|
|
|
| Home | Episodes | Store | Forum | iTunes | Chat |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: What do you think of the new Arizona Immigration Law? | |||
| It's a step toward fascism. |
   
|
10 | 33.33% |
| Somewhat against it. |
  
|
6 | 20.00% |
| Indifferent. |
  
|
1 | 3.33% |
| Somewhat for it. |
  
|
3 | 10.00% |
| It's the best thing for the US. |
  
|
7 | 23.33% |
| What law? |
  
|
3 | 10.00% |
| Voters: 30. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#61
05-03-2010
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
|
#63
05-03-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
No, you didn't. I screwed up Face's post about travel documents that you said Americans should have to carry.
|
|
#65
05-03-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If the checking is tied directly into due process, as the case seems to be, and cannot be performed spontaneously, then in the end it's not going to end up garnering more racism than is already present in law enforcement since it requires a preexisting reasonable doubt that can be easily alleviated by legal persons with documents that they should have with them anyway.
|
|
#66
05-03-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#67
05-03-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#68
05-03-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
State laws differ on the following, but in terms of federal law: 1) A citizen is not required to have nor carry any identification 2) In 2004 the supreme court ruled that citizens do not have a "constitutional right to refuse to reveal their identity when requested by police." It is perfectly reasonable and constitutional that you must truthfully identify yourself when requested by police officer who has detained you on reasonable suspicion of your participation in a crime. In many states, if not all, it is also a crime to falsely identify yourself to a police officer. The Arizona law gives Arizona state and local law enforcement the ability to inquire into your residency status: 1) If they have reason to believe you are not in the country legally AND 2) If they have already detained you or are questioning you for some crime/offense for which they already have reasonable suspicion. Now, your question is what happens with citizens? If you're suspected of a crime... and If they suspect that you might not be in the country legally and you are not carrying ID on you, they will ask you to identify who you are and they will attempt to verify what you say. As a citizen, you won't get in trouble for not carrying documents that you don't carry on you and don't even possess. But, if you were in the country illegally and weren't able to produce those documents and/or gave the officer a false name it's a crime
|
|
#70
05-05-2010
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#71
05-05-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Lol this law dosent really make all that much sense.
How do you profile an illegal........in america lol
|
|
#72
05-09-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
*somewhat against it*
...I'm a mix of background blood. But I learned in my high school Spanish class that my last name is an alternate spelling in Spanish of "Mexican". The catch is, I'm not Mexican.
Since Mexicans seems to be the number one illegal immigrants in the US, I can assure you all that I won't be going to AZ anytime soon. Why? Because Americans sometimes can be huge bigots and might assume that I'm an illegal just on the premise of my last name. My saving grace is that coming from a mixed heritage, I don't look too latina. It really encourages racial profiling, even though I know it's for the best intentions. The law just doesn't address the real issue--the faulty US/Mexico boarder. The money for the law should have gone to the boarder patrol instead. C'mon, illegals aren't that dumb--after all, they snuck into the country pretty damn easily. They'll know not to live in Arizona where the law is.
|
|
#73
05-12-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
The problem with what you propose is also the core issue that precipitated this state law. The border patrol is a federal agency and the federal government is charged with securing the border. Yet, the federal government has been lax in both securing the border and enforcing federal laws on unlawful immigration. If the federal government was adequately doing it's job in this area, Arizona would have had no need to pass a law that allows state and local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration policy
|
|
#74
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
This law gives the police the power to detain someone, upon their suspicion that the person may be here illegally... humm how do you explain that to anyone without sounding like a racist prick? "I'm sorry I stopped you because you... erm look brown so therefore you must be illegal immigrant, may I see your documentation?" seriously how? How can this be happening??? We are de-evolving! evolving backwards!!! I saw this on the news about 2 weeks ago while having breakfast with my family and my stomach turned. This is basically making it ok to discriminate and this is not going to end well.
|
|
#75
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#76
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I like how the president stated how the law would work......Priceless. Oh, we also have a fantastic atorney general as well. (sarcastically)
|
|
#77
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#78
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
The law specifies that the officer first must be in "lawful contact" with the person which, while not being explicitly defined in the law, is accepted to mean that the person has been lawfully detained in the course of the officer's duty in connection with an offense. After meeting that requirement, there must be "reasonable suspicion" that "the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the united states" before the officer can elect to investigate the issue.
Reasonable suspicion is a well defined legal burden in law and the US justice system, and here it cannot constitute solely race and/or broken english, but must be a combination of multiple factors.
|
|
#80
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Seriously what is wrong with you all? Its easy to say, Ban the mexicans who have anchor babies but what if a foreign white person is asked to leave? oh nooooo 
|
|
#81
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#82
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Good then that is fair, hey i was just saying the same thing underling said
because i agree with him but some people here are racist toward hispanics and people who are not white and that is wrong
|
|
#83
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
underling:: it is true that police can be curupt or just not perfect. But you cant say thats a reasonable reason to not have the law, the law itself is fine, so long as it is followed the way it is written.
Arizona is just enforcing an already existent federal law, that you can't be hear illegaly. the only reason race is invalved is because opponents of the bill make it about race, the law itself does not desegnate hispanics. people do that. i really think face and DA are the most correct on this issue.
|
|
#84
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#86
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#87
05-15-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
But, speaking of fantasy lands imagine a world where police had the power to search anyone they wanted, at any time, with no burden of reasonable, so long as they claim it's to defend against terrorism. And what if they could take DNA samples from anyone that they detain using these powers and keep them forever and ever, regardless of whether they are guilty of any crime, tried for any crime, or charged for any crime, or even justly detained. What a horrible fantasy land that would be... oh wait that's England. The Arizona law isn't willy nilly stop-anyone-who's-hispanic. As I've said several times now, and detailed just this evening, police must first be in lawful contact with a person in regards to an unrelated offense. Then, IF there is reasonable suspicion that this person is be in the country illegally, which cannot be based alone on race or accent, the officer may seek to determine if they are here legally. These are powers that Federal law enforcement already possess, and it is already federal law that resident aliens carry their documentation on them. The issue, the reason that Arizona even had to pass this law, is because the feds aren't enforcing the the existing law. You see, when there's a sticky, divisive issue such that it's difficult and costly (in terms of money and political capital, voters) to resolve it through revised legislation, such as illegal immigration, it becomes much easier to just stop enforcing the law and ignore the problem. Neither the democrats nor the republicans want to lose votes by actually addressing the problems with legislation. Several years ago a few lawmakers actually attempted to resolve this root issue. Ted Kennedy and John McCain (You know, that guy that everyone said was just another Bush) broke with the absurdity of both their respective parties to come together and compromise. They created a reasonable bill that, while not perfect, accounted for much of the concerns of both parties and would have taken a major step forward towards resolving the issue. Of course it brought republicans and democrats together in the spirit of lilliputian ideals to kill it as swiftly as possible. Republicans want the border to actually be secured and for those who are here illegally to leave and get in the back of the line of those who wish to come here legally... BEFORE revamping the immigration process to allow, much more easily, people to come here legally as workers. Democrats want everyone who is here illegally to be made legal, regardless of how they got here and the laws that they broke in doing so... BEFORE securing the border. But most of both sides won't budge on this, so it's kind of a Mexican Standoff, ironically. Democrats want to turn all the people here illegally now into democratic voting citizens. Republicans don't want to unfairly reward the actions of millions who came here illegally, in the face of those who took the time and effort to go through the process the legal way. With all this trench digging and ignoring going on federally, the border states actually have to deal with the effects of people streaming in across the border with no id, no background checks, and who can assume a different identity if they get into trouble. Many people who come into this country illegally just want a better life and, other than the conditions of their immigration, aren't criminals... but then some are criminals, and the problem is that we can't tell which are the good and which the bad. The federal government sure isn't doing any checking. Your feelings against this law seem to be that the powers it grants to state law enforcement officers will, despite the specified usage, be abused, so it should be scrapped. It's probable that some officers will abuse the power granted to them under this law - just as there are officers that already pull people over because of the color of their skin, or let someone go after an arrest because he's the son of some golfing buddy, or take a few hundred dollars a week for not busting some drug dealer. To follow your logic, since almost every power granted to law enforcement officers has the potential to be abused, then they shouldn't have those powers. No power to stop cars for traffic violations, no power arrest criminals. This Arizona law provides reasonable powers, with reasonable restraints to state and local police officers who have a reasonable need to enforce existing rules that an unreasonable federal government ignores. The issue people have should not be with a reasonable law, but with those police officers and politicians who already abuse their positions... and with those who misconstrue the facts and meaning of said laws to suit their own ideological goals.
|
|
#88
05-16-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Why else would you be pro law? Do the mexicans take all your jobs lol south park reference "They took our jobs" whatever happened to people being allowed to live in a land where they can be free and allowed to express themselves regardless of their race? Martin luther king would be ashamed
|
|
#89
05-16-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#90
05-16-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Really?
|
|
|
|
