Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Arizona Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 8
 
 
2010-04-27 2:26 PM
in reply to: #2813206

User image

Master
2946
200050010010010010025
Centennial, CO
Subject: RE: Arizona

Ok, I didn't read every post, but notice there were several that mentioned that if Arizona companies stopped employing immigrants that it would help the problem.  But... The problem is two-fold.  First there is the argument that immigration takes jobs from americans and they don't pay taxes.  Maybe partially true in some cases.  2.  Many crimes are committed by illegal aliens.  This is true. 

So what happens if companies in AZ stop hiring?  Immigrants will go somewhere else.  Problem is, with AZ being a border state, you will still see immigrants passing through, but now they will commit more crimes to get money to make it to Colorado or elsewhere. 

In my opinion, the best solution is to determine status when the opportunity exists and follow the law (send them back).  This does not mean hunt them down.  It just means gov. agencies should ask for documentation.  This includes, schools, police, fire, hospitals, libraries.  Do not provide services (obviously if someone is hurt you should treat them then deport them).  Pretty simple, enforce the law that is all.  Do not agressively go after immigrants, just enforce the law and let everyone share the responsiblity.



2010-04-27 2:28 PM
in reply to: #2820405

User image

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: Arizona
Paulettejo - 2010-04-27 3:19 PM

I've tried to make this point already...because the defintion of "suspicious" has everything to do with ethnicity, it can't be anything but discriminitory.   If this is AZ's stance, the law needs to be rewritten


Please back up your assertions with evidence.

Main Entry: sus·pi·cious
Pronunciation: \sə-ˈspi-shəs\
Function: adjective
Date: 14th century

1 : tending to arouse suspicion : questionable <suspicious characters>
2 : disposed to suspect : distrustful <suspicious of strangers>
3 : expressing or indicative of suspicion <a suspicious glance>

Funny, no mention of race there...
2010-04-27 2:28 PM
in reply to: #2820352

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2010-04-27 2:29 PM
in reply to: #2820394

Champion
10020
50005000
, Minnesota
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Arizona

I think a mountain has been made out of a molehill, here.  I read the first few pages and the following seems to be true:

  • Only those already elligible for "contact" will be questioned.  Reasonably, you shouldn't be pulled over just to check your ID - the officer must have cause.  If they do not have cause, it's not the law's fault.  It's the officer's fault.  The offers will do what they will, doesn't make it right.  In Minnesota we had a law for a long time that made not wearing a seatbelt illegal but it was only enforced if you were pulled over for another reason.  Now it's a primary offense.  But I have to assume some cops pulled folks over for lots of "dumb" reasons to give the seatbelt ticket.   They are human.
  • As already pointed out, asking for an ID is no big deal.  Even if a person is stopped on the street (like the public drunkenness example), it's not unreasonable to ask for an ID.  If I (a very pale causasian girl with a Minnesota accent) was stumbling around at 2 am without my ID - I think it's reasonable for a police officer to request it my ID.  I assume there's another law that states you must have a state issued ID in one of those categories. Does anyone know?
  • Only if a person is actually arrested are they required to prove their immigration status.   Otherwise it's when "practiceable." 

The lawmakers shouldn't be responsible for proving the negative here.  They are simply building in a way, that works across the board, to help them identify lawbreakers.

2010-04-27 2:40 PM
in reply to: #2820418

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2010-04-27 2:55 PM
in reply to: #2820481

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: Arizona
Paulettejo - 2010-04-27 3:40 PM

What suspicious activity do no-citizens do (that citizens don't) that raises a red flag that these people are in the country illegally?  ...I can't think of anything, so in the end, it really is about brown people...which is unconstitutional.  


What does it matter if they are citizen or not.  If they are doing something suspicious they are stopped.  ONLY THEN CAN THEY BE ASKED ABOUT THEIR STATUS.

Read.  Then come back.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion

They are not going to be able to randomly be able to stop brown skinned people and check their IDs.  The cases will be throw out of court.

Are there racists in the police force.  Sure.  Are they ALL racists.  Heck no.

Edited by TriRSquared 2010-04-27 2:57 PM


2010-04-27 2:59 PM
in reply to: #2820542

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.

Edited by AcesFull 2010-04-27 3:00 PM
2010-04-27 3:03 PM
in reply to: #2820555

Runner
Subject: RE: Arizona
AcesFull - 2010-04-27 3:59 PM

TriRSquared - 2010-04-27 2:55 PM
Paulettejo - 2010-04-27 3:40 PM

What suspicious activity do no-citizens do (that citizens don't) that raises a red flag that these people are in the country illegally?  ...I can't think of anything, so in the end, it really is about brown people...which is unconstitutional.  


What does it matter if they are citizen or not.  If they are doing something suspicious they are stopped.  ONLY THEN CAN THEY BE ASKED ABOUT THEIR STATUS.

Read.  Then come back.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion

They are not going to be able to randomly be able to stop brown skinned people and check their IDs.  The cases will be throw out of court.

Are there racists in the police force.  Sure.  Are they ALL racists.  Heck no.

Having lived in the South, I just hate to see us going back to the days of, "What are you doing in these parts, ni****r?"  No, most cops are not racists, but why give the racists quarter?  If we want to be sure everyone is a citizen, then lets just require everyone to carry documentation and submit to random checks.  I'm fine with that, so long as we don't single out a specific group.

And yes, the will be able to randomly stop brown people. 



OK, where does it say the police (or anybody) will be able to randomly stop people? Can you provide a page and line number, please?

I fail to see how this law institutionalizes racism. I have ALWAYS been asked for identification whenever I was stopped by the police. How is this any different?

Ultimately, isn't this issue pretty much the same as LA from years back? That had nothing to do with the laws on the books, and more to do with the people in charge. I just don't see this law doing anything significant.
2010-04-27 3:06 PM
in reply to: #2820555

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: Arizona
AcesFull - 2010-04-27 3:59 PM

And yes, the will be able to randomly stop brown people. 



Aces you are 100% wrong on this.  According to the law they cannot do this.  Wrong.

You are projecting your feelings and opinions into the argument.  Nowhere does it state they can randomly stop anyone.

Edited by TriRSquared 2010-04-27 3:07 PM
2010-04-27 3:29 PM
in reply to: #2813206

Master
1585
1000500252525
Folsom (Sacramento), CA
Subject: RE: Arizona
This debate reminds me a little of the death panels debate with health care. People take a kernel of truth from the bill and then it grows and morphs into something that people are convinced is in the bill that really isn't.
2010-04-27 3:56 PM
in reply to: #2820653

Pro
4311
20002000100100100
Texas
Subject: RE: Arizona
uclamatt2007 - 2010-04-27 3:29 PM

This debate reminds me a little of the death panels debate with health care. People take a kernel of truth from the bill and then it grows and morphs into something that people are convinced is in the bill that really isn't.


^heads up the LA chapter of the Death Panels^


2010-04-27 4:02 PM
in reply to: #2820729

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2010-04-27 4:03 PM
in reply to: #2820443

Champion
5376
5000100100100252525
PA
Subject: RE: Arizona
Zilla - 2010-04-27 3:28 PM
AcesFull - 2010-04-27 12:03 PM

TriRSquared - 2010-04-27 1:59 PM
AcesFull - 2010-04-27 2:56 PM

rayd - 2010-04-27 1:35 PM
drewb8 - 2010-04-27 11:54 AM I'm disappointed no one has brought up the obvious solution.  Just put an RFID chip in every rightful citizens shoulder with scanners on all the sidewalks.  If you're a citizen you walk on and nothing happens.  If you don't have a chip a red light goes on and the cops come and take you away for further questioning.  no messy problems with profiling, etc.  If we can do it for my dog, why not us?  It'll save a ton of money on enforcement.

that's it...genious!

My concern is not with having to provide documentation, its with singling out one group.  If the AZ law setup a requirement for ALL Arizonans to carry documentation, and to supply said documentation on request of law enforcement, I'd be okay with it.  I mean, to be fair, perhaps AZ could just setup random checkpoints and look at everyone's documents, then there would be no question of racial profiling.  I mean, if you are a legal citizen, you just present your papers, they get scanned and you're on your way.  No biggie, right? 

Of course, people will complain about AZ becoming a police state, but those folks who are complaining don't seem to mind when the police state only applies to people other than themselves. 



What group is it singling out?  It's singling out criminals.  Guess what, lots of laws single out criminals.

The law states that the immigration status of ALL suspects need to be checked.  Have you EVER been stopped by a cop and NOT been asked for some form of ID?

They are not talking about stopping "suspects."  They are talking about stopping anyone the police deem to be a possible immigrant.  In AZ, that means Brown People. 

I have no problem with being ID'd randomly, or anytime I'm stopped for a possible crime.  The AZ law makes it okay to ask me for ID just because I talk with a funny accent (which I've been developing with exposure to all the Minnesotans around me, you betcha).



Over the years I've gone through many Border Patrol checkpoints on the wide open, not very heavily traveled highways of southern AZ, and when I've been alone they indicate for me to roll down my window .. they look in the car .. they look at me and they wave me along.  When I've gone through with someone else in the car that "looked like" me .. same thing ... when I've gone through with someone Hispanic, who was very much so a US citizen, in the car ... we were asked to show ID and at times a few questions .. then we were waved on through.  The only time they wanted me to step out of the car and pop my trunk was when I was driving my ex husbands fancy black sports car up from Sierra Vista, I was the only car at the checkpoint and no other cars came by in the time I was there.  Maybe they were bored.  Who knows.  I don't know what that means but that's my experience with Border Patrol.


I was stopped and they asked to see in the back of my Toyota 4x4 pickup.  I got questioned quite a bit because I had PA plates and a 4WD pickup.  I was told that out of state plates and the type of vehicle were "flags." 
2010-04-27 5:25 PM
in reply to: #2818029

Master
2006
2000
Portland, ME
Subject: RE: Arizona
in2deep - 2010-04-26 5:26 PM Wouldn't proof of citizenship be a drivers license?


No. There are states that do not require citizenship as a criteria to obtain a drivers license.

Edited by Jackemy 2010-04-27 5:33 PM
2010-04-27 5:28 PM
in reply to: #2820964

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Arizona
Jackemy - 2010-04-27 6:25 PM
in2deep - 2010-04-26 5:26 PM Wouldn't proof of citizenship be a drivers license?


No. There are states that do not require citizenship and a criteria to obtain a drivers license.


Yup when I moved to FL they refused to take just my NM drivers license to obtain my FL drivers license, I had to provide my passport as well.
2010-04-27 5:42 PM
in reply to: #2813206

Master
2006
2000
Portland, ME
Subject: RE: Arizona
The funny thing about this Arizona thing is while they are trying to kick out non-citizens of the illegal type my city is trying to pass a law to give non-citizens the right to vote.

My take is the federal government has failed Arizona and they are back into a corner. The government and social cost to deal with the illegal population is crushing on the economy and the taxpayers of that great state. I don't blame the supporters in AZ for trying to do something.

Frankly, this wouldn't have occurred if the Fed would get their head out their arse and enforce the law and our soveignty. And also if the late Sen. Kennedy didn't lie to the citizens of this country when he pushed through the 1965 immigration and naturalization act.


2010-04-27 5:50 PM
in reply to: #2813206

Payson, AZ
Subject: RE: Arizona
Am I the only one who doesn't always carry id?  I do not take my license when I am out running or biking or if I walk across the street to the store, or I take my dog out for a walk.  If I do this and a cop decides to ask for my id (justified or not) and I do not have it I have potential jail and a huge fine.  So, now it is the law that you must carry your license or other such documentation with you.  Thankfully I am Canadian so they'll probably leave me alone but it worries me none the less.  This is very similiar to when the blacks had to carry papers to prove that they were free and not slaves. 

Someone pointed out 70% of Arizonians supported this law.  Where did that number come from?  Some poll or was this voted in?  I honestly don't know, but if it is some poll I would like to see the demographics on that one.
2010-04-27 5:54 PM
in reply to: #2820992

Veteran
663
5001002525
Central Point
Subject: RE: Arizona
Jackemy - 2010-04-27 3:42 PM The funny thing about this Arizona thing is while they are trying to kick out non-citizens of the illegal type my city is trying to pass a law to give non-citizens the right to vote.


Citizenship = {}
2010-04-27 5:55 PM
in reply to: #2820432

Payson, AZ
Subject: RE: Arizona
velocomp - 2010-04-27 12:26 PM

In my opinion, the best solution is to determine status when the opportunity exists and follow the law (send them back).  This does not mean hunt them down.  It just means gov. agencies should ask for documentation.  This includes, schools, police, fire, hospitals, libraries.  Do not provide services (obviously if someone is hurt you should treat them then deport them).  Pretty simple, enforce the law that is all.  Do not agressively go after immigrants, just enforce the law and let everyone share the responsiblity.



It is funny that a lot of folks are blaming the federal government for lack of action and that is why there is such a problem but your right, if the law was followed by all then we would not be in this situation.  When I started to work in the states I had to get a social security number.  On my social security card is a big stamp that says I must have papers to work in the states.  I had to show both to my company to start employement. 

2010-04-27 7:16 PM
in reply to: #2820481

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: Arizona
Paulettejo - 2010-04-27 3:40 PM
What suspicious activity do no-citizens do (that citizens don't) that raises a red flag that these people are in the country illegally?  ...I can't think of anything, so in the end, it really is about brown people...which is unconstitutional.  


Run when you shout La Migre' Tenge sus papeles
2010-04-27 7:42 PM
in reply to: #2813206

Master
1848
100050010010010025
Canandaigua
Subject: RE: Arizona

Stop and Identify statutes

Not a lawyer but how does this differ from Stop and Identify laws in such states as Nevada?  In Hiibel v. Nevada the guy was arrested for not giving ID to cop although he was not breaking laws. 


2010-04-27 8:05 PM
in reply to: #2820555

Subject: RE: Arizona

AcesFull - 2010-04-27 12:59 PM

TriRSquared - 2010-04-27 2:55 PM
Paulettejo - 2010-04-27 3:40 PM

What suspicious activity do no-citizens do (that citizens don't) that raises a red flag that these people are in the country illegally?  ...I can't think of anything, so in the end, it really is about brown people...which is unconstitutional.  


What does it matter if they are citizen or not.  If they are doing something suspicious they are stopped.  ONLY THEN CAN THEY BE ASKED ABOUT THEIR STATUS.

Read.  Then come back.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion

They are not going to be able to randomly be able to stop brown skinned people and check their IDs.  The cases will be throw out of court.

Are there racists in the police force.  Sure.  Are they ALL racists.  Heck no.

Having lived in the South, I just hate to see us going back to the days of, "What are you doing in these parts, ni****r?"  No, most cops are not racists, but why give the racists quarter?  If we want to be sure everyone is a citizen, then lets just require everyone to carry documentation and submit to random checks.  I'm fine with that, so long as we don't single out a specific group.

And yes, the will be able to randomly stop brown people. 

Fear mongering that's all this is, no fact, no substance, plain and simple.

Please site out of the statute where you come up with this opinion.

2010-04-27 10:33 PM
in reply to: #2813206

Champion
5522
5000500
Frisco, TX
Subject: RE: Arizona

It is sad that the State of Arizona had to pass such a law.  The feds are not doing their jobs - period.  Furthermore, the cities are actively working against solving the illegal immigration problem by forbidding their police forces to check the citizenship status of suspects who are arrested for other crimes.  (I think it is called "sanctuary city" and includes both Phoenix and Tuscon)  The people are completely frustrated with no one presenting a solution to their problems that arise from illegal immigration (the people in Texas are not far behind either). 

By the way - everyone yammering on about racial profiling...  what "race" are hispanic people?  Last I checked they were "causasian".    Minor point I know, but I have become very sensitive to everyone throwing the "race" term around every time something comes up they don't agree with.   Perhaps we should call it statistical profiling...  statistically speaking the probability of a hispanic being an illegal immigrant is much higher by several orders of magnitude than the "blonde" person that everyone loves to throw about.   That is the facts - like it or not....

2010-04-27 11:03 PM
in reply to: #2821542

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Arizona
ashort33 - 2010-04-27 10:33 PM

By the way - everyone yammering on about racial profiling...  what "race" are hispanic people?  Last I checked they were "causasian".    Minor point I know, but I have become very sensitive to everyone throwing the "race" term around every time something comes up they don't agree with.   Perhaps we should call it statistical profiling...  statistically speaking the probability of a hispanic being an illegal immigrant is much higher by several orders of magnitude than the "blonde" person that everyone loves to throw about.   That is the facts - like it or not....



Hispanic is defined as a different race from Caucasian by the EEOC. They recently revised the categories (below), but White/Caucasian and Hispanic have been identified as being different races for a while.

The revised categories are:
Hispanic or Latino
White (not Hispanic or Latino)
Black or African American (not Hispanic or Latino)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (not Hispanic or Latino)
Asian (not Hispanic or Latino)
American Indian or Alaska Native (not Hispanic or Latino)
Two or More Races (not Hispanic or Latino)
2010-04-27 11:15 PM
in reply to: #2813206

Champion
6931
5000100050010010010010025
Bellingham, Washington
Subject: RE: Arizona
What would happen if you were in Mexico and you lost your passport and the Federallies started to ask you questions?

Edited by BellinghamSpence 2010-04-27 11:16 PM
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Arizona Rss Feed  
 
 
of 8