Boycotts, Vacations, Guns & Money

imported post

daddy4count wrote:

I understand some of the reasoning behind the boycott...

The only part of the AZ law that I take exception with is the requirement to display proof of citizenship based on what you look like. Face it, there are many Americans with Latino herritage... this is a direct violation of their rights.
Read the bill. None of that is in there.
Racial profiling is bad methodology in America for that very reason. If all Americans were white it would be easier... but since we are a melting pot of so many cultures it isn't as simple to judge by appearance as it might be in some countries.
Read the bill.
That being said, I am all for kicking out illegals who refuse to play by the rules.

When did we stop calling them "illegal" and start calling them "undocumented" by the way? Is this so we will stop thinking of them as law breakers?

No, sir... it is not illegal... this is an "undocumented" fully automatic rifle... hmmmmmm... isn't the same somehow?

I also tend to think that no one state has the right to tell another what to do or how to think... we are America, we're allowed to disagree. We shouldn't have to enforce trade embargo on our fellow countrymen.

If it is unconstitutional the Fed's and the ACLU will work it out... if not then it isn't anybody's business but the citizens of that state. It is between them and the politicians who wrote and passed the legislation.
It is a mirror image of federal laws ALREADY on the books.
just my two cents... or did I give you a quarters worth..?
You need to stop posting until you READ THE BILL!

Click to expand...

imported post

I don't get it, Plankton... you want me to do what?

imported post

daddy4count wrote:

I don't get it, Plankton... you want me to do what?

Click to expand...

haha he didn't pull any punches and he does have a good point... I have found that MOST people I have talked to that are against the bill have never even read it... therefore are opposed to something they know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about... They are relying on the liberal Media to tell them what to do. Sad but True...

Americans need to engage and actually read the legislation BEFORE they condemn it... :banghead:

imported post

haha he didn't pull any punches and he does have a good point... I have found that MOST people I have talked to that are against the bill have never even read it... therefore are opposed to something they know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about... They are relying on the liberal Media to tell them what to do. Sad but True...

Americans need to engage and actually read the legislation BEFORE they condemn it...



Might as well be talking about some proposed gun bill the way people 'know all about it" and really dont know squat-inc news media..

imported post

I didn't think the bill was a good idea until I read it. After reading it it seems reasonable. When the federal gov. isn't doing it's job, what else is a state to do? I still say if you want to fix immigration stop the freebies, and stop prohibition of drugs.

imported post

I agree and have to admit that I let the media spin on both sides cloud my perception of the issue. I do my best to avoid "News" for this reason.

But again, this is all Arizona's business.

The wording of the legislation really has no bearing on that point. Until they violate the Constitution the rest of the country should just keep our noses out of it.

But we are all allowed our opinions...

So now that I have expressed mine I suppose I should wander over and actually read the piece of law that is none of my business but about which I have so many opinions...

imported post

Okay, I read it.

I still agree with 99% of it... not that it's any of my business...

But I did find the sections that have been misrepresented by the media locally. And while the wording seems logical as it is read, I can see the potential for abuse and where they derived the basis for their complaints.

Let me preface by saying that I don't necessarily agree with the polarizing stance many have taken regarding this issue... but based on the wording of the Bill one can easily extrapolate any one of a number of abusive outcomes...

11-1051, B - basically says a cop can detain you if he thinks your citizenship is in question. It also provides for verification via interagency communications (US 8-1373(c)) which means they can hold you until INS (or other) verifies your status.

Now I don't know how you interpret this... but what would "reasonable suspicion" be?

"He looked Mexican... I think he was speaking... Mexican."

An extreme argument? yes, I agree... but the potential is there

Subsection E of the same portion of the Bill states that a cop can arrest you if he feels you have done something deserving of deportation. This is based upon his perceived probably cause, not a warrant (explicit in the wording). To me this is treading dangerously close to trampling all over due process...

Finally in 13-2319, E it does give permission to the LEO to pull you over if he as reason to believe you are smuggling an illegal... AND have broken a traffic law.

This is probably the most grossly misrepresented portion of the Bill, in my opinion.

Oh, and what happens if something goes horribly wrong and the cops and state trample your rights?

You get to sue them... in AZ court. If this ever happens I would love to hear how it works out for the Plantif

--- --- ---

So now I have read it... I still agree with most of it. And while I do admit that what I was lead to believe about this legislation was not factual, the potential for abuse does exist... much the same as any Bill.

I still disagree with the boycotts... for the same reasons I did before.

imported post

One_Shot wrote:

Texas leans heavily to the left on the illegal immigration law because so many illegals are here and vote. Texas politicians refuse to require I.D. to vote, hence the illegals vote for the Dem and Liberals who return the favor by not enforcing the laws already on the books and by not making any more laws to remove or stop the illegal immigrants from flooding our state.

Click to expand...

Illegals can now vote? I hope that was a misstype... :what:

imported post

There is nothing that would stop an illegal alien from voting in Alabama. All he needs is an electric bill as "identification."

imported post

eyesopened wrote:

One_Shot wrote:

Texas leans heavily to the left on the illegal immigration law because so many illegals are here and vote. Texas politicians refuse to require I.D. to vote, hence the illegals vote for the Dem and Liberals who return the favor by not enforcing the laws already on the books and by not making any more laws to remove or stop the illegal immigrants from flooding our state.

Click to expand...

Illegals can now vote? I hope that was a misstype... :what:

Click to expand...

Oh unfortunately there is NO miss tying there... See this is part of the problem!

Many if not MOST American's don't know that in most states there is no actual ID required to vote... Why do you think the Liberals are all for opening borders? Why do you think Obama isn't going to secure the borders or especially not support AZ? Who do you think all the Illegals are voting for when they get here?

This is our Wake Up CALL America! :shock:

imported post

If the police wanted to violate your rights, they wouldn't need this law to do so.

As an immigrant, I have no problem with this law. When I had a visa or green card, I was required by federal law to carry them withme at all times.

Recently on the news, Iwaswatching one ofthe protests in Arizona against the law that people don't seem to have the time to read, and saw the funniest sign. It said "Illegal is not a crime." That pretty muchsays it all about the protesters. They feel they have a right to be in this country, without bothering togo through the process.Someone needs to finish the fence.

imported post

daddy4count wrote:

Racial profiling is bad methodology in America for that very reason. If all Americans were white it would be easier... but since we are a melting pot of so many cultures it isn't as simple to judge by appearance as it might be in some countries.

That being said, I am all for kicking out illegals who refuse to play by the rules.

When did we stop calling them "illegal" and start calling them "undocumented" by the way? Is this so we will stop thinking of them as law breakers?

Click to expand...

well then, HOW would they be identified? If a law enforcement officier can't even ask a person if heis a citizen during an otherwise lawful stop then we may as well just go ahead and throw in the towel. I for one am sick and tired of this "it violates their rights" BS. I don't care about illegal (CRIMINAL) invaders and their supposed rights.



Furthermore, if someone is a citizen of the United States and he is offended that a LEO asked him about his citizenship status in order to fight back against the criminal invaders trying to destroy this country then he is not much of a U.S. citizen. Screw him and the illegal, criminal invader. Kick 'em both out.



Doesn't anyone give a d*** about this country and want to do anything to save it? Is everybody so hyper-sensitive about the enemies rights that he is embarassed about being a U.S. citizen and is therefore offended that a LEO inquires about his status. I'd be damn proud to tell a cop giving me a speeding ticket (or what ever) that I am a U.S. citizen. The heathen, criminal, ILLEGAL invaders are sure proud of their country and have protests here and wave their rag of a flag around while they chant in their foreign tongue and demand that our government confiscate our money and give it to them and also demand that we learn their language.



If a LEO asks about your citizenship status during a lawful stop he is not violating anyone's rights. It's only a violation of one's rights if the LEO has no RAS or PC or other legitimate reason for the stop.



Now there is yer two cents worth

imported post

I agree with you.

It is not the rights of the illegals I am concerned with... it is those of us who should not be hassled because we look a certain way or someone believes we are in the wrong.

Sure, a copy can do a lot of things...

Around here a cop can't compel anything unless he detains and / or arrests you (with a few exceptions like providing a license when driving a car)

But I tell you this, the first time an American born citizen with Latino heritage is detained because of the way he looks and because the cop does not consider a drivers license valid proof... there will be an uproar.

Oh wait... that already happened...

http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=7409929

imported post

Where was the outrageaboutthe constitution free zone that the border patrol hadset up within 100 miles of the boarder. I haven't heard anything about this for a while, and it may still be going on. I don't recall seeing thousands of illegal aliens protesting in 2008. Was there no one to astroturf them into a frenzy?

imported post

Glad that you agree with me. Not many people do so that puts you in rare company!!



It just irks the heck out of me when everybody whines and raises h*** about the government not "doing something" about the illegal (CRIMINAL) invaders, then when the gov'mint DOES do something they all bi**h and moan that their rights are being violated.



I think a lot of this is not genuine concern for the preservation of rights, but rather a bunch of sanctimonious BS to impress each other how hard corewe are against "the man".



I think if there were an armed robbery in the mall and the cops went around asking people for help IDing the robbers that some on this board would tell them "I don't have to answer any questions without a lawyer present", or, "I have a right to remain silent and I don't have to answer your questions".



The thing is that the LEO must have a legitimate reason for the stop in the first place before he can inquire about a person's legal presence here. Cops in AZ are not going to just go walking around town grabbing every dude that "looks Mexican". As for the "profiling" part, that's BS too. Very very very very few other groups are here illegally in huge numbers in this country. So, if it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and looks like a duck, then.....................

imported post

I do not see what all the fuss is about. All the illegals will leave AZ as fast as they can and go straight to the sanctuary cities that are protesting AZ. Problem solved and I hope you enjoy your rising crime rates and lowering standards of living.

imported post

They can pass right on through to Canada!

:arrow:

imported post

daddy4count wrote:

They can pass right on through to Canada!

:arrow:

Click to expand...

That's a good point.

One of the irritatingargumentsfromthesmart folkson why we should just give afree pass to those who enter the US illegally, is based on a question of "who will clean the hotel rooms and pick the strawberries if we kick out all the illegal aliens."

I'll give you one guess who cleans hotel rooms, picks produce and other similar jobs in Canada.

imported post

Hey if hiring criminals is the way to go then look at the tweakers... crack and meth addicts... man those cats can get some serious work done in a day!

At least being citizens they can pay into the trough that feeds the teet they suckle.

imported post

If a LEO asks for proof of citizenship during a lawful stop without RAS that the stoppee is an illegal alien, then he is violating that person's rights just as surely as mine were violated by the officer who stopped me for OCing without RAS that I had committed (or was committing or was about to commit) a crime.

Some scenarios: A cop stops a truck for a missing tail light. Six guys jump out of the back and take off running, yelling in Spanish, "Immigration!" The cop's partner stops one of the six. He has RAS to check citizenship.

A deputy observes a bunch of guys just hanging around a Home Depot. A truck pulls up, and the driver leans out an yells, "Any of you guys want to earn some under-the-table money to send home to Mexico?" Several guys say yes, and jump into the truck. The deputy now has RAS for the stop and RAS to check citizenship, both.

These are not situations that will come up regularly. But, when they have in the past, LEOs have turned a blind eye. Now, they know that they have the weight of "Los 1070" behind them.

Here is another scenario. At 5 AM a family is awakened by a loud crash, followed by an incessant horn. Everyone gets up, dazed, asking what happened. One family member, clearly shaken, keeps shouting, "I'm OK. I'm OK."

Slowly realization sets in that someone hit the house with a car, barely missing the preteen son's bed. Upon going outside, the car is discovered, horn blaring, driver unconscious. A strong smell of alcohol wafts from the open window. The driver is rousted to consciousness. The hood is popped. And, the battery wire is disconnected to shut off the horn.

The driver begs the homeowner not to call the cops. He doesn't want the cops to find out that he is here illegally. With tens of thousands of dollars in damage done, no way the cops don't get called. The driver is arrested for drunk driving. The homeowner is out $1000 in two deductibles: one for the house, and one for the Blazer that the drunk also hit.

The cops advise the homeowner that nothing will happen on the illegal alien count because they are not authorized to deal with that charge and because current policy forbids them from calling ICE.

It would have been nice for this homeowner if Alabama had a law like Arizona's 1070 15 years ago. The illegal skipped and was never held to account for his drunk driving and the damage he did (with a stolen car).