Show Us Your Papers

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Stuff...

Thanks for the article.

[Ninjafoo 0]

No, the Arizona law is an reaction to an exponentially rising problem with illegals coming over and committing crimes. It was enacted after a border rancher was found murdered along a known coyote route.Sheer number alone will prevent this law from being used as a fishing expedition. The police are not sitting around all day looking for things to do.Here are some crime stats for AZAs you can clearly see, Phoenix AZ has a higher violent crime rate than New York, with 1/8th the number of people. In fact every stat shows AZ worse than New York.And we all know New York is a cess pool!

In Phoenix there is a large problem with street gangs: MS-13 (maybe you've heard of them), Lvl, brown pride (didn't make that up), wet-back power (didn't make that up either) just to name a few. All of these gangs are known for having a large number of illegals in them. Just good, honest, hard-working, raping, killing, thieving people. I guess the problem isn't what they do though...it's that we make them out to be criminals. We just need to legalize murder, rape, theft and everything would be fine.

[Balloon guy 158]

In Phoenix there is a large problem with street gangs: MS-13 (maybe you've heard of them), Lvl, brown pride (didn't make that up), wet-back power (didn't make that up either) just to name a few. All of these gangs are known for having a large number of illegals in them. Just good, honest, hard-working, raping, killing, thieving people. I guess the problem isn't what they do though...it's that we make them out to be criminals. We just need to legalize murder, rape, theft and everything would be fine.

you forgot drugs...See the policy of the left is Don't Ask: Don't TellAt the borderAt the schoolAt the hospitalsBut not at the big business..if they don't 'know' that they hired an illegal....it's hefty fines for them

[CaneBrain 95]

An Arizona police officer just sued the governor and the state alleging that it is impossible to enforce the new law on a race-neutral basis.This law will not last long AND it will cost AZ taxpayers lots of money. Way to send a message.....'we like wasting money and time'.

[Balloon guy 158]

An Arizona police officer just sued the governor and the state alleging that it is impossible to enforce the new law on a race-neutral basis.This law will not last long AND it will cost AZ taxpayers lots of money. Way to send a message.....'we like wasting money and time'.

Cause Government is normally so efficient and spendthrifty?

[Jeepster80125 0]

An Arizona police officer just sued the governor and the state alleging that it is impossible to enforce the new law on a race-neutral basis.This law will not last long AND it will cost AZ taxpayers lots of money. Way to send a message.....'we like wasting money and time'.

Cause Government is normally so efficient and spendthrifty?

Both good points.Can we vote not to give the tie breaker to ninjafoo?kidding

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

An Arizona police officer just sued the governor and the state alleging that it is impossible to enforce the new law on a race-neutral basis.This law will not last long AND it will cost AZ taxpayers lots of money. Way to send a message.....'we like wasting money and time'.

Yeah. Legislators should never try and do what they think is the right thing because there is going to be opposition that results in costly law suits. ...or perhaps it is the fault of the Cop for wasting the Taxpayers Money by bringing up the lawsuit?

[Ninjafoo 0]

An Arizona police officer just sued the governor and the state alleging that it is impossible to enforce the new law on a race-neutral basis.This law will not last long AND it will cost AZ taxpayers lots of money. Way to send a message.....'we like wasting money and time'.

If they are going to throw out the ridiculous claim it's impossiple to be enforce on a race-neutral basis, then they should also throw out the ridiculous reminder that this law aslo applies to Canadians, Dutch, Finnish, and other other white people who may be here illegaly.

[jmkiser 0]

If they are going to throw out the ridiculous claim it's impossiple to be enforce on a race-neutral basis, then they should also throw out the ridiculous reminder that this law aslo applies to Canadians, Dutch, Finnish, and other other white people who may be here illegaly.

And how is a cop supposed to know if a Canadian is illegal unless he looks like this?

[rjkdb8 1]

Legislators should never try to enact law that any 2nd year law student would instantly recognize as plainly unconstitutional.

QFT

[hblask 1]

You are out of your mind Henry. And dead wrong.edit: as I was writting this a story came on about Sherrif joe and a illegal sweep that just finished.They targeted an area notorious for coyote drop houses and high crime.They rounded up 100 people.... 75 were illegal, and they found almost 1000 pounds of pot.Go Sherriff Joe, GO!!!

I guess there are no unsolved murders, rapes and robberies in Arizona, but hey, at least a bunch of hard-working Mexicans can't get stoned anymore.Oh, and the immigration problem is solved. Or not. Perhaps it just got more violent and dangerous.I'm glad Arizona has their priorities straight. After all, those rape victims were probably just asking for it anyway.

[hblask 1]

, how about you stop pretending for a second that there is enough time or resources to stop every single brown guy they see just for a good ole harrasing.

So as long as it's less than 100% of innocent Hispanics being harassed, you are OK with it? What percentage do you think is OK? 95%? 90? How many hours of their lives do cops get to waste?I curious if you would consider the same level of harassment OK in a rich white suburban neighborhood, where the cops just wander around hauling random people to the police station?

[hblask 1]

...and people who come here illegally are, by definition, here illegally and criminals.Thanks for clearing that up.

As I've pointed out, this is the most retarded argument ever. You can't define people as criminals for wanting a better life.I mean, obviously we have, but it's really a sad, embarrassing chapter in US history. It is 100% against everything this nation was founded upon, and history will not look kindly on this time, just as they do not look kindly on FDRs racist roundup of Japanese.

[Ninjafoo 0]

So as long as it's less than 100% of innocent Hispanics being harassed, you are OK with it? What percentage do you think is OK? 95%? 90? How many hours of their lives do cops get to waste?I curious if you would consider the same level of harassment OK in a rich white suburban neighborhood, where the cops just wander around hauling random people to the police station?

I think 0% is ok for just harassing people. We both know that that is an impossible number though. We both know (well maybe not since you seem to under estimate how much of Arizona is brown) that it's not even possible to harass the amount of people you're talking about. What I really think should happen is everyone should have their drivers license modified to show citizenship, or carry and extra card to show citizenship. You should have to show this everytime you are stopped just like proof of insurance and drivers license. This elminates the race factor and still deals with the problem.

[hblask 1]

Wow, so much misinformation and intentional twisting of words, I'm not sure you are worth my time, but I'll give it another try:

No. It is about stopping illegal behavior. Hope that clears it up for you.

You or nobody else has any moral right to declare voluntary consensual behavior illegal. Period.

Frankly, if I've done something that qualifies as "reasonable cause" then I'm going to have to live with being more closely investigated. If some dumb cop decides to overstep the boundary of "reasonable cause" then I'll react accordingly. I'd expect the same with the AZ Law.

This law isn't about "reasonable cause" and you know it and I know it and everybody knows it, so I'm not sure why the defenders of this law feel the need to pretend it's something it isn't. The law is to harass people who have done nothing wrong -- nothing. We've already seen the result -- an innocent citizen being harassed and handcuffed despite carrying ID.

Has anyone ever been pulled over for "speeding" or some other excuse when a cop was wrong or trying to fish for something else? Yes. Who is wrong in that case, the cop or the law? Some bad cops will do bad things. This law, like ANY law, can be abused.

But this isn't a law that "may be abused", this is a law that invites, in fact, demands that cops abuse the rights of innocent people. Quit pretending.

...but you said the Government must protect inalienable rights......I guess they're only inalienable on this side of the Atlantic.

The US Constitution only applies to the United States, yes. Does this surprise you? The other countries will eventually claim their rights, but it may take another century. We are lucky to live in a country that claimed theirs already -- and it was a hard fought battle. That's why it pisses me off so much to see people just casually throw that away because they are afraid they may hear someone speak Spanish in their vicinity.

Again, we need to assume that every illegal coming here is going to contribute. Even though they don't pay any taxes and are just taking jobs that we as Americans are "too lazy" to do ourselves. I mean you already stated that EVERYONE contributes more economically than they consume. Nice world you live in.

Except they do pay taxes, lots of them. And yes, more workers means a higher standard of living. I suppose there is some point where if, say, only 1% of the immigrants wanted jobs it may be a net loss, but in reality it is near 99%. After all, think about what you would need to uproot your life to go to another country. Would you do it to be on welfare? Of course not, nobody does that.

Oh gee. Now you want to separate. I thought this was all the same issue.

WTF are you talking about, I've pointed out the difference in almost every post.

Oh. OK. Now you want to pick and choose. I guess we'll just let you decide which laws are OK to enforce and which ones aren't. Come back and let me know what you've decided.

Huh? You're really stretching here. It's OK, I can see you've never thought about this much before, and it takes a while. But yes, as a country, we need to set an age of majority. Otherwise, we could say 2 year olds could consent to contracts against their parents wishes. This is obviously not a sensible situation. So we set an age limit. Right now, it's 18 for most things. This is not surprising or controversial.

No. It isn't. Again have you paid attention to the actual law and subsequent governor requirement for training BEFORE the law takes place? The Police will need to have a reason to ask for ID and Immigration Papers. You're assuming harassment. If Harassment occurs then it should be addressed. Like with ANY law.

But there are already stories proving that you are wrong on this. Very, very wrong.

[hblask 1]

No, the Arizona law is an reaction to an exponentially rising problem with illegals coming over and committing crimes. It was enacted after a border rancher was found murdered along a known coyote route.

Think about this. What is a coyote route? It is a route to bring in people or drugs illegally. So they created a law to prevent a crime that is only even possible if the law exists? How prescient of them.

[hblask 1]

So let's do away with all cops because some are bad?

Before this country went crazy making victimless crimes illegal, cops were respected members of the community, known for their honesty. See, the problem with victimless crimes is the cops have to violate a lot of rights to enforce them. And that creates dishonest police and lack of respect for laws and law enforcement.

[rjkdb8 1]

Bottom Line: I am anti ID Requirements for citizens, pro ID Requirements for Visitors. If a law enforcement officer has reasonable suspicion regarding an individual's status, s/he should be able to investigate the legal status of an individual, including the legality of being in this country. This is not an unreasonable expectation. If that makes people who are here illegally uncomfortable - too bad. If it makes some who are here legally uncomfortable, well that is the price paid for addressing what I feel is an important problem of illegal aliens.

Some people believe police should have the right to search anyone for any reason and if that makes people that engage in illegal activity uncomfortable, then too bad. The only problem with that belief and your bottom line is well settled SCOTUS precedent.Laws that mandate classification on the basis of race are subjected to the most stringent standard of judicial review, which is generally fatal. I think CaneBrain correctly implied that the AZ legislature likely appreciated the obvious equal protection issue when the law in question was enacted.

[hblask 1]

The problem with Henry's argument is that he is trying to say the open borders are the best solution, just as legalizing drugs, BECAUSE the enforcement side doesn't sit well with him.If our borders were 100% open, we would face problems in the very near future. From situations like in the 70s when Carter told Cuba that ANYONE who wants to come to America will get immediate citizenship from Cuba, so Castro emptied his insane asylums and jails into Miami, to situations like severe overcrowding in the big cities where 'the jobs are'.Controlled immigration is done in every sovereign nation, but Henry thinks it is immoral.Now I think his reasons are noble, allowing the human who wants the best chance they can get. Just like I think wanting to give free health care to everyone is noble.The problem is that it will break our country. Destroying our country to try to enact an unrealistic goal isn't noble, it is blindly foolish.

Maybe I haven't explained it well enough. First, I never said 100% open borders. I said create a reasonable means to live and work here, and a reasonable path to citizenship. Fix that, and nobody sneaks across except people who could not get here honestly. Second, it's not just the problems with the means of enforcement, it's the harm caused when behavior that could easily be controlled through honest transactions get handled on a black market. It ALWAYS creates more harm than the original problem. Look at prohibition in the 20s. It ALWAYS works like that. We gave up on that experiment for a reason.

[vbnautilus 48]

We've already seen the result -- an innocent citizen being harassed and handcuffed despite carrying ID. But there are already stories proving that you are wrong on this. Very, very wrong.

The law has not taken effect yet, so I don't think these arguments are valid as criticisms of the new law.

[hblask 1]

I think that the discussion regarding the second point of the morality of the crime itself is merely a smokescreen to try and confuse the issue regarding the investigation and ultimate enforcement of the crime. HB is saying that because of his interpretation of the morality of the crime itself, it is wrong to enforce the laws that make the act a crime. He IS suggesting we ignore certain illegal acts because the acts shouldn't be illegal in the first place.

It's not a smokescreen, it's a central tenet of the American justice system. Unfortunately, our public schools don't teach much American history anymore.

[hblask 1]

I would imagine that cops can 'just tell' a lot of times about things like law breaking etc.As such they would be a pretty good bet to use this law to the best effect, while mitigating the negative potentials because there is no upside to harassing law abiding people. Why risk their career to mess with a mexican guy walking along the road in a shopping district?

I guess that's why a Hispanic US truck driver just got handcuffed for a half an hour despite having several valid forms of ID.But that won't happen, right?

[hblask 1]

In Phoenix there is a large problem with street gangs: MS-13 (maybe you've heard of them), Lvl, brown pride (didn't make that up), wet-back power (didn't make that up either) just to name a few. All of these gangs are known for having a large number of illegals in them. Just good, honest, hard-working, raping, killing, thieving people. I guess the problem isn't what they do though...it's that we make them out to be criminals. We just need to legalize murder, rape, theft and everything would be fine.

Why do these gangs exist? Why don't they sell their products legally, the way alcohol and bread get sold?

[Ninjafoo 0]

Wow, so much misinformation and intentional twisting of words

For you to say this and then say the laws demands the harassment of brown is pretty laughable

[hblask 1]

The law has not taken effect yet, so I don't think these arguments are valid as criticisms of the new law.

Yeah, I don't think it's a coincidence that the rogue cops have stepped up the harassment already.I mean, it could be, just like it could be a coincidence that the vast majority of traffic stops in MN is of minorities despite the fact that hardly any of them live here.Seems unlikely, no?