Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Arizona Bill on ILLEGALS, Answer Me This?

page: 1
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+69 more 
posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
As many on ATS know I am a Law Enforcement Officer in Georgia and have been keeping an eye on the many threads posted about the new Arizona ILLEGAL Immigration Bill. Reading so many posts you see such a broad spectrum of beliefs, ideas, emotions, etc...but I haven't noticed many commenting on the following.

As a LEO I need Probable Cause or atleast Articutable Reasonable Suspicion to make a traffic stop or stop someone on the street. The Arizona Bill fear is that cops will profile and stop "hispanics" for just simply looking hispanic and forget about PC or ARS. Is that a valid fear, sure. There are people of ALL professions who simply suck at their jobs and tend to break rules to do things THEIR way, BUT what about those of us who do the job right and do come across ILLEGAL aliens?

Case in point. I mentioned on another thread that the other day I stopped a 2009 Ford Mustang doing 89 in a 55 and the driver happened to be "hispanic". Now the driver could not produce a valid drivers license, BUT handed me these awesome FAKE International Drivers Licenses they get for $50 here in Atlanta. Now after a few checks it was confirmed he was not licensed to drive the vehicle so he was arrested. Now, this driver is 24 years old working at Tyson Chicken driving a $30,000 car...ok fine, but then while searching his person I find a Social Security Card in his wallet and the card ended up being stolen and this scumbag was using and DESTROYING the credit of an elderly woman in the area, while he was thriving. Anyway, the car was impounded and I charged him, taking him to the jail. So I ask you folks...as a LEO KNOWING (100%) that this guy is not only a criminal...he IS an ILLEGAL alien from Mexico...should I and my State have the power to make sure he is deported back? Or should I do what we have been doing for years....call ICE and tell them what we have, only to be told they are not interested? Sounds like AZ was sick of hearing this answer for everyone they wanted to get out of their cities.

Someone, PLEASE give me a legitimate answer as to why local police and other agencies should NOT be allowed to deal with these guys/gals directly and get them out of here. What reasoning could you possibly come up with when the stop was legit, the arrest was legit, the lack of citizenship CONFIRMED, and he/she IS caught doing criminal deeds? You don't need to be a "fed" to check the status of citizenship....that is called an excuse by the Government to make the rest of the populace actually believe locals can't enforce this BS!

EDIT TO ADD: He had NO passport, NO visa, NO nothing....and yes he did admit he paid a coyote $200 to come across somewhere in TX....

[edit on 4/28/2010 by rcwj1975]




posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 



No problem, send them back

100%

sound good?



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Personally, I think that he should be given a trial.

If found guilty, he should have to pay his fine, do his time and then immediately be deported.

I think that he should have to wait a minimum of 5 years before he would be eligible to get a visa to come to this country legally.


+6 more 
posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 


Hey I am from Ga, I used to work with an immigration lawyer, as an interpretor for the court and in the School system with children from migrant workers (mostly illegals), yes you are right, for a while Silvester was know for the "place" to get your "identification needs".

I am also Latina but against illegal immigration, and I will love to see the same law enforcing that was passed in Arizona all over the US states, including GA, I am tired of the gouging of state taxes my husband gets because GA is considered a "welfare state" so with all the unemployment going on around those that still holds a meaningful job and makes a decent income are been raped, states are doing this to fight budgets shortcomings.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
Personally, I think that he should be given a trial.

If found guilty, he should have to pay his fine, do his time and then immediately be deported.

I think that he should have to wait a minimum of 5 years before he would be eligible to get a visa to come to this country legally.


Oh I agree, he should get his trial and his car should be sold and his VICTIM given the money for restitution. Or given his car period....
He needs to answer for what he has done, then yes deported, BUT thats is the main issue here. He was arrested by me (local LE), so should WE have the power to execute the deportation papers, or should we hope that ICE will do so, or release him back to the streets of Atlanta? I think this is why AZ made this bill. They are sick of the FEDS refusing to deport, skirting the issue, and allowing these guys back out there to do it ALL OVER AGAIN.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by rcwj1975

Originally posted by Wildbob77
Personally, I think that he should be given a trial.

If found guilty, he should have to pay his fine, do his time and then immediately be deported.

I think that he should have to wait a minimum of 5 years before he would be eligible to get a visa to come to this country legally.


Oh I agree, he should get his trial and his car should be sold and his VICTIM given the money for restitution. Or given his car period....
He needs to answer for what he has done, then yes deported, BUT thats is the main issue here. He was arrested by me (local LE), so should WE have the power to execute the deportation papers, or should we hope that ICE will do so, or release him back to the streets of Atlanta? I think this is why AZ made this bill. They are sick of the FEDS refusing to deport, skirting the issue, and allowing these guys back out there to do it ALL OVER AGAIN.


ITs why we need to close down a couple of the 700 bases around the world and divert the funds to BOARDER enforcement, technology and the like.

I would NOT give this person trial in the strict sense, why pay for his sentencing and housing? (just me)

Put him on the other side of the boarder, which would hopefully be triple funded and fully staffed, so he cannot come back.



[edit on 28-4-2010 by Janky Red]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
Personally, I think that he should be given a trial.

If found guilty, he should have to pay his fine, do his time and then immediately be deported.

I think that he should have to wait a minimum of 5 years before he would be eligible to get a visa to come to this country legally.


We can not reasonably afford to give them all trials. Those are paid for with taxpayer dollars and frankly, 'we' are tapped out.

Edit to add: In this particular case, I feel he should be brought to trial since there is an actual victim that should be entitled to restitution. Her rights should be protected no matter what. In general however, I do not think illegals should be given trials.

As for the 'sentence', I think anyone found to be in this country illegally should receive a banned for life notice.

If you want the problem to stop, you can't simply give them a slap on the wrist. Not at this point. We are already past the tipping point, especially in the South.

Five years is nothing. Hell, twenty years isn't much even.
I say -- caught, deported, banned. Period.

[edit on 28-4-2010 by lpowell0627]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:44 PM
link   
I understand the no trial part...in a sense you can say they don't deserve a trial as they do not fall under citizenship (aka...not forwarded the same rights as Americans), but what about the victims? Especially those of the financial kind? I think we found out he ended up buying around $22,000 worth of stuff using a false name and the SSN. So do we sieze all their property thats worth value and give it to the victim? Have a sale and the victim(s) gets the profit?



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:46 PM
link   
rcwj1975, good to see you again.

I'm one of those who supports immigration enforcement, but at the same time, I don't support "papers please" without probable cause.

I don't think a police officer should be allowed to walk up to me on the street for no reason (assuming I'm NOT creating probable cause with my actions, if I am it's a different story) and demand ID at the threat of detainment.

I do believe that if someone is legitimately stopped through real probable cause and not just "I want to stop that guy because he's a pedestrian" (eg random ID checks to 'get lucky') then yes, of course you should be able to move them over to the appropriate federal authorities (border patrol, customs, ICE, whoever is appropriate).

My problem with Arizona is that I really do believe it's going to be abused heavily and that if police are allowed to stop you and papers please you for 'good faith' suspicion that you are committing the crime of being illegal, it basically gives them the ability to stop and detain anyone who's not carrying their birth certificate.

Sure, I'm white, it'd be harder to justify 'good faith' but all the officer has to say is that he goes off behavior, he can claim I was 'nervous' as I walked by him, etc etc etc and then just say that since he's not a racist, of course he thought I could be illegal too.

I think this is a dangerous law for that reason, I think it puts too much 'arrest power' in the police in that it lets you detain someone for not having a birth certificate and all you have to do is argue that it was in 'good faith'.

I know if I was in Arizona and got 'held' until I could provide a birth certificate, if it was the wrong time of day, it would take several hours at least.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 


You tell 'em rcw!

I don't think people begin to understand how miserably the federal government has failed to uphold their end of enforcement regarding illegals. Border states that bear the financial brunt of the wave have no choice but to defend themselves.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by rcwj1975
I understand the no trial part...in a sense you can say they don't deserve a trial as they do not fall under citizenship (aka...not forwarded the same rights as Americans), but what about the victims? Especially those of the financial kind? I think we found out he ended up buying around $22,000 worth of stuff using a false name and the SSN. So do we sieze all their property thats worth value and give it to the victim? Have a sale and the victim(s) gets the profit?



Well the lady did not spend that money, or issue the instruments to cause the harm...

the idea that she should be responsible for that is stupid, beyond stupid, however thats another issue.

Unfortunate thing, which I forgot, is the constitution does not distinguish in regards to
trials, meaning anyone is afforded whatever is stated in the constitution, irrespective of
anything, you are human, present and alive the constitution applies to you.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 


First and foremost, know I respect what you do, how hard your job is and as well you as an ATS'er, and understand completely what you're referring to in your original post.

Second and most important, it is a border issue, and the Coyote's bringing them in.

Third and as a sub-plot, this is a bureaucratic nightmare, created by the Federal Government.

In order to leverage State support, for Federal funding, they play on the xenophobia of American's.

The "they" I am referring to is Washington D.C. and the bureaucracy that is the entire Federal Government.

And as far as I.C.E. not being interested, that's complete horse-puckey on their part, it is their job, and through denial of assistance, they are essentially shirking their responsibility through criminal malfeasance and obstruction of justice.

It is quite simply a way to force us, as citizens, through societal and political blackmail, to accept the R.F.I.D. chipping program, through the Real ID Act.




Quote from : Wikipedia : Real ID Act

The REAL ID Act of 2005, Pub.L. 109-13, 119 Stat. 302, enacted May 11, 2005, was an Act of Congress that modified U.S. federal law pertaining to security, authentication, and issuance procedures standards for the state driver's licenses and identification (ID) cards, as well as various immigration issues pertaining to terrorism.

The law set forth certain requirements for state driver's licenses and ID cards to be accepted by the federal government for "official purposes", as defined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

The Secretary of Homeland Security has defined "official purposes" as presenting state driver's licenses and identification cards for boarding commercially operated airline flights and entering federal buildings and nuclear power plants.

The REAL ID Act implements the following:

* Changing visa limits for temporary workers, nurses, and Australian citizens.

* Establishing new national standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver identification cards.

* Funding some reports and pilot projects related to border security.

* Introducing rules covering "delivery bonds" (rather like bail bonds but for aliens who have been released pending hearings).

* Updating and tightening the laws on application for asylum and deportation of aliens for terrorist activity.

* Waiving laws that interfere with construction of physical barriers at the borders.

As of April 2, 2008, all 50 states have either applied for extensions of the original May 11, 2008 compliance deadline or received unsolicited extensions.

As of October 2009, 25 states have approved either resolutions or binding legislation not to participate in the program, and with President Obama's selection of Janet Napolitano (a prominent critic of the program) to head the Department of Homeland Security, the future of the law remains uncertain, and bills have been introduced into Congress to amend or repeal it.

The most recent of these, dubbed PASS ID, would eliminate many of the more burdensome technological requirements but still require states to meet federal standards in order to have their ID cards accepted by federal agencies.


The current legislation is the political and legislative backbone of the entire enchilada.

There is so much more, of course, but I thought this would be a basis of a beginning answer to your particular problem, but not the solution, because personally it should be ship their butt back across the border, and Mexico deal with them.

I have plenty of book suggestions to back up and corroborate my evidence on this information.

Just ask, if you want some of them, or U2U and I'll point you in the right direction.

First one I will suggest though is the one below :

Operation Gatekeeper: The Rise of the 'Illegal Alien' and the Remaking of the U.S.-Mexico Boundary


Library Journal : Amazon Review :

In October 1994, the Immigration and Naturalization Service began Operation Gatekeeper.

Its goal was to reduce the movement of Mexicans across the U.S. border between San Diego and Tijuana.

Nevins (Berkeley), who writes for the Nation, the Progressive, the Los Angeles Times, and other publications, examines this operation in the context of immigration between these two countries.

A historical account of the United States-Mexico border shows that, up through recent times, the movement of peoples between the two countries was of relatively little concern. Not until the period of 1970 to the 1990s did political pressures make securing the border a pressing national issue.

In turn, this pressure popularized the concept of the illegal alien.

Operation Gatekeeper itself was developed by the Clinton administration to counter efforts by Gov. Pete Wilson to restrict Mexican migration into California as well as the Proposition 187 movement to deny education, health, and social services to undocumented immigrants.

While the operation did defuse anti-immigrant feelings, it made the crossing much more dangerous and resulted in an increased loss of life. This work complements Peter Andreas's Border Games: Policing the U.S.-Mexico Divide (LJ 8/00) and Pablo Vila's Crossing Borders, Reinforcing Borders: Social Categories, Metaphors, and Narrative Identities on the U.S.-Mexican Frontier (Univ. of Texas, 2000).

Nevins does a good job of presenting the case, but the result is a narrowly focused work that is most appropriate for academic libraries.

Stephen L. Hupp, West Virginia Univ., Parkersburg
Copyright 2001 Reed Business Information, Inc.


And I suggest you watch this two part video.


(click to open player in new window)



(click to open player in new window)


[edit on 28-4-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by sremmos
 


I agree with you and hope that the officers out there do find PC or legitimate ARS to make their stops. If the violater is an ILLEGAL then the appropriate action must be taken. Like anything else we have to now sit back and see the outcome or the approach taken by the LEO's, the Courts, and the FEDS. I have a feeling ICE and the Border Patrol may be told NOT to work well with the local guys now that the suits on the hill are pissed off at the AZ law makers.....petty, but it happens.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by rcwj1975
Case in point. I mentioned on another thread that the other day I stopped a 2009 Ford Mustang doing 89 in a 55 and the driver happened to be "hispanic".


You stopped somebody while they were driving. When you drive you are required to carry identification at all times to prove you have a licence. This person was not simply walking down to the grocery store or with their kids to the park minding their own business. This law will inturn allow police officers to stop anbody at any time to constantly prove their birth right. Imagine that everywhere you go you have to be constantly harrassed by law enforcement to constantly defend your birth right in this country. This isn't about the simple routine stopping of a car. This crosses to everywhere you go and where you live where people will be required to constantly defend their rights in this country.

And I'd also assume your point here was that because you caught an hispanic who was in the country illegally from the routine car stop this justifies the law? Did you ever stop somebody walking down the street among a crowd of people? Did you ever randomly walk up to somebodies house and demand them to show their I.D because they looks out of place? Please oh please let me know.

[edit on 28-4-2010 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


As always I appreciate it and enjoy your input...considering your input is usually worth 10 minutes of reading...lol.

Yes I agree with you there may be or IS another reason for the Government to allow this, but in my experiance ICE simply is following orders and will only want to do their part when the camera's are rolling. They say we could NEVER deport all the ILLEGALS...well in my 9 years as a LEO I could of kicked about 1000 over the fence MYSELF!!!! So we all know thats BS...



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red
Well the lady did not spend that money, or issue the instruments to cause the harm...

the idea that she should be responsible for that is stupid, beyond stupid, however thats another issue.


I think you misread what i wrote. I am saying he used HER social security number and a fake name. Using HER credit to get all the stuff, so she is the victim and SHOULD be entitles to restitution before he gets booted....



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by rcwj1975
As many on ATS know I am a Law Enforcement Officer in Georgia and have been keeping an eye on the many threads posted about the new Arizona ILLEGAL Immigration Bill. Reading so many posts you see such a broad spectrum of beliefs, ideas, emotions, etc...but I haven't noticed many commenting on the following.

As a LEO I need Probable Cause or atleast Articutable Reasonable Suspicion to make a traffic stop or stop someone on the street. The Arizona Bill fear is that cops will profile and stop "hispanics" for just simply looking hispanic and forget about PC or ARS. Is that a valid fear, sure. There are people of ALL professions who simply suck at their jobs and tend to break rules to do things THEIR way, BUT what about those of us who do the job right and do come across ILLEGAL aliens?

Case in point. I mentioned on another thread that the other day I stopped a 2009 Ford Mustang doing 89 in a 55 and the driver happened to be "hispanic". Now the driver could not produce a valid drivers license, BUT handed me these awesome FAKE International Drivers Licenses they get for $50 here in Atlanta. Now after a few checks it was confirmed he was not licensed to drive the vehicle so he was arrested. Now, this driver is 24 years old working at Tyson Chicken driving a $30,000 car...ok fine, but then while searching his person I find a Social Security Card in his wallet and the card ended up being stolen and this scumbag was using and DESTROYING the credit of an elderly woman in the area, while he was thriving. Anyway, the car was impounded and I charged him, taking him to the jail. So I ask you folks...as a LEO KNOWING (100%) that this guy is not only a criminal...he IS an ILLEGAL alien from Mexico...should I and my State have the power to make sure he is deported back? Or should I do what we have been doing for years....call ICE and tell them what we have, only to be told they are not interested? Sounds like AZ was sick of hearing this answer for everyone they wanted to get out of their cities.

Someone, PLEASE give me a legitimate answer as to why local police and other agencies should NOT be allowed to deal with these guys/gals directly and get them out of here. What reasoning could you possibly come up with when the stop was legit, the arrest was legit, the lack of citizenship CONFIRMED, and he/she IS caught doing criminal deeds? You don't need to be a "fed" to check the status of citizenship....that is called an excuse by the Government to make the rest of the populace actually believe locals can't enforce this BS!

EDIT TO ADD: He had NO passport, NO visa, NO nothing....and yes he did admit he paid a coyote $200 to come across somewhere in TX....

[edit on 4/28/2010 by rcwj1975]
In this case why would he NOT be sent back?


It is not like you targeted him, he is clearly a criminal, and he has no business here.

Now, if a hispanic were doing speed limit, same scenerio, would I support pulling him over just to see papers? No.

The way you describe the situation it seems like the best thing to do is send this criminal back, why should we pay for his incarceration etc.?



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by rcwj1975

Originally posted by Janky Red
Well the lady did not spend that money, or issue the instruments to cause the harm...

the idea that she should be responsible for that is stupid, beyond stupid, however thats another issue.


I think you misread what i wrote. I am saying he used HER social security number and a fake name. Using HER credit to get all the stuff, so she is the victim and SHOULD be entitles to restitution before he gets booted....


I understand

It was a tangent

my point was if the IDIOT ain't gonna pay, the issuers of the credit should be next in line if she reported the lost card or did not order the card in the first place. Identity theft is a scam upon a scam - the only crime I know of you can liable for
without doing ANYTHING active or passive.

Thats BS IMO

[edit on 28-4-2010 by Janky Red]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
You stopped somebody while they were driving. When you drive you are required to carry identification at all times to prove you have a licence. This person was not simply walking down to the grocery store or with their kids to the park minding their own business. This law will inturn allow police officers to stop anbody at any time to constantly prove their birth right. Imagine that everywhere you go you have to be constantly harrassed by law enforcement to constantly defend your birth right in this country. This isn't about the simple routine stopping of a car. This crosses to everywhere you go and where you live where people will be required to constantly defend their rights in this country.


Assuming that is what will happen. Or is it AZ is using my kind of example and saying hey, we arrest MANY ILLEGAL aliens for crimes with no suitable outcome and want to do something about it. Are we jumping the gun? Lets allow the bill to start and allow the LEO's a chance to do things RIGHT.


And I'd also assume your point here was that because you caught an hispanic who was in the country illegally from the routine car stop this justifies the law? Did you ever stop somebody walking down the street among a crowd of people? Did you ever randomly walk up to somebodies house and demand them to show their I.D because they looks out of place? Please oh please let me know.


It justifies the law when you DO get an ILLEGAL committing a crime and can take your own measures to get them out of here. Yes I have stopped people walking down the street for their actions and doing things that raised my suspicions. Do I just stop people at random...of course not, but have Arizona officers done that so far???? As for walking up to someone house and asking them for ID, yes...I have, 1 while on the warrants unit (so that makes it easy) and once while a guy was trying to break the window to get in....it was his house (AFTER CHECKING HIS ID), but again no not just for the hell of it.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I'm with you 100% on this thread even though I have presented opposition arguments for what I think the AZ law is. That being said, your actions are above reproach in this matter. An offense was committed thus you made the traffic stop. Surely this isn't the same as "stop and frisk" or "papers!" tactics which I can't condone.

The issue of restitution for the victim is also a good one and the issue could well involve a trial. I guess it would be too easy to liquidate the auto and deport the guy without trial.
I defer to your much better judgement.

gj





new topics

top topics



 
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join