View Poll Results: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Incorrect understanding of the law and its consequences.

    27 47.37%
  • Intentional effort to mislead, with a goal of increasing opposition.

    24 42.11%
  • Correct understanding of the law and its consequences.

    11 19.30%
  • Sincere disagreement with both the law and its consequences.

    25 43.86%
  • Other (Please explain).

    7 12.28%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 95

Thread: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

  1. #41
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    …Stuff and things…
    So you are saying that "Reasonable Suspicion" is an intentionally vague standard that, if used, will be scrutinized at a later date by someone, probably the police department in question and the courts involved?
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #42
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by country View Post
    Seems to me that is where probable cause comes in. Reporting a crime would not be probable cause to ask for immigration status
    That is correct, but it is a favorite strawman.
    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.

  3. #43
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    It's not the reporting of the crime thats the probable cause.
    Then what would be the "probable cause" in asking for ID. when someone is reporting a crime?

    What would be the "lawful contact" to look for probable cause when someone is reporting a crime?

    I think you are just being intentionally dense so you can float your straw men.
    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.

  4. #44
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    So you are saying that "Reasonable Suspicion" is an intentionally vague standard that, if used, will be scrutinized at a later date by someone, probably the police department in question and the courts involved?
    I'm betting that "because he had brown skin" ain't gunna cut it.
    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.

  5. #45
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Those who side with illegals "rights" have yet to be victimized by an illegal in some way or other. Sheriff Joe just arrested some who were doing just that, and working at a metal fabrication shop. Someone filed a complaint months ago and the sheriff's dept did an investigation. Looks like their employer will have to face the music as well.
    One report was that they were using stolen identities....
    A friend who works for a bunch of lawyers is having to recreate an accident where a coyote rolled a van while trying to elude immigration, and those injured are suing, and will probably get some compensation in a settlement. There were 28 illegals in the van.

    I don't get the liberal view of this issue...if they are here illegally, they should have NO rights beyond basic human rights. There should be no right to cross our borders without permission, and no right to sue if they get hurt doing it....
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  6. #46
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    Those who side with illegals "rights" have yet to be victimized by an illegal in some way or other. Sheriff Joe just arrested some who were doing just that, and working at a metal fabrication shop. Someone filed a complaint months ago and the sheriff's dept did an investigation. Looks like their employer will have to face the music as well.
    One report was that they were using stolen identities....
    A friend who works for a bunch of lawyers is having to recreate an accident where a coyote rolled a van while trying to elude immigration, and those injured are suing, and will probably get some compensation in a settlement. There were 28 illegals in the van.

    I don't get the liberal view of this issue...if they are here illegally, they should have NO rights beyond basic human rights. There should be no right to cross our borders without permission, and no right to sue if they get hurt doing it....
    If we were living in the real world (not the liberal world) transporting 28 Illegal Aliens would be a felony. Any injury or death in the commission of a felony is treated as premeditated. Seems to me it would be the coyote that would be the focus of any law suit, but this isn't the "real world".
    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. #47
    User
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    mo
    Last Seen
    03-16-11 @ 09:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    88

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    It's not the reporting of the crime thats the probable cause.
    I think you just agreed with me. I said reporting a crime is no basis for asking for immigration status. Commiting a crime would be probable cause to ask for ID.

  8. #48
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    It is a bit vague, and probably too discretionary.

    But that is something that is necessary in law enforcement, sometimes...I think...meh, I dunno.
    Its not vague.. As Zyph pointed out already before I could get to it, there is a legal standard for "reasonable suspicion" which, believe it or not, all your traffic stops are based upon. Yes, when you are pulled over, the police officer must have "reasonable suspicion" to do so. This is reviewed on a case by case basis by the legal system via lawyers and judges to ensure that what the officer believed was reasonable suspicion actually complies with the courts opinion as well.

    The vast majority of law enforcement action is based upon opinion, opinion on whether or not the facts at hand meet the established standards, and sometimes the opinion of law enforcement and the opinion of judges/attorneys just doesn't match. But the judges always win


    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Additionally, there's the matter of what constitutes "lawful contact." Illegal immigrants will be dissuaded from reporting crimes against them or against others, for fear that they will be deported.
    Lawful contact is just that, a contact with a citizen that is lawful. If I bust into a house with no authority to do so, that is not a lawful contact. If I stop a vehicle without reasonable suspicion to do so, that is not a lawful contact. If I stop a vehicle with reasonable suspicion then that IS a lawful contact. If I walk up to an individual on the street an ask them if they would mind speaking with me for a second (they have the right to say no unless I possess reasonable suspicion to place them in "investigative detention") and the individual agrees to stop and speak to me, that is a lawful contact.

    Your second point is the ONLY issue I have with this legislation in its entirety.


    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    It's all too vague. How do you systematize what constitutes reasonable suspicion that someone is an illegal alien?
    Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard. This new law is going to bring about alot of troubles for the courts until the judges and the officers are in the same line of thinking on what reasonable suspicion of this particular crime constitutes. But for most people who understand what reasonable suspicion is already, its obvious.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    A thought/question: How to better define the 'reasonable suspicion'?
    Its already defined.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Which is why, as I understand it, they must check with federal authorities as to the suspected illegal's immigration status.
    Yes. You can't arrest someone on reasonable suspicion, only probable cause. In order to obtain that probable cause, You would have to check with federal authorities in this particular case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Hmmm....the cop pulls over the carload of people, and the driver can't cough up a valid license....none of the passengers speak english.

    It's totally unreasonable for the cop to suspect that the car is stuffed with Invaders breaking the law, right?
    While yes most people would find it reasonable for the officer to think they were illegal immigrants, a procedure for that would be to obtain their ID (which by the way illegal immigrants often carry since everyone loves booze and cigarettes) and ensure they have a current address for the individuals and follow up with Federal authorities to ensure their immigration status, or turn this information over to ICE (which is probably already over-burdened in a place like Arizona).


    Quote Originally Posted by Crunch View Post
    It's a short bill, written with the clear knowledge that the libs were going to find anything in the bill that smacked of racial profiling. Nothing in the bill does, so it stands to reason that either.....

    #1. The "advisors" can't read.

    #2. The "advisors" lied about what was in the bill.

    #3. The libs are lying about what their "advisors" told them was in the bill.

    #4. The libs didn't read it and are talking out their asses.

    Take your pick.
    Correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    Please check the posts on the first page. You're also welcome to deny that what is quoted from the law there actually exists and that mexicans and liberals together are just making it up and half the country lives in lalaland... the half you're not part of.
    Umm... Its obvious from this post that you don't understand, nor care to understand, what the words in the text from the law actually mean.


    Quote Originally Posted by country View Post
    Seems to me that is where probable cause comes in. Reporting a crime would not be probable cause to ask for immigration status
    You don't need "probable cause" to ask federal authorities someones immigration status. You just need reasonable suspicion and a name, dob, ETC.
    The probable cause for the state law IS the confirmation from Federal Immigration authorities that this individual is NOT a legal alien or resident of the United States.

    Reporting a crime would be a reason to ask someone for their drivers license or identification, as you need to know who your victim or witness is.

    At that point, if no valid state issued ID is given and the officer has reason to believe that the person should have one if here legally (ie, the victim meets the police outside of his CAR to report an incident that occurred at a nearby business where he is the victim, is alone, and cannot provide a driver's license), has difficulty understanding english as an adult, is not to the officers knowledge learning disabled (thus would have a defense to not understanding english), does not possess a valid visa or "green card" (which the person WOULD show, I know from experience), etc. The officer can then obtain this victims information that he needs to obtain anyways for his report and pass it along or follow up on his own to determine this person's immigration status, and obtain a warrant for arrest if he felt the need to do so upon finding out that the individual is not a legal resident/visitor of the United States.

    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    It's not the reporting of the crime thats the probable cause.
    Correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crunch View Post
    Then what would be the "probable cause" in asking for ID. when someone is reporting a crime?
    This is no probable cause to ask for something.

    1. Officers are allowed to ASK people pretty much anything just like any other person.
    2. Asking for someone's identification, to, you know, IDENTIFY them when they have been a victim is the expected norm in law enforcement.

    What would be the "lawful contact" to look for probable cause when someone is reporting a crime?
    The fact that the are lawfully speaking with a victim of a crime. How is that so hard? The lawful contact and the reasonable suspicion (not probable cause) do not have to be related. I think a great deal of people are failing to realize this. Or being intentionally ignorant to support their predisposed beliefs.

    I think you are just being intentionally dense so you can float your straw men.
    Ditto for you.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    02-12-11 @ 12:32 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    939

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by Crunch View Post
    It's a short bill, written with the clear knowledge that the libs were going to find anything in the bill that smacked of racial profiling. Nothing in the bill does, so it stands to reason that either.....

    #1. The "advisors" can't read.

    #2. The "advisors" lied about what was in the bill.

    #3. The libs are lying about what their "advisors" told them was in the bill.

    #4. The libs didn't read it and are talking out their asses.

    Take your pick.
    Or #5, the advisors read it and told government officials what was in the bill and the media, not Eric Holder, or other Democratic officials, twisted the bill to fit their needs.

  10. #50
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: New Arizona Immigration Law: Why the negative response?

    Quote Originally Posted by country View Post
    I think you just agreed with me. I said reporting a crime is no basis for asking for immigration status. Commiting a crime would be probable cause to ask for ID.

    Probable cause is not needed to A S K for anything.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •