Arizona's New Immigration Law

CRedskinsRule · 04-30-2010, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

So they can just walk in become a citizen then the next month file for food stamps, goverment housing, etc... There is a reason why you cannot just go to the local DMV and become a citizen. Our dept would tripple if we just let anyone become a citizen by just filling out a little paper work.

Well, according to the naysayers they already get the benefits just but without paying taxes, so it could possibly be a wash.

firstdown · 04-30-2010, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Well, according to the naysayers they already get the benefits just but without paying taxes, so it could possibly be a wash.

They do get some by just living here. Kids attend school, use hospitals, and a few other things. If legal then they could access other things like unemployment, SS, etc...

CRedskinsRule · 04-30-2010, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

They do get some by just living here. Kids attend school, use hospitals, and a few other things. If legal then they could access other things like unemployment, SS, etc...

and they would pay taxes, not be crowding the jails due to immigration policy, etc.... They still would be deported for committing crimes, but just living here wouldn't make a person an immediate criminal.

mredskins · 04-30-2010, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I'm so damn sick of the illegal immigration debate.

Just make it easier to become a citizen. Don't make people have to wait so long and jump through so many hoops that it drives people to cross the border illegally.

The people who are so up in arms about illegals always say they are fine with immigrants who want to come here for a better life. Fine. Then don't make it so difficult to become a citizen. Then there will be less illegal immigration.

I agree as well. The majority are hard workers and do jobs us natural born Americans don't want. More people equals more jobs.

tryfuhl · 04-30-2010, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mredskins

I agree as well. The majority are hard workers and do jobs us natural born Americans don't want. More people equals more jobs.

Only by the means of increased supply for goods and services. And even then that doesn't mean that the jobs will be created, just the processes can become more efficient or run faster.

Rainy Parade · 05-03-2010, 09:50 AM

btw, saw this article and thought you all might find it interesting:

Email reveals Arizona law was designed to maximize harassment
By Gabriel Winant

I was once privy to a conversation between a couple of middle-aged lefties, one white, one black. The white guy was remembering his early hippie days, and said, "You know, I think what first taught me to be afraid of the cops was smoking pot. That's when I lost my childhood innocence about the power of the state." The black woman looked at him, rolled her eyes, and said, "That's because you’re white -- that's why it took you so long."

It's a funny story, but it contains a point that can't be made often enough right now: the arguments coming from conservatives in defense of Arizona's controversial new immigration law tend to claim that it only empowers police officers to demand documentation after "lawful contact," and hence doesn’t constitute racial profiling or harassment. (See this coming from Ramesh Ponnuru, of the National Review, here.) This idea reveals thoroughgoing ignorance about what profiling is, and how it works.

When conservatives like Ponnuru think of racial profiling, they seem to think of a straw man. The image is something like an evil officer out of the Jim Crow South, full of "prejudice" (itself a fairly silly and inaccurate way to describe racism), enacting his hatred by stopping black people or Latinos arbitrarily. Although it is arbitrary and unfair in terms of who gets targeted, racial profiling also fits into a set of structures guiding police behavior. If cops want to stop someone, they'll be able to cite some legitimate-sounding suspicion, whether it is actually legitimate or not. Profiling doesn't need to feel like profiling to the police, and they don't need to be secret Klansmen to enforce racial discrimination. It shows up way before you get to that point, among ordinary officers who probably just think they're doing their duty.

Ta-Nehisi Coates, for example, tells a story about being stopped in Chelsea on the way back from an NPR interview, on suspicion that he was a Latino male who had robbed someone; he also notes that discriminatory policing can end up much, much worse than it did for him that day. This is also the basic point made by Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, in his announcement that he wouldn’t enforce the Arizona law. Said Dupnik, "If I tell my people to go out and look for A, B, and C, they're going to do it. They'll find some flimsy excuse like a tail light that's not working as a basis for a stop, which is a bunch of baloney."

Apparently in response to criticism from out of state, the Arizona legislature has amended the law to change "lawful contact" to "lawful stop, detention or arrest." Although a "lawful stop" really doesn't seem like it would have excluded, say, Coates in Chelsea, that's not the worst of it. The amendment also requires officers responding to city ordinance violations to inquire about immigration status, again if they have reasonable suspicion.

The Center for American Progress recently obtained an email sent by Kris Kobach, a lawyer for the Immigration Reform Law Institute, the group which claims it drafted the bill, to Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, who was its sponsor. The email was sent as the legislature prepared the amendment to the law that was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last Friday. Kobach wrote,

When we drop out "lawful contact" and replace it with "a stop, detention, or rest, in the enforcement a violation of any title or section of the Arizona code" we need to add "or any county or municipal ordinance." This will allow police to use violations of property codes (ie, cars on blocks in the yard) or rental codes (too many occupants of a rental accommodation) to initiate queries as well.

I have not received anything from the people on the phone this afternoon. Please ensure that they make this addition as well. Thanks!

I have no real complaint with lawyers in Washington writing laws for state legislators. Both sides do that kind of thing, and there's nothing inherently wrong with turning to out-of-state experts. But what Kobach dictated to Pearce here was a recommendation to broaden the scope of police power to maximize the probability of racial profiling. Coates' point, and Dupnik's, that police can find a reason to stop someone when they want to stop someone, probably held true for Arizona before the bill's new amendment. It certainly still does after. The crucial thing that Kobach revealed in this email is that questioning people with brown skin under essentially trumped-up pretexts isn't just a bug in the law. The legislation doesn't accidentally risk the possibility of a campaign of harassment. It builds it in. It's what it was written to do.

firstdown · 05-03-2010, 10:16 AM

Funny how the news has ignored the violence at some of these protest. Instead they say the Tea Party rallies are full of hate and violence.

YouTube - Arizona immigration protest turns violent riot

I could not find any video of the buildings damaged this weekend.

SmootSmack · 05-03-2010, 12:33 PM

The majority of these people don't come here looking to break the law or disrespect the country. They seek better lives for the children and grandchildren so that maybe one day they can have the freedom and opportunity to go to a good university, become a doctor, a moderator on a message board, or a scientist, or a lawyer, or a captain of industry, and so on.

firstdown · 05-03-2010, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

The majority of these people don't come here looking to break the law or disrespect the country. They seek better lives for the children and grandchildren so that maybe one day they can have the freedom and opportunity to go to a good university, become a doctor, a moderator on a message board, or a scientist, or a lawyer, or a captain of industry, and so on.

The only way they can come here and do as you say is to do it through the legal system. A person coming here not learning english and just working to send money home will not be the next doctor, lawyer etc... From what I see thats the majority of who is coming here.

mredskins · 05-03-2010, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

The only way they can come here and do as you say is to do it through the legal system. A person coming here not learning english and just working to send money home will not be the next doctor, lawyer etc... From what I see thats the majority of who is coming here.

Yeah I agree with you here. I think the are good people but the dreams that SS rattle off are just not a reality.

I know very few people who farm during the day and study law at night.

SmootSmack · 05-03-2010, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mredskins

Yeah I agree with you here. I think the are good people but the dreams that SS rattle off are just not a reality.

I know very few people who farm during the day and study law at night.

Didn't actually read my post did you?

saden1 · 05-03-2010, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Didn't actually read my post did you?

LOL...I know of no children and grandchildren who farm during the day.

mredskins · 05-03-2010, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Didn't actually read my post did you?

No I went back and re-read it you were more referring to their children grand kids.

I made two mistakes:

1)Siding with firstdown

2) hastily skimming through your post

CRedskinsRule · 05-03-2010, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mredskins

Yeah I agree with you here. I think the are good people but the dreams that SS rattle off are just not a reality.

I know very few people who farm during the day and study law at night.

I think you seriously underestimate both the illegal immigrant, and more importantly,the ethic they teach their children. I don't discount that there are illegals who are criminals, but I believe most (more than 51%) are trying to escape a life of poverty, and see the US as a way to a better life.

As for "very few people"... I worked a 12 hour night shift 4 days a week and maintained a full credit college semesters to earn my Bachelor's in Computer Science, and at the same time saw many others doing the same thing. People come to America because of the promise of a better life, and usually are willing to work as hard or harder to maintain it than those got it handed to them due to their birth.

mredskins · 05-03-2010, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I think you seriously underestimate both the illegal immigrant, and more importantly,the ethic they teach their children. I don't discount that there are illegals who are criminals, but I believe most (more than 51%) are trying to escape a life of poverty, and see the US as a way to a better life.

As for "very few people"... I worked a 12 hour night shift 4 days a week and maintained a full credit college semesters to earn my Bachelor's in Computer Science, and at the same time saw many others doing the same thing. People come to America because of the promise of a better life, and usually are willing to work as hard or harder to maintain it than those got it handed to them due to their birth.

I am proud of your accomplishments but the majority of the population doesn't go to these extremes to better their lives.

05-03-2010, 09:50 AM	#6
Rainy Parade Special Teams Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 269	Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law btw, saw this article and thought you all might find it interesting: Email reveals Arizona law was designed to maximize harassment By Gabriel Winant I was once privy to a conversation between a couple of middle-aged lefties, one white, one black. The white guy was remembering his early hippie days, and said, "You know, I think what first taught me to be afraid of the cops was smoking pot. That's when I lost my childhood innocence about the power of the state." The black woman looked at him, rolled her eyes, and said, "That's because you’re white -- that's why it took you so long." It's a funny story, but it contains a point that can't be made often enough right now: the arguments coming from conservatives in defense of Arizona's controversial new immigration law tend to claim that it only empowers police officers to demand documentation after "lawful contact," and hence doesn’t constitute racial profiling or harassment. (See this coming from Ramesh Ponnuru, of the National Review, here.) This idea reveals thoroughgoing ignorance about what profiling is, and how it works. When conservatives like Ponnuru think of racial profiling, they seem to think of a straw man. The image is something like an evil officer out of the Jim Crow South, full of "prejudice" (itself a fairly silly and inaccurate way to describe racism), enacting his hatred by stopping black people or Latinos arbitrarily. Although it is arbitrary and unfair in terms of who gets targeted, racial profiling also fits into a set of structures guiding police behavior. If cops want to stop someone, they'll be able to cite some legitimate-sounding suspicion, whether it is actually legitimate or not. Profiling doesn't need to feel like profiling to the police, and they don't need to be secret Klansmen to enforce racial discrimination. It shows up way before you get to that point, among ordinary officers who probably just think they're doing their duty. Ta-Nehisi Coates, for example, tells a story about being stopped in Chelsea on the way back from an NPR interview, on suspicion that he was a Latino male who had robbed someone; he also notes that discriminatory policing can end up much, much worse than it did for him that day. This is also the basic point made by Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, in his announcement that he wouldn’t enforce the Arizona law. Said Dupnik, "If I tell my people to go out and look for A, B, and C, they're going to do it. They'll find some flimsy excuse like a tail light that's not working as a basis for a stop, which is a bunch of baloney." Apparently in response to criticism from out of state, the Arizona legislature has amended the law to change "lawful contact" to "lawful stop, detention or arrest." Although a "lawful stop" really doesn't seem like it would have excluded, say, Coates in Chelsea, that's not the worst of it. The amendment also requires officers responding to city ordinance violations to inquire about immigration status, again if they have reasonable suspicion. The Center for American Progress recently obtained an email sent by Kris Kobach, a lawyer for the Immigration Reform Law Institute, the group which claims it drafted the bill, to Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, who was its sponsor. The email was sent as the legislature prepared the amendment to the law that was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last Friday. Kobach wrote, When we drop out "lawful contact" and replace it with "a stop, detention, or rest, in the enforcement a violation of any title or section of the Arizona code" we need to add "or any county or municipal ordinance." This will allow police to use violations of property codes (ie, cars on blocks in the yard) or rental codes (too many occupants of a rental accommodation) to initiate queries as well. I have not received anything from the people on the phone this afternoon. Please ensure that they make this addition as well. Thanks! I have no real complaint with lawyers in Washington writing laws for state legislators. Both sides do that kind of thing, and there's nothing inherently wrong with turning to out-of-state experts. But what Kobach dictated to Pearce here was a recommendation to broaden the scope of police power to maximize the probability of racial profiling. Coates' point, and Dupnik's, that police can find a reason to stop someone when they want to stop someone, probably held true for Arizona before the bill's new amendment. It certainly still does after. The crucial thing that Kobach revealed in this email is that questioning people with brown skin under essentially trumped-up pretexts isn't just a bug in the law. The legislation doesn't accidentally risk the possibility of a campaign of harassment. It builds it in. It's what it was written to do. __________________ BUMS LOGIC all the muse unfit to print: original writings about music, film, tv. culture, humor, etc direct link to the stuff on BumsLogic.com written by me

05-03-2010, 10:16 AM	#7
firstdown Living Legend Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: chesapeake, va Age: 62 Posts: 15,817	Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law Funny how the news has ignored the violence at some of these protest. Instead they say the Tea Party rallies are full of hate and violence. YouTube - Arizona immigration protest turns violent riot I could not find any video of the buildings damaged this weekend.

05-03-2010, 12:33 PM	#8
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law The majority of these people don't come here looking to break the law or disrespect the country. They seek better lives for the children and grandchildren so that maybe one day they can have the freedom and opportunity to go to a good university, become a doctor, a moderator on a message board, or a scientist, or a lawyer, or a captain of industry, and so on. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

Arizona's New Immigration Law

Debating with the enemy