ARIZONA UPDATE

[T.P.]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/70324

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/immigration/mexican-drug-cartel-sheriff-arpaio-07292010

[Bobbo]

It’s important to remember that laws affect ALL of us, not just certain people.

I hear police officers complain all the time how their job would be so much easier if they had full authority and citizens had no rights.

It’s a good thing that our laws stand in the way of tyranny.

[Chrisj CMA]

It’s important to remember that laws affect ALL of us, not just certain people.

I hear police officers complain all the time how their job would be so much easier if they had full authority and citizens had no rights.

It’s a good thing that our laws stand in the way of tyranny.

Now whos talking outta their 4th point of contact?  I have trained and worked with many forms of law enforcement over the years in several states, and not once herd such absurdaties.  So you hear that ALL the time.......what, every day......once a week, what? By how many officers...........I dont think so

[Hog Killer DS0048]

I have agree with Chris on this one. I live in Tucson, 60 miles from the border and to my knowledge no law enforcement officer has even been charged with discrimination. Arizona is bankrupt. 14 to 16 BILLION dollars in debt. Much of that debt goes to feed, provide medical care, educate, and pay for the incarceration of illegal aliens. 1100 alone in Maricopa county. That also doesn't take into account the jobs that taken away from legal citizens. The majority of the citizens of Arizona are in favor of this new law and Governor  Jan Brewer is a shoe in for reelection. I have no doubt that Arizona will prevail in the law suit to enforce 1070.

[3fan4life]

VA Attorney General states that Police in VA have the right to check immigration status:


http://www.examiner.com/x-54956-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m8d2-VA-Attorney-Gen-says-cops-can-check-for-immigration-status


Maybe if enough states would stand up to the feds in this and other categories things would start to improve.

[Psychotic Bovine]

"I hear police officers complain all the time how their job would be so much easier if they had full authority and citizens had no rights."

While this may not be the dumbest thing I have ever heard on the Internet, it's definitely a contender for the top 10.
What a total insult to all of the hard working men and women tasked with enforcing the nations laws.

[JimC]

Bobbo,
You are full of sh=t!

"I hear police officers complain all the time how their job would be so much easier if they had full authority and citizens had no rights."

I was a cop for 26 years, , sat through thousands of roll calls, hundreds of meetings, weeks and weeks of training, and spent countless hours socializing with other cops after work. I never once heard a cop say anything close to what you wrote!

Most cops are very in tune to the constitution, and most work within it in their daily duties.

If what you said had was made up to fuel a fire and provoke a response, it worked!
YOU ARE A TROLL, and nothing more.

[Bobbo]

If you boys would have come over to North St. Louis (murder capitol of the US competing with Detroit) or near South side, and hung out at the many places I talk to the local police, you would’ve gotten an earful.  I have three cop brothers-in-law, and they were the ones that first mentioned it to me over twenty years ago.  Of course, most won’t say anything in polite conversation, but the ones I know have no problem expressing their opinion.

My comment wasn’t a slam against police officers, as many have suggested.  It is an observation I’ve made through my many conversations.  The Sheriff in the posted link was complaining that his job is harder due to the law not allowing him to indiscriminately arrest people.

[hubcapsc]

The Sheriff in the posted link was complaining that his job is harder due to the law not allowing him to indiscriminately arrest people.

There's a word for asserting things that aren't true.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,”

-Mike

[FLAVALK]

Once again, we ask that you remain seated suring this ride and PLEASE do not feed the trolls.....

[Bobbo]

The Sheriff in the posted link was complaining that his job is harder due to the law not allowing him to indiscriminately arrest people.

There's a word for asserting things that aren't true.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,”

-Mike

Sheriff Babeu was complaining that portions of the proposed amendment were blocked by the Obama administration (Judge Bolton).  The blocked portions dealt with giving police more power over citizens and allowing arrests to be made without warrants or evidence of a crime (See other posts about that subject).

Please point out what I posted that isn’t true.

[Chrisj CMA]

The Sheriff in the posted link was complaining that his job is harder due to the law not allowing him to indiscriminately arrest people.

There's a word for asserting things that aren't true.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,”

-Mike

Sheriff Babeu was complaining that portions of the proposed amendment were blocked by the Obama administration (Judge Bolton).  The blocked portions dealt with giving police more power over citizens and allowing arrests to be made without warrants or evidence of a crime (See other posts about that subject).

Please point out what I posted that isn’t true.

Being here illegally is evidence of a crime in and of itself.  That is the point of this law.  Stop someone for a traffic violation, the ID is fake....they dont have a SSAN, no adress........that is evidence of a few crimes right there.......arrest them and if it proves out they are illegal, send them home..........Mexico is lucky we dont send them home with a bill to reimburse us for the inconveniance

[Bobbo]

Being here illegally is evidence of a crime in and of itself.  That is the point of this law.  Stop someone for a traffic violation, the ID is fake....they dont have a SSAN, no adress........that is evidence of a few crimes right there.......arrest them and if it proves out they are illegal, send them home..........Mexico is lucky we dont send them home with a bill to reimburse us for the inconveniance

Lack of evidence is not evidence of a crime.

Think of this scenario:  You buy gas at your local station.  You don’t get a receipt.  A mile or two away, you are pulled over for not using a signal.  The officer sees the full tank of gas on your gauge and thinks to himself “this could be one of those gas thieves”.  He asks for proof that you paid for the gas in your car.  You can’t prove it.  You are arrested and taken to the station, fingerprinted, etc.  The store owner says he can’t print out gas receipts for a few days until a manager comes in.  You stay in jail during that period.  After viewing surveillance videos and checking the billing records you are released.

Is the above situation acceptable to you?  Remember, laws are applicable to everyone, not just illegals.

[hubcapsc]

Please point out what I posted that isn’t true.

I quoted it and made it blue. Perhaps Scott can add a button that will allow me to make
it blink and emit sounds...

-Mike

[Bobbo]

Please point out what I posted that isn’t true.

I quoted it and made it blue. Perhaps Scott can add a button that will allow me to make
it blink and emit sounds...

-Mike

Well, I guess you don’t have a real answer, so a cutesy one will have to do…

[Duckwheat]

I think it is amazing how people in other parts of the US think they know what is best for Arizona. I can remember Prop 186 in California tried to limit health care to illegal immigrants. That was over 10 years ago.
How do the Feds think these states can function trying to provide health care and services to the residents of Mexico. Everyone (AZ,CA,NM,TX) is going broke subsidizing the Fed's inability to act.

The Dems do not want to alienate a voting block. THere are no testicles in Ameican politics today, none.
That comment about cops is pretty far out there. You got to remember they are just like us. They go home to a wife, kids, payments and enjoy and struggle with the same things.

This is a problem that is not going away. It hasn't yet.

DW

[Chrisj CMA]

Being here illegally is evidence of a crime in and of itself.  That is the point of this law.  Stop someone for a traffic violation, the ID is fake....they dont have a SSAN, no adress........that is evidence of a few crimes right there.......arrest them and if it proves out they are illegal, send them home..........Mexico is lucky we dont send them home with a bill to reimburse us for the inconveniance

Lack of evidence is not evidence of a crime.

Is the above situation acceptable to you?  Remember, laws are applicable to everyone, not just illegals.

Driving without a valid licence is a crime......if you need a fake ID and you are here illegally you dont have insurance...another crime.......if the name on your fake ID is not yours.....Identitiy theft...another crime......where do you get off saying "lack of evidence" 

[..]

The Sheriff in the posted link was complaining that his job is harder due to the law not allowing him to indiscriminately arrest people.

There's a word for asserting things that aren't true.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,”

-Mike

Sheriff Babeu was complaining that portions of the proposed amendment were blocked by the Obama administration (Judge Bolton).  The blocked portions dealt with giving police more power over citizens and allowing arrests to be made without warrants or evidence of a crime (See other posts about that subject).

Please point out what I posted that isn’t true.

Bobbo,

Help us all out please and highlight where the sherrif states exactly what you quoted him as saying. Thanks.

(CNSNews.com) – Pinal County (Ariz.) Sheriff Paul Babeu is hopping mad at the federal government.

Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

“What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU,” Babeu said.

The sheriff was referring to the law suits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Department of Justice challenging the state’s new immigration law.

“So who has partnered with the ACLU?” Babeu said in a telephone interview with CNSNews.com. “It’s the president and (Attorney General) Eric Holder himself. And that’s simply outrageous.”

Last week, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton placed a temporary injunction on portions of the bill that allowed law enforcement personnel during the course of a criminal investigation who have probable cause to think an individual is in the country illegally to check immigration status. The state of Arizona filed an appeal on Thursday with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,” Babeu said.

Babeu and Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County Ariz., spoke by phone with CNSNews.com last week about the May 17 ACLU class-action lawsuit, which charges the law uses racial profiling and named the county attorneys and sheriffs in all 15 Arizona counties as defendants. The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit on July 6, charging the Arizona law preempted the federal government’s sole right to enforce immigration law.

“If the president would do his job and secure the border; send 3,000 armed soldiers to the Arizona border and stop the illegal immigration and the drug smuggling and the violence, we wouldn’t even be in this position and where we’re forced to take matters into our own hands,” Babeu said.
Dever said the federal government’s failure to secure the border and its current thwarting of Arizona’s effort to control illegal immigration within its borders has implications for the entire country.


“The bigger picture is while what’s going on in Arizona is critically important, what comes out of this and happens here will affect our entire nation in terms of our ability to protect our citizenry from a very serious homeland security threat,” Dever said. “People who are coming across the border in my county aren’t staying there. They’re going everywhere USA and a lot of them are bad, bad people.”

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), about 250,000 people were detained in Arizona in the last 12 months for being in the country illegally. Babeu said that that number only reflects the number of people detained and that thousands more enter the country illegally each year.

The CBP also reports that 17 percent of those detained already have a criminal record in the United States.

Both Babeu and Dever said they want to remain involved in the legal battle over the law, which many experts predict will end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Dever has hired an independent attorney to represent him in the ACLU case and his attorney has already filed a motion of intervention in the DOJ lawsuit so the “(Dever) will have a seat at the table.”

A Web site also has been launched by the non-profit, Iowa-based Legacy Foundation to raise money for the Babeu’s and Dever’s legal defense.

Both men said they believe the outcome of the case has national significance.“For us, this is a public safety matter and a national security threat,” Babeu said.

[Bobbo]

That comment about cops is pretty far out there. You got to remember they are just like us. They go home to a wife, kids, payments and enjoy and struggle with the same things.

This is a problem that is not going away. It hasn't yet.

DW

You’re absolutely right that police are regular people tasked with a difficult job.  I’m sure my conversations with them were the result of frustrations with the bureaucracy and the appearance of leniency on both the accused and convicted criminals.  They sometimes mentioned how they would like to “bash in some heads”, but obviously couldn’t do that.  They also expressed frustration that they knew someone was committing a crime, but they had to wait for warrants before they could do anything about it.

[Bobbo]

The Sheriff in the posted link was complaining that his job is harder due to the law not allowing him to indiscriminately arrest people.

There's a word for asserting things that aren't true.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,”

-Mike

Sheriff Babeu was complaining that portions of the proposed amendment were blocked by the Obama administration (Judge Bolton).  The blocked portions dealt with giving police more power over citizens and allowing arrests to be made without warrants or evidence of a crime (See other posts about that subject).

Please point out what I posted that isn’t true.

Bobbo,

Help us all out please and highlight where the sherrif states exactly what you quoted him as saying. Thanks.

(CNSNews.com) – Pinal County (Ariz.) Sheriff Paul Babeu is hopping mad at the federal government.

Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

“What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU,” Babeu said.

The sheriff was referring to the law suits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Department of Justice challenging the state’s new immigration law.

“So who has partnered with the ACLU?” Babeu said in a telephone interview with CNSNews.com. “It’s the president and (Attorney General) Eric Holder himself. And that’s simply outrageous.”

Last week, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton placed a temporary injunction on portions of the bill that allowed law enforcement personnel during the course of a criminal investigation who have probable cause to think an individual is in the country illegally to check immigration status. The state of Arizona filed an appeal on Thursday with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,” Babeu said.

Babeu and Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County Ariz., spoke by phone with CNSNews.com last week about the May 17 ACLU class-action lawsuit, which charges the law uses racial profiling and named the county attorneys and sheriffs in all 15 Arizona counties as defendants. The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit on July 6, charging the Arizona law preempted the federal government’s sole right to enforce immigration law.

“If the president would do his job and secure the border; send 3,000 armed soldiers to the Arizona border and stop the illegal immigration and the drug smuggling and the violence, we wouldn’t even be in this position and where we’re forced to take matters into our own hands,” Babeu said.
Dever said the federal government’s failure to secure the border and its current thwarting of Arizona’s effort to control illegal immigration within its borders has implications for the entire country.


“The bigger picture is while what’s going on in Arizona is critically important, what comes out of this and happens here will affect our entire nation in terms of our ability to protect our citizenry from a very serious homeland security threat,” Dever said. “People who are coming across the border in my county aren’t staying there. They’re going everywhere USA and a lot of them are bad, bad people.”

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), about 250,000 people were detained in Arizona in the last 12 months for being in the country illegally. Babeu said that that number only reflects the number of people detained and that thousands more enter the country illegally each year.

The CBP also reports that 17 percent of those detained already have a criminal record in the United States.

Both Babeu and Dever said they want to remain involved in the legal battle over the law, which many experts predict will end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Dever has hired an independent attorney to represent him in the ACLU case and his attorney has already filed a motion of intervention in the DOJ lawsuit so the “(Dever) will have a seat at the table.”

A Web site also has been launched by the non-profit, Iowa-based Legacy Foundation to raise money for the Babeu’s and Dever’s legal defense.

Both men said they believe the outcome of the case has national significance.“For us, this is a public safety matter and a national security threat,” Babeu said.

First, you should note, I did not quote the sheriff.

Second, my comment was a summation of the comments the sheriff made.

Paragraphs 3, 5, 8, and 9.

[..]

The Sheriff in the posted link was complaining that his job is harder due to the law not allowing him to indiscriminately arrest people.

There's a word for asserting things that aren't true.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,”

-Mike

Sheriff Babeu was complaining that portions of the proposed amendment were blocked by the Obama administration (Judge Bolton).  The blocked portions dealt with giving police more power over citizens and allowing arrests to be made without warrants or evidence of a crime (See other posts about that subject).

Please point out what I posted that isn’t true.

Bobbo,

Help us all out please and highlight where the sherrif states exactly what you quoted him as saying. Thanks.

(CNSNews.com) – Pinal County (Ariz.) Sheriff Paul Babeu is hopping mad at the federal government.

Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

“What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU,” Babeu said.

The sheriff was referring to the law suits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Department of Justice challenging the state’s new immigration law.

“So who has partnered with the ACLU?” Babeu said in a telephone interview with CNSNews.com. “It’s the president and (Attorney General) Eric Holder himself. And that’s simply outrageous.”

Last week, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton placed a temporary injunction on portions of the bill that allowed law enforcement personnel during the course of a criminal investigation who have probable cause to think an individual is in the country illegally to check immigration status. The state of Arizona filed an appeal on Thursday with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help,” Babeu said.

Babeu and Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County Ariz., spoke by phone with CNSNews.com last week about the May 17 ACLU class-action lawsuit, which charges the law uses racial profiling and named the county attorneys and sheriffs in all 15 Arizona counties as defendants. The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit on July 6, charging the Arizona law preempted the federal government’s sole right to enforce immigration law.

“If the president would do his job and secure the border; send 3,000 armed soldiers to the Arizona border and stop the illegal immigration and the drug smuggling and the violence, we wouldn’t even be in this position and where we’re forced to take matters into our own hands,” Babeu said.
Dever said the federal government’s failure to secure the border and its current thwarting of Arizona’s effort to control illegal immigration within its borders has implications for the entire country.


“The bigger picture is while what’s going on in Arizona is critically important, what comes out of this and happens here will affect our entire nation in terms of our ability to protect our citizenry from a very serious homeland security threat,” Dever said. “People who are coming across the border in my county aren’t staying there. They’re going everywhere USA and a lot of them are bad, bad people.”

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), about 250,000 people were detained in Arizona in the last 12 months for being in the country illegally. Babeu said that that number only reflects the number of people detained and that thousands more enter the country illegally each year.

The CBP also reports that 17 percent of those detained already have a criminal record in the United States.

Both Babeu and Dever said they want to remain involved in the legal battle over the law, which many experts predict will end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Dever has hired an independent attorney to represent him in the ACLU case and his attorney has already filed a motion of intervention in the DOJ lawsuit so the “(Dever) will have a seat at the table.”

A Web site also has been launched by the non-profit, Iowa-based Legacy Foundation to raise money for the Babeu’s and Dever’s legal defense.

Both men said they believe the outcome of the case has national significance.“For us, this is a public safety matter and a national security threat,” Babeu said.

First, you should note, I did not quote the sheriff.

Second, my comment was a summation of the comments the sheriff made.

Paragraphs 3, 5, 8, and 9.

People like you are disgusting. You misquote and then you try to wriggle out of it like a greasy politican.

[hubcapsc]

Second, my comment was a summation of the comments the sheriff made.

Your comment was an untruthful and purposely misleading assertion about what the sheriff said.
If you people had a leg to stand on, you'd wouldn't have to resort to misdirection 100 percent
of the time...



-Mike

[Bobbo]

People like you are disgusting. You misquote and then DELETE the original post you made with the misquote. Then you try to wriggle out of it like a greasy politican.

I have never deleted my posts. 

[Bobbo]

Driving without a valid licence is a crime......if you need a fake ID and you are here illegally you dont have insurance...another crime.......if the name on your fake ID is not yours.....Identitiy theft...another crime......where do you get off saying "lack of evidence" 

As I understand it, you can get a valid drivers license and ID even if you’re not a US citizen.  That’s why those items aren’t proof of citizenship.  The lack of evidence is not having immigration papers with you.  Under this proposed law, if an officer thinks you are illegal, you can be arrested even though you are a citizen.

[hubcapsc]

Under this proposed law, if an officer thinks you are illegal, you can be arrested even though you are a citizen.

D00d... you need to get your story straight... will they indiscriminately arrest people, or will they discriminate with respect to
whom they might arrest?

-Mike

[3fan4life]

As I understand it, you can get a valid drivers license and ID even if you’re not a US citizen.  That’s why those items aren’t proof of citizenship.  The lack of evidence is not having immigration papers with you.  Under this proposed law, if an officer thinks you are illegal, you can be arrested even though you are a citizen.

I think that I understand what your point is on this subject:

It appears to me that you fear the police will abuse their powers of arrest, against possibly everyone.

To a small extent I can see a potential for that,

However, I do think that you are somewhat resorting to FEAR tactics though.

So, if you agree that ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is a problem, then I ask:

What do you propose be done to solve the problem?

[G-Man]

Driving without a valid licence is a crime......if you need a fake ID and you are here illegally you dont have insurance...another crime.......if the name on your fake ID is not yours.....Identitiy theft...another crime......where do you get off saying "lack of evidence" 

As I understand it, you can get a valid drivers license and ID even if you’re not a US citizen.  That’s why those items aren’t proof of citizenship.  The lack of evidence is not having immigration papers with you.  Under this proposed law, if an officer thinks you are illegal, you can be arrested even though you are a citizen.

Yes, in states like New Mexico, an illegal immigrant can get a driver's license....and this is a good thing.  The license will have a picture of the person and the address where this person resides.  Built into this is the ability for the authorities to enter this person's info into the computer and see this person's citizenship status.  So how many illegals do you really think apply for the lisence?  I'm guessing not many.

[..]

People like you are disgusting. You misquote and then DELETE the original post you made with the misquote. Then you try to wriggle out of it like a greasy politican.

I have never deleted my posts. 

Noted and I apologise.

[MP]

Bobbo:

The Federal gov't REQUIRES you to carry your immigration papers on you at ALL times.  So, you should have them.

I am so glad you want the whole world to come here.  With your rules, we could not stop anyone. Let them come.

Without our ability to enforce our borders, and who is a citizen, we have NO country.  And, I believe, that is what you want.

Troll on!

MP

[Bobbo]

As I understand it, you can get a valid drivers license and ID even if you’re not a US citizen.  That’s why those items aren’t proof of citizenship.  The lack of evidence is not having immigration papers with you.  Under this proposed law, if an officer thinks you are illegal, you can be arrested even though you are a citizen.

I think that I understand what your point is on this subject:

It appears to me that you fear the police will abuse their powers of arrest, against possibly everyone.

To a small extent I can see a potential for that,

However, I do think that you are somewhat resorting to FEAR tactics though.

So, if you agree that ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is a problem, then I ask:

What do you propose be done to solve the problem?

With any law of this nature, there is potential for abuse.  I’m not suggesting that abuse would be rampant, but I do question the effectiveness of the law versus the potential trouble it poses to real citizens.

Any law that infringes on citizens rights, even in a miniscule way, should be scrutinized.  That is what happened, and a Judge declared a small portion of the law invalid.

Of course I consider any illegal activity a problem.  Not all problems have a practical solution.

[Bobbo]

Bobbo:

The Federal gov't REQUIRES you to carry your immigration papers on you at ALL times.  So, you should have them.

I am so glad you want the whole world to come here.  With your rules, we could not stop anyone. Let them come.

Without our ability to enforce our borders, and who is a citizen, we have NO country.  And, I believe, that is what you want.

Troll on!

MP

I’m sorry, but I don’t have immigration papers.  I didn’t realize that I, and almost everyone I know, are felons.  Where do we turn ourselves in?      

I’ve never suggested we open our borders; I just disagree on a few provisions in the proposed Arizona law.  Apparently Judge Bolton agrees with me.   

[3fan4life]

Not all problems have a practical solution.

Agreed...

But, is it not better to do something rather than nothing?

Arizona and many other states are frustrated at the federal gov's do nothing policies and are simply trying to do something.


I've been known to tell indicisive colleagues on more than one occasion:

DO SOMETHING EVEN IF IT's WRONG.

[Bobbo]

But, is it not better to do something rather than nothing?

Arizona and many other states are frustrated at the federal gov's do nothing policies and are simply trying to do something.


I've been known to tell indicisive colleagues on more than one occasion:

DO SOMETHING EVEN IF IT's WRONG.

I guess it’s a lesser of two evils thing.  If doing nothing has less of a chance of harm than doing the wrong thing, then I would chose to do nothing.

I think Arizona can rework this proposed law to accomplish their needs and have it pass muster.  It’s just this first go-around wasn’t well thought out.

[Chrisj CMA]

The Arizona law has NO chance of "passing muster" with the federal government because the federal government does not want non violent illegals confronted in any way.  They see them as future constituants.  I believe this fight will go all the way to the Supreme Court and AZ will win more than they will lose, and all the other states preparing similar legislation will have a clearer path for their new laws....we as a country can by MAJORITY show the boneheads in Washington what works and what we arent going to stand for.

Wheres my proof.....right here.  The AZ law was purposefully written to shadow Federal law except it has some safeguards that the federal law doesnt.  So the big armwrestle here is not Bobbo's fears that racial profiling will occur, the armwrestle is over whether AZ has the authority to do all what the new law mandates.  That decision is going to be for a higher court

[Bobbo]

The Arizona law has NO chance of "passing muster" with the federal government because the federal government does not want non violent illegals confronted in any way.  They see them as future constituants.  I believe this fight will go all the way to the Supreme Court and AZ will win more than they will lose, and all the other states preparing similar legislation will have a clearer path for their new laws....we as a country can by MAJORITY show the boneheads in Washington what works and what we arent going to stand for.

Wheres my proof.....right here.  The AZ law was purposefully written to shadow Federal law except it has some safeguards that the federal law doesnt.  So the big armwrestle here is not Bobbo's fears that racial profiling will occur, the armwrestle is over whether AZ has the authority to do all what the new law mandates.  That decision is going to be for a higher court

First, I’ve never mentioned “racial profiling”.  My concerns are that the new law can snare legal citizens.  Any new law should be examined first to see what effect it has on non-criminals.  Only when the effect is minimal, should it be examined for effectiveness against criminals.  I believe this is in line with the originators plans to help secure liberty for citizens and keep government forces at bay.

I know many of the radio “talking heads” believe that some political parties are expecting to harvest new voters from illegals, but I have to wonder…  How many actually go to the trouble of registering to vote, then go to the polls?

[MP]

It is NOT a new law.  The law has been on the federal books for years.  This just allows AZ officials to enforce an EXISTING law.

Why do you think the AZ cops are so terrible, and the feds so great?

MP

[G-Man]

It's not that the dems think the "new" citizens will vote for them, they are worried about losing the present latino vote, which can affect the Black vote and other minority group votes.

I still do not see where a citizen's rights will be trampled on.  If everyone followed the rules, this couldn't happen.  If you drive, you are required to carry the license.  If you are here as a visitor legally, carry the required documents.  The left purposefully skews this when this is stated by saying that we don't have "citizenship" papers.  There is no such thing as citizenship papers and we all know this and the Left also knows who the rule applies to but needs to perpetuate the fear to prove they are right.

The example of a citizen getting "lost" in the system is the fear tactic being used, however, the chance of this happening is no greater with the law than without it.  With or without the law, if you are involved in a crime, become engaged with the authorities, and can't prove who you are, you will be detained...plain and simple...regardless of citizenship, color of skin, or language you speak.  

They're not worried about the guy going to work, buying ice cream, shopping in K-Mart.  These people will not come into contact with the law so they have nothing to fear.  But break the law, and you've now put YOURSELF in the position of demonstrating who you are.  If you can't, you're sunk.  This has nothing to do with the AZ law, this is simply the law of the land.  The AZ law just pushes for enforcement of existing laws.  Imagine, actually enforcing a law.....what a concept.  If we worry, and put laws on hold because we "believe" there is a cop out there who will abuse their power because of the law, we would have anarchy.  Much like we have now in AZ, according to the authorities in that state, not me, or O'Reilly, or Hannity, or Beck.

[Bobbo]

It is NOT a new law.  The law has been on the federal books for years.  This just allows AZ officials to enforce an EXISTING law.

Why do you think the AZ cops are so terrible, and the feds so great?

MP

The law is new to the state, and usurps law reserved for federal government, according to the lawsuit.

I don’t consider either the Arizona police or the feds terrible.

[Bobbo]

It's not that the dems think the "new" citizens will vote for them, they are worried about losing the present latino vote, which can affect the Black vote and other minority group votes.

So, using the same train of thought, the Republicans are pushing for this law for fear of losing the White vote?

The AZ law just pushes for enforcement of existing laws.  Imagine, actually enforcing a law.....what a concept.

Interesting concept…  A law to enforce existing laws.  What enforces that law?  Another law?!     That is a good example of circular reasoning.

[Trynt]

.
[/quote]



Interesting concept…  A law to enforce existing laws.  What enforces that law?  Another law?!     That is a good example of circular reasoning.


[/quote]

G-Man is pointing out that since the feds weren't enforcing their own immigration law, AZ passed their own version that closely mirrors the federal law.  Thus AZ can do the job the feds should be doing.  But you already know that.  You just like playing word games.