Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 139

Thread: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

  1. #61
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,022

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by FilmFestGuy View Post
    Well of course that's pushing it to its limits; but that was the point.

    But, if you have a tail light out, should you suddenly face arrest if you forgot your wallet?

    And let's face it; only an Hispanic person would suffer that fate. A Hispanic person who has forgotten their wallet or lost their ID would be considered arrest-worthy (until such time they can prove their identity).

    This law is draconian and it is NOT what you guys are making it out to be.

    If it were a simple law it would simply say, Arizona police should check immigration status as part of arrest procedures.

    There - that's done. It doesn't put one group at greater risk than another. It doesn't force people to "show their papers" at any cop's whimsy. It says, if you commit a crime, additionally, your legal status will be checked. Which is NOT what the Arizona law currently says. It merely states that the initial contact by the officer must be "legal". And it requires him or her to check the status of anyone they "reasonably suspect" of being illegal.

    That's vague and it can and will lead to draconian measures that will singularly be pointed at 1/3 of the Arizona population.

    And it took me about five seconds to write a law that avoids all the controversy.

    Then again, these Arizonans are thankfully protecting us from teachers with accents and human-animal hybrids.

    I swear, there's a really big gas leak out there or something has gotten into the water supply.
    I love the spin. Maybe you have gotten to close to some moonshine in TN.
    The english bill is to ensure that teachers speak so students can understand and the words are pronounced correctly. No teacher is loosing their jobs because of the bill.

    "
    The bill, which passed 16 to 12, would prohibit anyone in the state from "creating or attempting to create an in vitro human embryo by any means other than fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm."

    From azcentral.com
    The measure would also outlaw "transferring or attempting to transfer a human embryo into a nonhuman womb," "transferring or attempting to transfer a nonhuman embryo into a human womb" and "transporting or receiving for any purpose a human-animal hybrid."

    Louisiana passed a similar law in 2009, the same year Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) introduced the Human-Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act of 2009. The Senate did not take up Brownback proposed law.

    Read more: Arizona bill targets 'human-animal hybrids'

    Where was your protest when Louisiana passed their law in 2009?
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

  2. #62
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,803

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Has anybody found an actual definition for the term "lawful contact" anywhere? Some people say I must have already committed a crime, but I haven't found anything to support that interpretation. For all I know, "Good day sir!" could be interpreted as "lawful contact."
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Has anybody found an actual definition for the term "lawful contact" anywhere? Some people say I must have already committed a crime, but I haven't found anything to support that interpretation. For all I know, "Good day sir!" could be interpreted as "lawful contact."
    I think it's a cloudier version of the term "offensive contact" which, don't quote me though, means you have to have made contact with the officer because of some offending action like breaking a crime or suspicion.

    EDIT: Actually, I found the definition from Kris Kobach at the Washington Times. He states that:


    "That means the officer is already engaged in some detention of an individual because he's violated some other law," says Kris Kobach ...
    Last edited by jallman; 05-06-10 at 06:58 PM.

  4. #64
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    I really see absolutely no problem with verifying US citizenship, especially when there is a massive illegal immigrant problem. Mexico's laws regarding illegal immigration are far more harsh, the sentences are also very heavy compared to ours. They guard their southern border heavily as well. Honestly if the likes of the Mexican government and Obama are criticizing this bill then that's all the more reason to support it and see it as something that will help Arizona.

  5. #65
    Sage
    The Giant Noodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Last Seen
    11-03-14 @ 05:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,333

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Heck, I wouldnt even mind if they tazered the illegals. Why? Because they did something illegal. I think we should all call major cities in AZ and TELL THEM that we want their law to stand!
    CORPORATE GREED AND UNION GREED
    DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS
    DESTROYING THE BEST OF AMERICA ONE DAY AT A TIME

    This is the worst kind of discrimination. The kind against ME! ~ Bender

  6. #66
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Has anybody found an actual definition for the term "lawful contact" anywhere? Some people say I must have already committed a crime, but I haven't found anything to support that interpretation. For all I know, "Good day sir!" could be interpreted as "lawful contact."
    What fewer people have noticed is the phrase "lawful contact," which defines what must be going on before police even think about checking immigration status. "That means the officer is already engaged in some detention of an individual because he's violated some other law," says Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri Kansas City Law School professor who helped draft the measure. "The most likely context where this law would come into play is a traffic stop."
    Read more at the Washington Examiner: A carefully crafted immigration law in Arizona | Washington Examiner

    Contrary to the hysterical charges of racism being leveled at the statute, it does not permit a no-holds-barred inquisition of Hispanic people. Indeed, the state law demands more of police than federal law. To begin with, there is to be no inquiry about a person's immigration status unless the "contact" between the police officer and the person is "lawful" in the first instance.

    There are three relevant gradations of contact between a police officer and a person: non-custodial, brief detention, and arrest. The non-custodial context refers generally to any incidental interaction between a police officer and an individual — including those initiated by the individual. A police officer does not need suspicion in order to ask a person a question, but the person is not required to answer and the officer has no lawful authority to detain a person, even fleetingly, absent "reasonable suspicion."

    Brief detentions are known in the law as "Terry stops" — thanks to the famous Supreme Court case of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). Under Terry, a police officer may only detain a person if the officer has reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal activity. This standard is not met by a hunch or a generalized suspicion — a cop who says to himself, "Those look like Mexicans, they must be up to no good," does not make the grade. Instead, the officer must be able to articulate specific facts which, together with the logical inference to be drawn from those facts, reasonably suggest that criminal activity has occurred or is imminent. Courts are deferential to the judgment of police officers — the standard is not what any person would think of the facts observed but what an experienced cop acting reasonably and responsibly would think. But there must be specific, describable indicia of criminal activity.

    The permissible duration of a Terry stop depends on the circumstances. The Supreme Court has not set in stone some magic moment where a brief detention evolves into an arrest. But arrest happens when the detention has become police custody. At that point, the officer must have probable cause that a crime has been or is being committed.

    So the Arizona immigration law does not allow the police officer to have contact with the person unless the contact is lawful. This means if even the briefest detention is involved, the police officer must have reasonable suspicion that some crime has been or is being committed. Absent that, the officer is not permitted to stop the person.
    Arizona and 'Lawful Contact' - Andy McCarthy - The Corner on National Review Online
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  7. #67
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by mike2810 View Post
    I love the spin. Maybe you have gotten to close to some moonshine in TN.
    The english bill is to ensure that teachers speak so students can understand and the words are pronounced correctly. No teacher is loosing their jobs because of the bill.

    "
    The bill, which passed 16 to 12, would prohibit anyone in the state from "creating or attempting to create an in vitro human embryo by any means other than fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm."

    From azcentral.com
    The measure would also outlaw "transferring or attempting to transfer a human embryo into a nonhuman womb," "transferring or attempting to transfer a nonhuman embryo into a human womb" and "transporting or receiving for any purpose a human-animal hybrid."

    Louisiana passed a similar law in 2009, the same year Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) introduced the Human-Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act of 2009. The Senate did not take up Brownback proposed law.

    Read more: Arizona bill targets 'human-animal hybrids'

    Where was your protest when Louisiana passed their law in 2009?
    Oh, believe me, I would've made fun of Louisiana back then if I'd known about their bill, too. And I'll chalk this up as just one more reason to make fun of Brownback.

    From the Wall Street Journal:

    "The Arizona Department of Education recently began telling school districts that teachers whose spoken English it deems to be heavily accented or ungrammatical must be removed from classes for students still learning English."

    It goes on to say that this is likely a result of hiring ESL teachers (some specifically recruited from South of the Border) to meet No Child Left Behind requirements.

    And I love that "tink" (as it sounds to the enforcer) is proof of poor English instead of "think".

    They were hired for their ability to speak two languages. And now, they're going to be fired for the very skill-set that brought them here.

  8. #68
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I really see absolutely no problem with verifying US citizenship, especially when there is a massive illegal immigrant problem. Mexico's laws regarding illegal immigration are far more harsh, the sentences are also very heavy compared to ours. They guard their southern border heavily as well. Honestly if the likes of the Mexican government and Obama are criticizing this bill then that's all the more reason to support it and see it as something that will help Arizona.
    And the Nazis saw no problem with stopping citizens to ask them for their citizenship papers.

  9. #69
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by FilmFestGuy View Post
    And the Nazis saw no problem with stopping citizens to ask them for their citizenship papers.
    Good thing this isn't about Nazis and no one is flagging people down for papers

  10. #70
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Arizona lawmakers modify immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Good thing this isn't about Nazis and no one is flagging people down for papers
    Only those with brown skin who might have a tail light out or might linger too long on a street corner.

Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •