By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Why I think the Arizona law should be overturned..

TheRealMafoo on 27 April 2010

I got to thinking about this. While I agree with the law, I don't think the state has the authority to enforce it.

The concept of citizenship is not a state issue, it's at the federal level. States don't get to choose who is a citizen of that state. So for example, if I am a Mexican working in the US legally in California, the actions I must take as a legal immigrant should be the same in every state.

If in 49 states, I don't have to have my green card or passport with me to go to the mall for example, I should not have to have it in Arizona. The law should apply equally.

However, the fix in my opinion is the federal government applies the law that Arizona currently has, so all police can do there jobs. I agree with the law, just not the agency applying it.

 



Around the Network
badgenome on 27 April 2010

I was pretty skeptical of the law at first, but since the language (For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency […] where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person) has come to light, it sounds to me like something that should have been done all along.



damkira on 27 April 2010

For once, I completely agree with you. Also this law will be used to discriminate against Hispanic people..

 



TheRealMafoo on 27 April 2010
damkira said:

For once, I completely agree with you. Also this law will be used to discriminate against Hispanic people..

 

I am sure there is a very small portion of Americans or leigal immigrant who will be inconvenienced. Sadly, that's what happens when the government does not do it's job, and allows 12 and a half million people to break the law (and passes laws to make it easier).

The Government should have done right by the hispanic community, and protected our borders. 



NinjaguyDan on 27 April 2010



Switch: SW-5066-1525-5130

XBL: GratuitousFREEK

Around the Network
Sqrl on 27 April 2010
damkira said:

For once, I completely agree with you. Also this law will be used to discriminate against Hispanic people..

 

Lots of different laws are used to discriminate against lots of people.  The problem in those instances has a lot more to do with overzealous application than a fundamental problem with the law.

@topic,

For this particular law I would be completely against it except for one thing....The federal government has been derelict from its responsibility to secure the border for so long it has literally left the state no choice but to act on its own.

More specifically:

In the case of a cop already dealing with another matter asking a person for their driver's licence/ID/whatever to run it agaisnt a database on his computer (like they have at every traffic stop for the last 20 years)...Well that's not discrimination at all, that's basic common sense police work.

In the case of a cop coming up to someone out of the blue asking for ID to run in his computer...well that I have a whole lot more problem with.  But given a choice between a complete lack of legitimate enforcement and this...I choose this every day and twice on sunday.

The bottom line here is they need to fix the problem.  And they need to do it by telling the left (ie anti-fence) and the right (ie anti-amnety) to stfu and go sit in the corner. 

First they need to build a damn fence..not a high tech fence..that just makes it harder/expensive to repair.  A simple double chain link fence will do fine.  Then setup heavy UAV patrols that are used to locate illegal border crossings for border agents to deal with in person.  For the first decade or so this will require vigilence but as people realize crossing is no longer very feasible the attempts will slow and patrols can be replaced slowly over time with ground sensors operating off of solar panels, etc...

Second, we need a bill to fix the current immigration mess and turn the current morass of a process into something sensible (details are unimportant as long as the basics get done).

But once the fence/UAV patrols and sensible immigration rules are in place you work on the details of an amnesty package.  The specifics are unimportant really, but the basic idea is lay the ground rules of what illegals in the country need to do in order to get through the process.  They'll be required to do a few things like show they've spent their time in the country as productive citizens (ie a felony offense is no-go in my book), nothing crazy or overly burdensome but each person needs to be documented like any other citizen, and when they get through it they are full citizens.

 

Finally, to be clear: You absolutely cannot do amnesty first...all you do is open the flood gates and create a bigger mess.

It's really that simple:

  1. Stop the flood (build the fence). 
  2. Fix the immigration process.  No....really fix it and take enforcement seriously.
  3. Deal with everyone who got in before the fix (ie amnesty). 
  4. Anyone else who gets in after the amnesty process is over needs to be dealt with like a criminal...because they are.  Deterrence is the name of the game at this point.  We want to avoid anything like this happening again by making it appealing to immigrate legally when compared with illegally.

 

That's my $0.02 anyways....
To Each Man, Responsibility
TheRealMafoo on 27 April 2010
Sqrl said:
damkira said:

For once, I completely agree with you. Also this law will be used to discriminate against Hispanic people..

 

Lots of different laws are used to discriminate against lots of people.  The problem in those instances has a lot more to do with overzealous application than a fundamental problem with the law.

@topic,

For this particular law I would be completely against it except for one thing....The federal government has been derelict from its responsibility to secure the border for so long it has literally left the state no choice but to act on its own.

More specifically:

In the case of a cop already dealing with another matter asking a person for their driver's licence/ID/whatever to run it agaisnt a database on his computer (like they have at every traffic stop for the last 20 years)...Well that's not discrimination at all, that's basic common sense police work.

In the case of a cop coming up to someone out of the blue asking for ID to run in his computer...well that I have a whole lot more problem with.  But given a choice between a complete lack of legitimate enforcement and this...I choose this every day and twice on sunday.

 

 

The bottom line here is they need to fix the problem.  And they need to do it by telling the left (ie anti-fence) and the right (ie anti-amnety) to stfu and go sit in the corner. 

First they need to build a damn fence..not a high tech fence..that just makes it harder/expensive to repair.  A simple double chain link fence will do fine.  Then setup heavy UAV patrols that are used to locate illegal border crossings for border agents to deal with in person.  For the first decade or so this will require vigilence but as people realize crossing is no longer very feasible the attempts will slow and patrols can be replaced slowly over time with ground sensors operating off of solar panels, etc...

Second, we need a bill to fix the current immigration mess and turn the current morass of a process into something sensible (details are unimportant as long as the basics get done).

But once the fence/UAV patrols and sensible immigration rules are in place you work on the details of an amnesty package.  The specifics are unimportant really, but the basic idea is lay the ground rules of what illegals in the country need to do in order to get through the process.  They'll be required to do a few things like show they've spent their time in the country as productive citizens (ie a felony offense is no-go in my book), nothing crazy or overly burdensome but each person needs to be documented like any other citizen, and when they get through it they are full citizens.

 

Finally, to be clear: You absolutely cannot do amnesty first...all you do is open the flood gates and create a bigger mess.

It's really that simple:

  1. Stop the flood (build the fence). 
  2. Fix the immigration process.  No....really fix it and take enforcement seriously.
  3. Deal with everyone who got in before the fix (ie amnesty). 
  4. Anyone else who gets in after the amnesty process is over needs to be dealt with like a criminal...because they are.  Deterrence is the name of the game at this point.  We want to avoid anything like this happening again by making it appealing to immigrate legally when compared with illegally.

 

That's my $0.02 anyways....

I agree with you, on all but one point... the fence.

A fence will stop no one. If a man is going to risk his life for 2 days in a desert, he is going to find a way past a simple fence.

The way you stop it, is remove the reason they come over. In California, look up how many companies have been fined for hiring illegal aliens. When you find one, let me know.

The problem is not new laws, or fences. enforce the laws we already have, and no one will want to come to this country (well, other then people running guns and drugs).

95% of all the people who come here, come here looking for work. Remove that option, and we will be fine.



FaRmLaNd on 28 April 2010

Very good point about properly discriminating between what the Federal government and the States should be legislating and governing. Too many Federal governments continually sap the power of the states in areas where they really shouldn't be increasing their scope. But it also goes both ways as is the case here.



bimmylee on 28 April 2010

Agreed. It's a shame that the citizens of Arizona had to get so pissed off that they passed their own law before the federal government finally said, "o wait... ur state is full of illegal aliens... lol"



Check out my band, (the) Fracture Suit!!

http://www.myspace.com/fracturesuit

 

 

 

Have you been enslaved?

badgenome on 28 April 2010
Sqrl said:
damkira said:

For once, I completely agree with you. Also this law will be used to discriminate against Hispanic people..

 

Lots of different laws are used to discriminate against lots of people.  The problem in those instances has a lot more to do with overzealous application than a fundamental problem with the law.

@topic,

For this particular law I would be completely against it except for one thing....The federal government has been derelict from its responsibility to secure the border for so long it has literally left the state no choice but to act on its own.

More specifically:

In the case of a cop already dealing with another matter asking a person for their driver's licence/ID/whatever to run it agaisnt a database on his computer (like they have at every traffic stop for the last 20 years)...Well that's not discrimination at all, that's basic common sense police work.

In the case of a cop coming up to someone out of the blue asking for ID to run in his computer...well that I have a whole lot more problem with.  But given a choice between a complete lack of legitimate enforcement and this...I choose this every day and twice on sunday.

 

 

The bottom line here is they need to fix the problem.  And they need to do it by telling the left (ie anti-fence) and the right (ie anti-amnety) to stfu and go sit in the corner. 

First they need to build a damn fence..not a high tech fence..that just makes it harder/expensive to repair.  A simple double chain link fence will do fine.  Then setup heavy UAV patrols that are used to locate illegal border crossings for border agents to deal with in person.  For the first decade or so this will require vigilence but as people realize crossing is no longer very feasible the attempts will slow and patrols can be replaced slowly over time with ground sensors operating off of solar panels, etc...

Second, we need a bill to fix the current immigration mess and turn the current morass of a process into something sensible (details are unimportant as long as the basics get done).

But once the fence/UAV patrols and sensible immigration rules are in place you work on the details of an amnesty package.  The specifics are unimportant really, but the basic idea is lay the ground rules of what illegals in the country need to do in order to get through the process.  They'll be required to do a few things like show they've spent their time in the country as productive citizens (ie a felony offense is no-go in my book), nothing crazy or overly burdensome but each person needs to be documented like any other citizen, and when they get through it they are full citizens.

 

Finally, to be clear: You absolutely cannot do amnesty first...all you do is open the flood gates and create a bigger mess.

It's really that simple:

  1. Stop the flood (build the fence). 
  2. Fix the immigration process.  No....really fix it and take enforcement seriously.
  3. Deal with everyone who got in before the fix (ie amnesty). 
  4. Anyone else who gets in after the amnesty process is over needs to be dealt with like a criminal...because they are.  Deterrence is the name of the game at this point.  We want to avoid anything like this happening again by making it appealing to immigrate legally when compared with illegally.

 

That's my $0.02 anyways....

I can understand some sort of an amnesty way, way down the line after the bleeding has been stopped for some number of years, but I can't see why should they be made citizens as opposed to being given some sort of guest worker status or legal residence. And in terms of family reunification, just where would you draw the line? If you let 10-12 million people bring over their extended families, or even just their very large immediate families, that can get out of control very quickly.