• 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!

Ariz. governor signs immigration enforcement bill

Phoenix.
Well we have eliminated Sheriff's deputy, Police Officer, Immigration officer and customs officer.
So my next guess Court Officer, Parole officer or Detention officer.
 
Wow, I am tired of you being blind. The law states "Allows a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S." SB1070 - 492R - Senate Fact Sheet.

So, in your world how does an officer know if a person committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the us? Does he have radar? Or does he profile the person? I will talk slow so you can pick it up.



I would think someone who claims to be in law enforcement would know what the hell a public offense are.

Here is a list of Public offenses in Kansas.
Uniform Public Offense Code
Code:
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

DEFINITIONS

LIABILITY FOR OFFENSES OF ANOTHER

CORPORATIONS: CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY; INDIVIDUAL LIABILITY

 

ARTICLE 2. ANTICIPATORY OFFENSES

ATTEMPT

CONSPIRACY

 

ARTICLE 3. OFFENSES AGAINST PERSONS

BATTERY

BATTERY AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

SEXUAL BATTERY

ASSAULT

ASSAULT OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE WITH FIREFIGHTER

UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT

MISTREATMENT OF CONFINED PERSON

VIOLATION OF PROTECTION FROM ABUSE ORDER

CRIMINAL DEFAMATION

 

ARTICLE 4. SEX OFFENSES

LEWD, LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR

PROSTITUTION

PROMOTING PROSTITUTION

PATRONIZING A PROSTITUTE

 

ARTICLE 5. OFFENSES AFFECTING CHILDREN

CONTRIBUTING TO A CHILD'S MISCONDUCT OR DEPRIVATION

FURNISHING ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR TO A MINOR

FURNISHING CEREAL MALT BEVERAGE TO A MINOR

ENDANGERING A CHILD

WATERCRAFT; LIFESAVING DEVICES REQUIRED

PURCHASE OR POSSESSION OF CIGARETTES OR TOBACCO PRODUCTS BY A MINOR

SELLING, GIVING OR FURNISHING CIGARETTES OR TOBACCO PRODUCTS TO A MINOR

 

ARTICLE 6. OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY

THEFT

INTENT; PERMANENTLY DEPRIVE

THEFT; LOST, MISLAID PROPERTY

THEFT OF SERVICES

CRIMINAL DEPRIVATION OF PROPERTY

CRIMINAL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY

CRIMINAL TRESPASS

LITTERING

TAMPERING WITH A LANDMARK

TAMPERING WITH A TRAFFIC SIGNAL

UNLAWFUL MANUFACTURE OR DISPOSAL OF FALSE TOKENS

SERIAL NUMBERS

WITHHOLDING POSSESSION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY

UNLAWFUL DEPOSITS IN SEWERS

DAMAGING SEWERS

GIVING A WORTHLESS CHECK

CRIMINAL USE OF A FINANCIAL CARD

MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERS; SELLING MOTOR VEHICLES WITHOUT A LICENSE

EQUITY SKIMMING

 

ARTICLE 7. OFFENSES AFFECTING GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS

COMPOUNDING AN OFFENSE

OBSTRUCTING LEGAL PROCESS OR OFFICIAL DUTY

ESCAPE FROM CUSTODY

INTERFERENCE; ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

FALSELY REPORTING AN OFFENSE

PERFORMANCE OF UNAUTHORIZED OFFICIAL ACT

SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS

TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC RECORD

TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC NOTICE

FALSE SIGNING OF PETITION

FALSE IMPERSONATION

INTERFERENCE; CONDUCT, PUBLIC BUSINESS IN PUBLIC BUILDING

INTERFERENCE WITH POLICE DOGS

     

ARTICLE 8. DENIAL OF CIVIL RIGHTS

DENIAL OF CIVIL RIGHTS

 

ARTICLE 9. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE

DISORDERLY CONDUCT

UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

REMAINING AT UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

RIOT

MAINTAINING A PUBLIC NUISANCE

PERMITTING A PUBLIC NUISANCE

GIVING A FALSE ALARM

CRIMINAL DESECRATION

HARASSMENT BY TELEPHONE

PICKETING OF FUNERALS

HARASSMENT BY TELEFACSIMILE COMMUNICATION

UNLAWFUL POSTING OF POLITICAL PICTURES AND POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENTS

 

ARTICLE 10. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC SAFETY

CRIMINAL USE OF WEAPONS

DRAWING A WEAPON UPON ANOTHER

CRIMINAL DISPOSAL OF FIREARMS

CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM

CONFISCATION, DISPOSITION OF WEAPONS

UNLAWFUL DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS

AIR GUN, AIR RIFLE, BOW AND ARROW SLINGSHOT OR BB GUN

SEIZURE OF WEAPON

UNLAWFUL AIDING, ABETTING

CARRYING CONCEALED EXPLOSIVES

DEFACING IDENTIFICATION MARKS OF A FIREARM

CREATING A HAZARD

UNLAWFUL FAILURE TO REPORT A WOUND

BARBED WIRE

COMMUNICABLE DISEASES; PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES

OPERATING A VESSEL UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR OR DRUGS

THROWING OBJECTS

TATTOOING OR BODY PIERCING; PERSONS UNDER AGE 18

 

ARTICLE 11. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS

MATERIAL HARMFUL TO MINORS

GAMBLING

PERMITTING PREMISES TO BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL GAMBLING

POSSESSION OF A GAMBLING DEVICE

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Obviously not all these public offenses will get someone deported so here is something that does say which public offenses that would get one deported.

Code:
http://www.nationalimmigrationproject.org/CrimPage/crim_mats_april_2003.doc
http://www.criminalandimmigrationlaw.com/public/Deportation_Grounds_Checklist.pdf
In order to prove a person is removable, you must ask that person where he is from or you must approach him.


No you don't, see above.That person has to be suspected of a public offense that would cause someone to be deported. So you are a liar trying to claim the bill allows racial profiling.
 
A law enforcement officer (also called peace officer), in North America, is any public-sector employee or agent charged with upholding the peace, mainly police officers, correctional officers, customs officers, immigration officers, court officers, probation officers, parole officers, auxiliary officers, and sheriffs, marshals, and their deputies. A security guard is not normally a law enforcement officer.

Modern legal codes use the term peace officer (or in some jurisdictions, law enforcement officer) to include every person vested by the legislating state with law-enforcement authority—traditionally, anyone "sworn, badged, and armable" but, basically, who can arrest, or refer such arrest for a criminal prosecution. Hence, city police officers, county sheriffs' deputies, and state troopers are usually vested with the same authority within a given jurisdiction.

which one are you ?
I suspect none of the above seeing how he didn't know a public offense is.


Justia :: Glossary & Dictionary Public Offense
A crime. Compare to private or civil wrongs that violate "private laws," for example, a contract between two parties. The difference between civil/private and criminal/public wrongs is that public offenses focus on the behavior of the offender while the law of civil wrongs focuses on making an injured person whole. (
 
I would think someone who claims to be in law enforcement would know what the hell a public offense are.

Here is a list of Public offenses in Kansas.
Uniform Public Offense Code
Code:
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

DEFINITIONS

LIABILITY FOR OFFENSES OF ANOTHER

CORPORATIONS: CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY; INDIVIDUAL LIABILITY

 

ARTICLE 2. ANTICIPATORY OFFENSES

ATTEMPT

CONSPIRACY

 

ARTICLE 3. OFFENSES AGAINST PERSONS

BATTERY

BATTERY AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

SEXUAL BATTERY

ASSAULT

ASSAULT OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE WITH FIREFIGHTER

UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT

MISTREATMENT OF CONFINED PERSON

VIOLATION OF PROTECTION FROM ABUSE ORDER

CRIMINAL DEFAMATION

 

ARTICLE 4. SEX OFFENSES

LEWD, LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR

PROSTITUTION

PROMOTING PROSTITUTION

PATRONIZING A PROSTITUTE

 

ARTICLE 5. OFFENSES AFFECTING CHILDREN

CONTRIBUTING TO A CHILD'S MISCONDUCT OR DEPRIVATION

FURNISHING ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR TO A MINOR

FURNISHING CEREAL MALT BEVERAGE TO A MINOR

ENDANGERING A CHILD

WATERCRAFT; LIFESAVING DEVICES REQUIRED

PURCHASE OR POSSESSION OF CIGARETTES OR TOBACCO PRODUCTS BY A MINOR

SELLING, GIVING OR FURNISHING CIGARETTES OR TOBACCO PRODUCTS TO A MINOR

 

ARTICLE 6. OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY

THEFT

INTENT; PERMANENTLY DEPRIVE

THEFT; LOST, MISLAID PROPERTY

THEFT OF SERVICES

CRIMINAL DEPRIVATION OF PROPERTY

CRIMINAL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY

CRIMINAL TRESPASS

LITTERING

TAMPERING WITH A LANDMARK

TAMPERING WITH A TRAFFIC SIGNAL

UNLAWFUL MANUFACTURE OR DISPOSAL OF FALSE TOKENS

SERIAL NUMBERS

WITHHOLDING POSSESSION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY

UNLAWFUL DEPOSITS IN SEWERS

DAMAGING SEWERS

GIVING A WORTHLESS CHECK

CRIMINAL USE OF A FINANCIAL CARD

MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERS; SELLING MOTOR VEHICLES WITHOUT A LICENSE

EQUITY SKIMMING

 

ARTICLE 7. OFFENSES AFFECTING GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS

COMPOUNDING AN OFFENSE

OBSTRUCTING LEGAL PROCESS OR OFFICIAL DUTY

ESCAPE FROM CUSTODY

INTERFERENCE; ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

FALSELY REPORTING AN OFFENSE

PERFORMANCE OF UNAUTHORIZED OFFICIAL ACT

SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS

TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC RECORD

TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC NOTICE

FALSE SIGNING OF PETITION

FALSE IMPERSONATION

INTERFERENCE; CONDUCT, PUBLIC BUSINESS IN PUBLIC BUILDING

INTERFERENCE WITH POLICE DOGS

     

ARTICLE 8. DENIAL OF CIVIL RIGHTS

DENIAL OF CIVIL RIGHTS

 

ARTICLE 9. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE

DISORDERLY CONDUCT

UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

REMAINING AT UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY

RIOT

MAINTAINING A PUBLIC NUISANCE

PERMITTING A PUBLIC NUISANCE

GIVING A FALSE ALARM

CRIMINAL DESECRATION

HARASSMENT BY TELEPHONE

PICKETING OF FUNERALS

HARASSMENT BY TELEFACSIMILE COMMUNICATION

UNLAWFUL POSTING OF POLITICAL PICTURES AND POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENTS

 

ARTICLE 10. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC SAFETY

CRIMINAL USE OF WEAPONS

DRAWING A WEAPON UPON ANOTHER

CRIMINAL DISPOSAL OF FIREARMS

CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM

CONFISCATION, DISPOSITION OF WEAPONS

UNLAWFUL DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS

AIR GUN, AIR RIFLE, BOW AND ARROW SLINGSHOT OR BB GUN

SEIZURE OF WEAPON

UNLAWFUL AIDING, ABETTING

CARRYING CONCEALED EXPLOSIVES

DEFACING IDENTIFICATION MARKS OF A FIREARM

CREATING A HAZARD

UNLAWFUL FAILURE TO REPORT A WOUND

BARBED WIRE

COMMUNICABLE DISEASES; PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES

OPERATING A VESSEL UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR OR DRUGS

THROWING OBJECTS

TATTOOING OR BODY PIERCING; PERSONS UNDER AGE 18

 

ARTICLE 11. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS

MATERIAL HARMFUL TO MINORS

GAMBLING

PERMITTING PREMISES TO BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL GAMBLING

POSSESSION OF A GAMBLING DEVICE

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Obviously not all these public offenses will get someone deported so here is something that does say which public offenses that would get one deported.

Code:
http://www.nationalimmigrationproject.org/CrimPage/crim_mats_april_2003.doc
http://www.criminalandimmigrationlaw.com/public/Deportation_Grounds_Checklist.pdf



No you don't, see above.That person has to be suspected of a public offense that would cause someone to be deported. So you are a liar trying to claim the bill allows racial profiling.

Don't spin the public offense they speak of hear is entering the us illegally. So how do you know if someone entered the US illegally?
 
Wow, I am tired of you being blind. The law states "Allows a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S." SB1070 - 492R - Senate Fact Sheet.

So you can't prove your bull**** charge that they can stop based on race.

Got it.

Your lies once again were exposed.

So, in your world how does an officer know if a person committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the us? Does he have radar? Or does he profile the person? I will talk slow so you can pick it up.

In order to prove a person is removable, you must ask that person where he is from or you must approach him. Now since the law is in AZ, the majority of illegals are hispanic, so the officer that approaches this person is going to ask a latino, not an anglo, or asian, etc. Now that is racial profiling. Show me the lie again? SB1070 - 492R - Senate Fact Sheet

The MAJORITY not ALL. You can't claim its racist if it doesn't target a specific group!

Your lies are more transparent all the time.

And you still cannot point to a single section that says its ok to target someone based on race.

What a shocker
 
I suspect none of the above seeing how he didn't know a public offense is.


Justia :: Glossary & Dictionary Public Offense
A crime. Compare to private or civil wrongs that violate "private laws," for example, a contract between two parties. The difference between civil/private and criminal/public wrongs is that public offenses focus on the behavior of the offender while the law of civil wrongs focuses on making an injured person whole. (

Wow, and the you are now the expert. I answered your question the public offense they speak of is entering the us illegally.
 
Don't spin the public offense they speak of hear is entering the us illegally.


What you quoted said any public offenses that makes a person removable form the U.S.So that means if we go by your quote then that means someone suspected of a deportable offense.


"Allows a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S."
So how do you know if someone entered the US illegally?

When that person is arrested you ask for proof of citizenship or legal status.This is what Oklahoma or at Tulsa does.If you get arrested the police will ask you for proof of legal status regardless of the color of your skin.
 
So you can't prove your bull**** charge that they can stop based on race.

Got it.

Your lies once again were exposed.



The MAJORITY not ALL. You can't claim its racist if it doesn't target a specific group!

Your lies are more transparent all the time.

And you still cannot point to a single section that says its ok to target someone based on race.

What a shocker

What a shocker, You did not expose ****, you twisted it. My arguement is there dwell on it. Digest it. Accept it.
 
Wow, and the you are now the expert.

Seeing how you claim to be in law enforcement you should know what a public offense is. Because isn't that like in your job description to deal with that sort of stuff like burglary,murder,theft and etc? Are you Apparently you are lying about being in law enforcement and only read what you wanted to or you are hopping that someone doesn't know what the hell a public offense is or bother to look it up on the internet just to spread pro-illegals fear mongering. So what kind of "peace officer" are you?

I answered your question the public offense they speak of is entering the us illegally.
You should read your quote they said "any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S.".
 
What you quoted said any public offenses that makes a person removable form the U.S.So that means if we go by your quote then that means someone suspected of a deportable offense.


"Allows a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S."


When that person is arrested you ask for proof of citizenship or legal status.This is what Oklahoma or at Tulsa does.If you get arrested the police will ask you for proof of legal status regardless of the color of your skin.

I am not denying this fact. Your are correct, if arrested, and legally stopped, or you attempt to enter the us, or fly on a plan, you are obligated to present ID.

Does law enforcement have the right to ID me if I am doing nothing illegal? If they have no reason or probable cause to stop you or I?
 
I feel this law was justified because Obama has not done enough and Napolitano is a poor excuse for comments she has made in the past about the border problem.

I have nothing against immigrants as long as they have their passports and or greencards handy. There may be a long waiting period to get these but that is not Arizona's fault. Something had to be done and I praise the Senators and people that were involved for this bill.

Obama and company were too busy with the HC bill to pay attention to the border crimes and I remember Hillary stating awhile back and apology to Mexico that the war on drugs is our fault. It was something very close to that effect.

The government needs to get the immigrants granted their papers more quickly. That's one of the biggest problems, imo.
 
Wow, I am tired of you being blind. The law states "Allows a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S." SB1070 - 492R - Senate Fact Sheet.

So, in your world how does an officer know if a person committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the us? Does he have radar? Or does he profile the person? I will talk slow so you can pick it up.

In order to prove a person is removable, you must ask that person where he is from or you must approach him. Now since the law is in AZ, the majority of illegals are hispanic, so the officer that approaches this person is going to ask a latino, not an anglo, or asian, etc. Now that is racial profiling. Show me the lie again? SB1070 - 492R - Senate Fact Sheet


An officer is allowed to do this with any other crime, why would this one be any different?
 
Moderator's Warning:
Members should refrain from accusing one another of lying. Members should focus on the issues concerning the Arizona law.

Thank you.
 
I am not denying this fact. Your are correct, if arrested, and legally stopped, or you attempt to enter the us, or fly on a plan, you are obligated to present ID.

Does law enforcement have the right to ID me if I am doing nothing illegal? If they have no reason or probable cause to stop you or I?

I may have missed it but you being in LE should answer your own question. IMO, the answer is No. The LE officer needs probalbe cause

Since you work in LE in Az. Let me ask you. what are the odds that the people hanging around Home Depot looking for work are not in the US legally? Some are and some are not is my guess. If the people seeking day work are breaking a city,county,state law and someone complained. Wouldn't the LE have an obligation to follow up on the complaint. Then LE could under the new law check for legal status.

If you and your friends are just walking down the street, what makes you think the new law would require LE to stop and check your ID? There is nothing required in the law for them to do so. There is no probalble cause. However, if the group is creating a public nuisance and someone complains, then LE could follow up on the compaint and check status.

If this law, when enacted is too much for you. maybe LE in Arizona is not for you. Besides didn't the Gov say guidelines and training would be provided on how to implement the law?
 
Well, if the Democrats get a pass for the healthcare turd then Az. gets a pass on this IMO. It's a bad law but "something needed to be done", yall remember that right?

Did you miss the whole "two wrongs don't make a right" lesson in first grade?
 
What a shocker, You did not expose ****, you twisted it. My arguement is there dwell on it. Digest it. Accept it.

I accept the fact you place the race card based on a false claim that all illegals are of one race or even only people of color.

I accept that you cannot prove your false claims of race based law when you run from quoting the part of the law that says it.
 
There is a war going on in Mexico and spilling over onto the Arizona side.

This is not simply to catch an illegal taking a job from somebody else.

The Fed doesn't want to afford any help to the state so the state has to do it themselves.

I have no problem with profiling people that are likely to be commiting a crime.

People are dying in Arizona and nobody is doing anything.

The honest illegal people will eventually leave Arizona so as to not be subject to this law, I have no problem with that.

The bad guys won't care about the law anyway and hopefullly will get caught.

If you don't think it is an actual war, why don't each and every one of you take a trip to the Arizona border and talk to the people there.

Like I have said before, I am in Mexico right now. I don't go out at night. I don't go to a gathering of people. I don't put myself at risk at all.

Now I am not in a border city but it is still pretty bad here. The police section in our newspaper has gone from a couple of cars stolen and a few people being arrested for possession to having 10 or more stories every day about people being kidnapped and killed.

Life has changed drastically.

The border towns are a lot worse and it would be scary to even step foot there, so I understand how US citizens that usually have a feeling of safety would want a law like this.

If you don't live in the southern part of Arizona you have absolutely no right to even make a comment about what they are doing. You have no idea what is going on there.

It is a lot to say that Phoenix is second on the list of the most kidnappings. Why do you think it is so, Phoenix is second only behind the capital of Mexico D.F.?

Like it or not this is an undeclared war and the citizens are going to have to put up with an officer asking a few questions for their safety.

If racial profiling can make the state safer I say do it.
 
the action by arizona THRUSTS this ultimately explosive and incendiary issue upon the president

do you recall when bush-mccain's "amnesty" exploded so violently in rhino faces the phone banks in dc were shut down, summer 07?

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007]Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


kinda like the week before health care, except rhino leadership actually listened to the unambiguous and angry expression of american sentiment and backed down

unlike health care, which the tone deaf president went on record as prepared to DEEM into being

indeed, the party in power in the end resorted to CRAM to rewrite radically 1/6 of our economy (let alone all the SOCIAL changes imposed)

radical immigration reform, like vat, is in obama's dna

he would be compositionally, physically incapable of NOT picking it up

and when, driven by force of character, he did embrace the querulous question of what to do with so many already here, how to keep more from coming, he must do so from an extremist, europeanized, internationalist bent

but HOW and WHEN he was to advance this cause were open to political playmanship

that is, he would've preferred to come down on the border in his usual wont

once more, like vat---he'd mumble and surmise, dissemble and deny, all with moistoned finger stuck upright in the whafts of hot air certain to ensue

once more, like health care---his ability to discern the real meanings of those reactions would be beyond his ken

obama's legislative agenda, now that cap and trade is off the table, is 3---reg reform (monday, tomorrow, according to reid), immigration, some kinda compromise on climate

arizona changes that

now, it's gotta be---border, border, border

which, to our extremist in the white house, can only be interpreted as---citizenship, citizenship, citizenship

just what will the inclusion of 12 to 30 million formerly illegal neighbors and friends do to the bottom line, already busted, of obamacare?

just how many minutes will it take the electorate to ask the obvious empirical?

why can't obama see two moves ahead?

he is, as always, on the extreme WRONG side of this issue

ask bush/mccain

ask the 70%

70% of Arizona Voters Favor New State Measure Cracking Down On Illegal Immigration - Rasmussen Reports

why has the maverick moved over?

phoenix is the kidnap capital of the us

the cartels are close to capturing their country

the cartels appear to control border towns like ciudad

while the cartels were killing americans from the embassy obama was in iowa selling health care which already passed

Drug gang killers blamed in ambushes of three with U.S. ties - USATODAY.com)

Anderson Cooper 360: Blog Archive - Obama returns to Iowa to sell health care - CNN.com Blogs

immigration is thrust in obama's unready face

it's gonna kill his party

wall street's a dirty word, you can slap em and cuff em and americans will applaud

but health care's different, it's in the gut

and immigration even more so

party on, progressives

viva zapata!
 
the action by arizona THRUSTS this ultimately explosive and incendiary issue upon the president

do you recall when bush-mccain's "amnesty" exploded so violently in rhino faces the phone banks in dc were shut down, summer 07?

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


kinda like the week before health care, except rhino leadership actually listened to the unambiguous and angry expression of american sentiment and backed down

unlike health care, which the tone deaf president went on record as prepared to DEEM into being

indeed, the party in power in the end resorted to CRAM to rewrite radically 1/6 of our economy (let alone all the SOCIAL changes imposed)

radical immigration reform, like vat, is in obama's dna

he would be compositionally, physically incapable of NOT picking it up

and when, driven by force of character, he did embrace the querulous question of what to do with so many already here, how to keep more from coming, he must do so from an extremist, europeanized, internationalist bent

but HOW and WHEN he was to advance this cause were open to political playmanship

that is, he would've preferred to come down on the border in his usual wont

once more, like vat---he'd mumble and surmise, dissemble and deny, all with moistoned finger stuck upright in the whafts of hot air certain to ensue

once more, like health care---his ability to discern the real meanings of those reactions would be beyond his ken

obama's legislative agenda, now that cap and trade is off the table, is 3---reg reform (monday, tomorrow, according to reid), immigration, some kinda compromise on climate

arizona changes that

now, it's gotta be---border, border, border

which, to our extremist in the white house, can only be interpreted as---citizenship, citizenship, citizenship

just what will the inclusion of 12 to 30 million formerly illegal neighbors and friends do to the bottom line, already busted, of obamacare?

just how many minutes will it take the electorate to ask the obvious empirical?

why can't obama see two moves ahead?

he is, as always, on the extreme WRONG side of this issue

ask bush/mccain

ask the 70%

70% of Arizona Voters Favor New State Measure Cracking Down On Illegal Immigration - Rasmussen Reports

why has the maverick moved over?

phoenix is the kidnap capital of the us

the cartels are close to capturing their country

the cartels appear to control border towns like ciudad

while the cartels were killing americans from the embassy obama was in iowa selling health care which already passed

Drug gang killers blamed in ambushes of three with U.S. ties - USATODAY.com)

Anderson Cooper 360: Blog Archive - Obama returns to Iowa to sell health care - CNN.com Blogs

immigration is thrust in obama's unready face

it's gonna kill his party

wall street's a dirty word, you can slap em and cuff em and americans will applaud

but health care's different, it's in the gut

and immigration even more so

party on, progressives

viva zapata!

WTH? Care to stick to the topic at hand?
 
I feel this law was justified because Obama has not done enough and Napolitano is a poor excuse for comments she has made in the past about the border problem.

I have nothing against immigrants as long as they have their passports and or greencards handy. There may be a long waiting period to get these but that is not Arizona's fault. Something had to be done and I praise the Senators and people that were involved for this bill.

Obama and company were too busy with the HC bill to pay attention to the border crimes and I remember Hillary stating awhile back and apology to Mexico that the war on drugs is our fault. It was something very close to that effect.

The government needs to get the immigrants granted their papers more quickly. That's one of the biggest problems, imo.

How are the police to know if anyone is an immigrant? If you dont carry your id at all times how will the police be able to tell if you are or are not an immigrant?


As for being required by law to carry ID at all times. I mocked the UK when they were going to make it a law to force its citizens to carry ID at all times. I would mock the Canadian government, and I mock Arizona for becoming a psuedo fascist state.

Under no circumstances will I produce ID if all I am doing is walking down the street in a free country. Under no circumstances will I as a free person respond to any unreasonable question by the police if I have been doing nothing wrong.


I can not wait untill this law results in the arrest of an Ameircan citizen because they look like they are Mexican. I will enjoy it greatly when that person sues the state, the police dept for discrimination and wins. I hope that person gets a massive judgement that bankrupts the state
 
How are the police to know if anyone is an immigrant? If you dont carry your id at all times how will the police be able to tell if you are or are not an immigrant?


As for being required by law to carry ID at all times. I mocked the UK when they were going to make it a law to force its citizens to carry ID at all times. I would mock the Canadian government, and I mock Arizona for becoming a psuedo fascist state.

Under no circumstances will I produce ID if all I am doing is walking down the street in a free country. Under no circumstances will I as a free person respond to any unreasonable question by the police if I have been doing nothing wrong.


I can not wait untill this law results in the arrest of an Ameircan citizen because they look like they are Mexican. I will enjoy it greatly when that person sues the state, the police dept for discrimination and wins. I hope that person gets a massive judgement that bankrupts the state

Hence the whole "probable cause" thing in the law. :roll: It's no different than it is now in any state. Any police officer can question you or search you, or even detain you if they have ... PROBABLE CAUSE. That is the way it works today pretty much everywhere in the states.

The difference now in AZ, they can ask for proof of citizenship too.

So do tell me, what is the big deal, exactly?
 
Bawwaa


So Skin color will not matter, because people will not stereotype people that are a different skin tone than them? I am laughing at that naive out look on this law...... How can right wingers say that with a straight face? I know that a law like this is more than likely going to boil down to how the person is different color than them, or they talk with a accent. I am not saying it wrong to have immigration laws I am wondering how it is going to be implemented myself.

Know don't get me wrong I am all for Immigration laws as long as the basic human rights are not being abolished, because of the law in question. I have read this bill, but to me the above paragraph is my only worry about this law. I agree with Lord Tammerlain that I will mock the UK when they done this type of thing, and I will mock Arizona for the same thing as well.
 
Last edited:
How are the police to know if anyone is an immigrant? If you dont carry your id at all times how will the police be able to tell if you are or are not an immigrant?


As for being required by law to carry ID at all times. I mocked the UK when they were going to make it a law to force its citizens to carry ID at all times. I would mock the Canadian government, and I mock Arizona for becoming a psuedo fascist state.

Under no circumstances will I produce ID if all I am doing is walking down the street in a free country. Under no circumstances will I as a free person respond to any unreasonable question by the police if I have been doing nothing wrong.


I can not wait untill this law results in the arrest of an Ameircan citizen because they look like they are Mexican. I will enjoy it greatly when that person sues the state, the police dept for discrimination and wins. I hope that person gets a massive judgement that bankrupts the state

Way to over react....you want to bankrupt a state just to minimize the potential of Law Enforcement inconveniencing a few citizens while trying to rid the state of an incredible tax burden that exists because some foreigners want to live in America and don't want to go about it legally.

Not to worry, the state won't pay out much in lawsuits. You can't claim much of a loss in your life based on the few minutes it takes to dig out your ID....
 
Hence the whole "probable cause" thing in the law. :roll: It's no different than it is now in any state. Any police officer can question you or search you, or even detain you if they have ... PROBABLE CAUSE. That is the way it works today pretty much everywhere in the states.

The difference now in AZ, they can ask for proof of citizenship too.

So do tell me, what is the big deal, exactly?

The probable cause is the issue.

Just what is going to be probable cause?


Looking Mexican? Speaking Spanish?

If just once an American citizen or legal immigrant is stopped for either of those two reasons I hope that PD and the state is sued and for millions of dollars.
 
Back
Top Bottom