Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law Page: <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 6:56:37 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Well, there are at least 4 challenges to this, one by a cop, glad to know there is the one cop in AZ that will uphold the law to the best of his ability.

Wonder what will happen?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 361
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:02:23 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Even Karl Rove questions its Constitutionality.

Time will tell.

In the meantime--another unfunded mandate.

People have got to learn that stuff costs money.





< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 4/30/2010 7:52:55 AM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 362
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:17:01 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Simply walking on a sidewalk does not constitute reasonable suspicion.

You've gone from auto check point to walking down the street; however first hand I've experience as well as other family and friends, being questioned and asked for ID simply for "walking down the streets" of NJ in my 'youth'.

quote:

Huh? I thought you were in favor of REDUCING red tape, instead of adding yet more. You can't have it both ways

It's not having it both ways - if the requirement to establish citizen had to be confirmed at every portal for licensing it wouldn't be any more difficult or increasing "red tape" than the current requirement of bringing a utility bill to establish residency.

Stipulating to all the current fraud that exists now in the process, the result of a vetted ID and/or license or any of the many government issued ID's currently employed it would not add any time or more bureaucracy to the process.

I think the failure to address any of the pragmatic position of anyone trying to overturn this law or enforcement of existing immigration laws on a Federal level a more important issue on a couple of fronts.

As stated, the consequences are:

- Don't recognize the sovereignty of the US and feel people here illegally should be deported
- Don't believe there should be a requirement of legal status for employment.
- Support the exploitation of illegal workers by corporations.
- Want to continue impact on unemployment and larger corporate profits by not enforcing documentation of residency and/or employment status.

Now if anyone just doesn't believe a government has the right to say who comes in and has the ability to work under their sovereignty; why not just say it? I appreciate a desire for 'One World Government'. I don't agree with it, but the position of open borders is the way to achieve individual mobility. However the consequence is not one sided. A corporation having that same 'right' will simply use the same open borders to move and get the cheapest labor possible.

Of course that is happing now - illegally with the exploitation of these illegal workers - but that's a position many are supporting by trying to eliminate this Arizona law. I don't see a call, or even a chance of 'amnesty' happening in the current economic and political climate.

Keeping the status quo in Arizona benefits whom?

From my perspective it benefits those exploiting the current situation, not those being exploited. I find it amazing that tomorrow thousands will be marching to protest the legal sovereignty of th USA. They are marching for the 'freedom' to have illegal workers exploited! I'm expecting there to be corporate sponsors, like Tyson, helping the cause.

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 4/30/2010 7:20:22 AM >

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 363
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:17:14 AM   
cadenas


Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xbrand
Just walking down the street......must be some sort of 'probable cause' to be stopped and asked to present ID....especially in Phoenix AZ. Yes, on a number of occassions, I was stopped, approached by two policemen, questioned and had to present ID, which they filled out the info, onto a little blue card they had. Not once but a number of times.

This was years ago, when none of this 'profiling' was even thought of.


Actually, it WAS thought of. Somebody sued about it it, and the Supreme Court decided that exactly this was unconstitutional. The case originated in San Diego and was Kolender v Larson in 1983.

quote:


And...you are correct, most US people do not have a birth certificate readily at hand, to produce on demand. However, if, for some reason, one is needed, all that needs be done is write a request for a copy, to be sent, from your city of the state you were born in, along with the required fees.

This "all that is needed" actually is quite a burden for poor people. The fees are sometimes pretty steep. And remember that the average homeless person wouldn't even have a place to keep such documents safe.

BTW, not all births in the USA are recorded. Hospital births usually are.


(in reply to xbrand)
Profile   Post #: 364
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:21:58 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 365
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:33:13 AM   
cadenas


Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline 		Exactly the point, actually. When an officer pulls you over individually, then of course he can ask for your ID. Whatever caused him to pull you over constitutes a reasonable suspicion.

Another unfortunate aspect that causes confusion is that we frequently abuse a driver's license as ID. Your ticket was specifically for not having a Driver's License - not for not carrying ID. You still would have gotten a ticket even if you had carried a US passport. On the other hand, if you had a foreign DL (many of which don't have a photo).

The question here is about sobriety checkpoints and about blanket questions WITHOUT an individual reason to pull you over. I don't know why you were asked for a DL in that case; I don't think it is Constitutional. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, just that it may have been illegal. Most people probably wouldn't fight such a ticket on Fourth Amendment grounds, so police still can go ahead.

Come to think about it: one potential outcome of the new Arizona law is that illegal immigrants could sue and force Arizona to issue driver's licenses regardless of nationality, on the basis of the Fourth and Fifth Amendment.

Or conversely, they could fight deportation on similar grounds.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight
I keep reading the same statement. I have read in here 3 or 4 times that an officer can't ask for your id at a checkpoint unless he has suspicion that you are impaired. Having been all over this country, that doesn't sound correct. I have been through sobriety checkpoints in a dozen or more states and the 1st thing they do is ask for your driver's license. In fact, I recieved a warning ticket for not having my DL on me at a checkpoint that was set up between my house and the store that is only 5 miles away. Had I been an asshat rather than being cooperative and polite, I would have been given a citation that cost money.
In this state, an officer has the authority to ask you for DL, proof of insurance, and registration any time he pulls you over. He needs a valid reason to pull you over but he could just be pulling you over to let you know that your back seat belt is hanging out of the door or that there is an accident ahead or to watch out because Farmer Badfence's cows are out again.
I've been pulled over because a similar vehicle to mine belonged to a local drug dealer. Since I was dating a cop's daughter at the time, they knew immediately that I was not the other guy but they checked my info anyway. Its their standard operating procedure and there is no invasion of privacy or anything illegal or immoral about it.

(in reply to Irishknight)
Profile   Post #: 366
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:48:53 AM   
cadenas


Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
quote:

Simply walking on a sidewalk does not constitute reasonable suspicion.

You've gone from auto check point to walking down the street; however first hand I've experience as well as other family and friends, being questioned and asked for ID simply for "walking down the streets" of NJ in my 'youth'.

That presumably was before 1983, when that was ruled unconstitutional.

quote:

quote:

Huh? I thought you were in favor of REDUCING red tape, instead of adding yet more. You can't have it both ways

It's not having it both ways - if the requirement to establish citizen had to be confirmed at every portal for licensing it wouldn't be any more difficult or increasing "red tape" than the current requirement of bringing a utility bill to establish residency.

Actually, it is MUCH more complicated. And we already have the experience with DMV (in most states) and the Social Security Administration - both of which have already been tasked with investigating the immigration status of applicants. And both agencies get it wrong very frequently. Quick pop quiz:

- If you were to determine whether a tourist was legally in the USA, which document would you ask for? Hint: most people get this one wrong.
- If you want to determine if an Indian tribal member was eligible to start a business, what would you ask for?
- What document do you ask for to determine if a student is legally in the USA?

I'm always flabbergasted by just how naive Americans are about immigration law. There is a reason it is a specialty discipline that even most lawyers don't understand.

quote:


Keeping the status quo in Arizona benefits whom?

You are asking the wrong question. Your question should be: changing the law in Arizona benefits whom? And that is primarily two groups. It benefits the corporations who keep illegal immigrants subjugated as cheap labor. And it benefits politicians who can scream from the rooftop "see, we did something" while in reality things are falling apart even more.

The protests you are criticizing are against a short-sighted pandering to a few extremist voters.


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 367
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:50:45 AM   
xbrand


Posts: 95
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline 		Thank you.

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 368
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 7:59:53 AM   
cadenas


Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline 		In the other thread, I misunderstood what you were referencing. Now that I see the context, here is more information. On quick notice, I found this link http://shusterman.com/amnestyusimmigration.html (the CSS and LULAC cases were amnesty cases).

Note that INS issued regulations for the 1986 amnesty in 2001 and update these regulations in 2002. They still didn't get it right; that was what the CSS and LULAC cases (as well as an additional law passed by Congress in 1999 - 13 years after the amnesty!) were about.

These were not a few isolated cases; rather, it was a class action because INS hadn't processed most of the amnesty cases properly to begin with.

This particular link only goes to 2003, and the amnesty issue was still ongoing at that time. If you want me to, I'll be happy to dig more and give you more information about the final resolution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

The thing is that the last time we tried that in 1986, fixing legal immigration fell by the wayside. The amnesty took 20 years to process (the last cases were decided in 2005), and other than that it ended up as an enforcement-only approach. That's what got us into this mess in the first place.

I would like to see your proof of this.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 369
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 8:10:35 AM   
xbrand


Posts: 95
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline 		Actually, I am ingesting these sorid posts here on CM...makes me puke at the asinine comments and insulting manner in which most of you guys communicate. Where ever one brings reason and logic to the thread, then you have the guy who can only offer only foul insults. It would appear, this is the only way SOME of you guys are capable of communicating and debating.

When you get your own crappola, thrown back into your face, you go crying the blues, but not without some foul stupidities.

What a schmuck.....it that your usual signoff sig?

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 370
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 8:14:27 AM   
xbrand


Posts: 95
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline 		Then go research the item, yourself.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 371
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 8:18:27 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		I didnt realize i was asking you about this issue, xbrand. i happen to want to know more, who better to ask than the person who brought up the issue to begin with. Or are you above the belief that people should actually back up the things they say or believe.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to xbrand)
Profile   Post #: 372
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 8:19:17 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

That presumably was before 1983, when that was ruled unconstitutional.
WRONG - The last first hand occurrence, 3 years ago in Redondo Beach. The 'crime' suspicion was beth's daughter walking down the street where a hit and run occurred 1/2 hour ago - lacking ID, she was taken to the police station and beth had to go and pick her up.

A cop can assign "suspicion" and/or suspicious activity as a convenience to just bust balls if so inclined. Oh, I guess we should have sued the police instead of reprimanding her daughter for not carrying her ID?

quote:

Actually, it is MUCH more complicated. And we already have the experience with DMV (in most states) and the Social Security Administration - both of which have already been tasked with investigating the immigration status of applicants. And both agencies get it wrong very frequently.
As I've said on many occasions; the government's inefficiency isn't a matter of debate. I know they are bad at managing anything and ALL bureaucracies only serve to grow themselves and do not serve their own existence agenda. It dooms any real national health care program - but again, US government inefficiency may be an established fact, but its a distraction in this debate.

The requirement of proof is on the side of the applicant. Unable to provide vetted documents should be a problem for the applicant NOT the government. You either have them and get the permit/license/whatever; or you don't and leave without one. Making having one - a required 'proof' of citizenship. It could be a library card.

A person should have no access to services and//or programs without meeting that requirement.

Here's a perfect illustrating example:
quote:

What document do you ask for to determine if a student is legally in the USA?
It SHOULD be the student ID issued by the institution. However that would require the institution to Vet, monitor, as well as report any change of status invalidating the ID and the legal right of that individual to be in the USA. However, that's a pragmatic approach without consideration of "good intent", "for the chilren...", or "political correctness"; therefore it will never be utilized.


quote:

I'm always flabbergasted by just how naive Americans are about immigration law.
I'm no less "flabbergasted" by how people want to distract from the issue by making such statements.

You either support a country sovereignty or you don't.

There are required Visas to be in the US under any circumstance; from student to worker. It's not complicated - political correctness tries to make is such - but in reality it is VERY cut and dry.

We're heading to Italy again at the end of this month. They'll be 7, ranging from my 87 year old father to two 22 year olds. Not one of us would consider walking around without some form of ID with a Visa. Why do you feel the USA should be an exception in this regard to any other country in the world? Again - unless you are for open borders, 'globalization' and a 'one-world' government. Why not say so?

quote:

changing the law in Arizona benefits whom?

A Law shouldn't and usually doesn't benefit anyone. It protects the innocent and identifies law breakers. It establishes, and usually, IS law for all.

A law only identifies what is not legal. Laws become a problem when people don't obey them, and exploit as in this case, on both sides of the issue, the lack of enforcement. It is the current lack of enforcement that results in; "things are falling apart even more."

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 4/30/2010 8:38:27 AM >

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 373
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 8:22:15 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
Smells like desperation to me, their logic is failing them so they're hurling the kitchen sink.


quote:

ORIGINAL: xbrand

Actually, I am ingesting these sorid posts here on CM...makes me puke at the asinine comments and insulting manner in which most of you guys communicate. Where ever one brings reason and logic to the thread, then you have the guy who can only offer only foul insults. It would appear, this is the only way SOME of you guys are capable of communicating and debating.

When you get your own crappola, thrown back into your face, you go crying the blues, but not without some foul stupidities.

What a schmuck.....it that your usual signoff sig?


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to xbrand)
Profile   Post #: 374
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 8:22:25 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

In the other thread, I misunderstood what you were referencing. Now that I see the context, here is more information. On quick notice, I found this link http://shusterman.com/amnestyusimmigration.html (the CSS and LULAC cases were amnesty cases).

Note that INS issued regulations for the 1986 amnesty in 2001 and update these regulations in 2002. They still didn't get it right; that was what the CSS and LULAC cases (as well as an additional law passed by Congress in 1999 - 13 years after the amnesty!) were about.

These were not a few isolated cases; rather, it was a class action because INS hadn't processed most of the amnesty cases properly to begin with.

This particular link only goes to 2003, and the amnesty issue was still ongoing at that time. If you want me to, I'll be happy to dig more and give you more information about the final resolution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

The thing is that the last time we tried that in 1986, fixing legal immigration fell by the wayside. The amnesty took 20 years to process (the last cases were decided in 2005), and other than that it ended up as an enforcement-only approach. That's what got us into this mess in the first place.

I would like to see your proof of this.



Thank you for responding here. Can we concentrate these posts on the other thread? Im finding this all fascinating to learn of things like this and would like to continue there.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 375
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 8:57:05 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

The protests you are criticizing are against a short-sighted pandering to a few extremist voters.


I'd agree - however you put in that category the Mayor of LA, most of the City counsel, and many other elected officials, many who swore an oath to uphold the Laws of the City, State, and Country, already on record who will be out there "pandering" with, as you call them the expected 100,000 "few extremist voters". Tomorrow they will be out there supporting the protest against the enforcement of law.

The 'crime' here is that most of them will be re-elected.

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 376
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 9:08:25 AM   
xbrand


Posts: 95
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline 		It is supposedly an OPEN FORUM.....duh. If you want to know more, you have access to a computer, which assuredly you do..... then take your time, and google the topic, research the item...yourself, rather than ask someone else to do your 'legwork' while you go about your own daily routines, without a care; letting the other person feverishly labor the research for you.

Then you have a base in which to intelligently discuss the issues......hello, anyone home?

OPEN FORUM.....hello.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 377
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 9:11:00 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		Duh?

lmao

quite an intelligent way with words you have. and you are, of course, entitled to your opinion. as i am to have an opinion based upon yours. interesting how discussion groups work that way.

"Duh."

Will have to remember to work that word into my next debate.

~smirks

As to this part...

quote:

If you want to know more, you have access to a computer, which assuredly you do..... then take your time, and google the topic, research the item...yourself, rather than ask someone else to do your 'legwork' while you go about your own daily routines, without a care; letting the other person feverishly labor the research for you.


I seem to recall the person i asked as being a authority on the subject. I tend to ask people who state they know more than just the limited knowledge you can find on a web site. Im sure if cadenas minded coming up with that information for me, i would have been told so by cadenas.

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 4/30/2010 9:14:11 AM >

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to xbrand)
Profile   Post #: 378
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 9:11:47 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Let's just all stamp 666 on our foreheads.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 379
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 4/30/2010 9:14:43 AM   
xbrand


Posts: 95
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline 		Thank you.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 380
Page:   <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law Page: <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094