Arizona's anti-imigration law...

UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)

Well-Known Member
Maybe I should hide my ethnicity, then I'd be fine in AZ.

I was being serious. It is so easy for those not affected by this on a daily basis, myself included, to say that they would have no problem showing their ID even though they were simply minding their own business and the only reason for the request is the color of their skin or their non-Anglo appearance.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
I was being serious. It is so easy for those not affected by this on a daily basis, myself included, to say that they would have no problem showing their ID even though they were simply minding their own business and the only reason for the request is the color of their skin or their non-Anglo appearance.
I was being serious as well as to exemplify the ridiculousness of the enforcement and what I consider to be inherent flaw in the law. I can't hide my ethnicity, but it would be a determinent in asking for ID.
 

tieguy

Banned
Let me expand on my answer. I've pretty sat back and watched with the exception of a few one liners here and there. The liberals continue to sell racial profiling in arizona as if arizona was representative of the jim crow/ george wallace south.

in fact Arizona is a very diverse state and in todays world realtiy is the police forces represent the diversity of the state.

so when you make the racial profiling arguement what you're really saying is that a hispanic police officer will engage in discriminatory pracitices against a hispanic person.

anyone else laughing at this arguement besides me?
 

KingofBrown

Well-Known Member
I’m not confused, but it’s clear you’re the one confused. I wouldn’t say anarchy currently exists in Arizona, I would say some police irregularities (like the destroying of official documents, etc.), but I wouldn’t be so radical to say there’s an anarchy in Arizona. Just because Brewer is incompetent, that doesn’t mean there’s anarchy in Arizona. I’m with you that police should be allowed to do their jobs, but the problem is not that. The problem is that it seems that some top officers have disregarded the real issues. As I’ve said it before, and I have explained this, SB1070 is not fighting any of the real felons, or the serious crimes. Instead, it’s obstructing this type of enforcement. And I don’t think you believe that SB1070 will help prevent or fight the crime you described above, do you?
So that’s why you have these radical views. If you have had that experience, now I would understand your hatred towards a certain group of people; I understand it in some way but I don’t support it. I guess the only people that can do that type of crimes are illegal immigrants. Do you have any official facts to say that rapes and those types of crimes are only or mostly committed by illegal aliens? I don’t think you do. And if someone happens to have that experience at first hand from a Muslim or a ******, I wouldn’t either support his/her hatred towards all Muslims or all ******* if those would be his/her feelings. Your views are getting more and more speculative and radical each time.


you're clearly confused. anarchy currently exists in arizona. Police should be allowed to do their job. What you realistically need is for a few drug crazed illegals to break into your house cut your throat and rape your wife before you fully understand this point. Until that happens you'll keep lighting up one bong after another while you chase frivolous semantics of law.
 

KingofBrown

Well-Known Member
How’s that for radical? The way you have stated it, it is extremely radical, indeed. Not even, listen, not even Tom Tancredo thinks like that. But, you’re free to have those radical views, or any other type of views. Our Founding Fathers have protected you in the Constitution to have Freedom of Expression, but watch out don’t go too radical.
I invite you to read the article I placed. If you finish reading it, you’ll find it has a lot to do with illegal immigrants, too. As I’ve said it before, it doesn’t matter if it bothers or bothers you not. We can’t break our amendments just because some people feel they’re going to solve a problem by doing so, or just because they feel it won’t affect them or they’re OK with that. Because in doing so you’ll cause more challenging problems.
Here’s an example: May be an atheist would say he/she is OK if they take away the part of the 1st Amendment where it says “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” After all he/she has no religion. But, I guess we don’t care if he/she is or not OK with that, right? Well, at least I wouldn’t care if that individual feels OK with that perception. If you want to find several examples for your radical view, just take a look at the site I have provided.

Were the Founding Fathers criminals trying to protect themselves when they inserted the 4th and 5th amendments into the Bill of Rights? After all, nobody who hasn't done anything wrong needs to worry about being searched or being forced to testify against himself. Over the years, Americans have become accustomed to showing ID in any number of circumstances. Few have asked the question, 'Why?'

http://www.papersplease.org/id.html


you're right my view is extremely radical. I will willingly produce my ID anytime requested because I have nothing to hide. Were the Founding Fathers criminals trying to protect themselves when they inserted the 4th and 5th amendments into the Bill of Rights? how's that for radical?
 

KingofBrown

Well-Known Member
I am laughing on this (your) argument. Where are your getting your Census facts? From FAIR? LMAO. Why don't you visit official sites like census.gov or at least Wikipedia?

Arizona is what 80 percent hispanic? I don't think the white minority has to wourry about racial profiling.

Let me expand on my answer. I've pretty sat back and watched with the exception of a few one liners here and there. The liberals continue to sell racial profiling in arizona as if arizona was representative of the jim crow/ george wallace south.

in fact Arizona is a very diverse state and in todays world realtiy is the police forces represent the diversity of the state.

so when you make the racial profiling arguement what you're really saying is that a hispanic police officer will engage in discriminatory pracitices against a hispanic person. I think your argument is already bump, but it seems you have never heard of people like Anna Gaines.

anyone else laughing at this arguement besides me?
 

Lue C Fur

Evil member
I was being serious. It is so easy for those not affected by this on a daily basis, myself included, to say that they would have no problem showing their ID even though they were simply minding their own business and the only reason for the request is the color of their skin or their non-Anglo appearance.

That would not happen...but the left wants everyone to believe that. Show me where it says that in the AZ law. This has been beat to death and i posted in the original link to this thread the AZ law....you dont get asked for your ID because of the color of your skin. Please show me where this says that in the AZ law.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
That would not happen...but the left wants everyone to believe that. Show me where it says that in the AZ law. This has been beat to death and i posted in the original link to this thread the AZ law....you dont get asked for your ID because of the color of your skin. Please show me where this says that in the AZ law.
Because it happens in the enforcement of other laws and don't pretend it doesn't. There doesn't have to be evidence a crime for law enforcement to ask for ID but as many have pointed out being an illegal in this country is, well, a crime. Therefore, someone acting "suspicious" (you tell me what that means) gives law enforcement the right to basically go fishing. Hell, the right has been defending the use of racial profiling for decades, and now you are going to tell me that with such a relaxed law they are going to use restraint? I don't see that happening.
 
What I want to see is the people that are supposed to be securing the border out there doing just that. If the federal government, who's job is doing that, would secure the border people like these would be home watching TV and drinking beer.

No need for profiling when you see them walking across the boarder or climbing over the fence.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Raise taxes institute the draft and deploy 100,000 service men and women on the border. I don't know how to make it any simpler and we may as well stop acting like it's gonna be cheap and easy.
 
Raise taxes institute the draft and deploy 100,000 service men and women on the border. I don't know how to make it any simpler and we may as well stop acting like it's gonna be cheap and easy.
Taxes are going to increase anyway and for much more frivolous reasons. While boots on the ground will certainly help, that's not the total answer. Another help would be for the enforcement of our immigration laws already on the books. I don't think anyone has suggested that this is a simple or inexpensive fix.
Tell me bbsam, would rather our tax dollars go to pay for making our citizens safer or for supporting people that are not supposed to be here?
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Taxes are going to increase anyway and for much more frivolous reasons. While boots on the ground will certainly help, that's not the total answer. Another help would be for the enforcement of our immigration laws already on the books. I don't think anyone has suggested that this is a simple or inexpensive fix.
Tell me bbsam, would rather our tax dollars go to pay for making our citizens safer or for supporting people that are not supposed to be here?
I'm trying to meet people half way. I'm agreeing, secure the borders first. Just pay for it up front.
 

tieguy

Banned
Not crazy about him but he is less of a threat to me then those mexican bandito's sneaking across the border. Eliminate the lawless border problem and this guy goes back to his klan meetings.
 
I'm trying to meet people half way. I'm agreeing, secure the borders first. Just pay for it up front.
I don't disagree with that. Not sure the federal government pays for anything up front, but I get your idea. It's a fact that every dollar the gov spends comes from the tax payers and everything the do cost money. My concern is, what programs do we really need and which ones are things that people should be doing for themselves. Securing the USA is the responsibility of the federal government, providing an abortions not. (please, no side argument on this thread, there's been too many already)
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
And I understand your point, but it is another discussion. This is not a situation to be resolved by the elimination of waste fraud and abuse. It is national security and not to be done "on the cheap".
 
Top