Arizona's anti-imigration law...

[KingofBrown]

It's clear that you will not take anyone's word on what "reasonable suspicion" is or how it is determined, so I see no logic in wasting time trying to explain it to you. May be you don’t have a solid argument to explain how to suspect someone is an illegal immigrant without racial profiling.
You've got your mind made up that anyone supporting this law is neo-nazi or other brands of white supremacists, which is so far from the truth it isn't even funny.


Please point to me where I have call you a white supremacist, or if I have insinuated such a thing to you or others because you are in favor of the law. Please don’t accredit me with thoughts or ideas that I have never expressed. Most people who support the law haven’t even read it, or don’t even know what it is all about (it’s in the polls you like to read); they’re told it fights illegal-immigration, but that’s all they know. They don’t know who wrote it, or who’s taking credit for it; what it says, all the corrections it has had, the groups behind it, the civil rights problems in Arizona; etc.

The funny thing to me in whole is the law, and how people disguise the content of it with statements like: “If you discriminate illegals is not racism, it’s nationalism.” “They’re just asking for an ID.” “There’s already a Federal Law.” “We’re just enforcing existing Federal laws.” “Have you read the law?” “Most people are in favor of the law.” “Reasonable Suspicion would be considered if you don’t show an ID.” “They’re just criminals, and that’s it.” It’s funny to me when people try to mix illegal immigrants with drug smugglers, rapists, killers, thieves, terrorists, vandals, etc. As if we had 12 to 15 million felons, not 12 to 15 million illegal immigrants, and as if that sounds logical.

 

[KingofBrown]

A good place to start profiling may be the border:

if you see someone hiding in the bushs and he aint deer hunting then he may be an illegal. Is this a public offense for you?

see someone swimming the colorado river with all their clothes on they may be illegal.

Hiding inside false walls in a trailer with 50 others , they may be illegal.

pull ya over for a traffic stop and you can't produce a license, Id or speak english you may be an illegal. Does not speaking English makes someone a suspect? …Please. Does the accent matter to you, too?
“Simple justice requires that public funds, to which all taxpayers of all races [colors, and national origins] contribute, not be spent in any fashion which encourages, entrenches, subsidizes or results in racial[color or national origin] discrimination. John friend. Kennedy. Make a further reading to what Sir. John friend. Kennedy was referring to. And please don’t say illegals don’t contribute with taxes, because if it was to be true, there are citizens that don’t speak English, either. If officers would consider language like you say, you support my statements that the law is racist, even without looking at the color of the skin.

This law won't hurt any law abiding citizens like myself that carry and willingly produce Id when asked by law enforcement. I don't in any way consider it a violation of my rights to prove I belong in this country. It’s nice, but it doesn’t matter what bothers or what bothers you not; what matters are the rights that are written, that cover the majority and the minorities as well. And those rights are still there for when you finally consider a discomfort.

to me its a membership card that allows me access to the greatest country in the world.


LOL. In any of those situations… Then why the heck do we need such a law!? If you see someone like that, you don’t need to write such a controversial and absurd law. Officers have always been allowed to stop and detain people, and call ICE in those situations. But, now you’re hurting the rights of the people established in our nation. It’d be very different and interesting if everyone was asked to prove their status wouldn’t it? Plain and simple, directly. With no differences. “Show me your papers.”

 

[KingofBrown]

Yes, it has. But, some people here don’t know the difference between drug smugglers (and other type of felonies) and illegal immigrants. Bud Hart “Biggun” explains it in one simple sentence.


I don't know if this point has been discussed in the 80 threads on this topic.

http://www.personalliberty.com/liber...ona-to-mexico/

 

[bbsam]

Here's the problem with reasonable suspicion: Twenty years ago my buddy and I were in college. Saturday morning he gets on the bus takes a ride for 20 minutes to a baseball card shop. Gets there, finds out they're closed. Waits for the next bus, get's on and 5 minutes later he's pulled off hand-cuffed and questioned. Was there a murder, a break-in, arson? No. The neighbor saw a black guy looking in the store window.

So what's the problem with reasonable suspicion? It's not reasonable. So am I to believe this is simply an isolated incident? I don't.

 

[trplnkl]

Here's the problem with reasonable suspicion: Twenty years ago my buddy and I were in college. Saturday morning he gets on the bus takes a ride for 20 minutes to a baseball card shop. Gets there, finds out they're closed. Waits for the next bus, get's on and 5 minutes later he's pulled off hand-cuffed and questioned. Was there a murder, a break-in, arson? No. The neighbor saw a black guy looking in the store window.

So what's the problem with reasonable suspicion? It's not reasonable. So am I to believe this is simply an isolated incident? I don't.

Plain and simple, your friend was treated wrongly and illegally. That was unreasonable suspicion.

 

[bbsam]

Plain and simple, your friend was treated wrongly and illegally. That was unreasonable suspicion.

Plain, simple, and unfortunate fact is that it happens alot.

 

[trplnkl]

No one has said all illegal immigrants are drug smugglers, human traffickers, murderers or any other type of felons. Many of the are though.

There is one undeniable fact, illegal immigrants are still breaking the federal law. That fact makes them criminals.

The only thing wrong with the phrase ,“If you discriminate illegals is not racism, it’s nationalism.” is the term discriminate.
Arresting and deporting illegals from Mexico is not racism.

 

[trplnkl]

Plain, simple, and unfortunate fact is that it happens alot.

Yes, it is unfortunate.

 

[moreluck]

One of Obama's appointees, I forget her name, has a commercial on T.V. for anyone who feels they aren't getting paid fully on their job.....it said illegals too, no names and no questions asked, just call.

So our gov't has a person watching and making sure the illegals are getting paid correctly....WHAT A COUNTRY !!

 

[Babagounj]

Mexico Sues Arizona over Law (UPDATED)


A REAL American President would tell Mexico to butt out of the affairs of the United States.
A REAL American President would secure our borders without any pre-conditions including amnesty for ILLEGALS.
A REAL American President would stand with Arizona.
A REAL American President would stand with America.
Anybody know where we can find a REAL American President?

One Old Veteran​

 

[KingofBrown]

Exactly, “Reasonable Suspicion” and “Probable Cause” are very broad terms to deal with. In addition you add that to a controversial and vague law that started with (not solely) considering race, color or national origin, for detaining illegal immigrants. In a state with many civil rights charges. And the main proponents having links with white supremacy groups. And nobody can mention the word racism because you’re using the “race card.” What a hoax.

Here's the problem with reasonable suspicion: Twenty years ago my buddy and I were in college. Saturday morning he gets on the bus takes a ride for 20 minutes to a baseball card shop. Gets there, finds out they're closed. Waits for the next bus, get's on and 5 minutes later he's pulled off hand-cuffed and questioned. Was there a murder, a break-in, arson? No. The neighbor saw a black guy looking in the store window.

So what's the problem with reasonable suspicion? It's not reasonable. So am I to believe this is simply an isolated incident? I don't.

 

[trplnkl]

Exactly, “Reasonable Suspicion” and “Probable Cause” are very broad terms to deal with. In addition you add that to a controversial and vague law that started with (not solely) considering race, color or national origin, for detaining illegal immigrants. In a state with many civil rights charges. And the main proponents having links with white supremacy groups. And nobody can mention the word racism because you’re using the “race card.” What a hoax.

Reasonable suspicion and probable cause are used in may laws...want to through all those laws out as well? May as well just fire all police officers and let the criminals run the place.

 

[moreluck]

Apparently he has a Plan B..........

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...tion-plan-unilaterally-grant-blanket-amnesty/

 

[KingofBrown]

If you wanna' go through all those laws please mention any that... In addition you add that to a controversial and vague law that started with (not solely) considering race, color or national origin, for detaining illegal immigrants. In a state with many civil rights charges. And the main proponents having links with white supremacy groups.
Good luck on finding any that did go through. Remember, it has to be a current one.

Reasonable suspicion and probable cause are used in may laws...want to through all those laws out as well? May as well just fire all police officers and let the criminals run the place.

 

[KingofBrown]

Hey, is this where you get your statistics of the criminals that are here illegaly in jail? 1:45 Damn myths, and 1:15. "If we reported it, it's a fact." LOL.

Smart is believing half of what you hear; brilliant is knowing which half to believe. Nice quote, isn't it?

 

[trplnkl]

Apparently he has a Plan B..........

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...tion-plan-unilaterally-grant-blanket-amnesty/

If there is anything to this and appears to be coming to fruition, the states sharing a boarder with Mexico, better dig in.

 

[trplnkl]

If you wanna' go through all those laws please mention any that... In addition you add that to a controversial and vague law that started with (not solely) considering race, color or national origin, for detaining illegal immigrants. In a state with many civil rights charges. And the main proponents having links with white supremacy groups.
Good luck on finding any that did go through. Remember, it has to be a current one.

Just because you don't understand the law doesn't make it vague...LOL.
You keep harping on the word "solely" like it is in the final draft of the law, :hint: it isn't. The controversy is mainly from Mexican illegals and their co-harts because it will have an effect of requiring illegal aliens (criminals) go back to Mexico....where...they...belong. This law also will make illegal aliens go to their respective home lands as well.

I am a little bothered by the attachment with FAIR and that other group (can't recall the name at this moment). My support of this law is based on what the law says, not who said it. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while.

 

[trplnkl]

[video=youtube;IqKvSxmUoVQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqKvSxmUoVQ&feature=player_embedded#![/video]

Hey, is this where you get your statistics of the criminals that are here illegaly in jail? 1:45 Damn myths, and 1:15. "If we reported it, it's a fact." LOL.

Smart is believing half of what you hear; brilliant is knowing which half to believe. Nice quote, isn't it?

If you question is pointed at me, No..I don't get any info from Lou Dobbs. Watching the video you posted, I watch 2-3 times the amount of time I have ever listened to Dobbs.
Dobbs is a nutcase.

 

[BrownPR215]

Food for thought!

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) has offered his expertise to Arizona law enforcement, who have spoken out strongly against the state’s new profiling law, SB 1070, because of the way that it inhibits community policing and fighting real crime.

Rep. King's advice to worried police has been simple: “just check their shoes!”

Rep. King also made the absurd statement Monday that law enforcement could spot those here illegally by either noting indicators such as, “What kind of clothes people wear…what kind of shoes people wear, what kind of accent they have, the type of grooming that they might have…” or:

“…just a sixth sense...”

 

[KingofBrown]

that started with (not solely) considering race… And my question from the beginning was: Who the heck with an IQ of 20 signs such an absurdity? LOL.

The more fundamental problem with the law is its vague language. It requires law enforcement officials to demand papers from an individual when they have a "reasonable suspicion" that he is an illegal immigrant.
When used in a law-enforcement context, "reasonable suspicion" is always understood to be subjective, but it must be capable of being articulated. In the case of identifying illegal immigrants, the ambiguity of what this "crime" looks like risks including an individual's appearance, which would seem to violate the Constitution's equal protection clause. Such ambiguity is especially dangerous when prescribed to an issue as fraught with emotion as that of illegal immigration. -Sheriff Clarence Dupnik

Just because you don't understand the law doesn't make it vague...LOL.
You keep harping on the word "solely" like it is in the final draft of the law, :hint: it isn't. The controversy is mainly from Mexican illegals and their co-harts because it will have an effect of requiring illegal aliens (criminals) go back to Mexico....where...they...belong. This law also will make illegal aliens go to their respective home lands as well.

I am a little bothered by the attachment with FAIR and that other group (can't recall the name at this moment). My support of this law is based on what the law says, not who said it. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while.