New Law in the U.S. State: Arizona

[MMM]

Originally Posted by clintjm

To you're first question, no. The fact is most illegals in that section of the nation are from south of the border. It is just a fact. An unfortunate fact for legal immigrants south of the border.

Bingo. Government enforced harassment of legal citizens based on skin color.

Originally Posted by clintjm

The fact is it is a federal law already on the books having to provide their green card or proof of citizenship that the state is now empowering their law enforcement to do only after being stopped for a primary offense AND if they meet certain criteria, none of which is race. People meeting such criteria disclosed in the bill, would be "carded" , regardless of race.

Read the law: "LAWFUL CONTACT". What is lawful contact? Lawful contact means a cop can question you for any reason. Here it is SUSPICION that you are illegal. As you stated above, most illegals are people of color. There it is. If you are brown, you are suspicious of being an illegal immigrant.

Let's say I am a Latino man born in Phoenix, AZ. Just by the fact that I am a person of color, I am a suspect. Sorry, I don't have a green card. I am not an immigrant. But now I have to have a different level of paperwork ...have to carry my original birth certificate or valid passport around with me ...where my white neighbor doesn't.

Originally Posted by clintjm

Again no different than any country as far as asking for ID, <cough> Japan, but a lot more liberal.

What rights are we losing?

Police rights to stop anyone at any time and detain them for not having proof of citizenship on their person.

That's a pretty big one, Clint.

[manganimefan227]

Welp, I guess I won't be going to Arizona, nope, not even to get to some other place, My folks are from Puerto Rico, We'd be stopped plenty of times I bet . . .

I know 9/11 has drawn some lines but isn't this a bit much?

[clintjm]

Originally Posted by MMM

The fact that you can be a legal citizen but stopped and forced to show your citizenship once, weekly, daily or hourly is government sponsored harassment.

Forcing one group of legal citizens to carry a different level of identification than other groups is discrimination.

How so? Again I don't see race written anywhere in that bill.

Originally Posted by MMM

Because it isn't enforced. Government isn't in the business of harassing big business because by hiring illegals Arizona businesses can keep prices down.
So then why would we think this new law will work if immigrants consistently use fake papers? A business owner should have the same ability (no more or less) to identify false paperwork as law enforcement officials. If not they should not be hiring immigrant workers. Same standards should be held.

No argument here. No problem with enforcing the law here either; just isn't going to solve the problem alone.

Originally Posted by MMM

No. Not if there is no work. Take the lollipop away and the ants disappear. It's that simple. Yes, it will. Take away the lollipop and the ants disappear.

No it is not that simple. The fact is the government will never be able to stop
businesses from hiring as that is just a piece of the illegal activities some of the businesses are involved in. No more than government will be able to stop all crime.

Secondly, even if there isn't work, they will still come because it is simply a better life just to survive the problems of their home country. The problem with that comes a drain on resources and eventually the rise in crime for those just trying to survive.

Originally Posted by MMM

This encourages the proactive hunting of undocumented residents by the use of "reasonable suspicion": a very vague and a bit frightening amount of power to give.

How would you do it then? Unreasonable suspicion? I have no problem with government proactively hunting undocumented residents. In fact they do this today.

[fluffy0000]

Arizona is following down the path - that the state of California followed with the 'epic fail wagon' called prop 187' - passed in 1994 and l8tr struck down by the federal courts in 1997'.
the first line in prop 187-

1.All law enforcement agents who suspect that a person who has been arrested is in violation of immigration laws must investigate the detainee's immigration status, and if they find evidence of illegality they must report it to the attorney general of California, and to the federal Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).

[MMM]

Originally Posted by clintjm

How so? Again I don't see race written anywhere in that bill.

How would you do it then? Unreasonable suspicion? I have no problem with government proactively hunting undocumented residents. In fact they do this today.

You answered your own question. Reasonable Suspicion. That's a nice way of saying Racial Profiling. Like you said, most of the people in Arizona illegally are from south of the border. Therefore if you look like an immigrant then you are automatically a suspect of being an illegal immigrant.

Even if you are an American born 100% pure citizen.

I don't see how you could support this, Clint. This seems to go against everything you believe in, assuming you think citizens of color have the same rights as white citizens.

[clintjm]

Originally Posted by MMM

Bingo. Government enforced harassment of legal citizens based on skin color.

Bingo what?
WHERE IS THE SKIN COLOR OR RACE WRITTEN INTO THE BILL?
What if the driver can't speak English? Can state law enforcement ask them then? They could ask any one they want. They could ask a 73 year old white lady if they wanted to if it fits the profile of possibly being in the country illegally.

Originally Posted by MMM

Read the law: "LAWFUL CONTACT". What is lawful contact? Lawful contact means a cop can question you for any reason. Here it is SUSPICION that you are illegal. As you stated above, most illegals are people of color. There it is. If you are brown, you are suspicious of being an illegal immigrant.

Let's say I am a Latino man born in Phoenix, AZ. Just by the fact that I am a person of color, I am a suspect. Sorry, I don't have a green card. I am not an immigrant. But now I have to have a different level of paperwork ...have to carry my original birth certificate or valid passport around with me ...where my white neighbor doesn't.

Police rights to stop anyone at any time and detain them for not having proof of citizenship on their person.

That's a pretty big one, Clint.

You said it, they can stop ANYONE. It is then NOT Racial!
Are you against the police questioning ANYONE about their immigration status?

I don't see anything in the bill about carrying a passport or birth certificate.
In Arizona a legal/real State ID or State DL is allowed because they actually do background checks unlike some states.

What country are you going to go that doesn't already do this?

[Megabyte117]

Well, I'll just go out there and say I attended the protests on Sunday.

This bill is a joke, and if you honestly believe that there will be no racial profiling, you have to look no further than our own "infamous" Sheriff Arpaio.

Additionally, with our state's economy is already in shambles, education being in the miserable half-dead state it is in, it won't be able to take the fallout that is most certainly coming as a result. Remember Arizona's refusal to recognize MLK day as a holiday, and the boycotts that followed and caused it to lose billions because of it.

As a hispanic, I will not be surprised if me or my family is stopped. But if I am, I will refuse to speak English.

I don't see anything in the bill about carrying a passport or birth certificate.
In Arizona a legal/real State ID or State DL is allowed because they actually do background checks unlike some states.

There was a recent case of a hispanic man being pulled over and questioned by a police officer. And despite being able to produce a driver's license, he was still imprisoned because he wasn't able to present anything more than that. It took his girlfriend (or wife, I can't remember which) to come to the station with his birth certificate.

[clintjm]

Originally Posted by MMM

You answered your own question. Reasonable Suspicion. That's a nice way of saying Racial Profiling. Like you said, most of the people in Arizona illegally are from south of the border. Therefore if you look like an immigrant then you are automatically a suspect of being an illegal immigrant.

Even if you are an American born 100% pure citizen.

I don't see how you could support this, Clint. This seems to go against everything you believe in, assuming you think citizens of color have the same rights as white citizens.

Thank goodness we have a translator here to tell us what Reasonable Suspicion is a nice way of saying Racial profiling.

Again the lawful contact refers to having someone engaged in suspicious activity. That suspicious activity doesn't include being in the country illegally alone.

Walking down main street... NO.
Walking along the side of the border. Yes.
Not being able to produce ID and not speaking English. Yes.

Yes I do agree even though law enforcement won't be questioning a lot of white or black individuals on the street; it doesn't mean that it isn't going to happen. INDIRECTLY this is racial profiling, but the fact is the PROBLEM is with people of racial background from south of the border in Arizona.

Would you be happy with law enforcement being required to ask for State ID or DL for ALL individuals to be politically correct or just not being allowed to question anyone immigration status?

Don't tell me what I believe in buddy boy. Why don't you just come on out and say I'm a racist for backing this.

I have no problem with being asked for State ID or DL if I lived on a border state with problems resulting from illegals.

I see... we'll never be able to ask anyone of any of any race their immigration status because their exists more than one race on the face of the planet.

Sticking your thumb in your mouth and saying fining businesses is going to fix this major problem isn't going to work. Illegals come here for all kinds of things, besides work.

[jesselt]

There shouldn't be a need to explain that racial profiling will occur because it would be the leading reason to "suspect" that someone isn't an American. It obviously doesn't have to be written into the law for the connection to be clear. The chances of a white immigrant illegally entering the United States are much, much lower than a non-white immigrant illegally entering the United States. The law gives permission for police to require proof of legal status based on skin color because it does not directly state that skin color does not constitute suspicion.

Also, the country's official language is not English, so why should an inability to speak English constitute a need to present proof of citizenship?

[clintjm]

"It is a dangerous game stirring up fears of people being hunted down and put in jail because of their race or nationality. The law specifically bans picking up someone just because they are Hispanic or even because the person was originally from Mexico or any other country you can read a copy of the law right here.

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf

Anyone arrested for a crime must have their immigration status determined before they are released. Thus, it is not just Hispanics who will be required to provide evidence of citizenship, but so will all whites, blacks and Asians. If the eligibility for public services depends on citizenship, again, everyone who applies, regardless of race, will have to provide an ID. In other circumstances, law enforcement officials must have reasonable suspicion, not based simply on the person's race or origin, that the individual is an illegal alien before they can ask to check someone's ID."


"Police today already have to deal with the "reasonable suspicion" standard all the time in other areas of law enforcement, and most understand very well how this standard limits what they can do. Police know that they can't pull over drivers for fear that they are smuggling drugs just because they are of a certain race. "Reasonable suspicion" requires that the known facts and circumstances are sufficient to convince a person of "reasonable prudence" that a crime has been committed. Obviously in a state such as Arizona, with an estimated half a million illegal immigrants, the vast majority OF illegal aliens are going to be Hispanic. But the reasonableness standard used by Arizona specifically requires something other than just race or national origin.

The ID requested is hardly draconian: a driver's license, a non-operating identification license, valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification, or "any valid United States federal, state, or local government issued identification." Rather than requiring multiple IDs as some fear, the law clearly says that "any" of the IDs is sufficient. And the notion of having to carry IDs is not something unique to Arizona. President Obama and many Democrats, such as Senator Charles Schumer, support a national ID card, so it hard to argue that Arizona's requirement will impose an undue burden.

Even if a person does not present the required ID, that doesn't necessarily mean the person faces problems. The new Arizona law requires that "a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person." Today, this is not hard to accomplish quickly as computer records have photographs and other identifying details for people who have state-issued IDs. The only exception to making "a reasonable attempt" is if making that investigation would "hinder or obstruct" a criminal investigation. That isn't going to effect many cases."

Written by journalist John Lott.