What exactly is wrong with Arizona Immigration Law SB1070?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**jp400**

agnosto wrote:
Should I scan my degree and certificates for you? My word carries just as much weight in a discussion on the topic matter as yours. You spent a week doing something and I've spent years working within the community. Congrats.

Oh I didn't know that you were Operations Command during that timeframe. A week you say...

From the sound of things, I bet you have spent years behind a desk.

**Wrexasaur**

Kanluwen wrote:The point is:
This law is ENTIRELY ridiculous. It's racial profiling at its very core.

Being Hispanic in Arizona might be pretty crappy for a while...

You want to do something about illegal immigration?

Then put the companies making it lucrative to bring illegal immigrants across the border into your crosshairs.

That makes the situation complicated though! Who would want to do that?

**Frazzled**

Proudly displayed, in the second paragraph, "in defeating and elusive, narco-terrorist". You'd think they could edit something if they wanted to be taken seriously...

Should I scan my degree and certificates for you? My word carries just as much weight in a discussion on the topic matter as yours. You spent a week doing something and I've spent years working within the community. Congrats.

Correction, you say you have.

But lets take you at your word. You work in the, er federal government no? The same federal government that's stood by and allow this to happen (under both Dem and Rep governments)? If so you have unclean hands in this matter.

**Frazzled**

jp400 wrote:

And if they would have made me run around in the old school blues, you would have seen me naked greeting boarder jumpers.

Well that might have actually worked. It'd scare me.

**jp400**

Frazzled wrote:
jp400 wrote:

And if they would have made me run around in the old school blues, you would have seen me naked greeting boarder jumpers.

Well that might have actually worked. It'd scare me.

Yeah.. seeing a grown man wearing nothing but issue undies would scare anyone....

**Kilkrazy**

agnosto wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:The law sounds like our Suss law of the 70s, which was repealed in the 80s because it caused too many riots, and was brought back under guise of Terrorism legislation in the 2000s.

Basically it allows the police to stop and search people on suspicion.

The problem with the law was that it was disproportionately used against black people, who not unnaturally saw that as evidence of racism on the part of the police.

I imagine Arizona and other border states probably have a high proportion of legal Mexican-American residents, who are going to be on the receiving end of the big stick as much as any illegals.

BTW there is a similar law in Japan which allows the police to stop and ask any foreigner they like for his passport or Alien Registration Card which must be carried at all times.

The Japanese have the advantage that they can easily pick on non-Japanese looking people suspecting them to be foreign. However they also pick on non-Japanese looking Japanese people (naturalised citizens) who are not obliged by law to carry ID, and this can cause friction.

We already have probable cause laws that allow police to detain and question if they have even the slightest evidence of wrong-doing (i.e., speeding violation) this is what you see on the show "Cops" when the officer pulls a car over for speeding to some other traffic infraction then finds drugs or something.

The whole time I lived in Asia, I was never once asked for ID except when entering a country. In fact, I was lost in Tokyo (I forget which ward) and a police officer walked away from me when I asked him, in my terrible Japanese, where the train station was. LOL. Ah, memories. That's not to say, they are lax; to the contrary, when I first entered the country, I was detained in Narita airport because my visa document had some writing on it that some twit at the dispatch service I was going to work for had scribbled on it. They checked my story and contacted the service then let me go after I wrote an apology and spoke with some official. Quite a surreal experience.

English police also had and have reasonable suspicion laws to work with. In the Suss days they had an unreasonable suspicion law which they used to stop black people because they felt like it. It got so bad that TV comedy shows were doing sketches about police stopping a man for crossing the road with thick lips, or wearing a loud shirt in a built-up area.

The last three times I have been to Japan the police have questioned me right outside the Immigration and Arrivals in Narita Airport. I don't give them any sass because it would probably lead to trouble and it's a chance to practice Japanese. I've got my gaijin card and a legit Japanese address so it isn't a problem.

It makes me wonder how suspicious I look -- white, middle-class, middle-aged, sitting at the coach station next to a smart suitcase with airline tags on it, drinking a Diet Coke while looking tired, jet-lagged and fanning my face with a coach ticket.

I suspect actually they pick on me because I look so "straight" I am sure to be an easy tick on their "Question 50 suspects a day" form.

Funnily enough I have never been stopped while wandering around, whether in the suburbs or the city centre.

You would have to be a very lame kind of illegal immigrant to get into the country through the airport Immigration and then get caught outside the terminal building.

**Wrexasaur**

Interesting opinion article from the NY times.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/breathing-while-undocumented/?ref=opinion

I’m glad I’ve already seen the Grand Canyon.

Because I’m not going back to Arizona as long as it remains a police state, which is what the appalling anti-immigrant bill that Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law last week has turned it into.

If you wanted to be clear as to the intent of the article before reading it... or... to just react to the first paragraph.

You would have to be a very lame kind of illegal immigrant to get into the country through the airport Immigration and then get caught outside the terminal building.

"I'll just sit here for a minute and drink my pepsi... what? Is that a bad idea or something?"

**Frazzled**

And one from the WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703465204575208382473306238.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

**helgrenze**

Kilkrazy wrote:
It makes me wonder how suspicious I look -- white, middle-class, middle-aged, sitting at the coach station next to a smart suitcase with airline tags on it, drinking a Diet Coke while looking tired, jet-lagged and fanning my face with a coach ticket.

I suspect actually they pick on me because I look so "straight" I am sure to be an easy tick on their "Question 50 suspects a day" form.

The Diet Coke is a dead give away. No-one actually drinks that.

**Frazzled**

helgrenze wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:
It makes me wonder how suspicious I look -- white, middle-class, middle-aged, sitting at the coach station next to a smart suitcase with airline tags on it, drinking a Diet Coke while looking tired, jet-lagged and fanning my face with a coach ticket.

I suspect actually they pick on me because I look so "straight" I am sure to be an easy tick on their "Question 50 suspects a day" form.

The Diet Coke is a dead give away. No-one actually drinks that.

Only Alqaeda moles. Its how we spot them. Actually there is no such thing as Diet Coke. Its all a clever ploy.

**jp400**

Frazzled wrote:
helgrenze wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:
It makes me wonder how suspicious I look -- white, middle-class, middle-aged, sitting at the coach station next to a smart suitcase with airline tags on it, drinking a Diet Coke while looking tired, jet-lagged and fanning my face with a coach ticket.

I suspect actually they pick on me because I look so "straight" I am sure to be an easy tick on their "Question 50 suspects a day" form.

The Diet Coke is a dead give away. No-one actually drinks that.

Only Alqaeda moles. Its how we spot them. Actually there is no such thing as Diet Coke. Its all a clever ploy.

**Kilkrazy**

Well I usually have a Melon Soda but I thought you Americans would find it easier to understand Diet Coke.

**Wrexasaur**

Frazzled wrote:And one from the WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703465204575208382473306238.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

Reading it currently, and as I expected, it is referring to the fact that this new law is a direct reaction to the lack of federal intervention. I fully assume that the point of this new law, was actually to to get the feds to do something, not for the state to address the problem; hence the rather loud method of getting this law passed.

...

...Arizona's police chiefs association opposed the new law. Local enforcement agencies don't want responsibility for enforcing national immigration laws because they say it makes them less effective at their day jobs. When people in immigrant communities see the local police as deportation agents, they become less likely to report crimes and help in investigations. Conditions worsen.

Restrictionists insist, with some justification, that these laws are shrinking the illegal population. The larger reality is that border crossings track the economy. The recent downturn has meant fewer illegal entries and more immigrants going home. Before the law, Arizona's illegal population had fallen 18% in the past year.

Congressional Democrats have no intention of enacting serious immigration reform before November. President Obama is surely playing politics with the situation in Arizona for gain in the fall. He'd like to pick a fight and define Republicans as anti-Hispanic going into the election, without having to propose anything substantive.

We'd support a national immigration reform that was realistic about the fact that most of these are economic migrants who will find a way to come here in any case if this is where the jobs are. The most effective way to reduce illegal entries and defuse these tensions is to expand legal channels, including guest worker programs. This would reduce illegal immigration and free up security resources to threats from drug gangs and the like.

But so long as Republicans, Democrats and Mr. Obama mainly view immigration as an electoral weapon, the nation can expect more desperate laws like Arizona's.

A tactical application of pressure, being used to be able to ask the question... "What exactly are you going to do about it instead? It is YOUR job, we are just trying to protect our state."

**Frazzled**

Wrexasaur wrote:
Frazzled wrote:And one from the WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703465204575208382473306238.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

Reading it currently, and as I expected, it is referring to the fact that this new law is a direct reaction to the lack of federal intervention. I fully assume that the point of this new law, was actually to to get the feds to do something, not for the state to address the problem; hence the rather loud method of getting this law passed.

...

...Arizona's police chiefs association opposed the new law. Local enforcement agencies don't want responsibility for enforcing national immigration laws because they say it makes them less effective at their day jobs. When people in immigrant communities see the local police as deportation agents, they become less likely to report crimes and help in investigations. Conditions worsen.

Restrictionists insist, with some justification, that these laws are shrinking the illegal population. The larger reality is that border crossings track the economy. The recent downturn has meant fewer illegal entries and more immigrants going home. Before the law, Arizona's illegal population had fallen 18% in the past year.

Congressional Democrats have no intention of enacting serious immigration reform before November. President Obama is surely playing politics with the situation in Arizona for gain in the fall. He'd like to pick a fight and define Republicans as anti-Hispanic going into the election, without having to propose anything substantive.

We'd support a national immigration reform that was realistic about the fact that most of these are economic migrants who will find a way to come here in any case if this is where the jobs are. The most effective way to reduce illegal entries and defuse these tensions is to expand legal channels, including guest worker programs. This would reduce illegal immigration and free up security resources to threats from drug gangs and the like.

But so long as Republicans, Democrats and Mr. Obama mainly view immigration as an electoral weapon, the nation can expect more desperate laws like Arizona's.

A tactical application of pressure, being used to be able to ask the question... "What exactly are you going to do about it instead? It is YOUR job, we are just trying to protect our state."

yep.

**Major Malfunction**

While I don't live in a border state, I do live in one with a significant immigrant population (Georgia) and I have experienced issues here first hand. Driving in Metro Atlanta in certain parts, Gwinnett county to be specific, has become fairly perilous. The chances of you facing an illegal alien without a drivers license let alone insurance is significant. The Gwinnett county blotter is filled daily with arrests made for traffic offenses and the story is the same one over and over... "Driving without a valid license" or "Driving without insurance" with the occasional "Providing False Identification" or "DUI" and "Hold for Immigration.

Don't take my word for it... check it out here:
http://www.gwinnettmugs.com/

The Arizona law doesn't seem to onerous to me. It appears to need some reason for requiring ID (lawful contact) and if I get pulled over, I have to provide ID. If it's good enough for me it's good enough for anyone else.

**helgrenze**

Kanluwen wrote: "Help us take down Wal-Mart, which provides you low low prices by being one of the largest employers of illegal immigrants in the country".

Sorry Kan but you are going to have to prove this bit. And not with the union backed BS from the "Walmart is bad" sites. I know for a FACT that Walmart does EXTENSIVE background checks regularly on its current and future employees. Even to the point that I was approached, while one the job, about something that I didn't even know was on my record. And I am a 6'4", shaggy, white guy.

Also the Immigration problem isn't only "mexicans" there are just as many coming through Mexico that are Panamanian, Guatamalan, even some from South America. And yes there is a difference... just one.

**agnosto**

jp400 wrote:
agnosto wrote:
Should I scan my degree and certificates for you? My word carries just as much weight in a discussion on the topic matter as yours. You spent a week doing something and I've spent years working within the community. Congrats.

Oh I didn't know that you were Operations Command during that timeframe. A week you say...

From the sound of things, I bet you have spent years behind a desk.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad there are people in the military puting their lives on the line for those of us that sit behind desks.

That said, I have a great deal of experience (years) with this particular population in social work, education and now at an administrative level which is a great deal more than your several months spent on the border in an, "observe and report" capacity. I'm discounting your opinion, I'm simply stating that my experience differs from the reasoning that you are espousing.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
Proudly displayed, in the second paragraph, "in defeating and elusive, narco-terrorist". You'd think they could edit something if they wanted to be taken seriously...

Should I scan my degree and certificates for you? My word carries just as much weight in a discussion on the topic matter as yours. You spent a week doing something and I've spent years working within the community. Congrats.

Correction, you say you have.

But lets take you at your word. You work in the, er federal government no? The same federal government that's stood by and allow this to happen (under both Dem and Rep governments)? If so you have unclean hands in this matter.

Think what you like. My opinion is just as valid as yours.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Well I usually have a Melon Soda but I thought you Americans would find it easier to understand Diet Coke.

Man, I could use some CC Lemon about now.

**Frazzled**

except you have a vested interest in the status quo. I don't. The staus quo needs to end.

**helgrenze**

The Arizona law also makes provision for the Fed Laws to take precident. Should the Feds actually make the attempt to do their job.

SB1070 also prohibits state, county, or local officials from limiting or restricting "the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law" and provides that Arizona citizens can sue such agencies or officials to compel such full enforcement.[8][11]

**agnosto**

Frazzled wrote:except you have a vested interest in the status quo. I don't. The staus quo needs to end.

Actually, I stand to benefit more from progressive reform rather than the status quo. I support change; however, I do not believe such laws as SB1070 are necessarily the best way to go about it.

**SilverMK2**

For a nation which was essentially founded by a bunch of immigrants killing off the native population and taking all their stuff, a few Mexicans doing low paid jobs that no one else wants to do for virtually no money really doesn't seem all that bad to me

[/taking the wee rather than making a serious point]

**dogma**

agnosto wrote: Yeah and the fact that I work for the government and deal with legal and illegal immigrants on a daily basis carries no merit...

Frazzled wrote:None to me. You're part of the problem.

So, basically, you want to willfully ignore data pertaining to the situation you're critical of in order to rant about vague concepts?

Dude, if we got you a tie-dyed t-shirt and a joint, put you in Berkley during the 60's, and changed some of the words coming out of you we'd have one hell of a hippie.

**Frazzled**

And if the illegal aliens were suddenly gone where would you be?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverMK2 wrote:For a nation which was essentially founded by a bunch of immigrants killing off the native population and taking all their stuff, a few Mexicans doing low paid jobs that no one else wants to do for virtually no money really doesn't seem all that bad to me

[/taking the wee rather than making a serious point]

Sophistry. Do you have an open border? How about we let all the refugees from Africa come live there, including the Somali khat eating pirates and technicals?

**dogma**

Frazzled wrote:except you have a vested interest in the status quo. I don't. The staus quo needs to end.

No, that's a false conclusion. People working in a given system do not necessarily have a vested interest in the status quo.

**agnosto**

Frazzled wrote:And if the illegal aliens were suddenly gone where would you be?

Actually, I'd have more work, not less because then they wouldn't be hiding.

**dogma**

Frazzled wrote:And if the illegal aliens were suddenly gone where would you be?

Paying for the increased cost of goods and services with everyone else.

Frazzled wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:For a nation which was essentially founded by a bunch of immigrants killing off the native population and taking all their stuff, a few Mexicans doing low paid jobs that no one else wants to do for virtually no money really doesn't seem all that bad to me

[/taking the wee rather than making a serious point]

Sophistry. Do you have an open border? How about we let all the refugees from Africa come live there, including the Somali khat eating pirates and technicals?

He said it was sophistry in his post. Additionally, your rebuttal is sophistry, as are the majority of your attempts at argument in this thread.

**Frazzled**

agnosto wrote:
Frazzled wrote:And if the illegal aliens were suddenly gone where would you be?

Actually, I'd have more work, not less because then they wouldn't be hiding.

If they weren't here would you have a job?
If you did have a job how much money is being spent in your group on people who are criminally here, that could be spent on US citizens-the people that actually pay your salary?

**Marshal2Crusaders**

Has no one heard about the special work camps the government is building to house all of the illegals so that it doesnt overburden the prison system?

**ShivanAngel**

dogma wrote:
Frazzled wrote:And if the illegal aliens were suddenly gone where would you be?

Paying for the increased cost of goods and services with everyone else.

Frazzled wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:For a nation which was essentially founded by a bunch of immigrants killing off the native population and taking all their stuff, a few Mexicans doing low paid jobs that no one else wants to do for virtually no money really doesn't seem all that bad to me

[/taking the wee rather than making a serious point]

Sophistry. Do you have an open border? How about we let all the refugees from Africa come live there, including the Somali khat eating pirates and technicals?

He said it was sophistry in his post. Additionally, your rebuttal is sophistry, as are the majority of your attempts at argument in this thread.

Even though i agree with something being done about the illegals....

Id love to see how many of the " THEY DERK DER DERBS" people would actually get a job.... OR would they find another reason to complain.... I really dont get it, give me a newspaper and a day and by the end of it i bet you i will have some form of employment.

**gregor_xenos**

Unlike North Carolina you're pushing majority hispanic in Arizona. it wold require more that, ala speaking Spanish, waiting at a known day labor position, working at McDonalds, that sort of thing.

Been to NC lately?