Running through a redlight? Swerving in traffic? Driving erratically? All the things police officers pull over people already for?
Dude! :shock: Who doesn't carry around papers, in one form or another? I've been carrying my ID, SS card, debit cards, insurance cards, student ID, geeze.... the list goes on. I bet I get asked for my ID twice a day, at least. In fact, I have C.I.D. on the signature line of all my plastic.
I have to respect someone who goes to the fringe on preserving liberties. I was livid about some of the Patriot Act measures myself. But, I'm sorry. I don't buy it. It's all about scoffing at the law by the illegal aliens, their supporting friends and families and the uber-liberal thinking people.
This "racial profiling" excuse don't fly nor pass my smell test. However, it does appear to give one the "moral highground" when they use that excuse to obstruct illegal alien control. But I am one who believes that claiming the moral highground does not necessarily mean possessing the moral highground.
My conscience tips the scale in favor of protecting and serving the US interests and NOT in the favor of those who try to usurp our laws using any excuse they can grab and hold on to, to avoid enforcing immigration laws.
And let's be honest here. If these illegal aliens were from the middle east or some other 3rd world non-hispanic country, does ANYONE here think these protesting latinos would give a **** about their rights or "profiling?" Pulling the race card is so dishonest. (Especially when it's pulled by a race that wrote the book on modern day racism.)
Racial Profiling Excuse = Caca de Toro.
I hear what they say. But the real gripe ain't really about racial profiling, no matter what they say. This is all about Uncle Antonio who snuck in under the wire. I hate it when people piss in my hair and try to convince me it's raining.
Because this law doesn't require "probable cause" to detain and search.
That is already the law. You don't need the new law for this.
If a person is already lawfully detained a police officer can already ask for ID.
That is not what this new law does.
Try again.
What percentage favors concentration camps?
I But again, the law against being illegal is already on the books. All the laws needed are already on the books. Our failure is not one of laws, but the lack of will to enforce laws.
That won't change here, and I am still uncomfortable with the effort to have people carry papers. It's all to historically connected to bad stuff.
Oh yeah, I'm sorry. "reasonable suspicion" It's a HUGE difference. :roll: And that's AFTER they've established "lawful contact", which doesn't include randomly stopping someone walking down the street. They have to have a REASON to be talking to you to begin with and THEN they have to have a "reasonable suspicion" that you could be undocumented to THEN ask for your proof of citizenship.
OMFG
The horror.
How will the world go on. Cops might ask for someone's proof of citizenship if they stop you for some other legal reason.
Actually, it does. You should read it. Someone does something stupid, the officers ask for their ID. MSNBC is spinning this as some quasi-fascist law that'll have the Gestapo running around screaming "papieren, bitte!" and there is a kernel of truth in that. You'll need identification papers if you do something stupid in Arizona.
Otherwise, you have to highlight the portions where I'm wrong at.
Simply put. You are wrong. You don't have to do anything stupid to be detained under this law. In fact, the reason why law enforcement agencies across the country are strongly against this, it allows any wacko citizen to file suit if they believe the police aren't doing enough to enforce the law.
No. If they police view someone and believe that there is a reason to believe they MIGHT be undocumented, the law mandates the police to inquire or else possibly be sued.
This law IS about enforcement.
Are you against people being required to carry a drivers license and proof of insurance too?
So what you're saying is that we need some TORT REFORM!
The fact that you defined it incorrectly below shows your ignorance on the issue.If you knew anything about the law, you would know that there is a HUGE difference between "probable cause" and "reasonable suspicion". The fact that you question it shows your clear ignorance on the issue.
Wrong."Probable cause" requires evidence that a crime has been committed and that the person sought to be detained is involved in the criminal activity.
Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard in United States law that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts and inferences. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard, in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably believe a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; such suspicion is not a mere hunch.The "Reasonable suspicion" standard allows the police to detain based on a belief that they might uncover some criminal activity. Essentially, a fishing expedition. :doh:doh:doh
Snippet
That is true. If you accept that human beings can be illegal simply for coming here, and that it is natural and good that people should be snatched out of their homes, torn away from their families and deported back to Mexico against their will simply because they were born there (as I suppose most Americans do) then there's no reason not to support this law. It's just the enforcement of that same principle. It's an idiotic, nationalistic, racist sort of principle. But it's widely held, even among many on the so-called left.This law IS about enforcement.
Lame argument because you aren't. I suspect that you would feel quite differently if you were being stopped, detained and harassed simply because your skin was a darker shade of tan.
You are aware DD, at least according to the TV guys, that well over a third of these people doing the stopping and "harassing" as you put it are hispanic themselves? And the two-thirds that aren't are fraternal brothers to the 1/3 that are because they are cops.
Generally speaking, in my humble opinion, once you're a cop, another cop's skin color doesn't count. They are much like the military in that regard. I know, as a white guy, that if I had just as many hispanic "brothers" as I did "white" brothers, I would be MORE than careful not to appear to EVER be doing any racial profiling. Now, granted, if this was New York, I would have to give racial profiling possibilities a serious second look. But this is AZ. The hispanic culture is so intertwined, I think racial profiling is the least of our worries there.
This law IS about enforcement.
Are you against people being required to carry a drivers license and proof of insurance too?
A. NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.
The United States' Apartheid Wall is under construction on Tohono O'odham Nation lands, shown here at the San Miguel Gate.
Minutes after this photo was taken, a delegation of Mohawks and other Native people stood before the Border Patrol with fists held high in solidarity and would have intervened in the arrest of Mayans, if the Border Patrol had not packed the Mayans into a vehicle and sped away.
Delegates from the Indigenous Peoples' Border Summit of the Americas were disgusted to see the border wall going up on Indian land; the "cage" where men women and children are held on Indian land; and the arrests of Mayans, mostly women and children, on Tohono O'odham land.
"We saw it all firsthand in America," said Bill Means, Lakota and cofounder of the International Indian Treaty Council on Nov. 8, when an Indigenous delegation went to the [so-called] "US/Mexico" border here, south of Sells, to document human rights abuses [including murders, rapes, torture, deaths] for a report to the United
Nations.
We are going to take this wall down," Means said, after viewing the construction of a "border vehicle barrier" by contractors and National Guard on Tohono O'odham land. [This wall is something to see. It is iron posts filled with cement, sunk 5 ft. into the ground and 6 1/2 ft. high. it is going to be electrified.]
Speaking a few hours later to the Indigenous Peoples Border Summit of the Americas II in San Xavier, Means called for solidarity of Indigenous Peoples throughout the world to halt the arrests of Indigenous Peoples who are walking north in search of a better life, and solidarity to bring down the US/Mexico border wall.
"One inch of intrusion into our land is not acceptable!" Mohawk Mark Maracle told the Border Summit. "I became very angry when I saw those guys rounding up our people. It is a violation of our Great Law to witness what we saw today and do nothing about it."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?