Xenophobic Arizona

[bigmack]

The clearly racist & xenophobic State of AZ has passed the immigration bill.

46zilzal has convinced me that such measures are brought about by people unwilling to accept others and who judge people by their skin color.

______________________________________

Oh, one other thing... Here are 4 dead American citizens of 12 that are killed everyday by people in this country illegally.

Shame on the xenophobes in AZ!

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/100-1.jpg

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/

[JustRalph]

The Governor just signed it

It is now law.

[Tom]

The new cradle of America - Texas/Arkansas.

[boxcar]

The new cradle of America - Texas/Arkansas.

I'm hoping Florida will join these two next. It's a long shot -- but one can hope.

Boxcar

[HUSKER55]

jUst so I don't make any social blunders,

If I am searching for illegal spanish people I should stop all black people, red people, white people, people wearing funny hats???


Please explain.

[bigmack]

jUst so I don't make any social blunders,

If I am searching for illegal spanish people I should stop all black people, red people, white people, people wearing funny hats???

Please explain.
Spanish people :lol:

Please explain.

[Robert Goren]

All the things my fellow liberals say maybe true, but that still doesn't address the fact that drug gang violence has spilled over the border. That has to be addressed. I have not seen any liberal's solutions to this. It is all to easy to have high ideals when you are not being shot at. I, for one, don't want hear anything bad about this law unless you first state a solution for the violence. JMO

[JustRalph]

jUst so I don't make any social blunders,

If I am searching for illegal spanish people I should stop all black people, red people, white people, people wearing funny hats???


Please explain.

Depends on what you are looking for. violent criminals using drugs.....stop the blacks.......guns........stop blacks/spanish............Illeg. Immigrants.........spanish
White collar criminals .........white guys in cars that cost more than 40k ........
cheap drugs, users only.......... stop white guys in cars more than 7 yrs old........etc...etc....should I go on?

These are real numbers that work......... it used to be called police work. Now it's called "profiling"

[Robert Goren]

Depends on what you are looking for. violent criminals using drugs.....stop the blacks.......guns........stop blacks/spanish............Illeg. Immigrants.........spanish
White collar criminals .........white guys in cars that cost more than 40k ........
cheap drugs, users only.......... stop white guys in cars more than 7 yrs old........etc...etc....should I go on?

These are real numbers that work......... it used to be called police work. Now it's called "profiling" How do we profile wall street bankers? They need to prove they are not stealing our money every time they are stopped. They need to carry around an audit.;)

[kenwoodallpromos]

What did theyput in the Rio Grande, alligators or pirahna?
2 houese from me roofing is currently being done by persons who do not know how to speak English.

[Miss Disco]

In some places Rio Grande is more like a creek than a river--my guess is it was loaded up with tequila.
Texas still has the right to secede. Perhaps, if things continue to implode nationally. they will consider it.

[skate]

How do we profile wall street bankers? They need to prove they are not stealing our money every time they are stopped. They need to carry around an audit.;)

First you address the politician(s) that told fannie/freddie, hence the banks, to increase the RISK limits on home loans.

Jack Reed, from R Is, good place to start. NYT, another good place to look.:eek:

Saves the skates sound sanctum, your scalp.

[Robert Goren]

First you address the politician(s) that told fannie/freddie, hence the banks, to increase the RISK limits on home loans.

Jack Reed, from R Is, good place to start. NYT, another good place to look.:eek:

Saves the skates sound sanctum, your scalp. Good get rid of them. They did tell them to increase the risk limits, but I can find anywhere they told them to bundle them up and sell them as securities. I can't anywhere they told AIG to insure them. I can't find find where they told them to lie to buyers about their value while they were shorting them.;)

[Robert Goren]

BigMack, I am sorry. My attempt to be clever with some sarcasm about bankers has drawn this tread off topic. Again I am sorry.

[bigmack]

BigMack, I am sorry. My attempt to be clever with some sarcasm about bankers has drawn this tread off topic. Again I am sorry.
Don't be sill, you appear to have a clear head about this topic.
____________________

For the record, as someone who has no shortage of Mexican (legal) friends and lives fairly close to the border...95% of illegals are Mexican. They'd laugh in your face if you called them Spanish. Don't be shy, call them Mexican. For them it's not a bad thing.

Again, this is not about immigration, it's about an invasion.

[46zilzal]

Bill Moyers made a great point: Just what does an ILLEGAL alien look like since they will not be wearing a sign..

[newtothegame]

Guess its a good thing he Bill Moyers isnt in charge of homeland security huh?? Then again.....:lol:

[Tom]

Bill Moyers must be senile.
What a stupid comoment by an irellevant dupe.

Tell you what Billy, go ask the widow of one of the many people murdered by one of them here illegally? Could make for nice show, Billy, you jerk.

Bill Moyers........A Hole of the month.

[jballscalls]

Bill Moyers must be senile.
What a stupid comoment by an irellevant dupe.

Tell you what Billy, go ask the widow of one of the many people murdered by one of them here illegally? Could make for nice show, Billy, you jerk.

Bill Moyers........A Hole of the month.

I always love when people on this board call someone stupid and spell the insult wrong LOL always cracks me up!

however, to agree with Tom's point, i don't think it's terribly hard to identify what an illegal looks like, and if you think they are an illegal, simply ask them to provide the documentation that says they aren't. come to think of it, maybe we should ID check everyone, i mean if your legal you got nothing to hide.

Even though people love to remind us "we're all immigrants" it may be time to have the statue of liberty and the US as a whole put up a "no vacancy" sign for a while. JMO

[boxcar]

I always love when people on this board call someone stupid and spell the insult wrong LOL always cracks me up!

however, to agree with Tom's point, i don't think it's terribly hard to identify what an illegal looks like, and if you think they are an illegal, simply ask them to provide the documentation that says they aren't. come to think of it, maybe we should ID check everyone, i mean if your legal you got nothing to hide.

Even though people love to remind us "we're all immigrants" it may be time to have the statue of liberty and the US as a whole put up a "no vacancy" sign for a while. JMO

Errr...'scuse me, JB, but when did illegal aliens become immigrants like many of our forefathers were? You can't tell what the difference is between someone being in this country legally and illegally? (My grandparents didn't steak into this country like thieves under the cover of darkness, thank you.)

Boxcar
P.S. And we're NOT all immigrants. I was born here. What's your excuse?

[jballscalls]

Errr...'scuse me, JB, but when did illegal aliens become immigrants like many of our forefathers were? You can't tell what the difference is between someone being in this country legally and illegally? (My grandparents didn't steak into this country like thieves under the cover of darkness, thank you.)

Boxcar
P.S. And we're NOT all immigrants. I was born here. What's your excuse?

sorry, i used the wrong word, my fault. i apologize.

what i said was the liberals often use the point that "we're all immigrants" meaning our families all started out somewhere else, just we got here sooner.

i was simply pointing out how i've heard rational for letting these people in or to stay, not my opinion.

[boxcar]

sorry, i used the wrong word, my fault. i apologize.

what i said was the liberals often use the point that "we're all immigrants" meaning our families all started out somewhere else, just we got here sooner.

i was simply pointing out how i've heard rational for letting these people in or to stay, not my opinion.

No, it's not what you said; although, it might have been what you meant to say. (You must be soul mates with Michelle.) Anyway, you should know better than to listen to half-wit libs and their lame arguments. Libs are clueless human beings. Reason? The thought processes of their brain have never migrated down to where their mouth is.

Boxcar

[jballscalls]

No, it's not what you said; although, it might have been what you meant to say. (You must be soul mates with Michelle.) Anyway, you should know better than to listen to half-wit libs and their lame arguments. Libs are clueless human beings. Reason? The thought processes of their brain have never migrated down to where their mouth is.

Boxcar

Michelle?

[boxcar]

Michelle?

She doesn't know how to say what she means either (according to liberals, that is).. Have you so soon forgotten that she said her hubby's home country was Kenya?

Boxcar

[jballscalls]

She doesn't know how to say what she means either (according to liberals, that is).. Have you so soon forgotten that she said her hubby's home country was Kenya?

Boxcar

i didn't know what Michelle you were referring too cause you didnt specify, now i understand you are referring to Michelle Obama. i dont pay attention to her

[ElKabong]

Bill Moyers made a great point: Just what does an ILLEGAL alien look like since they will not be wearing a sign..

Bill Moyers is an idiot. If it weren't for PBS the past 25 yrs, he'd have been locked up in some shack in Marshall or Longview talking to himself in endearing terms.

(if i misspelled that, don't hate on me...i just pass along jokes and porn, and the occasional political comment).

[boxcar]

i didn't know what Michelle you were referring too cause you didnt specify, now i understand you are referring to Michelle Obama. i dont pay attention to her

I don't pay too much attention to commies either but that "Freudian slip" was too big to let slide by the boards.

Boxcar

[bigmack]

Bill Moyers made a great point: Just what does an ILLEGAL alien look like since they will not be wearing a sign..
Good idea on your part to let Moyers do the thinking for you. Darn shame he's so irrelevant.

[JustRalph]

Bill Moyers made a great point: Just what does an ILLEGAL alien look like since they will not be wearing a sign..


easy to say sitting on your ass in Canada where you aren't being over-run.

It is very easy to identify Illegals. Especially if you have a State DMV/BMV computer in your car.......and this all occurs before you pull them over. Not to mention in some cities 90% are illegal. Take my word for it. I have recently been in a police car doing just this kind of work.

[GaryG]

Immigration is going to be a big item in the fall elections. The govt has done jack but they don't want the states to do it. You Can bet ACORN will have every Juan and Maria voting as many times as possible. I would say that it was a gutsy move by AZ, but actually their back is to the wall and they had no choice.

[skate]

Good get rid of them. They did tell them to increase the risk limits, but I can find anywhere they told them to bundle them up and sell them as securities. I can't anywhere they told AIG to insure them. I can't find find where they told them to lie to buyers about their value while they were shorting them.;)

OK ok ok , you are correct.

I'm trying to say, since the banks and aig's, are getting for the most part, most of the bad press (good) but now here we have The-Very-Same-Congress that put threats into the system (directed at Fannie and the Banks) and that-very-same=congress is about to issue New laws (same people) that They (congress)
forced on the Banks/aig's etc.

Mudd(fanny) was making $10 million/yr., down from $98 million, which is what Peterson, Paterson (?) previous guy received. How did he get the job?

Congress pushes these issues and it 's up to Mudd type people to follow through, if they want the job.

The fault lies with congress, the true boss.

The mudd types did the dirty work for congress, congress tried to alter the red-zoning by real estate people, congress gave the banks $500 billion to get the job done. Nice idea, if it works, but...didnt.

could i be wrong, sure.

[skate]

Bill Moyers made a great point: Just what does an ILLEGAL alien look like since they will not be wearing a sign..


any idea, as to what's going on these days?

[Robert Goren]

This law is not about immigration, it is about the violence that has spilled over the border. You may not think this going to do any good, but I haven't heard of a better idea. You do please come forward. If you like these kind of laws, you have to figure out a way to stop the violence.

[skate]

good for AZ, yepper.


i got held, bout 2 years ago, by 2 cops in Phoenix, for bout 1/2hr, beer got warm, i got pissed, but so what?

They were looking to see if I was making my truck payments, they could not find payment reports on their puter system.

When they brought up the problem, after i asked, i told them the truck was paid for and besides that, i'm a friend of fishbellies.:)

life

[prospector]

How do we profile wall street bankers? They need to prove they are not stealing our money every time they are stopped. They need to carry around an audit.;)
hell. don't worry about them...the real thieves are in congress..in both parties..ever see a poor congressman retire?
at least wall street has to work for their money..

[JustRalph]

Wording of the law just for an fyi:

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON, EXCEPT IF THE DETERMINATION MAY HINDER OR OBSTRUCT AN INVESTIGATION. ANY PERSON WHO IS ARRESTED SHALL HAVE THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS DETERMINED BEFORE THE PERSON IS RELEASED. THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. A PERSON IS PRESUMED TO NOT BE AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES IF THE PERSON PROVIDES TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR AGENCY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. A VALID ARIZONA DRIVER LICENSE.
2. A VALID ARIZONA NONOPERATING IDENTIFICATION LICENSE.
3. A VALID TRIBAL ENROLLMENT CARD OR OTHER FORM OF TRIBAL IDENTIFICATION.
4. IF THE ENTITY REQUIRES PROOF OF LEGAL PRESENCE IN THE UNITED STATES BEFORE ISSUANCE, ANY VALID UNITED STATES FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ISSUED IDENTIFICATION.

[Tom]

How can any reasonable person say there is anything wrong with that law?
Unless your goal is to bring illegals here.

[jballscalls]

How can any reasonable person say there is anything wrong with that law?
Unless your goal is to bring illegals here.

anyone who is against it i think is just worried about giving cops the ability to profile and harrass at their discretion, but really they already have that ability, i mean most traffic stops are based on their reasonable suspicion of a violation, they are not all concrete evidence like a radar gun.

i think it was Robert Goren above who posted why dont we just round up everyone in the country, do one big check, and boot the ones who don't pass? i'm sure our gov't could get something like this done efficiently and inexpensive right? :) but it almost sounds like the easiest way to get these criminals out

however if we kick out the illegals, the price of groceries, lawn service, and training at the track probably all go up!!

[newtothegame]

anyone who is against it i think is just worried about giving cops the ability to profile and harrass at their discretion, but really they already have that ability, i mean most traffic stops are based on their reasonable suspicion of a violation, they are not all concrete evidence like a radar gun.

i think it was Robert Goren above who posted why dont we just round up everyone in the country, do one big check, and boot the ones who don't pass? i'm sure our gov't could get something like this done efficiently and inexpensive right? :) but it almost sounds like the easiest way to get these criminals out

however if we kick out the illegals, the price of groceries, lawn service, and training at the track probably all go up!!

And for the prices that go up...how many things will go down???
Here's an idea...HEALTH CARE!!!!!

[jballscalls]

And for the prices that go up...how many things will go down???
Here's an idea...HEALTH CARE!!!!!

i know in theory it should go down, but do you think hospitals and doctors and insurance companies will lower their prices or will they just keep things the same and have a better bottom line??

maybe it's just simple supply and demand and it will decrease in price, if it does, another reason to get rid of illegals. the primary reason still should be because they are breaking the law

[skate]

Good get rid of them. They did tell them to increase the risk limits, but I can find anywhere they told them to bundle them up and sell them as securities. I can't anywhere they told AIG to insure them. I can't find find where they told them to lie to buyers about their value while they were shorting them.;)


Bobby bobby bobby, GOOD question, i've been waiting for the question, sorry i dont have the answer;) .

But you might, Where Would You want Fanny to go at the urgency from congress?

AND and and, here's what i think, will we "get rid of them"?

Of coarse, i suspect congress did not specify the exact path, reason being, this way they can remove themselves from direct path.

Look here, if congress did not put pressure (strong influence) on Fannie, does anyone think that Fannny would have come up with a new plank.

Also, at the same time, Fanny was actually (looks to me) in compitition with the likes of Country wide and many banks.

Keep in mind Mudd (fanny guy) made $10 Million/yr. So. Mr Mudd, do you want your job?

At that point in time, he decides to keep the ball rolling. Yah, ok, he's wrong but , most blame should go to the top in this case.
Instead, we have the very same people (congress) giving out orders again, they strill have control, big problem, and the media is right there with them, not giving the real story to the people.

[skate]

I always love when people on this board call someone stupid and spell the insult wrong LOL always cracks me up!




"Never trust a man that can only spell a word one way".


BF

[skate]

sorry for the off topic, i get excited:kiss:

[bigmack]

Geraldo Rivera told a Latino Congressman Saturday that he might get stopped on the streets of Phoenix by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio as a result of the new anti-immigration law signed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer the previous day.
:lol: :lol:

Somebody remind Jerry he's Jewish.

4lKgmsPDJgU

[skate]

anyone who is against it i think is just worried about giving cops the ability to profile and harrass at their discretion, but really they already have that ability, i mean most traffic stops are based on their reasonable suspicion of a violation, they are not all concrete evidence like a radar gun.

i think it was Robert Goren above who posted why dont we just round up everyone in the country, do one big check, and boot the ones who don't pass? i'm sure our gov't could get something like this done efficiently and inexpensive right? :) but it almost sounds like the easiest way to get these criminals out

however if we kick out the illegals, the price of groceries, lawn service, and training at the track probably all go up!!

good points here.


but im not sure if we get the fact that 'its not just the jobs that you mention' that are affected.

AND, might be a good idea (not saying it is), might be a good idea for foreign-born to take the place (job) of the WORKING MAN,

Then the working man can take his (not hers) pension and Soc. Sec. checks and hitch on down to S. America and get his monies worth.

[skate]

How can any reasonable person say there is anything wrong with that law?
Unless your goal is to bring illegals here.



"The bill in some ways toughens up a situation that the Obama administration had tried to roll back. Under a program known as 287g, some local law enforcement agencies were trained to enforce federal immigration laws by checking suspects' immigration status.

Mr. Arpaio, the Maricopa county sheriff, had been one of the most aggressive enforcers of 287g. However, the Obama administration in recent months has sought to scale back that program, and had reduced the resources it made available to Mr. Arpaio's office and others".

Feds are pissed, cause Arpaio gets some local (donations, not taxes) $ to make up for the fed shorting.


Not too much fo '287g' making the papers these days.

[JustRalph]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/apr/25/feds-push-to-seize-restaurant-a-rare-one/
San Diego

Feds’ push to seize restaurant a rare one
Illegal workers at heart of French Gourmet case

BY GREG MORAN, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
SUNDAY, APRIL 25, 2010 AT 12:04 A.M.

For more than three decades, The French Gourmet restaurant has been serving high-end cuisine in its 45-seat dining room, catering events across the county, and producing hundreds of wedding cakes annually.

But now the business on Turquoise Avenue in Pacific Beach finds itself the target of federal immigration authorities and prosecutors who want more than just a great Coquille St. Jacques or strawberry bagatelle cake.

In an indictment released last week, the government said it wants the property where the iconic restaurant has done business since 1979.

more at the link..............

[boxcar]

I wonder why there's so much anger in D.C. these days? And what's with BO's anti-state government speech? You see...when libs wax anti-government (any government), they're patriotic Americans just exercising their free speech. But when we conservatives do this kind of stuff, we're Nazis, we're teabaggers, we're terrorists, etc., etc. :rolleyes:

And what's so "misguided" about AZ about enforcing the laws that the federal government should be enforcing.

And how does this new law "undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans."? What about the federal government's role as a scofflaw by thumbing its nose at the rule of law by refusing to enforce its own laws? Doesn't that "undermine the basic notions" of the rule of law, upon which this country was founded? :bang: :bang:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/24/obama-assails-arizona-immigration-law/

Boxcar

[Tom]

Obama only reads what the TOTUS puts n the screen. He has no idea what the heck he is saying. Someone has to 'splain it to him later on.

Hey Barry - shut your garbage mouth. AZ is only enforcing laws that KENYANS will not.

[bigmack]

95% of the media has already made the 70% of AZ who are in favor of this bill out to be profiling xenophobes who have little compassion for their fellow man. It's laughable.

The costs to this country of illegal immigration; anyone want to see the stats?

[bigmack]

Mexican President Felipe Calderon on Monday slammed a tough new immigration law in the U.S. state of Arizona, which borders Mexico, saying it would breed hate and discrimination.

"Criminalizing immigration, which is a social and economic phenomena, this way opens the door to intolerance, hate, and discrimination," Calderon told a meeting with Mexican immigrant groups.

Have BO ask Calderon how many Guatemalans & El Salvadorans he jails and kicks out of his country.

[ArlJim78]

people criminalize themselves as soon as they cross the border. once that they make that choice they don't get to whine about hatred and discrimination. its not about hate or race, its about lawlessness.

[boxcar]

Mexican President Felipe Calderon on Monday slammed a tough new immigration law in the U.S. state of Arizona, which borders Mexico, saying it would breed hate and discrimination.

"Criminalizing immigration, which is a social and economic phenomena, this way opens the door to intolerance, hate, and discrimination," Calderon told a meeting with Mexican immigrant groups.

Have BO ask Calderon how many Guatemalans & El Salvadorans he jails and kicks out of his country.

Exactly right! Quite the hypocrite, this Mexican president. The Mexican government has ZERO tolerance for illegals in its country! And I mean ZERO!

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

http://www.economist.com/world/united-states/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15954262

[boxcar]

http://www.economist.com/world/united-states/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15954262

I'm thinkin' maybe 'cap wrote that piece since all the rhetoric seems to have come from his empty cup. The article is even more vacuous of substance than you are, zil.

Boxcar
P.S. Feel free to consider this a compliment. :D

[JustRalph]

http://www.economist.com/world/united-states/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15954262

There is a time and place for a "police state" and the people of Arizona have endorsed this plan. Why is it that Liberals scream and holler about the sanctity of elections and the freedom and fairness of the legislative process except when it goes against their beliefs ?

[boxcar]

There is a time and place for a "police state" and the people of Arizona have endorsed this plan. Why is it that Liberals scream and holler about the sanctity of elections and the freedom and fairness of the legislative process except when it goes against their beliefs ?

Excellent point, JR! Libs are great for expounding the greatness of "democracy" but as you say when the democratic process doesn't swing their way, then suddenly something is wrong with democracy.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Not a lib can address the FACTS of the law. Not a lib can offer a good reason why the law is not a good one.

Libs are empty when it comes to facts. End of story.
They will sacrifice national security for politics.
They will go out their way to try to discredit honest Americans rallying to express their concern for their country, yet to a man, or bot, or painted little girl, not a one of them is around when an angry mob of lawless animals attack cops over a completely legal law. Must be because they have so much in common with angry animals.

Disgusting.

[ArlJim78]

people are reacting hysterically without even reading what the law says. it doesn't allow for officers to stop people for looking suspicious.

"For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency…where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person…"

The key phrase is "For any lawful contact". Which means they can't just say "hey you look suspicious, show me your papers".

It's doesn't create a police state, or aparthied, and it is not misguided.

[bigmack]

The key phrase is "For any lawful contact". Which means they can't just say "hey you look suspicious, show me your papers".

It's doesn't create a police state, or aparthied, and it is not misguided.
You mean if they're stopped for a potential unlawful act they would have to show documentation like any of us actual citizens, or like anyone in any country in the world?

How can this be? How can they foist this fascist bill on these people? Somebody get Rev ( ;) ) Al involved!

It is completely unfair to ask them to abide by the same rules we have to. Carry documentation? This is too much to ask of people. This is like Hitlerville!!!

Someone in the protesting crowd should throw a bottle of water at the head of one of those cops.

(already done all of the above)

Get SpaceMonkey back in here talking about his fear for his safety.

[JustRalph]

Reverend Al is marching in Arizona this weekend..............

[NJ Stinks]

Get SpaceMonkey back in here....

I miss Space Monkey here too. :ThmbUp:

[boxcar]

Reverend Al is marching in Arizona this weekend..............

That's great! He'll further tick off all the blacks who don't want the illegals here either. You gotta love it.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

Reverend Al is marching in Arizona this weekend..............
oh please let's hope he runs afoul of the law in Sherriff Joe's territory.

[bigmack]

This from NYT. It's so beautiful I want to frame the article:

Several immigrant advocates and civil rights groups, joined by members of the San Francisco government, said the state should pay economic consequences for the new law, which gives the police broad power to detain people they reasonably suspect are illegal immigrants and arrest them on state charges if they do not have legal status.

Critics say the law will lead to widespread ethnic and racial profiling and will be used to harass legal residents and Latino citizens.

La Opinión, the nation’s largest Spanish-language newspaper, urged a boycott in an editorial Monday, as did the Rev. Al Sharpton, and calls for such action spread to social media sites. The San Francisco city attorney and members of the Board of Supervisors said they would propose that the city not do business with the state.

They followed the lead of Representative Raúl M. Grijalva, Democrat of Arizona, who had urged conventions to skip the state, though other Democrats who oppose the law, including Mayor Phil Gordon of Phoenix, pleaded for people not to punish the entire state.

Tourism and convention managers, struggling to rebound from the recession, said it was too soon to tell if the effort would have an impact, but some businesses said people were turning away from the state.

At the Arizona Inn in Tucson, the manager, Will Conroy, said that over the weekend 12 customers canceled reservations or said they would not return to the state because of the law.

“This is a very scary situation that the police can now just come up to you for no reason and ask for papers,” Joy Mann, a prospective guest who had previously stayed at the inn, wrote him in an e-mail message. “My son is a construction worker and is very suntanned. I cannot ask him to join us there now, as I would fear for him.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/us/27arizona.html

[JustRalph]

I will be planning a vacation to Arizona as soon as I can work it out

[JustRalph]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=146341

Pat Asks............"Who's country is this anyway?"

He also mentions the one group that is hurt the most by illegal Immigration

[HUSKER55]

LET THE LIBERALS HAVE THEIR WAY, NO LAW AND ORDER AT ALL

LIVE BY THE HOOK AND THE DRAW

I'M GOOD TO GO

NO MORE PRISONS, SHOT ON SIGHT.
NO MORE PAROL BOARDS..NOT NEEDED
NO REPEAT OFFENDERS MEANS NO MORE PAROL OFFICERS
NO LAWS AND LESS POLICE ACTUALLY NO POLICE
NO LAWYERS...NOT NEEDED SMITH AND WESSON SETTLE ALL DSPUTES
NO COURT SYTEM BECAUSE WHAT WOULD THEY DO
NO LEGISLATURES CAUSE THERE WOULD BE NOTHING TO LEGISLATE


BY GLORY THIS SOUND BETTER AS I GO

THINK OF THE MONEY TAX PAYERS WOULD SAVE

TARGETS WOULD BE EASY....NICE CLOTHES AND YOUR ARE A BULLSEYE


YA KNOW GUYS, OLD AL MAYBE ON TO SOMETHING


WHY MAKE AND PAY FOR LAWS WERE ARE NOT GOING TO ENFORCE

WHY PAY FOR IT

[46zilzal]

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/apr/27/arizona-law-xenophobic-ineffective/

First, it won’t stop undocumented immigrants from coming to the United States. As long as the U.S. per capita income is more than three times higher than Mexico’s — $46,400 vs. $13,500, to be precise — Mexicans and other Latin Americans will continue crossing the border one way or another.

Barring a greater economic integration that could benefit both the United States and its neighbors, nothing will stop Mexicans and other Latin Americans from seeking a better life if they can’t support their families in their own country.

Second, it will not make Arizona safer. On the contrary, it will divert police resources away from fighting crime and will compel undocumented immigrants — as well as U.S.-born Hispanics who won’t want to be hassled by police — not to report crimes.

The current Arizona anti-immigration hysteria was partly sparked by the killing of a rancher near the Mexican border last month. The anti-immigration law’s supporters say the killing was carried out by an undocumented migrant, and that they want to prevent similar crimes.

But the Arizona Police Chiefs Association and others opposed the measure, saying it will drain law enforcement resources and prevent witnesses from stepping forward. By the same token, U.S. authorities in 2007 publicly honored 26-year-old undocumented immigrant Manuel Jesus Cordova for rescuing a 9-year-old whose mother had died in an accident. Would Cordova do so under the new law?

Third, it will hurt Arizona’s economy. The new law is likely to be struck down by the courts as unconstitutional, but only after long and costly legal battles.

In addition, a flight of many of the estimated 470,000 undocumented Latinos from Arizona and the closing of some of the more than 35,000 Hispanic-owned businesses in the state will drain the state’s already ailing finances.

If Latinos leave, “they will take their tax dollars, businesses and purchasing power with them.” These are higher than the cost of state services they use, the Immigration Policy Center advocacy group says.

Fourth, if more U.S. states follow Arizona’s lead, there may be a Latin American tourism backlash. Many of the more than 13 million Mexicans, 2.5 million South Americans and 860,000 Central Americans who travel to the United States every year may think twice before visiting a country where they may be stopped by police just because of the color of their skin or the language they speak.

Fifth, and perhaps most important, the law is morally wrong and profoundly un-American. The United States, despite the decline of its international image immediately after the Iraq War, is once again being seen positively by a majority of countries, according to a BBC poll released last week. Racial profiling laws would no doubt hurt the U.S. image abroad.

My opinion: Arizona’s new law is not only legally dubious, economically counterproductive and morally repugnant, but it will do nothing to solve the U.S. immigration crisis. The solution is for the Obama administration to push for its much-promised immigration reform this year. That would help both secure the borders and give a path to legalization to more than 10 million undocumented immigrants.

Otherwise, headline-seeking local politicians in other states will seek to fill the vacuum with similarly xenophobic laws, with not much more effect than producing a big Hispanic exodus — within the United States.

— Andres Oppenheimer

[HUSKER55]

It is not morally wrong to enforce the law. The MSM claims these people make less than minimum so only McDonalds will benefit cause they gotta eat.

Your opinion is to let them enter and foot the bill.

That is not acceptable. Nor is putting up with the crime that follows.

We need a better idea than that.

[Robert Goren]

Zilly, you maybe right, maybe this will do nothing about the crime. I am listening, I want your ideas on how to stop the violence. I am sure that making all the illegals legal will do nothing to end it. It is time for the liberals to put up or shut up. Come up ways to stop the violence. JMO

[Robert Goren]

It is kind of amazing how some of the conservatives were willing to take on law enforcement with the militias a week ago are now so pro cop now. JMO

[lsbets]

From what I have read of this law I do not like it. It gives to much power to the police and opens the door to way too many potential abuses.

[ArlJim78]

It is kind of amazing how some of the conservatives were willing to take on law enforcement with the militias a week ago are now so pro cop now. JMO
you're not saying what I think you're saying are you?

are you trying to say that the nutty militia family arrested in Michigan a few weeks ago for plotting to kill police officers, are a representation of conservatives taking on law enforcement?:eek:

if not please explain how I have misinterpreted your point.

[Robert Goren]

you're not saying what I think you're saying are you?

are you trying to say that the nutty militia family arrested in Michigan a few weeks ago for plotting to kill police officers, are a representation of conservatives taking on law enforcement?:eek:

if not please explain how I have misinterpreted your point. No, but a so called conservative posted some pictures of a militia with their guns and implied that they were ready to take on law enforcement. Not one conservative here stood up and said this is not right. The Conservatives get awfully quiet when the subject of militias taking on law enforcement officers. JMO

[prospector]

you should see mc cain out here..now he wants 3000 more border agents, troops on the border and the fence completed..before his tight election he was reform... politicians don't care about the people till elections..no support from me, john..
hell, john..why not a bounty on illegals..worked on apaches..
troops should be on the border..why aren't the terrorists pouring thru arizona and texas? i don't see national security as political footballs..shame on them all.

[boxcar]

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/apr/27/arizona-law-xenophobic-ineffective/

First, it won’t stop undocumented immigrants from coming to the United States. As long as the U.S. per capita income is more than three times higher than Mexico’s — $46,400 vs. $13,500, to be precise — Mexicans and other Latin Americans will continue crossing the border one way or another.

Barring a greater economic integration that could benefit both the United States and its neighbors, nothing will stop Mexicans and other Latin Americans from seeking a better life if they can’t support their families in their own country.

Second, it will not make Arizona safer. On the contrary, it will divert police resources away from fighting crime and will compel undocumented immigrants — as well as U.S.-born Hispanics who won’t want to be hassled by police — not to report crimes.

The current Arizona anti-immigration hysteria was partly sparked by the killing of a rancher near the Mexican border last month. The anti-immigration law’s supporters say the killing was carried out by an undocumented migrant, and that they want to prevent similar crimes.

But the Arizona Police Chiefs Association and others opposed the measure, saying it will drain law enforcement resources and prevent witnesses from stepping forward. By the same token, U.S. authorities in 2007 publicly honored 26-year-old undocumented immigrant Manuel Jesus Cordova for rescuing a 9-year-old whose mother had died in an accident. Would Cordova do so under the new law?

Third, it will hurt Arizona’s economy. The new law is likely to be struck down by the courts as unconstitutional, but only after long and costly legal battles.

In addition, a flight of many of the estimated 470,000 undocumented Latinos from Arizona and the closing of some of the more than 35,000 Hispanic-owned businesses in the state will drain the state’s already ailing finances.

If Latinos leave, “they will take their tax dollars, businesses and purchasing power with them.” These are higher than the cost of state services they use, the Immigration Policy Center advocacy group says.

Fourth, if more U.S. states follow Arizona’s lead, there may be a Latin American tourism backlash. Many of the more than 13 million Mexicans, 2.5 million South Americans and 860,000 Central Americans who travel to the United States every year may think twice before visiting a country where they may be stopped by police just because of the color of their skin or the language they speak.

Fifth, and perhaps most important, the law is morally wrong and profoundly un-American. The United States, despite the decline of its international image immediately after the Iraq War, is once again being seen positively by a majority of countries, according to a BBC poll released last week. Racial profiling laws would no doubt hurt the U.S. image abroad.

My opinion: Arizona’s new law is not only legally dubious, economically counterproductive and morally repugnant, but it will do nothing to solve the U.S. immigration crisis. The solution is for the Obama administration to push for its much-promised immigration reform this year. That would help both secure the borders and give a path to legalization to more than 10 million undocumented immigrants.

Otherwise, headline-seeking local politicians in other states will seek to fill the vacuum with similarly xenophobic laws, with not much more effect than producing a big Hispanic exodus — within the United States.

— Andres Oppenheimer

Using the morality argument above and taking it to its logical conclusion, would this not also make all federal laws regulating and controlling immigration immoral? If not, why not?

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

Cars and trucks are stopped at the border, and proof of citizenship is required, especially when something looks suspicious. If people cannot provide the proper papers they are turned away. does anyone have a problem with this current practice? Is it xenophobic to do so? Is it morally repugnant? Of course not.

But once inside the country we're supposed to turn our heads and pretend that nothing is going on, and we can't even question anyone because someone might be offended? If that is the case why do we even bother with any border patrol? Let everyone in lest someone be offended or have their rights trampled.

Who is looking out for the rights of LEGAL Americans?

you cannot show me any country that is so accomodating to illegals.

it is one of the biggest failings of this nation that we have allowed this situation for so long. we are the first country to voluntarily self destruct because we no longer have the capacity or will to do things which are fundamental to survival as a nation.

[boxcar]

Cars and trucks are stopped at the border, and proof of citizenship is required, especially when something looks suspicious. If people cannot provide the proper papers they are turned away. does anyone have a problem with this current practice? Is it xenophobic to do so? Is it morally repugnant? Of course not.

But once inside the country we're supposed to turn our heads and pretend that nothing is going on, and we can't even question anyone because someone might be offended? If that is the case why do we even bother with any border patrol? Let everyone in lest someone be offended or have their rights trampled.

Who is looking out for the rights of LEGAL Americans?

you cannot show me any country that is so accomodating to illegals.

it is one of the biggest failings of this nation that we have allowed this situation for so long. we are the first country to voluntarily self destruct because we no longer have the capacity or will to do things which are fundamental to survival as a nation.


And in addition to all this, what an insulting slap in the face to all immigrants who are either legal residents or have become U.S. citizens. They obeyed all the laws, spent all the money and time in doing so and when applying for citizenship or their visa -- all for what!? What a kick in the teeth to the millions of people over the years who have played by the rules! Tell me, libs, where is the fairness in that? You libs believe that you have a mortal lock on "fairness", so explain this to me, please. Where is your "empathy" for all immigrants who are here legally?

Boxcar

[Tom]

To be fair, the US should adopt in total the Mexican immigration policy and laws.

Who here would object to that?

46?
Hcap?
Sec?
NJ?
MP?

What could be fairer?

[boxcar]

To be fair, the US should adopt in total the Mexican immigration policy and laws.

Who here would object to that?

46?
Hcap?
Sec?
NJ?
MP?

What could be fairer?

Heck...for that matter we should adopt the immigration policies and laws of virtually any nation on the planet, since no nation is as lax in enforcement of its laws as we are! This fact alone, makes irrelevant the argument about how the rest of the world would view us after passage of the AZ law.

Boxcar

[GaryG]

This fact alone, makes irrelevant the argument about how the rest of the world would view us after passage of the AZ law.Well, I am pretty sure how they view us now.....weak and impotent.

[cj's dad]

Baltimore was in horrible decline in the late 60's early 70's and there was a law enacted to give the Police the right to stop and frisk those who they knew or suspected were up to no good; such as ex felons, drug dealers, pimps, hoods, etc..... The Police knew these folks as these were the days of foot patrols when the cops KNEW who the troublemakers were. MOST of the crime, such as murder, drug sales, robbery were being committed in a certain part(s) of the city. Arrests went up as did convictions for drug & gun possession, but since the bulk of the perpatrators were of a certain ethnic background, the city leaders realized that they had passed a very discriminatory bill which was later repealed.

Crime continues to be a serious problem here in certain areas, thanks to the deep concern for the civil liberties of criminals.

[46zilzal]

We have similar problems here all the time with boat loads of people abandoned off the coast.

[ArlJim78]

according to federal law (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$busc8.wais&start=2394314&SIZE=5388&TYPE=TEXT):

e) Personal possession of registration or receipt card; penalties

Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times
carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of
alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him
pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. Any alien who fails to
comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to
exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.

[Robert Goren]

according to federal law (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$busc8.wais&start=2394314&SIZE=5388&TYPE=TEXT):

e) Personal possession of registration or receipt card; penalties

Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times
carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of
alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him
pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. Any alien who fails to
comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to
exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both. But what if you are a citizen who happens to look like an alien? Then you don't have carry anything. The cop stops you and you don't have papers, only your word. Does he arrest you? Like I have said before I like the idea of a national Id card. JMO

[boxcar]

But what if you are a citizen who happens to look like an alien? Then you don't have carry anything. The cop stops you and you don't have papers, only your word. Does he arrest you? Like I have said before I like the idea of a national Id card. JMO

But you're missing the larger point, which is: When Congress wrote that federal law about I.D. requirements that Jim cited, how did they think it would be enforced? Did Congress write an unenforceable law? What would happen, for example, if a Customs Officer asked for proof of citizenship from someone who looks like a foreigner, but the guy is U.S. citizen and doesn't have the I.D. on him? Did the Customs Officer violate the guy's constitutional rights? Should the Customs Officer be charged, tried, convicted and sent to prison for X number of years for doing his job?

Boxcar

[HUSKER55]

LIKE YOUR IDEA ROBERT

[Robert Goren]

But you're missing the larger point, which is: When Congress wrote that federal law about I.D. requirements that Jim cited, how did they think it would be enforced? Did Congress write an unenforceable law? What would happen, for example, if a Customs Officer asked for proof of citizenship from someone who looks like a foreigner, but the guy is U.S. citizen and doesn't have the I.D. on him? Did the Customs Officer violate the guy's constitutional rights? Should the Customs Officer be charged, tried, convicted and sent to prison for X number of years for doing his job?

Boxcar When Congress wrote the law, they never envisioned the mess we are in now. Not only do we have all Mexicans, but aliens from everywhere over staying their student and tourist visas. We have a real mess on all fronts. JMO

[JustRalph]

Oppenheimer is another idiot that doesn't know what he is talking about.

The Mexicans don't talk to the police NOW! they don't show up for court appearances, they refuse to do witness statements and they traffic in black market and stolen goods. They shop in primarily Mexican owned grocery stores etc, when they are available, and they are responsible for a huge portion of theft offenses in the "trades" like Construction etc. They shoot each other and refuse to report the crimes. They have no respect for the law. They are tyrants at home (the males) and their wives and children are powerless once they arrive here. They count on the men to support them. Anyone who is supposedly for rights of women and children would not be a fan of the illegal immigrants household here in the U.S.

All these assholes writing columns in the Washington post and NY Times don't know what the hell they are talking about.

Some estimates show that 2 billion dollars in cash crosses the border via wire transfer to Mexico and other South American countries every year, directly from Illegal Immigrants here in the U.S.

I have a few friends who were once illegal. They took steps that lasted 5 freaking years to get a green card. They work their asses off amd we have sat and talked about this subject and they don't mince words. They want heavier enforcement of the law. They are victims too.

[46zilzal]

Oppenheimer is another idiot that doesn't know what he is talking about.

The Mexicans don't talk to the police NOW! they don't show up for court appearances, they refuse to do witness statements and they traffic in black market and stolen goods. They shop in primarily Mexican owned grocery stores etc, when they are available, and they are responsible for a huge portion of theft offenses in the "trades" like Construction etc. They shoot each other and refuse to report the crimes. They have no respect for the law. They are tyrants at home (the males) and their wives and children are powerless once they arrive here. They count on the men to support them. Anyone who is supposedly for rights of women and children would not be a fan of the illegal immigrants household here in the U.S.

All these assholes writing columns in the Washington post and NY Times don't know what the hell they are talking about.

Some estimates show that 2 billion dollars in cash crosses the border via wire transfer to Mexico and other South American countries every year, directly from Illegal Immigrants here in the U.S.

I have a few friends who were once illegal. They took steps that lasted 5 freaking years to get a green card. They work their asses off amd we have sat and talked about this subject and they don't mince words. They want heavier enforcement of the law. They are victims too.
but we never racially profile!

If that Southern border were along Albania, you would say the same thing as it continues ALL THE TIME, AD NAUSEUM: THEY (put in any ethnic group you want since time began) cause all OUR PROBLEMS!!

[JustRalph]

but we never racially profile!

If that Southern border were along Albania, you would say the same thing as it continues ALL THE TIME, AD NAUSEUM: THEY (put in any ethnic group you want since time began) cause all OUR PROBLEMS!!

You are just like Oppenheimer. You sit on your ass in Canada commenting on something you know nothing about.

Let me ask you this question:

When was the last time you worked in a Police Department tasked with trying to Police a large city with a huge Illegal Alien population? When was the last time you answered a thousand 911 calls a month for a year in that same city? How about dispatching police officers in that major city? You haven't....of course. You are talking out of your ass.

Now the obvious, I have been doing the above for the last year, and just recently left the job. I know what the hell I am talking about. Now shut the hell up unless you think you have a better grasp of the situation than I do. I doubt anybody on this board knows more about it. Now crawl back in your troll hole............

[ArlJim78]

when will people understand that skin color is not the driving factor? maybe if they lived in the areas that are more or less controlled by the drug cartels, or had to live with the violence. yeah, easy to hurl the race card from thousands of miles away. not so easy to live in the thick of the problem, and deal with the economic and social unrest, while the federal government does nothing but dither.
its real simple, you have to control your borders or else you will have mayhem.

[BlueShoe]

Some estimates show that 2 billion dollars in cash crosses the border via wire transfer to Mexico and other South American countries every year, directly from Illegal Immigrants here in the U.S.
We may be able move the decimal point on this one. Some studies say that 20 billion each year is sent to Mexico by its citizens residing in other countries. This is Mexicos second leading source of income, second only to its oil giant Pemex.

[prospector]

arizona is crushing under the debt from the illegals using our systems and jails...there is a special election this may 18th to add a TEMPORARY 1% to the sales tax for the next 3 years to balance our budget..
i just filled out an early ballot voting NO! on the proposal..everyone i talk to is voting no..
here's a cost saving idea..put the entire jail system under sheriff joe..baloney sandwiches for all..
cut all public pensions by 25% starting next year and freeze all new hiring for 3 years...

[46zilzal]

Let me ask you this question:

When was the last time you worked in a Police Department tasked with trying to Police a large city with a huge Illegal Alien population? When was the last time you answered a thousand 911 calls a month for a year in that same city? How about dispatching police officers in that major city? You haven't....of course. You are talking out of your ass.

Now the obvious, I have been doing the above for the last year, and just recently left the job. I know what the hell I am talking about. Now shut the hell up unless you think you have a better grasp of the situation than I do. I doubt anybody on this board knows more about it. Now crawl back in your troll hole............
Living in a country with far more ethnic diversity, I see everyday how tolerance for those who are different works first hand. Some people try to understand and don't pull out their concealed weapon at first chance.

[rastajenk]

"Living in a country with far more ethnic diversity..."

What a humongous crock of shit. No place on this lonely planet has the diversity of the good ol' U S of A. You may think you're the smartest kid on the block, but when you spout crap like this, you're cover is blown.

Not that we didn't already know that, but it's worth repeating.

"Far more diversity"? Tolerance? I guess that's why they need unelected bureaucrats to man the Civil Rights Commissions, to enforce that special brand of Canadian tolerance. You're a sad joke, Mr. Knowitall.

[Tom]

Living in a country with far more ethnic diversity, I see everyday how tolerance for those who are different works first hand. Some people try to understand and don't pull out their concealed weapon at first chance.

Your reply has nothing to do with Ralph's post. As he said, the 911 class were the result of the illegal causing the problems. Your solution to murdering drug dealers rampaging is understanding?

My God man, do you ever read what you post???

[boxcar]

When Congress wrote the law, they never envisioned the mess we are in now. Not only do we have all Mexicans, but aliens from everywhere over staying their student and tourist visas. We have a real mess on all fronts. JMO

Why don't you try to answer my questions instead of deflecting them with the nonsense above? What good is the federal law if law enforcement can't enforce it due to run-amok political correctness?

Boxcar

[BlueShoe]

This move by Arizona is so damn basic, why doesnt everyone get it?
It is not against immigration, it is against invasion.
It is not against immigrants, it is against criminals.
Why cant they get it?

[JustRalph]

This move by Arizona is so damn basic, why doesnt everyone get it?
It is not against immigration, it is against invasion.
It is not against immigrants, it is against criminals.
Why cant they get it?


You forgot one point. It's against Democratic Voters..........

[Robert Goren]

Why don't you try to answer my questions instead of deflecting them with the nonsense above? What good is the federal law if law enforcement can't enforce it due to run-amok political correctness?

Boxcar I did. You just didn't like the answer.

[boxcar]

I did. You just didn't like the answer.

I didn't like your non-answer because it had nothing to do with my questions. :rolleyes:

Let's try this: Why require non-citizens to carry I.D. when law enforcement has to jump through fiery hoops before they're allowed to check the I.D.? PC has trumped the laws, has it? PC takes precedence over stupid laws! Might as well repeal the laws, right? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Robert Goren]

I am in favor of the law. It now up to the state of Arizona to administer it in a way that is not discriminatory. Discrimination on the bias of skin color is against Federal Law, not just political correctness. That is one Federal Law, I think we all agree, will get enforced. They will have to check enough non-Mexicans to make the law stick. I would think most Arizonans think it is bad enough that are willing to put up with that. JMO

[Robert Goren]

I didn't like your non-answer because it had nothing to do with my questions. :rolleyes:

Let's try this: Why require non-citizens to carry I.D. when law enforcement has to jump through fiery hoops before they're allowed to check the I.D.? PC has trumped the laws, has it? PC takes precedence over stupid laws! Might as well repeal the laws, right? :rolleyes:

BoxcarBecause if citizens don't have carry an ID, how do you tell a citizen from a non-citizen. It is not PC as you like to portray, but the law of the land. Discrimination on bias of skin color has been against the law for well over 50 years. Where have you been?

[bigmack]

Look. AZ has detained 38,000 illegals (that means in this country illegally) in the last 18 months. BO & Company sent down a team of DOJ agents at that time that have been in place since then to find any instances of injustice or profiling. To date there has not been 5 cases they've found. There hasn't been 3. There hasn't been a single case that they've found in 38,000 that have been even close to being a violation of civil liberties.

The media is propagating yet another campaign of misinformation. They can only ask for documentation of citizenship if they are suspected of violating a law. THEY CANNOT BE SINGLED OUT ON THE STREET OR IN A RESTAURANT OR IN THEIR HOME OR AT A BASEBALL GAME BECAUSE THEY FIT A CERTAIN PROFILE. ANYONE WHO TELLS YOU DIFFERENTLY IS A BALD-FACED LIAR.

In the case of 46Zilzal he's not a liar, he's psychotic.

[PaceAdvantage]

anyone who is against it i think is just worried about giving cops the ability to profile and harrass at their discretionWhat is stopping them from doing that even without this law?

[PaceAdvantage]

Some people try to understand and don't pull out their concealed weapon at first chance.I struggle to understand how someone who professes to be so super-intelligent can sound so idiotic day in and day out.

Your obsession with the police, guns and the military is alarming.

The LAST THING a sane police officer or ANYONE who carries a sidearm wants to do is be in a situation where he is forced to draw his weapon.

Unless of course that person is insane. Are you implying all police are insane? Wouldn't surprise me if you were...

[Tom]

This move by Arizona is so damn basic, why doesnt everyone get it?
It is not against immigration, it is against invasion.
It is not against immigrants, it is against criminals.
Why cant they get it?

Probably because, like many here, no one has actually read the law.
They react, as they are trained to do, like salavating dogs at dinner time, to key words. Kind of like "find" "replace" in your word processor, just "find" "reply." :lol:

[jballscalls]

What is stopping them from doing that even without this law?

well many a police officer has been sued or fired for racial profiling, so i imagine it's the same with or without this law, they could lose their jobs if they base pulling people over by race, which the new law even states they can't do.

But my guess is people dont care what the language of the law says, they just dont trust cops and are using this new law as an excuse to protest them.

my guess is there will be more lawsuits because of this new law, many people who will get carded or what not will think they were only carded because of their ethnicity and they'll do what whats turned into the new American way, file suit

[cj's dad]

from Mexico's immigration policy (law):

Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years (Article 118)

"A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos WILL BE imposed on foreigners who enters the country illegally (Article 123)

A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison (Article 127)

It is also illegal for a foreigner to participate in any protest or movement that is against the government of Mexico and is punishable by a prison term.

Mexico requires that any American entering Mexico must be in possession of TWO forms of I.D., passport and one other photo I.D.



In order to enter Mexico with a vehicle, you will be required to purchase auto insurance IN MEXICO as U.S. insurance is not accepted.

To be able to work in Mexico you must:

prove that the job is not capable of being done by a Mexican citizen
have a letter from your bank proving you are capable of being self supporting or show bank statements that prove you have had deposits of $1000.00 U.S. per month, including an equal amount for each dependent.

Children of foreigners cannot attend Mexican public schools unless they are fluent in Spanish.

[46zilzal]

I struggle to understand how someone who professes to be so super-intelligent can sound so idiotic day in and day out.

Your obsession with the police, guns and the military is alarming.

The LAST THING a sane police officer or ANYONE who carries a sidearm wants to do is be in a situation where he is forced to draw his weapon.

Unless of course that person is insane. Are you implying all police are insane? Wouldn't surprise me if you were...
Over the years, dozens and dozens of times, I have run into those who have lost out in the genetic game and have been dealt a hand of small stature...Rather than elevator shoes, the surrogate answer is to equalize this deficit with a "power" job (like a cop) and of course the required GUN in order to make up for this deficit. The classic "little man" syndrome of which we have a notable example..

This degenerates to the thuggery I witness all the time.

and the "real Americans" in the country are those who have been the most exploited, the multiple native Americans who continue to get screwed out of what was theirs and was stolen by a bunch of Johnny Come Latelys who just happen to forget that they were immigrants a few generations back.

[boxcar]

Over the years, dozens and dozens of times, I have run into those who have lost out in the genetic game and have been dealt a hand of small stature

I can say the same for those who have lost out in the genetic game of gray cells, Mr. Zilly. You can always tell who they are. The get on forums like this one and post dribble endlessly, all the while thinking they are the brightest of the bright bulbs in the factory. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[GaryG]

Why do the ball bearings keep coming to mind? Things are getting pretty squirrelly here.....better strap on the old hog leg before I go out.

[HUSKER55]

THE STATE TROOPERS put up road checks every now and then and no one complains. How is this any different. It is an ID check

Only criminals complain. The innocent have nothing to fear.

[boxcar]

I just listened to the remarks the Racist-in-Chief made yesterday about the poor oppressed illegals and how when they go out to buy ice cream in AZ, they're now subject to being harassed. And how the AZ law is so wrong because many moons ago before AZ was even state these illegals' ancestors walked there, hunted there, etc. This remark has absolutely no relevancy to the current situation in AZ unless BO was implying that these illegal aliens have some kind of "ancestral rights" to be there in AZ! Well, if this is the case, Rush just heaped BO's logic like burning coals right upon his head! How come these same "ancestral rights" don't apply to the Jews in Israel when it comes to their land, generally, and to Jerusalem, in particular? The Jews occupied that land and Jerusalem long before Palestine was a gleam in anyone's eye -- in fact, long before the Religion of Piece(s) was invented!

BO is so brilliant, isn't he? This hypocrite really knows how to mass produce Double Standards in assembly line fashion! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[cj's dad]

I heard his remarks also Box and this guy is honestly bordering on being pitiful.

If it were not for the fect that he is the POTUS, this entire situation would be laughable.

[Tom]

Sounds like he is mellowing out....last year, he was accusing doctors of ripping out the kid's tonsils. This year, they just got hassled.

Do you think he has actually read the law?
Doubtful - he didn't read his own! :lol:

[ArlJim78]

Its more of Obama and Holder at war with America. They only seem to get excited about defending terrorists and illegals.

now its a war on Arizona (and maybe Texas down the road)
war on insurance companies
war on Wall Street
war on capitalism and private sector profits.
war on doctors

[Robert Goren]

Its more of Obama and Holder at war with America. They only seem to get excited about defending terrorists and illegals.

now its a war on Arizona (and maybe Texas down the road)
war on insurance companies
war on Wall Street
war on capitalism and private sector profits.
war on doctorsAre you defending the AIG crooks and wall street crooks like Bernie Madoff? I hope we are at war against time. JMO

[GaryG]

Its more of Obama and Holder at war with America. They only seem to get excited about defending terrorists and illegals.

now its a war on Arizona (and maybe Texas down the road)Don't forget Oklahoma...that abortion bill where they overrode the gov's veto has the democrats' panties in a twist. Barry Hussein will surely weigh in on this as well. The Oklahoma legislature acted stupidly....

[Robert Goren]

At least they have not declared war on internet poker players like Bush and company did.

[boxcar]

Are you defending the AIG crooks and wall street crooks like Bernie Madoff? I hope we are at war against time. JMO

He's probably attacking tyranny. This is something, I'm sure, you wouldn't understand.

Boxcar

[Robert Goren]

He's probably attacking tyranny. This is something, I'm sure, you wouldn't understand.

BoxcarHe is attacking thieves, this is something, apparently, you don't understand. You seem to think that the thieves should get a pass because you don't like the president.

[JustRalph]

Governor of Arizona Approval rating up 16 points since she signed the law.

That should tell you about how the People of Arizona feel

[Lefty]

Obama said that the local officers of AZ could stop a person if the officer suspected that person was here illegally. Evidently Obama hasn't read the law or just does not care about facts. there must be probable cause before an officer can ask anyone for ID. In most states, EVERYONE is required to carry ID. Everytime I've been stopped, i've had to produce an ID.
There ya go.

[BluegrassProf]

I doubt anybody on this board knows more about it. Now crawl back in your troll hole............I'm a prior police officer, currently teaching/training future police officers, as I have been for the last three years. If you'd like to engage in a measuring contest, I'm your huckleberry. :ThmbUp:

Perhaps I can clear up a few things re: this issue (or at least attempt to, anyway)...

Lefty, you're a bit off in the above description in that you're combining two distinct moments in time: the lawful initiation of police/citizen engagement, and probable cause justifying a request for documentation (ID, immigration papers, etc.). Concern re: 1070 is due primarily to the issue of "lawful engagement," which absolutely does not require the commission of a crime.

As long as a police officer initiates contact with a citizen in an appropriate (read: lawful) manner - saying hi on the street corner, interacting in a public park, exchanging greetings out a car window, or yes, making a routine traffic stop for one of any number of violations...contact certainly doesn't mean solely, for example, detainment - officers are in the position to demand documentation when suspicion about immigration status (based primarily on appearance, obviously...any notion otherwise is fairly humorous, outside an accent, and this is coming from an ex-officer) arises. Contact leads to interaction, which leads to probable cause based on individual officer discretion...in other words, absolutely, the bill institutionalizes profiling based on an individual's appearance, little more. Certainly, profiling exists whether we want it to or not; the issue here is that we're looking at legislation that mandates it. bigmack, you can call me a liar all you want; doesn't phase me a bit; I speak from experience...that said, PA, you're absolutely right: there doesn't need to be a policy for this very thing to take place. The problem really isn't that times are a-changin' in policing - in fact, they'll probably not gonna be a whole heck of a lot worse than they are now, since policy need not be in place for officers to profile on the basis of race - it's that 1070 legitimizes problematic (and incredibly inefficient, more importantly) behavior, which certainly doesn't do much good to address the actual problem of illegal immigration.

CJ's Dad: Stop & frisks are an excellent comparative practice to the above, although your conclusion is misdirected. Stop & frisks are ONLY effective if done using a very specific methodology: using crime data & statistics to inform patrol areas and suspect traits, an officer might, for example, stop and frisk individuals known to be engaged in criminal activity in a certain part of a neighborhood during certain times of the day. We call this selective policing (or proactive policing, etc.), using intelligence to drive practice. Using stop & frisks en masse, or randomly for all citizens or large groups of citizens, is incredibly ineffective, and does NOT lead to a drop in crime (nor has it in the past, repeatedly). We don't stop & frisk all citizens, or all blacks, or all hispanics, or all welshmen, or all Republicans, or all Baretta owners. Doing so would be both ineffective and an enormous waste of time, energy, and personnel. If you want to stop the majority of crime, focus on the minority of recidivist offenders, and do so - very importantly - from the bottom-up...otherwise, as we see with 1070, you're attempting to put an infected band-aid on the skull fracture.

Keep in mind, 1070 is - despite the framing of the issue - a liberal policy...it increases officer discretion to interfere in individual lives and demand compliance with law. Ironically, it should be the most conservative among us that should find this policy the most problematic...the line between this sort of policy and things such as national IDs and entering private residences to ensure compliance with the law is razor-thin. It just happens that the population targeted by increased discretion in this case is hispanics...what happens when it becomes gun owners? Tea Partiers? Dissidents? Husker55, it's absolutely not only the criminal that needs fear overzealous enforcement and control through targeted legislation; you need not be hiding an illegal immigrant or illegal Baretta owner when your door is kicked down for you to be angry that it was kicked down at all.

If you think the only people who should be wary of the government - police included - are criminals, I suggest you look more closely. We've been through this before. It wasn't pretty. :ThmbDown:

The amount of discretion provided local police officers is enormous, and for damned good reason: there's enough on the plate as it is, and the ability to use trained judgement is incredibly important. Forcing local police departments to engage in a battle against illegal immigration represents the federal government tossing the responsibility for cleaning up its mess onto someone else, and making them do so in a way that has the potential to cause far more problems than it EVER hopes to solve. The answer to the problem of illegal immigration lies not in IDs or bushels of local interrogations and/or arrests, but in federal enforcement, at the border and throughout the nation...the last place it needs to happen is at the local level. If that ends up being the case, the illegal immigration battle is lost far before it's begun.

Send letters to Napolitano. About time for her to step up.

[JustRalph]

BlueGrass, I don't disagree with anything you posted. Maybe a few minor points, but nothing substantial at all. Your point about putting the Federal responsibility on to local officers is salient and one that should be discussed more. Especially when assigning blame for the position the country is in now. From your Moniker I surmise you are teaching Criminal Justice in College somewhere? That's a completely different discussion. Good for you.

I spent 12 yrs as an Officer, starting out in California in the early 80's. Watched the wave of illegals move its way into Ohio in the 90's where I was an Officer at that time. Just spent a year in North Carolina dealing with it again after moving inside to radio/communications.

Be aware of one thing. I am not a fan of today's police methods. Way too political and full of bullshit. Much for fanfare and news bites. I consider the courts churn that gets nothing accomplished. Jaded? A realist ? Do we really need a label ? I salute anybody who can survive in the current environment that Police Officers are forced to work in. But I also call it for what it is, as I see it. Politics........which is a damn shame. It shouldn't be that way.

[bigmack]

the issue here is that we're looking at legislation that mandates it.
Balderdash. Read the bill.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=36288129&key=MTExYzVjZTMt&pass=YzgxMy00YWRh

[boxcar]

He is attacking thieves, this is something, apparently, you don't understand. You seem to think that the thieves should get a pass because you don't like the president.

As I predicted, you don't have a clue.

Boxcar

[Tom]

New from the FUBO people...

http://www.fubowear.com/servlet/StoreFront

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Send letters to Napolitano. About time for her to step up.

Preferrably to the windowsill and then out to the sidewalk allowing someone with a shred of competence to replace her.

[JustRalph]

New from the FUBO people...

http://www.fubowear.com/servlet/StoreFront


Tom, on MSNBC yesterday, they actually had a banner running in front of one of their discussions

" New Arizona Law Makes it a Crime to be an Illegal Alien"

[BluegrassProf]

bigmack: man, you must be joking. I have; I am; it's what I do, daily. You can bank on that.

Sadly, repetition doesn't make a true statement make. You can freely google to better understand the issue(s) here, but in the text of the bill itself, refer to the early points of "lawful contact" and "reasonable suspicion"/"reasonable attempt" (Article 8, 11-1051(b)) - as noted in my last post - with respect to initiation of contact and the path to and through probable cause (where profiling comes into play); it's right there in black and white, as I JUST said, followed by a section referencing the issue of civil ligitation on the basis of perceived failure to comply (the latter being particularly worrisome to many police administrators as it places the burden of pandering squarely on their shoulders). Perhaps a night-school refresher law or crim course would provide some insight into these particular questions of definition, and how they play out on the street.

It would also very likely provide some insight into the importance of the balance between police discretion/practice and constitutionally-granted individual freedoms (yes, for citizens, who this practice absolutely affects...it targets illegals through sweeping profiling, citizens or otherwise). When we talk about freedom and the control of law by government, the former cannot be sacrificed for the latter; it defeats the purpose, and threatens very basic constitutional ideals.

When it comes to control of law and the powers of the police as agents of government, history reminds us repeatedly of the value of fundamentally conservative social control policy (plenty of Libertarians, for example, have perfectly justifiable concerns about policy that allows the state to demand personal information by force...and here we thought the census was bad...). Sure, at the moment, we're talking about targeting a specific ethnic minority...at the rate we're going, not for long. If you're justifiably concerned about expansion of the powers of government in today's political environment, please to look no further....unless you're looking at the regulation of happy-meal toys in Cali, which I just saw, and is equally disturbing. Look at that one all you want. :faint:

BlueGrass, I don't disagree with anything you posted. Maybe a few minor points, but nothing substantial at all. Your point about putting the Federal responsibility on to local officers is salient and one that should be discussed more. Especially when assigning blame for the position the country is in now. From your Moniker I surmise you are teaching Criminal Justice in College somewhere? That's a completely different discussion. Good for you.

I spent 12 yrs as an Officer, starting out in California in the early 80's. Watched the wave of illegals move its way into Ohio in the 90's where I was an Officer at that time. Just spent a year in North Carolina dealing with it again after moving inside to radio/communications.

Be aware of one thing. I am not a fan of today's police methods. Way too political and full of bullshit. Much for fanfare and news bites. I consider the courts churn that gets nothing accomplished. Jaded? A realist ? Do we really need a label ? I salute anybody who can survive in the current environment that Police Officers are forced to work in. But I also call it for what it is, as I see it. Politics........which is a damn shame. It shouldn't be that way.Yessir, sure do: I teach at a public university nowadays, in CJ as assumed. And nossir, we don't need a label (though if we're looking for one, I'd go with "realist"). ;)

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but absolutely, the whole of the criminal justice system today is overwhelmingly driven by politics...from the criminal law to the way the police do their job, it's all massively political. For a nation that traditionally values the maintenance of the space between politics and the law, wowow, we sure do a horrible job of it. :bang:

Policing is no exception: we either shove community policing down departments' throats (only to have whole neighborhoods spit on our feet when we try to hand out hugs) or have these gigantic crackdowns on mostly irrelevant offending/offenders that don't do much but a.) make the problem worse or b.) make the problem go somewhere else. Administrators sit in plushy chairs and make decisions based on something they thought they knew from when they pounded pavement, and beat cops sit through it wondering what in the HELL they're all talking about.

Politicians pass unmanageable and unenforceable laws and mandate overly restrictive or destrictive practices, and law enforcement does its best to wrap its collective mind around the insanity and make legislation useful on the street. Media jumps on anything that moves, crying disaster or deviance at the drop of a hat.

The absolute FIRST thing potential LE recruits hear from me is how politics & perception-driven the criminal justice system is today...I kid you not, verrry first thing (and as someone with plenty of experience in the field, I'm sure it'd be the first thing from your mouth, too! :D ). In short, agreed: the influence of those forces is the single biggest, most awkward, most painful stumbling block for officers and departments across the country, for both the passage of rational (read: "useful"), enforceable law and the implementation of effective policing practices. If anyone thinks that policing practices, for example, aren't driven most heavily by politics, media, and public perceptions of what policing entails (as opposed to, say, empirically-informed practices, for example), again, I suggest a much closer look.

It's wayway beyond plain to see that an effective enforcement plan for the problem of illegal immigration is long, LONG overdue. If one positive thing comes out of this AZ clusterbunk, we should hope that its process of dissolution will spur even an inch of damned movement from the federal government, who should call it quits with the age-old practice of passing the immigration buck and step up to the plate with a planned, focused enforcement effort, particularly through interdiction at the border and otherwise (and ultimately though focus on legitimate immigration policies)...Ms. Napolitano - or her predecessor, JHS ;) - can quit crying foul and start crying initiative. If you want to limit reactive policymaking, Ms. N and Co., take some ever-loving action. Focus on where the problem starts, and outcome will dramatically improve. And more importantly, Joe and Jane Fed, quit making life more difficult for the local police officer...he/she's got his/her hands full dealing with your problems as it is.

[JustRalph]

Bluegrass,

First class post. Informed and right on the money. I will take the label as a compliment. Enjoyed reading it. :ThmbUp:

[bigmack]

refer to the early points of "lawful contact" and "reasonable suspicion"/"reasonable attempt" (Article 8, 11-1051(b)) - as noted in my last post - with respect to initiation of contact and the path to and through probable cause (where profiling comes into play); it's right there in black and white, as I JUST said, followed by a section referencing the issue of civil ligitation on the basis of perceived failure to comply, the latter being particularly worrisome to many police administrators as it places the burden of pandering squarely on their shoulders.
As previously mentioned, 38,000 have been detained in the last 18 months with DoJ agents following their every move. Not a single case of profiling has occurred. Why do you suspect that is?

'Probable cause' is AFTER contact with the supposition of suspicious and/or illegal activity.

Furthermore, you're bringing up BigGovernment issues clamping down on legal citizens as if we need to fear this legislation as it will impact our lives. I laugh.

'96 brought legislation that allows states to act where The Feds don't. Little is mentioned of this.

AZ is under siege. 35% of Maricopa Cty Sheriffs are Hispanic. You're stretching in your implications that this bill MANDATES profiling. That is an absurd & false statement.

[BluegrassProf]

Bluegrass,

First class post. Informed and right on the money. I will take the label as a compliment. Enjoyed reading it. :ThmbUp:Much appreciated, and as well you should. :ThmbUp: Nice to see another poster on the board with firsthand appreciation for the system as it actually is, as opposed to what we reallyreally want it to be, or what Johnny Politics tells us it is. :cool: <--- (New IL governor Johnny Politics...stay tuned for his upcoming Apprentice appearance.)


bigmack: Suffice it to say, if you won't take very fundamental constitutionalist ideas - as well as the letter of the law itself and problems with its practical application, as noted above - into consideration in favor of relatively irrelevant soundbytes and neoliberal ideology, there's really no use in the mud-stuck back-and-forth, with which you'd no doubt agree. That said, this comment... Furthermore, you're bringing up BigGovernment issues clamping down on legal citizens as if we need to fear this legislation as it will impact our lives. I laugh. ...highlights for me sufficiently your lack of concern for the power of the police as representatives of the state. That's certainly your prerogative, disconcerting though it may be, and more than represents your position. Couldn't ask for anything more. :ThmbUp:

[bigmack]

That said, this comment... ...highlights for me sufficiently your lack of concern for the power of the police as representatives of the state. That's certainly your prerogative, disconcerting though it may be, and more than represents your position. Couldn't ask for anything more. :ThmbUp:
What am I talking to a Pentagon official concerned about the far reaching implications of looking into the emails of the Ft. Hood terrorist?

Climb out of your bureaucratic training and cite for me the passage in 1070 that I and my comrades need to be concerned of.

[BluegrassProf]

Climb out of your bureaucratic training and cite for me the passage in 1070 that I and my comrades need to be concerned of.I did, at length. See above; it's plain as day ("in black and white," to quote myself).

And certainly, feel free to marginalize my experience in the field as a trainee, an officer, and a trainer; your mouth doesn't affect me one bit. ;)

But by all means, carry on with the irrelevant (and in the case of the Ft. Hood question, nonsensical) haymaker swings; again, at this point, it's circular, and as I said, your prerogative. :ThmbUp:

[bigmack]

"lawful contact" and "reasonable suspicion"/"reasonable attempt" (Article 8, 11-1051(b)) - as noted in my last post - with respect to initiation of contact and the path to and through probable cause (where profiling comes into play); it's right there in black and white, as I JUST said, followed by a section referencing the issue of civil ligitation on the basis of perceived failure to comply (the latter being particularly worrisome to many police administrators as it places the burden of pandering squarely on their shoulders).
So we're clear, this is what you're saying legal citizens need to worry about?

1070 was drafted as a reaction to the inaction on the part of the Feds.

[newtothegame]

Or, maybe this is what citizens need to worry about?????

Justice Department: Three Border Patrol Agents Assaulted Per Day; Someone Kidnapped Every 35 Hours in Phoenix; One-in-Five Teens Use Drugs—With Mexican Traffickers ‘Predominant’ Supplier
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
threat assessment ("][/url]By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

Three Border Patrol agents are assaulted on the average day at or near the U.S. border. Someone is kidnapped every 35 hours in Phoenix, Ariz., often by agents of alien smuggling organizations. And one-in-five American teenagers last year used some type of illegal drug, many of which were imported across the unsecured U.S.-Mexico border.

These facts are reported in the recently released National Drug Threat Assessment for 2010, published by the National Drug Intelligence Center, a division of the U.S. Justice Department. They ought to add some perspective to the national debate raging over Arizona’s new law that requires local law enforcement officers to make a “reasonable attempt” to determine the immigration status of persons they legally come into contact with and whom they reasonably suspect of being in the country illegally

Assaults on Border Patrol agents have massively escalated in recent years, according to the Justice Department [url="http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs38/38661/index.htm), which was released on March 25. “Assaults against U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) agents increased 46 percent from 752 incidents in FY2006 to 1,097 incidents in FY 2008,” says the assessment. Given that there are 365 days in the year, 1,097 assaults equals 3 per day.

“Contributing most to this increase were rocking assaults, which rose 77 percent from 435 incidents in FY2006 to 769 incidents in FY2008,” said the assessment. A “rocking assault,” the assessment explains, “is defined as the throwing of rocks at Border Patrol agents by drug or alien smugglers with the intent of threatening or causing physical harm to the agent.”

The assessment also noted that Border Patrol agents are sometimes murdered in the line of duty. “However, some assaults against USBP agents in California have been deadly,” it said, “including the January 2008 murder of a USBP officer who was struck and killed by the automobile of a fleeing drug suspect in Imperial County and the fatal shooting of a USBP officer investigating suspicious activity in Campo in July 2009.”

The assessment indicates that kidnappings have become commonplace in Phoenix, Ariz., because families involved in alien smuggling have moved there to escape inter-smuggling-organization violence in Mexico.

“Although much of the violence attributed to conflicts over control of the smuggling routes has been confined to Mexico, some has occurred in the United States,” says the Justice Department assessment. “Violence in the United States … has been limited primarily to attacks against alien smuggling organization (ASO) members and their families—some of whom have sought refuge from violence in Mexico by moving to U.S. border communities such as Phoenix. For example, in recent years, kidnappings in Phoenix have numbered in the hundreds, with 260 in 2007, 299 in 2008, and 267 in 2009.”

The 267 kidnappings in Phoenix in 2009 equals one kidnapping every 1.37 days—or one every 35 hours.

“Nineteen percent of youth aged 12 to 17 report past year illicit drug use,” the report says. That is approximately one out of every five teenagers in the United States.

The main drug suppliers for these American teenagers are Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTOs), which increasingly dominate the U.S. market for illegal drugs.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/64910

[newtothegame]

or maybe its the lack of acnkowledging reality???

Napolitano: U.S.- Mexico Border ‘As Secure Now As It Has Ever Been’
Thursday, April 29, 2010
By Edwin Mora

(CNSNews.com) -- Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, while testifying before a Senate panel, said the United States’s southwest border is “as secure now as it has ever been.”

“I say this again as someone who has walked that border,” she said. “I’ve ridden that border. I’ve flown it. I’ve driven it. I know that border I think as well as anyone, and I will tell you it is as secure now as it has ever been.”

Napolitano made that remark in response to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who was questioning her during Tuesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Before being appointed secretary of Homeland Security, Napolitano served as the governor and attorney general of Arizona, where currently an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants reside. Arizona is also the state with the most illegal border crossings.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/64918

[newtothegame]

Awwwww damn the bad luck!!!! :lol:

Illegal Immigrants Plan to Leave Over Ariz. Law


Wednesday, 28 Apr 2010 06:31 PM

Many of the cars that once stopped in the Home Depot parking lot to pick up day laborers to hang drywall or do landscaping now just drive on by.

Arizona's sweeping immigration bill allows police to arrest illegal immigrant day laborers seeking work on the street or anyone trying to hire them. It won't take effect until summer but it is already having an effect on the state's underground economy.

"Nobody wants to pick us up," Julio Loyola Diaz says in Spanish as he and dozens of other men wait under the shade of palo verde trees and lean against a low brick wall outside the east Phoenix home improvement store.

Many day laborers like Diaz say they will leave Arizona because of the law, which also makes it a crime to be in the U.S. illegally and directs police to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants.

Supporters of the law hope it creates jobs for thousands of Americans.

"We want to drive day labor away," says Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's sponsors.

An estimated 100,000 illegal immigrants have left Arizona in the past two years as it cracked down on illegal immigration and its economy was especially hard hit by the Great Recession. A Department of Homeland Security report on illegal immigrants estimates Arizona's illegal immigrant population peaked in 2008 at 560,000, and a year later dipped to 460,000.

http://newsmax.com/US/US-Immigration-Day-Labor/2010/04/28/id/357208

[bigmack]

As long as a police officer initiates contact with a citizen in an appropriate (read: lawful) manner - saying hi on the street corner, interacting in a public park, exchanging greetings out a car window, or yes, making a routine traffic stop for one of any number of violations...contact certainly doesn't mean solely, for example, detainment - officers are in the position to demand documentation when suspicion about immigration status (based primarily on appearance, obviously...any notion otherwise is fairly humorous, outside an accent, and this is coming from an ex-officer) arises. Contact leads to interaction, which leads to probable cause :lol: based on individual officer discretion...in other words, absolutely, the bill institutionalizes profiling based on an individual's appearance, little more.
That entire statement is a huge pile of dung.

Anyone is asked to carry proper ID. Without proper ID things move to another level. For you, for me, for anyone. Citizen or not.

You're telling me that this bill gives carte blanche to law enforcement to walk up to anyone and say "show me your papers". (Line for effect. Naturally they would ask for proper ID but 'show me your papers' works so much better to reinforce a Nazi-like theme)

You're mistaken & you've been watching too many movies.

[PaceAdvantage]

Over the years, dozens and dozens of times, I have run into those who have lost out in the genetic game and have been dealt a hand of small stature...Rather than elevator shoes, the surrogate answer is to equalize this deficit with a "power" job (like a cop) and of course the required GUN in order to make up for this deficit. The classic "little man" syndrome of which we have a notable example..

This degenerates to the thuggery I witness all the time.

and the "real Americans" in the country are those who have been the most exploited, the multiple native Americans who continue to get screwed out of what was theirs and was stolen by a bunch of Johnny Come Latelys who just happen to forget that they were immigrants a few generations back.Like I said before...alarming you are...

[BluegrassProf]

Newtothegame: Absolutely, by all means, post away; for the most part, you're firmly reinforcing the need for federal enforcement of immigration law - not otherwise - and for leadership that ensures it. The first article is an almost perfect example: Or, maybe this is what citizens need to worry about?????

Justice Department: Three Border Patrol Agents Assaulted Per Day; Someone Kidnapped Every 35 Hours in Phoenix; One-in-Five Teens Use Drugs—With Mexican Traffickers ‘Predominant’ Supplier
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

...They ought to add some perspective to the national debate raging over Arizona’s new law that requires local law enforcement officers to make a “reasonable attempt” to determine the immigration status of persons they legally come into contact with and whom they reasonably suspect of being in the country illegally... That's precisely what it does: it highlights very basic reasons that local enforcement of immigration law, as has been proposed in AZ, is fundamentally misdirected. Three basic reasons, with respect to the issues of cross-border trafficking and violence directed towards border agents as discussed above:

1.) Local enforcement of immigration law is irrelevant to the issue of border violence, which springs largely from a grossly undermanned and underresourced border protection service and lack of a substantive, cohesive federal enforcement policy. The notion that arresting illegal immigrants at the local level will affect, for example, violence against border agents is absurd, and by ignoring the root of the problem as noted above, actually increases the dangers presented to interdiction agents (see #3). Local enforcement legislation also places undue pressure on a community's law enforcement agencies, who have a massively complex job as it is, and who simply do not have the training and expertise of federal agents (far more of which are needed in a multitude of positions). And it's incredibly problematic to place local police administrators, certainly, in the position of requiring compliance - or an appearance of compliance, at least - with a pandering policy that, given the lack of training, expertise and legitimacy, makes their officers' job more difficult and more dangerous with little impact on the problem of illegal immigration, a responsibility shrugged off by a politically-driven federal institution.

2.) As any immigration agent will confirm, the individual arrested at the local level is, with virtual certainty, not involved in cross-border trafficking (of humans, drugs, weapons, etc.). The local arrestee is, in fact, unlikely to be engaged in any criminal activity, other than the crime of illegal immigration (if you'd like data on this, I'm certainly happy to send it your way...it's police data, mind you, not scholarbabble). Attempts at local interdiction of drugs smuggled from Mexico are another excellent example: by focusing enforcement at the local level, you increase demand, price, and potency, often eliminating local competition for sales (most local dealer arrests, for example, do not involve drugs trafficked from overseas or across the border, which aids in the creating of an artificial monopoly for cartel-style operations...again, this is reinforced by both data and my own personal experience in law enforcement), improving the market for cross-border drug trafficking and ignoring the root of the problem where strides are far more likely to be made (again, see #3).

3.) By inefficiently focusing efforts on local enforcement (with all the problems that it entails), you ignore the clear roots of the issue: border protection. Immigration enforcement begins at the source; acting otherwise a.) leaves the door wide open, b.) creates the potential for litigation and, importantly, for increased violence at the borders, and c.) threatens the fundamentals of due process, something that - yes, absolutely - affects every single person in the country. You might feel comfortable with the government circumventing constitutional mandates, but not I...after all, it's all fine and good until the wrong person - or administration - is in charge, and you become the targeted minority (*ahem*Tea Partiers, *ahem*"domestic extremists"). And really, my opinion is neither here nor there...it is what it is. But it has no bearing on the letter of the law.


Bigmack: :D OK, big guy. Must be too many movies. Certainly moreso than my experience as a police officer, and as an instructor for those entering the field, and as advisee to criminal justice institutions throughout the country. Must just be the flicks. :ThmbUp:

The fact is this: I have little interest in - and hopefuly understandably, little time for - the neoliberal ideological debate. My initial intent here was to provide some clarification re: 1070 for anyone interested in understanding its controversial language, and to highlight some constitutional and practical concerns and implications - again, based on and reinforced by direct, firsthand experience in policing - for both the general public and for law enforcement practitioners (the latter being a body sadly overlooked by media in favor of maintaining the Gestapo-police stereotype, which they adore). At the end of the day, I could care less about your perspective (which I mean in the nicest way), misinformed though it may be.

Again (and again), feel free to carry on as you are; if you consider this a deep ideological debate and would like to be awarded status as victor, by all means, take that trophy. But I suggest doing so while refraining from dismissing my experience and expertise in the field, neither of which are garnered by trophies or senses of self-satisfaction. Trust me, you can make points without the ire.

More importantly, believe it or not, time spent here is actually time spent distracted from my considerably more relevant, actual role as instructor, ensuring that future police officers approach their mission in the most effective and efficient manner possible, respecting the role and confines of the constitution, and allowing them to understand how it can inform their mandate, rather than simply hinder it (not that I blame anyone else but myself for my distraction, clearly). My efforts are far better focused there, wouldn't you say?

[newtothegame]

Newtothegame: Absolutely, by all means, post away; for the most part, you're firmly reinforcing the need for federal enforcement of immigration law - not otherwise - and for leadership that ensures it. The first article is an almost perfect example: That's precisely what it does: it highlights very basic reasons that local enforcement of immigration law, as has been proposed in AZ, is fundamentally misdirected. Three basic reasons, with respect to the issues of cross-border trafficking and violence directed towards border agents as discussed above:

1.) Local enforcement of immigration law is irrelevant to the issue of border violence, which springs largely from a grossly undermanned and underresourced border protection service and lack of a substantive, cohesive federal enforcement policy. The notion that arresting illegal immigrants at the local level will affect, for example, violence against border agents is absurd, and by ignoring the root of the problem as noted above, actually increases the dangers presented to interdiction agents (see #3). Local enforcement legislation also places undue pressure on a community's law enforcement agencies, who have a massively complex job as it is, and who simply do not have the training and expertise of federal agents (far more of which are needed in a multitude of positions). And it's incredibly problematic to place local police administrators, certainly, in the position of requiring compliance - or an appearance of compliance, at least - with a pandering policy that, given the lack of training, expertise and legitimacy, makes their officers' job more difficult and more dangerous with little impact on the problem of illegal immigration, a responsibility shrugged off by a politically-driven federal institution.

2.) As any immigration agent will confirm, the individual arrested at the local level is, with virtual certainty, not involved in cross-border trafficking (of humans, drugs, weapons, etc.). The local arrestee is, in fact, unlikely to be engaged in any criminal activity, other than the crime of illegal immigration (if you'd like data on this, I'm certainly happy to send it your way...it's police data, mind you, not scholarbabble). Attempts at local interdiction of drugs smuggled from Mexico are another excellent example: by focusing enforcement at the local level, you increase demand, price, and potency, often eliminating local competition for sales (most local dealer arrests, for example, do not involve drugs trafficked from overseas or across the border, which aids in the creating of an artificial monopoly for cartel-style operations...again, this is reinforced by both data and my own personal experience in law enforcement), improving the market for cross-border drug trafficking and ignoring the root of the problem where strides are far more likely to be made (again, see #3).

3.) By inefficiently focusing efforts on local enforcement (with all the problems that it entails), you ignore the clear roots of the issue: border protection. Immigration enforcement begins at the source; acting otherwise a.) leaves the door wide open, b.) creates the potential for litigation and, importantly, for increased violence at the borders, and c.) threatens the fundamentals of due process, something that - yes, absolutely - affects every single person in the country. You might feel comfortable with the government circumventing constitutional mandates, but not I...after all, it's all fine and good until the wrong person - or administration - is in charge, and you become the targeted minority (*ahem*Tea Partiers, *ahem*"domestic extremists"). And really, my opinion is neither here nor there...it is what it is. But it has no bearing on the letter of the law.


Bigmack: :D OK, big guy. Must be too many movies. Certainly moreso than my experience as a police officer, and as an instructor for those entering the field, and as advisee to criminal justice institutions throughout the country. Must just be the flicks. :ThmbUp:

The fact is this: I have little interest in - and hopefuly understandably, little time for - the neoliberal ideological debate. My initial intent here was to provide some clarification re: 1070 for anyone interested in understanding its controversial language, and to highlight some constitutional and practical concerns and implications - again, based on and reinforced by direct, firsthand experience in policing - for both the general public and for law enforcement practitioners (the latter being a body sadly overlooked by media in favor of maintaining the Gestapo-police stereotype, which they adore). At the end of the day, I could care less about your perspective (which I mean in the nicest way), misinformed though it may be.

Again (and again), feel free to carry on as you are; if you consider this a deep ideological debate and would like to be awarded status as victor, by all means, take that trophy. But I suggest doing so while refraining from dismissing my experience and expertise in the field, neither of which are garnered by trophies or senses of self-satisfaction. Trust me, you can make points without the ire.

More importantly, believe it or not, time spent here is actually time spent distracted from my considerably more relevant, actual role as instructor, ensuring that future police officers approach their mission in the most effective and efficient manner possible, respecting the role and confines of the constitution, and allowing them to understand how it can inform their role, rather than simply hinder it. My efforts are far better focused there, wouldn't you say?

You say I am reinforcing your arguements...well just look at the bolded statement from your reply. I by no means claim to be a law scholar, ex-police, nor do I live in AZ. But ALL states now are being affected by Illegals.
I agree that " ..the need for federal enforcement".
Az would of never had to pass this law had the federal government enforced the current laws. (See the article I posted where Napalitano says in essence that are borders are safer now then ever). Do you agree with her assessment? Obviously this administration does! She is the head of her government agency and reports directly to the potus.
As to your legal arguements, YOU nor I, or anyone on this forum will be deciding this one. I doubt seriously that Holder and this administration will challlenge it. If they do, it will most assuredly be seen by the surpreme court, not us! :lol:

[bigmack]

My efforts are far better focused there, wouldn't you say?
Hey Friday, while we'll agree this is a job for The Feds, something has to be done. You offer no alternative and spend valuable time fretting of social rights rather than equal rights. Few of us have concern for the expansiveness of this state bill and how it might affect our lives.

The individual arrested at the local level is, with virtual certainty, not involved in cross-border trafficking (of humans, drugs)

Local level/Fed level - You're wrapped in semantics.

If your point is that this is not a state affair rather than a Federal - No Shit!

In the meantime, who's steppin' up?

[BluegrassProf]

I've absolutely got to get some sleep - working tomorrow, and it's almost 0500 here - so I can't keep up with the circles. No more biblical posts. Tragic! :faint:

I have no intentions of changing minds; that's not my place, and a waste of my - and everyone else's - time and energy. If nothing else, I hope I've provided some insight from a particular background in the field (one that understands both the letter of the law and the real-world, practical application of enforcement policy), and made some issues more salient, along with my own personal position on the issue, driven largely by that background (NTTG, agreed re: Napolitano & Co., as I've mentioned a handful of times...though the apathy is more historical than the current administration, dismissive though these folks certainly appear).

Time for some shut-eye, and for me at least, to leave debates where they are.

[boxcar]

I've absolutely got to get some sleep - working tomorrow, and it's almost 0500 here - so I can't keep up with the circles. No more biblical posts. Tragic! :faint:

"Tragic", you say? Far be it from me to bring tragedy into your life by some implied oversight! I think the following is appropriate for you, Mr. Policeman:

Prov 6:10-11
10 "A little sleep , a little slumber,
A little folding of the hands to rest" —
11 And your poverty will come in like a vagabond,
And your need like an armed man.
NASB

Better lock and load before you lay your head down. ;)

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

good comment from el Rushbo today: Wouldn't it be great if Obama got as tough on Iran as he is on Arizona.

[Show Me the Wire]

BluegrassProf:

As an ex-police officer you should know many statutes have the language of lawful contact and reasonable suspiscion as the standards for deeper investigation.

The initial contact language is not unique to this statute and has withstood the test of constitutionality.

I agree more emphasis should be placed on the border itself, but that is the responsibility of the U.S. government. A responsibility the U.S. government is ignoring.

The State of Arizona has the responsibility of protecting the health and welfare of its citizens, which comes into play after the illegal border crosser decides to remain within the State's borders, or is physically present within the State's borders. Authority is clear cut and there is no usurping of federal powers, different responsibilities depending on location of the activities.

[Lefty]

Newtothegame, please try not to confuse us with those pesky factual articles.

Lindsay Graham also asked the question again after she deflected with her diatribe about Az borders being as secure as they ever were. She said, it was an unfair question.
"Is the Az border secure" he asks again. She says it's an unfair question?
She's the Homeland security Chief? OMG

[boxcar]

BluegrassProf:

As an ex-police officer you should know many statutes have the language of lawful contact and reasonable suspiscion as the standards for deeper investigation.

The initial contact language is not unique to this statute and has withstood the test of constitutionality.

I agree more emphasis should be placed on the border itself, but that is the responsibility of the U.S. government. A responsibility the U.S. government is ignoring.

The State of Arizona has the responsibility of protecting the health and welfare of its citizens, which comes into play after the illegal border crosser decides to remain within the State's borders, or is physically present within the State's borders. Authority is clear cut and there is no usurping of federal powers, different responsibilities depending on location of the activities.

Exactly right! In fact, Rush was saying today that many illegals are already leaving AZ even though the law doesn't go into effect yet! Supposedly, at some Home Depot out there, the lot wasn't nearly as crowded today as it usually is. What's to prevent a cop from pulling into the lot and approaching anyone who is obviously loitering? This activity is, generally, standard modus operandi of illegal aliens looking for work. Suspicion of loitering, alone, would be sufficient grounds to check everyone's I.D.s.

Boxcar

[acorn54]

i don't see why we don't want illegal immigrants. if they fill jobs that americans don't want who is going to do the work if we prevent illegals from crossing the border. i mean jobs like being a dishwasher or cleaning bathrooms apparantly aren't jobs americans opt for. if illegals fill jobs that americans don't do i mean what's the problem with having them in the country?

[BlueShoe]

Other states are following the lead of Arizona it would seem. Yesterday Texas State Rep. Debbie Riddle was on Fox with Cavuto and stated that Texas will be introducing similar statutes. Oklahoma is already in a fight with Mexico over their new get tough stance, and Utah is said to be considering following suit.

[bigmack]

i don't see why we don't want illegal immigrants. if they fill jobs that americans don't want who is going to do the work if we prevent illegals from crossing the border. i mean jobs like being a dishwasher or cleaning bathrooms apparantly aren't jobs americans opt for. if illegals fill jobs that americans don't do i mean what's the problem with having them in the country?
http://immigrationcounters.com/

[Lefty]

acorn, do you not understand the meaning of illegal?

[Robert Goren]

i don't see why we don't want illegal immigrants. if they fill jobs that americans don't want who is going to do the work if we prevent illegals from crossing the border. i mean jobs like being a dishwasher or cleaning bathrooms apparantly aren't jobs americans opt for. if illegals fill jobs that americans don't do i mean what's the problem with having them in the country? There are no jobs that Americans won't do if the pay is right.

[cj's dad]

There are no jobs that Americans won't do if the pay is right.

Unless they can make more money by producing out of wedlock children, collect welfare, qualify for section 8 housing, food stamps, etc.... you get the big picture I hope.

[hazzardm]

Unless they can make more money by producing out of wedlock children, collect welfare, qualify for section 8 housing, food stamps, etc.... you get the big picture I hope.

Does embezzlement, Ponzi scheme , medical fraud , tax evasion, and insurance fraud count as working ??? They are MUCH more lucractive than food stamps et al. and cost this great county a lot more money.

[newtothegame]

Does embezzlement, Ponzi scheme , medical fraud , tax evasion, and insurance fraud count as working ??? They are MUCH more lucractive than food stamps et al. and cost this great county a lot more money.
So thats what is going on with those "impoverished" people in the "projects" that are driving around in those fifty thousand dollar vehicles????:faint:
And here all this time I thought it was my tax dollars hard at work!!! :lol:

[Lefty]

Bill Clinton said something like this is mostly driven by white male factory workers who have lost their jobs.
Sounds like ol slick is doing a bit of racial profiling his own darn self. gotta love these libs, they always do what they accuse others of doing.

[hazzardm]

So thats what is going on with those "impoverished" people in the "projects" that are driving around in those fifty thousand dollar vehicles????:faint:
And here all this time I thought it was my tax dollars hard at work!!! :lol:

Probably dope dealers with a bunch of suburban customers.

[Robert Goren]

So thats what is going on with those "impoverished" people in the "projects" that are driving around in those fifty thousand dollar vehicles????:faint:
And here all this time I thought it was my tax dollars hard at work!!! :lol:If there is ever 50k vehicle in the "projects", it won't be there long.:lol:

[Valuist]

How about this one for idiotic: a protest outside Wrigley before the Cubs/Diamondbacks game. Like one guy said on the radio, there is probably not a group of people less aware of current events than major league baseball players. I guess they figure Mark Reynolds or Chris Young can re-write the law.

[skate]

New from the FUBO people...

http://www.fubowear.com/servlet/StoreFront


yah did it againAttached Images
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5804&stc=1
#1 prize, makingpointwithsmallspace.

[Greyfox]

How about this one for idiotic: a protest outside Wrigley before the Cubs/Diamondbacks game.

http://i.imgur.com/URYpx.jpg.

[cj's dad]

Does embezzlement, Ponzi scheme , medical fraud , tax evasion, and insurance fraud count as working ??? They are MUCH more lucractive than food stamps et al. and cost this great county a lot more money.

Try your best to read what I posted regarding the detectives post that jobs would be taken by Americans if available at a decent wage.

The point I made is that there are zero incentives for welfare bitches to get a "job"when they can live off of taxpayers $$$$$ - get it now ?????

[Tom]

i mean jobs like being a dishwasher or cleaning bathrooms apparantly aren't jobs americans opt for.



OK, fine, but then suspend ALL thier food stnaps, wlfare, unemploynet, crazy checks, whatever - you refuse work, you get nothing., You starve in the streets - YOUR choice. No work no care!

[acorn54]

OK, fine, but then suspend ALL thier food stnaps, wlfare, unemploynet, crazy checks, whatever - you refuse work, you get nothing., You starve in the streets - YOUR choice. No work no care!
i agree with you tom
it is a shame what has happened in this country. i don't think it is sustainable and i just wonder what the eventual outcome will be when the chickens come home to roost.
the fact that this year there is a "making work pay" tax credit just goes to show even the people that run this country are aware that people on welfare and collecting food stamps and who knows what else are scamming the system.
all in all the people at the top have lost the will to decisively lead this country.

[JustRalph]

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9FDGL080&show_article=1

596 immigrants convicted of crimes nabbed in South
Apr 30 12:51 PM US/Eastern

[boxcar]

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9FDGL080&show_article=1

596 immigrants convicted of crimes nabbed in South
Apr 30 12:51 PM US/Eastern

This operation seemed to target illegals, specifically. Did the Feds engage in racial profiling? Were these criminals' civil rights violated? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[BlueShoe]

Tomorrow is May 1st, the most important day of the year in the Communist world. While the rest of us are paying attention to the Derby, the Reds have organized marches and demonstrations by illegals to protest the actions of Arizona. Once again, downtown LA is expected to be a major focus, with an estimated 100,000 expected to show up, waving their foreign flags and communist banners. Expect things to get ugly in Phoenix and Tucson. If things get out of control in Arizona, Governor Brewer has the option of calling out the Arizona National Guard and declaring martial law. That means that rioters and looters can be shot.

[boxcar]

Tomorrow is May 1st, the most important day of the year in the Communist world. While the rest of us are paying attention to the Derby, the Reds have organized marches and demonstrations by illegals to protest the actions of Arizona. Once again, downtown LA is expected to be a major focus, with an estimated 100,000 expected to show up, waving their foreign flags and communist banners. Expect things to get ugly in Phoenix and Tucson. If things get out of control in Arizona, Governor Brewer has the option of calling out the Arizona National Guard and declaring martial law. That means that rioters and looters can be shot.

And if things get ugly, just watch the mainstream media spin machine spin out of control. Coming right out of the chute, you can bet that it will be the police's fault.

But...if things do go south tomorrow, it will not work to the illegal's favor or to this administration's. Quite the contrary...

Boxcar

[BlueShoe]

But...if things do go south tomorrow, it will not work to the illegal's favor or to this administration's. Quite the contrary...Boxcar
Correct. The 2006 march in LA and the 2007 MacArthur Park LA Mayday riot was a huge wakeup call and absolutely galvanized the anti illegal immigration movement. Huge mistake by the pro illegal crowd, their actions were actually a good thing, as it woke people up as to just how serious the problem was.

[46zilzal]

Tomorrow is May 1st, the most important day of the year in the Communist world. While the rest of us are paying attention to the Derby, the Reds have organized marches and demonstrations by illegals to protest the actions of Arizona. Once again, downtown LA is expected to be a major focus, with an estimated 100,000 expected to show up, waving their foreign flags and communist banners. Expect things to get ugly in Phoenix and Tucson. If things get out of control in Arizona, Governor Brewer has the option of calling out the Arizona National Guard and declaring martial law. That means that rioters and looters can be shot.
Communists? Still thinking like old Joseph McCarthy and J Edgar

[boxcar]

Communists? Still thinking like old Joseph McCarthy and J Edgar

Are you saying communism in the world is dead? You're not thinking like someone living in La La Land, are you?

Boxcar
P.S. However, I would say that probably the only good commie would be a dead one.

[Tom]

Are you saying communism in the world is dead? You're not thinking like someone living in La La Land, are you?

Boxcar
P.S. However, I would say that probably the only good commie would be a dead one.

Trouble on the horizon for zilly.....La La Land is closing soon! :eek:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=69656

[BlueShoe]

Communists? Still thinking like old Joseph McCarthy and J Edgar
Joe has been proven right by history. Today, the communists are not under the bed; they are sitting in congress and there is even one that is in charge at the Whitehouse. Take a close look at the marchers and see how many banners there are with communist slogans, shirts with the image of Che, and flags bearing the hammer and sickle. One of the organizers and sponsors of the marches has been the National Lawyers Guild. More than half a century ago, when it was still in session, the House Un-American Activities Commitee (HUAC) labeled the NLG a communist party front organization.

[JustRalph]

Don't forget the communist enclave of Brentwood Ca

[bigmack]

A clear cut case of profiling.

I don't know why people are worried when law enforcement is plugged by an AK-47. :rolleyes:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4_30_10_20_21_56.png

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/30/arizona.deputy.shot/?hpt=T1

[JustRalph]

"Earlier this week, a CNN crew spent 12 hours on patrol with Pinal County deputies. In that time, the deputies captured more than 50 suspected illegal immigrants and about 2,000 pounds of marijuana."

The above is from the article...... 2k pounds.....Damn...!

"Frankly this is just a very horrible story, but we should not generalize," Alfonso Aguilar, former chief of the U.S. Citizenship Office, told CNN's Rick Sanchez when news of Friday's shooting broke. "We should focus on the criminality of the drug traffickers ... not scapegoat undocumented immigrants who do not pose any threat to society."

Why does the above not surprise me coming from a report by a guy named Sanchez? :lol:

Just Kiddin............

[BlueShoe]

Don't forget the communist enclave of Brentwood Ca
Would prefer to include Marin County and the entire San Francisco Bay area first. Can I start there?

[HUSKER55]

Ever notice that only criminals and democrats complain about obeying and enforcing the law?

I still haven't a viable alternative to the law that would stop the crimnals.

[Robert Goren]

Ever notice that only criminals and democrats complain about obeying and enforcing the law?

I still haven't a viable alternative to the law that would stop the crimnals.2nd amendmenters bitch all the time about gun laws.

[boxcar]

2nd amendmenters bitch all the time about gun laws.

Only when the government wants to make the laws more restrictive. But we still obey the laws, which is far more than can be said for liberals who openly encourage illegal aliens to disobey the immigration laws.

Boxcar

[Tom]

2nd amendmenters bitch all the time about gun laws.

Because the 2nd ammnedment is very clear on gun laws. All one has to do is read it. There is very little to interpret. Congress shall pass no law....