Well, AZ did something about the Immigration problem. It may not be perfect, but at least they're working on the problem.

It'll probably get over-turned before it's over, but, in my opinion, other states need to follow suit and MAYBE then DC will get the message that we HAVE A PROBLEM!!

In most other countries I've visited (and that's been quite a few) everyone (including citizens of that country) carried "papers" - passports usually, but something identifying their citizenship) - so I really don't see the harm in it here. I carry a DL and a SS card and other ID with me (have the papers filled out for a new passport - just can't remember to go get a picture taken, but if required I would - no problem). I just don't think it's a big deal.

If you got stopped for anything - an ID check could be mandatory - if you didn't have proper ID - take your rear in. And yeah, I know - racial profiling. But if that's what it takes to stop the flow of illegals... so be it. Citizens have proper ID - illegals don't. Citizens are told to have a nice day - Illegals are sent back to where they came from. The hell with "guest worker" status -- put some Americans to work - may not be what they "want to do" but they can FEED THEIR FAMILIES doing it!

Right now, I think AZ has some good ideas a several things. -- Aren't they the ones that have Sheriff Joe and his Tent City? I've even suggested to our Sheriff he start something like that - that guy has saved his county a bunch of money and has it working for him. His "guests" don't want to come back. The roads look good, he runs the local animal shelter (saving the country bunches of money) and I forget what-all.

Anyhow... that's my opinion.. I'm sure others will differ, but...

There is no where in the European Union where you have to carry paper's or passports. In fact, in the UK you don't even have to carry a driving licence. If you get stopped by the police or after an accident you get to choose a police station convenient to you and you get given a "show documents" slip which you have to take, along with your paperwork to the designated station.

England is over run with both legal and illegal immigrants. Our big problem is we end up with all the dross of Europe there who don't want to work and just want to claim social security. The sooner Britain gets out of the EU the better. I have no problem with immigration, I love being able to experience loads of different cultures. What I personally have a problem with is asswipes who want to come and live in a country and claim every penny they can without putting anything back in.

From my understanding, as it's been explained to me, Arizona is being seen as a big issue as it's on the borders with Mexico so hence it's seen as being anti hispanic. I wonder if it would be so big a deal if Montana for instance adopted this policy??

Remember, I don't KNOW as much about US politics as I'd like to! I'm trying to learn but it's a completely different system and it's confusing but I do welcome education on it!!

I don't know how I, personally could be "profiled"  but if I was walking down the street, or sitting in a cafe and an officer walked up to me asking to see I.D. I'd gladly give it to him and not for a second would I think I was giving up my freedom or my rights.

Those who have nothing to hide.  Hide nothing.

Quote:



“The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected.”
-G. K. Chesterton

That"s pretty much my take on the difference between the two. But it is starting to look up in November.

    And I would be pretty much okay if they mined the border. That would slow them up a bit, and no profiling.

Mike

If you read the law, profiling is not the issue.  Neither is anyone on the street asked for ID.  It is like the seat belt law used to be, secondary to another violation.  One has to be stopped for another issue before ID is asked for.  I have no problem with it.  All the way up here in IL we have the same problems, just maybe not quite as acute.  I remember a few years ago when someone at the Del Monte processing plant in Mendota IL decided to pull a prank and went into the cannery and yelled "Immigration".  In 5 minutes there were only two people on the floor, my brother and another employee.  Were all of them illegal? No, but it shows the problem.

Jerry

It's politics. Arizonans can look tough. The thing is that everybody profiles. The police would be hamstrung without it. I'm not sure that codifying it is necessary. It's the "show me your papers" end of the thing. It's crappy and I'm not looking forward to the mess this will create in courts all over the place and on cable news....bleaugh.

It's a great way to get votes in Arizona and no matter what happens the "acceptable" people win. It's perfect.

I'm not so sure that others...even here in western New York, are as upset about this as thought.  The the jury's out on it.....perhaps literally. I don't hear a lot of griping yet.

Charlie

My grandfather forbade the family to speak Swedish outside the house when they came here. I know about it Linda.

Charlie

If someone has committed a crime or is a suspect, the police have enough technology to identify them and we have a justice system to put them on trial to determine guilt or innocence.  Forcing everyone to carry an "official" ID card and giving the police the power to stop anyone to check that ID smacks of fascism. 




Further, the majority of those stopped will be non caucasion.  Illegal immigrants don't live lives of luxury-check and see what people on welfare get in your state, where they live.  Aside from creating a non-constitutional law, think of all the money that criminals will make producing false documents.  The current economic crisis that we seem to be coming out of was made by greedy, lying rich white Wall St. guys, not Pedro the gardner.

Quote:


Why is it non constitutional? And illegal immigration isn't good for anyone, legal or otherwise.

From the Federal document: Welcome to the United States, A guide for New Residents - Quote:

The Feds have required this for a while.

Quote:

TommyA - I don't believe I've seen any kind of introduction from you in the "Getting to know ya" section? Why not go there and tell us a bit about yourself - the nature of your CH, what meds you've tried, what works, what doesn't - that kind of thing. You seem very willing to comment on everything but CH. It'd be kind of nice to know that you're one of us.

Cuz if you're not, your opinion and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee, but you better have the dollar.

This was in the Stanford Daily yesterday and I have to say I was surprised since they tend to lean the other way at universities on stuff like this but I do like what she wrote.

Get it Right: “Undocumented” sounds nice–”Illegal” is accurate

Wall Street may enjoy a brief period of respite from the role of perfidious villain in the blame game propagated by the President in the coming weeks. The rules of this game are simple: assign culpability for the nation’s problems to some arch-nemesis. Previously, the position of Public Enemy No. 1 has been filled by President Bush (what can’t we blame on him), CIA interrogators (abusing helpless terrorists), health care insurance providers (greedy profit-seeking charlatans), Tea Partiers (raising Cain by quoting the Constitution…oh no!) and finally New York bankers (they single-handedly brought down the highly regulated “free” market…oxymoron?). However, the bankers may be able to continue their nefarious activities while their regulators watch porn at the taxpayers’ expense, at least for a short while, as a new blackguard threatens to wreak havoc on the greatness of our nation.
Arizona governor Jan Brewer had the audacity last Friday to sign into law a bill that reinforces federal illegal immigration laws. Having heard hysterical cries of “racism” and “apartheid” on the news waves, I decided to investigate the new law in an attempt to decipher how, in Obamaspeak, it threatens to “undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans.”
The law prohibits Arizona officials from limiting “the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.” It requires officials to determine immigration status if there is suspicion of illegality. It makes illegal immigration a state crime (note: it is already a federal crime). It prevents illegal immigrants from working in Arizona. For the record, under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, any citizen of any country 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” has committed a federal crime.
Given the existing federal statute, I wonder how exactly the “misguided” Arizona governor (along with the 70 percent of the “misguided” population that supported the bill) is violating American “notions of fairness?” Outraged predictions of racial profiling fly in from the left as commentators like Reverend Al Sharpton boldly declare, “we will bring freedom walkers to Arizona…we cannot sit by and allow people to be arbitrarily and unilaterally picked off as suspects because of the color of their skin.”
The race card has been played too many times. As Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce said, “illegal is not a race; it’s a crime.” Arizona shares a border with Mexico. Thus, it is not surprising that the majority of illegal border crossers are Mexican. Acknowledging this fact, and suggesting that the laws of our nation actually be enforced, is not a coordinated attack on people of Mexican heritage. It is an attempt to protect the rights of American citizens and legal immigrants.
According to ImmigrationCounters.com, the money wired to Mexico since January of 2006 amounts to more than $28.9 billion. There are approximately 22.7 million illegal aliens in the country, who have incurred social service costs of $397 billion since 1996. How is that demonstrating “fairness” to the American taxpayers providing these social services?
Small wonder that Mexico is displeased with the new law. The government of Mexico, in a two-page statement, laments that “legislators that approved this bill and the Governor of Arizona did not take into account the valuable contributions of [illegal] immigrants to the economy, society and culture of Arizona and the United States.”
Nobody is discounting the contributions of immigrants to the nation. How is it unjust to require that those who benefit from life in America do so legally? How is it racist to suggest that protecting the rights of American citizens trumps protecting non-citizens? It is ridiculous to claim that anti-illegal immigration laws are unconstitutional when, by definition, illegal aliens are not protected by the constitution.

I just don't see anything that tells me he's a clusterhead or a supporter.