Arizona's anti-imigration law...
- Thread starter Lue C Fur
- Start date
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Links to Obama’s Amnesty Speech Stories
• WASHINGTON TIMES — Obama tries to put Republicans on immigration hot seat
• FOX NEWS — Obama Pushes for ‘National Standard’ on Immigration
• PHOENIX BUSINESS JOURNAL — Arizona immigration law could create patchwork of rules
• MSNBC — Obama aims to jump-start immigration reform
• CNN — Obama seeks middle ground on immigration reform
• THE HILL — Obama pans ‘ill-conceived’ laws on immigration while calling for reform
• LA TIMES — President Obama calls for immigration reform, path to legalization for illegals
• NY TIMES — Calling Immigration System ‘Broken,’ Obama Pushes Bill
• CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR — The gaps are as wide as the border
• HERITAGE FOUNDATION— Obama’s Immigration Speech Showcases Plans for Amnesty
• FORBES — Obama Calls For Immigration Reform, But It Won’t Happen This Year
• IRISH CENTRAL — Obama’s speech calls for an overhaul of immigration
• UPI — Obama calls for immigration reform
• NY POST — Obama: Being American is ‘not a matter of blood or birth’
• CBS NEWS — Obama Blasts GOP, Calls Ariz. Law “Ill Conceived”
• ARIZONA STAR — AZ politicians split on Obama immigration speech
• ABC NEWS — Obama Calls for ‘Clear National Standard
• REUTERS — Obama pushes immigration reform amid weak support
• USA TODAY — Immigration plan ‘cannot pass without Republican votes’
• WASHINGTON TIMES — Obama tries to put Republicans on immigration hot seat
• FOX NEWS — Obama Pushes for ‘National Standard’ on Immigration
• PHOENIX BUSINESS JOURNAL — Arizona immigration law could create patchwork of rules
• MSNBC — Obama aims to jump-start immigration reform
• CNN — Obama seeks middle ground on immigration reform
• THE HILL — Obama pans ‘ill-conceived’ laws on immigration while calling for reform
• LA TIMES — President Obama calls for immigration reform, path to legalization for illegals
• NY TIMES — Calling Immigration System ‘Broken,’ Obama Pushes Bill
• CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR — The gaps are as wide as the border
• HERITAGE FOUNDATION— Obama’s Immigration Speech Showcases Plans for Amnesty
• FORBES — Obama Calls For Immigration Reform, But It Won’t Happen This Year
• IRISH CENTRAL — Obama’s speech calls for an overhaul of immigration
• UPI — Obama calls for immigration reform
• NY POST — Obama: Being American is ‘not a matter of blood or birth’
• CBS NEWS — Obama Blasts GOP, Calls Ariz. Law “Ill Conceived”
• ARIZONA STAR — AZ politicians split on Obama immigration speech
• ABC NEWS — Obama Calls for ‘Clear National Standard
• REUTERS — Obama pushes immigration reform amid weak support
• USA TODAY — Immigration plan ‘cannot pass without Republican votes’
Babagounj
Strength through joy
HERMOSILLO, Mexico (AP) — A massive gun battle between rival drug and migrant trafficking gangs near the U.S. border Thursday left 21 people dead and at least six others wounded, prosecutors said.
The fire fight occurred in a sparsely populated area about 12 miles (20 kilometers) from the Arizona border, near the city of Nogales, that is considered a prime corridor for immigrant and drug smuggling.
The Sonora state Attorney General’s Office said in a statement that nine people were captured by police at the scene of the shootings, six of whom had been wounded in the confrontation. Eight vehicles and seven weapons were also seized.
All of the victims were believed to be members of the gangs.
The fire fight occurred in a sparsely populated area about 12 miles (20 kilometers) from the Arizona border, near the city of Nogales, that is considered a prime corridor for immigrant and drug smuggling.
The Sonora state Attorney General’s Office said in a statement that nine people were captured by police at the scene of the shootings, six of whom had been wounded in the confrontation. Eight vehicles and seven weapons were also seized.
All of the victims were believed to be members of the gangs.
trplnkl
555
Babagounj
Strength through joy
According to the El Nuevo Diario newspaper an immigration bill similar to Arizona’s 1070 is being reviewed for final approval by the National Assembly in Managua, Nicaragua. The proposed law has sparked controversy and is seen by many as “drastic.” The article from El Nuevo Diario, claims the new immigration law would be dehumanizing leading to the opposition’s argument that illegal migrants would be treated “unjustly” in the poor Central American country.
If the Nicaragua Immigration Law was approved in its current form, Articles 153 to 158 would require every hotel, inn and motel, as well as all modes of public transportation operators would be required to ask for identification from those who request service or they could face prosecution and/or pay a fine.
If the Nicaragua Immigration Law was approved in its current form, Articles 153 to 158 would require every hotel, inn and motel, as well as all modes of public transportation operators would be required to ask for identification from those who request service or they could face prosecution and/or pay a fine.
trplnkl
555
No, it isn't articulated in the text of the law. Reasonable Suspicion is a term commonly used in law enforcement and has somewhat binding meaning, yet is subjective on the officer's opinion, with stipulations. This is nothing new.
The real question is what criteria is to be used to determine "RS" and how will the LEO's be trained in aspects to this law. One private agency ( sorry I do not remember the name) that formulates education and training programs for law enforcement is working on a program specifically for SB 1070. Exactly what it will entail is not known at this time.
I don't know what training Az LEOs go through, but I am sure all the agencies in Az have stringent programs. I do know that in our little sleepy city here, we have a Police Academy that trains all officers. I'm sure the training on "RS" is a very important part of the curriculum.
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/reasonable_suspicion
UPS Lifer
Well-Known Member
The author of 1070 is in the process of writing a bill to restrict citizenship to anyone born without one parent being a legal citizen.
Anchor babies are next!!!! This will really stir the pot and I am not sure they can word it in such a way to make it viable but it will bring heavy attention to a major problem.
I am so proud to live in a state that is willing to take a stand on the issues and not cower to the donkeys in Federal Government. The donkey-in-chief is good at making campaign type speeches but his #1 quality is polarizing America. It only took him a year to beat out the peanut farmer as the worst president of all time! Nice job BO!
Anchor babies are next!!!! This will really stir the pot and I am not sure they can word it in such a way to make it viable but it will bring heavy attention to a major problem.
I am so proud to live in a state that is willing to take a stand on the issues and not cower to the donkeys in Federal Government. The donkey-in-chief is good at making campaign type speeches but his #1 quality is polarizing America. It only took him a year to beat out the peanut farmer as the worst president of all time! Nice job BO!
trplnkl
555
It's pretty clear that a bill like that is out of the scope of State's rights. I applaud Az in taking the bull by the horns (so to speak) on the illegal alien problem there. Texas has problems too, but nothing on the scale of Az. Although El Paso is getting pretty rough.
KingofBrown
Well-Known Member
No, it isn't articulated in the text of the law. Reasonable Suspicion is a term commonly used in law enforcement and has somewhat binding meaning, yet is subjective on the officer's opinion, with stipulations. This is nothing new. What is new is that the term “Reasonable Suspicion” is used to determine the illegal status of a person.
The real question is what criteria is to be used to determine "RS" and how will the LEO's be trained in aspects to this law. One private agency ( sorry I do not remember the name) that formulates education and training programs for law enforcement is working on a program specifically for SB 1070. Exactly what it will entail is not known at this time.
I don't know what training Az LEOs go through, but I am sure all the agencies in Az have stringent programs. I do know that in our little sleepy city here, we have a Police Academy that trains all officers. I'm sure the training on "RS" is a very important part of the curriculum.
Wow, I never thought you could agree with me that a law that targets people doesn’t articulate the term “Reasonable Suspicion.” Then, you should now agree that it is a vague and ambiguous law. Cowboy, the training of an officer doesn’t matter much in a court if the law doesn’t articulate its meanings. Police officers have been trained for Reasonable Suspicion way before this law was written. I know that you trust in our officers, and believe they do their jobs correctly, and all that. But, what matters is what is written, not how you guess things will be done. Now, that you’re talking about the training and you seem to know much about it, can you tell me how the “Posse” are trained or how they will be trained. Or if the “Posse” will continue to target illegals at all?
A standard used in criminal procedure, more relaxed than probable cause, that can justify less-intrusive searches. For example, a reasonable suspicion justifies a stop and frisk, but not a full search. A reasonable suspicion exists when a reasonable person under the circumstances, would, based upon specific and articulable facts, suspect that a crime has been committed.
Now, with this definition, I’ll ask you once again, how you think this “Reasonable Suspicion” applies to “Reasonable Suspicion” to believe the individual is an illegal immigrant? As you’ve said the meaning is “somewhat” binding, and yet it is subjective on the officer’s opinion. Then, how in the world can you use it to determine the illegal status of a person? “Because the person didn’t show an ID.” “Because of the training of the officer” Don’t you think that a law that targets people must articulate its terms? Terms that are SUBJECTIVE like “Reasonable Suspicion” allow the officer to racial profile when determining the illegal status of a person.
13-2412.Refusing to provide truthful name when lawfully detained; classification
A. It is unlawful for a person, after being advised that the person's refusal to answer is unlawful, to fail or refuse to state the person's true full name on request of a peace officer who has lawfully detained the person based on reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime. A person detained under this section shall state the person's true full name, but shall not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of a peace officer.
B. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.
The real question is what criteria is to be used to determine "RS" and how will the LEO's be trained in aspects to this law. One private agency ( sorry I do not remember the name) that formulates education and training programs for law enforcement is working on a program specifically for SB 1070. Exactly what it will entail is not known at this time.
I don't know what training Az LEOs go through, but I am sure all the agencies in Az have stringent programs. I do know that in our little sleepy city here, we have a Police Academy that trains all officers. I'm sure the training on "RS" is a very important part of the curriculum.
Wow, I never thought you could agree with me that a law that targets people doesn’t articulate the term “Reasonable Suspicion.” Then, you should now agree that it is a vague and ambiguous law. Cowboy, the training of an officer doesn’t matter much in a court if the law doesn’t articulate its meanings. Police officers have been trained for Reasonable Suspicion way before this law was written. I know that you trust in our officers, and believe they do their jobs correctly, and all that. But, what matters is what is written, not how you guess things will be done. Now, that you’re talking about the training and you seem to know much about it, can you tell me how the “Posse” are trained or how they will be trained. Or if the “Posse” will continue to target illegals at all?
A standard used in criminal procedure, more relaxed than probable cause, that can justify less-intrusive searches. For example, a reasonable suspicion justifies a stop and frisk, but not a full search. A reasonable suspicion exists when a reasonable person under the circumstances, would, based upon specific and articulable facts, suspect that a crime has been committed.
Now, with this definition, I’ll ask you once again, how you think this “Reasonable Suspicion” applies to “Reasonable Suspicion” to believe the individual is an illegal immigrant? As you’ve said the meaning is “somewhat” binding, and yet it is subjective on the officer’s opinion. Then, how in the world can you use it to determine the illegal status of a person? “Because the person didn’t show an ID.” “Because of the training of the officer” Don’t you think that a law that targets people must articulate its terms? Terms that are SUBJECTIVE like “Reasonable Suspicion” allow the officer to racial profile when determining the illegal status of a person.
13-2412.Refusing to provide truthful name when lawfully detained; classification
A. It is unlawful for a person, after being advised that the person's refusal to answer is unlawful, to fail or refuse to state the person's true full name on request of a peace officer who has lawfully detained the person based on reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime. A person detained under this section shall state the person's true full name, but shall not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of a peace officer.
B. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.
KingofBrown
Well-Known Member
I believe this is a bad move by Rusell Pearce. If they'd played cleverly they shouldn't mention that bill yet. As you say "This will really stir the pot and I am not sure they can word it in such a way to make it viable but it will bring heavy attention to a major problem." So I think he's just drowning himself (I'm not saying politically, because I don't know). First, we need to try to solve the immigration problem in a smart way, and then the anchor babies’ problem will be obsolete. So I think that passing irrelevant bills to bring the attention to a problem or to call the attention of the Federal Government is not worth it. It is not worth it the resources neither the time of our so called "inefficient" Federal Government, when it can focus its attention and time to try to solve from the roots of the problems. I'm sure there are many other ways to bring the attention to problems, without passing irrelevant bills. But if it's for political moves, then that's another story. That's just my simple opinion.
About the presidents rank:
http://politics.usnews.com/news/art...ama-15th-best-president-bush-among-worst.html
"Obviously, there's not great validity to it since they've only been in office for one year," says the survey's co-director and statistician Douglas Lonnstrom. "But it's a benchmark for us to see how they move."
President tend to rank around 20th while they are in office, and Obama is no exception. His actions over the next few years will decide if he stays roughly the same like Reagan—who moved from 16th to 20th, 22nd, 16th again, and finally to 18th this year—or like Bush, who fell a dramatic 16 slots in the first poll after he left office, from 23rd to 39th.
About the presidents rank:
http://politics.usnews.com/news/art...ama-15th-best-president-bush-among-worst.html
"Obviously, there's not great validity to it since they've only been in office for one year," says the survey's co-director and statistician Douglas Lonnstrom. "But it's a benchmark for us to see how they move."
President tend to rank around 20th while they are in office, and Obama is no exception. His actions over the next few years will decide if he stays roughly the same like Reagan—who moved from 16th to 20th, 22nd, 16th again, and finally to 18th this year—or like Bush, who fell a dramatic 16 slots in the first poll after he left office, from 23rd to 39th.
KingofBrown
Well-Known Member
Another Aspect. This one is one of the most interesting, and the most ambiguous I think. I still wonder how people insist that this mirrors current Federal Law.
13-3883. Arrest by officer without warrant
A. A peace officer may, without a warrant, may arrest a person if he the officer has probable cause to believe The person to be arrested has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States.
“Probable Cause” Wow. Now an officer will have “probable cause” to arrest a person if he/she (the officer) thinks the person has committed ANY public offense that makes the person removable from the United States. So if the officer has probable cause (a reasonable BELIEF that a person has committed a crime) to think that the person is an illegal immigrant (which is a public offense that makes him/her removable from the US) the officer can arrest that person without a warrant. First, the officer has “reasonable suspicion” because the person didn’t show an ID, and if he/she didn’t show an ID that makes the officer to have probable cause to believe the person detained is an illegal immigrant (which is a public offense). So the officer can search the person and arrest him/her. It is that ambiguous that the officer can search the house of the supposed illegal even if the officer doesn’t have a warrant. WOW.
13-3883. Arrest by officer without warrant
A. A peace officer may, without a warrant, may arrest a person if he the officer has probable cause to believe The person to be arrested has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States.
“Probable Cause” Wow. Now an officer will have “probable cause” to arrest a person if he/she (the officer) thinks the person has committed ANY public offense that makes the person removable from the United States. So if the officer has probable cause (a reasonable BELIEF that a person has committed a crime) to think that the person is an illegal immigrant (which is a public offense that makes him/her removable from the US) the officer can arrest that person without a warrant. First, the officer has “reasonable suspicion” because the person didn’t show an ID, and if he/she didn’t show an ID that makes the officer to have probable cause to believe the person detained is an illegal immigrant (which is a public offense). So the officer can search the person and arrest him/her. It is that ambiguous that the officer can search the house of the supposed illegal even if the officer doesn’t have a warrant. WOW.
klein
Für Meno :)
Yes , Lucy, I just seen a report on the news yesterday. Open Sisammee was under Bush !!!
The number of illegal immigrants living in the United States has declined for the second year in a row, according to a recent Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report. The economic downturn appears to be the reason for the drop.
The report, prepared by DHS's Office of Immigration Statistics, estimated the number of “unauthorized immigrants” in the United States as of January, 2009. The report concluded that there were 10.7 million illegal immigrants in the United States, down from 11.6 million in 2008
The number of illegal immigrants living in the United States has declined for the second year in a row, according to a recent Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report. The economic downturn appears to be the reason for the drop.
The report, prepared by DHS's Office of Immigration Statistics, estimated the number of “unauthorized immigrants” in the United States as of January, 2009. The report concluded that there were 10.7 million illegal immigrants in the United States, down from 11.6 million in 2008
UPS Lifer
Well-Known Member
I agree with you. It is currently out of the scope of State's rights.
BO is missing the boat on this volatile issue. He might secure his party's future if he were to listen to the American people and secure the border first - send the troops to the Southern border.
Once the border is secure, BO would have the majority of Americans looking to come up with a reasonable and viable solution to immigration. I am not opposed to a realistic and common sense approach to a path for citizenship but the border has to be secure first.
One of my biggest requirements would be to make sure these immigrants assimilate into OUR (USA) culture and language. No citizenship without a job, residence, read & write the language. Those who are on the list legally get first opportunity for citizenship. Right now we are hemorrhaging from the illegals crossing the border once it is closed to a trickle we will be able to make adjustments for the good people who are here or want to be here.
klein
Für Meno :)
Where do you get your info from ?
He has more then double the "boots" then Bush had, on the southern border. It is almost at a still stand.
tieguy
Banned
I was drinking some likor one night when I came to a stand still in a still stand.
Lue C Fur
Evil member
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Voter Referendum on AZ Law Fails
No filing on initiative drive targeting Ariz. law
PHOENIX (AP) - An initiative drive to put Arizona’s new immigration law on the November ballot fizzled.
Thursday was the deadline to file the required nearly 154,000 voter signatures, but the Secretary of State’s office says the day passed without a filing.
The organizers of the “Compassion for all” campaign said in an Internet posting that they didn’t collect enough signatures and had closed out the campaign. They said they’d remain active in other activities to help the Hispanic community.
The proposed ballot measure would have repealed the law taking effect July 29 and imposed a 3-year moratorium to bar the Legislature from enacting similar legislation.
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
No filing on initiative drive targeting Ariz. law
PHOENIX (AP) - An initiative drive to put Arizona’s new immigration law on the November ballot fizzled.
Thursday was the deadline to file the required nearly 154,000 voter signatures, but the Secretary of State’s office says the day passed without a filing.
The organizers of the “Compassion for all” campaign said in an Internet posting that they didn’t collect enough signatures and had closed out the campaign. They said they’d remain active in other activities to help the Hispanic community.
The proposed ballot measure would have repealed the law taking effect July 29 and imposed a 3-year moratorium to bar the Legislature from enacting similar legislation.
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Mexico nabs gang leader in U.S. consulate killing
Suspect behind deadly shooting of American couple in Juarez, police say
MEXICO CITY — A drug gang leader says he ordered the killing of a U.S. consulate worker because she gave visas to a rival gang in the border city of Ciudad Juarez, federal police said Friday.
Jesus Ernesto Chavez, whose arrest was announced on Friday, leads a band of hit men for a street gang tied to the Juarez cartel, said Ramon Pequeno, the head of anti-narcotics for the Federal Police.
Pequeno said Chavez ordered the March 13 attack that killed U.S. consulate employee Lesley Enriquez and her husband as they drove in the violent border city, and he said Chavez told police that Enriquez was targeted because she gave visas to a rival gang.
Suspect behind deadly shooting of American couple in Juarez, police say
MEXICO CITY — A drug gang leader says he ordered the killing of a U.S. consulate worker because she gave visas to a rival gang in the border city of Ciudad Juarez, federal police said Friday.
Jesus Ernesto Chavez, whose arrest was announced on Friday, leads a band of hit men for a street gang tied to the Juarez cartel, said Ramon Pequeno, the head of anti-narcotics for the Federal Police.
Pequeno said Chavez ordered the March 13 attack that killed U.S. consulate employee Lesley Enriquez and her husband as they drove in the violent border city, and he said Chavez told police that Enriquez was targeted because she gave visas to a rival gang.
trplnkl
555
I heard this yesterday, m first thought was, " What the hell were they thinking?". It doesn't show much common sense to drive into Juarez and expect to be able to drive out at this time. Kinda like intentionally walking into a pit of diamondbacks.
