Arizona governor signs immigration bill - Page 11

**Reba** · 04-26-2010, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by souggy

Wirelessly posted

But one can draw parallel with the lack of humane treatments and deprivation of basic human rights.

If the USA defends its borders how is that a "lack of humane treatments and deprivation of basic human rights?"

Isn't defense of one's home and home land a basic human right?

souggy · 04-26-2010, 08:06 AM

Wirelessly posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Quote:

Originally Posted by souggy

Wirelessly posted

But one can draw parallel with the lack of humane treatments and deprivation of basic human rights.

If the USA defends its borders how is that a "lack of humane treatments and deprivation of basic human rights?"

Isn't defense of one's home and home land a basic human right?

The topic got nothing to do with defending one's borders; that's a related, but altogether seperate issue.

The topic got to do with how already existing immigrants are being treated.

**Reba** · 04-26-2010, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

who do you think the officers are more likely to "ask" the immigrants to show their documents? Europeans? Mexicans? Chinese? Arabs?

do you think it's right for officers to ask the American-born person of different race to show the document?

Until the officer sees documentation, how would he know if the person was American born?

**Reba** · 04-26-2010, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by souggy

Wirelessly posted

The topic got nothing to do with defending one's borders; that's a related, but altogether seperate issue.

The topic got to do with how already existing immigrants are being treated.

Are they being treated inhumanely by law enforcement agencies?

Does an illegal alien have a civil right to not be stopped and questioned about his status if there is suspicion?

If our borders were tightened up, we wouldn't have such a problem with people crossing over illegally in the first place. Why do we continue to allow this problem to go on? Other nations can keep out illegal aliens, so why can't the USA do the same?

souggy · 04-26-2010, 08:18 AM

Wirelessly posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Quote:

Originally Posted by souggy

The topic got nothing to do with defending one's borders; that's a related, but altogether seperate issue.

The topic got to do with how already existing immigrants are being treated.

Are they being treated inhumanely by law enforcement agencies?

Does an illegal alien have a civil right to not be stopped and questioned about his status if there is suspicion?

If our borders were tightened up, we wouldn't have such a problem with people crossing over illegally in the first place. Why do we continue to allow this problem to go on? Other nations can keep out illegal aliens, so why can't the USA do the same?

The demographics (and political systems) are not really the same.

Notice the ones with strong foothold on immigrations are either largely homogeneous democracies, or in case of multicultural countries-- have dictator regimes?

Do you agree that people of different backgrounds shouldn't have to worry about the police?

**Reba** · 04-26-2010, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

if you have a critical thinking skill as you claimed - then you should be saying "proof of citizenship" rather than driver license because driver license is not a proof of your immigration status....

Each state's laws are different, so I will refer only to my own in this reply.

Before you can get a drivers license in South Carolina, you have to prove your citizenship status. Therefore, if someone shows a SC drivers linsence, the officer knows that the driver has already gone thru that process.

Quote:

Accepted Forms of Identification

These guidelines establish standards for accepting documents submitted to the Department of Motor Vehicles by all applicants applying for a first time SC BEGINNER’S PERMIT, DRIVER’S LICENSE or ID card and all applicants previously licensed in SC who are returning to SC after having been licensed in another state. It is DMV’s responsibility as a licensing state to verify the accuracy and authenticity of any document furnished to us by any applicant applying for a credential.

There are several laws that require the department to collect personal information from an applicant:

* Name and Date of Birth (Section 56-1-80 and 56-1-90)
* Social Security Number (Section 56-1-90)
* Citizenship (Section 56-1-40(7) and 56-1-80)
* Residency (Section 56-1-40(7) and Section 56-1-80(c)

Our goal as an agency is to ensure that the customer is provided with as much information to assist him/her when applying for a credential. It is not the department’s intent to refuse to issue a credential to a customer who possesses acceptable documents. However, when a person applies for a SC credential, it is DMV’s responsibility to verify that the applicant is who he or she claims to be. Our license specialists are charged with examining the presented documents to make sure that they are authentic. With all of this in mind, the attached lists of documents have been expanded to ensure our customers have been provided every opportunity to comply with South Carolina laws and procedures.

United States Citizens

If you are a United States citizen applying for a first time beginner's permit, driver's license or identification card, you must provide documentation showing proof of your identity and citizenship, proof of your social security number and proof of residency in South Carolina. If you are applying for an ID or beginner’s permit, you do not need to provide proof of insurance. If you are applying for a driver’s license, you must provide automobile liability insurance information from an insurance company licensed to do business in South Carolina.

If you are a new resident moving to South Carolina from another state, you must also meet these same requirements.

Different documents are required to prove identity, social security number and citizenship. For a listing of all acceptable documents to obtain a SC Driver’s license or beginner’s permit, click here for Form MV93 Checklist for First Time Issuance of Driver’s License, Beginner’s Permit or Identification Card.

Proof of Identify and Citizenship

You may provide any document from the Proof of Citizenship/Proof of Identify, Name and Date of Birth section on Form MV93 Checklist for First Time Issuance of Driver’s License, Beginner’s Permit or Identification Card.

If you do not have a birth certificate and wish to obtain a certified copy of your birth certificate, contact State Office of Vital Records at the Department of Heath and Environmental Control (DHEC).

Quote:

International Customers Who are not US Citizens

International customers are citizens of US protectorates, immigrants, refugees, asylees, and other non-immigrants who are granted temporary entry into the United States. International customers who are not US citizens can only obtain a SC driving credential or ID at one of the following service centers:

Bluffton

Lancaster

Charleston - Leeds Ave.

Orangeburg

Myrtle Beach - 21st Ave. North

Florence

Conway

Greenwood

Irmo

Laurens

Columbia - Shop Rd.

North Augusta

Greenville - Saluda Dam Rd.

Rock Hill - Hand Mill Rd.

Spartanburg - Southport Rd.

Seneca

All persons authorized by the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, or the U.S. Department of State to live, work, or study in the United States on a temporary or permanent basis will be eligible to apply for a beginner's permit, driver's license or identification card.

The expiration date of the driver’s license will be determined by the applicant's authorized period of stay in the United States or the expiration date of the applicant's employment authorization document, but will not exceed 5-years.

Applications for beginner permits, driver’s licenses and identification cards for International customer will be accepted at sixteen of our DMV offices across the state. To apply for a South Carolina credential, all International customers who are not US citizens must provide the following each time they apply for an original, renewal or duplicate credential:

* Proof of Identity (SC Code Section 56-1-80 and 56-1-90(2))
* Proof of Date and Place of birth (SC Code Section 56-1-80 and 56-1-90(2))
* Current authorization to live, work or study in the U.S. (SC Code Section 56-1-40(7) and 56-1-80)
* Social Security Card or Letter from the Social Security Administration stating that the applicant is not allowed to work in the United States (SC Code Section 56-1-90)
* Proof of SC residency (SC Code Section 56-1-40(7) and Section 56-1-80(3))
* Automobile liability insurance information (if applying for a driver’s license) (SC Code Section 56-1-80(C))

At the time of application, all applicants must provide proper documentation to prove that the US Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, Department of State or the US Citizenship and Immigration Services authorizes them to live, work or study in the United States on a temporary or permanent basis, and that they are within their current authorized period of stay, depending on current immigration and visa status.

Form MV-94 International Customer Checklist for Issuance of Driver’s License, Beginner’s Permit and Identification cards lists the documentation requirements for each of the areas listed above for the most common immigration and visa statuses.

If your name has changed since birth, you must provide all legal documents (adoption records, marriage certificate, certificate of naturalization, court ordered name change) supporting all name changes from birth to present.

If your documents are not in English, a qualified translator must translate them and the translated documents presented must be original. A qualified translator is a person who routinely translates documents from another language into English as part of his or her work responsibilities. Examples of a qualified translator include: professor or instructor at an area college, university or high school who is authorized to teach a specific language; a person from a company or corporation who is authorized to translate corporate documents by the company; a translator certified to do translations professionally.

Applicants applying for a driver’s license must also submit a valid driver’s license from their country of origin as proof of prior driving experience. A qualified translator must also translate a driver's license unless an International Driving Permit accompanies the license. Applicants who cannot show proof of prior driving experience must first obtain a beginner’s permit and hold it for 180 days before applying for a driver’s license.

Once international customer applicants have presented acceptable documentation at one of the sixteen international customer-processing centers, they are eligible to receive a temporary 60-day paper credential. This paper document will authorize them to drive while their documentation is being verified in our central headquarters. Applicants with a temporary paper credential must also carry with them at all times their immigration documents, including passport or other immigration document displaying the applicant’s photograph, name and date of birth.

If DMV central headquarters can verify all the documentation submitted by the applicant, a photo credential with an expiration date based on the authorized period of stay will be mailed to the applicant.

SC Department of Motor Vehicles

South Carolina also issues ID cards for people who don't drive:

Quote:

Identifications Cards

Identification cards are issued to any persons at least 5 years of age and who are residents of South Carolina. You may apply for an ID card by completing Form 447 and presenting proper identification at your local DMV office. The card expires five years after the issue date.

The same proofs of proper identification are required as for the drivers licenses.

PowerON · 04-26-2010, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJB

Of course. Since one Mexican is a psycho murder, that must mean that all Mexicans
are.

From what I seen that they're not ignore us if one of us try insult on them. low Mexican have angry issues.

PowerON · 04-26-2010, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

You don't have 10,000 illegal aliens entering Canada each day, everyday, taking up your resources, adding to the crimes, drug trafficking, additional taxes, hospital costs and so on.

I wish and wonder what it is like when all illegal enter in Canada. They would feel probably same as us in southern.

**Jiro** · 04-26-2010, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Each state's laws are different, so I will refer only to my own in this reply.

Before you can get a drivers license in South Carolina, you have to prove your citizenship status. Therefore, if someone shows a SC drivers linsence, the officer knows that the driver has already gone thru that process.

SC Department of Motor Vehicles

South Carolina also issues ID cards for people who don't drive:

The same proofs of proper identification are required as for the drivers licenses.

that's why I checked California. yep - same as your state law. NJ same. NY same.

**Jiro** · 04-26-2010, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Until the officer sees documentation, how would he know if the person was American born?

by racial profiling

**Jiro** · 04-26-2010, 11:15 AM

Immigration law polarizes Arizonans

Quote:

These days, Jessica Mejia doesn't leave the house without three pieces of identification to prove her citizenship.

Mejia, a University of Arizona student who was born and raised in Tucson, says the habit formed last week, after a series of raids in Arizona targeting illegal immigrants. And now, a new state law that cracks down on illegal immigration has given her more cause for concern.

"Even if you're legal, you're in fear that maybe your driver's license isn't going to be enough or if you're walking down the street and the police stop you," said Mejia, 21. "It's a constant fear we're living in and even legal citizens are afraid to go out."

Senate Bill 1070 is set to take effect in August or September, if it withstands legal challenges that a number of groups who oppose the legislation are expected to raise.

Mejia's concerns were echoed by others in Tucson and across the country who oppose the legislation, which requires police to question people if they have reason to suspect they're in the United States illegally.

Mejia, who helped organize a protest in front of the state capitol Friday, is one of many student activists in Arizona organizing against SB 1070.

The law also requires legal immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times. But U.S. citizens like Mejia, who identifies herself as Chicana, says she carries her driver's license, voter registration card and school fingerprint card at all times out of fear of being racially profiled.

"How can you tell what will give an officer reasonable suspicion to stop you?" she said. "We understand there's a need for protection on the border, but we think it should come more with immigration reform, not by pulling over people and stopping them on the street."

Opposition to the bill is also coming from elected officials at various levels of government in Arizona. Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon said he has scheduled an item for the Tuesday session of City Council to prepare for legal action against SB 1070.

"I will direct the city manager and city attorney to file a lawsuit against the state to enjoin the law from going into effect and have it declared unconstitutional," he said.

Supporters of the law say it fills a void left by the federal government's failure to properly address immigration reform.

"One of the few enumerated, delegated and specified duties and powers given to the federal government in the Constitution is to provide for the common defense of the nation. In this they have failed by not securing the border and by not keeping immigration law up to date with the needs of our nation," said CNN iReporter Tom B., a defense contractor in Iraq who didn't want his last name to be used for security reasons.

"This law will allow local law enforcement in the course of their duties to question individuals in regards to their immigration status. Since Arizona is a border state they are the site of the main issue at hand," he said in an e-mail.

Arizona state Rep. Russ Jones, who voted for the bill, said the state felt compelled to craft its own legislation.

"Until the federal government actually puts up an effective border fence securing our southern border, we cannot sit back and hope for the best while our laws are broken every day and the hands of law enforcement are tied."

Gov. Jan Brewer signed the legislation Friday, citing border-related crime as a key factor. She also issued an executive order that requires additional training for local officers on how to implement the law without engaging in racial profiling or discrimination.

The rules, to be established in by the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board, are due back to her in May. The law goes into effect 90 days after the close of the legislative session, which has not been determined.

Other police organizations that support the bill, including the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, say the legislation has numerous safeguards to protect the rights of minority groups.

"The bill requires reasonable suspicion for officers to make contact and also contains language that allows officers discretion in enforcing the law," a statement on the group's website says. "Officers cannot stop a person based solely on race, color, or national origin."

The Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police, which had opposed the measure, issued a statement saying, "Law enforcement professionals in the state of Arizona will enforce the provisions of the new law to the best of their abilities."

The bill's passage immediately triggered vows from advocacy groups across the country to pursue legal action to stop it in its tracks.

Victor Viramontes, senior legal counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said his organization plans to ask the federal government for a permanent injunction to prevent the law from taking effect.

"What we need is singular immigration policy, and that's what the Constitution mandates. The Arizona statute stands in the way of the federal government's ability to do its job by overwhelming the system," Viramontes said.

Most undocumented immigrants follow the laws of the country, Viramontes said, and deserve the same human rights afforded U.S. citizens. (Take notice of this line, Steinhauer)

"Sometimes it's politically expedient to target undocumented immigrants and push them further into shadows, but they're already some of the most vulnerable to civil rights abuse, and the Legislature's role should be to protect these contributing members of society."

On the ground in Arizona, students and young people are at the forefront of the fight, using social media and technology to organize.

"As soon as [Brewer] signed that bill it shook the hornet's nest. It awoke not only Arizona, not only our community, but the nation," said Jeff Santino, a student organizer and graduate student at the University of Arizona. "People are all flooding us with support and I think we need to garner that support."

Mejia said her generation owes it to future generations to ensure they don't grow up in a society that legalizes discrimination. She said she also feels a debt to her parents and grandparents, who may be too busy working to support their families to engage in a political fight.

"I feel like it's a really big responsibility on our shoulders to protect our community when they don't have voice in what's going on."

Quote:

Arizona college student carries three pieces of ID to prove citizenship, fears being detained

and this is America? I almost thought it's Third Reich.

CJB · 04-26-2010, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerON

From what I seen that they're not ignore us if one of us try insult on them. low Mexican have angry issues.

This just proves my point further, that racism is fueling a lot of the anti-immigrant sentiment.

kokonut · 04-26-2010, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by souggy

Wirelessly posted

The topic got nothing to do with defending one's borders; that's a related, but altogether seperate issue.

The topic got to do with how already existing immigrants are being treated.

Defending the borders do include ensuring that people have the proper documentation while here in the United States. Hence the bill:

Quote:

The legislature declares that the intent of this act is to make attrition through enforcement...

Quote:

IF AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES IS CONVICTED OF A VIOLATION OF STATE OR LOCAL LAW, ON DISCHARGE FROM IMPRISONMENT OR ON THE ASSESSMENT OF ANY MONETARY OBLIGATION THAT IS IMPOSED, THE UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT OR THE UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED.

Quote:

IN ADDITION TO ANY VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW, A PERSON IS GUILTY OF WILLFUL FAILURE TO COMPLETE OR CARRY AN ALIEN REGISTRATION DOCUMENT IF THE PERSON IS IN VIOLATION OF 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1304(e) OR 1306(a). IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF THIS SECTION, AN ALIEN'S IMMIGRATION STATUS MAY BE DETERMINED BY:
1. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHO IS AUTHORIZED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO VERIFY OR ASCERTAIN AN ALIEN'S IMMIGRATION STATUS.

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf

This thread includes discussion about border control and defenses. Reba raised pertinent questions all related to this thread discussion.

kokonut · 04-26-2010, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJB

This just proves my point further, that racism is fueling a lot of the anti-immigrant sentiment.

That may be in some instances but again it's using the tired race card for naught. Note that this bill was passed *overwhelmingly* with bi-partisan support, and then signed by the governor of Arizon.

CJB · 04-26-2010, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

That may be in some instances but again it's using the tired race card for naught. Note that this bill was passed *overwhelmingly* with bi-partisan support, and then signed by the governor of Arizon.

Just cause it's bi-partisan doesn't prove anything. Conservatives and liberals are both very capable of being racist.

Rampratt · 04-26-2010, 12:00 PM

Jiro, I think maybe we need to clarify "civil rights" and personally I for one say "NO" I don't think they should have any rights in this country if entered illegally, they are criminals no matter how you coat it and should be treated the same as any other criminal. That does NOT imply that they should not receive humane treatment but it does say they should not be "untitled" to the same things as legal citizens are. They have not put one dime into this country so should not reap rewards. I guess one could say they may pay sales tax if they purchase anything but I think that is a small % of total tax. Anyway, if Illegal then they are illegal!

kokonut · 04-26-2010, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJB

Just cause it's bi-partisan doesn't prove anything. Conservatives and liberals are both very capable of being racist.

That's not the issue and a red herring. The Federal govt failed to protect the border in the first place and allowed illegal behaviors to manifest itself. This is about enforcing the Federal as required. Something that, ironically, the Federal govt failed to do or in this case dragged their feet for years. The state had no choice but to find ways to protect their borders and citizens. If it's such a problem then repeal that section of the Federal law and make it where states do not have the right to protect their citizens and their borders.

kokonut · 04-26-2010, 12:05 PM

Even Obama said they are here illegally and used the word "illegally."

“Surely we can all agree that when 11 million people in our country are living here illegally, outside the system, that's unacceptable,”

So, let's not mince words about the definition of "illegal" which means they have broken the law entering the U.S. without proper documentation. Doing so is a crime.

CJB · 04-26-2010, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

That's not the issue and a red herring. The Federal govt failed to protect the border in the first place and allowed illegal behaviors to manifest itself. This is about enforcing the Federal as required. Something that, ironically, the Federal govt failed to do or in this case dragged their feet for years. The state had no choice but to find ways to protect their borders and citizens. If it's such a problem then repeal that section of the Federal law and make it where states do not have the right to protect their citizens and their borders.

Every "red herring" has been a point you made that I was simply echoing and replying to, from citing criminal rates to bi-partisan support. Seems to me you're just blowing off everything I say as a "red herring" without realizing they're all points you originally brought up.

I've already explained that it's not illegal immigrants that is racist, it's the way in which AZ officers can now suspect anyone of being an illegal immigrant and the fact they have little to go by other than racial profiling.

If the only real opposition is that illegal immigrants are taking up our resources without paying, then why not make them legal and have them pay taxes and put in too? Problem solved. Why is shutting them out the only solution? After all everyone in America was an immigrant at one point or another, if we shut out all the immigrants throughout history, there would be no America.

CJB · 04-26-2010, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

Even Obama said they are here illegally and used the word "illegally."

“Surely we can all agree that when 11 million people in our country are living here illegally, outside the system, that's unacceptable,”

No one's debating whether illegal immigrants are illegal.

**Jiro** · 04-26-2010, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rampratt

Jiro, I think maybe we need to clarify "civil rights" and personally I for one say "NO" I don't think they should have any rights in this country if entered illegally, they are criminals no matter how you coat it and should be treated the same as any other criminal. That does NOT imply that they should not receive humane treatment but it does say they should not be "untitled" to the same things as legal citizens are. They have not put one dime into this country so should not reap rewards. I guess one could say they may pay sales tax if they purchase anything but I think that is a small % of total tax. Anyway, if Illegal then they are illegal!

criminals have civil rights. that should apply for illegals as well. any human being on American soil - regardless of their immigration status is entitled to civil rights. we've been preaching about it to all countries with history of poor human rights.

The illegals obviously do not have voting rights, gun rights, and several other rights that the American citizen has. The major portion of Civil Rights is the human rights. They are entitled for right to a fair trial too... if they claimed to be political asylum or whatever.

Here's a problem - those kind of people want you to think the illegals will have the same rights as American citizen if Obama passed some bills (which does not exist at all).

kokonut · 04-26-2010, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJB

Every "red herring" has been a point you made that I was simply echoing and replying to, from citing criminal rates to bi-partisan support. Seems to me you're just blowing off everything I say as a "red herring" without realizing they're all points you originally brought up.

I've already explained that it's not illegal immigrants that is racist, it's the way in which AZ officers can now suspect anyone of being an illegal immigrant and the fact they have little to go by other than racial profiling.

If the only real opposition is that illegal immigrants are taking up our resources without paying, then why not make them legal and have them pay taxes and put in too? Problem solved. Why is shutting them out the only solution? After all everyone in America was an immigrant at one point or another, if we shut out all the immigrants throughout history, there would be no America.

Did you know there is an Executive order requiring the training on implementing the law without racial profiling?

Resources being taken up is more than not just paying. It's more taxes we have to pay, we see limited resources meant for our citizens, we see families of victims murdered or killed by illegal aliens that take up their time and resources (even lawsuits), it ties up the system, and so on. Making them "legal" isn't the answer if our border is still porous. Not a good idea.

Yes, immigrants because they entered the U.S. legally. That's why there is an emphasis between "illegal" and "legal" immigrants.

**Jiro** · 04-26-2010, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

Even Obama said they are here illegally and used the word "illegally."

“Surely we can all agree that when 11 million people in our country are living here illegally, outside the system, that's unacceptable,”

So, let's not mince words about the definition of "illegal" which means they have broken the law entering the U.S. without proper documentation. Doing so is a crime.

as CJB said - the issue is not about what illegal immigrants doing is illegal or not. It's about how the police does the job.

kokonut · 04-26-2010, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJB

Every "red herring" has been a point you made that I was simply echoing and replying to, from citing criminal rates to bi-partisan support. Seems to me you're just blowing off everything I say as a "red herring" without realizing they're all points you originally brought up.

I've already explained that it's not illegal immigrants that is racist, it's the way in which AZ officers can now suspect anyone of being an illegal immigrant and the fact they have little to go by other than racial profiling.

If the only real opposition is that illegal immigrants are taking up our resources without paying, then why not make them legal and have them pay taxes and put in too? Problem solved. Why is shutting them out the only solution? After all everyone in America was an immigrant at one point or another, if we shut out all the immigrants throughout history, there would be no America.

How is it racism if America accepts legal immigrants and not illegal immigrants?
You Don't Speak for Me - are these people racist??

**Jiro** · 04-26-2010, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

Did you know there is an Executive order requiring the training on implementing the law without racial profiling?

good luck with that. It's typical political oxymoronic game. or rather a knee-jerk legislation for shock factor to get federal government moving with federal immigration bill even though they know the legislation will eventually get struck down.

enforce the law without racial profiling..... LOL!!!! talk about "Politically Correct" - how ironic!!!

CJB · 04-26-2010, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

Did you know there is an Executive order requiring the training on implementing the law without racial profiling?

So what criteria are officers going to be using when they suspect someone of being illegal?

CJB · 04-26-2010, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

How is it racism if America accepts legal immigrants and not illegal immigrants?
You Don't Speak for Me - are these people racist??

Nowhere did I claim that not accepting illegal immigrants is racist. Suspecting people on the street of being illegal based on racial profiling is racist.

CJB · 04-26-2010, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

good luck with that. It's typical political oxymoronic game. or rather a knee-jerk legislation for shock factor to get federal government moving with federal immigration bill even though they know the legislation will eventually get struck down.

enforce the law without racial profiling..... LOL!!!! talk about "Politically Correct" - how ironic!!!

Exactly. They're covering their asses. So that if Officer Smith gets accused of a race-related hate crime, Smith's lawyer can say "oh but, see, we implemented training to avoid racial profiling."

Steinhauer · 04-26-2010, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Are they being treated inhumanely by law enforcement agencies?

Does an illegal alien have a civil right to not be stopped and questioned about his status if there is suspicion?

If our borders were tightened up, we wouldn't have such a problem with people crossing over illegally in the first place. Why do we continue to allow this problem to go on? Other nations can keep out illegal aliens, so why can't the USA do the same?

Your touching on a very important point.

These people want "more rights" than American citizens. They were criminal to begin with and feel they are "above the law" and anyone who wishes to enforce the law are "racial profiling abusive leo's".

**Jiro** · 04-26-2010, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

Your touching on a very important point.

These people want "more rights" than American citizens. They were criminal to begin with and feel they are "above the law" and anyone who wishes to enforce the law are "racial profiling abusive leo's".

what rights? do they currently have those rights? source please?

04-26-2010, 12:05 PM	#318 (permalink)
kokonut Registered User Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 15,348	Even Obama said they are here illegally and used the word "illegally." “Surely we can all agree that when 11 million people in our country are living here illegally, outside the system, that's unacceptable,” So, let's not mince words about the definition of "illegal" which means they have broken the law entering the U.S. without proper documentation. Doing so is a crime. __________________ Before AD. After AD. "Restriction on free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." -Thurgood Marshall, former Supreme Court Justice "... turns out they are telling the truth."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

04-26-2010, 12:00 PM	#316 (permalink)
Rampratt Registered User Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Casa Grande Arizona Posts: 149	Jiro, I think maybe we need to clarify "civil rights" and personally I for one say "NO" I don't think they should have any rights in this country if entered illegally, they are criminals no matter how you coat it and should be treated the same as any other criminal. That does NOT imply that they should not receive humane treatment but it does say they should not be "untitled" to the same things as legal citizens are. They have not put one dime into this country so should not reap rewards. I guess one could say they may pay sales tax if they purchase anything but I think that is a small % of total tax. Anyway, if Illegal then they are illegal!