Out of vague curiosity, did anyone actually READ why I said back there? Or were you all too caught up in double-checking each other's detailed statistics and sources and bickering over arcane points of definition, as if showing something was 93% instead of 95% proved something in particular?

The law proposed in Arizona IS flawed, and will likely be wiped away before it ever goes into effect, and Ron is correct that Brewer is mostly just positioning herself politically......but the situation that allows anyone to PROPOSE such a law is gonna be with us indefinitely. Does anyone have any idea what to **DO**, even if this stupid law disappears in a few weeks?

There are several questions...should ANYONE be required to be able to prove who they are whenever a law officer thinks he has cause to inquire? Should ANY profiling be done for the purpose of enforcing immigration issues? By whom and under what circumstances? How should quotas, if any, be established? What should BE the criteria we use to even answer those questions?

   The answers to such questions are not obvious & automatic, but almost no one is asking the questions or addressing the actual situations that deal with the basic problems.