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: 9
9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96



Who really cares .

American law cares. To single a person out just because they are not white and demand identification is discrimination.



How does someone tell if someone is gonna go on a shooting spree. After all thats why it's perfectly acceptable to ask ID to buy a gun.

No they ask for ID to see if you are of legal age and residence to check to see if you have a criminal background. If ID's had this person is going to use to kill people written on it then we wouldn't have any guns laws would we?




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

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

There are two different circumstances. Many people who enter the country legally remain after they are not lawfully allowed to. That is a civil, not criminal case.


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



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Then the I.D. checks, detention, and investigation would reveal if the "immigrant" has record of legal entry.

The absence of a record would indicate a clear possibility of "illegal" entry.

The "Executive/Selective" prosecution is where the loophole is being exploited.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen




The absence of a record would indicate a clear possibility of "illegal" entry.

Yes. It's called due process.


The "Executive/Selective" prosecution is where the loophole is being exploited.
How so? With the immigration court backlog at 450,000 and rising?

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



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Yes.

Due Process, and total well planned government failure of handling the so-called "backlog".

Here is a better source other than a law firm with a vested interest.



(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts

Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

8 U.S. Code § 1325 - Improper entry by alien






posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Due Process, and total well planned government failure of handling the so-called "backlog".
Are you implying that cases are not been brought before the court? That the backlog is intentional? You may want to review how many cases are adjudicated. But that's not exactly your style, is it?




Here is a better source other than a law firm with a vested interest.
Says pretty much the same thing as your first source. Yes, illegal entry is a criminal misdemenor.
What's your point again?



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: xuenchen

Are you implying that cases are not been brought before the court? That the backlog is intentional?



You bet.

I am deeply suspicious.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:05 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen




I am deeply suspicious.

As well as having an aversion to research.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Well I think this court decision will set standards in other jurisdictions.

I accept my A+ in advance.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Glad to see you would be happy to see this law spread that gives police even more power. And you will be in a thread soon talking about how all the power they are getting is coming from the big gov types.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Again you dodge tge question.
I know people get asked but will you amswer my question or not?.
Do you want mandatory id cards and the police to have the power to stop people to see these papers.
It is pathetic you can not say yes or no.

Simple yes or no please.

So don't say they already do because you are not answering my question.
Man up and answer yes or no.

I have checked and it is not law to carry any ID unless operating a vehicle so answer the question put to you for the 4th time.



edit on 6-9-2015 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-9-2015 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I will ask you then seeing some are too cowardly to give a simple yes or no.

Do you want mandatory ID cards which the police can stop and ask for?.

Oh and this isn't about driving or having a bank account etc.
You are just walking down the road.
edit on 6-9-2015 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: xuenchen

Glad to see you would be happy to see this law spread that gives police even more power. And you will be in a thread soon talking about how all the power they are getting is coming from the big gov types.


Hmmm.

Not sure I said I supported anything.

I am pointing out the legal aspects.

The oil is still on the top.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen




I am pointing out the legal aspects.

Ha!
That's a good one.


Due Process, and total well planned government failure of handling the so-called "backlog".

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



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: xuenchen

I will ask you then seeing some are too cowardly to give a simple yes or no.

Do you want mandatory ID cards which the police can stop and ask for?.

Oh and this isn't about driving or having a bank account etc.
You are just walking down the road.


Ummmm.....

Not sure.

But the question is actually moot.

The U.S. already has State I.D.s and some are called "Real I.D."

Any State I.D. (Drivers License or State picture I.D.) is valid nationwide as is a Passport.

We've had this for a long time.

And the police can stop anybody anywhere any time on public property with "Probable Cause".

"Probable Cause" is trickier on private property and sometimes requires a warrant signed by a judge.

You can calm down now.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen




And the police can stop anybody anywhere any time on public property with "Probable Cause".

Can they detain you for not having an ID? Jail you?


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



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage



Yeah it was wasn't it.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: xuenchen




And the police can stop anybody anywhere any time on public property with "Probable Cause".

Can they detain you for not having an ID? Jail you?



Somebody already answered that.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

No it isn't moot at all.
Do you have to carry one of these at all times? nope.
So can you answer my question or not?
Yes or no?.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



Somebody already answered that.

What was the answer?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join