Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 227
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?Page 10 of 23    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23)
"Both the referenced teachers/professors should be arrested and charged with sedition and treason."

Yup, book burnings and labeling people with different views as seditious or treasonous is probably next after massive arrests.

Arizona's new laws will target primarily hispanic/latino looking people at this point. While most will not be subject to long detentions, many can be if labeled differently. Labels change with administrations and within jurisdictions. People I know were just arrested in West VA, for blocking a mountain top removal operation for a few hours in an act of civil disobedience. Their bail is set at $100,000 while on the same day in the same jurisdiction, a man accused of four sex crimes involving a 13-year-old got out on $15,000 bond. Another man, after stabbing someone five times in the back, was being held on $10,000 bond and his accomplice on $6,000 bond. A 19-year-old Beckley woman was arrested for wanton endangerment after shooting at another woman in a Family Dollar parking lot and was being held on $10,000 bond.

"Eco-terrorists" were a favorite target of the last administration. Despite no person ever being harmed by animal rights and environmental activists, they were deemed far more dangerous than armed militias, and hate groups. This administration is more focused on hate groups in the US. It's hard to tell what will happen in the near future as the nation becomes more reactionary. The Supreme Court has just ruled that people deemed to be "sexually dangerous" can be held indefinately.

Senator John McCain has introduced a bill that would allow the government to imprison an unlimited number of American citizens indefinitely without trial. The Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010, or S. 3081, has eight cosponsors and explicitly names U.S. citizens as among those who can be detained indefinitely without trial.

The language in S. 3081 "To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limita-
tions on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes. "

"Enemy belligerents" is a pretty broad term that can encompass a wide swath of acts deemed to be against the US, including under the section that notes, "Such other matters as the President considers appropriate."

Consider for example, a president decides that the "War on Drugs" is an actual war and anyone dealing drugs could be an enemy belligerent. Or that the much touted "illegal alien invasion" is officially an INVASION. Those caught up in the sweeps without papers would be subject to indefinite detentions. Further on down the road, as Tea Partiers become more armed, threatening, and protest, assault and riot, can you possibly imagine that an embattled Administration would extend the suspension of rights to them, declaring them "enemy belligerents".

Having seen what happened to peace and environmental activists in the past decade, and our ugly racist past, none of these scenarios are by any means a reach. While it might seem reasonable today to suspend rights including Miranda, Habeas Corpus, the 4th, 5th, and 14th, etc for a certain part of our culture, these things do tend to lead nations down the slippery slope as history has shown us so many times.

In early 2001, none of us could have envisioned how many rights we were willing to throw away in the aftermath of 9/11. Many of us are still in disbelief, and see the continued erosion as threats to our democracy. But then again, thinking that could be construed as "anti-American", subjecting folks like us to be subject to indefinite detention.

The ACLU has some very real concerns about the AZ Law.
http://www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights-racial-justice/frequently-asked-questions-about-arizona-racial-profiling-law
 davidsauvignon
Joined: 2/6/2008
Msg: 228
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/18/2010 1:01:21 PM

The law is also quite clear that requiring that someone produce proof that they're not committing a crime is considered a search and detainment, both of which are unconstitutional unless accompanied by either a warrant or probable cause.

Not quite true. Take police license/registration or sobriety checkpoint for example. No warrants are issued and no probable cause exists until there is detainment. If probable cause ensues after the detainment, e.g. open containers, smell of alcohol, dilated pupils, etc. the police can legally make the arrest. See Michigan v. Sitz, for example.





~ds~
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 229
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/18/2010 1:05:42 PM

So your claim that ID "requires a drivers license" is not true. In fact, no state requires a DL in order to identify someone. No state requires any document in order to identify someone. (It shouldn't need to be pointed out, but given the sincerity of some posters, I'll point out that DL's can used for ID, but they're not required)


Okay then. But this is about AZ. For this thread and what everybody else is talking about here and what we've been talking about for the last 16 pages, a DL is one of the things that's acceptable as proof of citizenship in AZ.; not "papers, not a trunk full of commissioned affidavits stamped by the Fuhrer, just a DL.


The law is also quite clear that requiring that someone produce proof that they're not committing a crime is considered a search and detainment, both of which are unconstitutional unless accompanied by either a warrant or probable cause. Supporters of this bill will continue to dance around these constitutional fact because there's just no explaining why some want to disregard the constitution and it's requirement for probable cause.


Reasonable suspicion is required to ask the question in the first place, (not unusual or unprecedented in American Law). Probable cause is still required to arrest. Warrants are not always required to arrest people (shouldbe obvious). Probable cause can't be based on race or language. I think that there are many many many circumstances that would raise probable cause; no id (99% of people stopped by cops have id), no job, no address, no relatives in country, no record of border crossing, contrary answers to questioning, no knowledge of surroundings or circumstances, and on and on. What is a fact is that the arrest can't be made on a hunch, must be concrete in nature, and can't be made based on race. How large do you think the microscope will be when the first few cases are heard?

As for an explaination for disregarding the constitution, you can't afford to have 500k illegal immigrants in one state any more. You will go broke. Your golden doors aren't so golden anymore. Legal citizens want those jobs now. Unless you're all okay with about a 70% tax rate you will someday very soon have to stop spending money you don't have. You're not the first or only country with this problem. Spain legalized all illegal immigrants in 2005 and now they're broke and sending Moroccans back by the boat full without any process. If anyone has a better idea, you should suggest it.


So it's down to disputing whether detention "up to six months" is "definite" or "indefinite"


No. You started off the thread by saying cops in AZ will be able to just pick you up and drop you off in Nevada. Now it's indefinite detention. Papers sounds nice and scary too. It's possible that the reality of this law lies somewhere in between people who are suggesting Jefferson, Adams and Paine are going to return as constitution zombies and kill everybody for this discretion and people who sure as sh't gonna round up them eeelegals and send 'em all back on the first boat to Tijuana, or in AZ, Nogales. I think a little too much is expected of cops to make this law work, but the federal jurisdiction has done absolutely nothing to address the issue either. So if it does nothing else but motivate a federal response, it will be a step in the right direction. If it serves a a beginning to future laws that work, then great.
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 230
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/18/2010 1:19:26 PM
Let’s see exactly what the provisions of that statute are, shall we? Just how much of an “excuse” they need. From Arizona statute 13-2314:


This really IS predictable... But I still have to ask...

Why is it that all the conservative types like to try to rebut by quoting laws that have no bearing on the issue...?

What, pray tell, do Arizona's Title 13, Chapter 23 (ORGANIZED CRIME, FRAUD AND TERRORISM) statutes have to do with the point rebutted (other than next to nothing unless the person is under investigation for running a human smuggling ring)...?

This is, at a minimum, utter BS intended to deflect from the issue or it is evidence of limited to no understanding of the issue (or at least the points made as rebuttal)...

Next time... Try quoting law that is ACTUALLY relevent to the issue... Like Arizona's Title 13, Chapter 39 (FORFEITURE) statutes... Here, I'll help you to get started...

http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp?Title=13

I read and re-read the 30 specific acts defined above by the statute. For some reason, I just can’t find “caught without papers” being a situation where the proceeds of crime statute applies. Additionally, as I bolded the phrase in the statute which defines “racketeering”, part of the litmus test is that the crime must be severe enough to be punishable by a year imprisonment…which of course, “up to 6 months” doesn’t apply. So yes, I think your argument is in fact, a “slippery slope” one.

THEN come back with another "well researched" rebuttal...

No. You started off the thread by saying cops in AZ will be able to just pick you up and drop you off in Nevada.

No, I didn't... At least not in the way you have expressed it here (and, to be honest, I STARTED OFF disputing the idea that cops had the authority simply demand ID for any reason at all and arrest you for not providing it)... I DID, however, at a LATER POINT in the thread, point out that they could "dump" the person in New Mexico or Nevada, which the law DOES allow them to do...

suggesting Jefferson, Adams and Paine are going to return as constitution zombies and kill everybody

Ummm... Everybody knows that zombies kill by eating brains... What would be the point in them arising to go after the drafters of this law...? They could never survive as zombies without their prefered "food choice"...
 Ailliss
Joined: 3/16/2010
Msg: 231
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/18/2010 11:01:09 PM

("Where they burn books, they will ultimately also burn people.")~jed~


What does that have to do with requiring that our public schools not advocate the overthrow of our government?

Or that some classes be only for certain ethnicities that want to incite revolution?

No one said anything about burning books. Quite the opposite as the books I referenced are evidence of sedition, treason instruction.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 232
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/19/2010 7:59:47 AM

I think that there are many many many circumstances that would raise probable cause; no id (99% of people stopped by cops have id), no job, no address, no relatives in country, no record of border crossing,


Regardless of what YOU think, SCOTUS has already ruled that none of those can be used to show probable cause.


So in the three weeks since this law was signed, scotus has already ruled these specific things are out? Amazing. I'd love to see some evidence of this. All I've found are actual supreme court definitions of probable cause.


A reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime. The test the court of appeals employs to determine whether probable cause existed for purposes of arrest is whether facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. U.S. v. Puerta, 982 F.2d 1297, 1300 (9th Cir. 1992). In terms of seizure of items, probable cause merely requires that the facts available to the officer warrants a "man of reasonable caution" to conclude that certain items may be contraband or stolen property or useful as evidence of a crime. U.S. v. Dunn, 946 F.2d 615, 619 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. Denied, 112 S. Ct. 401 (1992).

It is undisputed that the Fourth Amendment, applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits an officer from making an arrest without probable cause. McKenzie v. Lamb, 738 F.2d 1005, 1007 (9th Cir. 1984). Probable cause exists when "the facts and circumstances within the arresting officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe that a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime." United States v. Hoyos, 892 F.2d 1387, 1392 (9th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 825 (1990) (citing United States v. Greene, 783 F.2d 1364, 1367 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1185 (1986)).


From what I've read, based on their personal believe that anyone approached may be an illegal alien based on his/her knowledge of atypical activities, locations, behaviors, where experience provides the police with reasonable suspicion that a person may be illegal, any cop is allowed to inquire and pursue that suspicion until satisfied.


Under this new AZ law, DLs may or MAY NOT be sufficient to prove citizenship depending on which state issued the DL. So your claim that DL is sufficient is FALSE.


DL's require proof of citizenship in 46 states. So you're 8% correct in your claim. Congrats. If you really need further clarification, just read the bloody law as it is written.
 jed456
Joined: 4/26/2005
Msg: 233
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/19/2010 10:16:06 AM

What does that have to do with requiring that our public schools not advocate the overthrow of our government?

Or that some classes be only for certain ethnicities that want to incite revolution?

No one said anything about burning books. Quite the opposite as the books I referenced are evidence of sedition, treason instruction.


It is a slippery slope while Im in know way advocating the overthrow of the government,unless violent actions are taken it is covered under free speech you may not like it,hell the neo Nazi's and the klan disgust me but they have a right to voice there IMO racist crap and this Arizona law is exactly that racist crap.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 234
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/19/2010 10:48:30 AM
Gosh, what with the left AND the right constantly threatening to overthrow the government, it is kinda surprising that the government hasn't been, like, overthrown.
 Ailliss
Joined: 3/16/2010
Msg: 235
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/19/2010 5:06:33 PM

Nazi's and the klan disgust me but they have a right to voice there IMO racist crap


Show me please just one class in the American school system that is just for Nazis or for Ku Klux Klan members and that these classes advocate killing non-white persons or overthrow of the U.S. government?

I cited my example. Cite yours……..you cannot.

It is tragic that some Americans think it proper for schools to teach children that the white race is bad, that we should be murdered and our current government replaced with a Mexican one. There is something really wrong with this mentality.
 junipermoon
Joined: 3/1/2006
Msg: 236
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/19/2010 5:58:30 PM
There is a whole continuum between no exposure
and advocacy. Limiting access to ideas and ideologies does
nothing but foster hate and misunderstanding.


thank you.

i read the twisted report with interest, trying to figure out
where it mentioned any details about encouraging 'innocent
children' to hate the white race.

alas, i found none. none, except for a wild misinterpretation
of reported events. and dickensian rhetoric that truly made me want
to laugh or scream.

analogy alert!!!
just because i had my students read adventures of
huckleberry finn
does not mean that i advocate use of the 'n' word.
 jed456
Joined: 4/26/2005
Msg: 237
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/19/2010 9:59:11 PM

It is tragic that some Americans think it proper for schools to teach children that the white race is bad, that we should be murdered and our current government replaced with a Mexican one. There is something really wrong with this mentality.


I'm sorry this is one of the most twisted responses I have ever read on here.One being proud of your race is fine but you see I look at everyone as being part of the human race.And yes there is something very wrong with your take on the subject. have a good night!I will not be responding anymore. thank you
 Ailliss
Joined: 3/16/2010
Msg: 238
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 1:39:37 AM

And yes there is something very wrong with your take on the subject.


A contraire; there is something sick about Americans condoning teaching kids, in our public schools, to overthrow our government or that the white race is oppressive and evil. This is what is twisted.

Most of the kids listening to the vile rhetoric of Ron Gochez, a high school social studies teacher at the Santee Education Complex in Los Angeles, are Mexicans here illegally.
In his spare time, Gochez calls for a Mexican revolution from the steps on the UCLA campus.


Western Voices World News recently posted

By way of Third World insolence based in socialism he expressed an abiding hatred for white Americans by advocating an open call for “revolutionary” activities by his “Latino” students against the United States and by extension its founding race:

“We are revolutionary Mexican organization here. We understand that this is not just about Mexico. It’s about a global struggle against imperialism and capitalism… At the forefront of this revolutionary movement is La Raza. We will no longer fall for these lies called borders. We see America as a northern front of a revolutionary movement… Our enemy is capitalism and imperialism.”- Gochez

You may recall how the mainstream media was quick to jump on the possibility that Tea Party members may have used racial slurs, even though proof has yet to be uncovered. And yet here we have video of a Mexican high school teacher calling for revolution in America and what do we hear from the media? Crickets -- at least until now via Fox News. So which is more newsworthy: unconfirmed reports of racial slurs unsupported by video evidence of the so-called white racist incidents, or video of a non-white activist calling for violent revolution against white Americans, the burden of socialism, and the continued invasion of the Southwestern states for Mexico?

Social Justice teacher and racebaiter Ron Gochez needs to be fired from his teaching position at Santee High School, just as quickly as a white American activist would certainly be fired had the same situation been discovered.



He left Mexico because he could not succeed there; why does this coward not call for a revolution in his native homeland?


Additional twisted, lame pandering to the illegals and revolutionaries.



California kids sent home for wearing USA flag apparel on Cinco de Mayo
May 6, 2010 By Steve McGough

Four students at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, Calif. were sent home from school after refusing to remove bandannas and T-shirts on May 5 – Cinco de Mayo – since their apparel was incendiary.

From KTUV with hat tips to Michelle Malkin and Jim Hoft.
I had no idea Cinco de Mayo was now an American holiday to be respected and treated with the same respect the Forth of July is. This is a dangerous precedent indeed, but what concerns me most is the attitude of students like Sal Orona.
We frequently discuss the melting pot of the United States population, but historically, immigrants became fully assimilated – for lack of a better word – into the unique United States culture formed by our history, Founding Fathers and founding documents. With no doubt, our borders, language and culture defines America.
Now, we have some citizens – and many illegal aliens – who frequently talk of reconquista – the complete removal of the borders in North America – and the destruction of the United States as we know it. They think the Constitution is an outdated document, they think they have been repressed, they think they are owed.

As Malkin notes…
The left threw assimilation out the window decades ago, of course. And educators no longer teach civic pride. It’s all about assigning blame, assuaging guilt, and stoking grievances. P.C. is the death of us.


Ms. Malkin is a first generation american born to immigrants that came here legally and desired to assimilate.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 239
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 2:50:53 AM
"Ms. Malkin is a first generation american born to immigrants that came here legally and desired to assimilate."

That is so ironic. While deriding Gochez, you then go on to reverence for Malkin, one of the most bigoted, divisive, vitriolic, hate-mongers working full time to divide Americans. Her list of hated ones is long, hating gays , hispanics, Muslims, Liberals, and anyone left of her favored fascists. Reflecting back at some of her rants, I would venture to guess that Malkin hates around 80% of the people in the US. This bigot actually wrote the book on how good Japanese internment was in the US and advocates it today for Arab and Muslim Americans. Gochez and other's of that ilk don't hold a candle to Malkin's racism. Her ties to VDARE, a prominent hate group, are well documented.
http://www.splcenter.org/vdare-foundation

Let us know when Michelle can assimilate with the human race.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 240
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 7:17:28 AM

Boy, you might just be the only person in the US who think SCOTUS has been around for only three weeks. That is amazing!!


Yeah, that really is dumb of me. I thought they just invented the supreme court. Go back and read what I wrote again. Actually forget it. I'll just explain it to you again....I said the az immigration law is three weeks old! Not scotus.


Brown v State of Texas


That case proves my point even more. The cops in that case had no reason at all to stop the guy and arrested him only because he didn't identify himself. They had no reasonable suspicion that a crime of any kind was being committed and therefore had no probable cause to arrest him. The AZ law, as I've said time after time, as is written directly in the law itself, must have tangible criteria that a crime (being illegaly present in the country) has been committed. Failing to provide id isn't enough to arrest anyone. A combination of a bunch of stuff I've already mentioned which you've ignored along with any average cops reasonable belief that a crime is happening does make up that tangible criteria and does constitute probable cause. And that has been upheld in different supreme court cases with different circumstances several times. And in all probability, a couple years from now a bunch of these cases will end up there too. Think about it. If this law is unconstitutional because there is no possibility of probable cause existing, then there is no such thing as illegal immigration. It wouldn't exist. Nobody would have to worry because all federal laws would cease to exist. If that's your opinion, fine. But as a matter of philosophy, the law exists so there must be some way to prove that it is being broken.


Requiring citizens to prove TO A POLICE OFFICER (trials are supposed to happen in court rooms, not the side of the road) that they are not committing a crime when there is no probable cause is unconstitutional.


You're right. Trials don't happen on the side of the road so at that point you're not innocent until proven guilty.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 241
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 8:03:29 AM

No, it proves nothing because I am not contesting the polices' authority to question someone based on reasonable suspicion. There is no constitutional issue with a police officer stopping someone and asking them a few general questions (see prior post for some examples) including their name and address if they have reasonable suspicion.


What if the suspect can't give answers to the reasonable questions a cop asks? What then? The cops walks away? Or is there a point in time when reasonable suspicion turns to probable cause? If there isn't, if a suspect can give all the wrong answers and the cop has no choice but to walk away, then your point is idiotic. There is no law. The cop might as well not even ask any questions at all. There would be no point. You keep saying "absence of probable cause". At some point in an investigation, reasonable suspicion turns to probable cause or it doesn't. If there is no way for that to happen, then there is no point to having reasonable suspicion.

Here's my point about Brown vs Texas...


One officer testified that he stopped appellant because the situation "looked suspicious, and we had never seen that subject in that area before." The officers did not claim to suspect appellant of any specific misconduct, nor did they have any reason to believe that he was armed. When appellant refused to identify himself, he was arrested for violation of a Texas statute which makes it a criminal act for a person to refuse to give his name and address to an officer "who has lawfully stopped him and requested the information."


There was no reason to stop the guy in the first place! They didn't have any lawful reason to stop him which is exactly what the AZ laws upholds. There must be a lawful reason other than immigration to stop someone, there must be reasonable suspicion to ask the questions, and there must be probable cause to arrest. If you don't think cops have the ability to do all of this correctly, then scrap the law. But as is, the law addresses all these concerns.
 cooldude
Joined: 4/26/2004
Msg: 242
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 5:41:19 PM
Yes, President Calderon has no room to speak against our policies. He needs to go back to Mexico and fix their overwhelming problems such as their strict immigration policies, raise their own standards of living for their citizens to prevent Mexicains having to find a better life in another county. Fix all the corruption in the government & the rich.

Obama says the law has the potential to be discriminatory, which he gave us a fine example of himself during the Cowley/Gates incident where he acted so stupidly without knowing all the facts.

As you travel back to Mexico, Calderon, please take Obama with you, as he has more intrest in other countries then his own. Obama does not even stand up for his own country, just bow down to others.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 243
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 5:55:51 PM

The constitution allows the police to stop and question people (within limits) if they have reasonable suspicion. The constitution DOES NOT allow the police to search someone for proof of citizenship on the basis of reasonable suspicion.


I really doubt that's true. Some states have stop and identify laws. It seems like they are different in every state. The majority allow for suspects to not provide any information at all, but do allow cops to consider this refusal in the "totality of the circumstances" when deciding to arrest someone. So it's not totally unconstitutional for cops to arrest someone for being unidentifiable if it is considered along with other evidence or if it obstructs an investigation into a probable crime, like, I dunno, being here illegally.


In an opinion decided last year in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humbolt County, that particular question was addressed head on. In Hiibel, the United States Supreme Court held that a police officer's arrest of a suspect, after the suspect refused to identify himself during a Terry stop in violation of Nevada law, did not violate the Fourth Amendment.


There are lots of supreme court cases to cite on this, more than I'm interested in. But one thing is for sure, not any single one is the omnipotent factor in deciding whether this law sucks or not.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 244
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 7:05:36 PM
One of the inconvenient truths is that laws like these are subjective, interpreted over a wide range of jurisdictions, using the concept that the cop is inordinately right over the testimony of the civilian. Increasingly the burden of proof is placed upon the citizen, a reversal of assumption of innocence in any given stop. The Arizona low lays the burden of proof on the citizen to prove innocence. There is the presumption of guilt that comes into place with this corruption of the Bill of Rights. If you refuse to, or cannot show adequate documentation, you are now automatically presumed guilty, particularly with your accent, manner of dress, color, and nervousness at being stopped by people with arms, dogs and an attitude. I have been caught up with this zealousness as a white guy and feel some empathy for folks guilty of nothing more than Driving While Black, Driving While Hispanic, Driving while Liberal, etc, in various jurisdictions.

The questions remain that if the "good white folks" who support this profiling,are willing to accept such profiling in their ethnic groups for the "greater good". Thus far the Jewish among us have expressed concern and empathy, but for the most part, the declining Euro-white majority are comfy and responding accordingly to our inevitable mixing.
Everyone who hit this part of the world are the mixed races of the same black mom so long ago in the rift valley of Africa. The accents change, the skin color varies at times, the language constantly evolves where we can't even communicate over a hundred years, much less thousand, and somehow...it is now the end of humankind that this stuff is happening in our short lifetimes? It has always happened in the lifetimes of us evolving critters. Those that refuse to evolve have some serious emotional issues that mere forums cannot help nor cure.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 245
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 7:13:43 PM
One of the inconvenient truths is that laws like these are subjective, interpreted over a wide range of jurisdictions, using the concept that the cop is inordinately right over the testimony of the civilian. Increasingly the burden of proof is placed upon the citizen, a reversal of assumption of innocence in any given stop. The Arizona low lays the burden of proof on the citizen to prove innocence. There is the presumption of guilt that comes into place with this corruption of the Bill of Rights. If you refuse to, or cannot show adequate documentation, you are now automatically presumed guilty, particularly with your accent, manner of dress, color, and nervousness at being stopped by people with arms, dogs and an attitude. I have been caught up with this zealousness as a white guy and feel some empathy for folks guilty of nothing more than Driving While Black, Driving While Hispanic, Driving while Liberal, etc, in various jurisdictions.

The questions remain that if the "good white folks" who support this profiling,are willing to accept such profiling in their ethnic groups for the "greater good". Thus far the Jewish among us have expressed concern and empathy, but for the most part, the declining Euro-white majority are comfy and responding accordingly to our inevitable mixing.
Everyone who hit this part of the world are the mixed races of the same black mom so long ago in the rift valley of Africa. The accents change, the skin color varies at times, the language constantly evolves where we can't even communicate over a hundred years, much less thousand, and somehow...it is now the end of humankind that this stuff is happening in our short lifetimes? It has always happened in the lifetimes of us evolving critters. Those that refuse to evolve have some serious emotional issues that mere forums cannot help nor cure.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 246
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 7:47:15 PM

a reversal of assumption of innocence in any given stop.


There is no assumption of innocense in any given stop. If cops presummed everyone was innocent, they'd never have to arrest anyone. Presumption of innocence is a your right when you go to trial. Other than that, I'm right there with you on the white guilt trip.
 HeyJenny
Joined: 11/13/2008
Msg: 247
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 10:30:45 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BioYQbMJjo

Alex Jones showing the Mexican president Calderon speaking in our Congress how he doesn't want us (U.S. citizens) to own guns !! Then our president kissing Calderon's behind.

Calderon needs to fix his own corrupt country and we need to keep him our of ours, along with the illegals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6vnmIcYN4Y

The above link shows it is not just Mexicans but also terrorists crossong the border.
 cooldude
Joined: 4/26/2004
Msg: 248
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/20/2010 10:54:23 PM

The above link shows it is not just Mexicans but also terrorists crossong the border.


I'm not suprized in the slightest. I know sooner or later it will happen. All it will take is a major terrorist to come into our country undetected through Mexico before something is finally done about this.
 cooldude
Joined: 4/26/2004
Msg: 249
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/21/2010 6:47:46 AM

Same source says crime in AZ is declining


After reading that news report, it does not mention so much the decline of crime in Arizona, but along the 2,000 mile boarder between US and Mexico. The boarder has been strengthened in California & Texas so you should see a decline in those area's.

But the report continues to say:


Other sources say the up-tick in violent incidents is a result of heightened enforcement and security measures which are acting as a "natural funnel," forcing drug traffickers, smugglers and illegal workers trying to cross the border into a concentrated area of more dangerous paths into the country.


So where that funnel leads is Arizona is where the boarder is not as well maintained.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 250
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/21/2010 7:02:26 AM

The issue is whether the cops can demand law abiding citizens to provide proof of their citizenship without probable cause, which the Constitution requires.


And I'm saying, very slowly so that you can understand, probable cause exists when a cop uses reasonable judgment etc etc etc in determining someone status in the United States. Lots of cases have shown this to be valid in many many circumstances. None the less, no cases have been heard by the supreme court on this particular law so most of this has yet to be determined. I think your problem is that you can't comprehend that living in the states is illegal if you're not properly immigrated or born there. So that makes proving your citizenship mandatory when suspected of this particular crime. So when you say law abiding citizen, that citizen is still suspectded of a crime and has probably committed the crime if unable to prove otherwise. And what you're really saying is that there is no such thing as illegal immigration. You're saying there is no constitutional way to be in the United States illegally so therefore there must not be any law. That's fine. I agree with every single hippie out there who wants to wander freely across the continent trading baskets and woven goods.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 251
view profile
History
The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?
Posted: 5/21/2010 9:30:14 AM
No Luckyhot777s...No one expects that we should all think alike, nor is it communism, Nazi-ism, etc, to hope that people could look at this issue with a little more compassion, consider other perspectives, and alternatives to knee-jerk legislations like Arizona pushed.

I see most of the blame placed on the backs of the immigrants and a disproportionate burden of proof and harassment placed on the backs of hispanic/latino Americans. It is in great part, the policies of the US that drive the demand and the destruction of the economies of rural as well as the irresponsibility of business owners, overwhelmingly conservative, that willingly employ and even demand undocumented workers.
http://triplecrisis.com/going-beyond-immigration-policy/
snip..
Still waiting for the immigration connection? Smithfield’s Mexican hog operations put a lot of small-scale hog farmers out of business, as producer prices fell 56 percent in real terms. More importantly, U.S. exports of below-cost corn flowed south in a torrent thanks to NAFTA. U.S. exports increased over 400 percent while real prices in Mexico declined by two-thirds. These shocks to rural Mexico pushed an estimated 2.3 million people out of agriculture between 1993 and 2008, among them former corn and hog farmers desperate for work.

A few of them no doubt found work in Smithfield’s Mexican hog operations. But with the Mexican economy floundering under the NAFTA economic model, many looked northward for their jobs. Migration to the United States doubled from the already high pre-NAFTA levels, despite stepped up enforcement along the U.S.-Mexico border. The border crackdown not only failed to slow the influx, it paradoxically encouraged those who survived the perilous journey to stay rather than risk repeated trips for seasonal work, as many had done before.
end snip..

I worked on a project one day, with a man from southern Mexico. He and his family were legally here, the family became US citizens, was well established in his community here, yet had not been back to see the rest of his family for 14 years, fearing he would never be able to come back despite jumping through all the right hoops to live here legally. Such is the fear that even those legal citizens from the south must bare daily.

When the meat processing operations are raided, families are torn apart, kids left without parents. Border crossings are increasingly deadly, many people now walking 20-60 miles through the desert, finding water caches destroyed by the Nativists, often abandoned by their coyotes when things get desperate. (For those who play the terrorist card, do you really think someone would go through all that if they could merely borrow a boat from Canada a helluva lot easier?)

Merely because some of us wish to consider these immigrants and migrants as real people with real families, does not mean we do not support real, just and humane reforms and enforcement of existing laws while respecting human rights. Without meaningful economic reforms that quit punishing the people of Mexico, central America and elsewhere, the immigrants will continue to be the symptom of this diseased economic system. Without appropriately punitive sanctions against those who demand cheap, exploitable labor, nothing will change but the death toll on the border. Without parents instilling a work ethic in their children, there will be a growing void of capable and willing workers for the vital trades. The guy who owns our old farm did not go out of his way to find immigrants to do the work. There were simply none of the younger generation of the region willing to do the hard work that farming entails. Without reforming US drug laws, we will continue to drive the outsourcing of pot growing to the violent cartels.

There is something disconcerting about the coldness that people display toward the real hardships and misery of people just trying to feed and house their families, keep their families together and live in peace. The much hated immigrants are not the enemy.

For those with some semblance of empathy left in their souls, this piece looks at the nitty gritty, down on the ground challenges that these people face.
http://www.truthout.org/arizonas-war-immigrants59522

Off topic..luckyhot777. BP is currently controlling WHO is allowed to participate in cleanup attempts. Volunteers MUST take an 8 hour course on how to not poison yourself, offers no wildlife rescue in the syllabus and is not allowing anyone unauthorized near the impact areas. I friend of mine is reporting back daily. The oil invasion will be going on for years or decades. A lot more economic, environmental and social damage will happen from this negligence than anything we have ever seen before.
PS..I've done decades of public service work as a volunteer...have you?
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The real reasons behind Arizona's Immigration Law?