Arizona takes off its ‘rainbow shades’ and faces border reality

Cal Thomas's picture

Arizona has decided that if the federal government will not live up to its responsibility to control the border, it will.

Governor Jan Brewer, a Republican, signed a bill that allows police officers to inquire about a person’s immigration status if there is reason to suspect that individual might be an illegal immigrant.

The governor correctly noted that the new law “represents another tool for our state to use as we work to solve a crisis we did not create and the federal government has refused to fix.”

The latest example of that failure is the Obama administration’s refusal to finish the border fence begun with some reluctance by the Bush administration.

Critics of the new law, who plan a court challenge, ask how police officers will “know” by observation whether someone might be in the country illegally. Police officers regularly make judgment calls about suspicious behavior, whether it involves erratic driving, passing small packets on the street in drug-infested neighborhoods, or searching cars for drugs and alcohol.

“Immigrant groups” are upset that in Arizona people might actually be forced to comply with the law or face deportation.

Let’s get something straight. The failure to protect America’s southern border has been a bipartisan effort. Democrats want more illegal immigrants in the country because they are a potential source of votes they hope will contribute to a permanent Democratic majority. Republicans and their donors want more illegal immigrants in America because they are a source of cheap labor. Once you understand this, you can ignore much of the talk about “human rights.”

If a state, or nation, has laws it will not enforce for political reasons, it mocks both the law and politics, to say nothing of the cultural order.

If the language of laws has no meaning other than what lawmakers assign to them after a law is enacted, it is proof that we have arrived in a kind of legal “Wonderland” in which Alice is told by Humpty Dumpty, “When I use a word ... it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

To which Alice responds, “The question is ... whether you can make words mean so many different things.” Politicians constantly try.

So what does the “illegal” in illegal immigration mean? For that matter, what does the less judgmental and legally vacuous “undocumented alien” mean? If something is illegal, according to dictionary.com, it is “forbidden by law or statute.”

If one is “undocumented” that person lacks “the needed documents, as for permission to live or work in a foreign country.” Sociological and political considerations notwithstanding, the law should be the law and its requirements ought to be universally adhered to, or punishment imposed for their violation.

According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform, as of 2007, there are about 475,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona straining an already overburdened economy. Taxpaying citizens must underwrite the cost of schooling for their children, as well as visits to emergency rooms.

In California, several hospitals have had to close because they could no longer afford to give free care to noncitizens.

Gangs in Arizona operate under the command of drug lords in Mexico. This and other criminal activity threaten the peace and security of Arizonans and potentially all American citizens.

Is this something that must be endured for the sake of “human rights groups” and “immigration rights groups,” or is it long past time to slow the flow?

The Arizona legislature and Gov. Brewer have correctly chosen to slow the flow. They realize a state and a nation unwilling to protect their borders cannot hope to preserve qualities that have made this country what it is but won’t be for much longer if we permit this illegal invasion to continue.

[Cal Thomas is America’s most widely syndicated op-ed columnist, appearing in more than 600 national newspapers. He is the author of more than 10 books and is a FOX News political contributor since 1997. Email Cal Thomas at tmseditors@tribune.com.] ©2010 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.

OmerK
OmerK's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/24/2010
Arizona has signed the

Arizona has signed the toughest law against illegal immigration. Senate Bill 1070 has gotten a lot of scrutiny ever since the Governor of Arizona signed off on it. I have been studying up on this law questioning; if every person is so against this law what good may come from it? The press seemed to be overloaded with all the details in opposition to this bill. Now I have observed some arguments from Canadian-American Journalist David Frum for this bill. Frum used to be an economic speech writer for President George W. Bush, so he has some education behind his responses. He says that litter, property damage, violence, lack of decent education for our kids, and trafficking of people (including slaves)are a handful of the factors this Bill is a beneficial thing. He says it is not a perfect Bill and that it has its flaws, although the Government has neglected to do anything with the immigration problem, and now the states boarding Mexico and surrounding those have to take some huge measures.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Legal Hispanic Voters

You just might consider that those legal Hispanic voters just may be more politically savy than many voters who--regardless of whose idea it is, walk in and vote for a Democratic candidate without a clue of the issues or the candidates positions.

Sankar
Sankar's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/27/2010
Cal Thomas

Well, gangs exist in Detroit and Chicago, and.....also. Want to build a fence there? How about the guard? How about Illinois and Michigan passing a law to deport them to ,,,,,where ever?

This is a ploy to force the USA to pay for everything there. Anyone with any logic knows, even if they lie about knowing, that a few cops in the desert of Arizona ain't gonna do much.

They have to quit hiring them! Jail the hireers!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Mr. Thomas - The Illegal Immigration Problem

to finish the border fence begun with some reluctance by the Bush administration.

To many, that attempt at building a 'fence' on the Arizona state line was truly from Alice in Wonderland strategy. . .and a waste of money. Did you ever see the tunnels that have been discovered?

Democrats want more illegal immigrants in the country because they are a potential source of votes they hope will contribute to a permanent Democratic majority. Republicans and their donors want more illegal immigrants in America because they are a source of cheap labor. Once you understand this, you can ignore much of the talk about “human rights.”

Even with this cynical truism, human rights are involved here. .. the rights to be treated like a citizen of the US regardless of your skin color. Shall we all carry papers to prove we're citizens? What about the 'American looking' illegals (with white skin) in our northeaster states? Or those from other countries with 'dark brown' skins who may appear to be African America? Will all African Americans have to carry papers? Surely we know that the ID mentioned in the bill can be falsified. One can get a green card in McArthur Park in LA for a very reasonable price. THE EMPLOYERS, when hiring, NEED TO VALIDATE CITIZENSHIP/LEGALITY. EVEN OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! (All of the 'cleaning crews' that clean our state and federal offices are not 'documented'.)

The Arizona legislature and Gov. Brewer have correctly chosen to slow the flow

Jobs!! That is why 'they' come - JOBS! Until you punish the employers for hiring illegals, this problem will not be solved unless you really close the borders. (and a fence will not do the job - and additional 'military' on our border will have our young men and women fighting the 'drug lords'. Will the almighty dollar paid to our legislators by 'employers' in this country continue to stop us from solving this problem?

rmoc
rmoc's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/22/2006
Punish Employers who hire Illegals

I agree that if the laws are enforced on hiring illegals that this would reduce the amount of illegal immigration. It is funny when I had my fence put in I made sure to state that I would only accept documented workers and guess who showed up..a bunch of "good ole boys". I wonder if I had not said anything whether the crew would have been spanish speaking?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Tell me DM..

"Even with this cynical truism, human rights are involved here. .. the rights to be treated like a citizen of the US regardless of your skin color"

Just where in any way is that happening here?

Illegals are Criminal and are not Citizens.. PERIOD. They do not have Rights
as granted to a US Citizen.

Under this law if you are legal you have no issues.. If not then GO HOME.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
There you go again SL

"Under this law if you are legal you have no issues.."

Why don't we just do away with the Fourth and Fifth Amendments altogether. Why should the police have to have probable cause? Why should you have the right to not answer questions put to you by the police? If you are legal why would you have an issue to being searched or questioned?

A police officer does not have the authority to arrest someone for refusing to identify himself when he is not suspected of committing a crime. See Larry d. Hiibel, petitioner v. Sixth Judicial District Court Of Nevada, Humboldt County, et al.

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government." Patrick Henry

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Wrong Jeff

I have to assume you believe the Police have no right to ask for Id.. Your premise is incorrect.. The Arizona Law already assumes a lawful stop. They are already detained.. LAWFULLY.. Jeff.. You must identify yourself upon request once LAWFULLY detained.. That is what this law does.

What is your point?

If you are stopped for any LAWFUL reason you are required by LAW to present ID. If you do not have ID or that ID appears to be false then further detention is warranted. PERIOD

Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humbolt County

In sum, Hiibel holds a state may criminalize a refusal to produce identification as long as the detention is predicated on a valid Terry stop (i.e., reasonable suspicion). In other words, police officers do not violate the Fourth Amendment when they arrest an individual after the individual refuses to provide identification during a lawful detention pursuant to their state's stop-and-identify statute.

Show me where the Arizona's law deviates from this..

http://epic.org/privacy/hiibel/

"Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Arrest for Refusal to Identify. In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court has narrowly upheld a Nevada law allowing law enforcement to arrest an individual when he refuses to identify himself, and reasonable suspicion--though not probable cause--exists that he has committed a crime. (June 21, 2004)"

You need to read your own sources Jeff..

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
I awsn't clear SL

The Arizona law allows the police to question passengers who are not under suspicion of a crime. That's where the fight will be.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Being illegal is a crime

Jeff and there you are..

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Sure it is SL

How are you going to prove it? Of course, your solution is to move us closer to a police state. Like it or not, they have Constitutional rights. We can argue about whether they should but the fact is that they do and any legislative solution will have to take that into consideration.

The Arizona law is probably unconstitutional but it's good if it prods the Federal government to address the issue. Obama is wicked smart to ask for bipartisan input on the issue since he knows what input the Republicans are going to offer. It looks like the Rs are not going to play. They know what will happen to any Hispanic votes they might get if they reveal their position. Nothing is going to happen before the election. Maybe it'll be an issue in 2012.

I would have loved to have seen Reagan hounded out of the Republican Party when he gave the illegals amnesty. You guys have pulled the Party so far to the right that RWR is starting to look left of center.

BTW: Check out the next Senator from Florida:

Fed up' billionaire Greene launches Florida campaign today

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Americans Support Arizona's new LAW.

"More than three-quarters of Americans have heard about the state of Arizona's new immigration law, and of these, 51% say they favor it and 39% oppose it.

Most Americans have heard about Arizona's tough new immigration law, and they generally support it. The law was passed partly in response to a lack of federal action on the issue. Since the Arizona bill became law, congressional Democrats have considered taking up the issue in the coming weeks, though this initial read on public opinion toward the Arizona law suggests Americans may not necessarily back an attempt to supersede or otherwise undermine it." Gallup Polls

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127598/Americans-Favor-Oppose-Arizona-Immigra...

Let Obama and the rest of the Dems go after it Jeff.. It's just another LOSER for them.. Go get those mean Arizonians..

btw.. are you saying asking a criminal if they are a criminal is now UN-CONSTITUTIONAL..?

If simply determining if someone is here ILLEGALLY who may be worse than that btw.. is wrong that what the hell is right Jeff?

You liberals need to wake up and smell the coffee. We are losing America and the Invasion has been going on some time and we do NOTHING. Jeez now we can't even ask them.. CRAZY time.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
C'mon SL

It's called the Fifth Amendment. The police can't make you answer anything. When you say "you liberals" I guess you're including Jefferson and Madison too.

The difference between our philosophies is that you want to impose a police state and I want a more complex solution that takes into account Constitutional liberties.

Your disdain for the Constitution continues to dismay and amaze me.

mudcat
mudcat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Jeff, stop running around and get home by 5PM every weekday

Then you can watch Glen Beck's history lessons. Yesterday was especially enlightening. I do believe you could use a refresher course since it has been many years since you actually studied these things. And it has been even more years for me, but sadly the 2 generations between then and now are really getting a dumbed down version of American History.

I don't know who picks these books out for students or the motivation of those who write them, but the two I read a few months ago (neighbor who is a teacher gave them to me) are revising history big time. Why is that? Have they discovered new facts in the last 40 years or is someone trying to make a political point? Or do we just want dumber students?

Glen Beck's version is pretty close to what I was taught in school.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Well Jeff why don't you put that to the test..

"The police can't make you answer anything"

Go downtown take a axe handle and break out some windows. Refuse to identify yourself.. I will bet anything you want that eventually you will tell the Police everything they want to know.

Don't want to go that far.. Ok.. Try this. Leave your ID at home..Get in your car ramp it up to say a hundred or so.. When you get stopped.. Refuse to Identify yourself.. go ahead plead the 5th.. see where that get's you..

Do me a favor first.. give me a call before you do. I will do a ride along.. Cause I really want to see this.

You hide behind the Constitution only when it favors you Jeff.. You want a BIG Government. Our Founding Fathers did not want anything of a sort..

Who's closer to the Constitution Jeff..? Big Government Liberal or Small Government Conservative?

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Bunk SL

Obviously if I blatantly break the law it's different. The Arizona law expands police powers to cover people who have committed no obvious crime. Whose supporting Big Government here?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
OK Jeff using your words..

"Obviously if I blatantly break the law it's different. The Arizona law expands police powers to cover people who have committed no obvious crime. "

Jeff.. ANYTIME a Police Officer makes an arrest unless committed in his/her presence a Police Officer must have Reasonable Suspicion or Probable Cause.

That is an immutable fact. Because ALL immigrants MUST have a Green Card and MUST carry it at ALL TIMES during a lawful stop a Police Officer may inquire as to status. It is pretty simple Jeff.

If a person having entered illegally into the US then that person has committed a CRIME.. So by your words.. "Obviously if I blatantly break the law it's different" They are breaking the law Jeff.. Thus they have no RIGHT to remain silent as constituted under our laws.

Simply asking for their status is not an invasion of privacy or a violation of self-incrimination.

A Green Card(Required by law) is just like having a drivers license. If you have one you automatically give consent to present when asked by Law Enforcement Officers. You see Jeff Just like a DL a green card is not a RIGHT it is a privilege.

btw.. Ok let's say you have not broken any laws.. You are however pulled over.. Go ahead and refuse to give up that DL and refuse to id yourself.. Jeff. Again give me a call cause I want to see that one too.

Another btw.. The 10th Amendment the States have a Right to self Rule is what I am fighting for. You want to take that away in favor of Federal Rule.. So yeah I say you're more of the Big Government Liberal. Not a founding principle.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
You're up too late SL

I agree that the driver has to show ID, but the Arizona law extends to questioning passengers if a driving violation occurs.

Blatantly unconstitutional as we shall see.

And I welcome your support of the Tenth! The first time in history someone from the right supported it.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Well like you said

WE shall see.. It does make for a good debate though doesn't?

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Yes it does

Here's the Dems plan:

Democrats Reframe the Debate on Immigration

The Republican lemmings are not being allowed by their masters to support it.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Democrats to unveil immigration plan-Amnesty

"On Wednesday, the Associated Press reported that Reid and Democratic Sens. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and Robert Menendez (N.J.) are forging a proposal that would call for more border security measures before expanding citizenship options."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/04/democrats-to-unveil-immigrat...

No let's don't enforce our laws.. let's give in.. We wouldn't want to offend someone and have riots now would we.. No let's vilify teapartiers. Those haters and radicals need to be stopped.

Riots to date Teaparty's: 0

Riots to date Liberals 1 city 1 more day- 4

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2499465/posts

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
A moderate take on IR
Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Jeff - Thanks for sharing

Some questions and comments:

Conservatives, while supporting stronger enforcement, have long opposed national identity cards, or making the Social Security card a de facto one.

Interesting. Does anyone know why?

The proposal opens the door wider than ever before to high-skilled immigrants. It would offer permanent-resident status, with a document known as a green card, to every foreigner with an advanced degree in science or technology from an American university. It would make it much easier for foreign students in the sciences to stay in the United States after they graduate, and eliminate numerical restrictions that have kept highly educated immigrants from India and China waiting for many years before becoming residents.

With India and China's population problems - this may be a good idea in their eyes - maybe not. We're skimming the cream of the crop so to speak.

On Friday, different sides were weighing in. Roman Catholic bishops embraced the framework but strongly opposed the benefits for same-sex couples. The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights said the proposal was “heavily framed around enforcement".

The solving of this situation requires cooperative and visionary input. Have we ever had this type of 'thought' before an election? With elections every two years - will we ever have visionary, wise solutions to our issues?

I do support enforcement of existing law - applied equally to all illegal immigrants, regardless of where they live or the color of their skin or their academic achievements. In reality, how will that affect our country? Who will be forced to leave? How will it affect our economy? Has anyone done a study?

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Oh Great Legal Scholar Lindsey

Let me give you a hypothetical question and ask for your sage words of wisdom!

A police officer notices a car doing 56 mph on a road where the speed limit is 55 mph. Since the driver appears to be of Hispanic origin, the police officer of course pulls him over. The driver of the vehicle claims he has no license or identification.

Let's assume that's a lawful traffic stop right there, and assume the driver is cited and/or arrested.

There are 3 passengers in the car. They are also of Hispanic origin. The police officer asks each of them for identification. Each of them claim not to have any identification.

Can they be detained?
Can they be arrested?

Hint: Google "shufflebeam"

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Well first.. Sniffle

The Car would not be stopped for 1 mile over.. but beyond that.

This is where "Reasonable Suspicion" comes in..

The officer is allowed to ask them questions.. Since we are doing hypothetical here.. Let's say only one can speak English. Upon questioning of the driver states they are friends going to his "brothers" house.. Upon asking the "1" Hispanic individual that speaks English he states they are going to work and they don't know the driver.

Well then Sniffle the answer to your questions are in order:

Yes
No-Detained until proper ID has been established.

There are no hard fast answers.. Snif. It all depends on the circumstances.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Immigration, Racial Profiling and, Amnesty

It seems like all the "left leaning gang" can do is throw out scenarios to defend their position. So here's my scenario.

Lets suppose that the immigration amnesty idea became the law of the realm. You know, the one that says we'll bring everyone out into the open and they'll have to pay a fine, learn English and finally sign some forms and basically become "registered". After that I guess the problem just goes away.......well, at least to those that propose this folly.

Now the scenario; what if there were still those that did not pay a fine, learn English, or register. How are we as nation going to police that scenario? We apparently can't stop them and ask for papers since that that would be sooo wrong.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
CY - ARIZONA LAW? AMNESTY?

Lets suppose that the immigration amnesty idea became the law of the realm. You know, the one that says we'll bring everyone out into the open and they'll have to pay a fine, learn English and finally sign some forms and basically become "registered". After that I guess the problem just goes away.......well, at least to those that propose this folly.

This has nothing to do with the Arizona Law. The Feds have not done their job in implementing the law - illegal immigration. Immigrants come here to work - and are hired illegally by their employers. Where in the Arizona Law is their talk about amnesty for those already here? That's another issue.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Davids mom,

The thought behind the post was to look beyond the Arizona law to the proposed amnesty idea that many in Washington are embracing as a solution.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cyclist

OK. Not just Washington - but in many states where people are looking ahead to see what the economic result will be when so many service people elect to leave the country. The hotel industry, the construction industry, and many of our government projects will take a big hit. This requires some serious thought and not a knee jerk reaction by a few. The Arizona situation - where the criminal element appears to have the upper hand is another matter, IMO. I feel this law opens the door to 'racial profiling' - which had been identified and almost stopped. It will be interesting to see where this goes.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Davids mom,

No doubt, there will be some economic pain; but, if we continue to ignore the problem or only take steps that pacify those that hold illegals as protected at all costs then, the problem just keeps getting larger and compounds.

Like it or not, deportation has to happen for those not in this country legally and the only way that can be enforced is to check for valid documentation. This is true now and it will be true under any new proposed scheme. Perhaps the much touted enhanced social security card will become the "papers" establishing US residency that will be the answer.

Washington needs to get this moving as you and I are soon going to be paying for medical care for those that can't afford it. I would like to think we are paying for those in this country legally.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
This is a silly argument, in general Jeff

Each state has the same burden of proof when stopping someone. Unless it is a uniform checkpoint where they have a publicized stop schedule, each officer must have probable cause based upon the totality of circumstances. The left is vilifying this bill, but to actually read it is to understand it and not La raza talking points. Right now, if a state officer pulls someone over (regardless of race/etc) for cause and they cannot provide proof of who they are, they are taken in to determine who they are and if they are really a criminal in hiding. Once it is determined that someone is in the country illegally, that state officer must call the feds to see if they will take them in custody for processing and possible deportation. The feds do not want to be bothered with this and say to release them on their own recognizance 95% of the time. That means they can get out and continue doing what they are doing. This solves nothing. This is a good step as it allows a state to take over a derelict federal government function within its own borders. But more needs to be done. Here is what the left wants to see-- of course no open borders, but,
no fence along the border,
no workplace inspections and enforcement
No detention of illegals once they are legally found

what is the point of having national sovereignty if you cannot determine who can enter and leave your country? Let's do this:

step up and destroy businesses that knowing hire illegal labor
perform sweeps of businesses and industries that knowingly hire illegal immigrants - include jail time
deport illegal immigrants when they are legally found
make it painful for an individual resident to knowingly hire an illegal- under the table payment - include jail time
Set up a strong guest worker program and run it from the embassies, not our own soil.

and finally, enforce antisolicitation laws at all home center parking lots and require I9 paperwork to hire day laborers.

Suddenly there would be no illegal immigration problem.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
I believe that you are wrong Wedge

The left believes that checking citizenship before hiring is the key to a very large part of the problem. This provision is blocked and strenuously opposed by the Republicans and the right.

Boehner will not allow any Republican support any bi-partisan or Democratic immigration reform.

Boehner: Not a Chance Immigration Reform will Pass this Year

Sen. Lindsey Graham was trying but they pressured him into bailing out last Saturday. He has now abandoned his own bill.

Your solution seems imminently reasonable. I believe that it can be simplified by requiring proof of citizenship over the next couple of years with a verifiable Social Security card, instant background check for employers to use, and penalties for hiring illegals.

Why someone in this country illegally who commits a crime is not deported is beyond my understanding.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Wedge

Let's do this:
step up and destroy businesses that knowing hire illegal labor
perform sweeps of businesses and industries that knowingly hire illegal immigrants - include jail time
deport illegal immigrants when they are legally found
make it painful for an individual resident to knowingly hire an illegal- under the table payment - include jail time
Set up a strong guest worker program and run it from the embassies, not our own soil.and finally, enforce antisolicitation laws at all home center parking lots and require I9 paperwork to hire day laborers.
Suddenly there would be no illegal immigration problem.

You're right!!

But those legislators who are dependent on the lobbyists and special interests will fight this tooth and nail. Those of us who have seen the sweat shops in this country, the illegal importation of women for sex, etc. know that there are more illegals here than meets the eye - AND THEY ARE WORKING! ARREST/FINE THE CRIMINALS WHO HIRE THEM! I like the idea about letting their embassy's handle their work permits, etc.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL -I speak from experience

..you've obviously never been stopped for driving 'white'. . .or asked if you speak English . . .you speak from your experience - and it's not happening to you. I respect that. Can't you understand that 'other' citizens have had different experiences? A policeman in Los Angeles was training a new policeman in an area where I worked as a young teacher. I was driving home from the school where I worked in a car that my husband had given me. The policeman (trainer) knew my family and me. The trainee said he was going to pull me over. The trainer asked him why - and he said a 'black' woman driving that car must be a prostitute in this neighborhood. If the trainer in the car had not been one who followed the law - I could have been pulled over for 'probable cause'. Do you understand? We either all carry 'papers' or do the right thing and VALIDATE DOCUMENTATION/CITIZENSHIP BEFORE HIRING. That is the law that needs to be enforced. Hiring illegals is a crime! Arrest/punish the criminals . . .and send the illegals back to their country of origin.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
DM & the trainee

What you are saying is that the trainer did his job and perhaps the trainee learned a lesson. But factually, nothing happened to you. So how did you learn the facts of this incident? Guess the trainer told you, huh?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
AHG

YUP. I said the trainer knew me and my family. Actually this was in the late 60's and the 'black community' and LAPD had a very tenuous relationship. This scenario was used as a role-play exercise. There were L cars in those days (a single man in a patrol car) - and stopping a person without probable cause on Central Avenue near 52nd street would have been dangerous. There were young black men on the corner (in fact on two corners) and the officer, had he been alone, could have put himself in unnecessary danger. (The young men on the corners were students at my school) If he felt he had probable cause, he should have run the license number of the car; and asked for back up because of the young people on the corner. No - nothing happened to me - my point being without proper training, citizens and law enforcement can be in danger. And even with proper training, some law enforcement officers act before they survey the situation - and in these times, many citizens become upset and uncooperative. There are enough criminals committing crimes - that officers should not have the additional responsibility of validating citizenship/documentation papers while working the streets protecting us. Employers should validate the legality of an immigrant. In Arizona, like Kawfi suggested - all Hispanics feel that they will be questioned, rounded up, and sent ??? and many in Arizona are from families that have been citizens for generations. . .and proud of their Hispanic and Native American heritage. I shared this to remind us of how some people think of people of color. We as a country have worked very hard at stopping racial profiling. Blacks in the south have learned that NOT all white men in pick-ups with Confederate symbols are their enemy (THAT’S RACIAL PROFILING) - but it seems that some like Kawfi feel that all Mexicans in Arizona are enemies of the citizens there. Many citizens of Arizona are Mexican American - and resent the implication that they are part of the criminal element. ARREST/FINE THE EMPLOYERS.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
DM, Employers and Criminals

I agree with fining employers. Or like a recent case in CA, seizing the property of habitual violators French Restaurant). But I am more interested in deporting the criminal element of illegal aliens and some states are focusing on that more and more.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
AHG

We're certainly on the same page here. I never understood the releasing of illegals on 'bond'. It will be interesting to see how this works out. The attempted bombing in New York is a real wake up call.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM your problem is you are still living in the 60's

The year is 2010 50 years later things have changed.. Most Police Officers are college educated with an extreme awareness of Reasonable Suspicion and Probable Cause. In the 60's you could not sue an Officer if you were black.

Today all you have to do is speak harshly and claims of Police Brutality is filed the next day. ACLU and SPLC along with the others of Racebaiters inc. will be marching in the streets.

So today's Officer is hyper aware. Are there still incidents of excessive use of force.. YES.. Is it 60's style rampant.. not even close.

So to try to place this in 60's era mentality is pediatric at best.

Go google-Illegal Aliens and Rape.. See how many hits you get..and that is just 1 crime. Illegal Aliens are creating a major issue with crime

Now go google- MS-13. This is the worst of the worst. The bloods and crips are scared of these guys..

This is the problem DM this is what Arizona is facing.. and you want them to what? Hold hands and sing songs? What..

The Feds will not help.. They have to do something. SO they did..

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL and others

In the 60's you could not sue an Officer if you were black.

Where do you get your facts? Did you ever hear of Johnny Cochran? He made his fame suing LAPD and LA County Sheriff's Department - in the 60's!! Your reality today in 2010 is the way you hope it is. SL try this. Darken your skin for one week - and let me know how you're treated in these United States. There are problems in California and Arizona and throughout the United States with illegal immigration. It has been tolerated because of the cheap labor it offers to employers. No matter how well officers are trained today - this law is perceived as giving the government carte blanche to question any person with a dark skin or Latin appearance. The unjust implementation of this is that no one is targeting the illegal Asians, Africans, or Middle Easterners in this manner. (Not to mention the Slavic population in our northeastern states) Our 'leaders' are taking the 'easy way' out by not implicating the employers in this criminal activity. . .including state and federal government employers. VALIDATE CITZENSHIP OR PERMIT TO WORK PAPERS BEFORE HIRING! Don't raise the concern of racial profiling - enforce the existing law. ARREST/FINE THE EMPLOYERS. As for the 'drug lords' - I agree that the Feds DEA have dropped the ball. Arizona is not the only state that has this problem. Money (which is at the core of our drug problem) is truly corrupting this country - including some of our 'good' citizens. We'll see how/if Arizona implements this new law - without 'racial profiling'. Check out the investigation of hiring practices at our own Hartsfield/Jackson Airport. Illegals are being hired there!! The Federal government should send men and women (DEA) to assist law enforcement in Arizona to stop the drug running and violence in that area. (Not all are Latino) Again, fear of the 'darker' being used for political reasons. FINE/ARREST THE EMPLOYER. STOP THE DRUG TRAFFIC.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM this is your problem right here..

DM Wrote:"Darken your skin for one week - and let me know how you're treated in these United States."

You act as if there has been no advancement. You act as if German Sheppard's attack you everyday. Have you seen who is President? Let me give you a hint it is a BLACK MAN.. !!

You are stuck in the racism cycle. It's all about race to you.. Nothing has changed. You said it yourself America was founded on Racism.. and nothing has changed from your perspective to date..

"The unjust implementation of this is that no one is targeting the illegal Asians, Africans, or Middle Easterners in this manner. (Not to mention the Slavic population in our northeastern states)"

WRONG.. If you are a little Green Man from MARS and are here illegally this law will do the same to you as it does to ILLEGAL MEXICANS.. DM.

But why I bother going over this with you is the question.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
S. Lindsey & DM

Lindsey, it has nothing to do with race. It deals as usual with power. The idea that someone would be stopped and asked for papers in America is repugnant to most. However, it is not that easy. The fact that most of the illegal aliens in the southern states are of Hispanic origin is an issue. If a citizen of the United States is pulled over and asked for papers by the police, I don’t think they have anything to worry about. It’s the fact that the police can do this under the Arizona law that upset so many. Asking for a driver’s license by a law enforcement official if they suspect you have driven over the speed limit seems to be no problem at all. However, if you happen to be Hispanic and you are stopped by the police for being Hispanic this is a real problem for those that come here illegally. Over 70% of the people of Arizona support this law and a large percentage of these people are Hispanic.

So, what gives? The fact is that it is not about this issue, it is about two questions high on the democratic list of wants. How do they consolidate the Hispanic vote behind Democratic candidates? How do they get 12 million more dedicated voters, voting democratic? The Democratic Party just loves their position. The more the Republicans push to protect our sovereignty, the more they polarize a Hispanic vote against them. If the Democrats can legalize citizenship for 12 million new voters then they will maintain power. They don’t give a rat’s a__ about our borders or our sovereignty, they care about maintaining power by consolidating the Hispanic vote.

That’s what is going on, politics as usual.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Petey C. Observer
PTC Observer wrote:

Lindsey, it has nothing to do with race. It deals as usual with power. The idea that someone would be stopped and asked for papers in America is repugnant to most. However, it is not that easy. The fact that most of the illegal aliens in the southern states are of Hispanic origin is an issue. If a citizen of the United States is pulled over and asked for papers by the police, I don’t think they have anything to worry about. It’s the fact that the police can do this under the Arizona law that upset so many. Asking for a driver’s license by a law enforcement official if they suspect you have driven over the speed limit seems to be no problem at all. However, if you happen to be Hispanic and you are stopped by the police for being Hispanic this is a real problem for those that come here illegally. Over 70% of the people of Arizona support this law and a large percentage of these people are Hispanic.

Well said, although with regard to your 70% figure, I suspect a similar percentage of white folks supported Jim Crow laws back in the 1950s.

PTC Observer wrote:

So, what gives? The fact is that it is not about this issue, it is about two questions high on the democratic list of wants. How do they consolidate the Hispanic vote behind Democratic candidates? How do they get 12 million more dedicated voters, voting democratic? The Democratic Party just loves their position. The more the Republicans push to protect our sovereignty, the more they polarize a Hispanic vote against them. If the Democrats can legalize citizenship for 12 million new voters then they will maintain power. They don’t give a rat’s a__ about our borders or our sovereignty, they care about maintaining power by consolidating the Hispanic vote.

That’s what is going on, politics as usual.

Aaaaaand here is where your position leaves the firm ground of reality and enters the wispy realm of whimsy. You are positing that Democrats are somehow to blame for this Republican law. It is true that the Democratic party loves their position, it was handed to them on the proverbial silver platter by Republicans focused on short-term political gains.

Republicans may want to preach that this legislation is about "protecting our borders" and/or "guarding our sovereignity" but that is simply basic public relations flackery. What this legislation is really about is "regaining political power".

The Republicans core voter is the aging (50+) white male voter. Until about 1990, they could rely on this bloc to give them power by sheer force of numbers at the voting booth. However, with each passing year their core voter is dwindling as a percentage of the American demographic. Their political power is eroding while the number of African American and Hispanic voters continue to grow.

The Republicans are engaged in a high risk/high reward campaign to "energize the base". In order to appeal to their typical voter's overdeveloped sense of entitlement, Republicans must find a demographic to use as a scapegoat. In the past, Jews, African Americans and most recently homosexuals have been demonized by conservative Republicans. Now, they are focused on Hispanics.

Demonizing Hispanics is effective from two perspectives for Republicans: it fires up their white base and suppresses Hispanic turnout at the polls. The downside is that many legal Hispanic voters are driven from an increasingly "exclusive" Republican party into the welcoming arms of the "inclusive" Democratic party.

Will this risky strategy work? The Republicans will most likely see some short term gains, but then Republicans were always about the "short term". I believe that over the long run however this will prove to be disastrous for the Republicans, paving the way for a solid Democratic voting bloc which has not been seen since the early days of the New Deal.

Time will tell.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
CP Bacon

Time will tell indeed.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
PTC too true

Borders we don't need no stinken borders..

Mexican Army battles Phantom Army on US Border
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtrGHOt2KbI

Mexican Military incursion into USA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk4QGHj1bqM

ARMED MEXICAN MILITARY ON U.S. SOIL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUITKCEatOI&feature=fvw

Mexican Army invades US.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ipFuOIBrUw&feature=related

U.S. Border Patrol Guard Held At Gun Point By Mexican Army
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNFVbvGrCRI&feature=related

Our Government is out of control and so are the borders.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Perceptions - SL

You are stuck in the racism cycle. It's all about race to you.. Nothing has changed. You said it yourself America was founded on Racism.. and nothing has changed from your perspective to date..

Gosh SL, I'm the only one in the country who is discussing 'race'? I don't think so. I have shared on this site how proud I am of the advancement I have witnessed in my lifetime. The very fact that I'm living peacefully in Fayette County with friends and neighbors of all colors testifies to the progress that I have experienced. HOWEVER - stop using President Obama as an example that all is well in the US! Until you walk in my shoes, don't judge my perception.
I have learned how SOME feel about many issues while participating on the blog - and there are cogent arguments that have nothing to do with race - BUT I feel that the law in Arizona is being used as a stop gap - which does not solve the problem and continues to divide Americans. We disagree - but someone who has no idea what he is talking about will not shut me down.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM Wow..

Grab that sign and loud speaker and hit the streets..

WOW.. no one is trying to "shut" you down.. SOME on here are simply pointing out OUR perception that YOUR perceptions are tinged with 60's rhetoric and hyperbole..

But fight on DM.. Powell, Rice, Thomas and all the Wealthy BLACK Citizens I see coming out of some of the richest neighborhoods in Fayette County might not see it the way you do.. But if you think being black is a disadvantage well that's your issue isn't?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Lindsey - the 60's

I attempted to control my anger at DM response to your post last night, but this latest accusation is just over the top. Censorship!! If anything Lindsey your patience with this person is way beyond most.

Lindsey, it's in her interest to live in the 60's. DM ignores and distorts fact and truth with the aim of taking what is “rightfully” hers in the name of “justice” and her peoples’ struggle and people of color everywhere.

I was in the eye of the storm of the civil rights movement in the 60’s, and fought side by side with blacks and whites in the south because that’s where I was born and lived. When I say whites, I mean southern whites too. I am certain that our friend DM is a transplant and knows all about our experience here simply because of her public school education. The nature of our struggle and what it meant to be beaten to obtain real justice is merely an idea but not a reality to DM. In DM’s world it is a tool to continually divide us, to point out our differences and not our common goal of freedom and our common humanity. Our history is simply something she has learned by rote but not through experience. I am certain she never rode behind the white line painted on the bus floor to remind us each day of the injustice and hatred in the world. I am certain she never sat with us at the lunch counter and suffered the result of ordering coffee. She merely tags along on brave men and women’s coat tails to justify her demands for “equality”.

She serves no interest but her own and speaks for no one but herself. She is a spokesman for no one. She does not appreciate what others have done to give her what she has because she simply uses it for her own purpose.

DM attempts to use race and gender as a weapon to justify economic “equality” ignoring the reality that it is ability, skill, and hard work that separates us as human beings not race and gender.

The backbone of the philosophy of the entitlement class is to ignore reality and facts as a way of hiding their envy of those more productive than themselves. This government created class uses race and gender as a cloak to steal, they sap hope from those better than themselves. They pull the nation down to achieve their equalitarian aims.

I grow very tired of the same old clap trap from the entitlement crowd and their certain knowledge that they are somehow empowered simply because they belong to a different race or gender. I am repelled by the notion that our struggle for equal rights was and is an excuse to steal wealth from our fellow human beings through government power. That our worth is not measured by the sweat of our brow and our God given intelligence but by government edict and entitlement.

They have not learned a simple truth ≈ “Nemo leditur nisi a seipso!”

After her last insult that tied us both to a killer, I refuse to communicate again with this person.

She is beyond reason because her motives are clear and it is called self interest.

Do what you will, but my suggestion is to ignore her. I certainly will.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Wow PTC OBSERVER

I'm still in touch with Freedom Riders - and many here in Fayetteville have shared with me how their parents 'SECRETLY' supported the movement. What you write sounds good and soothes your ego - but is so far from reality. Anyone who actually shared the indignities of that era (White or Black) would never express themselves as you have done. You are not a good psychoanalyst - so stop trying to 'figure' me out. You can continue to ignore me (which you haven't done yet!) - but I will continue to express myself in this forum.

Lindsey - I have no idea what this person is talking about - but if I insulted you, I'm sorry. :-(

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - insult

From Davids Mom

Subject: McVeigh/Lindsey/ptc observer

Forum topic - lion - 04/19/2010 - 6:14pm

Linking people (whom you do not know) to killers in a subject line is insulting, my response was due to this one "mistake".

I apologize for "going off" on you, your apology is accepted.

I have to remember that this blog is "entertainment", nothing more.

I think I will entertain myself somewhere else.

:-)

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Nah DM I'm good..

Love the debate though.. been working on another project and could not be on here..

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL

I've also enjoyed the debate - learning a lot. Really enjoy The Fayette Woman! I hope those who really want to know what Fayette County, especially Fayetteville is all about, glance at this marvelous local magazine. So uplifting - and full of great advice!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Thank you Linsey

Take the time to read their autobiographies SL. You have never walked in their shoes. I've always lived in 'better' neighborhoods with neighbors of all colors since I was 12. LA had segregated neighborhoods for years. Did you experience that? If you accept, as I do, that people have different perspectives in our country - then there is no need to always try to do the one-up-man thing that you think you are so good with. . .or to call someone a 'racist' or 'demented'. I have never used those words to describe your perceptions. I know that 'black' is not a disadvantage. It's the way some treat 'blacks' or non-whites which makes 'blacks' have to go to a greater effort to be kind, compassionate, and understanding of those who feel that being 'white' is still an advantage.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - 60's

never mind.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM we all have our "Experiences"

Both good and bad.. They do shape us somewhat. But to take what is happening in Arizona and throw out a blanket charge of something which may or may not happen is ludicris and irresponsible.

You see racism in every motive..I see reason in every action. Different perspectives I guess.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
My dear friend SL

I see reason in every action.

You're blind.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
as the teens say today

WHATEVER!!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
*

*

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Auntie Zeituni and her 2nd deportation hearing

As reported by MSNBC the White House Press Secretary, when asked about the Feburary 4 hearing for President Obama's aunt stated "We would continue to say that everybody in this country should and must follow the law," Gibbs said.

Well I'm glad somebody in the President's inner circle understands that important concept.

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
SL

If every person in AZ is asked the same question and must produce documentation no matter what race then there is no problem. As you know that won’t happen in this case. The majority of the people who will have to produce documentation will be Hispanic. That would be racial profiling and racism at its best. Cut the head off the chicken by closing/placing heavy fines on the companies that hire illegals. We also must be prepared to pay more at the grocery store if this happens.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
Why does everyone assume that this will be applied willy nilly?

How is this any differently applied than any other employment situation or traffic stop throughout the US? If there is probable cause (like a traffic citation)or a bolo for a given car, we all get pulled over and asked to provide ID. If the AZ cops apply the normal and court-tested standards for public stops, how is this a wrong idea?

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
C'mon Wedge, you know the answer...

it's so some can then point the accusatory finger and say "See, we told you so, it's racist." Doesn't matter that there's no "race" involved here.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Wedge. . .

because we have seen and experienced the 'traffic stop' scenario. We also know that the eyes of law enforcement are turned away when obvious illegals are working in certain industries. Those who live in urban areas and Border States are affected by the federal governments lack of meeting their responsibility in this area - but citizens who knowingly hire illegals are criminals. It would take less time from the local law enforcement agencies if the federal government would identify, charge and prosecute those employers who hire illegals. Now the lobbyists for the construction industry and most of the service industries will be at state capitals and DC fighting this implementation of the law. In Arizona and California, the time spent checking the papers of criminals (those that were questioned due to 'probable cause' is wasted - because work papers/documentation papers are forged and on the street almost before the government issues them.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Cops bad Criminals goood... Wedge.

That is the mentality of the left. You see it here in Jeff, DM and Tman,

All of a sudden Police Officers are just going to start abusing power and calling out the dogs on those poor "brown" people. Next thing you know it will be firehoses and night sticks.

Incredible.. I guess asking these Libs to at least read the law before spouting talking points, but no LaRaza is more credible.

I guess when Arizona reaches #1 status and beats out Bogotá then maybe the Libs might ALLOW the Citizens of Arizona to do something.. Probably make them give the Illegals the state most likely.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
THIS IS TEA PARTY SPONSORED?

Are you sure? Is this Arizona law part of their platform?