Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 219
  1. #121  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Why do you have a problem with that? Would you be alarmed if an officer questioned an individual that he suspected was trying to break in to your home?

    This is our home. They are breaking in.
    If the reason for their suspicion was that they were in the neighborhood and were a minority, then I'd have a large problem with it. This law doesn't prevent the suspicion to be exactly that.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #122  
    Quote Originally Posted by xForsaken View Post
    thats a bit of a reach,, but to be fair not that much,,, decent comparison
    the problem with that little law is its to subjective, too open to interpertation. I really wanna see some of the people on this board, or say the govenor of that fine state pulled over, and arrested because he has no proof of birth.lolo
    how about this,, your white, your in a black neighborhood, and a cop stops you,, based on your not in the right place or,, you dont look like a local.. lolol
    Happens all the time. Where's the outcry?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. #123  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Happens all the time. Where's the outcry?
    Do you have any facts to support that white folks are profiled in black neighborhoods? Or just "happens all the time" makes it a fact?
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  4. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #124  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Do you have any facts to support that white folks are profiled in black neighborhoods? Or just "happens all the time" makes it a fact?
    Should I shorten it to "it happens"? That better?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  5. #125  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Breaking into your home is a crime. Standing outside a 7/11 or walking down the street isn't.
    Let's face it. Being poor and appearing so is the only crime committed by those being targeted by this AZ law. The Republican party of AZ thinks its residents (and the nation) are not mentally skilled enough to recognize this law as the Emperor's new clothes for racism. They're wrong.
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #126  
    Now that I've read the law and have at least a laymans grasp of it, I don't see what the big hubbub is.... It says "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency…where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person…"

    "Lawful contact" does not mean "casual observance" (like davidra's example of simply walking down the street). It means that the officer is engaged with the individual already in some lawful engagement, like pulling them over for a traffic violation. Additionally, there has to be probably cause to suspect, after the "lawful contact" has occured. And then, they have to refer the matter to someone authorized to legally access that person's immigration status (e.g., the feds).

    The criticism of this bill is way over the top, and unfounded. Just more fear mongering to energize the base in an upcoming election cycle. Nothing more.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. #127  
    What is the issue for asking for ID. You are asked for it all the time anyhow. If an officer asks you for ID you can be arrested for not having one. Arrested as a vagrant. My own son has been arrested and held for not having ID. He makes sure he carrries is now.

    You show ID to board a plane, board a ship, cash a check, return an item to a store. Buy a house, Buy a car, you show ID. It is really not a big deal if you have nothing to hide and certainly not racist. Buy a ticket for will call, you show ID. Many other times, those are just ones off the top of my head.

    Using a credit card you should be asked of ID. I personally do not sign my credit card. I write "ASK FOR ID ONLY" in that signature box.

    I get extra checking at Airports because my name begins with an O'. Does not bother me in the least. If it protects us, I am happy to do it.
  8. #128  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Now that I've read the law and have at least a laymans grasp of it, I don't see what the big hubbub is.... It says "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency…where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person…"

    "Lawful contact" does not mean "casual observance" (like davidra's example of simply walking down the street). It means that the officer is engaged with the individual already in some lawful engagement, like pulling them over for a traffic violation. Additionally, there has to be probably cause to suspect, after the "lawful contact" has occured. And then, they have to refer the matter to someone authorized to legally access that person's immigration status (e.g., the feds).

    The criticism of this bill is way over the top, and unfounded. Just more fear mongering to energize the base in an upcoming election cycle. Nothing more.
    Oh, really? Why don't you find the definition of "lawful contact" in any law book? It's not there because it doesn't exist. It means whatever the police or their supervisors determines it means. One defense lawyer noted:

    This hinges on the definition of "reasonable suspicion", as there isn't a legal definition for "lawful contact". That is what is referred to as a "Terry Stop", named for a Supreme Court case called Terry v. Ohio, which essentially says that if a police officer has reasonable suspicion that "crime is afoot" he can briefly detain an individual to ask questions and, if the officer has a reasonable belief that the individual may be armed and dangerous, he may conduct a "pat down search" for weapons. This is opposed to a "casual encounter" which says that a police office can approach anyone just for the heck of it to ask a question, but without reasonable suspicion the person can't be detained, so if it is a casual encounter the person is free to tell the cop to kiss off and go on his way. Both of those would be "lawful contact". The issue isn't really about stopping someone with reasonable suspicion that there may be a crime (that's already the law everywhere), it is making undocumented immigration status itself a crime, such that a person can be stopped on suspicion that they may not be documented. Of course you can ask many many African Americans that this kind of thing already de facto exists in many places in this country (that is pulling someone over because of the color of his or her skin), but the cop in those places simply takes the added step of making up some "other violation" to justify the stop.
  9. #129  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Just more fear mongering to energize the base in an upcoming election cycle. Nothing more.
    Exactly. Jan Brewer should be ashamed of herself.

    Since this law sets new precedent, where are the definitions of probable cause where immigration status is concerned, after a suspect is already being questioned for an originating purpose?
  10. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Oh, really? Why don't you find the definition of "lawful contact" in any law book? It's not there because it doesn't exist. It means whatever the police or their supervisors determines it means. One defense lawyer noted:
    Great, you found a purported lawyer who wrote an opinion piece and who doesn't seem to understand simple concepts like "lawful contact". I didn't claim it was a "legal term".

    "Punch in the nose" isn't a legal term either, but I know what the hell it means.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  11. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #131  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    It's a federal crime, NOT a state crime. So state police have no jurisdiction over it.
    They do now.... in Arizona, in fact.

    Actually, they have to turn over to the feds. Additionally, I think you'll find that it is totally in line with Fed law.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  12. #132  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Great, you found a purported lawyer who wrote an opinion piece and who doesn't seem to understand simple concepts like "lawful contact". I didn't claim it was a "legal term".

    "Punch in the nose" isn't a legal term either, but I know what the hell it means.
    Actually, he stated what he felt "lawful contact" was in the post. Did you actually read it?

    But what's funny is that you, as a non-lawyer, are absolutely confident that this law requires people to have committed a crime and be "pulled over" or something similar before they can be asked for their papers? (and do you really think a driver's license will be enough? They're not that hard to fake...look for something else when this is implemented).

    I think you're wrong. I hope you're right, but as is pointed out, if that's the case, there was no need for this law at all, and it's just pandering to the right wing racists. And please don't confuse opposing this law with supporting illegals. That is just NOT the point.
  13. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #133  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Actually, he stated what he felt "lawful contact" was in the post. Did you actually read it?
    Yeah. Statements like "...it is making undocumented immigration status itself a crime..." clued me in that the guy doesn't know what he's talking about. My non-lawyer eyes picked that right up.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  14. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    It's the "reasonable suspicion" that is so vague. It changes from officer to officer, based on their own prejudices.

    As for "lawful contact," police have historically used "Disturbance of the peace" or "resisting arrest" to take in anyone they want. Check out the civil rights history and how cops would stop, check, and arrest blacks for being...well, black. What was the crime? "Disturbing the peace."

    Even today, African Americans use the phrase, "Driving while black." African Americans in nice cars are often pulled over by police because of the car they own. The assumption is an African American could never afford such a car--it must be stolen. It's happened to a number of my African American friends.

    Police willl come up with whatever reason as an excuse to put you under suspicion.

    Why do I suspect that this law won't be used to arrest all the illegal Irish people here....
    All of these "could happens" haven't happened, and if they do, I'm sure the cops will be challenged.... or do we have a shortage of aclu lawyers in Arizona?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  15. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #135  
    Quote Originally Posted by spopyu View Post
    sounds logical to me. since when do i have to prove my citizenship on a daily basis? I guess you're not worried about it cus you're white, huh?
    Who said anything about proving citizenship on a daily basis?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  16. #136  
    Quote Originally Posted by spopyu View Post
    there's a big difference between you knowing what it means, and then interpreting what it means in court.

    If you dont think this will lead to cops harassing legal minorities (and also legal white citizens), then you arent living in the same world as I am.

    cops use whatever BS excuse they can to interrogate and harass citizens. This law just extends their right to harass us. that is, until the supreme court deems this unconstitutional...which will happen. So thanks for wasting taxpayer money arizona. I'm glad I dont live in your racist state.
    What Republicans are counting on is the current Right-leaning US supreme court, after clearing the AZ supreme court, to uphold it. After which, they assume the rest of us will just accept it as the law of the land. Just like other legalized sins of the past they assume we had forgotten about. They couldn't be more wrong.
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #137  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I doubt the Supreme Court will.
    And you may be right!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #138  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    How ironic for an (purportedly) African American person to make this statement. How many times have we all heard, "this place was once beautiful until all the black people moved in..."?

    It sounds disgusting no matter who says it about whom.
    Did we loose sight of the fact that these people are illegal, perhaps? And why are you calling this person's race in to question?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. #139  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Happens all the time. Where's the outcry?
    LA riots 1991...
    "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
  20. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #140  
    Quote Originally Posted by spopyu View Post
    they're only illegal because we have deemed them illegal. They did nothing different than your ancestors, or maybe even you.
    You mean like abide by the laws of the land?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions