ARIZ. SHERIFF: Armed Militias beware or be shot

[Master PO]

Holy Christ dude, I know you keep saying it, I keep saying it too, so stop repeating as if I don't understand or agree with that.

agree.

 

[Lutherf]

And if their wasn't a demand for their labor, they would not come.

It has ALWAYS been a matter of economics, it was true for your ancestors just as it is for the "illegals".

If someone wants to come here to work then they need to do so LEGALLY.

By coming here illegally they are setting themselves up for problems farther down the road.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Well, in 2007 we introduced the Legal Arizona Workers Act which did EXACTLY what you suggest but the Obama administration decided to sue us to overturn it.

You introduced it? So not only are you a movie producer/bagel eating wannabe cowboy......but a member of the AZ Legislature?

News Flash...the SCOTUS upheld it.....and it was the Chamber of Commerce that filed the original case against it. If only you guys knew who is your real enemy.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

If someone wants to come here to work then they need to do so LEGALLY.

By coming here illegally they are setting themselves up for problems farther down the road.

It is a matter of law, not vigilantes on the road.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

our state has enacted many laws, one which would take away the business license of people who hire illegals, yet the liberals and illegals complain its not fair.

make it illegal for people to stop and pickup illegals for day labor.......again its been claimed its not fair.

Uh....it is the Chamber of Commerce representing BUSINESSES that has the money and power to block laws that stymies their profit margins.

You guys are are just clueless to the economics.

PS..I'm an AZ native.

 

[Master PO]

Uh....it is the Chamber of Commerce representing BUSINESSES that has the money and power to block laws that stymies their profit margins.

You guys are are just clueless to the economics.

PS..I'm an AZ native.

what?....laws are made by our legislature ,not the COC....although they made have influence, they dont make laws.

our state has made several laws, the federal government has sought to destroy......you yourself brought up the legislature.......no one else did.

and i stated they have acted in accordance with what you said.

and your a master?

 

[Lutherf]

You introduced it? So not only are you a movie producer/bagel eating wannabe cowboy......but a member of the AZ Legislature?

News Flash...the SCOTUS upheld it.....and it was the Chamber of Commerce that filed the original case against it. If only you guys knew who is your real enemy.

The ACLU challenged it as did some employers and damned near every "human rights" group.

The challenge by the employers involved a conflict between meeting the requirements of the LAWA and existing anti-discrimination laws. In essence, an employer had to hire someone before they could check their status and then would have to fire that person if they couldn't pass E-Verify which, at the time, had LOTS of conflicts. The idea was sound but the tools to get the job done simply hadn't been perfected yet.

The challenge by the ACLU and the human rights groups was because in addressing the issue of illegal immigration from both the employer side and the illegal entrant side it might have actually been effective.

The Holder DoJ took offense to it because the law originated in Arizona and didn't allow the Executive branch to exercise complete supremacy over immigration.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

what?....laws are made by our legislature ,not the COC....although they made have influence, they dont make laws.

That is not what I said, I said they brought suit to stop the legislation under discussion.......but if you SERIOUSLY believe the the CoC does not have a huge influence on the AZ legislature, then this is worse than I thought.

our state has made several laws, the federal government has sought to destroy......you yourself brought up the legislature.......no one else did.

and i stated they have acted in accordance with what you said.

and your a master?

WTF? I'll give you a pass on the grammar......but just what are you asking? Master?

Wow.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

The ACLU challenged it as did some employers and damned near every "human rights" group.

The challenge by the employers involved a conflict between meeting the requirements of the LAWA and existing anti-discrimination laws. In essence, an employer had to hire someone before they could check their status and then would have to fire that person if they couldn't pass E-Verify which, at the time, had LOTS of conflicts. The idea was sound but the tools to get the job done simply hadn't been perfected yet.

The challenge by the ACLU and the human rights groups was because in addressing the issue of illegal immigration from both the employer side and the illegal entrant side it might have actually been effective.

The Holder DoJ took offense to it because the law originated in Arizona and didn't allow the Executive branch to exercise complete supremacy over immigration.

Um, the court challenge on the legislation under discussion, is know as "Chamber v Whiting", ie Chamber of Commerce.

The SCOTUS upheld the legislation.

Lets get the basics straight.

 

[Master PO]

That is not what I said, I said they brought suit to stop the legislation under discussion.......but if you SERIOUSLY believe the the CoC does not have a huge influence on the AZ legislature, then this is worse than I thought.

WTF? I'll give you a pass on the grammar......but just what are you asking? Master?

Wow.

what you said........

If you wanted to stem the flow of workers, then you would be pressuring the AZ Chamber of Commerce, the AZ House and Senate and Jan to stop BUSINESSES from hiring, but AZ business has relied on cheap labor since before 1912. If you were interested in stemming the flow of MJ, then you would be pushing to relax further the laws on use and cultivation.

i posted our legislature has already enacted laws, to do as you have stated people need to pressure them to do.......well they did it.

to stop benefits to illegals, to make it illegal to stop and pickup illegal day workers, to make it illegal for them to hangout at home depot for jobs.

to take away license of businesses who hire illegals............and everyone of these actions, has been set upon by liberals and illegals as being ........unfair hateful and mean....or claim they are illegal laws.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

what you said........



i posted our legislature has already enacted laws, to do as you have stated people need to pressure them to do.......well they did it.

to stop benefits to illegals, to make it illegal to stop and pickup illegal day workers, to make it illegal for them to hangout at home depot for jobs.

to take away license of businesses who hire illegals............and everyone of these actions, has been set upon by liberals and illegals as being ........unfair hateful and mean....or claim they are illegal laws.

The money, the power, to limit efforts to stop hiring rests with the Chamber of Commerce. Follow the money, you have lost perspective, you are not focused on the interests how wield the real power.

It is this simple, if they cannot receive a paycheck, they will not remain. I have seen this set of arguments from guys like you for decades and you guys NEVER get it, it is all about economics.

 

[Master PO]

The money, the power, to limit efforts to stop hiring rests with the Chamber of Commerce. Follow the money, you have lost perspective, you are not focused on the interests how wield the real power.

It is this simple, if they cannot receive a paycheck, they will not remain. I have seen this set of arguments from guys like you for decades and you guys NEVER get it, it is all about economics.

sorry...... your not getting it........laws were already passed.....but over turned by the federal government....of did you not pay attention to what happened.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

sorry...... your not getting it........laws were already passed.....but over turned by the federal government....of did you not pay attention to what happened.

You are not getting it, the SCOTUS upheld it.

You continue to miss the bigger picture, you guys always do.

 

[Master PO]

You are not getting it, the SCOTUS upheld it.

You continue to miss the bigger picture, you guys always do.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that one key part of the Arizona immigration law, known as Senate Bill 1070, is constitutional, paving the way for it to go into effect. Three other portions were deemed unconstitutional in a 5-3 opinion.

The part ruled constitutional is among the most controversial of the law's provisions. It requires an officer to make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there's reasonable suspicion that person is in the country illegally.

Arizona immigration law: Supreme Court upholds key portion of Senate Bill 1070

Appeals court upholds injunction on SB 1070′s day-laborer provisions

Appeals court upholds injunction on SB 1070′s day-laborer provisions – Cronkite News

 

[Lutherf]

The money, the power, to limit efforts to stop hiring rests with the Chamber of Commerce. Follow the money, you have lost perspective, you are not focused on the interests how wield the real power.

It is this simple, if they cannot receive a paycheck, they will not remain. I have seen this set of arguments from guys like you for decades and you guys NEVER get it, it is all about economics.

You might want to educate yourself a little more on Whiting. While the USCC was the lead in the case it wasn't the only party:

The following seven amicus briefs were filed in support of the Chamber’s legal challenge to LAWA:

- Business groups and trade associations, in an amicus brief including the Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. (ABC), the Human Rights Initiative for a Legal Workforce (HR Initiative), the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce (USHCC), the chambers of commerce of Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, New Jersey, and West Virginia, the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the State Chamber of Oklahoma, the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry, the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the Texas Association of Business, and the Association of Washington Business, and also a separate amicus brief by the Equal Employment Advisory Council (EEAC);

- The Obama Administration, in an amicus brief filed by acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal;

- Current and former members of Congress, including Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA), Representative Howard Berman (D-CA), and former Representative Ron Mazzoli (D-KY), a sponsor of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act at issue in the litigation;

- Civil rights groups, including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Asian American Justice Center (AAJC), Asian American Institute (AAI), Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), Asian Law Caucus (ALC), Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California (APALC), LatinoJustice PRLDEF, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (Lawyers’ Committee), League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Legal Aid Society—Employment Law Center (LAS-ELC), Los Abogados Hispanic Bar Association (Los Abogados), National Council of La Raza (NCLR), National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON), National Employment Law Project (NELP), and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC);

- Immigrant rights groups, including the National Immigrant Justice Center, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and the American Immigration Council; and

- The labor union Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

U.S. Chamber

The USCC is a lobbying group and under Donahue have supported a number of acts which fly in the face of Conservatism including an endorsement of Hillarycare and support of Obama's "stimulus". Their opposition to the LAWA was a political decision made to keep them on top of the K street crowd.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that one key part of the Arizona immigration law, known as Senate Bill 1070, is constitutional, paving the way for it to go into effect. Three other portions were deemed unconstitutional in a 5-3 opinion.

The part ruled constitutional is among the most controversial of the law's provisions. It requires an officer to make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there's reasonable suspicion that person is in the country illegally.

Arizona immigration law: Supreme Court upholds key portion of Senate Bill 1070

Appeals court upholds injunction on SB 1070′s day-laborer provisions

Appeals court upholds injunction on SB 1070′s day-laborer provisions – Cronkite News

Were we talking about SB1070? No we weren't.

You might have brought it up in your mind, but the discussion was about the "Legal Arizona Workers Act"...but then again, you were not really following along.

SB1070 has nothing to do employment enforcement....so you have yet again changed the subject.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

You might want to educate yourself a little more on Whiting. While the USCOCC was the lead in the case it wasn't the only party:

U.S. Chamber

The USCC is a lobbying group and under Donahue have supported a number of acts which fly in the face of Conservatism including an endorsement of Hillarycare and support of Obama's "stimulus". Their opposition to the LAWA was a political decision made to keep them on top of the K street crowd.

I never said they were the "only" interest, I said they are the money and power behind attempts to block law restricting access to cheap labor.

You still don't understand the basic economics, as long as you don't, you will never get to an effective solution.

 

[Master PO]

Were we talking about SB1070? No we weren't.

You might have brought it up in your mind, but the discussion was about the "Legal Arizona Workers Act"...but then again, you were not really following along.

SB1070 has nothing to do employment enforcement....so you have yet again changed the subject.

look up HB 2162, i relive this was added to SB 1070

On April 29, the last day of legislative session, the Arizona Legislature approved and the governor signed HB 2162 that included provisions intended to address the racial profiling concerns. HB 2162 amended SB 1070 to specify that law enforcement officials cannot consider race, color or national origin when implementing the provisions of the original law, except as permitted by the U.S. or Arizona Constitution. The law clarified the original law’s language around “reasonable suspicion” by requiring state and local law enforcement to reasonably attempt to determine the immigration status of a person only while in the process of a lawful stop, detention or arrest (the original language referred to “lawful contact.”) HB 2162 also stipulated that a lawful stop, detention or arrest must be in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town of this state.

http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/immig/analysis-of-arizonas-immigration-law.aspx

 

[Dooble]

It's his desert, dammit, and he wants sole control.

I think the Smugglers want to split it with him.

 

[apdst]

I am pretty sure good old boy joe doesn't want to start threatening his support base. The guntards and racist dicks of the minutemen are the guys who put him into power, and without them he won't be sherrif for much longer. The good old boy code is when you see people doing the wrong thing and they are white racists like you, you look the other way as a cop. Jope's testicles might have started to grow a bit to big for his britches and the good old boys will cut him down to size if he starts screwing with white people. Don't get me wrong, if joe wants to start thinking he is king of the white people he is certainly welcome to take on the nutbars of his race. I am perfectly fine with anything he wants to do that expedites his removal as sheriff or from this mortal coil. If he wants to send ex-action hero stephen segal into the fray i am quite ok with that also. Perhaps he could hire chuck norris too and we could get rid of many useless twats all at once. Chuck norris, so bad ass he was killed by some inbred hick with an assault rifle looking for mexicans. Oh please santa i have been especially good this year and not killed any idiots so could you please bring me that headline for christmas and make sure it is from an actual news source?

What makes them racists?

 

[Monserrat]

What makes them racists?

Owning a gun?

 

[apdst]

Owning a gun?

All gun owners are racist?

 

[Monserrat]

All gun owners are racist?

I think a lot of people have a negative stereotype of white gun owners as being bigoted, ignorant people. That's why when you have someone saying that not all groups patrolling the desert are created equal and that some coordinate their efforts with law enforcement, it doesn't matter.