It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Judge upholds Arizona's 'show your papers' immigration law

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 05:54 PM
link   

And yes let's have check points everywhere. Somebody has to stop the invasion.


THAT kind of thinking is DANGEROUS and anti-American. That is NOT what this country is about and doesn't represent its founding principles, and we are trying to save this country from people like you, if you truly believe that. So who hates America? It's not us.


originally posted by: whyamIhere
I dare anybody to sneak in Mexico. The put you under the jail.


Le sigh.

Why it is that people (on the right, particularly) like to compare the way others countries do things and their laws to the way the US does things and its laws with the sentiment that they are better and that we should be more like those countries? "Well, if you did that in MEXICO," or "If you're caught doing that in IRAN" and crap like that, but only when it serves their own partisan views (socialist France, no, but a theocracy, sure).

We are NOT other countries, and that's why we are great country because we have evolved beyond that crap. People need to stop saying we need to be like countries that deny basic rights, short cut legal processes, or those who have different laws.

Someone needs a lesson on what makes America great and unique, and it's because we are not like what some groups think we should be and what they want to make us into.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: yuppa



If you are here illegally you should have no more rights than the right to a speedy trial and deportation and basic human rights to avoid abuse.

A speedy trial, huh?
There's only 450,000 of them lined up. How many immigration courts are there? How many cases a day can each go through.
So, you agree that their rights are being violated?
trac.syr.edu...


Currently our "great leader" chooses to not enforce this law
I'm sorry...what? If the law is not being enforced, why is the backlog growing?


Actually speedy trials can be 3-5 mins a peice if its just th judge deciding. Since they are not legal citizens summary trials like i propose will work much better. NExt. you crossed illegally yes? yes sir. why? fo r my family. No excuse deport. NEXT! Just like that.


You obvious don't know what a speedy trial means in the context in which it was written. It's not that it goes by quickly once started, but that you have the right to have a trial as quickly as possible after arrest or charge. As in, NOT sitting in prison for X years waiting for the government to build a case or for your case to be brought to trial.


The provision is “an important safeguard to prevent undue and oppressive incarceration prior to trial, to minimize anxiety and concern accompanying public accusation and to limit the possibility that long delay will impair the ability of an accused to defend himself.”14 The passage of time alone may lead to the loss of witnesses through death or other reasons and the blurring of memories of available witnesses. But on the other hand, “there is a societal interest in providing a speedy trial which exists separate from and at times in opposition to the interests of the accused.”


Link: law.cornell.edu



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: muse7
Chalk this one up as another great gift that Republicans have given this country along with 2 endless wars, the NSA and the Patriot Act, war on drugs, LGBT discrimination, etc


And the other side of us gave us world war 1,world war 2, VIETNAM, BOSNIA, and the NSA was created back in the day by a Democrat then another one created the FISA act, Carter which did the same thing as the PA, Then other Democrat created the Ominbus Counter Terrorism Act in the 90s, Clinton that does the same thing.

That wasn't good enough created gun control, created the so called 'war on poverty' America's longest running war, and their own DISCRIMINATION because we all know how evil rich people,bankers, and corporations are.

How about he who is without sin cast the first stone.

As if the LEFT is 'better' than the 'Right'.

The are not EVEN close to being.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

You gonna just ignore my question? .



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: neo96

You gonna just ignore my question? .


Miss this post ?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And to say it again.

Americans are 'asked' for their papers on a daily basis.

From the cops to the banks, and everyone else in between.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

All the examples you and others have presented are completely different (alcohol, guns, cigarettes, bank). Point being, you can't be randomly asked for identification or papers *just because* and without valid, lawful reason (and looking or being Hispanic is not a valid lawful reason).

Although some think you should.

Walking down the road, or taking a walk, shopping, etc, cop rolls up, "Hey, let me see your ID and/or check your immigration status."

Um, no. Doesn't work that way. And it shouldn't. Period.


edit on 6-9-2015 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

That isn't exactly what the Arizona law says. There must be a "lawful stop or detention". Let's assume you are detained for legitimate reasons. The trouble is, you can be detained until you provide proof of your immigration status. Legal or not, citizen or not.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:11 PM
link   
When did the term ILLEGAL stop meaning AGAINST THE LAW ? Maybe I should go to the bank and demand an undocumented loan for 1,000,000 dollars . Write my demands on the back of a deposit slip...would it work ?The laws of this nation were put in place over the years were put in place to protect the country and it's citizens. And punish anyone that broke them.
This is becoming worse than a farce . It is stupid .
Oh , wait. Straight from the chairperson of the Democratic (re
rogressive Liberal) Party:
DNC Chair: Republicans Believe Illegal Immigration 'Should be a Crime'

Her words , not mine.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog




DNC Chair: Republicans Believe Illegal Immigration 'Should be a Crime'


Well then I guess they wouldn't have a problem with 'undocumented' guns.

Since being 'illegal' isn't a crime.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

DNC Chair: Republicans Believe Illegal Immigration 'Should be a Crime'



It is not a criminal offense to be in the US unlawfully. It is a civil offense. The law would have to be changed to suit some.

But mere unlawful presence in the country is not a crime. It is a violation of federal immigration law to remain in the country without legal authorization, but this violation is punishable by civil penalties, not criminal.

blogs.findlaw.com...

edit on 9/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96



Since being 'illegal' isn't a crime.

People cannot be illegal.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Liquesence

That isn't exactly what the Arizona law says. There must be a "lawful stop or detention". Let's assume you are detained for legitimate reasons. The trouble is, you can be detained until you provide proof of your immigration status. Legal or not, citizen or not.


Even though that's what the law says, I'll wager that people will still be profiled and there will then *become* a lawful reason for the stop until immigration status can be proved, and I'll wager that is also what happened for this initial case to have moved forward.

Hell, they can always find a "reason" for a stop...



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Yeah.
But the law itself doesn't really address that. The judge did find though, that it does not encourage profiling.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: neo96



Since being 'illegal' isn't a crime.

People cannot be illegal.


Depends on if you are a terrorist then you can be a illegal person under the geneva conventions. They need to make it a federal crime instead of civil. PErsonally a DMZ would work wonders for Immigration.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Depends on if you are a terrorist then you can be a illegal person under the geneva conventions.
Citation?



They need to make it a federal crime instead of civil.

What would that accomplish? Throw them in prison because they live here? The millions of them? Good plan. Sort of like marijuana possession being a criminal offense, no? Solved the problem, did it?
edit on 9/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: yuppa

Depends on if you are a terrorist then you can be a illegal person under the geneva conventions.
Citation?



They need to make it a federal crime instead of civil.

What would that accomplish? Throw them in prison because they live here? The millions of them? Good plan. Sort of like marijuana possession being a criminal offense, no? Solved the problem, did it?


Article 4 isnt it about illegal persons? they are not in uniforms and are terroririzing the border towns sometimes so it could be argued they are terrorist if finagled just right.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: yuppa

Depends on if you are a terrorist then you can be a illegal person under the geneva conventions.
Citation?



They need to make it a federal crime instead of civil.

What would that accomplish? Throw them in prison because they live here? The millions of them? Good plan. Sort of like marijuana possession being a criminal offense, no? Solved the problem, did it?


Article 4 isnt it about illegal persons? they are not in uniforms and are terroririzing the border towns sometimes so it could be argued they are terrorist if finagled just right.

Geneva Convention: Article 4

Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.

You can read the rest of it, if you like.
www.icrc.org...

edit on 9/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

If they are counted as illegal combatants though they can be held with no rights though. we could apply it to criminal Illegals at th every least. If thye come in with Guns or drugs consider them combatants and there ya go. no rights to screw with because they have none under that stipulation.

There is always a caveat.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Blah blah...Geneva convention...blah blah...illegal persons...blah blah...stipulation.

The article has nothing to do with terrorism or "illegal persons." It defines who the Convention covers.

edit on 9/6/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

But the "selective" confusion lies here.... the gaping loophole.



Improper Entry Is a Crime

To be clear, the most common crime associated with illegal immigration is likely improper entry. Under federal criminal law, it is misdemeanor for an alien (i.e., a non-citizen) to:

Enter or attempt to enter the United States at any time or place other than designated by immigration officers;

Elude examination or inspection by immigration officers; or

Attempt to enter or obtain entry to the United States by willfully concealing, falsifying, or misrepresenting material facts.

The punishment under this federal law is no more than six months of incarceration and up to $250 in civil penalties for each illegal entry. These acts of improper entry -- including the mythic "border jumping" -- are criminal acts associated with illegally immigrating to the United States.

Like all other criminal charges in the United States, improper entry must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict.

Is Illegal Immigration a Crime? Improper Entry v. Unlawful Presence







top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join