Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Illegal immigration and the state of Arizona

View Poll Results: Do you support Arizona's new immigration law?
Poll Options:
Yes 23 votes (63.89%)
No 13 votes (36.11%)
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll
Illegal immigration and the state of Arizona (Page 3)
Thread Tools
Rumor
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2010, 09:49 PM
 
Currently, if you are over a certain age (or a legal immigrant or here on a VISA) you have to carry a Government issued ID (state or federal) with you at all times?
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2010, 10:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Captain Obvious View Post

I'm sorry what do you have a degree in?
Comp Sci maybe French Lit?
You're right, I should've just said I thought your analogy was absurd.

I understand how the language was phrased and that it tired to circumvent directives which on the surface conflict with Federal jurisdiction but it was a futile attempt. It does not change the fact that when it goes under judicial review by the Federal courts there is no way around the fact that the individuals who wrote it and AZ officials have to acknowledge that state officers are holding, fining, and prosecuting suspects for immigration violations which they simply cannot do. No state can.

I mean you people in here can argue like a bunch of chumps about the problem of immigration but that isn't going to change on what side of the line the laws that govern it are held. Only the Feds can write, enforce, and prosecute individuals for breaking immigration laws.
Surely you have the IQ points to grasp that
Where did you get this idea that only the Feds can enforce and prosecute individuals for breaking immigration laws?
justice.gov

Arrest of Illegal Aliens by State and Local Officers
Subsection 1324(c) of Title 8 specifically authorizes state and local officers "whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws" to make arrests for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324. There is also a general federal statute which authorizes certain local officials to make arrests for violations of federal statutes, 18 U.S.C. § 3041. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that 18 U.S.C. § 3041 authorizes those local officials to issue process for the arrest, to be executed by law enforcement officers. See United States v. Bowdach, 561 F.2d 1160, 1168 (5th Cir. 1977).
Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that an arrest warrant "shall be executed by a marshal or by some other officer authorized by law." The phrase, "some other officer," includes state and local officers. Bowdach, supra.
Section 439 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 added a new 8 U.S.C. § 1252c which provides that notwithstanding any other provision of law, to the extent permitted by relevant State and local law, State and local law enforcement officials are authorized to arrest and detain an individual who (1) is an alien illegally present in the United States; and (2) has previously been convicted of a felony in the United States and deported and left the United States after such conviction, but only after the State or local law enforcement officials obtain appropriate confirmation from the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the status of such individual and only for such period of time as may be required for the Service to take the individual into federal custody for purposes of deporting or removing the alien from the United States.
In the absence of a specific federal statute, the validity of an arrest without a warrant for violation of federal law by local peace officers is to be determined by reference to local law. See Miller v. United States, 357 U.S. 301, 305 (1958); United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 589 (1948).
In approving a state trooper's arrest of persons who appeared to be illegal aliens, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held, simply, as follows: "A state trooper has general investigative authority to inquire into possible immigration violations." See United States v. Salinas-Calderon, 728 F.2d 1298, 1301, n. 3 (10th Cir. 1984).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held, in Gonzales v. City of Peoria, 722 F.2d 468 (9th Cir. 1983), that the structure of the Immigration and Nationality Act does not evidence an intent to preclude local enforcement of the act's criminal provisions. Id. at 474. Based on the pertinent legislative history, the court of appeals rejected the argument that since 8 U.S.C. § 1324(c) specifically authorizes local officers to make arrests for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a), and 8 U.S.C. §§ 1325(a) and 1326 contain no comparable provision, Congress must have intended that local officers be precluded from making arrests for violations of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1325(a) and 1326. Id. at 475. The decision warns, however, that the first violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a) is a misdemeanor, and that if applicable state law authorizes law enforcement officers to arrest for misdemeanors only if committed in their presence, they would not be authorized to arrest aliens for illegal entry (unless the officers should happen to know that the alien had previously been convicted of illegal entry) unless they saw him/her cross the border.


Where did you get this idea that only the Feds can write immigration laws?
National Conference of State Legislatures

State Laws Related to Immigrants and Immigration
January 1 – June 30, 2008; State legislatures continue tackling immigration in a variety of policy arenas at an unprecedented rate. So far this year, 1267 bills have been considered in 45 state legislatures and at least 175 laws and resolutions have been enacted in 39 states. A total of 190 bills and resolutions have passed legislatures, 12 bills are pending Governor’s approval and three bills were vetoed.
The 2008 level of activity is comparable to the same time last year, when 1404 bills and resolutions were considered in all fifty states, and 182 laws were enacted in 43 states. As in recent years, the top three areas of interest are identification/driver’s license (203 bills introduced – 30 laws enacted), employment (198 bills introduced – 18 laws enacted), and law enforcement (214 bills introduced - 10 laws enacted).


Of course States can write and enforce immigration laws. BTW, it works both ways such as a pilot guest worker program in one state to expedite the approval of foreign workers. I can't imagine why folks would want it any other way. Sure it'll go to court, but there's more legal precedent supporting SB 1070 than you seem willing to acknowledge. Again, if the law serves nothing more than a reminder of how derelict the Feds have been in their obligation to secure our borders, so be it.

This is not Arizona's fault, but it's going to do something. Apparently.
( Last edited by ebuddy; Apr 27, 2010 at 10:23 PM. )
ebuddy
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2010, 10:19 PM
 
If you believe that Hispanics are only 2% of AZ population you're deeply deluded.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2010, 10:33 PM
 
I think the law can (and should) stand. I'm assuming its authors weren't ignorant of the relevant statutes and court rulings concerning the enforcement of immigration law. The federal appellate courts have recognized that states have a right to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration laws. Yes, the reasonable suspicion language is vague, but to me reasonable suspicion is synonymous with probable cause, and we all know police have broad probable cause powers.

There is a crime epidemic spawned by illegal immigration, and the federal government has been committed to ignoring it. Certainly the Dems don't want to do anything to piss off their Hispanic constituents, a key and growing segment of the population that is politically dominated by those who aid and abet illegal immigration. Even if the GOP takes Congress in November, Congressional Republicans are largely afraid of being labeled racist for supporting strong enforcement. The western border states except for California are clamoring for enforcement, have been asking for enforcement from the feds, and have been mostly ignored. They're now taking responsibility for a problem that the federal government has dropped the ball on.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Captain Obvious
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2010, 11:09 PM
 
lol
how many hours with google did that take you to come up with?

Look at the details:

Subsection 1324(c) of Title 8 specifically authorizes state and local officers "whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws" to make arrests for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324. There is also a general federal statute which authorizes certain local officials to make arrests for violations of federal statutes,
All of that pertains to local officials executing federal arrest warrants not taking it upon themselves to enforce what they deem are violations of federal law.

Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that an arrest warrant "shall be executed by a marshal or by some other officer authorized by law." The phrase, "some other officer," includes state and local officers. Bowdach, supra
there's that pesky word warrant again

State and local law enforcement officials are authorized to arrest and detain an individual
.........but only after the State or local law enforcement officials obtain appropriate confirmation from the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the status of such individual and only for such period of time as may be required for the Service to take the individual into federal custody for purposes of deporting or removing the alien from the United States.
SB1070 doesn't do that. It over reaches and penalizes individual under its own set of state criminal code statutes. Furthermore, federal officers can turn down custody of detainees if they so wish. They are under no obligation to do anything with those individuals just because Arizona says so.

In fact everything you posted is meant to be used by a representative of the US Federal government in upholding arrests in federal court for federal crimes and not on the state level. It is worthless in furthering the argument that states can make arrests on their own and carry out their own sentencing for an area of law they have no jurisdiction over.


Of course States can write and enforce immigration laws.
They can try you mean. That any of those laws are valid is something altogether different. They won't pass review.

there's more legal precedent supporting SB 1070 than you seem willing to acknowledge
No, not really.
( Last edited by Captain Obvious; Apr 27, 2010 at 11:15 PM. )

Barack Obama: Four more years of the Carter Presidency
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2010, 11:21 PM
 
For those of you who oppose this law, unless it was passed with an emergency provision, you have until July 1st to get your arse here and collect signatures and get it on the ballot. Arizona is an initiative/referendum state. Laws do not take effect until after 90 days after the session ends to give people time to collect referendum signatures, unless passed with an emergency provision.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 12:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
They do this already in all 50 states. They're called DUI check points.
Random checkpoint - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Well, I'm suggesting Arizona's new illegal immigration law to include random checkpoints for illegal immigration and requesting everyone to proof legal residence and citizenship. Not only that, but to check for gun permits as well if they are spotted with a gun.

I'm telling Arizona to do it. To extend to law to include random checkpoints. I say go for it.

You know, to avoid racial profiling. I just hope grandma carries her ID with her.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 12:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by Rumor View Post
Currently, if you are over a certain age (or a legal immigrant or here on a VISA) you have to carry a Government issued ID (state or federal) with you at all times?
What law would that be?

Maybe if you are driving you have to carry your driver license.

I go jogging without my wallet.

My 90 something year old grandma goes for a walk every morning. Don't not have an ID and does not speak a word of English.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 07:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by Captain Obvious View Post
lol
how many hours with google did that take you to come up with?
Actually, it was super-duper easy. Maybe not as easy as straight pulling facts from my ass, but it was pretty simple.

Look at the details:
I'd rather first take a look at the statement you made that drew my attention:
Originally Posted by Captain Obvious
AZ officials have to acknowledge that state officers are holding, fining, and prosecuting suspects for immigration violations which they simply cannot do. No state can.
You're just dead wrong here. As I've established, local officials indeed have the right to arrest and hold suspects for immigration violations. So... now let's look at those details:

Subsection 1324(c) of Title 8 specifically authorizes state and local officers "whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws" to make arrests for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324. There is also a general federal statute which authorizes certain local officials to make arrests for violations of federal statutes
In fact, states like Alabama and Florida have agreements with the Federal government to prosecute immigration violations. Again, you're just dead wrong. Only the Feds... nothing.


All of that pertains to local officials executing federal arrest warrants not taking it upon themselves to enforce what they deem are violations of federal law.
SB 1070 clearly states a legitimate contact. In what instances are the police engaged in legitimate contact if not related to their duties to enforce criminal laws?

there's that pesky word warrant again
What's even peskier IMO is the portion of the language you chose to exclude;

or such period of time as may be required for the Service to take the individual into federal custody for purposes of deporting or removing the alien from the United States.
In the absence of a specific federal statute, the validity of an arrest without a warrant for violation of federal law by local peace officers is to be determined by reference to local law. See Miller v. United States, 357 U.S. 301, 305 (1958); United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 589 (1948).


If the courts hear cases related to SB 1070, they'll be forced to acknowledge the holes in Federal statutes. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I think they'll be found to be well within their jurisdiction by current Federal law.

SB1070 doesn't do that. It over reaches and penalizes individual under its own set of state criminal code statutes. Furthermore, federal officers can turn down custody of detainees if they so wish. They are under no obligation to do anything with those individuals just because Arizona says so.
First of all, you've not cited a singular "overreach" of anything, you're just comparing it to ATF raids in meaningless emotional tirades. Secondly, none of this precludes the local authorities' right to hold suspected illegal immigrants until the Feds take them into custody for removal and/or deportation. Arizona does not have to endure the result of lame Federal enforcement of their own legislation.

In fact everything you posted is meant to be used by a representative of the US Federal government in upholding arrests in federal court for federal crimes and not on the state level. It is worthless in furthering the argument that states can make arrests on their own and carry out their own sentencing for an area of law they have no jurisdiction over.
This may have been the general understanding until several moves since 9/11/01 granting local authorities a much greater role in making arrests on their own (established by several cases mentioned above).

Could you please cite the language of SB 1070 related specifically to sentencing? Thanks.


They can try you mean. That any of those laws are valid is something altogether different. They won't pass review.
They can try you mean? In fact they do more than try as evidenced by the information I've already cited showing several hundred new laws enacted each year in almost every state in the US.

No, not really.
Granted it's just my perception, but... yeah, really.
ebuddy
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 09:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by Rumor View Post
Currently, if you are over a certain age (or a legal immigrant or here on a VISA) you have to carry a Government issued ID (state or federal) with you at all times?
Uhm, is that a question or a comment ?

-t
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 09:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
My 90 something year old grandma goes for a walk every morning. Don't not have an ID and does not speak a word of English.
Yeah, that gene seems to be running deep

-t
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 10:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Yeah, that gene seems to be running deep

-t
Look who's talking.

Coming from a guy who has trouble with punctuations and writing even a proper sentence.

Besides, a better word would be 'trait' rather than 'gene'.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 10:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
If you believe that Hispanics are only 2% of AZ population you're deeply deluded.
Since I'm the only in this thread who's mentioned "2%" I will presume that this was directed at me. I'll just ask you to read what I said a little more carefully this time:

Originally Posted by OAW
Bottom line for traffic stops in Missouri?

African-Americans are 67% more likely than whites to be stopped ... 67% more likely than whites to be searched ... 23% less likely than whites to have contraband on them ... and 67% more likely than whites to be arrested.

Hispanics are just as likely as white to be stopped (though they are only 2% of the population) ... twice as likely as whites to be searched ... 51% less likely than whites to have contraband on them ... and 96% more likely than whites to be arrested.

The reality is this type of sh*t happens all over the US. Racial profiling is already occurring. Has been for years. And in a state like Arizona where Hispanics make up approximately 30% of the population they are undoubtedly feeling the brunt of it compared to African-Americans who only make up 4% of the population.

And now they want to give the police the power to demand proof of citizenship on top of this? How are law-abiding Hispanic citizens in Arizona NOT going to get hassled by this?
Clearly the 2% is in reference to the Missouri Hispanic population. It was a summary of undeniable racial profiling statistics where I cited Missouri as an example. I even went on to say that Hispanics were 30% of the population in Arizona. I'd suggest you brush up on those reading comprehension skills before leveling accusations of delusion my way.

OAW
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 10:50 AM
 
How much of the AZ population is Illegal?
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 10:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Why not go even further out of respect for the law.

I saw set up random checkpoints in Arizona and check everyone's citizenship or visa.

Random searches would even be better. They might be hiding illegal drugs or illegal immigrants.

Conservatives for big government police state.
Needed because of the decades of big government ineptitude. Decades of open borders has been liberal policy for too long, and now it's back to bite them in the ass. Remove all illegals. It's not about race either. Kick ALL the lawbreakers out. Close the borders. You only have to kill a few of them to get the point across. Better them than US citizens. These open borders have allowed illegals to get back into the US just a short time after being booted out. That crap must stop.
     
jokell82
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 11:25 AM
 
Turns out illegal immigrants are less likely to commit a crime. Oh, and that fence meant to keep them out? Actually it keeps them here:
Immigration and Crime | The Agitator

All glory to the hypnotoad.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 11:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Needed because of the decades of big government ineptitude. Decades of open borders has been liberal policy for too long, and now it's back to bite them in the ass. Remove all illegals. It's not about race either. Kick ALL the lawbreakers out. Close the borders. You only have to kill a few of them to get the point across. Better them than US citizens. These open borders have allowed illegals to get back into the US just a short time after being booted out. That crap must stop.
So you are a big government protectionist.

No surprise there.

How much increase in taxes are you will to pay to close the borders and monitor it 24/7?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Macrobat
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 12:12 PM
 
Actually, there is already a Federal law requiring just this, but it has been "suspended," during the Bush Administration. All the AZ law does is force compliance by local law enforcement with the already-existing FEDERAL law.

What that means is, despite Obama's histrionics, veiled threats and campaigning - unless the FEDERAL law is first repealed, the AZ law will STAND.
"That Others May Live"
On the ISG: "The nation's capital hasn't seen such concentrated wisdom in one place since Paris Hilton dined alone at the Hooters on Connecticut Avenue." - John Podhoretz
     
Macrobat
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 12:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Rumor View Post
Currently, if you are over a certain age (or a legal immigrant or here on a VISA) you have to carry a Government issued ID (state or federal) with you at all times?
Many states and municipalites have laws requiring just that. When I was in the USAF in Denver, CO in the early 80s, CO had a law saying that not only were you required to have an ID, but at least $10 on you.IL has a curfew law that requires all people over 18 to be able to prove it, because minors are curfewed after midnight. Gonna cry "agism" now and say THEY are being profiled?
"That Others May Live"
On the ISG: "The nation's capital hasn't seen such concentrated wisdom in one place since Paris Hilton dined alone at the Hooters on Connecticut Avenue." - John Podhoretz
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 01:09 PM
 
Why aren't Al Sharpton and the race-bait coalition demonstrating down in Mexico? Anyone ever read Mexico's immigration laws, which actually ARE -like every other nation on earth- strictly enforced? (Of course not.)

Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)

Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34)

Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)

The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)

Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:

Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)

A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individuals identity. (Articles 85 and 86)

A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).

Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:

Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)

Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)

Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:

Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)

Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)

Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121).

Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.

Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says, "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)

Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)

Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)

Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:

A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)

Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)


Ohhh... all that sounds just like Nazi Germany to me. Where's the liberal mob up in arms or mounting any protests? Why not storm into Mexico and mount a protest against this? It's not like you'd be ARRESTED or anything!

How many of those feigning outrage here go to Mexico -or any other country for that matter- without the REQUIRED documents for entry? A show of hands please.

Why is it that race-baiters think that it's impossible for Mexicans or any other 'brown-skinned people' to obey the same laws that they have no trouble obeying? Who's really got the racist belief system here?

Meanwhile, a glowing example of just how stuck-on-stupid much of the US media is over the AZ law:


     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 01:32 PM
 
Crash, you've outdone yourself in volume over substance. Your questions are farcical. There is no rational reason to expect that Mexico's and the United States' immigration policies would be the same any more than they would be on any other topic. And it's not hypocrisy for people in the United States to be more interested in U.S. policy than Mexican policy -- that's rational self-interest. And the issue is not that "brown-skinned people" are expected to obey the same laws, it's that people think the law in practice will impose a burden in an unfair way based on race. I assume you understand these things.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 01:40 PM
 
Not all Mexicans are "brown skinned" Many, like myself, are fair skinned. My Paternal grandmother had blond hair and blue eyes. A tech I work with has red hair. My family, on both sides, date back to the Santa Fe settlement.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 01:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Not all Mexicans are "brown skinned" Many, like myself, are fair skinned. My Paternal grandmother had blond hair and blue eyes. A tech I work with has red hair. My family, on both sides, date back to the Santa Fe settlement.
That's a good point.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
finboy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 02:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
I think Arizona should extend the illegal immigration law to guns.

Demand provide a proof of citizenship to buy and own guns.
They already have that.
     
finboy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 02:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Astonishingly, you do have a point.

The law is is trying to "fix" a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.
If the Federal government did its job to keep the borders safe and closed, this would be a non-issue and no law would be required.

-t
That would make too much sense! You better be careful, you might end up tagged as a subversive racist Teabagger! Or whatever else the bigots want to call you from The Left.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 02:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
That would make too much sense! You better be careful, you might end up tagged as a subversive racist Teabagger! Or whatever else the bigots want to call you from The Left.
What you quoted from turtle is the most uncontroversial part of all of this. What would help is if people would stop focusing on the moonbats on either side. I get frustrated with these debates because on one side you have people raising legitimate concerns that a perhaps well-intentioned law, when implemented, will lead to injustice on racial lines. On the other side, though, people supporting the law choose not to engage this argument, but to engage another false argument that the law itself is racist.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 02:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
They already have that.
Not anymore they don't.

The same week they make it a requirement for legal citizens to show proof their citizenship, they make it legal for anyone including illegal immigrants to buy guns in Arizona without a background check or permit.

Not permit or background check require to buy and carry a gun in Arizona.

In Arizona:

Legal immigrants require to show proof of citizenship.
Illegal immigrants can buy and carry guns without background check or permit.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 02:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Since I'm the only in this thread who's mentioned "2%" I will presume that this was directed at me. I'll just ask you to read what I said a little more carefully this time:

Clearly the 2% is in reference to the Missouri Hispanic population. It was a summary of undeniable racial profiling statistics where I cited Missouri as an example. I even went on to say that Hispanics were 30% of the population in Arizona. I'd suggest you brush up on those reading comprehension skills before leveling accusations of delusion my way.

OAW
Ok, how about this, you're delusional because you think that a law like this isn't a necessity in AZ. You can also shove your PC bullsh*t, if they're looking for Mexican nationals who are here illegally, of course they're going to profile for Hispanics. I'm Hispanic, and even I agree with this. I don't have a problem with showing my ID next time I'm in AZ, because I understand that they have a real crisis on their hands.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
jokell82
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 02:47 PM
 
So what exactly is the crisis? The crime rate in AZ has been steadily declining. Is it just the fact that these people merely exist inside our borders? Or is there some other huge problem that isn't obvious?

From my earlier link:
"Over the last decade, the violent crime rate has dropped by 19 percent, while property crime is down by 20 percent. Crime has also declined in the rest of the country, but not as fast as in Arizona."

All glory to the hypnotoad.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 03:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by jokell82 View Post
So what exactly is the crisis? The crime rate in AZ has been steadily declining. Is it just the fact that these people merely exist inside our borders? Or is there some other huge problem that isn't obvious?

From my earlier link:
"Over the last decade, the violent crime rate has dropped by 19 percent, while property crime is down by 20 percent. Crime has also declined in the rest of the country, but not as fast as in Arizona."
Don't you know.

When crime is down and illegal immigration is down in Arizona over the pass few years, this mean CRISIS MODE!

Either that or elections are coming up, and by passing this law, they hope to drive out all the legal immigrants who are of hispanic or latino decent because they tend to vote democratic.
( Last edited by hyteckit; Apr 28, 2010 at 03:08 PM. )
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 03:35 PM
 
Or, maybe it could be that most illegals aren't paying taxes, making tons of cash and undercutting American labor, and then sending that cash directly back to Mexico? Of course the Mexican gov't is hostile about this, Mexican illegals in the US make up the majority of their country's revenue.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 03:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Ok, how about this, you're delusional because you think that a law like this isn't a necessity in AZ. You can also shove your PC bullsh*t, if they're looking for Mexican nationals who are here illegally, of course they're going to profile for Hispanics. I'm Hispanic, and even I agree with this. I don't have a problem with showing my ID next time I'm in AZ, because I understand that they have a real crisis on their hands.
Ok. We'll just chalk up your non-response to my previous point as a tacit admission that you were wrong and I was right.

As for this post ....

1. I never said it wasn't necessary. I never said that illegal immigration wasn't a problem in AZ. What I said was that this particular law would without question result in racial profiling against Hispanics ... citizens, legal immigrants, or otherwise ... in AZ. I also said that it would make a lot more sense and be a better use of resources to target the THOUSANDS of businesses that employ illegal workers and induce them to come here in the first place than to target the MILLIONS of Hispanic citizens and immigrants.

2. Is the issue illegal immigration? Or is the issue illegal immigration by Mexicans? Is it about the crime ... or is it about who commits the crime? Call it "PC" if you want to ... but if law enforcement is only "looking for Mexican nationals" as you said then that's what we call selective enforcement of the law ... which is "illegal" in and of itself.

3. As for you personally being Hispanic that is hardly an argument. There's also a lot of HIspanics ... who actually live in AZ ... who oppose this. Thousands of them were demonstrating against this the other day. A more useful thing to note would be what percentage of Hispanic citizens in AZ support this. Something tells me it will be far from the majority.

OAW
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 03:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Or, maybe it could be that most illegals aren't paying taxes, making tons of cash and undercutting American labor, and then sending that cash directly back to Mexico? Of course the Mexican gov't is hostile about this, Mexican illegals in the US make up the majority of their country's revenue.
But on the other hand, they "create" American jobs by using emergency rooms for free

-t
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 03:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Or, maybe it could be that most illegals aren't paying taxes, making tons of cash and undercutting American labor, and then sending that cash directly back to Mexico? Of course the Mexican gov't is hostile about this, Mexican illegals in the US make up the majority of their country's revenue.
Those getting paid in cash under the table certainly aren't paying income taxes. Those working under false papers most definitely are. All are paying sales taxes. The drivers among them are paying gasoline taxes. The smokers among them are paying cigarette taxes. Those among them with a phone are paying telecommunication taxes. The property owners among them are paying property taxes. Etc., etc. To say that most illegal immigrants aren't paying taxes is just utter and complete BS.

As for undercutting American labor ... again, the people responsible for that are the American business owners who hire them. And IMO these are the people that need to be targeted if one is serious about getting a handle on illegal immigration. Not a single illegal immigrant can sneak across the border and force somebody to hire them. Like I said earlier ... dry up the employment opportunities and the problem will take care of itself. All without requiring 24 hour armed guards along the entire US - Mexico border. Imagine that.

OAW
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 03:58 PM
 
Damn immigrants taking my nanny and gardening jobs!

Seriously, what REAL jobs are these Mexicans supposed to be stealing? And if so, isn't that the fault of the immoral asshole who hired them?
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 04:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Those getting paid in cash under the table certainly aren't paying income taxes. Those working under false papers most definitely are. All are paying sales taxes. The drivers among them are paying gasoline taxes. The smokers among them are paying cigarette taxes. Those among them with a phone are paying telecommunication taxes. The property owners among them are paying property taxes. Etc., etc. To say that most illegal immigrants aren't paying taxes is just utter and complete BS.
I bet a lot of them, if legal, wouldn't even be required to pay income taxes when all is said and done, as conservatives are fond of pointing out regarding the working poor in general.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 04:28 PM
 
Election year == CRISIS MODE!

Arizona

4/12 - New gun law
illegal immigrants can buy guns without a background check and can carry guns without a permit

4/23 - New immigration law
legal immigrants must show proof of legal residence because they look funny
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
CreepDogg
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 04:28 PM
 
I think it's interesting that generally, the same people who espouse free trade and free market capitalism get all protectionist when it comes to the labor market.

It seems to me that the free market solution here would be to put all immigrants 'above the table' when it comes to work status, and let the market sort it out. Everyone is on the same playing field, and the 'slave trade' is eliminated.

The protectionist solution would be to create a government bureaucracy to kick 'em all out.

Both are valid solutions, obviously showing different intents.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 04:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
4/12 - New gun law
illegal immigrants can buy guns without a background check and can carry guns without a permit
I don't know how you stand on this, but I think it's f*cking idiotic.

But then again, it's their state. Let them do what the people deem right.
If this stuff is in disfavor with the constituents, they will vote differently next time around.

-t
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 04:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Ok. We'll just chalk up your non-response to my previous point as a tacit admission that you were wrong and I was right.
No, I chalk it up to you not being able to understand that I already answered your comment.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 05:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
No, I chalk it up to you not being able to understand that I already answered your comment.
Dude ... seriously. Clearly your initial response to me centered around your erroneous claim that I said HIspanics were only 2% of the AZ population. That was the only thing you said and I responded to that. So if by "answering your comment" you mean "changing the subject" then have at it. Don't worry. I really don't need you to concede the point. I just find it a tad bit amusing that you actually decided to talk sh*t about it rather than just let it go.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Apr 28, 2010 at 05:21 PM. )
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 05:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Election year == CRISIS MODE!

Arizona

4/12 - New gun law
illegal immigrants can buy guns without a background check and can carry guns without a permit
"Undocumented Workers" (the PC term) and hoodlums did that before the law was passed to eliminate the CCW permit. The change just leveled the playing field so I can carry concealed if i so wish. I have a holster and open carry my Beretta 92FS. BTW since Arizona passed the CCW law, we haven't turned into the "free fire zone" the anti gun rights advocates predicted.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 05:50 PM
 
Nevermind.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 05:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
"Undocumented Workers" (the PC term) and hoodlums did that before the law was passed to eliminate the CCW permit. The change just leveled the playing field so I can carry concealed if i so wish. I have a holster and open carry my Beretta 92FS. BTW since Arizona passed the CCW law, we haven't turned into the "free fire zone" the anti gun rights advocates predicted.
Keep the law enforcement busy harassing legal residence for proof of legal status, while allow criminals and illegal immigrant easy access to guns.

That's brilliant.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
finboy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 07:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
4/12 - New gun law
illegal immigrants can buy guns without a background check and can carry guns without a permit
PSST. They can do that now, and evidently do that already on a big scale in some places along the border.
     
finboy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 07:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by CreepDogg View Post
I think it's interesting that generally, the same people who espouse free trade and free market capitalism get all protectionist when it comes to the labor market.

The protectionist solution would be to create a government bureaucracy to kick 'em all out.
Yet those same folks consistently put forward that one of the few legitimate jobs of the federal government is defending the country's borders.

Free labor markets would mean we pay people whatever we want to, treat them how we want to, and free markets would mean no handouts for illegals (because my taxes wouldn't pay for it). I'm not sure we're there yet. Most of us don't want to live in that world, but we would like to see people accountable for their actions, and punished for breaking laws instead of rewarded. Most people just want to see equity.

That bureaucracy thing already exists. Those laws are in place. It's getting people to stop the cry of "racist" and actually respond to the law of the land that's the problem.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 08:13 PM
 
ILLEGAL ALIENS SUCK! ILLEGAL ALIENS SUCK!

They violate the law. They kill people. They commit crime. They steal jobs.

We hate lawbreakers.

Illegal aliens want to buy a gun in Arizona? Okay. No background check required. Illegal aliens can get guns anyway, so might as well sell it to them.

Yeah, let's sell nuclear weapons to our enemies too. Because they'll probably get it from China or Russia.

Wow. Talk about some logic flaw in thinking.



ELECTION TIME

2 safe bets.

1. It's the democrats/liberals fault
2. It's the illegal immigrants fault

backup
1. It's Bill Clinton's fault!
2. It's Obama's fault.
3. Socialist/Communist


Yeah, we know it's the Democrat's fault for not doing anything about the illegal immigration problem when Republicans control congress and Pres. Bush was president.


Now that illegal immigration is down due to the economy, illegal immigration is in CRISIS MODE!
( Last edited by hyteckit; Apr 28, 2010 at 08:21 PM. )
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
CreepDogg
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 08:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
Yet those same folks consistently put forward that one of the few legitimate jobs of the federal government is defending the country's borders.

Free labor markets would mean we pay people whatever we want to, treat them how we want to, and free markets would mean no handouts for illegals (because my taxes wouldn't pay for it). I'm not sure we're there yet. Most of us don't want to live in that world, but we would like to see people accountable for their actions, and punished for breaking laws instead of rewarded. Most people just want to see equity.
Right. The core of the inequity right now is that illegals aren't subject to labor law and aren't really in a position to complain, so as you might expect, they're cheaper. Employers like that. So there are 2 practical solutions to get 'equity' - get rid of labor laws altogether (although, as you point out, most of us don't want to live in that world), or let illegals work and make them subject to the same labor laws. Then we'd have equity and we'd see who employers would decide to hire.

I'm not saying I think this is the only answer, only that claiming illegals shouldn't be here on the grounds that 'they're taking jobs' amounts to protectionism. And that the most practical 'free market' solution would be to open our borders to their labor.

That bureaucracy thing already exists. Those laws are in place. It's getting people to stop the cry of "racist" and actually respond to the law of the land that's the problem.
Fair enough - it's not 'creating' the bureaucracy but most definitely is expanding it. Laws that are impractical or expensive to enforce aren't very useful. So the question here is - how much are you willing to pay to enforce closing our borders? Because it will most certainly be expensive. Especially if part of the bureaucracy is responding to lawsuits clamoring for even more enforcement.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 08:42 PM
 
Solution for Arizona's problem:

LEGALIZE DRUGS!

Free trade of drugs. Arizona needs to chill and smoke some weed.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2010, 09:19 PM
 
Republicans want to tag people with RFID microchips to solve the illegal immigration problem.

Haha... I thought I was just using hyperbole. It's true.

The GOP does want to tag people with RFID microchips like cattle.

3rd District GOP hopefuls take tough stances on immigration | GazetteOnline.com

http://iowaindependent.com/33017/gop...draws-backlash
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,