• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

By 12 to 1, ABC, CBS, and NBC Rip Arizona's Immigration Law

The reporting and the media in main stream is more left leaning they even admit it. My issue is with the former elected officials and party affiliates and
news organizations and think tanks and research groups that are supportive of the government and the two main political party's.
None of the news represents the main stream average American views.
ACTUALLY- The news media is dangerous to our liberty's IT has became corrupt and now is the tool of information from the government. Terror alert- Think what would our media outlets left and right do? What ever uncle sam asked of them is what they would do BLOCK all info from us if asked to. WE NEED A FREE PRESS NOT a government ran information network!
TWO PARTY RULE is the tool used to keep us in the herd and grazing on the plains of Cooperation.
 
Goof Noodle said:
No, you just asked a stupid question to someone else and are unhappy with the answer I gave you. It is the cops job to ask for identification from people that look suspicious of breaking the law.
Click to expand...


Stupid question? Which by the way ,wasn’t directed at you. Which was…
(How many times have you been stopped for a traffic offense where the officer that stops you ask for not only your papers but everyone of your passengers as well?)
Click to expand...

So your saying any passenger, in a vehicle, that is stopped for a traffic violation should cough up their “papers please”?

As for a the rest of your meaningless, projecting, crystal ball reading post I….. :roll:
 
GOOF NOODLE I wanna post this on my blog.
Remind me again, what happens to an American that gets caught in Mexico illegally? Why is it different for Mexicans who are in America illegally? Will you go down to Mexico and fight for equality for Americans in Mexico?
 
donc said:
Then you must be big fan of racial or ethnic profiling like they do in China, as well as the old Soviet Union, not to mention the apartheid regime in South Africa. :2wave:
Click to expand...

:) and the admissions office of colleges in the United States.
 
donc said:
The Constitution has something in it that forbids a government from differentiating between anyone on the basis of race; sadly that includes illegals/ illegal aliens (whatever that is).
Click to expand...

1. actually no, the Constitution doesn't have "something in it that forbids a government from differentiating between anyone on the basis of race".

2. the Arizona law specifically states that race or ethnicity will not be a factor in determining whether or not one is an illegal alien.

To pass muster under the Fourth Amendment, detention must be reasonable.
Click to expand...

you do realize that the Arizona state law only allows local authorities the power to demand proof of citizenship when they are already dealing with another enforcement issue such as speeding, running red lights, and the light? the notion that a cop can just begin to randomly harass hispanics has no basis in the law, only in overly dramatic responses to it.

Do you consider asking thirty percent of the population of a state (which Hispanics are in Arizona) "Papers, please" constitutional?
Click to expand...

if they are pulled over for speeding, yes.
 
cpwill

1. actually no, the Constitution doesn't have "something in it that forbids a government from differentiating between anyone on the basis of race".
Click to expand...

At the time the constitution was written people of a different colors were not considered people either.Note the highlighted part.

(The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.)


2. the Arizona law specifically states that race or ethnicity will not be a factor in determining whether or not one is an illegal alien.


you do realize that the Arizona state law only allows local authorities the power to demand proof of citizenship when they are already dealing with another enforcement issue such as speeding, running red lights, and the light? the notion that a cop can just begin to randomly harass hispanics has no basis in the law, only in overly dramatic responses to it.

if they are pulled over for speeding, yes.
Click to expand...


And of course the slippery slope of individualized suspicion applies to all of the passengers in said vehicle as well?

Do you think that it is appropriate for the LEO, after he writes the ticket to the driver of the vehicle, to ask the passengers for any of the following?

While your at it which of these do you happen to have on you when you go o to the store?

Documents serving as primary evidence of U.S. citizenship are:

* Previously issued, undamaged US passport
* Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state of birth
* Consular Report of Birth (of U.S. citizen) Abroad or Certification of Birth
* Naturalization Certificate
* Certificate of Citizenship
 
donc said:
At the time the constitution was written people of a different colors were not considered people either.
Click to expand...

actually they were. what slaves were not considered to be, however, was full citizens. which is why their representation is partial, as opposed to nonexistant.

(The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.)
Click to expand...

yup. fortunately, the Arizona law does not violate this amendment. no one is busting down doors without warrant because the inhabitants 'look hispanic' or anything so silly. in fact, the law specifically prohibits such behavior.

And of course the slippery slope of individualized suspicion applies to all of the passengers in said vehicle as well?
Click to expand...

I think that when you start making the "slippery slope" argument to claim that police officers are going to break the law, then you are resting your argument a thin branch indeed.

Do you think that it is appropriate for the LEO, after he writes the ticket to the driver of the vehicle, to ask the passengers for any of the following?

While your at it which of these do you happen to have on you when you go o to the store?

Documents serving as primary evidence of U.S. citizenship are:

* Previously issued, undamaged US passport
* Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state of birth
* Consular Report of Birth (of U.S. citizen) Abroad or Certification of Birth
* Naturalization Certificate
* Certificate of Citizenship
Click to expand...

:) well, in order to be driving the car you need a valid drivers license, a proof of registration to yourself (which will require further proof of identification in order to secure), and proof of insurance.
 
I for one am not deciding where I stand on this issue until I see how the authorities in Arizona enforce this law. You can make all the fuss you want saying that this law encourages racial profiling, but who are you to say how the Arizona police will behave? Y'all are making it out as if every hispanic person in sight of a cop will be questioned and detained, which I am certain is far from the truth. If used sparingly, I support Az.
 
Nymphetamine said:
I for one am not deciding where I stand on this issue until I see how the authorities in Arizona enforce this law. You can make all the fuss you want saying that this law encourages racial profiling, but who are you to say how the Arizona police will behave? Y'all are making it out as if every hispanic person in sight of a cop will be questioned and detained, which I am certain is far from the truth. If used sparingly, I support Az.
Click to expand...


You being in the Bible belt should be familiar with the term “Driving While Black.” In this case it will be “Driving While Hispanic” with the added touch of “show me your papers”, any of the following will do, for you and your passengers. :2wave:

* Previously issued, undamaged US passport
* Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state of birth
* Consular Report of Birth (of U.S. citizen) Abroad or Certification of Birth
* Naturalization Certificate
* Certificate of Citizenship
 
donc said:
You being in the Bible belt should be familiar with the term “Driving While Black.” In this case it will be “Driving While Hispanic”
Click to expand...

given that the new Arizona law specifically forbids that, do you have a logical argument that police will be violating the law without seeing massive suit in response? seems to me if i'm a legal hispanic resident of Arizona, i'm hoping some dumb hick cop does harass me without cause - i'm going to make quite a bit of money off the subsequent emotional pain and suffering.
 
donc said:
You being in the Bible belt should be familiar with the term “Driving While Black.” In this case it will be “Driving While Hispanic” with the added touch of “show me your papers”, any of the following will do, for you and your passengers. :2wave:

* Previously issued, undamaged US passport
* Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state of birth
* Consular Report of Birth (of U.S. citizen) Abroad or Certification of Birth
* Naturalization Certificate
* Certificate of Citizenship
Click to expand...

All I am saying is that we shouldn't make assumptions about the execution of the law. I am not denying that there will be profiling in some amount, because even without the consent of the government there will be some amount of profiling done by the police. I think we just need to wait and see what happens. The worst that will come of this is a bunch of hispanics will get mad because they were inconvenienced, they will protest, and the law will be disbanded.
 
Grim17 said:
Attack the source and the poster, so you can avoid addressing the facts. Just what I expect from the "head buried in the sand" crowd.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

Well, the source is a problem, because rip is subjective. When you use a subjective standard, you're doing exactly what you're accusing others of, and hence the problem with what is being presented. If the networks are accurately reporting, then there is no problem. Just because you only want positive press doesn't mean positive press has been earned. All things are not equal. You can't expect to have things they way you want it unless you really want bias.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom