From what I've read about this new law the police cannot demand proof of legal status from everyone,only if there is a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is here illegally. What could prompt "reasonable suspicions". I doubt that Mexican ancestry would suffice legally in itself, since there are citizens and legal residents of Mexican ancestry. What to your minds would constitute a basis for "reasonable suspicion?"
But seriously, folks. Reasonable suspicion would be, say if they had no drivers license for starters. Maybe they see the cops and RUN, that would reasonable suspicion. Cops are trained for this stuff the same way they are trained to sense suspicion to search vehicles for drugs or booze. There's another one, you have drugs, there's a reason. If you are arrested then surely you would need to prove your status. Or how about if you are walking through the Arizona desert with nothing but a giant jug of water and a red bull? Reasonable suspicion.
I'm afraid that your first answer of "brown skin" may be closer to what will happen. Being arrested for something else might be sufficent legally, although not being a lawyer I'm not sure. A lot of citizens no doubt drive without a license sometimes, heck I"ve done it myself in my life.
I believe the law uses the term "reasonable suspicion". I would be amazed if any court holds "brown skin" to be grounds for reasonable suspicion. If I were, say, a US citizen of hispanic descent, just home maybe from serving in Iraq and I were pulled over and asked to show my papers, I would be pissed.
And while I do think you should know retarded, I think you're coming at it from the wrong end.
Once again the libs try to make the emotional argument rather than the logical argument. If I was a cop in Arizona I would pull over every car that had a Mexican looking person in it. I would stop them on the street, in the store, everywhere i saw them.
They're breaking the law and it's about time we enforced it.
Rhino, you are the one making an emotional argument. I made a legal argument regarding what constitutes "reasonable suspicion." You have confirmed that in your mind "reasonable suspicion" is being "Mexican looking." Of course some "Mexican looking" persons are American citizens. Supporters of this law such as yourself will have to find another standard than looking Mexican if you want to have any hope of being upheld in the courts.
Well I would agree with that, although I would put the "illegal alien problem" rather low on our list of problems in this country. But passing a law that itself will probably be found to be illegal isn't it.
first of all the illegal alien problem is HUGE and it has been for many years.
Also, the law they passed is not only legal, it isn't even new. The law is basically just saying that they're going to enforce the existing laws.
Here's what the NY Times had to say about the new law:
While police demands of documents are common on subways, highways and in public places in some countries, including France, Arizona is the first state to demand that immigrants meet federal requirements to carry identity documents legitimizing their presence on American soil. Ms. Brewer acknowledged critics' concerns, saying she would work to ensure that the police have proper training to carry out the law. But she sided with arguments by the law's sponsors that it provides an indispensable tool for the police in a border state that is a leading magnet of illegal immigration. She said racial profiling would not be tolerated, adding, "We have to trust our law enforcement."
Ms. Brewer and other elected leaders have come under intense political pressure here, made worse by the killing of a rancher in southern Arizona by a suspected smuggler a couple of weeks before the State Legislature voted on the bill. His death was invoked Thursday by Ms. Brewer herself, as she announced a plan urging the federal government to post National Guard troops at the border.
[...]
It requires police officers, "when practicable," to detain people they reasonably suspect are in the country without authorization and to verify their status with federal officials, unless doing so would hinder an investigation or emergency medical treatment. It also makes it a state crime - a misdemeanor - to not carry immigration papers. In addition, it allows people to sue local government or agencies if they believe federal or state immigration law is not being enforced.
I don't understand why we dont just give them citizenship and make them pay taxes and be eligible for a military draft. Aren't they coming to America because where they live is a really bad place? Arent they coming to find work? If they want to come let them come, and live as Americans. If they are illegal they are probably working under illegal conditions that an everyday citzen would be protected from and taking from collective pot all the tax payers contribute to. Wouldn't offering that make it easier to determine which Mexicans came to America for actual criminal activity and which ones came for a better life?
They can come here, they should just do it the proper way. The issue isn't WHY they came here it's HOW they came here. Now, I will say we are in a bit of a mess because we have so many illegals here that have amassed over the years because the Fed has had no enforcement. So, I know we just can't kick them all out. But Arizona is taking steps to at least deter future illegals from entering their state. Now Texas will get them all and when they get fed up they will enforce it. Then California and so on. The bottom line is there are so many here now soaking up our tax dollars it's gotta stop.
15 comments:
Just did some homework on Mexico's immigration policies and they are much more unforgiving than ours!
If you are not a citizen and try to protest anything you are automatically jailed in mexico.
From what I've read about this new law the police cannot demand proof of legal status from everyone,only if there is a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is here illegally. What could prompt "reasonable suspicions". I doubt that Mexican ancestry would suffice legally in itself, since there are citizens and legal residents of Mexican ancestry. What to your minds would constitute a basis for "reasonable suspicion?"
Brown skin.
But seriously, folks. Reasonable suspicion would be, say if they had no drivers license for starters. Maybe they see the cops and RUN, that would reasonable suspicion. Cops are trained for this stuff the same way they are trained to sense suspicion to search vehicles for drugs or booze. There's another one, you have drugs, there's a reason. If you are arrested then surely you would need to prove your status. Or how about if you are walking through the Arizona desert with nothing but a giant jug of water and a red bull? Reasonable suspicion.
I'm afraid that your first answer of "brown skin" may be closer to what will happen. Being arrested for something else might be sufficent legally, although not being a lawyer I'm not sure. A lot of citizens no doubt drive without a license sometimes, heck I"ve done it myself in my life.
What difference does it make? If you're a legal citizen you're fine. just show some identification and be on your way.
If you have brown skin and you're in an area know to harbor illegals be prepared to be checked out.
I don't see the problem with any of this. Profiling is an effective means of law enforcement and it's retarded to NOT do it.
I believe the law uses the term "reasonable suspicion". I would be amazed if any court holds "brown skin" to be grounds for reasonable suspicion. If I were, say, a US citizen of hispanic descent, just home maybe from serving in Iraq and I were pulled over and asked to show my papers, I would be pissed.
And while I do think you should know retarded, I think you're coming at it from the wrong end.
Once again the libs try to make the emotional argument rather than the logical argument. If I was a cop in Arizona I would pull over every car that had a Mexican looking person in it. I would stop them on the street, in the store, everywhere i saw them.
They're breaking the law and it's about time we enforced it.
Rhino, you are the one making an emotional argument. I made a legal argument regarding what constitutes "reasonable suspicion." You have confirmed that in your mind "reasonable suspicion" is being "Mexican looking." Of course some "Mexican looking" persons are American citizens. Supporters of this law such as yourself will have to find another standard than looking Mexican if you want to have any hope of being upheld in the courts.
You didn't try to make an emotional argument?
You're the one who mentioned an emotion and you associated it with a fictional returning Iraqi veteran.
Bottom line is we need to do something about the illegal alien problem in this country.
Well I would agree with that, although I would put the "illegal alien problem" rather low on our list of problems in this country. But passing a law that itself will probably be found to be illegal isn't it.
gary you should do some research.
first of all the illegal alien problem is HUGE and it has been for many years.
Also, the law they passed is not only legal, it isn't even new. The law is basically just saying that they're going to enforce the existing laws.
Here's what the NY Times had to say about the new law:
While police demands of documents are common on subways, highways and in public places in some countries, including France, Arizona is the first state to demand that immigrants meet federal requirements to carry identity documents legitimizing their presence on American soil.
Ms. Brewer acknowledged critics' concerns, saying she would work to ensure that the police have proper training to carry out the law. But she sided with arguments by the law's sponsors that it provides an indispensable tool for the police in a border state that is a leading magnet of illegal immigration. She said racial profiling would not be tolerated, adding, "We have to trust our law enforcement."
Ms. Brewer and other elected leaders have come under intense political pressure here, made worse by the killing of a rancher in southern Arizona by a suspected smuggler a couple of weeks before the State Legislature voted on the bill. His death was invoked Thursday by Ms. Brewer herself, as she announced a plan urging the federal government to post National Guard troops at the border.
[...]
It requires police officers, "when practicable," to detain people they reasonably suspect are in the country without authorization and to verify their status with federal officials, unless doing so would hinder an investigation or emergency medical treatment.
It also makes it a state crime - a misdemeanor - to not carry immigration papers. In addition, it allows people to sue local government or agencies if they believe federal or state immigration law is not being enforced.
I don't understand why we dont just give them citizenship and make them pay taxes and be eligible for a military draft.
Aren't they coming to America because where they live is a really bad place? Arent they coming to find work? If they want to come let them come, and live as Americans.
If they are illegal they are probably working under illegal conditions that an everyday citzen would be protected from and taking from collective pot all the tax payers contribute to.
Wouldn't offering that make it easier to determine which Mexicans came to America for actual criminal activity and which ones came for a better life?
They can come here, they should just do it the proper way. The issue isn't WHY they came here it's HOW they came here. Now, I will say we are in a bit of a mess because we have so many illegals here that have amassed over the years because the Fed has had no enforcement. So, I know we just can't kick them all out. But Arizona is taking steps to at least deter future illegals from entering their state. Now Texas will get them all and when they get fed up they will enforce it. Then California and so on. The bottom line is there are so many here now soaking up our tax dollars it's gotta stop.
Post a Comment