The Arizona Bill on ILLEGALS, Answer Me This?

page: 18
79
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by phatkhat
 



Ok...>PC<


I have no idea what that means. Mind clarifying?




posted on May, 1 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by pajoly
 


I believe, since Obama decided to sit on his hands on the issue and instead asked the justice department to look into if it's constitutional, if it wasn't we know it already. If not, there is a possiblity he's waiting until the elections are a little closer, then act to get rid of it.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by phatkhat
 



Ok...>PC<


I have no idea what that means. Mind clarifying?



probable cause?



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
reply to post by pajoly
 


I believe, since Obama decided to sit on his hands on the issue and instead asked the justice department to look into if it's constitutional, if it wasn't we know it already. If not, there is a possiblity he's waiting until the elections are a little closer, then act to get rid of it.



I'd say it is racial profiling and illegal.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 





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.


Sounds like the guy had a lot more going against him than just being an illegal immigrant. Why would his immigration status have anything to do with charging him with speeding and driving without a valid license?

And what does his immigration status have to do with checking the registration status of the vehicle. Don't you do that for every vehicle you stop (and many that you don't)?

What exactly about including immigration status as a charge would have helped you getting this guy off the streets. Once you arrested him for the stolen vehicle, THEN other stuff comes into play doesn't it? You can get a warrant to search his residence for other stolen property, you can check his immigration status, all that stuff as a matter of course. Isn't that right?

What additional authority would be needed to get this guy off the street, and under arrest where all his other stuff comes into play?

By the way, not all 'international driver's licenses' are bogus, but they are basically pointless. They are issued by the Automobile Associations, and they are defined in international treaties. Most US LEO's don't know what they are and you need your original license with them anyway. I have found that my Australian license, by itself, is perfectly acceptable in the USA and an IDL just confuses the situation needlessly. Likewise, American licenses are recognized in Australia. Save your $5 or what ever the AAA charges these days.

The one's being sold for $50 to illegal immigrants are, IMO, simply another way for people to rip off the vulnerable illegals. They are selling worthless pieces of paper and the buyer thinks he's covered. To whom is the buyer going to complain to?



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 



What exactly about including immigration status as a charge would have helped you getting this guy off the streets. Once you arrested him for the stolen vehicle, THEN other stuff comes into play doesn't it? You can get a warrant to search his residence for other stolen property, you can check his immigration status, all that stuff as a matter of course. Isn't that right?


No, he cannot check his immigration status. He cannot initiate the next steps, which would lead to deportation of an illegal. That was considered discriminatory before this law.

The driver could go in front of a judge in the morning, pay a fine in many cases, and walk right out the door, free as a bird.

This law permits LEO to request proof of citizenship as part of a PC or ARS investigation into a separate violation of a law.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by NMRaptor
 


Touching story, honestly, as I also served in the Army, went to Iraq and all the hallaballoo. I do feel bad for this guy, and think he should get some sort of compensation for the troubles he had.

BUT THIS IS ONE CASE!

You obviously don't understand the full impact of illegal immigration, and it has nothing to do with being scared of illegals. It has to do with a ballance of power shift in voting. If someone grants amnesty to EVERY illegal immigrant in the nation, who do you think they are going to vote for?

If this president get's their votes without thought, what do you think is going to happen when he/she suggests that they amend the constitution some more? That's right, MORE of your freedoms are gone!

There is more at stake than just the financial burden, or people playing the race-card, where there is no legitament reason to.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Seitler
 





It has to do with a ballance of power shift in voting. If someone grants amnesty to EVERY illegal immigrant in the nation, who do you think they are going to vote for?


If they are not citizens, they can't vote.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 





No, he cannot check his immigration status. He cannot initiate the next steps, which would lead to deportation of an illegal. That was considered discriminatory before this law.

The driver could go in front of a judge in the morning, pay a fine in many cases, and walk right out the door, free as a bird.

This law permits LEO to request proof of citizenship as part of a PC or ARS investigation into a separate violation of a law.


Pay a fine and walk out the door for stealing a car? Don't be silly. He provided fake ID. That will be investigated. During the arrest and the arraignment and court proceedings, at some point he will be checked for his status, priors, aliases, fingerprints, etc, etc, etc. They must find out who he is in order to check for priors and wants in other states, etc. Immigration status will come to light.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seitler
reply to post by NMRaptor
 


Touching story, honestly, as I also served in the Army, went to Iraq and all the hallaballoo. I do feel bad for this guy, and think he should get some sort of compensation for the troubles he had.

BUT THIS IS ONE CASE!

You obviously don't understand the full impact of illegal immigration, and it has nothing to do with being scared of illegals. It has to do with a ballance of power shift in voting. If someone grants amnesty to EVERY illegal immigrant in the nation, who do you think they are going to vote for?

If this president get's their votes without thought, what do you think is going to happen when he/she suggests that they amend the constitution some more? That's right, MORE of your freedoms are gone!

There is more at stake than just the financial burden, or people playing the race-card, where there is no legitament reason to.



Annnddd who exactly are they going to vote for? And more of what freedoms gone?

[edit on 2-5-2010 by phatkhat]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 



Pay a fine and walk out the door for stealing a car? Don't be silly.


Used that just to make a point. He could be bailed, though.


He provided fake ID. That will be investigated. During the arrest and the arraignment and court proceedings, at some point he will be checked for his status, priors, aliases, fingerprints, etc, etc, etc. They must find out who he is in order to check for priors and wants in other states, etc. Immigration status will come to light.


Immigration status will not come to light. Current laws prohibit it. That's the problem.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by phatkhat
 




Annnddd who exactly are they going to vote for?


The radical candidate who will promise them a fast, free ride to citizenship, free education, free health care, etc., etc., etc.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Jesus H Christ on a stick. The problem is right in what they are called. ILLEGAL immigrants. They are not LEGAL immigrants or there wouldn't be a problem. ILLEGAL means there is a law that forbids them from being here... That might be why they are called ILLEGAL! IF there is a law in place, shouldn't our LEO's be able to enforce it?! Its really very simple logic. Pretty straight forward once you think with your head and not your bleeding heart...



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by phatkhat
 




Annnddd who exactly are they going to vote for?


The radical candidate who will promise them a fast, free ride to citizenship, free education, free health care, etc., etc., etc.



Isn't that what the government supposed to do in the first place? Now answer the 2nd question: what freedoms we stand to lose?



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


If they are given amnesty, then they are citizens.

Amnesty is another word for Pardon. Which is what governments do for people when they don't want them to be known for having commited a crime. They revoke their sentence.

And in this case, If you pardon an illegal immigrant, if you take away the "crime", then they are legal. Legal citizens of the U.S. can vote.

Just thought I'd try to elighten you a bit.



Peace



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 


As another former LEO (both local and federal), to assume that AZ law enforcement will misuse this is wrong......This might actually force ICE to respond....

The law requires that PC must exist for a crime, i.e. a traffic stop will occur if normal PC is there, a DL and insurance request is done....If said person produces documents that appear to be fake, it should be business as usual, verify and arrest based on ALL law, local and federal.

Collier County here in Florida has been doing this for months.....no misuse by the LEO's....



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Your article is astounding. I am personally not racist, but I have had a problem with Hispanics flooding the, what use to be good cites, causing white family's to fleed from the area. Here in Grand Rapids, MI Hispanics have been a big problem. They are the majority of the drug lords, thieves, illegal immigrants, and a disgrace to our once peaceful city. The are the ones who have robbed me for my money, Beat up, raped, and harassed individuals all around. Now I am not racist, there are some good Mexicans out there, like the ones who go to college, get a real job, and actually try to get by like ordinary people. But I strongly agree with the new law and believe it should be allowed all over the States.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


If they are given amnesty, that means they become legal and are then allowed to vote!


----Edit----
Whoops, sorry Taupin Desciple, I didn't see that you had stated that fact already. Thank you!

[edit on 2-5-2010 by Seitler]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by phatkhat
 




Isn't that what the government supposed to do in the first place?


Not unless you live in a socialistic or communistic type of country.


Now answer the 2nd question: what freedoms we stand to lose?


Well, since Obama has already fired the CEO of GM, defrauded the company of 60% of it's stock, set the salaries of certain bank officers, I would say that these people have been deprived of the pursuit of happiness.

Since Obama is frequently on TV criticizing free speech whenever it doesn't agree with him, I would say the 1st Amendment has been violated.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 10:39 PM
link   
'Not unless you live in a socialistic or communistic type of country.'


Lol. those countries is where you serve the government and not vice versa.
I'm refering to a free society as defined as where the government serves YOU.


'Well, since Obama has already fired the CEO of GM, defrauded the company of 60% of it's stock, set the salaries of certain bank officers, I would say that these people have been deprived of the pursuit of happiness.'

But what about the rest of us? Banks are almost as bad as big oil. He really needs to go after BOTH those guys.

'Since Obama is frequently on TV criticizing free speech whenever it doesn't agree with him, I would say the 1st Amendment has been violated.'

Don't you mean i'm the decider Bush? Good thing he's gone




[edit on 2-5-2010 by phatkhat]





new topics




 
79
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join