Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Arizona Immigration Law Debate


BrownIndian

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply
So you're for or against this law Heck?

And for or against the current law?

 

And what'd be your solution if you were in charge?

(I have a guess but I'll wait for your answer.

 

WSS

 

This is a horrible law. And I find it entertaining to watch all of those people who've been railing about government thugs and brownshirts and the sanctity of the Constitution and all the rest completely flip and suddenly support the types of things they feared were already happening, but weren't. Now they're excited that we've deputized the Arizona police with the job of demanding identification from anyone they see fit to demand it from. It's a horrible idea, and it's almost certainly unconstitutional. The government does not have the right to harass citizens based on their race.

 

One third of Arizona's population is Latino, and as American as you and me. They're all targets of this new law now, as long as a policeman thinks they look the part. Whatever that is.

 

Just take a second and imagine if this were targeting European-looking immigrants, and what people on talk radio and this board would say then about gangster government and brownshirts and police states, and how we're all targets now. And they'd be right, sort of. Crazy, but right.

 

But this is us vs. them, and nativism always trumps principle on the far right.

 

If you want to know what I think should be done about immigration, I've already written it many times. Short answer: all you need to do is step up enforcement of the people who hire illegals, and fine them. You have to cut off the supply of jobs available. It works the same way as the influx of illegal drugs, except that cutting off the demand for illegal drugs is nearly impossible, whereas cutting off the demand of illegal employment isn't.

 

But nobody is going to do this because 1) they like the cheap labor, and 2) it puts the onus on business, rather than the illegals themselves, who are much easier targets with no political clout. So we'll spend billions on stupid fences and beefed up patrols, while never addressing the basic supply and demand problem.

 

Not to sound like you, but America wants it both ways. Something for nothing. And it won't work.

 

But politically, hey, I'm all for you guys being for it. You just gave us Arizona and the growing Latino block of voters for the foreseeable future. Why do you think the Democrats floated the idea of doing immigration before climate? Because you guys will dig your own graves with this stuff. You'll lose the Latino vote and scare the shit out of sensible independents with your rhetoric.

 

So more screeching, please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS, Heck.

 

The law says nothing of the sort. It clearly mandates NON-PROFILING. It doesn't violate anything

 

resembling civil rights, of any freakin body.

 

It says when you are found to have broken the law, and you are asked for proof of citizenship,

 

and you are not a citizen, you are an illegal immigrant.

 

But leave it to you lefties to plead for more illegals to be on the gov dole, and thereby always

 

vote for Democrats.

 

blech. It is really just the STATE ENFORCING the FEDERAL LAW.

 

Given that the lefty statists in our Fed Gov couldn't care less about laws they want to break,

 

the state of Arizona DESPERATELY had to act.

 

Be very quiet when you feel the need to blindly defend any kind of activism that comes down the pike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a horrible law. And I find it entertaining to watch all of those people who've been railing about government thugs and brownshirts and the sanctity of the Constitution and all the rest completely flip and suddenly support the types of things they feared were already happening, but weren't. Now they're excited that we've deputized the Arizona police with the job of demanding identification from anyone they see fit to demand it from. It's a horrible idea, and it's almost certainly unconstitutional. The government does not have the right to harass citizens based on their race.

 

One third of Arizona's population is Latino, and as American as you and me. They're all targets of this new law now, as long as a policeman thinks they look the part. Whatever that is.

 

Just take a second and imagine if this were targeting European-looking immigrants, and what people on talk radio and this board would say then about gangster government and brownshirts and police states, and how we're all targets now. And they'd be right, sort of. Crazy, but right.

 

But this is us vs. them, and nativism always trumps principle on the far right.

 

If you want to know what I think should be done about immigration, I've already written it many times. Short answer: all you need to do is step up enforcement of the people who hire illegals, and fine them. You have to cut off the supply of jobs available. It works the same way as the influx of illegal drugs, except that cutting off the demand for illegal drugs is nearly impossible, whereas cutting off the demand of illegal employment isn't.

 

But nobody is going to do this because 1) they like the cheap labor, and 2) it puts the onus on business, rather than the illegals themselves, who are much easier targets with no political clout. So we'll spend billions on stupid fences and beefed up patrols, while never addressing the basic supply and demand problem.

 

Not to sound like you, but America wants it both ways. Something for nothing. And it won't work.

 

But politically, hey, I'm all for you guys being for it. You just gave us Arizona and the growing Latino block of voters for the foreseeable future. Why do you think the Democrats floated the idea of doing immigration before climate? Because you guys will dig your own graves with this stuff. You'll lose the Latino vote and scare the shit out of sensible independents with your rhetoric.

 

So more screeching, please.

 

 

1. 70 percent of Arizona is for the new law.

 

2. Illegals can't vote.

 

3. Most Hispanics are conservative.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hispanics vote overwhelmingly Democratic. In the midterms in 2006, they voted 70%-30% for Democrats. In the presidential election in 2008, they voted for Obama over McCain by 36 percentage points. Most Hispanics are not conservative. A minority Hispanics are conservative.

 

As for the Arizona polls, they give a slightly lower figure than you cite. It's around 64% approve in Arizona.

 

And yes, illegals can't vote. Obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've gotta agree with Heck. Some Hispanics are conservative because of their Christian roots and will tend to vote pro-life, and therefore Republican. But when the republican party supports a law that alienates (ha, get it?), to this degree, every person in the state that is darker than khaki, you can bet that it's going to piss off a bunch of other brown people, especially the Latinos. Yes, the law outright states that you cannot stop people based on race, but you are not reading the context of what it does allow. It says that if there is "reasonable suspicion" that someone has committed a "crime," whatever that may be, then you can arrest them, and if they don't have adequate identification, you can detain them and take them to be sorted out by the INS.

 

That is complete bullshit. Most illegals aren't drug running, they're doing shit work for much less than anyone here will work for. So what, are you going to ask everyone with a shitty job for their papers and then detain them? Did you not watch the video of the truck driver? That's a crock of f*cking shit, and no American citizen should be subject to that because they were born with dark skin or speak poor English, there is no national language, ffs. Also, for all your pissing and moaning about how Fuhrer Obama is secretly giving the government too much control, you laud the Republicans in Arizona for turning it into a police state. Who's really being the Nazis here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hispanics vote overwhelmingly Democratic. In the midterms in 2006, they voted 70%-30% for Democrats. In the presidential election in 2008, they voted for Obama over McCain by 36 percentage points. Most Hispanics are not conservative. A minority Hispanics are conservative.

 

As for the Arizona polls, they give a slightly lower figure than you cite. It's around 64% approve in Arizona.

 

And yes, illegals can't vote. Obviously.

 

 

There are no conservative Democrats, Heck?

 

Die said that most hispanics are conservative. I believe most blacks are too. They vote democratic because they appear to care more.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that the state of Arizona did first was to make everyone show an id before being able to vote. That is great, Im tired of watching illegal aliens getting a chance to vote when they do not contribute anything to this country.

 

When they become citizens then they have a right to vote. Until then every state should adopt the requirement of showing identification in all elections. And if we find illegals trying to vote without being a citizen they should be charged with a felony and deported.

 

Maybe we can deport the liberal who drove them to the voting booth as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no conservative Democrats, Heck?

 

Die said that most hispanics are conservative. I believe most blacks are too. They vote democratic because they appear to care more.

 

Of course there are conservative Democrats, and conservative Hispanics, and conservative blacks. But I don't know where you guys are getting this "most are" idea. Most aren't.

 

When they get to choose between the conservative candidate and the liberal candidate, they overwhelmingly choose the liberal one. Blacks go about 90% for the Democrats. Hispanics go about 70% for the Democratic candidate. If you want to imagine all of those people who are voting for the more liberal candidate are really conservative, I don't know what to tell you.

 

The real tweak here is that Republicans have taken many basic things that have a wide range of support, and then claim that being for them is conservative - things like families and religion, the Constitution, law and order. Well, lots of people think those things are important, and that doesn't make them conservative. You guys just imagine that it does, and that liberals hate all that stuff.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Good info, Vape, but this is about only one race - at the national level.

 

I disagree with Heck in that many - if not most - hispanics and blacks are conservative. They may or may not vote for Democrats or Republican at the national, state, and local levels.

 

 

90% of blacks might have voted for Obama but black voters in CA were instrumental in defeating the gay initiative in that state. Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Liberal, National, State, and Local is not a flat file as Heck suggests.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Black voters tends to be more conservative on gay issues, yes. I still don't know how you go from that to "most black voters are conservative."

 

If you can't make the case that black voters are overwhelmingly liberal, then I don't know who else would be. They're the most reliable Democratic voting block of all, and by a decent margin.

 

It'd be like me saying white Southern Baptists are really liberals because they voted for wetland restoration in the Mississippi Delta.

 

You can find the stats about how groups self-identify if you like, but they're not really go gauges anyway, as I mentioned above,

 

After all, there are certain things that I'm conservative about. That doesn't make me a conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good info, Vape, but this is about only one race - at the national level.

 

I disagree with Heck in that many - if not most - hispanics and blacks are conservative. They may or may not vote for Democrats or Republican at the national, state, and local levels.

 

 

90% of blacks might have voted for Obama but black voters in CA were instrumental in defeating the gay initiative in that state. Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Liberal, National, State, and Local is not a flat file as Heck suggests.

 

 

I can understand to a point, the anger at the perception that if you have dark skin you will be stopped. I remember I drove from CA to Ohio on leave because I was going to be stationed in Japan. While in Ohio, and staying with my parents, I decided we needed a break and my wife and I drove to Niagra Falls. Had a great time. Crossing the bridge into NY however, is when the time turned bad. My wife is Japanese, and speaks with an accent. The Customs guy kept asking her questions rapidly, which she had a hard time understanding. I answered for her, and he would get angry and tell her to answer. She showed him her Resident Alien Card, and he still kept asking questions. Then he asked me why I had CA plates? Where did I cross the border into Canada, etc. Finally, after about 45 minutes he let us pass. I was pissed to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, this may be racist, but I'd think that Blacks and Latinos are conservative, for the most part, when it comes to things religion has a say in. I would bet that most Latinos are pro-life because of their most-likely Catholic roots. As for the black community, I think their disapproval of gays either comes from either Christian upbringing or ignorance. I mean, the most hatred I've ever seen toward homosexuals has come from the black community. However, when it comes to an issue that is arguably much more important and MAY ACTUALLY AFFECT THEIR LIVES, like the economy, I'd bet that they tend to be more liberal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Black voters tends to be more conservative on gay issues, yes. I still don't know how you go from that to "most black voters are conservative."

 

If you can't make the case that black voters are overwhelmingly liberal, then I don't know who else would be. They're the most reliable Democratic voting block of all, and by a decent margin.

 

It'd be like me saying white Southern Baptists are really liberals because they voted for wetland restoration in the Mississippi Delta.

 

You can find the stats about how groups self-identify if you like, but they're not really go gauges anyway, as I mentioned above,

 

After all, there are certain things that I'm conservative about. That doesn't make me a conservative.

 

 

I am saying that most hispanics and blacks are conservative regardless of how they vote. Maybe I am talking lifestyle - at least generations ago - and you are talking about politics.

 

You can measure your position but there is no baromoter for me. Just a life of open eyes, talking and interacting, etc.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's pretty much it. The conservative aspects of those two blocks are generally religiously-based. But you'll only see it in cases where they can vote single issues, like John mentioned with the Prop 8 measure here in California. Latinos also voted in favor of Prop 8, though by a smaller margin than blacks.

 

But when it comes to candidates, they lean heavily Democratic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree that this will result in an abundance of racial profiling. If anything I think it will lead to linguistic profiling. The color of your skin won't matter...if you're pulled over and you have a poor grasp and understanding of the English language you will be asked for proof. Some people may still have an issue with this but I think it is common sense and probably a decent indicator (at least a decent starting point for reasonable suspicion to start).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good thing the law is clear about what is and isn't "reasonable suspicion." (It isn't.) Good thing every Arizona police officer is trained like a customs or border agent and knows how to deal with these situations. (They're not.) Good thing the law doesn't allow for anyone with a gripe to "report reasonably suspicious-looking Latinos" to law enforcement, and require the police to follow up. (It does.)

 

I don't see foresee any problems at all.

 

The only good thing about this little disaster is that it's going to force Congress to do something on a federal level.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here would be a good place to start.

 

http://www.yumalettucedays.com/educational.html

 

Did you know that half of Arizona's 3 Billion dollar agricultural revenue comes from Yuma County? That's right! We have a 1.5 Billion dollar industry in our own back yard and most people take it completely for granted.

 

Go to the farms here and get verification of legal citizenship/residency from everyone on these farms. Everyone. For every illegal you harbor as a farm owner, you get fined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good thing the law is clear about what is and isn't "reasonable suspicion." (It isn't.) Good thing every Arizona police officer is trained like a customs or border agent and knows how to deal with these situations. (They're not.) Good thing the law doesn't allow for anyone with a gripe to "report reasonably suspicious-looking Latinos" to law enforcement, and require the police to follow up. (It does.)

 

I don't see foresee any problems at all.

 

The only good thing about this little disaster is that it's going to force Congress to do something on a federal level.

 

 

I'm sure in your capacity as a writer you are immensely qualified to debate law enforcement issues (LMAO). Police officers detain U.S.Citizens on a daily basis and limit there constitutional rights when they are arrested. Duly sworn law enforcement officers are offered a 4 week course of instruction from ICE (look it up) on illegal immigration issues. Your argument is nothing. Arizona has there shit together on this. The Feds will lose in court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand to a point, the anger at the perception that if you have dark skin you will be stopped. I remember I drove from CA to Ohio on leave because I was going to be stationed in Japan. While in Ohio, and staying with my parents, I decided we needed a break and my wife and I drove to Niagra Falls. Had a great time. Crossing the bridge into NY however, is when the time turned bad. My wife is Japanese, and speaks with an accent. The Customs guy kept asking her questions rapidly, which she had a hard time understanding. I answered for her, and he would get angry and tell her to answer. She showed him her Resident Alien Card, and he still kept asking questions. Then he asked me why I had CA plates? Where did I cross the border into Canada, etc. Finally, after about 45 minutes he let us pass. I was pissed to say the least. Diehard

***********************************

That customs guy was crossing the line, and that was harrassment at worst, completely rude at best.

 

I hope he lost his job soon after.

 

The law in Arizona is the SAME AS FEDERAL LAW. But the Fed refuses to enforce it - they want those

 

votes by those who are dependent on the Fed, and who don't speak enough English.

 

Hey, if someone is a citizen, they should be speaking fairly good English. Or, they don't become citizens?

 

Isn't that right?

 

My friend from India spoke pretty good English before he even came to America, which he loves.

 

Someone goes DWI, speaks no English... and libs don't like if the person is asked later to provide

 

some info to be sure that the person is a CITIZEN?

 

Forget it. It isn't racial profiling, it's enforcing the Federal Law.

 

And the idea that "it lends itself to abuse" can be the same for ANY law.

 

Speeding. Jaywalking. Carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, assault....

 

"why, they might use that law as a racially profile excuse"... baloney. 100% baloney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's go back to that truck driver again. Let's say he was pulled over for speeding. He shows ID and gives an SSN (which the cops can verify, by the way). The cop says, that isn't enough, and gives him to the INS. How is that not worse than what happened to Diehard and his wife? Do you think this cop should lose his job?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...