Page 14 of 17 FirstFirst ... 491011121314151617 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 326
  1. #261  
    Read your Bibles this is just the beginning, can you say CHIP PLEASE!!!
  2. #262  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Great article! Btw, the Constitution doesn't contain the words "due process" or "criminals".

    Uh, yes it does...check out the 5th and14th amendments...
  3. #263  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    So you're not for corporate racial profiling where someone tips off ICE about illegal immigrant activity and then ICE performs an audit?
    If ICE gets an anonymous tip and they check it out, but there are no illegals, does that not mean that the tipster is the one doing the profiling? Maybe a disgruntled applicant who did not get the job, but a person of another race did?
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  4. #264  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    If ICE gets an anonymous tip and they check it out, but there are no illegals, does that not mean that the tipster is the one doing the profiling? Maybe a disgruntled applicant who did not get the job, but a person of another race did?
    Signing an affidavit that makes it clear you will go to court if you have intentionally provided false information should put a stop to such silliness.
  5. #265  
    Dumb
  6. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #266  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    If ICE gets an anonymous tip and they check it out, but there are no illegals, does that not mean that the tipster is the one doing the profiling? Maybe a disgruntled applicant who did not get the job, but a person of another race did?
    Okay, so you must have been against the Obama administrations push to have ICE do exactly that. I suppose at least that would be consistent.
  7. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #267  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Well, in fairness, I do abhor hyperbole regarding health care, especially when it's grossly incorrect or outright lying. So I will retract my statement. I don't think the attitude that Mexicans are the same as dogs is "representative" of T-baggers. Just some of them, like Pat Bertroche (R). It's worthwhile to notice, though, that nobody in the republican party has expressed outrage about his "chip" comments.
    Maybe you would have heard more of an outcry if this had come from someone significant, rather than just some guy running for his first term in Iowa's 3rd congressional district against six other Republican candidates. This guy is a physician, by the way, who has raised a whopping $1,140 towards his campaign. If he truly represented Iowan Republican views one would think he'd have that fat-cat money flowing in.
  8. #268  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    Okay, so you must have been against the Obama administrations push to have ICE do exactly that. I suppose at least that would be consistent.
    Is that what I said? No, nice attempt to spin what I said...
    I am for audits, I am for "anonomous tipsters" and I am for the companies that hire illegals to be fined, heavily. Jail for repeat offenders.

    The problem with going after just the illegals is that the employer will just hire the others that keep coming over. You are not solving anything, just spending tax dollars, and I thought you were against that?

    Go after the demand, not the supply!
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  9. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #269  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    Is that what I said? No, nice attempt to spin what I said...
    I am for audits, I am for "anonomous tipsters" and I am for the companies that hire illegals to be fined, heavily. Jail for repeat offenders.

    The problem with going after just the illegals is that the employer will just hire the others that keep coming over. You are not solving anything, just spending tax dollars, and I thought you were against that?

    Go after the demand, not the supply!
    So are you only against racial profiling if ICE comes up empty handed then? I'm confused why such racial profiling is okay if it results in the fining and/or jailing of some corporate fat-cats but not okay on an individual level.
  10. #270  
    Quote Originally Posted by scott500 View Post
    If you are not here legally...out you go! It's sad that AZ even had to pass such a law.

    Look... If you want to live in the United States, great. Come here through the proper channels and make a new life for yourself...we're glad to have you.

    However, come here illegally and your $hit out of luck. That's not the way it works.

    it's funny how people are up in arms about the unjustness of a law when you've broken it and now fear having to be held responsible for your actions.

    Sorry...you can't rob a bank then whine about how unfair the punnishment is when your about to be caught. You rolled the dice coming here when you shouldn't have. The only person to blame is yourself.
    sigh.... your cultural protectionism is showing
  11. #271  
    Quote Originally Posted by jakranz33 View Post
    sigh.... your cultural protectionism is showing
    There is a totally lawful & legal process that the Constitution has granted the U.S. Congress to deal with in terms of naturalization.

    People who want to come to America need to follow the immigration rules, like everybody else. The people of America should not need to bend to the will of the "illegal aliens of America"; we should not need to learn Spanish, we should not need to sacrifice decent paying jobs for no paying jobs, we should not need to deal with people getting in accidents and fleeing because they couldn't even communicate as well as an American 4-yr old, we should not have to deal with people coming across our borders just to give birth to anchor babies... we just shouldn't have to deal with any of that junk.

    Why not just go thru the naturalization process like all the other "good Citizens"?
  12. #272  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    So are you only against racial profiling if ICE comes up empty handed then?
    I did not say that. I said if they get a false tip from, say some overzealous person who thinks that a certain company has too many Asians for his liking, for example, that would be profiling. It would not be profiling on ICE's part as they are just responding to a complaint.

    I'm confused why such racial profiling is okay if it results in the fining and/or jailing of some corporate fat-cats but not okay on an individual level.
    I am confused as to how you think fining individuals will deter illegal immigration when they are being given jobs by these "fat-cats". Someone gets deported, that's awesome, they'll just hire another one to replace him and get off with out reprimand. Last I checked, it is a federal crime to hire illegals...

    Why do you feel that companies are above the law?
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  13. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #273  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    I did not say that. I said if they get a false tip from, say some overzealous person who thinks that a certain company has too many Asians for his liking, for example, that would be profiling. It would not be profiling on ICE's part as they are just responding to a complaint.
    I don't think that's what you said but, fine.

    I am confused as to how you think fining individuals will deter illegal immigration when they are being given jobs by these "fat-cats". Someone gets deported, that's awesome, they'll just hire another one to replace him and get off with out reprimand. Last I checked, it is a federal crime to hire illegals...

    Why do you feel that companies are above the law?
    I've never, ever said that businesses who hire illegal aliens shouldn't face fines or other penalties. I'm just asking why its racial profiling to ask an individual for citizenship but not it's not racial profiling to go to a business, based on tips and other investigation, and ask for employees' I-9 forms. Of course, it depends on what the "tip" involved but it certainly seems susceptible to racial profiling. Don't you think? If I go to a construction site and see a bunch of people working there that "looK' like they may not be legal and call ICE, what am I doing?
  14. #274  
    Quote Originally Posted by chile_man View Post
    I Dont Support It At All.. Its Going To Start something big that we are later going to regret Its Funny Cause arizona use to be mexico once and they sold it to the united states.... (just putting this down for does that dont know there history)I Just hope it doesnt get out of hand
    I thing it's funny x2, 'cause with that kond of law making, no wonder Mexico wanted to get rid of it.
    However, I feel like having that "deja vu" feeling learning about those laws.. where was that ? Wasn't it in Germany in the late 1930's / early 1940's, or was it a few decades ago in South Africa ? Can't quite recall... ?

    Anyway: best of luck !
    WebOS still makes sense.
  15. #275  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy
    I'm just asking why its racial profiling to ask an individual for citizenship but not it's not racial profiling to go to a business, based on tips and other investigation, and ask for employees' I-9 forms.
    The problem isn't even just racial profiling, as much as it is... the cop has no authority to go around demanding papers.

    Where I'm from, the cop is lucky to get my first name. He's not getting anything past that, because I will not consent to contract with him. He is a commercial agent, and I don't want to associate with him in anyway. I'll tell him my given name, and then I'll move on.

    Now, if other people around me don't understand that they don't NEED "papers, and they don't realize that they're NOT slaves who must obey the State's *every* command... eventually, it's gonna tick me off when I go to jail because some cop was unaware that I don't need to prove myself to anybody, because nobody ever brought up the case that I'm a FREE MAN WITH RIGHTS, ENDOWED BY OUR CREATOR.

    The State didn't create the property and life that we all know. God did that. He also created men with the intellect to create the Constitution, which created the Democratic Republic that we all know today. In no way can the Constitutional Republic demand anything from the people other than what the will of the people so choose. WE CREATED THE STATE!!! HECK... depending on your definition of "THE STATE" [and there are many], We the People are the ultimate form of "the State".

    It's really very simple.

    If you choose to contract with a business, one that asks for I-9 forms... that's your own choice in who you contract with!! They ask for I-9 forms, you can walk away if you so choose.

    But if a cop starts DEMANDING PAPERS FROM EVERYBODY... you'll soon start to wish you'd rethought the intention of your authoritarian leaders, after the cop is threating to taser you once you tell him that you choose not to contract with thugs.
  16. wjclint's Avatar
    Posts
    40 Posts
    Global Posts
    41 Global Posts
    #276  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm View Post
    There is a totally lawful & legal process that the Constitution has granted the U.S. Congress to deal with in terms of naturalization.

    People who want to come to America need to follow the immigration rules, like everybody else. The people of America should not need to bend to the will of the "illegal aliens of America"; we should not need to learn Spanish, we should not need to sacrifice decent paying jobs for no paying jobs, we should not need to deal with people getting in accidents and fleeing because they couldn't even communicate as well as an American 4-yr old, we should not have to deal with people coming across our borders just to give birth to anchor babies... we just shouldn't have to deal with any of that junk.

    Why not just go thru the naturalization process like all the other "good Citizens"?
    Sorry but this just comes across as whining. We shouldn't have to deal with murderers but we do, we shouldn't have to deal with people texting and driving but we do, we shouldn't have to deal with fraudulent financial transactions but we do. "We just shouldn't have to deal with any of that junk."

    The question isn't should we have to deal with it or not; the question is how are we going to deal with it. This isn't a new question, but one that has been asked, and answered over and over and over again. The answer is developing a system where we attempt to balance personal freedom and liberty with the need to deal "with that junk."

    For example, lots of criminals are not prosecuted or are found not guilty after a trial. In other words lots of guilty "criminals" are on the street. One big reason for this is that in our society, thank goodness, we have struck a balance where the standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt." If you want more guilty people in jail we could shift that balance toward enforcement and away from liberty by requiring proof of guilt by a "preponderance of the evidence." Way less guilty people would be walking free. However, the cost would be a lot more innocent people would be in jail.

    The same applies to criminal investigations. We have developed, over hundreds of years of statutory law and case law, a balance of the need to investigate "that junk" with the need to keep a tight rein on law enforcement to protect our life, liberty and property. Part of that balance involves using and enforcing standards such as probable cause and reasonable suspicion. It also involves the recognition that racial profiling is to great a risk to our society to use even if it might in some instances result in less of "that junk" happening without prosecution and punishment.

    The Arizona law tries to shift this balance away from liberty and toward enforcement for one particular type of crime. I personally see nothing that is so special about illegal immigration that would support such a shift. In addition the shift in this case is done in a way that necessitates the use of racial profiling for the statute to have any meaning. The only instances I can think of where the "papers please" portion of this law has any meaning is at border crossings and investigations based on reliable third party information (snitches and informants). In every other instance in the real world application of this law there will be racial profiling. This is simply unacceptable in a country that is supposed to tightly guard against infringements against personal liberty.

    I also find the fact that the conservative sections of our society seem to be so in support of this law to be sickening hypocrisy. "We are the party of true Americans that support protecting American liberty . . . . unless your skin is too brown then you need to show your papers to the government whenever it's demanded."
    Phone History: VisorPhone --> Treo180 --> Treo650--> Treo700p--> PalmCentro --> HTCTouchDiamond (2weeks) --> PalmCentro --> Palm Pre
  17. #277  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    that last line is what leads to racism. (im not saying your racist, or will be) how is being born somewhere something to be proud, or ashamed of? You didn't do anything, two people had sex, and you where born where your mom was.

    and can we stop referring to illegal immigrants as criminals? While technically they are braking the law, it's very different then what we usually mean when we say a criminal. It's people who's economical life sucks so much, they are willing to risk going to jail, in an attempt to work a crazy amount of hours at low pay to feed their families. I'm not saying let them do whatever they want, I'm just saying be respectful. These are not bad people, these are people looking for a better life through extream hard work. Considering usa was made from not ony using, but stealingland that didn't belong to us, ee can have some sympathy. O yea,we killed 25 million people in the process..


    they are not bad peole, they are people whos interest and yours conflict.


    (typed from pre, so there might be some errors.)
    I'm with you..
  18. #278  
    Hopefully, you guys will realize that if your leaders really wanted to STOP Mexican immigration, they would go to the source... which is the employers.

    No matter which way you look at it, it would solve every problem that exists with immigration.

    - Fine the employers HEAVILY
    - Destroy the immigrants' desire to cross over to our border;
    - Keep the freemen free.

    What is so difficult about this?
  19. #279  
    Quote Originally Posted by wjclint View Post
    Sorry but this just comes across as whining. We shouldn't have to deal with murderers but we do, we shouldn't have to deal with people texting and driving but we do, we shouldn't have to deal with fraudulent financial transactions but we do. "We just shouldn't have to deal with any of that junk."
    Well... ya see... it's all about rights. That's what our ENTIRE system is based on.

    The U.S. of A. belongs to the States, which are collections of men and women that collectively OWN this property. Mexicans don't have the right to our property, so what business do they have here??

    They are, effectively, infringing on our rights.

    We don't "deal with murderers", because we throw them in jail for infringing on someone else's rights.

    We don't "deal with people texting while driving" because they HAVEN'T infringed on someone else's rights.

    And we don't "deal with fraudulent financial transactions" either if we can find out who was infringing on whose rights... and then we toss that Mother in the pen.

    We NEED TO "deal with illegal aliens", because they are causing us unnecessary problems that our congressmen are not fixing.

    ILLEGAL ALIENS, who infringe on our rights in more ways than one... do NOT deserve to stay here. They need to be deported and naturalized, unless, of course, they can CLAIM THEIR RIGHTS TO OUR LAND, which is more than possible, provided that they can speak our language, and can defend themselves in court with constitutions, statutes, definitions, and case law.

    If the illegal aliens do not know their rights, then they cannot claim their rights, then they have none.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjclint View Post
    The question isn't should we have to deal with it or not; the question is how are we going to deal with it. This isn't a new question, but one that has been asked, and answered over and over and over again. The answer is developing a system where we attempt to balance personal freedom and liberty with the need to deal "with that junk."
    I already answered the question... go to the source -- the employers. No need to get "THE STATE" asking every one of the millions of AZ residents (mostly just the brown ones, tho) to see some papers, when those folks *will* go to an employer, where they can be verified in a legitimate way. Get the verification process legitimized, and you'll have a solution that everyone can appreciate.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjclint View Post
    For example, lots of criminals are not prosecuted or are found not guilty after a trial. In other words lots of guilty "criminals" are on the street. One big reason for this is that in our society, thank goodness, we have struck a balance where the standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt." If you want more guilty people in jail we could shift that balance toward enforcement and away from liberty by requiring proof of guilt by a "preponderance of the evidence." Way less guilty people would be walking free. However, the cost would be a lot more innocent people would be in jail.
    Everybody who infringes on the rights of another deserves to be in jail. If you harm somebody, if you harm somebody's property, or you commit fraud in your contracts.... you go to jail.

    Any complaints with Common Law as has been defined by the Courts?

    Quote Originally Posted by wjclint View Post
    The same applies to criminal investigations. We have developed, over hundreds of years of statutory law and case law, a balance of the need to investigate "that junk" with the need to keep a tight rein on law enforcement to protect our life, liberty and property. Part of that balance involves using and enforcing standards such as probable cause and reasonable suspicion. It also involves the recognition that racial profiling is to great a risk to our society to use even if it might in some instances result in less of "that junk" happening without prosecution and punishment.
    Umm... I think I'm with you, for the most part. You're saying that probable cause is ok, but not if the intent of probable cause turns into racial profiling, and that this bill should NOT be passed, right?? And that we should get the employers to do this fact checking with the proper tools, right?? ... because in that situation, nobody's rights will ever be infringed, right??

    Quote Originally Posted by wjclint View Post
    The Arizona law tries to shift this balance away from liberty and toward enforcement for one particular type of crime. I personally see nothing that is so special about illegal immigration that would support such a shift. In addition the shift in this case is done in a way that necessitates the use of racial profiling for the statute to have any meaning. The only instances I can think of where the "papers please" portion of this law has any meaning is at border crossings and investigations based on reliable third party information (snitches and informants). In every other instance in the real world application of this law there will be racial profiling. This is simply unacceptable in a country that is supposed to tightly guard against infringements against personal liberty.
    Right on. Except... the "something that is so special about illegal immigration" is that THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE ON OUR LAND, UNLESS THEY GO THRU THE NECESSARY STEPS, AS WE HAVE REQUESTED OF CONGRESS... AND CONGRESS SHOULD BE ENFORCING THRU THE EMPLOYERS, NOT INDIVIDUAL MEN AND WOMEN.

    Quote Originally Posted by wjclint View Post
    I also find the fact that the conservative sections of our society seem to be so in support of this law to be sickening hypocrisy. "We are the party of true Americans that support protecting American liberty . . . . unless your skin is too brown then you need to show your papers to the government whenever it's demanded."
    Protecting Americans is good. Removing liberties is bad. Go to the source -- the employers.

    If any Mexican came here to sit on his ayse, claiming this land as his own, every single step of the way... I'll be right next to him on that same stoop drinking a 40. God Bless Property Rights! God Bless America! God Bless ALL PEOPLE!! God Bless God Himself!

    But screw this unnecessary piece of legislation, and any congressman who thought this was a better solution than going straight to the employers.

    WHY DO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS COME TO AMERICA, AGAIN????!!????
  20. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #280  
    Easy guys. Yelling isn't going to help.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.

Posting Permissions