• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Arizona Sherrif: Federal Government Now The Enemy

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
65,339
Reaction score
33,360
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
and he is right. someone who seeks to disarm you as armed thugs approach, but refused to protect you himself, is not your friend.

Pinal County (Ariz.) Sheriff Paul Babeu is hopping mad at the federal government.

Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

“What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court... “Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,” Babeu said...

“If the president would do his job and secure the border; send 3,000 armed soldiers to the Arizona border and stop the illegal immigration and the drug smuggling and the violence, we wouldn’t even be in this position and where we’re forced to take matters into our own hands,” Babeu said.
Dever said the federal government’s failure to secure the border and its current thwarting of Arizona’s effort to control illegal immigration within its borders has implications for the entire country.


“The bigger picture is while what’s going on in Arizona is critically important, what comes out of this and happens here will affect our entire nation in terms of our ability to protect our citizenry from a very serious homeland security threat,” Dever said. “People who are coming across the border in my county aren’t staying there. They’re going everywhere USA and a lot of them are bad, bad people.”.. For us, this is a public safety matter and a national security threat.”
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
and he is right. someone who seeks to disarm you as armed thugs approach, but refused to protect you himself, is not your friend.

Pinal County (Ariz.) Sheriff Paul Babeu is hopping mad at the federal government.

Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

“What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court... “Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,” Babeu said...

“If the president would do his job and secure the border; send 3,000 armed soldiers to the Arizona border and stop the illegal immigration and the drug smuggling and the violence, we wouldn’t even be in this position and where we’re forced to take matters into our own hands,” Babeu said.
Dever said the federal government’s failure to secure the border and its current thwarting of Arizona’s effort to control illegal immigration within its borders has implications for the entire country.


“The bigger picture is while what’s going on in Arizona is critically important, what comes out of this and happens here will affect our entire nation in terms of our ability to protect our citizenry from a very serious homeland security threat,” Dever said. “People who are coming across the border in my county aren’t staying there. They’re going everywhere USA and a lot of them are bad, bad people.”.. For us, this is a public safety matter and a national security threat.”

Good for him!!! I agree with every word, but I'd quibble about his 3,000 men suggestion. Here's mine:

2,000 miles of border.
4,000 troops, one every 1/2-mile X 3 Shifts
1,000 troops X 3 shifts to administer/supply/oversee/relieve/reinforce.
15,000 troops total times $60,000 annual salary (don't National Guardsmen just WISH!) = $900,000,000 divided by 300,000,000 people in the country = $3.00 per person to REALLY secure the southern border.

Budget request for Customs and Border Protection budget: $10.1 billion in 2010. Think we could allocate 10% of that to actually doing something?
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
65,339
Reaction score
33,360
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
we're going to have to figure for supplies and ammo.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,986
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Look - it's undeniable that poking at this problem with anymore umph is going to cause a big fight . . . that, overall, I think is the president's hesitation - more so - he doesn't support efforts to quell illegal immigration, never has.

If a more pro-stoppage president was in office things wouldn't be hitting such a brick wall.

But Obama doesn't support any stoppage measures - thus - he will never ease their function and passing.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,638
Reaction score
16,378
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The federal government regarding border security is the equivalent of a guard who deliberately lets in trespassers.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
77,063
Reaction score
44,657
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I think it really depends on what he means to do about it. For I think I heard him say that he would enforce the Arizona law as written even though a federal court struck down several measures in it. While there is need to address the problem, if we really want to (we lived with it for god knows how long, it's only recently it's become a partisan hot topic), it needs to be done in a manner which can elicit the best change. Did people rag on Bush for not doing anything? Cause it didn't really seem to get done under him either. And people should be prepared for the consequences of this, which include higher prices for certain produce and services. Fair enough, wages in some of those places have not risen well enough for Americans to want to do the job. Either we accept the illegal immigrants and pay them less than we could get away with paying Americans, or we accept the price increase and the increase in wages necessary to encourage the people to do the job. Or we can pay some engineers to create a machine to do it for us.

But in the end I don't think bitching about the Federal government being ineffective and slow will do anything. I mean, ****, New Orleans isn't even rebuilt in full yet. The Federal government is typically bad at this. On the other hand, I would say that our international boarders do lie within the proper realm of the Federal, not State, government.
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
65,339
Reaction score
33,360
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The federal government regarding border security is the equivalent of a guard who deliberately lets in trespassers. murderers, rapists, and thieves, while simultaneously disarming the victims

:) i think that's what you meant to say :)
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,145
Reaction score
9,334
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No where in AZ illegal immigration laws controls "legal" immigration. Federal laws states where and how it legal to enter the US. The laws are targetting those that enter illegally. How does this changes federal law?
 

Rogue

Conspiratist
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
608
Reaction score
53
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
No where in AZ illegal immigration laws controls "legal" immigration. Federal laws states where and how it legal to enter the US. The laws are targetting those that enter illegally. How does this changes federal law?

Excellent point. Apparently though our illegal alien loving traitorous fed gov is concerned with having sole control of making sure no real effective enforcement of immigration laws will take place.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,986
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I mean, ****, New Orleans isn't even rebuilt in full yet.

I was just thinking of this last night - how odd it seems that the government promised to clean up *and* improve the coast post oil disaster . . . yet they've proven incapable of doing *exactly that* for New Orleans.

With many of the tenants gone they had a clean slate - an unbelievable and unprecedented opportunity to remake the entire area from the ground up. They could have really capitalized on that - but did they? Nope - opportunity to create a heaven on earth which would act as a tourist magnet wasted.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
77,063
Reaction score
44,657
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I was just thinking of this last night - how odd it seems that the government promised to clean up *and* improve the coast post oil disaster . . . yet they've proven incapable of doing *exactly that* for New Orleans.

With many of the tenants gone they had a clean slate - an unbelievable and unprecedented opportunity to remake the entire area from the ground up. They could have really capitalized on that - but did they? Nope - opportunity to create a heaven on earth which would act as a tourist magnet wasted.

Well in hindsight, it would have been cheaper to have given everyone a check and told them to move out, then bulldoze the place. Cheaper and faster. I mean, one can only live under the Mississippi river for so long, the thing will find its natural course eventually.
 
Top Bottom