BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:33 AM

OK, I've read the Arizona law again, kindly provided to us by Doug in a link to his posting of 30 April 2010 7:21 PM.   

We are--again--getting off track here. Let's get back to the wording of the law itself.

It would be advisable if all parties were to read it, prominent among these being Doug himself.

Doug assures us that no person would be picked up under the new law unless the person is already involved in a non-immigration-related offense.

Fine, Doug.   Exact quote needed, with page number.

The closest thing I have found is "law enforcement officer, without a warrant, may arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the US".

"Any public offense":   that would, it seems, include immigration-related offenses.

So where exactly is the provision that an offense which has nothing to do with immigration must be present before the officer arrests the person?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:35 AM

Mousethief, I believe Genie is responding to the attempt by GUEST.DavidE to conflate illegal immigration in Arizona with the shooting of a police office by MJ smugglers.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:44 AM

I knew I had missed something.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:51 AM

Ron, did you see the part where it says that it is now illegal in AZ to participate in a street-corner labor market? As I read that, and we have them here in Albuquerque, if someone pulls up and says "anybody want to mow my lawn?", anyone who responds is breaking the law, and is then liable to an immigration check. Oh yeah - so is the guy asking for a short-term employee.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:56 AM

For more, read Leonard Pitts, Jr.

"If we really wanted immigration reform, we'd have had it years ago.

"In 2006, President George W. Bush supported a proposal that would've required undocumented immigrants to take English classes and pay fines and back taxes in exchange for guest worker status and, eventually, citizenship. "I know this is an emotional debate," said Bush. "But one thing we cannot lose sight of is that we're talking about human beings, decent human beings that need to be treated with respect."

"But Bush was shouted down by angry people carrying "Go back to Mexico!" signs. Their counter proposal? To somehow round up and bus an estimated 11 million people to the border, an idea that was to pragmatism and practicality as Lady Gaga is to modesty and restraint. Similar thinking, if you want to call it that, is evident in the bill recently signed into law by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona, that has vaulted that state into a raging controversy."

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 12:17 PM

As usual, Pitts hits the nail on the head.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 02 May 10 - 02:03 PM

Ron, did you see the part where it says that it is now illegal in AZ to participate in a street-corner labor market? As I read that, and we have them here in Albuquerque, if someone pulls up and says "anybody want to mow my lawn?", anyone who responds is breaking the law, and is then liable to an immigration check. Oh yeah - so is the guy asking for a short-term employee.

Sounds like a Hiring Fair to me - fortunately the UK has progressed since the mid 18th century!!

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 04:02 PM

Strangely you don't see a lot of pasty skin out in front of the Home Depot looking for day labor jobs. And yet they complain that the illegal immigrants are taking away jobs from "Americans". Do I believe my eyes, or the rhetoric of the known-to-be-quite-capable-of-lying-through-their-perfect-teeth right? The eyes have it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 02 May 10 - 04:13 PM

Having looked (briefly) at the Huffingpoop linked by bb, I must advise that most people probably should NOT bother with it. In usual Huff-n-Puff manner, it fails to identify any source. It "cites" things "included in the bill" but doesn't identify "a bill" that exists.

A link at the bottom of the "report" goes to a "FULL SUMMARY" as a source:

I'm at a loss to discern the meaning of "full summary" here, since it gives no source that is "summarized," and I'm unable to distinguish between a "full" summary and an "ordinary" summary (which might, of course, be a summary of a full summary?)

The "source" linked by Huff-n-Puff is NOT a piece of legislation, or even proposed legislation; but is - at best - a "proposed position" statement that enumerates a multitude of "pie-in-the-sky-possibly-good-things" that might be worth considering when the business of actually writing a bill gets under way.

Most likely it's from an intercepted email "homework" assignment by some newby legislator who was told to "write a proposal for practice."

It must be conceded that the extreme reliance in Huffy's "source" on "modern technology" is something of a joke, in light of recent admissions that the exisitng "electronic/remote-sensors" on the border are a near-total failure, the newest FAA flight control computer system is too dangerously flawed to be safely deployed, and that the Census Bureau's new "automatic" database automatically crashes so frequently that it may be unusable; but that's something to be reviewed later IF actual legislation can be started.

The Arizona Senate Bill linked later is at least "credible;" but careful readers will note that only amended sub paragraphs of the law are included in the text available. I found numerous "amended paragraphs" whose meaning, intent, and likely effect cannot be discerned without pulling the full Arizona State Code to see what the "overlying section" says.

"Anyone in violation of X.xxx.# may be held liable for ..." has no meaning unless you know what X.xxx.# says, and the bill, as published, does not tell you without additional (and difficult) research of Arizona codes.

The most glaring (apparent) failure of the Arizona law that I perceive is that I can find NO INDICATION of what constitutes "reasonable proof of legal presence." This means that anyone who "might be required to show proof" is given NO INDICATION of what proof is sufficient. This places all legal persons at risk of arrest if the local cop (given authority to adjudicate the case by the AZ Senate Act¹) makes the decision.

¹ Arizona SB-1070 page 3
1 B. IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF THIS SECTION, THE FINAL DETERMINATION OF AN ALIEN'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY EITHER:
…
A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR AGENCY COMMUNICATING WITH THE UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT OR THE UNITED STATES BORDER PROTECTION PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

What does "communicating with" actually mean? If a local cop calls immigration and says "I've got this guy" does that constitute "communication" and allow the cop to decide to imprison, fine, and/or deport the person? It probably does if "report to ICE" is the only action required of the cop by the US Code. I suppose the cop could look up USC 1373(c), but I've known several who probably would rely on the "chief" (who also might not bother to look it up) for advice.

Advice: Read very carefully, and think about whether what it looks like the law says is what it actually does say. At present, I find it impossible to be too sure of much of anything.

John

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 10 - 05:22 PM

Someone above mentioned 'bounty hunter' type activity. What are the chances that this law will breed that kind of gainful employment? Bounty hunting used to be very common, and it would seem that the opportunity of nosing around to find and apprehend illegal "aliens" could be very lucrative.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: DougR
Date: 02 May 10 - 07:23 PM

Ron Davies: I have read the law. I am not a immigration lawyer, are you?

You state, in a recent post, "First if is clear the goal is to fight illegal immigration and than many citizens plan to use it (the law I assume) to do that.

The purpose of the law is to STOP illegal immigration, NOT fight it.

You also state, "A few problems: if lawful contacts made by a law enforcement official and 'reasonable suspion exists that the person may be an alien', the person can be apprehended."

If the person is stopped by a law enforcement officer while commiting a crime the officer can ask to see identification identifying the person as a legal citizen of the U.S. If the suspect cannot provide proof of citizenship, the officer will contact ICE to determind if an arrest should be made. That's not quite what your post says.

I am not going to get bogged down discussing whether or not the law is constitutional. That will be determined by the courts. If the Supermes rule that it is not, that will be the end of it. Until then, it seems to me arguing constitutionality is a waste of breath and time.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Genie
Date: 02 May 10 - 08:05 PM

Alex, my point is that when we talk about the draconian new Arizona "papers, please" law or the issue of illegal immigraton in general, someone always drags in the issue of drug smuggling - often as rationalization or justification for these sweeping new laws. I'm just saying that drug smuggling isn't always done by illegals or other non-citizens and that most of the crime associated with drugs would probably go away if our government didn't single out drugs like marijuana and cocaine for prohibition and spend so much money and manpower on trying to prevent their recreational use.    Neither of those two drugs is inherently any more dangerous than alcohol or some prescription meds, but the latter are tolerated and merely regulated, while we waste money and lives trying to stamp out the use of the former.    To blame illegal immigrants or the "porous border" for the violence associated with drug trafficking is misplacing the target.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: pdq
Date: 02 May 10 - 08:17 PM

If you stop all illegal immigrants at the border you will also be stopping the drug smugglers.

That is not as difficult a concept as people are trying to make it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:53 PM

Only if the drug smugglers are all illegal immigrants. Your proof?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 May 10 - 10:28 PM

Mouser: "Only if the drug smugglers are all illegal immigrants. Your proof?"

You must be an AC/DC fan!

Genie: "Alex, my point is that when we talk about the DRACONIAN(?) new Arizona "papers, please" law or the issue of illegal immigraton in general, someone always drags in the issue of drug smuggling...(blah blah blah.."

These naive dreamers tend to do a lot of 'what if's' and stuff like that..come on, Genie, Get real!..What is more illegal?..ILLEGAL drugs or ILLEGAL immigration????

Ebbers: "What are the chances that this law will breed that kind of gainful employment? Bounty hunting used to be very common, and it would seem that the opportunity of nosing around to find and apprehend illegal "aliens" could be very lucrative...."

Stick to house cleaning and baking whole wheat bread, with glazed fixed eyes over the bay!

Ebbers: ""If we really wanted immigration reform, we'd have had it years ago."

This time you are exactly CORRECT!! I posted what their goal is, on a previous post. Neither party's administration will enforce it, because the corporate heavies won't allow them too...and after all, who do you think is calling the shots???...The President??????
The international bankers, and those behind them has wanted chips in everyone, for total control. There are plenty of sites to go into that further...Oh, by the way Ross Perot's company EDT developed them years ago..since the have been 'new breakthroughs'(?)..however, cancer and other health problems have also developed with them..as tests have shown!

Mouser: "I knew I had missed something."

We hold these truths to be self evident.

Genie: "The "war on drugs" may be concrete, but I'm not going to blame "illegal immigrants" for people being killed for the sake of prohibition of marijuana and cocaine."

A bit of advice: Don't party or hang out at your dealer's house!

Mouser: "Not sure what point you're making, Genie."

See above.

Mouser: "At least the "war on drugs" is a war on a concrete noun, unlike the "war on terror" which is a war on an abstract noun."

But one thing they have in common, they are both part of 'slight of hand' lies!!!

Genie: "Fossil, where is one supposed to carry that ID card when skinny dipping? ; )"

Love to tell you, but discretion is the better part of valor...however, here's a hint:...To extract them, pick the two fingers you like the least.........

Winking at all!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 May 10 - 10:56 PM

Gee Doug, you somehow have forgotten to give us the exact quote in the new law that specifies that involvement in a non-immigration- related crime must be present in order for a person to be apprehended under the new law.

Can't understand how that could have slipped your mind.

Yet you assure us that this provision is in the new law. Surely it would be no problem for you to give us the page number and exact quote.

We'll be waiting for you to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 10 - 10:56 PM

Frankly, GfS, I admire you even less when you try to be cutesy and funny. 'Tain't fittin.'

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:48 PM

Added to my "scroll past" list: GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: DougR
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:51 AM

Ron Davies: No, I haven't forgotten, but you said you read the law. Perhaps you only have a reading level of first grade, I have no way of knowing, but IF you really read the law, it's quite clear that a law enforcement officer would be in violation of the law if he asked for proof of citizenship from someone who has not committed a crime. Racial profiling is clearly prohibited.

Read the Bill!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:53 AM

Has not committed a crime? You mean who is not suspected of having committed a crime? Only a jury can say if a person has committed a crime or not. Not a cop.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:59 AM

Mouser: "Added to my "scroll past" list: GfS"

Promise??...Thank you!

Ebbers: "Frankly, GfS, I admire you even less when you try to be cutesy and funny. 'Tain't fittin.'"

Well, it figures, you thought it was 'cutesy and funny'...but still couldn't crack a smile.....Brrrr, must be cold up there!

Oh well,..but still smiling!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 03 May 10 - 03:16 AM

For DougR:

Arizona Senate Bill S.B. 1070, ENACTED:

ARTICLE 8. ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS

A. …

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON.

"Lawful contact" undoubtedly includes asking (presumed innocent) witnesses to an antisocial act or other event in which a crime may have occurred for their observations of events they may have witnessed. In many situations, the police have the authority to detain "for questioning" persons NOT SUSPECTED OF PARTICIPATION IN ANY UNLAWFUL ACT. Hesitation in responding, while it might be due to simply "not wanting to get involved" or fear of retaliation by someone who might be accused of an offence, could be considered by the officer, and is NOT EXCLUDED, as a cause for "reasonable suspicion," in which case the officer would be bound, by this law, to attempt to determine the legality of the person's presence in the US.

It is NOT, under the definitions and terms stated by this law, necessary that the person who's lawful presence MUST be questioned must be suspected (reasonable cause or otherwise) of ANY VIOLATION OF ANY LAW.

John

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: DougR
Date: 03 May 10 - 01:17 PM

The wording of Senate Bill AR 1070 has been modified to clarify the language of the portion of the Bill you copied, John. I'll see if I can find it online and copy it.

The purpose of the new wording was to clear up any misunderstanding that existed regarding a police officer requesting proof of citizenship from anyone arrested for allegedly commiting a crime.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Genie
Date: 03 May 10 - 03:02 PM

Gfs,

Crude jokes aside, who is going to hide something the size and shape of a credit card or passport in any bodily orifice?   

If you really had to have your proof of identity and citizenship with you at ALL times, the method would have to be much less cumbersome.    A microchip would be convenient to carry, but lots of us would oppose that for the reasons you mention.

[["Ebbers: The international bankers, and those behind them has wanted chips in everyone, for total control. There are plenty of sites to go into that further...Oh, by the way Ross Perot's company EDT developed them years ago..since the have been 'new breakthroughs'(?)..however, cancer and other health problems have also developed with them..as tests have shown!"]]

None of us wants either the government nor the big corporations to be able to track our every movement.

If it is really important for everyone to be identifiable when needed (even if unconscious or deceased) without being trackable or having their identity stolen, the government should use iris-identification technology -- and pay for the program with tax money (not imposing a financial hardship on already-impoverished people).   Unlike fingerprints, iris recognition does not leave traces of where you've been or where you are now (unless you're being scanned, e.g., by the police).    And unlike passports, ID cards, etc., this type of identification could not be forged. All the law enforcement people would have to do is run your iris scan through a database to see who you are and whether you were a legal resident or not.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 May 10 - 09:28 PM

Doug--


"...kindergarten reading level....."

Temper, temper, little man.



Doug R 29 April 2010 5:50 PM:

"The law states that it is against the law to use racial profiling as an excuse to ask for citizenship papers and that the only way a lawman can ask to see your papers is if he is arresting you for ANOTHER crime".



"arresting you for ANOTHER crime"

In fact, as I recall, you were rather harsh with Genie for not knowing this.

So now it's time for you to give us the exact quote in the law which specifies the requirement "he is arresting you for another crime." Please make sure the "crime" you cite is not an immigration-related crime only.

So far, as indicated by John in Kansas, it appears you are dead wrong on this.



But I'm sure you can clarify the situation.

We're waiting.

Thanks so much.


And I hope you get more sleep.

Obviously for some reason you were out of sorts.

Pobrecito.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 09:41 PM

Wow! Have you seen this?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/03/frum.immigration.education/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,SAULGOLDIE
Date: 03 May 10 - 09:43 PM

Perhaps this has already been mentioned--I didn't read the whole thread--but what if the ORIGINAL residents of this land started asking the rest of us to prove that WE belong here?? My people came from Russia, ca 1900. Guess I'd have to "go back," eh? Lookout UK, Germany, China, India, Africa(!) and basically the whole bloody REST OF THE WORLD!!!

This is what happens when people act from their lizard brains, instead of the superior ones G-d gave 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 10:08 PM

...what happens when people act from their lizard brains, instead of the superior ones G-d gave 'em.?

             You end up with illegal immigrants for Central America.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 May 10 - 10:33 PM

Good post, Genie. ...and by the way, your skinny dipping scenario, was a little over the top, as to suggest that you'd have to carry an ID with you even for that!..So I replied as I did. It was only to be a light-hearted reply. Too bad 'others' thought it was meant as anything more than that!

That aside, if the government would control the borders, as the Constitution mandates them to do, ALL of this would not be a problem! A lot of politicians are reluctant to get on board, because they want the Hispanic vote..and for them to actually enforce, or back enforcement of the LAW, as given in the Constitution, they fear they'd lose the vote. This is NOT representation, NOR is it upholding the oath they swore to, when they took office. ALL of those CON MEn should be thrown OUT of office!

Hey, best to you!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 May 10 - 10:52 PM

I sometimes think it is not possible that some of the American posters have any idea of how long our borders are, not to mention the kind of terrain and vegetation there is along the way. Just how is the US to be expected to "control its borders"? Do we really want vigilantes patrolling for practically 2000 miles?

And if we accomplish that, we still haven't even begun patrolling the *northern* border. And then there is the border of the West Coast. And the border of the East Coast.

Dang. It just doesn't end. Of course, patrolling will have to be 24/7, so there will be shift changes. Man, we're going to have to import some Mexicans to work on the line when we run out of previously unemployed USians.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 03 May 10 - 10:58 PM

Interestingly, the people demanding all this patrolling are the same ones that bitch about the size of government, and deficit spending.

They will not be happy until all of their conditions are met:

1. Federal gov't shall receive no income.
2. Federal gov't shall continue to pay our medicare.
3. Federal gov't shall consist entirely of the military, the prison system, and the border patrol. All other duties will devolve to the states.

And then they wonder why the liberals think they're dumb. Can't imagine.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 May 10 - 11:32 PM

I know - 'cause taxes are not constitutional. :)

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 May 10 - 11:35 PM

The stupid part of the whole thing is, you don't need to patrol the boarder at all--or at least not much--all you have to do is prosecute illegal employers. In fact, you could even go to the drug laws and confiscate property. That would pay for a whole lot of boarder enforcement--if you thought you needed it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:10 AM

Rigs, Yup!

Now as long as Mouser is posting how are we supposed to do all this, let me ask you this: Why is it so bad, or wrong, to ask to see an illegal alien's papers, as to his legitimacy in being here, but the same hypocrites think its not so bad for the government to see your health insurance papers???

I think its all out of hand, and YES the government, both state and federal have gotten WAY to intrusive ,and WAY too big, and quite unsustainable.

And as far as the hypocrisy of 'racial profiling', I guess the left don't count affirmative action's racial profiling!..as a double standard!

And what next?..the government telling people where to work, just to keep them employed??..Great! Some one just off food stamps, who has no skills, making guitars at CF Martin?(for example)..just because affirmative action placed him?

Supply and demand, and get the government off people's backs, EXCEPT an eye on corruption...but that's like letting the wolves guard the hen house!

The answer is going to have to lie, in our own personal integrity and morals, of which the bullshitters 'representing' us have shown very little of!..and that is an individual responsibility!

So before we jump off the deep end, choking everyone with stupid laws, FOR THE OTHER GUY, let's look in the mirror, and do the best we can....shit, even make it a little hipper, than profit first, no matter the means!

That is a cultural thing, and can be encouraged through music and the media, possibly churches and schools....and JOBS, not being undercut by illegals!....(among other things, as well)!

Manufacturing should be brought back to OUR shores, and not shipped overseas, for cheaper labor, whose profits only the corporation. The savings is NOT passed on to us, the consumer. Things cost them less to make, but they didn't get any cheaper to buy!

Not only that, we waste a lot of fuel, shipping the crap across the ocean, just so the mega corporations make a bunch more money, while we at home pay higher costs for it, and are out of work!

The federal government is solely to blame for this, by breaking the laws that govern them!!!!!...and still the clowns, on both sides of the aisle keep wanting to shred the Constitution, to suit their own wills...over the rights of 'WE the People". It's now them and us..what's THIS shit?????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: mousethief
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:22 AM

The stupid part of the whole thing is, you don't need to patrol the boarder at all--or at least not much--all you have to do is prosecute illegal employers.

True. But politically impossible.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:25 AM

Not when you have citizens out of work!!!

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: DougR
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:39 AM

Ron Davies: I read your last post, and I, obviously, caused offence when I cast aspersions on your ability to read. That was unfair of me and most unrealistic. If you can type, reading is not a problem at all!

I do apologize if I caused you anguish. Upon reflection, my suggestion that you cannot read was most assuredly unfair. Since you obviously CAN read, the problem you have with the subject under discussion must be comprehension.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 04 May 10 - 07:38 AM

And I in turn am sorry I misquoted you.   It was not "kindergarten" but "first grade". I can't tell you what a difference that makes.

Nice try, Doug.

Good to know you got enough sleep and your temper has cooled a bit.

Who knows--perhaps you've even learned that if you lose your temper, you automatically lose the argument--a lesson it seems hard for several Mudcatters to master.   Congratulations to you.



But we're still waiting for the direct quote from the new Arizona law that indicates the lawman must be arresting you "for another crime" in order to ask to see your papers under this new law.

Seems like you're joining some other illustrious Mudcatters in the rather widespread malady of seeking out the least sea -worthy vessel you can find, then lashing yourself to the mast.

I quoted you directly--and accurately-- on the "for another crime" issue.

So far, your smokescreen is quite impressive--but not quite good enough.

Where is that quote from the law about "for another crime"?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: artbrooks
Date: 04 May 10 - 08:08 AM

GfS, I ordinarily scroll past your posts, but something caught my eye and I think you have missed a point here. Nobody at all is questioning that illegal immigrants should be subject to deportation or whatever other legal sanctions are applicable. The issue is Arizona's new law which permits any law enforcement officer to require anyone with whom they come into official contact to prove that they are not an illegal immigrant, and allows them to be taken into custody until acceptable proof is provided.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 May 10 - 11:54 AM

Art, According to the law as I understand it, (now), and because of an amendment to it, they can run the check only if it is in conjunction with another 'offense'...however, as we all know, you(we), can always be pulled over, or stopped for virtually any excuse, for them to run a check.

Hey, I don't like this anymore than any of us..but Arizona is being choked with crime, from a flood of them coming in, whether looking for work, or smuggling drugs,..or whatever. SOMETHING had to be done, and the federal government, under both administrations, have fallen down on their job.
As I've posted before, should we be allowed to pick one law WE get to ignore?........................................(and I'm sure we all do)....with impunity??

Hey Art,..Respectfully,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 12:28 PM

GfS, I recognize some of your banter as tongue-in-cheek (plus I agree with some of what you've been saying).

My skinny dipping scenario, though, was not really so far-fetched.   We have two main "clothing optional" beaches near Portland (as do some other cities such as San Diego), and there was a time I used to frequent them.   It wasn't a good idea to take your valuables with you to the beach itself (not even money, because there were no booths selling anything), and unless you were the driver (we usually carpooled) you may not have left things like your credit cards and ID in the car. Vehicles parked in the lot or on the side of the country road were routinely broken into.

Now, some men's bathing trunks have places to safely stash an ID card, but even if you're not completely au naturel, most women's bathing suits don't.    The kind of law some are proposing would leave you vulnerable to harassment, major disruption of your day, and possible arrest and incarceration just for not having documentation of your legal residency with you at a time like that. I used the "skinny dipping" scenario because that one doesn't even offer the remedy of sewing a special little pocket into your Speedo to hold your "papers."

BTW, I keep hearing on radio that Arizona law ALREADY permits law enforcement to ask for proof of legal immigrant status or US citizenship if you are stopped for some other criminal code (and maybe even traffic law) infraction.    The new law changes it to
1) law enforcement MUST (not "may") ask for such proof and can be sued by anyone if they don't
and
2) this applies whenever there is "lawful contact" between law enforcement and an individual - not just when there is probable cause to suspect that a crime has been or is about to be committed.

If the law is currently being "tweaked," we'll judge the final product when it goes into force.   But as it stands, I think there is great cause for concern about undue racial and ethnic profiling and about violation of the 4th Amendment.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 12:31 PM

Rig, I agree. If you don't control that boarder, he's likely to eat you out of house and home. ; )

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 May 10 - 12:42 PM

What happens when your neighbor, disgruntled or not, calls the police and says that s/he believes that her/his neighbor is selling drugs and that s/he believes that lots of the Mexican-appearing visitors are illegals? What are police required to do, given that scenario?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 12:55 PM

C'mon, GfS, let's not be too specious here. LOL

You obviously can't require ONLY illegal aliens to show papers, now can you?   (Think about it.) : )

And does the new health care law say anything about carrying your health ins. papers WITH you?

Whether and to what extent "affirmative action" is comparable (in reverse) to racial profiling is a topic for another thread, I think, because a lot depends on how and to what extent minorities (and non-minorities such as women) are actively recruited or even given "extra credit" in hiring, etc.   Still, in the absence of "affirmative action," de facto racial, ethnic and gender "profiling" was the norm for decades (centuries?).

Since when do government work programs put people in jobs they're not qualified for? (Unless, of course, you include things like hiring recent law school graduates to replace highly experienced attorneys in the DOJ
because the latter weren't tied to your administration's political ideology, or appointing a former Arabian horse judging commissioner to head FEMA.)

You say you want manufacturing brought back home, you decry the power of "for profit, at all costs") corporations, unnecessary international shipping of goods, the constitution being "shredded," etc., but your solution is to get "big government" out of the picture?   How are we, the people, to control the excesses and abuses of those who are abusing the law, commerce, manufacturing, etc., except by way of our government officials (which, except for the Federal judges, we elect and can remove from office)?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:03 PM

Mexicans have been crossing the borders (illegally) for years.

It seems to me this became an issue when the violence started .... and that is directly aligned with the big $money$ to be made with drug smuggling ... when the general populace of the U.S. developed a taste for illegal drugs .... demand grew and so did the profits to be made in importing of drugs, and with those profits came violence.

I say the violence in marketing drugs is the real issue, not illegal immigrants.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:22 PM

I think that's a huge contributor to the problem, Bill.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: pdq
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:46 PM

Another item that people don't see coming is the death of the Middle Class.

Al Gore just bought a mansion in Montecito (CA, near Santa Barbara) for over 8 million dollars.

He will be neighbor to Barbara Streisand, Barbara Walters, and to countless other rich "celebrities" and the elite.

California is begining to look like much of the world, including India, Arab oil-rich states, and much of established Europe. Mexico also has an "elite" minority who own almost everything and the "peons" who do all the gunt labor and own almost nothing.

I wonder how much Al Gore will pay the Mexicans who mow his nice lawn?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:52 PM

could you imagine having Barbara Streisand and BaBa Walters as neighbors?

Good grief ... you'd think Al Gore would have more sense than that.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: pdq
Date: 04 May 10 - 02:13 PM

Instead, perhaps I should have mentioned that Montecito is home to Oprah Winfrey, Rob Lowe, Avril Lavigne and several Hiltons.

Al Gore's little heart is all a'twitter. He has finally "arrived".

Subject: RE: BS: 'Your papers, please' - for US citizens?
From: Genie
Date: 04 May 10 - 02:34 PM

Is Gore's "mansion" just a private residence? Or does it perhaps also contain offices (as Bill Gates's Redmond, WA "mansion" does)?
I agree it sounds bad (though a $1 million house in some places in California would be be a $200 house in other locations), but I'd need more details.

E.g., how much of that $8 million price tag was for things like state-of-the-art solar panels and weatherization, maybe a rooftop garden, etc.?   

And what makes you think Gore needs or wants to hire low-wage laborers to mow the lawn?

(Not sure what this has to do with the Arizona law or the issue of a national ID card, anyway.)