Sarah Palin claims minorities are 2nd class citizens

I'm from Arizona and I disagree with you about the racial strife. It's there. I can't believe some of the things I've heard people that I previously thought well of say about Mexicans.

 

I just think it's not a very good use of law enforcement to turn them into the INS. They should be focused on protecting people, not hunting down illegals. And this is going to hurt their capacity to do that.

All this will do is make illegal immigrants avoid the police even more - such that they will not be willing to serve as witnesses or report crimes. It will allow people to exploit illegals even more, and to commit even more crimes against them. It will hinder the police from investigating crimes against both citizens and illegals.

I can't imagine the police forces in Arizona are very happy about this bill - maybe someone should ask them to weigh in.

If you want to fight illegal immigration, then maybe McCain should try to eliminate the INS. Since the republican / tea bagger philosophy is that if you have less gov't, everything with work out auto-magically, then that's all they have to do. Get rid of the INS and everything will be solved.

 

****. I'm screwed.

 

Wow, it seems whites don't have a "Sixth Sense"!

Also, I did not realize that the whites involved in the Civil Rights movement just had to "trust" the word of the blacks claiming racism.

Maybe, it's just that you couldn't see the whites that could "see it."

 

LINKAGE

 

I'm persian, but I look mexican. This law essentially gives the cops the right to pull me over whenever they please for no reason. I was born and bread here in this great country, and right before my eyes Mr. McCain and Co. seem to be turning it into Hitler's Germany. Republicans have long called Obama the fascist, when in truth they were masking their own insecurities...

 

Incorrect. They cannot pull you over for looking hispanic. They cannot pull you over because they think you are an illegal immigrant.

They can pull you over for a traffic violation.

 

Commodore- Maybe you haven't seen it, but you can get stopped pretty easily by the cops if they feel like doing it. I'm not talking anything seen in the movies, I'm talking experience. Things like not completely stopping when making a right are very easy to go by interpretation.

You may not feel the way some do, but there is a lot of hate towards Mexicans these days in a lot of places. As a Hispanic, I get the vibe that its becoming ok to let out hateful sentiment so long as you cover it with the immigration argument.

I agree that the border issue is an important one, but it is a slippery slope coming from my perspective. All thi talk of "they are taking our country" is a bit misguided in my opinion. For one, many of these people arguing this give nothing back to the country. For two, they forget their history. Anyway I digress.

There need to be steps taken yes, but lets be careful about the laws we pass at the same time. Thats my only point.

 

tax cuts for 95% of the country
Citizen's United decision
Healthcare reform
Wall Street Reform
now this...

Makes one wonder if the tea party really has the convictions they say they have.

 

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_14975120?source=rss&nclick_check=1

[rquoter]
S.F. mayor bans city travel to Arizona in protest of immigration law
Bay City News

Posted: 04/28/2010 08:05:31 AM PDT
Updated: 04/28/2010 08:05:32 AM PDT

SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom Tuesday imposed a moratorium on city employee travel to the state of Arizona for official business and announced the creation of a task force to determine how best to extricate the city from its Arizona-related contracts.

The actions are in response to a new anti-immigration measure signed into law last week by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, and come one day after San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera issued a statement calling the law "draconian" and criticized the state for choosing "to isolate itself from the rest of the nation."

The moratorium is effective immediately as the mayor and others are considering an official city boycott of the state and take steps "to develop a smart and effect boycott that sends the appropriate message to Arizona while protecting the city's financial interests," Newsom said in a prepared statement.

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, Councilwoman Janice Hahn, Newsom's challenger in the November race for the state's lieutenant governor, said she will introduce a resolution calling on the city of Los Angeles to boycott the state of Arizona.

Supervisor David Campos also introduced emergency legislation at Tuesday's board meeting calling for a citywide boycott of the state and Arizona-based businesses because the law "will inevitably lead to racial profiling," the resolution reads.

The controversial Arizona law makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally and requires police officers to question, "when practicable," those they "reasonably suspect" are illegal immigrants.

Under the new law, even lawful foreign residents would be committing a crime by failing to carry immigration documents, and it would be illegal to stop on a public street to negotiate the hire of day laborers.

In order to work out details regarding the extent of such a boycott, Newsom announced the formation of the Arizona Boycott Workgroup, which brings together the city controller, purchaser and treasurer along with members of the city attorney's office, among others.[/rquoter]

 

For walking down the street, or else risk being arrested on suspicion of being illegal? Yeah I'd say it is.

Anyway, that's a horrible criteria to use, all manner of civil rights infringements (colored water fountains, eg) wouldn't pass this test - that's because there's something greater at stake than mere inconvenience.

 

<object width="512" height="296"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/I7xO2wVWxeu4-bW6M9ECsw/31/68/i32"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/I7xO2wVWxeu4-bW6M9ECsw/31/68/i32" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" width="512" height="296"></embed></object>

 

That was true until courts stopped enforcing the exclusionary rule for evidence. Courts nowadays give so much more leeway on evidence than they used to so its a bit naive to assume that a court would back anyone up claiming they got pulled over under false pretenses.

Hell in 2006, Scalia basically said **** the exclusionary rule (I forgot which case it was).

 

Commodore already explained that this is incorrect. A cop cannot ask for proof of citizenship without cause (i.e commiting a traffic violation). I'm not sure why so many are having trouble with this concept.

 

Because no one ****ing defends that right anymore. This isnt the 70s when courts actually threw out evidence based on the exclusionary rule anymore. There are plenty of cops that get away with pulling you over based on false pretenses. I'd worry less if courts threw out evidence that was gathered for bull**** reasons but that never happens anymore.

 

Read the law.

You can be arrested and treated as an illegal alien on the basis of mere suspicion that you are an illegal alien. If you look like you might possibly could be from Mexico, the law treats you as guilty unless you are able to prove you are innocent. If you are pulled over at one of those New Years Eve drunk driving checkpoints and aren't aren't drunk, but speak with a Mexican accent, adios chulo. Viva la Mexico.

Guilty until proven innocent.

The fundamental concept offends me, and for all you conservatives who b**** about "the encroaching government" to think guilty until innocent is OK, in my opinion you've forfeited all right to b**** about how much the government is imposing on you. Shut up and take it in the rear like you demand from all the brown people.

 

Maybe I mis-read something. Here is the law: http://bit.ly/azyxR2

Here is a quote of the law:

It mentions nothing about cause other than "lawful contact" (which means nothing illegal, contrary to your suggestion). And what, exactly, is "reasonable suspicion"?

 

"If you look like you might possibly be from Mexico" is specifically excluded from the reasons one can be asked for proof of residence. From TSchmal's link:
[rquoter]Stipulates that a law enforcement official or agency cannot solely consider race, color or national origin when implementing these provisions, except as permitted by the U.S. or Arizona Constitution.[/rquoter]