A. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR 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. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). E. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITHOUT A WARRANT, MAY ARREST A PERSON IF THE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON HAS COMMITTED ANY PUBLIC OFFENSE THAT MAKES THE PERSON REMOVABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES.
Well my wife was born in the US and as a kid always ran from the "Migra" whenever they came near the fields when she was picking crops.
if you're a cop, how do you determine this? A REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that there are most likely way more racist Republicans than there are Communist Democrats... I' m just sayin...
It doesn't matter who wrote the bill. The Arizona legislature voted to pass it into law. It's some kind of logical fallacy to ignore the content of the bill and focus on the author and then paint that author as an undesirable in some way because he has affiliations with other undesirables that you can label a hate group. Especially when that author has no political power himself and the content of that bill was reviewed and approved of by a majority of popularly-elected congressmen, whom I assume are adults of sound mind responsible for their own actions. If you want to criticize the law, simply recognize the effects will be bad and racist; no need to look at authorship or even intentionality.
You're missing the point. They may be legal, but they don't want to be threatened to show their papers based on a "reasonable suspicion."
I think what needs to happen is this - All arizona residents should be required to carry their birth certificate and if they do not have it they should be arrested on grounds of being an illegal. That way, it's fair and doesn't discriminate. You can't make one ethnic group carry proof of citizenship and not make other groups carry it either. That's clearly a civil rights violation and brings us back to the 50's. what a travesty of justice for our own citizens. Today's Arizona is yesterday's Alabama.
Disgusting. I don't have a HUGE problem with it if it were just checking of a driver's license or something people have on them all the time, but a birth certificate? Ridiculous. This is genuine racial profiling and half the country is condoning it. Again, I am totally moving to Canada.
The solution is actually quite simple. Everybody, regardless of race or sex, when arrested for a misdemeanor or felony, should be required to produce proof of citizenship. The social security office could produce a microchipped SSN card with no information on the card but linked to a data base. Each person would be required to memorize a 9-digit number that would, in combination with a pre-recorded voice print and/or eye print, unlock the account upon demand. For those who don't like the Biblical implications as per the Book of Revelation, we already have an ID that we hold in our hand or our head -- a Social Security number. For those with privacy issues, you lost privacy years ago when you accepted Social Security and driver's license numbers. In addition, if a person can't prove citizenship, his or her employer could be penalized $10,000 per undocumented worker per month. Green cards, of course, provide temporary citizenship. Also, a child cannot be a citizen unless one or both of his or her parents is a U.S. citizen. As a bonus, all of those microchipped cards would provide new jobs making and processing them. Bonuses abound!
This "check everyone" approach has been suggested by several commentators here and elsewhere (see e.g. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/05/whats-sauce-for-the-goose/56404/). However, when everyone gets checked at airports, Republicans start b****ing about why white grannies and blonde cheerleaders are being subject to inconvenience at airports when it's really them Arabs we should be worried about and we should focus on inconveniencing Arabs and other similar looking people (including South Asians, Central Asians, and Jeff Van Gundy). http://vodpod.com/watch/3512278-msn...co-gov-thinks-racial-profiling-is-a-necessity Is "check everyone" simply not a tenable position for among right-wingers? I am guessing so, perhaps having to do with the paranoia crowd who think ID checks and such things are socialist conspiracies (when applied to them, not to other people who look "foreign"). On the flip side, I wonder why the Republicans are shifting their position on "racial profiling" from "we are all for focusing energy on the ethnicity that are most likely to be guilty of [Blank] (blank, could be crime, terrorism, or whatever)" to "our law doesn't really provide for ethnic profiling." What all of a sudden cause them to being proud profilers to stealth-at-best profilers? My guess is this has to do with Latinos being different than blacks (target of police profiling for regular crime) and Arabs (target for terrorist profiling). Unlike Arab Americans, there are actually a substantial number of Latino in the country and unlike African Americans, those Latinos actually would consider voting for Republicans (McCain got a good number of Latino votes in the last election).
i didn't say "check everybody." I said check "everybody, regardless of race or sex, when arrested for a misdemeanor or felony....." That's a big difference. If granny is arrested, check her citizenship. If blondie is arrested, check her citizenship. If a guy with a turban is arrested, check his citizenship. If .... Well, as I have said many times before, laws should be applied equally to all persons, whether a Senator or a dishwasher.
So much for "less" gov't in our lives!!!! So do you agree that the current law is flawed and unfair then? Since it doesn't "check everyone"? Under the current law, a lot of granny's and white people should be arrested since they don't carry proof of citizenship currently. They should be arrested and sent to Canada or something.
More proof that the tea party is not for "less government," it's just for more Republican government.
I have to agree with the others. Apparently your call for less government only holds as a position of you guys some of the time.
Less government generally is better. Sometimes it is not. I often read where some of you assume that the Tea Parties are of one opinion. It's convenient for some but not factual. However, I understand the fear and need of people like Batman Jones who desperately want to pigeon-hole and thereby marginalize a growing national groundswell. We need solutions to the problem of illegal immigration and insecure borders. We have SS numbers already. My suggestion was merely to apply technology to what we already have and thereby curb identity theft and improve the equal application of law. The Tea Party advocates with whom I have had the privilege of communicating are pragmatists, not radicals.
