter than a frogs ass, and use stimulus money for the entire project.

Gort
05-02-2010, 07:37 AM
Maybe check out our imigration laws from the 40s where it is mandatory for non citizens to keep on themselves paperwork showing they belong in the country. Even your family from Ireland needs to show paperwork (size of a parking ticket) if asked while visiting America. Maybe you should really look at the bill. People are supposed to come here legally and we can monitor the amount of people from each country. We would know their sicknesses and any criminal activity before and then fingerprints for after. Right now, we dont get any of that. Gangs from El Salvador (13) murders at will.

the democrat "outrage" over this law is all about one thing... power. they mean to overwhelm the voting rolls with illegal voters who will vote (or will have somebody vote in their name) for any and all democrats. that's why they are working so hard on amnesty right now. that party wants to rule in perpetuity and without any regard for the will of the true citizenry. if they get their way, it's bye-bye America and hello Stalinist Russia. the motor voter act from the Clinton era was a test of the system. they now know they can corrupt the voter rolls with success (they've stolen a half dozen high profile elections in recent years). this is why they fight so hard against common sense rules like showing valid picture IDs at the voting booth. they also want felons to vote, from inside PRISONS! all the while fighting in court to prevent our overseas military ballots from counting. there is a multi-front war going on for the future of this country. the democrats are the villains.

OABB
05-02-2010, 08:12 AM
the democrat "outrage" over this law is all about one thing... power. they mean to overwhelm the voting rolls with illegal voters who will vote (or will have somebody vote in their name) for any and all democrats. that's why they are working so hard on amnesty right now. that party wants to rule in perpetuity and without any regard for the will of the true citizenry. if they get their way, it's bye-bye America and hello Stalinist Russia. the motor voter act from the Clinton era was a test of the system. they now know they can corrupt the voter rolls with success (they've stolen a half dozen high profile elections in recent years). this is why they fight so hard against common sense rules like showing valid picture IDs at the voting booth. they also want felons to vote, from inside PRISONS! all the while fighting in court to prevent our overseas military ballots from counting. there is a multi-front war going on for the future of this country. the democrats are the villains.


Close. It's actually about taxes and republicans never want to pay any.

DenverBroncosJM
05-02-2010, 12:47 PM
I wonder how many people in this thread that are outraged about this bill actually live in Cali texas arizona etc.

I bet less than 10%.

That's ok you guys just sit on your high horse and while my property taxes in s. California amount to more than your mortgage for a year. I'll continue to b**** moan and whine about illegal immigration.

If you don't live it and feel it in your pocketbook of course it's easy to throw stones

DBruleU
05-02-2010, 01:13 PM
Close. It's actually about taxes and republicans never want to pay any.

There's a difference between paying taxes, and paying excessive taxes thanks to bloated federal Government and useless programs that in turn require more taxes.

Bronco_Beerslug
05-02-2010, 02:07 PM
Yah know, if the feds had any kind of brains at all, they could use this border violence from drug crime to spend a lot of money on securing the southern border. Between the DEA and Homeland Security they could wratchet up the border tighter than a frogs ass, and use stimulus money for the entire project.There is currently 10 border agents for every mile in AZ, can't get too much "tighter". And the crime rates have actually fallen or remained "flat" in border towns (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=2831408#post2831408) over the last few years.
Read today's front page editorial (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=2831390#post2831390) by AZ's largest newspaper.

Bronco Bob
05-02-2010, 03:26 PM
It gives authority to pull someone over for doing nothing at all (other than being mexican). You want to live in a police state?

No it doesn't. You have to be doing something wrong in the first place.
It's like the seat belt law, they won't stop you for not wearing one,
but if you run a red light or are in an accident, they can charge you
with not wearing it. Similarly, if you are, say, robbing a bank, they
can check your immigration status, and if you are here illegally, you
can also be charged with that.

Archer81
05-02-2010, 03:35 PM
There is currently 10 border agents for every mile in AZ, can't get too much "tighter". And the crime rates have actually fallen or remained "flat" in border towns (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=2831408#post2831408) over the last few years.
Read today's front page editorial (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=2831390#post2831390) by AZ's largest newspaper.


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54514

CNSNews.com) - Even though the Border Patrol now reports that almost 1,300 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border is not under effective control, and the Department of Justice says that vast stretches of the border are “easily breached,” and the Government Accountability Office has revealed that three persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year, the administration is nonetheless now planning to decrease the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border...

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/april-12-2010/wall-street-journal-story-captures-border-fear.html

A Wall Street Journal article from guest columnist Leo Banks (Tuscon Weekly) captures the fear for personal safety among residents of the Southwest border. Last week, Banks' visited a service for Arizona rancher Robert Krentz who was recently killed on his property by a suspected illegal alien, and he said that the issue of illegal immigration is different from most Americans.

Americans who do not live along the Mexican border often assume the antipathy to illegal immigration arises from racial or cultural concerns. But talk to people on the ground, and what they fear most is the loss of personal security. They are angry that the federal government is unable to provide them with this most basic of human rights...

:Broncos:

mkporter
05-02-2010, 05:44 PM
I wonder how many people in this thread that are outraged about this bill actually live in Cali texas arizona etc.

I bet less than 10%.

That's ok you guys just sit on your high horse and while my property taxes in s. California amount to more than your mortgage for a year. I'll continue to b**** moan and whine about illegal immigration.

If you don't live it and feel it in your pocketbook of course it's easy to throw stones

I do. San Diego. California's property taxes aren't really that high. I pay ~1.1% or so. See what other states pay:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/Advice/PropertyTaxesWhereDoesYourStateRank.aspx

And on top of that, they aren't gonna go up, no matter how much your house appreciates, thanks to prop 13. But that is a whole other can of worms.

mkporter
05-02-2010, 05:45 PM
No it doesn't. You have to be doing something wrong in the first place.
It's like the seat belt law, they won't stop you for not wearing one,
but if you run a red light or are in an accident, they can charge you
with not wearing it. Similarly, if you are, say, robbing a bank, they
can check your immigration status, and if you are here illegally, you
can also be charged with that.

Then what is the point of the law? They could check your immigration status when suspected of a crime already.

Bronco_Beerslug
05-02-2010, 06:03 PM
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54514

CNSNews.com) - Even though the Border Patrol now reports that almost 1,300 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border is not under effective control, and the Department of Justice says that vast stretches of the border are “easily breached,” and the Government Accountability Office has revealed that three persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year, the administration is nonetheless now planning to decrease the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border...
None of this stuff is new, it's been happening for years and years but you have people now saying we are being "overrun", crime is increasing, etc... this isn't happening. There is definitely a problem with illegal aliens that needs to be taken care of but all this fear mongering and paranoia by politicians and Right Wing mouthpieces has no basis.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Violence is not up on Arizona border
Mexico crime flares, but here, only flickers (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/05/02/20100502arizona-border-violence-mexico.html)

By Dennis Wagner - May. 2, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

NOGALES, Ariz. - Assistant Police Chief Roy Bermudez shakes his head and smiles when he hears politicians and pundits declaring that Mexican cartel violence is overrunning his Arizona border town.

"We have not, thank God, witnessed any spillover violence from Mexico," Bermudez says emphatically. "You can look at the crime stats. I think Nogales, Arizona, is one of the safest places to live in all of America."

FBI Uniform Crime Reports and statistics provided by police agencies, in fact, show that the crime rates in Nogales, Douglas, Yuma and other Arizona border towns have remained essentially flat for the past decade, even as drug-related violence has spiraled out of control on the other side of the international line. Statewide, rates of violent crime also are down.

While smugglers have become more aggressive in their encounters with authorities, as evidenced by the shooting of a Pinal County deputy on Friday, allegedly by illegal-immigrant drug runners, they do not routinely target residents of border towns.

In 2000, there were 23 rapes, robberies and murders in Nogales, Ariz. Last year, despite nearly a decade of population growth, there were 19 such crimes. Aggravated assaults dropped by one-third. No one has been murdered in two years.

Bermudez said people unfamiliar with the border may be confused because Nogales, Sonora, has become notorious for kidnappings, shootouts and beheadings. With 500 Border Patrol agents and countless other law officers swarming the Arizona side, he said, smugglers pass through as quickly and furtively as possible.

"Everywhere you turn, there's some kind of law enforcement looking at you," Bermudez said. "Per capita, we probably have the highest amount of any city in the United States."

In Yuma, police spokesman Sgt. Clint Norred said he cannot recall any significant cartel violence in the past several years. Departmental crime records show the amount of bloodshed has remained stable despite a substantial population increase.

"It almost seems like Yuma is more of an entryway" for smugglers rather than a combat zone, he said.

Perceptions vs. reality

Since the murder of Cochise County rancher Robert Krentz by a suspected illegal immigrant in March, politicians and the national press have fanned a perception that the border is inundated with bloodshed and that it's escalating.

In a speech on the Senate floor last week, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., declared that the failure to secure that border between Arizona and Mexico "has led to violence - the worst I have ever seen."

He reiterated that Saturday after speaking at the West Valley Military Family Day event in Glendale, saying the concern that drug violence could spill across the border remains intense because Mexico's political situation is volatile.

"The violence is on the increase," McCain told The Arizona Republic. "The president of Mexico has said that it's a struggle for the existence of the government of Mexico."

Congressional members, including Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and John Shadegg, R-Ariz., sent President Barack Obama a letter asking that National Guard soldiers be sent to the border because "violence in the vicinity of the U.S. Mexico border continues to increase at an alarming rate."

And last month, as she signed Arizona's tough new law cracking down on illegal immigrants, Gov. Jan Brewer also called for National Guard troops. The law makes it a state crime to be in Arizona illegally and requires authorities to check documents of people they reasonably suspect to be illegal. Brewer said she signed it to solve what she said is an Arizona "crisis" caused by "border-related violence and crime due to illegal immigration."

Clarence Dupnik, the sheriff of Pima County, said there always has been crime associated with smuggling in southern Arizona, but today's rhetoric does not seem to jibe with reality.

"This is a media-created event," Dupnik said. "I hear politicians on TV saying the border has gotten worse. Well, the fact of the matter is that the border has never been more secure."

Even Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever, among the most strident critics of federal enforcement, concedes that notions of cartel mayhem are exaggerated. "We're not seeing the multiple killings, beheadings and shootouts that are going on on the other side," he said.

In fact, according to the Border Patrol, Krentz is the only American murdered by a suspected illegal immigrant in at least a decade within the agency's Tucson sector, the busiest smuggling route among the Border Patrol's nine coverage regions along the U.S.-Mexican border.

Still, Dever said, the slaying proved useful to southern Arizonans who are sick of smugglers and immigrants tramping through their lands.

"The interest just elevated. And we keep the pressure on because next week something else is going to happen, and the window of opportunity will close," Dever said.

Cochise County's crime rate has been "flat" for at least 10 years, the sheriff added. Even in 2000, when record numbers of undocumented immigrants were detained in the area, just 4 percent of the area's violent crimes were committed by illegal aliens.

Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villasenor said his town suffers from home invasions and kidnappings involving marijuana smugglers who are undoubtedly tied to Mexican organizations. However, he added, most of those committing the rip-offs are American citizens.

"I think the border-influenced violence is getting worse," Villasenor said. "But is it a spillover of Mexican cartel members? No, I don't buy that."

More help on the border

While the nation's illegal-immigrant population doubled from 1994 to 2004, according to federal records, the violent-crime rate declined 35 percent.

More recently, Arizona's violent-crime rate dropped from 512 incidents per 100,000 residents in 2005 to 447 incidents in 2008, the most recent year for which data is available.

In testimony to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security last month, Dennis Burke, U.S. attorney for Arizona, noted that Arizona now has more than 6,000 federal law-enforcement agents, with the majority of them employed by the Border Patrol. That represents nearly 10 agents for every mile of international line between Arizona and Sonora.

Border Patrol presence has been backed by increases in counter-smuggling technology and intelligence, the establishment of permanent highway checkpoints and a dramatic increase in customs inspectors at U.S. ports.

"The border is as secure now as it has ever been," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a Senate panel last week.

Given that level of security, Bermudez and others say, it is no wonder that cartel operatives pass through border communities as quickly as possible, avoiding conflicts and attention.

In fact, violent-crime data suggest that violence from Mexico leapfrogs the border to smuggling hubs and destinations, where cartel members do take part in murders, home invasions and kidnappings.

In Phoenix and Tucson, cartel-related violence is hardly new.

In 1996, for example, Valley law-enforcement agents estimated that 40 percent of all homicides in Maricopa County were a result of conflicts involving Mexican narcotics organizations, mostly from Sinaloa state. A decade later, the Attorney General's Office exposed a $2 billion human-smuggling business based in metro Phoenix, where criminals often assaulted illegal aliens while holding them for payment of smuggling fees. More recently, cartel-related home invasions and abductions put Phoenix among the world leaders in kidnappings.

'A third country'

During a national border security expo in Phoenix last week, David Aguilar, acting deputy commissioner for Customs and Border Protection, said policy makers and the public need to understand that the border is not a fence or a line in the dirt but a broad and complex corridor.

"It is," Aguilar explained, "a third country that joins Mexico and the United States."

He emphasized that the cartels operate throughout Mexico and the United States, and he noted that those who think of border security in terms of a "juridical line" really don't understand the dynamics.

Aguilar said that Juarez, Mexico, is widely regarded as the "deadliest city in the world" because of an estimated 5,000 murders in recent years. Yet right across the border, El Paso, Texas, is listed among the safest towns in America.

A review of the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports suggests that Arizona's border towns share El Paso's good fortune. Douglas and Nogales are about the same size as Florence but have significantly lower violent-crime rates. Likewise, Yuma has a population greater than Avondale's but a lower rate of violent offenses.

In Nogales, Ariz., residents seem bemused and annoyed by their town's perilous reputation. Yes, they sometimes hear the gunfire across the border. No, they don't feel safe visiting the sister city across the line. But with cops and federal agents everywhere, they see no danger on their streets.

"There's no violence here," said Francisco Hernandez, 31, who works in a sign shop and lives on a ranch along the border. "It doesn't drain over, like people are saying."

Leo Federico, 61, a retired teacher, said he has been amazed to hear members of Congress call for National Guard troops in the area.

"That's politics," he said, shrugging. "It's all about votes. . . . We have plenty of law enforcement."

Bronco_Beerslug
05-02-2010, 06:10 PM
No it doesn't. You have to be doing something wrong in the first place.
This is incorrect as I pointed out in the other thread and why this law is unconstitutional as written and will be overturned. Under this law police can ask for ID from any "lawful" police/citizen contact.

For any “lawful contact” made by law enforcement officials “where a reasonable suspicion exists that a person is an alien... a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.” The phrase “lawful contact” is not much of a qualification. Just about any contact of a policeman with a citizen short of a shakedown is lawful. (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/04/why_conservatives_should_oppos.html)

The phrase “reasonable suspicion” is also broadly drafted. The law prevents police from checking immigration status “solely” because of race or ethnicity. But “reasonable suspicion” is purposely undefined in the law. In fact, Arizona’s governor, members of its legislature and local police officials have refused to publicly offer their standards for such suspicions, because those standards would almost certainly smack of racial profiling. Their silence is a kind of confession.

Rohirrim
05-02-2010, 06:12 PM
"Comprehensive immigration reform" is code language for complete and total amnesty. When are the American people going to stop being such suckers? Every time this issue has come up the government has issued amnesty to millions of illegals and then simply refused to fund the enforcement part, although the enforcement part is what they'll use to sell the bull**** bill. You'll hear the words "tough" and "employer mandates" and "crack down" over and over and over again. But it will never happen. It's bull**** piled upon bull****. And they are going to do the exact same thing this time. I guarantee it. The amnesty part will come first, the enforcement part will never happen. In ten years, we'll be talking about amnesty for a whole new ten million illegals.

Rohirrim
05-02-2010, 06:19 PM
This is incorrect as I pointed out in the other thread and why this law is unconstitutional as written and will be overturned. Under this law police can ask for ID from any "lawful" police/citizen contact.

They can already do that. It's not unconstitutional at all.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=03-5554

If an officer has a suspicion that a crime is being committed, ie. somebody is in this country illegally, they can ask for ID. The SCOTUS will not overturn this Arizona law. They probably won't even accept it for review. This law is so similar to existing Federal law that Arizona shouldn't have even bothered with it. As the Sheriff of Pinal County said, he's already been doing this for fifty years.

Bronco_Beerslug
05-02-2010, 06:49 PM
They can already do that. It's not unconstitutional at all.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=03-5554

If an officer has a suspicion that a crime is being committed, ie. somebody is in this country illegally, they can ask for ID. The SCOTUS will not overturn this Arizona law. They probably won't even accept it for review. This law is so similar to existing Federal law that Arizona shouldn't have even bothered with it. As the Sheriff of Pinal County said, he's already been doing this for fifty years.In this context they arrive at "lawful contact" through racial profiling which absolutely is unconstitutional as Republican and Democrat lawmakers, the ACLU and a myraid of other groups have pointed out.

Rohirrim
05-03-2010, 09:51 AM
In this context they arrive at "lawful contact" through racial profiling which absolutely is unconstitutional as Republican and Democrat lawmakers, the ACLU and a myraid of other groups have pointed out.

My point is not that the law is, or isn't, poorly written. No doubt it is. My point is that what those protesting and getting hysterical about this particular law don't really care about this law, per se. They want no enforcement of any law whatsoever. They want no immigration laws. Period. I guarantee you, any law with any enforcement provision in it will be protested. In the words of the protesters themselves the last time they hit the streets waving their Mexican flags, this land rightfully belongs to them and they have no intention of following any of the immigration laws of the United States as they see the U.S. as an illegal power with no right to tell them what to do.

TailgateNut
05-03-2010, 10:19 AM
My point is not that the law is, or isn't, poorly written. No doubt it is. My point is that what those protesting and getting hysterical about this particular law don't really care about this law, per se. They want no enforcement of any law whatsoever. They want no immigration laws. Period. I guarantee you, any law with any enforcement provision in it will be protested. In the words of the protesters themselves the last time they hit the streets waving their Mexican flags, this land rightfully belongs to them and they have no intention of following any of the immigration laws of the United States as they see the U.S. as an illegal power with no right to tell them what to do.

I've got their illegal power dangling between my legs. I'm beyond sick and tired of the constant whining by the illegal immigrants and their nannies. They are breaking the law and want to take advantage of our laws to protect them. **** THAT!!!
My ****ing business is struggling to stay afloat because of businesses which employ these illegal MFers.

OABB
05-03-2010, 10:25 AM
I think we make all the illegals wear armbands that say "mexi" and we round them up in camps. They are bad for our economy and must be "taken care" of. It will be hard to get them into the "showers" as most of them are naturally afraid of showers so instead I think we will just install gas lines into the Home Depot parking lots.

problem solved. It's just that This Arizona law is just too weak and liberal.

TailgateNut
05-03-2010, 10:33 AM
I think we make all the illegals wear armbands that say "mexi" and we round them up in camps. They are bad for our economy and must be "taken care" of. It will be hard to get them into the "showers" as most of them are naturally afraid of showers so instead I think we will just install gas lines into the Home Depot parking lots.

problem solved. It's just that This Arizona law is just too weak and liberal.

I know part of this is a joke, I just don't know which part, nor do I know if you are for or against the "new and improved Arizona law".

Rohirrim
05-03-2010, 10:51 AM
I know part of this is a joke, I just don't know which part, nor do I know if you are for or against the "new and improved Arizona law".

He's a funny guy. He's just making a joke that anybody who tries to do anything about illegal immigration is a Nazi and besides, it's not even a problem anyway, so why worry about it? It's kind of the "nothing to see here, go back to being a potato in front of your TV" approach. :wiggle:

What we should all remember is that illegal immigrants are not violating any just laws and they should not be treated like criminals.

broncocalijohn
05-03-2010, 01:09 PM
There is currently 10 border agents for every mile in AZ, can't get too much "tighter". And the crime rates have actually fallen or remained "flat" in border towns (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=2831408#post2831408) over the last few years.
Read today's front page editorial (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?p=2831390#post2831390) by AZ's largest newspaper.

oh boy. I guess you dont count kidnapping and murders from these illegal aliens as crimes. Maybe crime is going past the "border" towns and going str8 to Phoenix.

broncocalijohn
05-03-2010, 01:11 PM
In this context they arrive at "lawful contact" through racial profiling which absolutely is unconstitutional as Republican and Democrat lawmakers, the ACLU and a myraid of other groups have pointed out.

They changed the wording in three parts of the bill late last week. Going to be tough to call it unconstitutional now. If so, then sobriety checks would have been outlawed.

bronclvr
05-03-2010, 01:36 PM
Doesn't look like it skeered 'em!

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/03/mexicans-hold-noses-shop-arizona-despite-anger-immigration-law/?test=latestnews

Cool Breeze
05-03-2010, 01:48 PM
I think Arizona has been boycotting San Fransico for years...

TailgateNut
05-03-2010, 01:52 PM
Doesn't look like it skeered 'em!

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/03/mexicans-hold-noses-shop-arizona-despite-anger-immigration-law/?test=latestnews

"Life there is awful, but I don't go to the U.S. because I like living there," he added. "I go because I like dollars."


That's the true face of those who some want to offer amnesty. **** that. If you don't like it here, WTF are you doing in my country. GET THE **** OUT!!!

Archer81
05-03-2010, 02:04 PM
"Life there is awful, but I don't go to the U.S. because I like living there," he added. "I go because I like dollars."


That's the true face of those who some want to offer amnesty. **** that. If you don't like it here, WTF are you doing in my country. GET THE **** OUT!!!


This.

:Broncos:

Bronco_Beerslug
05-03-2010, 02:46 PM
My point is not that the law is, or isn't, poorly written. No doubt it is. My point is that what those protesting and getting hysterical about this particular law don't really care about this law, per se. They want no enforcement of any law whatsoever. They want no immigration laws. Period. I guarantee you, any law with any enforcement provision in it will be protested. In the words of the protesters themselves the last time they hit the streets waving their Mexican flags, this land rightfully belongs to them and they have no intention of following any of the immigration laws of the United States as they see the U.S. as an illegal power with no right to tell them what to do.Not everyone believes that way but a loud percentage does. Police departments (the majority) do not want to be hall monitors and many police are Hispanic or patrol Hispanic communities and this law undermines their ability to solve crimes. You and I both know that if employers were held responsible for hiring illegal's this problem would generally go away. Add in an amendment edit that all children born in this country have to be born to at least one parent who is an American citizen to gain automatic citizenship and deny social services to people here illegally and it all disappears.

Dogsweat
05-03-2010, 02:50 PM
It will be nice to vacation in Arizona.....

Bronco_Beerslug
05-03-2010, 02:52 PM
oh boy. I guess you dont count kidnapping and murders from these illegal aliens as crimes. Uh, those are AZ and FBI crime stats. What about them do you dispute? Crime rates have been declining or remaining "flat" for years and years in AZ.

Tombstone RJ
05-03-2010, 03:04 PM
Many illegals don't want to be in the US. I know that's shocking to some. That is why I offer amnesty to all the non legal migrants who don't have a criminal history and actually do want to stay.

If anyone here has the um, "audacity" to try and put yourself in their position (illegal immigrant's position) then you can understand where many of these people are coming from. Most have family somewhere south of the border and they would prefer to stay with their family but can't because they can't find work or get paid a decent wage. They mostly come to the US to work. They send whatever $ they make back to their families in the South.

If the fed gov wants to take care of the illegal immigration problem they first have to figure out which illegals who are living here actually want to stay. Many won't want to stay. Those who leave will most likely try to cross illegally again in the future and this is why border security has to improve.

I'm not sure what a work visa does or doesn't do but I'd be willing to guess that getting a work visa is probably a big pain in the azzz and that is why most illegals don't get them.

barryr
05-03-2010, 03:07 PM
The crime rates went down in AZ because there was a period of time where many illegals left and went back to Mexico once the economy started going downhill. So they can't commit a crime if not here.

GoBroncos DownUnder
05-03-2010, 04:32 PM
If you're illegally in the USA, you deserve to get your IGNORANT ass kicked out. End of story.


You and I both know that if employers were held responsible for hiring illegal's this problem would generally go away.
How dare you come up with a solution to the problem! :thanku::thanku::thanku:

Garcia Bronco
05-03-2010, 05:14 PM
I have no problems holding employers feet to the fire. Economic penalties on the business will do. However, you can't sit here and tell me the law is being upheld by the Feds.

Dogsweat
05-03-2010, 06:04 PM
If you're illegally in the USA, you deserve to get your IGNORANT ass kicked out. End of story.


Post of the day. Well said!


http://learnsomethingnewtoday.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/illegal_aliens.jpg

This is what they really think of you.

Meck77
05-03-2010, 06:07 PM
Well it's working for AZ. On the evening news they reported neighborhoods in AZ are becoming ghost towns. One slum lord lost 7 tenants in a week. Cali...Here they come!

Bronco_Beerslug
05-03-2010, 07:35 PM
Well it's working for AZ. On the evening news they reported neighborhoods in AZ are becoming ghost towns. One slum lord lost 7 tenants in a week. Cali...Here they come!
And Colorado...

--------------------------------------------------------
Estimated number of Illegal Immigrants (most recent) by state (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/peo_est_num_of_ill_imm-people-estimated-number-illegal-immigrants)
Showing latest available data.

Rank States Amount

# 1 California: 2,209,000
# 2 Texas: 1,041,000
# 3 New York: 489,000
# 4 Illinois: 432,000
# 5 Florida: 337,000
# 6 Arizona: 283,000
# 7 Georgia: 228,000
# 8 New Jersey: 221,000
# 9 North Carolina: 206,000
# 10 Colorado: 144,000

TailgateNut
05-03-2010, 08:14 PM
And Colorado...

--------------------------------------------------------
Estimated number of Illegal Immigrants (most recent) by state (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/peo_est_num_of_ill_imm-people-estimated-number-illegal-immigrants)
Showing latest available data.

Rank States Amount

# 1 California: 2,209,000
# 2 Texas: 1,041,000
# 3 New York: 489,000
# 4 Illinois: 432,000
# 5 Florida: 337,000
# 6 Arizona: 283,000
# 7 Georgia: 228,000
# 8 New Jersey: 221,000
# 9 North Carolina: 206,000
# 10 Colorado: 144,000


Colorado has way more than that LOW estimate.

Archer81
05-03-2010, 08:16 PM
And Colorado...

--------------------------------------------------------
Estimated number of Illegal Immigrants (most recent) by state (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/peo_est_num_of_ill_imm-people-estimated-number-illegal-immigrants)
Showing latest available data.

Rank States Amount

# 1 California: 2,209,000
# 2 Texas: 1,041,000
# 3 New York: 489,000
# 4 Illinois: 432,000
# 5 Florida: 337,000
# 6 Arizona: 283,000
# 7 Georgia: 228,000
# 8 New Jersey: 221,000
# 9 North Carolina: 206,000
# 10 Colorado: 144,000


...Anyone else think its ridiculous that they have a rough guess how many illegals live in any given state but the concept of deporting them all is just crazy talk?

:Broncos:

azbroncfan
05-03-2010, 08:57 PM
And Colorado...

--------------------------------------------------------
Estimated number of Illegal Immigrants (most recent) by state (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/peo_est_num_of_ill_imm-people-estimated-number-illegal-immigrants)
Showing latest available data.

Rank States Amount

# 1 California: 2,209,000
# 2 Texas: 1,041,000
# 3 New York: 489,000
# 4 Illinois: 432,000
# 5 Florida: 337,000
# 6 Arizona: 283,000
# 7 Georgia: 228,000
# 8 New Jersey: 221,000
# 9 North Carolina: 206,000
# 10 Colorado: 144,000

Well California will have 2,492,000 here before long.

broncocalijohn
05-03-2010, 11:47 PM
Uh, those are AZ and FBI crime stats. What about them do you dispute? Crime rates have been declining or remaining "flat" for years and years in AZ.

I would love to see this in more detail. I know Sheriff Joe has been helping in that apartment for awhile now. In LA, a huge percentage of illegals are now occupying the LA County Jails. So, are the AZ illegals behaving better than the ones in California?

RaiderH8r
05-04-2010, 07:25 AM
Many illegals don't want to be in the US. I know that's shocking to some. That is why I offer amnesty to all the non legal migrants who don't have a criminal history and actually do want to stay.

If anyone here has the um, "audacity" to try and put yourself in their position (illegal immigrant's position) then you can understand where many of these people are coming from. Most have family somewhere south of the border and they would prefer to stay with their family but can't because they can't find work or get paid a decent wage. They mostly come to the US to work. They send whatever $ they make back to their families in the South.

If the fed gov wants to take care of the illegal immigration problem they first have to figure out which illegals who are living here actually want to stay. Many won't want to stay. Those who leave will most likely try to cross illegally again in the future and this is why border security has to improve.

I'm not sure what a work visa does or doesn't do but I'd be willing to guess that getting a work visa is probably a big pain in the azzz and that is why most illegals don't get them.

How about putting yourself in the shoes of an immigrant who is working through the arduous and exhaustive process to legally become a resident of the US? How about going through the years and years of BS hoop jumping only to learn that these people who have essentially cut the line...illegally...are going to get a free pass?

They want to be here? Fine. Get in f'ing line and take a f'ing number.

They want to send their money back to Mexico? Fine. First cut goes to Uncle Sam, right off the top, just like everybody else.

Yeah, getting a visa is a pain in the ass. Which is why we should be preferential to those who are actually trying to get one legally versus any consideration of amnesty or special treatment to those who have shown a blatant disregard for the law.

How the hell is this even a discussion?

mizzoutigers
05-04-2010, 08:23 AM
I would love to see this in more detail. I know Sheriff Joe has been helping in that apartment for awhile now. In LA, a huge percentage of illegals are now occupying the LA County Jails. So, are the AZ illegals behaving better than the ones in California?

and who do you think is paying for those illegal pieces of sh** in jail.

Rohirrim
05-04-2010, 08:29 AM
And Colorado...

--------------------------------------------------------
Estimated number of Illegal Immigrants (most recent) by state (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/peo_est_num_of_ill_imm-people-estimated-number-illegal-immigrants)
Showing latest available data.

Rank States Amount

# 1 California: 2,209,000
# 2 Texas: 1,041,000
# 3 New York: 489,000
# 4 Illinois: 432,000
# 5 Florida: 337,000
# 6 Arizona: 283,000
# 7 Georgia: 228,000
# 8 New Jersey: 221,000
# 9 North Carolina: 206,000
# 10 Colorado: 144,000

For a total of less than 7 million? Those numbers are ridiculously low. Even those who try to mask the numbers for political reasons admit the number is closer to 10 or 12 million. The Pew report a few years back said the number could be closer to 20 million.

baja
05-04-2010, 08:40 AM
I have read as high as 30 million

TailgateNut
05-04-2010, 09:00 AM
For a total of less than 7 million? Those numbers are ridiculously low. Even those who try to mask the numbers for political reasons admit the number is closer to 10 or 12 million. The Pew report a few years back said the number could be closer to 20 million.


I'll take 20-30Million as being closer to reality than this lowball estimate. I'd venture to guess there's probably 100 thousand employed in the construction, landscape, farming and service sector in colorado. Just a guess, but much more realistic than those BS numbers. This doesn't even account for their herds of offspring and multiple family members liveing in their households.

Time to call Orkin!