Q on Arizona's new law

olddude said:
Isn't this profiling? When law states that Born and naturalized citizens have same rights; why only "foriegn" looking individuals need to carry copy of passport and naturalization certificate? are we supporting discrimination of different kind?
Better solution would be enforce issuance of drivers license to legal immigrants.
Click to expand...

How is this profiling? Profiling of who? And what is exactly a "foriegn" looking individuals?

I don't understand what is the big deal about this. On routes close to the southern border ICE routinly sets up immigration checkpoints essentially doing the same thing. If they suspect you're not a citizen and you don't have your green card with you they will detain and question you. Now the police has the authority to ask you about your immigration status like in any other country in the world.
 
This is NOT any other country in the world. And, ICE setting up a roadblock and checking EVERYONE'S immigration status is one thing, so if this is what they want to do, tell EVERYONE to get proof of citizenship or residency and carry it (and see how happy the supporters of this new law will then be). Another thing is that in the US, immigration enforcement is a FEDERAL power and is carried out by specialised agencies. One benefit of this is that actual law enforcement do not have to waste precious time and resources on something that has its own resources budgeted. State and local law enforcement, especially in Arizona, already have many OTHER problems that they have been mandated to address, and they need to focus on them. Someone mentioned kidnappings, so tackle them. The border violence is also horrendous, so pay attention to that. I agree that illegal immigration is a diffucult issue, but this law IS discriminatory. REQUIRE EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY TO CARRY PROOF OF LEGALITY, and then at least citizens will be safe IF they are mistaken for an illegal immigrant. Arizona wanted to score points and satisfy some right-wingers, and this half-arsed legislation is the result. They did NOT think it through.
 
Another thing is that in the US, immigration enforcement is a FEDERAL power and is carried out by specialised agencies. One benefit of this is that actual law enforcement do not have to waste precious time and resources on something that has its own resources budgeted. State and local law enforcement, especially in Arizona, already have many OTHER problems that they have been mandated to address, and they need to focus on them. Someone mentioned kidnappings, so tackle them. The border violence is also horrendous, so pay attention to that. I agree that illegal immigration is a diffucult issue, but this law IS discriminatory.
Click to expand...

Yes, this law is discriminatory against illegal aliens. If the FEDS were doing their job this law would have never been put in place. The problem is that the southern states are so fed up with footing the bill while the rest of the country does nothing else but criticizing. I hope this law will be eye opening in D.C. I think it has already sent the message…

Just a comment about your right wing nonsense:

70% of AZ voters supported this new law. I guess they are all right wing nuts but hey this is their state!

Recent polls from Texas show similar approval rate:

MMIGRATION POLL
Where do you stand on Arizona's tough new immigration law?
(Poll closes: Apr 30 at 11:59 p.m.)
Strongly oppose 17%
Oppose 5%
No opinion 1%
Favor 10%
Strongly favor 65%
Other Write-Ins:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
if you would like to repeat same thing over and over, fact does not become fiction. I would like to know how one can determine legal status "with a reasonable suspicion".
in your posts, you have not agreed to suggestion that everyone should carry proof of status; if everyone is not expected to carry proof, please enlighten us with who should carry proof of citizenship. by the way; the definition of discimination is "unfair treatment of one person or group, usually because of prejudice about race, ethnicity, age, religion, or gender".
I can get my own polls results and chose only what I would like to hear; that does not change the fact that this law is discrimnatory. I have been to Europe (most of countries in that) and never had to carry "proof of status" with me on daily basis (except when entering/leaving a country).
As for the check points, if it is published that there would be check points by ICE, everyone would know to carry ID/status documents.
People visiting Arizona from other states would not know to carry a copy of passport (and copy of birth certificate); are you suggesting they desrve to be detained?
And when separation of state and federal powers clearly states who needs to do what, why Arizona needs a law that violates separation of powers? is Arizona separating from Union?
 
if you would like to repeat same thing over and over, fact does not become fiction.
Click to expand...

I replied to a comment that the law has been drafted so it’ll satisfy a few right wing nuts. The stats show that this is not true. And BTW: it is none of your business how many times I repeat myself.

I have been to Europe (most of countries in that) and never had to carry "proof of status" with me on daily basis (except when entering/leaving a country).
Click to expand...

Well, you may have gotten away with it but you are required to carry your passport with you at all times in the EU as a visitor, your passport + residency permit (whatever is the best translation) as a foreigner living there or ID if an EU citizen. The police in most countries can stop you without any suspicion or without any reason at all and check who you are (no need for probable cause). And you are required to show proof of identity. If you can’t they may check you out over the radio and if you are suspected to be a foreigner without proper papers they will most likely detain you and bring you in. So you may have never been caught but believe me you don’t want to start arguing when the German police asks your for passport!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My understanding of the new law is that if you are stopped and asked for an ID, an Arizona state driver license or a license from most other states will satisfy the requirement for proving legal presence. Most states now offer drivers license to only those who are legal in the country.
 
Please, do provide reasoning of how to determine what is "reasonable suspicion" without discriminating one way or the other; that is, after providing valid ID like drivers license or state issued ID. One can't selectively answer when supporting a law.
 
Wow, a lot of heat ! I knew Arizona was a hot state, but ...

#1. I lived in Europe for almost 2 years. Yes, you better carry your ID. It was not always checked, but I would say one in 50 train trips. One of my colleagues was taken by the police since he did not carry it one day they checked.

#2. I am in 2 minds about this ID thing. I do not like profiling, but given the number of illegals in US, and with 80% (I guess) in AZ fitting a profile, why would you not use that parameter? Effective law enforcement says you must check people who do not fit the profile, but I see no harm in "adjusting the random variable" so that your chances of success (in terms of illegals caught per search) will increase.

#3. What's wrong with discrimination? Is locking up a murderer discrimination? Is prosecuting a thief discrimination? Letting them go will be discrimination.
 
sanjoseaug20 said:
Wow, a lot of heat ! I knew Arizona was a hot state, but ...

#1. I lived in Europe for almost 2 years. Yes, you better carry your ID. It was not always checked, but I would say one in 50 train trips. One of my colleagues was taken by the police since he did not carry it one day they checked.

#2. I am in 2 minds about this ID thing. I do not like profiling, but given the number of illegals in US, and with 80% (I guess) in AZ fitting a profile, why would you not use that parameter? Effective law enforcement says you must check people who do not fit the profile, but I see no harm in "adjusting the random variable" so that your chances of success (in terms of illegals caught per search) will increase.

#3. What's wrong with discrimination? Is locking up a murderer discrimination? Is prosecuting a thief discrimination? Letting them go will be discrimination.
Click to expand...

1. Everyone legal (All citizens, irrespective of born, naturalized, ethnic and racial background) need an ID that would be comprehensive ID; most states do not participate in that program currently; most states don't even share local criminal databases with each other). Otherwise, we just went 40 years back in time. well, may be few hundred years where only men with land could vote. I am sure we passed that phase in our journey.
2. Don't know what to say. Profiles are for people who fit in small numbers. eg. Serial killers are profiled but not everyone else who is not a serial killer.
3. Locking up murderer is not discrimination; prosecuting thief is not discrimination;letting them go after appropriate judicial process is not discrimination either; what is discrimnation is depriving someone of their civil right is discrimination. This country is made great by everyone's contribution, everyone includes all people. And we are here talking freely because of same civil right that we enjoy.
The question is simple; How do we determine what parameter to use to determine legal status in the country after presenting a valid state issued ID like driver license? especially as a visitor from other state?
 
Profile is what will give you most bang for the buck. That does not mean you close down other paths of investigation, but you first take care of the low hanging fruit. I do not see anything wrong with that ... does not matter if profiling is used for 1 in a million search, or 1 in a 100 search.

Until we decide what parameter to use, what's the harm in using 1 parameter which will have 99.99% accuracy, and an exception path to handle the people who do not fit in. [ I am not saying I have read AZ law and it fits the 99.99% accuracy. ]

A visitor from another state would be told to carry an ID satisfying AZ law - when they board the plan, when they enter through road, or big hoardings in Spanish near the Mexico border (this one just to rile you).
 
:D

I have said enough on this subject but lastly; regardless of where an immigrant is from, this law is discriminatory. A comprehensive ID for all living in US and strict penalties for those (individuals or companies) who hire illegals is the right approach. There are laws that exist today and only need to implement them. Arizona is not a different country to check papers prior to boarding a plane or entering Arizona, it is part of Union.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top