Not any Mexican. If you see a Mexican wearing a suit and tie, pulling up to a professional building, chances are he’s not illegal. Just use common sense.
A fair point. But inevitably, a legal immigrant will probably get asked for papers and then we might get a lawsuit.
But if they’re doing it to rid the country of illegals, if I were a legal Mexican living in AZ, why should I mind proving my citizenship if it helps the police crack down on this crap that’s sucking the country dry?
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you. Enforce the law. If they’re illegal, get them out of there.
I suppose the other side of that is the whole, never give up freedom for security argument.. But it’s a state law, that supposedly 70% of the state was for.. So if the other 30% find it THAT horrible, then they can go to another state. But if it’s made out to be a bigger deal than it really is, well, then the problem won’t be solved.. These types of problems never get solved unless a hard line stance is taken, i.e. if your’e here illegally, then yesterday was your last full day, get the @#$ out.
Further, in other countries around the world, if you cross the border, you’re either shot or imprisoned on the spot. Here? You get welfare, healthcare and other subsidies. Nonsense.. Throughout history, countries have built and guarded their walls to keep invaders out. Just because it’s 2010 and not 1310 doesn’t change a damn thing in my opinion.
So again, count your blessings that you were lucky enough to be born here, or have your citizenship and do what you can do to keep the country from becoming a cesspool of uneducated morons.
Totally agree. If the majority is for it, I think the state has the legal right to do what they’re doing. The question is whether or not it can be struck down on Constitutional grounds. Maybe it can. But until it’s struck down, I say enforce the law.
EDIT: In response to your second post, Mexico’s immigration policy is way tougher than ours. They throw you in jail for being there illegally.
And then in a ridiculous showing of hypocrasy, Obama goes on TV to put his two cents in, as if he gives a rats ass about the Constitituion. Obama, get your nose out of AZ’s business!
Obama cares about the Constitution when it’s convenient for him to care. True for most people, myself included sometimes.
Immigration is a problem, but this is not the solution.
Sacrificing the Constitution and violating the 4th Amendment is cutting off our nose to spite our face.
Instead what needs to be done is turn off the immigration magnet that is the welfare state.
“I just joined the forum because I had to reply. This phrase, “illegal immigrants” has become just another thing people and politicians throw around. Yet does anyone actually stop to think what the word illegal means?? They’re not supposed to be here, period. If you’re not a legal citizen of the USA, you get deported, sent back to your country, end of story. Clean up this freakin’ country and get us back on track damnit!” - dax702
The problem with your view is that the government has made it ridiculously hard to immigrate here on the false premise that restrictions on immigration will stem immigration. Unforuntately what these people are basing their choices on are conditions here vs the typically socialist/fascist third world hell holes they currently live in. So until the sum total of the experience of immigrating gets as bad in their judgement as living where they are currently, they will continue to come to the US. However, thanks to the government’s idiotic policies it’s not a question of whether or not to come to the US, but to do so legally or illegally, and more and more people who shouldn’t have trouble coming here make the choice to do so illegally and so get lumped in with the dregs and criminal element who also take that route.
If you want to cut down on problems related to illegal immigration then immigration needs to be easier, not harder. If it’s easier, people who simply want to come to the US and work and be productive and give themselves and their families a better chance will take the legal route, and the criminals will still take the illegal route, and then law enforcement won’t be wasting their time arresting people who are not a problem. This is very similar to one of the practical problems associated with the drug war, which is concentrating on an entire population rather than just the portion of that population that is actually a problem. From a simple accounting point of view if only X% of a defined population is really an issue in terms of causing harm to other people or property, concentrating on the whole population is a loss. So if only 20% of those who are technically ‘illegal immigrants’ are actually a real law enforcement problem, concentrating on the entire population is a bad use of funding.
If you make immigration easier, if you end the drug war, and if you end or at least curtail the welfare state, and if you end policies that strangle job creation domestically, you don’t have an immigration problem.
Unforuntately that list of “ifs” is likely impossible to accomplish in the current political system.
From a practical standpoint it’s always been my approach to say that I do support easier immigration but pich it to people with the above accounting angle and with a focus on the idea that people who are not harming others or their property should not be a concern of law enforcement. Unfortunately this is simply an area where the problem is not a single policy issue but a few, but you’re not likely to see it framed that way in popular media discourse. It’s immigration, not immigration and the drug war and entitlements and strangulation of domestic job creation, the latter three leading to issues people usually blame on immigration but which are really separate.
The way I see it is just a bandage over a much bigger issue that the state refuses to address.
I agree with what you’re saying. I will admit that I don’t know how difficult it is to immigrate here legally; although I’ve heard it’s pretty difficult and can take numerous years - is that not accurate?
Yes, the welfare state and drug war are big parts of the problem. I suppose illegal immigration wasn’t an issue in the late 1700s. You’re right, it is an invasion of privacy and it’s a catch-22:
Ask an illegal to prove his status and you caught one, but ask a citizen who is “suspicious” and then you’ve invaded his privacy. Tough call, definitely
“I agree with what you’re saying. I will admit that I don’t know how difficult it is to immigrate here legally; although I’ve heard it’s pretty difficult and can take numerous years - is that not accurate?”
That’s correct. Which is ridiculous. I’m not against some restrictions remaining so long as the drug war and the welfare state are with us and so long as we have shitloads of so-called public property, but there’s no reason why it should take years and years for a honest, hard working person to come to this country and try to make something for themselves.
“Yes, the welfare state and drug war are big parts of the problem. I suppose illegal immigration wasn’t an issue in the late 1700s. You’re right, it is an invasion of privacy and it’s a catch-22:”
‘Immigration’ as such has always been an issue, it’s just been rebranded as ‘Illegal Immigration’ these days.
“Ask an illegal to prove his status and you caught one, but ask a citizen who is “suspicious” and then you’ve invaded his privacy. Tough call, definitely.”
Not to me, the answer is don’t fucking do it. Anytime the government asks law abiding citizens to give up their freedom so they can ‘do their jobs’, the proper question to shoot right back to them is, “What assinine ‘laws’ are you trying to enforce that would require the abridgement of my freedom?” Even with a moderate minarchist position, there’s really no reason why the government should have the ability or need to harass law abiding citizens. When it states such a need, you’re guaranteed to find it’s to enforce a ‘law’ that never should have made it on to the books in the first place.
I recall once I asked that very question in another forum somewhere in response to a then recent story about a cop. Some kid had pulled into a public parking lot, a cop came in and harassed him, threatened him with false charges, etc. The kid recorded the whole thing, the guy soon lost his job and badge. To which I said thank God if He’s out there. Of coruse in this particular forum there were statists a’plenty who said the kid was “asking for trouble” with his actions. It was kind of funny to see the avalanch of BS, contradictory justifications and what not, of how and why a law abiding citizen is ‘asking for trouble’ while breaking no law or even some much bothering anyone else.
Bottom line is, if some state stooge comes up to you and says they may need to throw you in prison for an indeterminate time until you can prove you don’t belong there, you’re probably not too far from the time when a bullet in their head is the appropriate response.
You’re damn right. How dare someone have the wrong ethnicity and act intimidated by the presence of armed thugs who are known to attack and kill regularly.
Found this poll:
"A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 70% of likely voters in Arizona approve of the legislation, while just 23% oppose it.
Opponents of the measure, including major national Hispanic groups, say it will lead to racial profiling, and 53% of voters in the state are concerned that efforts to identify and deport illegal immigrants also will end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens. Forty-six percent (46%) don’t share that concern
Those figures include 23% who are very concerned and 18% who are not at all concerned."
Why should I mind proving I am not carrying weapons when passing through a full body scanner at an airport? The TSA is keeping the air safe!
dax702 wrote the following post at Mon, Apr 26 2010 11:09 PM:
But if they’re doing it to rid the country of illegals, if I were a legal Mexican living in AZ, why should I mind proving my citizenship if it helps the police crack down on this crap that’s sucking the country dry?
I don’t mind the full body scanners at all.. maybe women mind more because they’re self conscious about their bodies but that’s a moot point.
Don’t mind the scanners either. It’s worth it to me to know that the odds of someone having a weapon on the plane are reduced.
“Don’t mind the scanners either. It’s worth it to me to know that the odds of someone having a weapon on the plane are reduced.”
lol, the security theater makes you feel better? Even though it runs up hundreds of billions in costs every year, and still didn’t stop a blatant security threat waltzing on board with explosives last Christmas? Don’t get me wrong, if people want securitized air transportation I’m all for it. Just not when the government is in control of the charade.