Democrat County Supervisor Doesn’t Know Arizona Borders Mexico but Supports Boycott

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Dronetek, Jun 25, 2010.

  1. Congress: They think islands capsize, and Arizona doesn't border Mexico.
     
  2. Zpyro, you bought up appearance yourself. It doesnt specifically say appearance but you stated yourself that you undersand the concept whn you made your Utah vs. Canada arguement. What will the officers use as "reasonable suspicion" to detremine someones from mexico? Think about it..there is no specific wording out it but we all know people who look hispanic (or mexican) will be targeted.
     

  3. or the smart one who knows how to interpret the law with some common sense, unlike some people.

    Keep on saying "I haven't read the law" I'm in law school for Christ sakes.


    Oh and this,

     

  4. Really?


    Hm.


    The officers use.....reasonable suspicion. It's exactly what it sounds like. It's not reasonable to suspect somebody's immigration status based solely on race. It's even outlined, as I've shown several times, that it specifically CANNOT be based on race.

    People who look like they're from Mexico will be targeted? Duh. But that's nothing new, it's called profiling and it's done for a reason; IT WORKS. You aren't going to suspect somebody who is white and speaks english of being an illegal immigrant from Mexico. You guys wanna talk about common sense, you should realize that illegal immigrants coming from hispanic countries are going to look hispanic. So because people from hispanic countries look hispanic, our law enforcement then cannot enforce existing Federal law? You also missed the point of my Montana/Canada analogy. What you're essentially saying is that if illegal immigrants look the same as us, it's A-OK to enforce the laws, but if they look different then it's somehow wrong to enforce the laws, based solely on race. It's not acceptable to you guys to enforce existing Federal laws, just because a state near Mexico has a lot of Mexican-looking people in it. Despite, all the while, the fact that the law specifically prohibits racial discrimination.


    You're the one who keeps saying it, bud. I posted quotes directly from the text of the law, and rather than arguing THAT, you're butt-hurt that I claimed you didn't read it, and are stuck on that alone. Why not actually prove wrong what I'm saying? Prove how a law that prohibits discrimination is still discriminatory. As I said, if you have a problem with racist cops, then complain about racist cops. I'll be right there with you.
     

  5. Yes, because your acting like a child, have nothing to say? "OH YOU HAVEN'T READ THE RULING, YOUR SO STUPID" It's child like and pathetic.

    It also makes alot of what you say invalid...sorry to say. But when you have to attack someone after an opinion is made, your argument goes out the window. cheers mate :wave:
     


  6. Put in bold, where in my post I said what you just claimed I said.



    Exactly.




    You can keep going back to your red herring, but again, you're making yourself look a fool. You haven't yet rebutted a single thing I've said, for a law student I expected much more from you.

    You can dismiss my points as invalid, that's fine. They still stand. I don't need your approval in any case. As a logical argument, you have not disproven any conclusions because you have not disproven any premises. If you can't do that, that's fine by me.
     
  7. Drone, thank you for putting this out.

    I can't speak for every person who is against this bill, BUT i can say that the level of knowledge this woman has about something she strongly disagrees with, is about on par with every person that i have dealt with that has told me this bill is "racist" and "legalizes racial profiling." I am observing that every person who makes this claim to me is of Latin decent, and it seems like they are offended by it simply because it effects other people that are latin as well.(Which in my eyes is completely racist!!!) Not a single person who disagrees with this bill has offered me a scrap of legitimate evidence that discredits the legality, or usefulness of this bill, outside of saying its racist.

    For those of you who are saying that this bill "legalizes racial profiling" You guys need to start copying the part of the bill that MAKES THIS STATEMENT, because many people have already copied the parts of the bill that prove that it does not condone it.

    REASONABLE SUSPICION ALREADY EXISTED BEFORE THIS BILL!!! You know what the reasonable suspicion for being an illegal immigrant is described as in this situation? Not having a legal identification, and not having papers that prove your identity and legal status in this country. I mean Jesus Christ the language of the bill almost makes it easier to sue a police department when they DO commit racial profiling, as it makes a crystal clear description of what profiling actually is.

    Racial profiling is social. If a officer is a racist, it is going to influence his actions based on race. He is not going to stop because a law forbids it. Even if you allowed racial profiling in your laws, people who were not racist to begin with would not all of the sudden start racially profiling people!!!

    All immigrants must carry documentation regardless of their status, not just mexicans. http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/M-618.pdf < Scroll down to page 8
    My stepfather is Of German decent, and it would be a very bad idea for him to travel without his credentials. Why is is such a big deal for someone who is an immigrant to be required to keep their credentials with their person?

    Im getting so f'ing tired of people that are getting away with calling wolf on racism, when these same people attack the intelligence and credibility of any person who claims that something is racist against white people.

    + rep to drone and zpyro from me.
     
  8. Reasonable suspicion IS NOT SKIN COLOR OR APPEARANCE! Let me say that one more time, REASONABLE SUSPICION IS NOT SKIN COLOR OR APPEARANCE!

    Reasonable suspicion is; however, lack of driver's license, no form of identification, etc.

    With all due respect, you seem to be the one acting immature. Zypro presents a perfectly logical argument specifically pointing to the text of the law that forbids profiling. And saying "OH YOU HAVEN'T READ THE RULING, YOUR SO STUPID" (bolded because he never said that) DOES NOT make an argument invalid. You only choose to say so because you have no legitimate rebuttal.
     
  9. That's exactly what he was saying.
     
  10. Ok show me where he said, "You're stupid."
     
  11. He didn't last long.
     
  12. Prepare for emergency skull evacuation......

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrqTm3Sup58]YouTube - Liberal Activist Compares US Border Patrol to the KKK[/ame]
     
  13. Are you kidding me? What is it with these ugly mannatees and the bullshit they spew? Surprised that one in the background was even able to stand up on her own for cryin out loud.
     
  14. Ha ha, perhaps you should include a caveat: "Reasonable suspicion is... lack of driver's license, no form of identification, etc. (provided that you look Hispanic & poor)". The white guy driving around without his wallet is not going to be pulled into the station on the grounds that he may in fact be an illegal. The Hispanic guy who's just as much an American as you or I on the other hand...

    Beef up border security, streamline the immigration process and naturalize everyone currently within our borders. Drop the bullshit half-assed solutions..
     

  15. lol... fuck border patrol, lets give out free health care and sammichs!
     
  16. Nobody is going to be pulled into the station regardless of anything. If reasonable suspicion exists, the LEO hands the case over to the feds without the suspect being detained or anything. If the suspect is in fact a legal citizen, I doubt they'll ever know they're being investigated. However, the illegal will have immigration showing up at their door ready to give them an escort back to wherever.
     
  17. How many white illegal Mexican immigrants do you know about? Thats like saying you cant arrest a KKK member, because it would be profiling white people.

    How in the world can you fault a cop whop pulls someone over for breaking the law and it just happens to be a Mexican with no identification or English?
     
  18. It doesn't matter that the bill says that racial profiling can't be used. There is NO other thing that a police officer can use as reasonable suspicion than race. Explain to me what other factors.

    And the absence of a drivers license thing is bs. Many U.S citizens do not carry around their ids. But how much more likely is it that a person that is hispanic without their id is going to be taken away than a white person without their id.
     

  19. Right, but they do check your name/license plate or SS number. If that comes up negative, you're going in.



    No more likely, unless the background search brings up illegal status or warrants. YOU CANNOT ARREST SOMEONE SIMPLY FOR HAVING BROWN SKIN.
     

  20. You're still incorrect. Reasonable suspicion means exactly what it says. REASONABLE. It's entirely reasonable that an illegal immigrant in a state bordering Mexico looks Mexican, is it not? A vast, vast majority of the illegal immigrants are Hispanic and poor. That's simply a fact. So does that mean the AZ cops can't enforce the law, simply because those people happen to be of a certain race? It's not the fault of AZ that the people who are destroying their communities just happen to be poor Hispanic people. People of AZ couldn't give a shit less what race the illegal immigrants are, they just don't want illegal immigrants fucking shit up.


    AZ is saying the same thing you are (with the exception of amnesty). The problem is, the fucking Feds won't listen. If the Feds aren't going to do their duty and protect the border, then the states are going to have to step up and do it for them. The states should not be forced to suffer from the ill effects of illegal immigration, simply because the Feds refuse to do their job. If they leave it up to the Feds, they'll just keep kicking the can down the road like they always do. We can't piss off the Mexicans! Oh noes!!

    There are certainly better ways to go about the issue in AZ, but the fact of the matter is that they have simply had enough of their cries falling on deaf ears. If nothing else, this should be calling attention to the goddamn problem of illegal immigration, and the Feds should be jumping on it, showing that they can actually do something right for a change (Wasn't Obama all about change? Where is it? Not in AZ, that's for damn sure). Instead, they just chastise AZ and threaten lawsuits. Way to fix the problem, Feds! :rolleyes: And we're back where we started, the entire reason this issue even exists in the first place is because the Federal government, once again, is failing at its actual reason for existing. The Federal government doesn't exist to play mommy to everybody, it exists to protect and strengthen and unite the States. At this point, the Feds and assholes from other states alike (douchebag local government officials who think AZ's immigration law has anything to do with other state's local governments) are not at all doing anything to actually fix the problem, they'd rather continue to be divisive and "condemn" and boycott AZ. Obama doesn't even need Congress to do anything, the laws already exist, they just aren't being enforced. Contrary to popular belief (and Obama's belief, apparently), the President doesn't make laws, he's supposed to only enforce them. Maybe he should have stayed in Congress, since he doesn't want to do the job of enforcing existing Federal law...

    I really, really wish the Feds would step up and actually do something to help fix the problem. I think the Federal govt has gotten way too big, but even though it's so huge, it can't (or won't) do its basic functions like protecting the damn country. It's ridiculous that this is even an issue.
     

Share This Page