New Law in AZ (AR) and Our Reasoning

FiveB247x

"Illegal alien fans"? When you phrase it like how do you expect anyone to take you seriously? No one poster that I've seen has said anything other than that we should have laws or reform towards immigration but this current one is wrong for a variety of reasons.

And as for your "cough cough puke" comment, lighten up francis.

unsung wrote:

I have a question for all of you illegal alien fans.

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

_

unsung wrote:

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

I think the bill targets undocumented immigrants AT THE EXPENSE OF other people of color who are here legally.

What's your point, exactly? That a law that harms a minority population is ok as long as that wasn't its primary intention?

Let me ask you this: Back when the US goverment decided to put hundreds of uranium mines on the Navajo reservation & hire Navajos without telling them that research had already shown that uranium causes cancer, was that okay since the purpose was not to harm Navajos? And, even though they chose a marginalized population to exploit, did this have nothing to do with viewing this group as inferior?

cajunkiwi

unsung wrote:

I have a question for all of you illegal alien fans.

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

Okay, I'll try and answer this question for the benefit of all of you who hate human rights (but love sweeping generalizations):

Plug in your common sense neurons and let them charge up for a while. Let them get warm. Now unleash some common sense and see where it goes.

The law is being passed in a state that shares a border with Mexico. Some people think the sky is falling and America is falling apart at the seams because 11 million Mexicans have entered the country illegally (by the way - where did that number come from? Are the minutemen just sitting around counting all day?). Americans aren't complaining loudly about the people from Europe and Canada who are in the country illegally - they're complaining about Mexicans. You know, the guys who don't look like they're from Utah.

Now... someone proposes a bill that, in its original form, was going to legalize racial profiling. No races were named in the bill, because to name a race specifically would be to hand the ACLU a successful lawsuit on a silver platter.

But what was the directive in the bill? Pull over people who look like they're in the country illegally. Where was the bill proposed? In a state that borders Mexico. Which nationality is the one being targeted by anti-illegal immigration activists nationwide? Mexicans. If your common sense neurons work at all, you'd know the police weren't going to be on the lookout for people speaking French or German.

Just because Mexicans aren't named in the bill - because, again, to do so would see the state get sued into the Stone Age - doesn't mean it wasn't aimed at them. If you're asking the cops to pull over and question people who "look" foreign, then I have to ask: is it easier to spot someone who looks Mexican, or someone who looks Canadian?

But then again, common sense is in short supply around these parts these days. This is a country where the president is branded a Socialist, Marxist, and Communist by people who don't know the first thing about Socialism, Marxism, or Communism beyond the fact that they have something to do with Russia. This is a country where the president is called a tyrant for exercising his rights as a president by people who remained silent when his predecessor passed a law that gave the police the right to monitor its citizen's phone calls and emails. As Jon Stewart put it, "You're confusing tyranny with losing."

So, I have a question for you - you who, in scb's thread about whether or not society was regressing said the problem was people being too PC and not taking responsibility for their own actions (the latter of which I wholeheartedly agree with, by the way: if people were a little more responsible for their own actions a few more problems might be solved). My question is - when you picture an illegal immigrant in your head, physically speaking, what do you see? What does an illegal immigrant "look like" to you?

_

cajunkiwi wrote:

unsung wrote:

I have a question for all of you illegal alien fans.

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

Okay, I'll try and answer this question for the benefit of all of you who hate human rights (but love sweeping generalizations):

Plug in your common sense neurons and let them charge up for a while. Let them get warm. Now unleash some common sense and see where it goes.

The law is being passed in a state that shares a border with Mexico. Some people think the sky is falling and America is falling apart at the seams because 11 million Mexicans have entered the country illegally (by the way - where did that number come from? Are the minutemen just sitting around counting all day?). Americans aren't complaining loudly about the people from Europe and Canada who are in the country illegally - they're complaining about Mexicans. You know, the guys who don't look like they're from Utah.

Now... someone proposes a bill that, in its original form, was going to legalize racial profiling. No races were named in the bill, because to name a race specifically would be to hand the ACLU a successful lawsuit on a silver platter.

But what was the directive in the bill? Pull over people who look like they're in the country illegally. Where was the bill proposed? In a state that borders Mexico. Which nationality is the one being targeted by anti-illegal immigration activists nationwide? Mexicans. If your common sense neurons work at all, you'd know the police weren't going to be on the lookout for people speaking French or German.

Just because Mexicans aren't named in the bill - because, again, to do so would see the state get sued into the Stone Age - doesn't mean it wasn't aimed at them. If you're asking the cops to pull over and question people who "look" foreign, then I have to ask: is it easier to spot someone who looks Mexican, or someone who looks Canadian?

But then again, common sense is in short supply around these parts these days. This is a country where the president is branded a Socialist, Marxist, and Communist by people who don't know the first thing about Socialism, Marxism, or Communism beyond the fact that they have something to do with Russia. This is a country where the president is called a tyrant for exercising his rights as a president by people who remained silent when his predecessor passed a law that gave the police the right to monitor its citizen's phone calls and emails. As Jon Stewart put it, "You're confusing tyranny with losing."

So, I have a question for you - you who, in scb's thread about whether or not society was regressing said the problem was people being too PC and not taking responsibility for their own actions (the latter of which I wholeheartedly agree with, by the way: if people were a little more responsible for their own actions a few more problems might be solved). My question is - when you picture an illegal immigrant in your head, physically speaking, what do you see? What does an illegal immigrant "look like" to you?

unsung

cajunkiwi wrote:

unsung wrote:

I have a question for all of you illegal alien fans.

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

Okay, I'll try and answer this question for the benefit of all of you who hate human rights (but love sweeping generalizations):

Plug in your common sense neurons and let them charge up for a while. Let them get warm. Now unleash some common sense and see where it goes.

The law is being passed in a state that shares a border with Mexico. Some people think the sky is falling and America is falling apart at the seams because 11 million Mexicans have entered the country illegally (by the way - where did that number come from? Are the minutemen just sitting around counting all day?). Americans aren't complaining loudly about the people from Europe and Canada who are in the country illegally - they're complaining about Mexicans. You know, the guys who don't look like they're from Utah.

Now... someone proposes a bill that, in its original form, was going to legalize racial profiling. No races were named in the bill, because to name a race specifically would be to hand the ACLU a successful lawsuit on a silver platter.

But what was the directive in the bill? Pull over people who look like they're in the country illegally. Where was the bill proposed? In a state that borders Mexico. Which nationality is the one being targeted by anti-illegal immigration activists nationwide? Mexicans. If your common sense neurons work at all, you'd know the police weren't going to be on the lookout for people speaking French or German.

Just because Mexicans aren't named in the bill - because, again, to do so would see the state get sued into the Stone Age - doesn't mean it wasn't aimed at them. If you're asking the cops to pull over and question people who "look" foreign, then I have to ask: is it easier to spot someone who looks Mexican, or someone who looks Canadian?

But then again, common sense is in short supply around these parts these days. This is a country where the president is branded a Socialist, Marxist, and Communist by people who don't know the first thing about Socialism, Marxism, or Communism beyond the fact that they have something to do with Russia. This is a country where the president is called a tyrant for exercising his rights as a president by people who remained silent when his predecessor passed a law that gave the police the right to monitor its citizen's phone calls and emails. As Jon Stewart put it, "You're confusing tyranny with losing."

So, I have a question for you - you who, in scb's thread about whether or not society was regressing said the problem was people being too PC and not taking responsibility for their own actions (the latter of which I wholeheartedly agree with, by the way: if people were a little more responsible for their own actions a few more problems might be solved). My question is - when you picture an illegal immigrant in your head, physically speaking, what do you see? What does an illegal immigrant "look like" to you?

That is a smokescreen for the truth. The fact remains it is to rid this country of people who chose to break our laws as their very first act of arriving here.

I don't know what they look like, could really be anyone. By that logic should we just allow them to be free and march on our streets demanding we change our laws to suit them? If asking for an ID is the only way to make the determination then that is what needs to be done.

gimmesometruth27

unsung wrote:

I have a question for all of you illegal alien fans.

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

illegal alien fans?? :roll: why do you present things in such crass, dramatic, and condescending manner? if supporting basic human rights for all humans makes me a "fan" in your eyes, then guilty as charged.

upon reading this bill i think the intended target is mail order brides from russia...yep, that's it...and arizona bordering mexico has nothing to do with it...........

Boxes&Books

"The Obama administration’s enforcement efforts in 2009 led to the deportation of 387,790 illegal immigrants — a 5 percent jump over the Bush administration’s record in 2008".

Obama doesn't do Shit! They should deport him for not being born in the United States.... right Unsung!

Seems like Obama had a better season then Bush.......

I like what the President said yesterday about immigration reform. His comment seems down the middle.... Now he'll need a little support from the elitist....and maybe something good could be accomplished....

FiveB247x

This is a very black and white answer to a very grey issue.

You are solely blaming the people, yet completely ignore all of the unenforced laws and illegal activities business and the government do or do not do which not only escalate this problem, but enable it.

And regarding the ID topic, I think there is more of an outcry from citizens about big brother and infringement compared to illegals not doing such.

In order to really resolve this issue, there has to be an across the board effort by all parties involved to make immigration reform not only secure and possible, but to be beneficial to all involved. There's repercussions to every aspect of this issue no matter how you cut and dice it, so to give a black and white - good/bad on solely one isn't practical in any manner to a long term solution for anyone involved.

unsung wrote:

That is a smokescreen for the truth. The fact remains it is to rid this country of people who chose to break our laws as their very first act of arriving here.

I don't know what they look like, could really be anyone. By that logic should we just allow them to be free and march on our streets demanding we change our laws to suit them? If asking for an ID is the only way to make the determination then that is what needs to be done.

cajunkiwi

unsung wrote:

That is a smokescreen for the truth. The fact remains it is to rid this country of people who chose to break our laws as their very first act of arriving here.

I don't know what they look like, could really be anyone. By that logic should we just allow them to be free and march on our streets demanding we change our laws to suit them? If asking for an ID is the only way to make the determination then that is what needs to be done.

That's true - the purpose of the bill is to deport people who are in the country illegally. However, the problem is with the way the bill was written. It not only gave the police the authority to pull over someone who looked foreign (and was guilty of nothing more than looking foreign), but it also gave the public the right to sue the police if they weren't doing a good enough job - which, in turn, could well lead to an increase in racial profiling incidents (because the cops would rather pull over Mexicans than get sued).

There were no guidelines given to the police about who they should/shouldn't pull over, beyond "anyone they suspect is in the country illegally" - which is a pretty big gray area. If you're a cop in Arizona and you saw a white person walking down the street, would you think, "Man, that dude could be an illegal immigrant from Canada, maybe I should pull him over and check."? Or would you be more likely to see a Hispanic-looking person walking down the street and think, "Man, I keep hearing that there are 11 million Mexicans in this country illegally, maybe I should pull this guy over and check."?

The overwhelming majority of the Hispanic-looking people would be U.S. citizens, residents, or tourists - in other words, people in Arizona legally. However, the cops have now wasted their time (and took a dump on their human rights) by suspecting/accusing them of being illegal immigrants. Not only that, but if you've ever dealt with cops before, you'll know that they aren't all warm and fuzzy people - and not only are they less warm and fuzzy than usual when dealing with minorities, but would be even LESS warm and fuzzy than usual with the threat of a lawsuit hanging over their heads if they didn't deport enough illegal aliens.

_

scb wrote:

unsung wrote:

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

I think the bill targets undocumented immigrants AT THE EXPENSE OF other people of color who are here legally.

What's your point, exactly? That a law that harms a minority population is ok as long as that wasn't its primary intention?

Let me ask you this: Back when the US goverment decided to put hundreds of uranium mines on the Navajo reservation & hire Navajos without telling them that research had already shown that uranium causes cancer, was that okay since the purpose was not to harm Navajos? And, even though they chose a marginalized population to exploit, did this have nothing to do with viewing this group as inferior?

You gonna answer my questions, unsung?

cajunkiwi

scb wrote:

scb wrote:

unsung wrote:

As the bill is written what group is its' intended target? I don't want your interpretation of it, I want to know the law.

I think the bill targets undocumented immigrants AT THE EXPENSE OF other people of color who are here legally.

What's your point, exactly? That a law that harms a minority population is ok as long as that wasn't its primary intention?

Let me ask you this: Back when the US goverment decided to put hundreds of uranium mines on the Navajo reservation & hire Navajos without telling them that research had already shown that uranium causes cancer, was that okay since the purpose was not to harm Navajos? And, even though they chose a marginalized population to exploit, did this have nothing to do with viewing this group as inferior?

You gonna answer my questions, unsung?

Nah, he'll just reply and tell you it's a smokescreen for the truth

_

cajunkiwi wrote:

scb wrote:

scb wrote:

I think the bill targets undocumented immigrants AT THE EXPENSE OF other people of color who are here legally.

What's your point, exactly? That a law that harms a minority population is ok as long as that wasn't its primary intention?

Let me ask you this: Back when the US goverment decided to put hundreds of uranium mines on the Navajo reservation & hire Navajos without telling them that research had already shown that uranium causes cancer, was that okay since the purpose was not to harm Navajos? And, even though they chose a marginalized population to exploit, did this have nothing to do with viewing this group as inferior?

You gonna answer my questions, unsung?

Nah, he'll just reply and tell you it's a smokescreen for the truth

Looks like he's not even going to reply. How can we be expected to take what people say seriously if they refuse to engage in actual conversation? :?

Godfather.

the bill was created to help solve a problem, civil rights are very imporant but so are the rights of Americans.
I have seen police on t.v that said they don't even wan't to deal with this issue,it would be impossible to make everybody happy with any new bill to replace the new Az. bill,in all honesty I don't think that most( but not all )protesters of this bill will be happy unyil the borders are opened up(thats what they seem to be after) and that would be a huge problem,some can say this bill only targets Mexican people but will be a tool to targe anybody here illegly from any other country and thats where the profiling will come in and not be a issue of skin color.

Godfather.

_

Godfather. wrote:

... civil rights are very imporant but so are the rights of Americans.... some can say this bill only targets Mexican people but will be a tool to targe anybody here illegly from any other country and thats where the profiling will come in and not be a issue of skin color.

Godfather.

:? :?

I don't understand either of these statements, especially the first one. We are talking about the civil rights of Americans, so how can you say it's okay to violate the civil rights of Americans because the rights of Americans are more important?? :?

cajunkiwi

Godfather. wrote:

the bill was created to help solve a problem, civil rights are very imporant but so are the rights of Americans.
I have seen police on t.v that said they don't even wan't to deal with this issue,it would be impossible to make everybody happy with any new bill to replace the new Az. bill,in all honesty I don't think that most( but not all )protesters of this bill will be happy unyil the borders are opened up(thats what they seem to be after) and that would be a huge problem,some can say this bill only targets Mexican people but will be a tool to targe anybody here illegly from any other country and thats where the profiling will come in and not be a issue of skin color.

Godfather.

Actually, I think the profiling will be racial and will be based on skin color. If you're a cop looking to pull over someone for being in the country illegally, will you pull over the guy who looks like Carlos Mencia or will you pull over the guy who looks like Robin Williams?

By the way, scb, you got old in a hurry... lol

Godfather.

tonifig8 wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

Maybe I'm wrong on this but didn't the language in the bill just recently get changed.

You are correct --- I guess they finally realized that it was simply racial profiling..... Let's tune in and see what else gets changed.....

I am sure so many of you guys will continue to support this bill, no matter what! That my friend, I do not understand.... The law makers finally realized it, why can't everyone else? :? :? :? :?
very confusing if you ask me.

I don't think it's a matter of some of us supporting the bill some of us are just tired of what has been happening along the border states and the other countrys that people come here from illegally.
this is a step in the right direction to some of us, it might not be perfect but it's a start.

Godfather.

_

cajunkiwi wrote:

By the way, scb, you got old in a hurry... lol

You mean my avatar? Yeah, we grow up so fast these days! j/k The picture is of my grandmother. Wasn't she beautiful!?

cajunkiwi

scb wrote:

cajunkiwi wrote:

By the way, scb, you got old in a hurry... lol

You mean my avatar? Yeah, we grow up so fast these days! j/k The picture is of my grandmother. Wasn't she beautiful!?

One minute you're two young girls, and the next you're an adult woman - it's like Transformers gone crazy.

She's beautiful though! And probably less crazy than mine - my grandmother used to swear she could see auras, and once gave me a book by L. Ron Hubbard (long before I'd ever heard of Scientology). I never read the book, but when I found out who L. Ron Hubbard was, suddenly some of the things my grandmother used to say were seen in a whole different light...

gimmesometruth27

ahhh yes....more bigotry at work....by the way, i find the term "anchor baby" absolutely disgusting and reprehensible....yet it is ok for privileged white lawmakers and rush limbaugh to use it...

Author of Arizona immigration law wants to end birthright citizenship

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100521/ ... ews_pl2192

The author of Arizona's immigration law, state Sen. Russell Pearce, told constituents he wants to pass another measure to invalidate citizenship granted to the children of illegal aliens.

Pearce wrote that he plans to "push for an Arizona bill that would refuse to accept or issue a birth certificate that recognizes citizenship to those born to illegal aliens, unless one parent is a citizen," in an email obtained by Phoenix CBS affiliate KPHO.

Pearce also forwarded an email from another correspondent expanding on the proposal — which he later told KPHO he didn't agree with. "If we are going to have an effect on the anchor baby racket, we need to target the mother. Call it sexist, but that's the way nature made it. Men don't drop anchor babies, illegal alien mothers do," the email said.

Pearce did tell the CBS affiliate, however, that he didn't see anything wrong with using the term "anchor baby" to refer to natural-born U.S. citizens.

Last year, 92 Congressmen sponsored a bill that would change the 14th Amendment so that children of illegal aliens born in the United States would not be granted citizenship. The bill is still in committee.

Last month, Rep. Duncan Hunter of California told a tea party rally he would support deporting children of illegal aliens, even if they are citizens.

"And we're not being mean. We're just saying it takes more than walking across the border to become an American citizen," he said. "It's what's in our souls."

His spokesman later sought to clarify the remarks with the Associated Press, saying that Duncan believes that "U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants should stay with their parents unless there is a legal guardian who could take care of them."

— Liz Goodwin is a national affairs writer for Yahoo! News

unsung

Finally someone introduces this.