Arizona Official Threatens to Cut Off Los Angeles Power as Payback for Boycott

[goof2]

Originally Posted by pauldun170

We have cute little policies against racial profiling here in NYC.
There is always some reason that can be used to pull someone over if you really wanna pull them over.

It is the same everywhere. That is why I said they need to at least find a pretext.

[101lifts2]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

No, it does not.

It states that they may check status during any "Lawful Contact".

Don't waste your time Googling a legal definition of "Lawful Contact", because there isn't one. It's a made up term, and it doesn't mean dick.

For all you or I know, asking someone if they want a delicious cookie, is "Lawful Contact".

JC

You know that Lawful Contact means the cop needs a valid reason to pull you over or ask for ID. Why don't you just say police are going to abuse the law like you would like to say and quit saying the law states you can pull someon over because of race? And I do agree they will abuse it (like most other shit cops have power over), regardless, that is not what we are discussing.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

You know that Lawful Contact means the cop needs a valid reason to pull you over or ask for ID.

Funny thing. "Lawful Contact" has been removed from the law, and replaced with "Lawful stop, detain or arrest". Why? Like I said before, "Lawful Contact" is not an enforceable legal term. There is no legal definition, so it can't be proved or disproved. It was a built in loophole.

The word solely, has also been removed after 3 Federal law suits were filed. Why is that important? It's important because in the original version, officers were allowed to take race or nationality into consideration, as long as it wasn't the only thing on their minds.

B. For any lawful contact stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county.......... A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.


So, the original intent and spirit of the law was pretty clear. It's been forced to change into it's Sunday School clothes, but it's still based on shaky constitutional grounds.

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

Why don't you just say police are going to abuse the law like you would like to say and quit saying the law states you can pull someon over because of race? And I do agree they will abuse it (like most other shit cops have power over), regardless, that is not what we are discussing.

Maybe that should be what we're discussing, since we both seem to know that's what's going to happen.

JC

[101lifts2]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Funny thing. "Lawful Contact" has been removed from the law, and replaced with "Lawful stop, detain or arrest". ......

Ok it was removed, so what are you still bitching about?

...Maybe that should be what we're discussing, since we both seem to know that's what's going to happen.

JC

Do you honestly think police don't pull people over because there is a black guy driving a brand new car? Come on. This law is really going to do nothing other than put thousands upon thousands of illegals in the hands of INS because citizenship has to be determined.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

This law is really going to do nothing other than put thousands upon thousands of illegals in the hands of INS because citizenship has to be determined.

At which point ICE will "not necessarily process" them if you believe the head of the agency.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2...izona-law.html

Homeland Security official weighs in on Arizona law
May 19, 2010 1:32 PM | 16 Comments
Arizona's new law targeting illegal immigration is not "good government," a top Department of Homeland Security official said in Chicago Wednesday.

John Morton, who heads U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said his agency will not necessarily process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona officials. The best way to reduce illegal immigration is through a comprehensive federal approach, not a patchwork of state laws, he said.

"I don't think the Arizona law, or laws like it, are the solution," Morton said during a visit to the Tribune editorial board.

While Americans frustrated over illegal immigration urge the Obama administration to do more, officials also have been criticized by Latino activists over the increase in immigrants deported back to their home countries. Despite the outcry, Morton said his agency intended to step up enforcement in places like Illinois.

A former federal prosecutor, Morton said his agency intends to expand the Secure Communities initiative, which gives local sheriff's departments and police access to a Homeland Security database that includes fingerprints. The initiative recently grew to include most of Chicago's suburbs.

Morton also said the agency intends to increase scrutiny of employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

"If we're going to bring about meaningful changes in behavior, you have to do that by focusing on the employer," he said.

Morton acknowledged that a wide spectrum of Americans is frustrated over the immigration system - from pro-reform activists upset that Obama has not aggressively pushed a legalization bill to immigration hawks who perceive that the U.S.-Mexico border remains porous.

"In the immigration business, if they are against you on both sides, it's generally a sign that you're doing something right," he said.

-- Oscar Avila

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

Ok it was removed, so what are you still bitching about?

Simple. It should not have been there in the first place.

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

Do you honestly think police don't pull people over because there is a black guy driving a brand new car? Come on.

Of course they do. That why I don't like any like law that has the potential to make matters worse.

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

This law is really going to do nothing other than put thousands upon thousands of illegals in the hands of INS because citizenship has to be determined.

I'm ok with that. I don't think you understand my position at all. If there were a magic beam you could shoot at someone, and determine their legal status, I'd say lets buy one, and going shining for illegals.

But there isn't.

What bothers me most about this, is the tone. Every time the economy goes bad, people come out of the woodwork with their torches and pitchforks. All of a sudden, it's ok to hate people.

WTF is that all about? It's bullshit, and frankly, it's decidedly un-American.

JC

[goof2]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

What bothers me most about this, is the tone. Every time the economy goes bad, people come out of the woodwork with their torches and pitchforks. All of a sudden, it's ok to hate people.

WTF is that all about? It's bullshit, and frankly, it's decidedly un-American.

JC

Why do you make the assumption that this is about hate? I can only speak for myself, but I don't hate immigrants from anywhere regardless of their immigration status. According to a few polls I have seen a majority of Americans support this law. I seriously doubt it is because they all hate "brown people". I'm sure there are some who support it for the motivation you are implying but I'll bet there are some who support the financial reform bill for no other reason than "it sticks it to those Jew bankers" too. The fact remains that our immigration and border security policies have been ineffective for a long time. This law attempts to force the federal government to change that and that reason alone is acceptable to me.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Simple. It should not have been there in the first place.



Of course they do. That why I don't like any like law that has the potential to make matters worse.



I'm ok with that. I don't think you understand my position at all. If there were a magic beam you could shoot at someone, and determine their legal status, I'd say lets buy one, and going shining for illegals.

But there isn't.

What bothers me most about this, is the tone. Every time the economy goes bad, people come out of the woodwork with their torches and pitchforks. All of a sudden, it's ok to hate people.

WTF is that all about? It's bullshit, and frankly, it's decidedly un-American.

JC

I don't have the time or energy to pick apart your posts. What's Un-American? I'll tell you what is Un-American...

How about having the White House hold a Dinner for the Mexican President, and having him BASH a state in OUR country while giving a speech to OUR Congress and OUR OWN CONGRESS has a standing ovation for him BASHING OUR OWN STATE AND IT'S PEOPLE!!!! That is what is wrong.

NO MATTER THE TOPIC, right or wrong. They are still a state in OUR country!

[Homeslice]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

What bothers me most about this, is the tone. Every time the economy goes bad, people come out of the woodwork with their torches and pitchforks. All of a sudden, it's ok to hate people.

WTF is that all about? It's bullshit, and frankly, it's decidedly un-American.

JC

My opinion is that not ENOUGH people cared about immigration during good times. Tough enforcement is something that should have been in place ALWAYS.

Illegal immigrants:
1) Use our roads & hospitals without paying for them (unless they pay taxes, but I would like to see hard data on what % of them actually do)
2) Send a substantial portion of their earnings back home, OUT of the American economy
3) Are often involved in drug smuggling (National Forest land in CA is often stolen by these people in order to grow weed)
4) Do not care about integrating into America as much as those who are legitimately pursuing citizenship (Many plan on just making some money and then leaving after a few years)

Not to mention, if this government really cares about terrorism, like they claim to, then why not focus their attention on what is currently the easiest way for terrorists & weapons to get into this country? Wouldn't that be a more effective approach than all this Patriot Act/Echelon crap?

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Inferno

I don't have the time or energy to pick apart your posts.

Is it just my posts you don't have the time or energy to pick apart, or do you just lack time and energy in general?

Originally Posted by Inferno

What's Un-American? I'll tell you what is Un-American...

How about having the White House hold a Dinner for the Mexican President, and having him BASH a state in OUR country while giving a speech to OUR Congress and OUR OWN CONGRESS has a standing ovation for him BASHING OUR OWN STATE AND IT'S PEOPLE!!!! That is what is wrong.

NO MATTER THE TOPIC, right or wrong. They are still a state in OUR country!

How ABOUT this: I AGREE WITH YOU!!! I don't give a RATS ASS about how Felipe FUCKING Calderon feels about OUR BORDER LAWS!

(We have a right to secure our borders, and deport anyone without documentation, and DUDE! Why didn't you tell me about the RANDOM CAPS thing earlier? This is THE SHIT!!)

JC