DHS strips Arizona sheriff of authority to patrol for illegal immigrants

reply to post by ShiftTrio


I've been in this discussion from page one and if you'd read my previous posts you wouldn't continue wasting space pointing out links to articles about the Maricopa County jail and allegations against the Sheriff.

I've already stated I don't support the Sheriff in terms of his jail or anything else but in this case he's in the right.

The man cannot be 100% in the wrong and stay elected. Do you really think he's the top abuser of prisoner's rights in the USA? There are jails all over this country that make his tent city look like a county club.

The fact is we have a bunch of left-wing pro immigration types in this discussion who refuse to address the real issues and keep hammering away at the immigration enforcement.

It's typical BS and transparent as hell but some people can't seem to realize that everyone sees right through them.

Part of the constitutional rights you claim to defend include each counties ability to choose who heads up the Sheriff's department. If the people of Maricopa County want to keep electing the man and support what he does it really isn't anyone else's business.

The solution is very simple. Don't commit crimes in Maricopa County and if you're an illegal alien you might want to find somewhere else to live. The days of "sanctuary city" status there seem to be over.

It's a crying shame that we couldn't criminalize left-wing knee-jerk liberal bias.

On a separate note.

To respond to that one post by lillydale.

Yes I was comparing Americas methods of handling illegal immigrants with that of other nations such as China or Russia. I never said America should be like said nations in every way shape and form.

Once again you were putting words in my mouth.

Rush Limbaugh put it best. "You're a foreigner. You either assimilate and abide by America's standards or get out."

[edit on 10/11/09 by Marked One]

Originally posted by Marked One
It's a crying shame that we couldn't criminalize left-wing knee-jerk liberal bias.

Yes

Its a crying shame when a mind sees only through a straw - - then resorts to labeling and name calling.

One who can not see both sides of a coin - - has no valid opinion of worth.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Marked One
It's a crying shame that we couldn't criminalize left-wing knee-jerk liberal bias.

Yes

Its a crying shame when a mind sees only through a straw - - then resorts to labeling and name calling.

One who can not see both sides of a coin - - has no valid opinion of worth.

I couldn't agree more.

You just described your typical liberal f***-tard to a T.

There's a lot of them in this thread and not to mention throughout the rest of this forum. Although I'm not going to name names.

I really enjoy intelligent - thought provoking threads/comments/opinions.

Worth responding to.

Originally posted by ecoparity
reply to post by ShiftTrio

 

I've been in this discussion from page one and if you'd read my previous posts you wouldn't continue wasting space pointing out links to articles about the Maricopa County jail and allegations against the Sheriff.

I was pointing out other people From AZ actually did disagree, since you said and I quote

("who actually live in the Phoenix area describe going through these "immigration check points" and so far every single one of them not only had no problem with the cops, they support the continued use of them. "
I've already stated I don't support the Sheriff in terms of his jail or anything else but in this case he's in the right.)

This is a lie and I was pointing it out. Also posting of these articles is to show it is not just illegal's but American's who face his disregard for the constitution.

The man cannot be 100% in the wrong and stay elected. Do you really think he's the top abuser of prisoner's rights in the USA? There are jails all over this country that make his tent city look like a county club.

The fact is we have a bunch of left-wing pro immigration types in this discussion who refuse to address the real issues and keep hammering away at the immigration enforcement.

It's typical BS and transparent as hell but some people can't seem to realize that everyone sees right through them.

I do not disagree with the electoral process, nor that he was elected fair and square. I can name several corrupt elected officials. This does not make him right, but its does make him sheriff until the good people of Arizona feel other wise. I only ask the corruption and disregard of the constitution stops.

I think it is you who is not facing the real issues. The illegal search and detaining of legal American's. Answer this question. Are you ok with this?
If 1 legal American is held for or rights violated in the search for illegal immigrants are you ok with it . That is the real issue here.


See you cannot type me into one genre of political bias, as I do believe in states rights, I do believe in ALL of our constitution , not just the ones that suite me. I did not vote for Obama, and I am a proud gun owner. Your bias is the only transparency here. I see both sides of an argument and one thing I have found, I have NEVER EVER heard an argument that both sides did not have good reasons, just bad solutions.

Part of the constitutional rights you claim to defend include each counties ability to choose who heads up the Sheriff's department. If the people of Maricopa County want to keep electing the man and support what he does it really isn't anyone else's business.

It is my business if MY sheriff is committing crimes against our constitution and our founding fathers. To say it is no ones business is ignorance, and I am afraid you would not do very well as a founding father.

The solution is very simple. Don't commit crimes in Maricopa County and if you're an illegal alien you might want to find somewhere else to live. The days of "sanctuary city" status there seem to be over.

Actually, I agree with you about committing crime, No one should ,illegal ( Yes I see the irony) or other wise. that is not what this is about. Its about the ones who have done nothing wrong. where is your outrage for them? I believe all immigrants need to obtain their status legally , and if you get caught and you are an illegal , then you should be deported. I would like to stop the flow of illegals into the country along with the drugs and violence. Make NO MISTAKE about it. But there are better, legal ways that our founding fathers would be proud of, and this my friend is something we need to be striving for in this day and age. This country needs a dose of the good ole days , and I mean 1776. Where progressive, freedom oriented ideas for all were welcomed, applauded and carried out with passion.

Also I want to bring up the notion that; did you know anything that is considered open minded in Texas would still readily be deemed "too far right wing" in a place like California? Just saying.

Originally posted by Marked One
Also I want to bring up the notion that; did you know anything that is considered open minded in Texas would still readily be deemed "too far right wing" in a place like California? Just saying.

You've lived in California?

California is not liberal. There are liberal areas. Like most states/areas - - the more developed (like major cities) the more liberal. California is actually mostly agricultural - mostly Mexican/Catholic.

But the major cities in California are highly populated.

Originally posted by Annee
I really enjoy intelligent - thought provoking threads/comments/opinions.

Worth responding to.

Pot, kettle - kettle, pot.

I'm still waiting for your response to that question.

reply to post by ShiftTrio


Its obvious you haven't read the entire discussion, especially my previous posts.

I'll respond to your one question but to be honest the rest of your post was like eating jello a/f/a intellectual quality of content.

I've spent a very long time having to travel weekly for work. That means I have to put up with TSA searches, screening, etc. The places I work are almost always secure meaning I have to endure background checks, more searches and screening in and out of the office each day and even places where I have to be escorted by a security person everywhere I go, even including the bathroom.

If I and others are going to have to put up with this constant encroachment on my 4th amendment rights then I fully expect the government to secure the borders and enforce immigration laws to the full extent of the law.

I also expect that all people in this country have the same treatment under the law regardless of who they are or where they come from.

I've listed numerous, sourced examples of illegal aliens being treated "better" that citizens. I haven't even gone into the true cost of illegal immigration, the impact on our economy and on our work force.

So to answer your question, yes. If I'm willing to put up with some encroachment on my rights so that I can fly without incidents of terrorism and work within a secure environment then I am willing to put up with a temporary use of police checkpoints in areas known to harbor large numbers of illegal aliens if the end result is the deportation of the illegals and the enforcement of our immigration laws.

Basically your worried about one possible instance of your rights being violated and ignoring the other dozen ways they are being violated every single day due to the illegal immigrant issue.

reply to post by ecoparity

You summed up what I thought perfectly, lol. Though I can respect your honesty and appreciate it as it at the very least shows you stand by your convictions.

You would make a great British colonialist. The problem, is you are willing to give up your rights, because your scared , because it easy. This is NOT what America is about. You can't have the rights you want and take away the rights you do not for convenience. It kills me to see these people wearing American flags but not have the fortitude to stand by what this country is about because it may inconvenience them. There are better solutions, we are better people then this. Nothing worth fighting for is easy my friend. I am not willing to give up my rights, when something else can be done. The other issue is someday it will effect the rights you do care about, because it sets a precedent, for what we as a people are willing to deal with in the face of fear, fear that in most cases is unfounded. How many terrorists has Ole Joe caught?

Please understand, I agree with you, Immigration is an issue. We have a lot of problems with crime in this country, That does not mean we start going into peoples houses or pulling them over because we think they could do something?

Its a very slippery slope you are on, and I hope, you never are in the position where people who do what you do, or look how you look become a stereo type for some sort of crime.

As for the substance of my post. There was plenty to chew on in there, but like I am with spinach. You did not like the taste.

PS There is always room for jello ..



[edit on 11-10-2009 by ShiftTrio]

reply to post by ecoparity



What does any of your personal security issues have to do with Sheriff Joe - - overstepping his jurisdiction and/or raiding small businesses in a gestapo fashion?

I drive Arizona to CA about twice a month and now have to go through 4 border check points.

But they are within the law and posted on a website for every citizen to see.

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by ecoparity

 

What does any of your personal security issues have to do with Sheriff Joe - - overstepping his jurisdiction and/or raiding small businesses in a gestapo fashion?

I drive Arizona to CA about twice a month and now have to go through 4 border check points.

But they are within the law and posted on a website for every citizen to see.

Until you answer the question I'm done wasting time on you.

For the 3rd time now, posted in a direct response to you: The Sheriff did not step out of his jurisdiction (which is a geographical reference but I'll play along with your misuse of the term for now).

The DHS gave the Maricopa County Sheriffs Department the ability to take over immigration enforcement duties in place of ICE via contract.

Your continued insistence in ignoring that fact makes your honesty and strength of position in this discussion plain to all as non existent.

Its very clear your issue is the immigration enforcement, not who is doing it or how. Your one of those bleeding heart liberals who think the best solution to this problem is to grant amnesty to all the poor, downtrodden illegals. Sorry, I've invested a great deal of time and energy into examining the problem first hand and amnesty is not the solution.

Do you realize simply taking in all the illegal immigrants does nothing to solve the larger issues of poverty and social disorder in the home countries of these people? Mexico's public assistance program is to drive people to the border and hope they make it across into America.

If we take away that option and combine it with political pressure we can improve the lives of many more people. Hell, we can even provide some funds to help with this and it will still be a better option economically for the US.

I just find it sadly typical of the political responses of the left as well as the extreme right. Short term solutions which solve nothing and more often than not actually make the problem worse. Worse, your liberal guilt makes you all to happy to condemn your fellow Americans to poverty in favor of illegal aliens. You don't even have the slightest clue how many American workers have been displaced or even how many Americans have been victimized by criminals who shouldn't even be here, do you?

I looked it up before I used it -- because common words are often used incorrectly.

Jurisdiction.

1 : the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law
2 a : the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate b : the power or right to exercise authority : control
3 : the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised

reply to post by ShiftTrio


You can preach that libertarian noise all you want to but it stands about as much chance of becoming reality as does a sudden flood of pixies flying out of your ass.

It must be nice to be able to pretend everything is so black and white. The world is a great big grey area, my friend. That libertarian all or nothing BS is just as useless as the far left and the far right.

The Sheriff's department was not running around wholesale violating the rights of citizens. Like your liberal friend you completely fail to see the give and take in daily reality. She because she doesn't want any enforcement of immigration laws and you because you think society can actually operate according to your definition of constitutional rights.

I completely agree that the government has overstepped the boundaries in a number of ways but that does not invalidate the numerous instances of Americans being willing to set aside those rights in very limited instances in exchange for certain benefits.

We do it every time we get on an airplane as well as the other instances I've listed.

The supreme court has ruled again and again that those rights can be infringed upon given a specific set of circumstances and for specific purposes. I know, you disagree and think society can function under strict libertarian ideals. As nice as that would be it's just not going to happen.

Like it or not the limited use of check points supervised by the court has met the review and approval of the county judicial system. These claims of the Sheriff running around like the "Gestapo" bursting into the homes of citizens to search for illegals are complete and total BS.

The only people complaining seem to be the ones who might not want to interact with law enforcement due to criminal activity, drug use and so on. Now I've never been one of those people who support the concept of "if you're doing nothing wrong why be worried" but in this case it fits.

Limited and temporary checkpoints in areas with an overwhelming presence of illegal aliens is not a wholesale violation of the constitution. By your own posts you've admitted they are stopping people of all racial backgrounds - were you searched or asked to provide proof of residence?

I've seen no proof the immigration checkpoints go beyond checking for proof of legal status. If they start searching people and their cars at these checkpoints without probable cause then we can talk about boundaries being overstepped.

It sounds to me like you were stopped and asked for proof of residence and offered some good advice by the officer on not dressing like a gang member. I'd strongly consider following that recommendation, especially given the area you were stopped in.

When these checkpoints start popping up all over town, even in areas where the number of illegal aliens is considered low or non existent and searches of person and property start taking place, then I'll agree we have a constitutional issue. Otherwise its just another function of border control and immigration enforcement like the highway checkpoints on the highways. I'm guessing some people will start having an issue with those the minute they are no longer able to know ahead of time where they are located. Then it will be a "Gestapo black boot, constitution stomping issue".

Originally posted by ecoparity

The DHS gave the Maricopa County Sheriffs Department the ability to take over immigration enforcement duties in place of ICE via contract.

Then why exactly is he being investigated?

You can not use profiling as just cause to raid a business. Employing those of Mexican heritage is not just cause.

And please leave your personal issues out of it.

Originally posted by Annee
I looked it up before I used it -- because common words are often used incorrectly.

Jurisdiction.

1 : the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law
2 a : the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate b : the power or right to exercise authority : control
3 : the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised

No, dear. You keep insisting that the Sheriff is acting outside of his jurisdiction as a vigilante. Since, as the law enforcement entity in the county he already meets the definition of item 1 and item 2 does not apply your only possible application of the term is geographical in that he does not have the power to enforce federal immigration laws in that location.

So who does?

DHS / ICE

And who granted him the full duties of immigration enforcement in Maricopa County? ICE.

Now the new administration wants to strip him of that power. Now he no longer has the contract to provide federal immigration law enforcement in that location.

Fortunately he still has jurisdiction to enforce state laws in Maricopa County which include state immigration laws.

So. Clearly the Sheriff is the body for law enforcement and can do so in that location. Unless your assertion is that Sheriff Joe is the sovereign government your claims of non jurisdiction were and still remain completely incorrect.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by ecoparity

The DHS gave the Maricopa County Sheriffs Department the ability to take over immigration enforcement duties in place of ICE via contract.

Then why exactly is he being investigated?

You can not use profiling as just cause to raid a business. Employing those of Mexican heritage is not just cause.

And please leave your personal issues out of it.

That's funny ICE / INS raids businesses based on informants reporting illegal aliens working in them all the time.

So it's OK for the feds to do it but not the Sheriff, even when he's been granted the power of enforcing federal immigration laws by them?

Can you provide a source for this investigation?

What personal issues? If your going to accuse me of something have the guts to say it. Don't tiptoe around and whisper in people's ears. I know that's difficult for liberals to do, be direct and up front but this is a discussion forum based on text. Those kinds of nuances cannot function here.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by ecoparity

The DHS gave the Maricopa County Sheriffs Department the ability to take over immigration enforcement duties in place of ICE via contract.

Then why exactly is he being investigated?

You can not use profiling as just cause to raid a business. Employing those of Mexican heritage is not just cause.

And please leave your personal issues out of it.

Here's a nice liberal source for you which details the fact that Maricopa County had a legal agreement with DHS to perform street sweeps in addition to jail checks of immigration status:

ACLU

The program is referenced as "287g" and is in force with local law enforcement across the country. The DHS deciding to revoke this agreement isn't about Sheriff Joe, it's about the Obama administration pushing an under the table amnesty program via lack of enforcement.
Since you obviously don't research an issue prior to debating it may I suggest you invest some time into examining this before continuing to embarrass yourself?

Originally posted by ecoparity


That's funny ICE / INS raids businesses based on informants reporting illegal aliens working in them all the time.

Exactly!

I worked for a company in Los Angeles (years ago) that got raided. One worker had a traffic ticket go to warrant (or something like that) and it was somehow discovered he was illegal.

They used that as just cause to legally come into the business. Once legally on the property they then checked everyone (that didn't jump the fence) for legal status.

A report of an illegal would be just cause. But I think you have to have an actual name. Again - once legally on the property - I believe you can check everyone.

But - you can't profile and I think it is still illegal to raid a business just because they have workers of Mexican heritage.

Some information I get from Articles/Opinions/Discussions in my local Arizona paper. Which I am not giving the name of.