Rep. Brian Bilbray can spot an undocumented immigrant by their shoes

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Dickie4:20, Apr 22, 2010.

  1. Way to go Arizona! Hand those civil liberties away!
     

  2. Only if you look hispanic...

    Maybe they could introduce a system where by legal hispanics could get a tattoo to show they are permitted and not aliens..

    This would cut out the need to have their "papers" with them at all times...
     
  3. Or maybe citizens can just carry around their driver's license like normal. You guys are blowing this way out of proportion. Does anyone who's NOT illegal run around all day with out any identification?
     
  4. You do realize that if you are a legal alien of any sort you are required, under identical federal law, to have identification on your person at all times?

    Further, you do realize, as per what I highlighted earlier in this thread, that cops can't just go around 'asking for papers', they can only check immigration status in circumstances where they would normally check a person's ID, verify who they are, etc.

    And in the circumstaces where a citizen doesn't have their ID on them, what does a cop do? Same thing they normally do. They take the name, they run the name in the laptop in their car, and a driver's license and/or state ID pops up verifying identity.

    Less liberal talking points, more thinking for yourself please.
     
  5. Under the law, police must now stop anyone who they have “reasonable suspicion” to believe may be an “illegal immigrant.” Thats no liberal talking point, its the truth.

    The new law mandates racial profiling and could waste hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.


    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLh40fl9JJI]YouTube - How will Arizona Profile People? Shoes![/ame]


    The irony is this bill was supposed to mobilize the extreme elements of the GOP base, but has instead became a rallying cry for latino's, immigrant communties, and civil rights activist around the country.


    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7G3Ve1CVlo]YouTube - AZ Student Security Team[/ame]


    In other news, Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva from Arizona, had to close his offices Friday due to recieving multiple threats.

    Arizona the "Show Me Your Papers" state.
     
  6. #66 Dronetek, Apr 25, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2010
    No, it doesnt. If it did , you would show us where.

    So basically, if you're here on a green card and cant produce your documents, you're going to be fined. Obviously, though, this section doesn’t apply to citizens, and the carry requirement is already part of federal law. All this does is make it a crime under Arizona law too.

    As well as Latino supremacy and racist hate groups. Why did you leave them out?

    Hey, leave it to libs to turn something like this around and make Americans the bad guys. They're doing the same thing with terrorism, by making American citizens the boogymen and all but ignoring Islamic extremists.
     
  7. #67 Sir Elliot, Apr 25, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2010
    Dickie,

    Have you read the bill? Or even my post quoting specific language from the bill? it's only 17 pages, I linked it a page or two back.

    What you are saying is NOT in the law.

    Let's deal with what the law SAYS instead of what MSNBC wants you to think it says.

    EDIT: Drone should also bold the part about "Lawful Contact" which is a legal term that defines when/how officers can be in contact with a citizen. Like a traffic stop.
     
  8. #68 SmokinP, Apr 25, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2010
    Who is going to do the jobs that the illegals do after they are all removed ?
    I can see this having an affect on the local economy.

    Cant see the legal people being able to bare the heat and conditions involved in some of the jobs these illegal people do.
     
  9. Official unemployment in Arizona is 9.4%.

    A lot of folks would be happy to have those jobs.

    Employers won't be able to exploit mexicans by paying them under min. and avoiding disability insurance, unemployment insurance, etc (which are mandated uner the law).

    Americans are willing to do every job out there. The difference is we aren't willing to do those same jobs at $2 an hour.

    Now... what happens when wages are forced to increase along with the naturally increasing cost of goods and services? That's called economic expansion. Artificially suppressed wages hurt the economy massively by preventing real economic growth.

    Also, what happened after Eisenhower's Operation Wetback (Operation Wetback - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) that kicked out illegals? Farmers were forced to improve their farming techniques and use new technology to make up for not having people they could exploit for slave-like labor.

    The result? Massive increases in agricultural output in the areas that were previously relying on slave labor.

    Over the long run, this type of enforcement will almost certainly benefit the economy.

    But the economy arguments are moot, imho, because at what price do we value exploitation? Even if it is an economic loser (and I doubt it will be), it is good because it stops workers from being exploited.
     

  10. When the local producers go to market nobody is going to give a fuck about this..
    The local economy will suffer.
    This is one of the situations where things have to be let slide somehow to support the american way of life..
    Passing this law is like punching yourself in the balls to prove your a man..:confused:
     

  11. How will local producers suffer from this? And what type of local producers are you referencing? Some 75% of Arizona's population is based in phoenix. We're not talking lots of farm labor here.

    Also, what do you mean "let it slide to support the American way of life"

    Artificially depressed wages, with the benefit of those wages going to a foreign country, hurt the american economy and way of life significantly. Inflation isn't an issue if wages keep up with inflation. Inflation is an issue today because wages don't keep up with inflation... largely due to illegal aliens being exploited.

    Further, exploitation is not the american way of life.
     

  12. Ahem excuse me for a moment..

    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOL:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

    Yes you are right elliot..;)
     
  13. #73 Dickie4:20, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 26, 2010
    Its not the law huh? Ok there Elliot. What the hell does MSNBC have to do with anything?

    Judge Napolitano, who is hardly a liberal or radical latino supremacist, said the law "is so unconstitutional that I predict a federal judge will prevent Arizona from enforcing it."

    What about that Elliot or Drone? Is that just a typical left wing MSM talking point by a radical?

    Law professors agree with him, not you two.

    Even Charles friggin Krauthammer noted that it "could lead to a lot civil rights abuses".
     
  14. #74 pineapple skunk, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 26, 2010
    civil rights? for who? citizens or illegal immigrants?

    i think its fair to say that illegal immigration totally and COMPLETELY fucks us over.. if you disagree you obviously live in the north east or something
     

  15. I don't actually. I think the only economic problems of immigrants are ones that already existed that they expose. Job shortages shouldn't just happen like that. Especially not because new people. Because you know what new people bring? New needs. They need food, goods, and services just like anyone else. I believe what they need either equals or outweighs what they can produce.

    I know plenty of "day laborors." And surprise....they all happen to be americans too. Where I'm from in Kansas just about anyone able, willling, and unemployed are. My best friend's dad is. He'll shingle your roof, do your siding, cut your hay field, or haul firewood. He has a record and can't get a job anywhere else. He does whatever work he can for whatever cash he can when he can. A jack-of-all-trades isn't something that's inherintly bad. Making people illegal I think by far has a greater impact on the economy.
     

  16. Erm, you posted videos from MSNBC. That's what MSNBC has to do with anything.

    So far there still haven't been any substansive arguments against the bill. Your "SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS!" argument has been shown to be bunk. Now we get vague references to constitutionality as if:
    1) Liberals cared what the Constitution actually says
    and
    2) As if somehow enforcing laws that have been on the books for generations and have been upheld as Constitutional are somehow suddenly unconstitutional

    What, precisely, is unconstitutional about the bill?

    What, precisely, is wrong about the bill?

    What, exactly, are your objections to the bill?

    Please cite actual text from the bill and not MSNBC videos. It's only 17 pages. Surely if you're so opposed to the law, there is something within the law to be opposed to? Or is it merely the enforcing of laws that you are opposed to?
     
  17. I cant keep up with this thread...

    It's hurting my brain.
     
  18. Ive already gone into detail about these issues, you just want to play dumb.

    But why do you care what i say anyways, im a liberal and i dont care about the constitution.:rolleyes:
     

  19. Perhaps I've missed your objections? You mentioned that the people who wrote the bill are supposedly racist, and that someone who supports the bill put his foot in his mouth on TV, and that the bill might have a negative economic impact.

    2 out of 3 aren't objections at all, but red herrings. The third is a valid point for disagreement, but if that's your only objection to the bill that's a rather narrow objection and certainly not one that you've made overly clear.
     

  20. I'm pretty sure he was talking about the part of the constituion which enumerates congress with the sole power to set naturalization laws. This has long been regarded as giving the implied power to set immigration laws as well. How can a state regulate someone when they aren't a citizen of or doing business with their state?
     

Share This Page