Arizona's Immigration Bill

[IDrinkaRum]

Hobbs - I didn't say 50% of the people in Arizona have their homes invaded by illegals. I said the people who leave their houses have a 50/50 chance of people invading their houses. I've watched the news, read the papers, read columns on the internet, listened to talk radio, etc., etc.

And again, check out the 1968 ruling of Terry v. Ohio. It's already legal for cops to pull someone over on the suspicion of doing something illegal and the people may be searched.

People look for racial profiling when there is none to be found.

Let's say there's a crime, description of subject is this: 5'10", large frame, light-medium olive complected, brown hair/brown eyes. Guess who would be pulled over with that type of description? Hispanics, yes, but also, my husband, Mr. Rum. When my husband gets a tan, he gets very dark. (So does Child Rum, my MIL, my mom, and my sister). My husband is Scottish on his father's side & English with some Native American thrown in for good measure on his mother's side.

Give this law a chance to go into effect and see how it goes. And if it makes the illegals too scared to go to Arizona, then it's doing its job effectively.

[Hobbs]

Yes, it is legal for people to be stopped for reasonable suspicion...but how is "I think he's illegal" considered reasonable suspicion? That's an opinion. Even someone swerving in and out of lanes isn't considered sufficient to stop for a drunk driving violation.

Show me those papers, show me those Internet columns. As the person positing that position, it is your job to provide the burden of proof. Until then, it's just idle speculation. Plus, if you're going to cite Faux News, don't bother.

In your example, it doesn't address the problem in AZ at ALL. Let's face it; when you bring up the words "illegal" and "Arizona" people aren't thinking of any nationality but Mexican. CH makes a valid point. Unless officers are pulling over blue-eyed, pale blondes and asking for their IDs as well, it's nothing but racial profiling.

As you seem to like to cite court cases, here's one very relevant to the discussion:
In U.S. v. Montero-Camargo (208 F.3d 1122, 9th Cir. 2000), the court adopted the broad definition, declaring that race could not be used as a factor, even when other factors are present, to take a law enforcement action. The use of race as part of an identifying description of a specific suspect for a specific case, however, is allowed.

The problem is, it's not making illegals scared to go to AZ, it's making American citizens (like myself) afraid of visiting with the threat of being pulled over.


Here's my quickie research on AZ crime:

"Crime rates in Arizona at lowest point in decades. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), the violent crime rate in Arizona was lower in 2006, 2007, and 2008 -- the most recent year from which data are available -- than any year since 1983. The property crime rate in Arizona was lower in 2006, 2007, and 2008 than any year since 1968....The BJS data further show that violent crime rates and property crime rates in California, New Mexico, and Texas dropped from 1998 through 2008 -- the most recent year from which data are available..." Mediamatters.org.

[IDrinkaRum]

Look, it's been pointed out, not only by the police departments in Arizona, but also by the Governor (who has signed an amendment) that this law will not lead to racial profiling.

No one can be pulled over because of how they look. They have to be in the process of comitting a crime (bad driving, waving a gun around, etc.) before the police can do anything about them.

Mr. Rum asked me where I wanted to go on vacation this year. I told him I wanted to go to Arizona. I have no fear of being pulled over/harassed.

Again, if the government had done what they were talking about: strengthening the border patrol, erecting a wall, anything, the Arizona law would never have been enacted. I hope this gets the heads of the politicians out of their asses and get them to collectively enact an illegal immigration law that boots all those in the country out at the same time.

[Hobbs]

Look, it's been pointed out, not only by the police departments in Arizona, but also by the Governor (who has signed an amendment) that this law will not lead to racial profiling.

No one can be pulled over because of how they look. They have to be in the process of comitting a crime (bad driving, waving a gun around, etc.) before the police can do anything about them.

Yeah, cuz I really expect them to be unbiased towards Hispanics

Mr. Rum asked me where I wanted to go on vacation this year. I told him I wanted to go to Arizona. I have no fear of being pulled over/harassed.

Fine, go where you want. I won't cuz I know when to take the hint and stay from places I'm not wanted.

Again, if the government had done what they were talking about: strengthening the border patrol, erecting a wall, anything, the Arizona law should never have been enacted. I hope this gets the heads of the politicians out of their asses and get them to collectively enact an illegal immigration law that boots all those in the country out at the same time.

Fixed it for you. Whatever gripe that AZ had with the federal government, it gives them no right to usurp federal authority. I hope this unconstitutional law gets repealed/shut down soon.

So I take it you have no proof of the crime rates you claimed?

[crashhelmet]

Hobbs - I didn't say 50% of the people in Arizona have their homes invaded by illegals. I said the people who leave their houses have a 50/50 chance of people invading their houses. I've watched the news, read the papers, read columns on the internet, listened to talk radio, etc., etc.

50% chance?

There is at least a 50% chance that I'll die in a car accident on my way home from work tonight. At least a 50% chance that I'll slip in the shower and break my neck. At least a 50% chance that North Korea or Iran will launch Nuclear missiles this weekend and start a war.

I don't want to scare you, but there's a 50% that you'll be attacked and killed tonight. Better stock up on your pepper spray and whatever ammo you can find.

50% chance means it either will or it will not happen. That can applied to so many things.

Now, if you had said half of the homes in the state of Arizona have been invaded by illegals, that might be something to be concerned with. It's funny how people throw numbers around to scare people. Gotta love propaganda.

CH

[IDrinkaRum]

Crime statistics per city per state

Arizona #38 of livable states in the union

From 2007

Hobbs - propaganda can go both ways. We can't have this law because there might be racial profiling!


Also, haven't you been listening to those in charge? The Attorney General, Eric Holder, and even President Obama have both stated that they have not read the Arizona bill. They just "know" (how? magically? a genie told them? the ghost whisperer is helping them out?) the bill will cause racial profiling and will hurt the United States? (How? By driving people away who would vote for the Democrats because the Democrats are the "benevolent" peoples who gave them amnesty after breaking the laws of the country they are living in?)

Article from May 12, 2010 - more people are in support of Arizona law than those against it.

For the record, the county I live in in the state of Virginia was villified a few years ago for enacting legislation against illegal immigrants. It's cleaned up most of the areas of the town where I live. So I completely understand the need for this type of law and why it was drafted in the first place.

And again I say: If the Federal Govenment hadn't renegged on its promises to help out the border states in the first place, Arizona wouldn't have had to enact this bill.

[sarcam]Or should we just hand California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas back to the Mexicans? Would that be a better alternative?[/sarcasm]

Also, why if the Arizona bill is "so bad", are lawmakers in Maryland (definitely NOT a border state) considering writing up a simliar law to that of Arizona's?

Don't know if any of you will accept a link to TPM (Talking Points Memo), but there are other states who have or are considering just as harsh legislation as that in Arizona

[Hobbs]

Oh, so now I'm a Mexican?!

WTH?! I seriously can't understand people's prejudices.

Ok, good. Crime statistics. Where is it stated that illegal immigrants are responsible for this crime? If all you can do is put numbers without correlating it to immigration, all you're doing is demonizing a people, which is what racists have been doing since time immemorial.

My mother was just told at the store that, since she didn't like the AZ law, she, "Needs to get the Hell out!" Nice to see this isn't a racial thing.

[daleduke17]

IDrinkARum, like usual, Obama is talking out of his ass.

Shouldn't he, as a scholar, read up on stuff before speaking on it?

[Hobbs]

IDrinkARum, like usual, Obama is talking out of his ass.

Shouldn't he, as a scholar, read up on stuff before speaking on it?

Anyone with even a minor understanding of civil rights should be able to talk against this bill.

[crashhelmet]

First of all... Have either of you even read this law?

Crime statistics per city per state

Arizona #38 of livable states in the union

From 2007

Hobbs - propaganda can go both ways. We can't have this law because there might be racial profiling!

That was actually me mentioning propaganda.

I don't see a single spot in any of those statistics that break down the crimes by legal vs illegal residents. Now, the 10 worst states were all southern states, except for New Mexico

Worst Ten Livable States 2004
41. New Mexico
42. Kentucky
43. West Virginia
44. Arkansas
45. North Carolina
46. Tennessee
47. Alabama
48. South Carolina
49. Louisiana
50. Mississippi

You're not going to insinuate that the illegals are migrating as far east as South Carolina and West Virginia at a rate high enough to grossly inflate their crime rate, are you?

Let me, once again I might add, point out the massive failures with this law and how it can lead to racial profiling.

The people of Arizona have the right to sue the various law enforcement departments up to $5,000.00 a day for every time they fail to enforce this law. This means the LEOs have to enforce this in fear of being sued.

You can be incarcerated and fined up to $2500.00 USD if you are asked for proof of citizenship/legal immigration and fail to provide it.

Current acceptable forms of proof are:

From Proof of Legal Presence in the United States from the California Dept of Real Estate website

List A: Acceptable Documents to Establish U.S. Citizenship

A person who is a citizen of the United States as evidenced by one of the following:

1. A copy of a birth certificate issued in or by a city, county, state, or other governmental entity within the United States or its outlying possessions.

2. A U.S. Certificate of Birth Abroad (FS-545, DS-135) or a Report of Birth Abroad of a U.S. Citizen (FS-240).

3. A birth certificate or passport issued from:

o Puerto Rico, on or after January 13, 1941;
o Guam, on or after January 17, 1917;
o U.S. Virgin Islands, on or after January 17, 1917;
o Northern Mariana Islands, after November 4, 1986;
o American Samoa;
o Swain's Island; or,
o District of Columbia.

4. A U.S. passport (expired or unexpired).

5. Certificate of Naturalization (N-550, N-57, N-578).

6. Certificate of Citizenship (N-560, N-561, N-645).

7. U.S. Citizen Identification Card (I-179, I-197).

8. An individual Fee Register Receipt (Form-G-711) that shows that the person has filed an application for a New Naturalization or Citizenship Paper (Form N-565).

9. Any other document which establishes a U.S. place of birth or indicates U.S. citizenship.

List B: Acceptable Documents to Establish Alien Status

An alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence under the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) must submit supporting documentation (legible copy of the front and backside of the document) to establish legal presence under one of the following categories:

1. An alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence under the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA). Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-551 (Alien Registration Receipt Card commonly knows as a "green card"); or
o Unexpired Temporary I-551 stamp in foreign passport or on INS Form I-94.

2. An alien who is granted asylum under Section 208 of the INA. Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-94 annotated with stamp showing grant of asylum under Section 208 of the INA;
o INS Form I-688B (Employment Authorization Card) annotated "274a.12(a)(5)";
o INS Form I-766 (Employment Authorization Document) annotated "A5";
o Grant Letter from the Asylum Office of INS; or
o Order of an immigration judge granting asylum.

3. A refugee admitted to the United States under Section 207 of the INA. Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-94 annotated with stamp showing admission under Section 207 of the INA;
o INS Form I-688B (Employment Authorization Card) annotated "274a.12(a)(3)";
o INS Form I-766 (Employment Authorization Document) annotated "A3"; or
o INS Form I-571 (Refugee Travel Document).

4. An alien paroled into the United States for at least one year under Section 212(d)(5) of the INA. Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-94 with stamp showing admission for at least one year under Section 212(d)(5) of the INA.

5. An alien whose deportation is being withheld under Section 243(h) of the INA (as in effect immediately prior to September 30, 1996) or Section 241(b)(3) of such Act (as amended by Section 305(a) of Division C of Public Law 104-208). Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-668B (Employment Authorization Card) annotated "274a.12(a)(10)";
o INS Form I-766 (Employment Authorization Document) annotated "A10"; or
o Order from an immigration judge showing deportation withheld under Section 243(h) of the INA as in effect prior to April 1, 1997, or removal withheld under Section 241(b)(3) of the INA.

6. An alien who is granted conditional entry under Section 203(a)(7) of the INA as in effect prior to April 1, 1980. Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-94 with stamp showing admission under Section 203(a)(7) of the INA;
o NS Form I-688B (Employment Authorization Card) annotated "274a.12(a)(3)"; or
o INS Form I-766 (Employment Authorization Document) annotated "A3".

7. An alien who is a Cuban or Haitian entrant (as defined in Section 501(e) of the Refugee Education Assistance Act of 1980). Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-551 (Alien Registration Receipt Card, commonly known as a "green card") with the code CU6, CU7, or CH6;
o Unexpired temporary I-551 stamp in foreign passport or on INS Form I-94 with code CU6 or CU7; or
o INS Form I-94 with stamp showing parole as "Cuban/Haitian Entrant" under Section 212(d)(5) of the INA.

8. An alien paroled into the United States for less than one year under Section 212(d)(5) of the INA. Evidence includes:

o INS Form I-94 showing this status.

9. An alien who has been declared a battered alien. Evidence includes:

o INS petition and supporting documentation.

So now tell me... Do you carry any one of these pieces of documentation on you at all times?

Are the police going to start arresting EVERYBODY that fails to provide something on this list and overfill their jail cells? If they write them a ticket for the fine and let them go, who's to say the illegal won't run off and hide in a different city or to another state? How do they decide who gets arrested and who doesn't? How do they decide who gets asked and who doesn't?

The first time they decide that they don't need to ask John Smith for his proof of legal residence, but continue to ask Juan Martinez for his, it's profiling. If they ask a white dude with a British or German accent but not the white dude that sounds like he's from "like... oh my gawd... The Valley" it's profiling.

It. Must. Be. Everybody. Or. Nobody.

CH

[Boozy]

If you noticed, I said the second part of your post. Segundo!

Mod Note:

Taking a few extra seconds to properly edit your quotes prevents this kind of misunderstanding. If you're only responding to a small part of someone's post, trim everything out of the quote except for that bit.

This applies to everyone; I was just using this misunderstanding as an example.

Thanks.

[IDrinkaRum]

Everyone who says this will cause the cops to engage in Racial Profiling, please google Prince William County and illegal immigrants.

Here is an article about a sharp decline in violence in my county - and the mention of our law against Illegal Aliens

Virginia is NOT a border state. Yet we had a disproportional amount of illegals in our area (Northern Virginia - we're outside of Washington, DC). The law has been around since 2007. Prince William County, I believe was one of the first cities/counties/areas in the U.S. to enact a law against illegal aliens. In the 3 years since this law was enacted, there. has. not. been. anyone. who. alleges. our. cops. have. been. racial. profiling. 3 years. That tells me, that this Arizona law can get the illegals our of the state without racial profiling.

Because illegals are no longer allowed in our area, they have gone north up into DC and into Maryland. As I posted in my previous post, Maryland is now thinking of a law similar to Arizona.

The Federal Government wants the states to stop enacting these types of laws? Then they darn well had better get their heads out of their asses, stop whining about the unfairness of the Arizona law, and start crafting legislation that will kick these criminals out of our country.

[Fryk]

I'm surprised that more people haven't jumped on criticizing the stupidest part of this bill: fining cops for not enforcing THIS AND ONLY THIS law. If the cops aren't doing their job to enforce the law, then discipline them! Fining them is just asinine. And why just this particular law? How is this NOT going to create a situations where cops ignore enforcement of most laws so they can avoid being fined for not enforcing this one??

[Hobbs]

I rfemember that law. I saw it in a documentary. I also remember the man who helped inact it was one of the most racist individuals I've heard outside of the KKK. He actually referred to Mexican immigration as the Reconquista. I don't know what the wars to reclaim the Iberian peninsula from the Moors has to do with immigration, but then again, who said these people were understanding of humanity?

This law was inacted for purely political gain. They wanted to pass something that the federal government and administration couldn't ignore in an election year. Passing this kind of legislation, historically, has been political suicide in an election year. The only reason it was done was to weaken the Democrats. Sometimes (ok, ALL the time) Republicans make me sick.

[AdminAssistant]

State and local level immigration laws don't really make sense to me. As Rum said, they just move. So, you aren't actually solving the problem, just moving it away from you. NIMBY - Not In My BackYard!! Legislation has to be federal and it has to be fair and sensible. We cannot, logistically, deport 11 million people. Most of those people have jobs and families and are just trying to get by. Deport the criminals, offer amnesty to the rest and get them legal. Just kicking out or harassing everyone who looks like the might be Mexican is wrong, it's unconstitutional, and it's racist. There is no statistical evidence that the crime rates in certain areas is tied to illegal immigrants.

There are ways to combat illegal immigration (like not buying products from companies that hire illegal workers.) But it's more satisfying to erect a useless, but symbolic, wall between our countries. Oh, and as a side note, who do you think the contractors are hiring to build that wall, hm?? A union carpenter working for $20/hour? Or an illegal willing to work for $5/hour? A wall that isn't even continuous and that people can easily climb, dig under, or cut through. However, it sends a horrific symbolic message to Mexicans as to how much we value their country. That is, not at all.