Sir Elliot is hispanic, and his skin happens to be darker than khaki. Further, the law is clear that reasonable suspicion is required and that the reason for stoping/interacting with the person in question must itself be lawful. The law also explicitly forbids race based enforcement. What is not forbidden, however, is circumstance based enforcement. If a group of persons are attempting to obtain employment as day laborers (itself an illegal practice), that is reasonable suspicion to check their immigration status. Normal citizens are not required to carry ID on their person. This law requires that non-citizens carry proper ID, which is almost certainly within the state's power to do (and I think federal law requires this too). Under reasonable circumstances you are also legally required to identify yourself to police officers. As part of this standard procedure to obtain your identity, if they discover that you are an illegal immigrant (a person who is breaking the law by being in America illegally) the Arizona police will now be empowered to arrest you for violating state laws that are distinct from federal laws. Those state laws are almost certainly Constitutional as well. So, folks may go around crying RACIST, NAZI, GESTAPO! all they want, but that doesn't impact the merits of this bill. Ultimately the Supreme Court will decide on the more controversial provisions. Either way, please argue the merits of the bill itself, what precisely is unconstitutional about it? Just because it might be "mean" doesn't make it unconstitutional. The law may be immoral (and I would be inclined to agree with that assessment), but there is always a gap between what is moral and what is law. The morality of the law does not impact the Constitutionality of the law, and that is what is important here.
If they want to keep people out of the country why don't they just build a giant glass bubble to put over the entire country??? Simpsons anyone?
If the designation of a hate group is a matter of opinion and not actual fact, then the SPLCs designation of hate groups is an opinion and not an actual fact. Further, it seems rather irrelevent to this debate. I'd be glad to discuss the absurdities of the SPLC in a different thread, and why I think radical hate organizations like the SPLC should be banned. The authorship of the bill is irrelevent. We can attack many bills for their authorship by radical hate groups. ACORN, a radical hate group, was behind much of Obama's legislative agenda. Indeed Obama even represented ACORN, a radical hate group, in the past. The Apollo Alliance, another radical hate group, wrote the entirity of the stimulus bill. The SEIU, another radical hate group, has been involved in crafting key legislation. But to attack the crafters of legislation as radical hate groups is a red herring. What matters is that the legislature of Arizona passed it and it now sits on the governor's desk, and the people of Arizona want it signed. And so the bill should be discussed on its own merits, and the red herring distraction techniques (usually employed by radical hate groups like the SEIU, ACLU, SPLC, and ACORN to trick the public) should be dropped.
Pics! (my skin color is slightly lighter then the underbelly of your typical white underbelly creature)
LOL ive talked about the meritts of the bill, and have gone into detail to why it is bad for this country. I think its important though to know who is writing this legislation. Can you name any legislation that was written by any those groups with any real evidence?
The failed stimulus was written largely by the Apollo Alliance. In 2008 Apollo released a draft stimulus bill, which became the framework (and largely the substance) of Obama's stimulus bill. This IBD editorial has a quick run down of some of the information. IBD Editorial Ever wonder how Obama was able to drop a multi-thousand page 700 billion dollar bill almost immediately upon entering office? It was written in advance by his radical hate group buddies at the Apollo Alliance, which was founded by american terrorist and serial bomber Jeff Jones (one of the founders of the Weather Underground along with his good buddy... Bill Ayers). The inmates are running the asylum. But don't take my word for it. Take Harry Reid's. Q.E.D.
Ok man. Im still not convinced that Bill Ayers wrote the stimulus bill, but thats a different topic. Back in the real world, yesterday Mike Huckabee validated racial profiling concerns realted to the implementation of the newly signed law. He told Fox News host Neil Cavuto, that it is going to open the state of Arizona up to a “plethora of lawsuits†that will prove “very, very costly". Later in that same interview, Huckabee added that, “Hispanic Americans have the right to be unhappy about the fact that they might be pulled over.â€, “If I were being pulled over because I looked a certain way, I would be highly offended,†Huckabee stated. He also remarked that the “federal government has to do something to stop the hemorrhaging of illegal immigration over the border.†The ACLU has already issued warnings about the new law that echo what Huckabee said. To begin with, SB-1070 will likely be deemed unconstitutional for allowing the state to regulate immigration, a power which the constitution assigns to the federal government. In the meantime, the new law stipulates that Arizona residents can sue local police if they believe they are not enforcing SB-1070. If SB-1070 ends up exacerbating racial profiling, as many have predicted is likely, it will also open local police agencies up to a slew of lawsuits related to potential civil rights abuses.
What? Do you have any valid agrument to make, cause if you dont get the fuck out of my thread. This thread wont be takin up with your worthless nonsense.
So, its worthless when it comes from me, but when you point out that tea parties are mostly white its valid? Dickie, these people are here ILLEGALLY! They are breaking our laws, demanding citizenship, acting racist and basically just disrespecting citizens of this nation. What do you think would happen if 10,000 Americans flooded in to Mexico carrying American flags and demanding citizenship? I can guarantee you it wouldn't be this mild. These people put themselves in this sittuation. All they have to do is go back home and come back legally.
Well thats why pot is illegal, so that we have a reason to throw Mexicans in jail right? That was our plan no?
When was i talking about the tea party being mostly white? I think ive only pointed out that Americans have about the same favorability of the "tea parties" and socialism. Right around 36%. And even if i did say the tea parties are mostly white, how would that make MY argument valid? Two invalids dont make a valid. Has there been any extensive polling on these protests against this law? Age, gender, etc.?
And the media also claimed anti-war protesters during the Bush years were Anti-american, terrorist loving, vegan eating radicals. Your point? I never claimed anything about anyone as a whole.
No they didn't and you know it. Maybe a commentator on Fox and Rush did, but they hardly represent the MSM. The media defended attacks like that on protesters, along with Democrats. Which is why you're still complaining years later, because the media made a big issue of it at the time. Now its A-OK. Whatever, I don't have time to go through your posts. Are you denying the media has tried to discredit the tea parties by claiming they are "mostly white"? I can start posting clips if you want. I want to know why its acceptable to demonize people based on their skin color when they're white, but racial, violent protests like this one get spin as peaceful and nothing is mentioned about race? I'd also like you to answer my question about 10,000 Americans marching and making demands in Mexico city with American flags.
Again, how does it make Arizona a police state? What provision, exactly, does so? The law does not permit randomly asking people for identification, it allows identification to be checked during otherwise legal and justified stops.
Hes just repeating the hyperbole from the racist Mexicans trying to force Americans to bend to their will.
Well, with current laws, within Arizona what constitutes a legal and ustified stop is already fucked. I mean within 100 miles of the border they can stop anyone for no reason whatsoever and ask for ID and search you. In fact, the old laws already have a lot of this new shit in it. This new bill in conjuction with the old laws do indeed make it exactly that. Just like most legislation that goes through now-a-days its redundant and controlling. At best this is a budget expansion and at worse it's the result of private prison lobbying aimed at expanding an economy that's stagnated since the last era of DNC control.