Archive

New Arizona law on immigration is stirring it up

  • Belly35
    State lawmakers and others in Texas, Utah, Georgia, Ohio and Maryland are seizing on Arizona's hard-line approach to illegal immigration, which has the approval of many conservatives who say it is necessary in the absence of adequate federal policies.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20003648-503544.html?tag=stack

    New Mexico or Florida will soon be add to that list ...that would make 8 States ........can we get 25 States


    WOW! What would Obama do if even more states followed Arizona lead ?
  • bigkahuna
    jhay78 wrote:
    Prescott wrote: I am not saying this law is just, but what remedies are better.Arizona's resources are being taxed by the illegal aliens and their children. It has been estimated that there are over 450,000 illegal aliens in Arizona.. What should they do??
    If you're a Republican, you enforce the law.

    If you're a Democrat, you turn those 450,000 into Democratic voters via amnesty, citizenship, and cries of "racial profiling" and "Nazi police state".
    Or you're like me and want them caught and turned right back around. If you become a legalized citizen AND then come over, Awesome.

    I know everyone on here wants something done about illegal immigration. However, this bill is not the way to go. I honestly wonder how many illegal Canadians are in the U.S., and if WA, ID,MT,ND,MN,MI,NY... are doing anything about it.
  • IggyPride00
    Arizona is now making a push to have teachers with heavy accents barred from teaching English.
    Arizona Grades Teachers on Fluency:
    State Pushes School Districts to Reassign Instructors With Heavy Accents or Other Shortcomings in Their English

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703572504575213883276427528.html

    They have also passed new provisions for their ethnic studies classes:
    The new bill would make it illegal for a school district to teach any courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or "advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals."

    The bill stipulates that courses can continue to be taught for Native American pupils in compliance with federal law and does not prohibit English as a second language classes. It also does not prohibit the teaching of the Holocaust or other cases of genocide.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/30/arizona-legislature-passes-banning-ethnic-studies-programs/

    Liberals are spinning completely out of control right now with these changes. If you want some comedy go read some progressive bogs about their take on all of this new stuff as they just can't handle it, you would think the world is ending the way some of them describe the consequences.
  • tk421
    This is what happens when the Federal Government abdicates their responsibility to control and secure the borders. The people in D.C. have no one to blame but themselves. If someone has people trespassing and breaking into their property, and the police and other authorities refuse to do anything about the problem, eventually the homeowner will get fed up and take matters into their own hands. This is what is starting to happen now.
  • jhay78
    tk421 wrote: This is what happens when the Federal Government abdicates their responsibility to control and secure the borders. The people in D.C. have no one to blame but themselves. If someone has people trespassing and breaking into their property, and the police and other authorities refuse to do anything about the problem, eventually the homeowner will get fed up and take matters into their own hands. This is what is starting to happen now.
    Except in the case of Arizona, "taking matters into their own hands" means simply enforcing existing federal law. It's not like they're sending SWAT teams out into the street to gun down anyone who looks Mexican (although if you believe libs then that's right around the corner;)).

    But I get what you're saying though- the federal government could have solved this problem a long time ago.
  • tk421
    jhay78 wrote:
    tk421 wrote: This is what happens when the Federal Government abdicates their responsibility to control and secure the borders. The people in D.C. have no one to blame but themselves. If someone has people trespassing and breaking into their property, and the police and other authorities refuse to do anything about the problem, eventually the homeowner will get fed up and take matters into their own hands. This is what is starting to happen now.
    Except in the case of Arizona, "taking matters into their own hands" means simply enforcing existing federal law. It's not like they're sending SWAT teams out into the street to gun down anyone who looks Mexican (although if you believe libs then that's right around the corner;)).

    But I get what you're saying though- the federal government could have solved this problem a long time ago.
    The way the left is whining, you'd think they were sending out SWAT. Anything that takes away from their potential voter base is not okay with them.
  • CenterBHSFan
    bigkahuna wrote: Or you're like me and want them caught and turned right back around. If you become a legalized citizen AND then come over, Awesome.

    I know everyone on here wants something done about illegal immigration. However, this bill is not the way to go. I honestly wonder how many illegal Canadians are in the U.S., and if WA, ID,MT,ND,MN,MI,NY... are doing anything about it.

    But, isn't this bill the same thing that is on the federal government's books? What's the difference in right or wrong between the fed and the state?
    Wouldn't the states be closer to the problem, and therefore able to deal with it more correctly, than the federal government?
  • bigkahuna
    The federal government says it's okay for law enforcement to walk up and ask anyone to PROVE they are an American Citizen?

    All sarcasm aside, please show me where it says this because I've never seen it say something like that.

    I know the feds have policy in place to find illegals, but I don't think it involves the FBI/CIA randomly searching people because they LOOK ILLEGAL
  • Sykotyk
    How is it constitutional to be stopped by police and asked to prove your citizenship only because 'they don't think you're a citizen'?

    You're innocent until proven guilty. Reasonable suspicion cannot be 'because you look Mexican'. There's no where in this law that Arizona can't just use it as a blanket requirement that everybody must prove at all times they're a citizen and any lack of proof will get you in trouble.

    I love how conservatives wave the constitution around ad nauseum, yet when there's a law that goes along with their belief system.... the constitution conveniently gets tucked away. The ends do not justify the means. Maybe in a dictatorship. But that's not where we live.

    Sykotyk
  • Mr. 300
    They can't stop you unless you're stopped for violation.
  • majorspark
    Mr. 300 wrote: They can't stop you unless you're stopped for violation.
    It appears you are correct. I posted this earlier in the thread but it does not appear to me that they can randomly just come up and ask someone for proof of their legal status.

    Here is a link to the Arizona law. Judge for yourself.

    http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

    Article 8 section B
    20 B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY
    21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS
    22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS
    23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
    24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE
    25 PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
    26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).
    It depends on the phrase "lawful contact". What is the definition of lawful contact? I would define "lawful contact" observing an individual violating state law. If it is contact based on violation of any Arizona state law, I would find no problem with this law. Just like someone stopped for speeding could be reasonably charged with a secondary offense of DUI, drug possession or have a warrant for arrest.
  • Glory Days
    i would say stopping a big rig and finding 50 people packed into the trailer might be probable cause to check their citizenship.
  • majorspark
    Glory Days wrote: i would say stopping a big rig and finding 50 people packed into the trailer might be probable cause to check their citizenship.
    If they looked Mexican that would make you a profiler and a racist.
  • Glory Days
    majorspark wrote:
    Glory Days wrote: i would say stopping a big rig and finding 50 people packed into the trailer might be probable cause to check their citizenship.
    If they looked Mexican that would make you a profiler and a racist.
    what if for every trailer of mexicans we find, we also find a trailer full of canadians, oh wait....
  • believer
    Glory Days wrote:what if for every trailer of mexicans we find, we also find a trailer full of canadians, oh wait....
    Ar you saying Canadians aren't clamoring to cross our borders illegally? That's right...the Canucks only visit here to get decent health care services.
  • CenterBHSFan
    Well for those who don't like the bill, how could you enforce illegal immigration (talking about people sneaking into that state from Mexico) into Arizona without any sort of profiling at all??

    Or is that the point?

    Look, the feds have dropped the ball on this one, so I have no problem with the states taking on this issue.
  • Mr. 300
    CenterBHSFan wrote: Well for those who don't like the bill, how could you enforce illegal immigration (talking about people sneaking into that state from Mexico) into Arizona without any sort of profiling at all??

    Or is that the point?

    Look, the feds have dropped the ball on this one, so I have no problem with the states taking on this issue.

    Obama's admin forced this upon Arizona. I applaud them for doing this to protect themselves. As stated earlier, it may not be perfect, but they can't afford to let it continue while Obama looks at Cap and Trade as more important.

    Now they need to rework the language so all those caught are deported if they are not here legally.
  • bigkahuna
    I'd be fine with some type of boarder. Really what's stopping Arizona from putting a fence up or something like that?

    I still think that even though you have to be detained to be asked to prove your citizenship, it's going to undoubtably lead to profiling. If you see me walking down the street, and you want to know bad enough, you'll find something to arrest me for(I "Look" Hispanic).

    Like I said, why aren't the Northern Border states doing this as well? Probably because you can't tell between a typical American Citizen and Canadian.

    This is EXTREME I know, but I'm going to use this comparison. In WWII, we put Japanese Americans in internment camps, why not the German Americans?
  • Prescott
    It depends on the phrase "lawful contact". What is the definition of lawful contact? I would define "lawful contact" observing an individual violating state law. If it is contact based on violation of any Arizona state law, I would find no problem with this law. Just like someone stopped for speeding could be reasonably charged with a secondary offense of DUI, drug possession or have a warrant for arrest.
    What is the problem if this is the law??? Cops ask for passenger ID all of the time during traffic stops.
  • KnightRyder
    Mr. 300 wrote: They can't stop you unless you're stopped for violation.
    or unless they make up some bullshit reason to stop you. which happens quite frequently.
  • majorspark
    KnightRyder wrote:
    Mr. 300 wrote: They can't stop you unless you're stopped for violation.
    or unless they make up some bullshit reason to stop you. which happens quite frequently.
    Yes it does. So what is the point should we stop allowing police officers to ask for ID when making traffic stops?
  • dwccrew
    bigkahuna wrote: The federal government says it's okay for law enforcement to walk up and ask anyone to PROVE they are an American Citizen?
    Sykotyk wrote: How is it constitutional to be stopped by police and asked to prove your citizenship only because 'they don't think you're a citizen'?

    You're innocent until proven guilty. Reasonable suspicion cannot be 'because you look Mexican'. There's no where in this law that Arizona can't just use it as a blanket requirement that everybody must prove at all times they're a citizen and any lack of proof will get you in trouble.

    I love how conservatives wave the constitution around ad nauseum, yet when there's a law that goes along with their belief system.... the constitution conveniently gets tucked away. The ends do not justify the means. Maybe in a dictatorship. But that's not where we live.

    Sykotyk
    Are you guys serious? Someone has to have committed some sort of violation, they can't just pull someone over and ask them to provide papers. Good God some people lack common sense and rationality. This bill doesn't put anyone's rights at jeopardy the way I interpret it. Now if law enforcement abuses it, that's a different story, but if they were going to profile, they would do it without this bill, so that point is moot.
    bigkahuna wrote: I'd be fine with some type of boarder. Really what's stopping Arizona from putting a fence up or something like that?

    I still think that even though you have to be detained to be asked to prove your citizenship, it's going to undoubtably lead to profiling. If you see me walking down the street, and you want to know bad enough, you'll find something to arrest me for(I "Look" Hispanic).

    Like I said, why aren't the Northern Border states doing this as well? Probably because you can't tell between a typical American Citizen and Canadian.

    This is EXTREME I know, but I'm going to use this comparison. In WWII, we put Japanese Americans in internment camps, why not the German Americans?
    My guess is that the northern states aren't doing it because Canadiens aren't coming over the border illegally and putting a financial drain on the local economies. Just a thought....
  • Mr. 300
    KnightRyder wrote:
    Mr. 300 wrote: They can't stop you unless you're stopped for violation.
    or unless they make up some bullshit reason to stop you. which happens quite frequently.
    What's your point?? It currently happens all over America....cops do it in most major cities.
  • Glory Days
    KnightRyder wrote:
    Mr. 300 wrote: They can't stop you unless you're stopped for violation.
    or unless they make up some bullshit reason to stop you. which happens quite frequently.
    only if you dont know law is it bullshit.
  • girevik
    I am happy about this law. My grandparents didn't come here from 4,000 miles away so they could watch the place get over ran by immigrants!

    Seriously, I can't wait to pay $10.00 for a tomato. Way to go, Arizona!