I don’t complain about Mexican people. I’ve extolled what I see as many of their virtues here on these boards, e.g. strong family unit, exceptionally hard workers. I have no tolerance for illegal immigration, of any flavor. It just turns out that it’s easiest for people from Mexico to get here.
I favor strong immigration reform, consisting of making to easier for people to come here (the number decided by us), a completely locked down border (so we can know everyone who comes in decide IF we want them in) and a guest-worker program similar to what Canada has.
I think one of the most effective thing we should do more of is to go after those who employ illegals. And I’ve stated before that I don’t think we do it conscientiously enough or punish them as severely as we should. And things won’t really change until some business go bankrupt due to fines and/or owners and upper management is walked away in orange jumpsuits.
In the end, WE need to craft an immigration policy that serves US best. If that means allowing in the number we do now, fine. If it means a tenth of that number, fine. If it means a hundred times that number, fine. But it all depends on having a secure border and a no-tolerance policy we can work toward for illegal immigration.
No, rebut is precisely correct. I am a precisely correct kind of guy. I addressed all arguments with rebuttals, citations to case law, and quotation from relevant authority.
I don’t remember a particularly strong debate presence for you. You did several posts that were your usual acerbic wit, leavened with sarcasm, but in terms of actual debate argument, I don’t recall any significant contribution from you.
No, how would that be useful to you? Or for a discussion dealing on how Arizona is out of control? I have no idea why I should.
I did mention that “it is very rare for dashboard cameras to be around to keep the cops in check.” I still say that the most abusive things will be safely outside the “protective” cameras that you are assuming will protect all minorities from abusive actions. The police actions in traffic stops are not BTW an item that I did mention.
Is this true? Because if it is, I cannot envision why people would be so upset with Arizona for actually putting teeth into what seems to me to be a toothless federal law that’s been circumvented and otherwise ignored for…a long time.
How important are illegal hispanics to our economy? What would it cost to make them documented workers, and why is that an issue?
I don’t get it, apparently. Everyone is crying about profiling, doesn’t that occur already? Does INS not have a purpose?
SOMETHING has to be done about illegal aliens in this country…I’m not saying this is necessarily the best way…but what alternative do you Dopers propose that’s better?
Which question are you answering? “No, you’re not going to address all the stuff you made up in your post?”
Or “No, you don’t know why she was arrested?”
Knowing why she was arrested would be kind of key to determine if her case represents abuse. Was there an existing warrant for her arrest? Did she resist when the police served the warrants to search the restaurants? If she was arrested for one of those reasons, then no, I don’t agree she was abused.
If they arrested her because she looked like she might be an illegal alien, then I agree she was abused.
So which was it?
Addressing why you made up all that stuff might shine some light on the actual strength of your case. In my experience, people with strong factual arugments don’t often need to make shit up.
Well, I say you’re full of shit? Why? Because the law has been on the books for years and you haven’t made one little peep against it, have you? But maybe you didn’t know about it. But you do now, right? The Arizona law effects one state, The federal law that says the same thing effects 50 states. So, if you’re soooo concerned about the injustice of this law, why aren’t you whining about the federal law? The bottom line is that you, as usual, don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. And you keep trying to conflate “unjust” and “unconstitutional” to create some impenetrable shield for your ill-though-out nonsense. Sorry. Won’t work.
So, he escaped a police state. Does that make him unerring? He’s simply wrong. As wrong as you. But you don’t have an excuse that makes the knee-jerking error as forgivable.
No, it’s helpful. In that it prevents illegals (and their lawyers) from using the fact that they broke a federal law and the feds aren’t the ones who were enforcing it. Problem is, our elected officials have dropped the ball on this for so long that there aren’t enough federal law enforcement agents to address the magnitude of the problem. So the result is that we have people who we know don’t belong here, but no one wants to say anything because we don’t have enough people to do anything about it. And this gets to the point. You don’t want anything in place to increase the effectiveness of the laws we have. You want to subvert our laws, and our borders.
Well, the initial law was more ripe for abuse. But it was changed in about a week to prevent the problems and more align with the federal law. People are up in arms about it because it might, in fact, be an effective tool. I’m sure Bricker can answer a specific legal question more accurately.
As to your last point, as I said upthread, I think the two most important things we can do is 1) go after employers in a serious way and 2) completely seal the borders.
Meh, That just demonstrates that you are stupid, I mentioned before that I was in favor of the current laws, and a reform to the immigration ones. So far, guys like you only offer the sick, and I’m getting tired of waiting for the carrot part. I became a citizen thanks to a previous reform to the law. Telling us immigrants that we are just subverting our laws is demonstratively idiotic.
First off why “illegal hispanics”, specifically? I’m not calling you racist, but I do think that was poor phrasing.
Secondly what this law does is make legitimately here Hispanics the targets of profiling and worse. Would you like to be pulled over more just because of your race? About possible arrest if you don’t have your ID handy?
So, you’re in favor of them, you just don’t want them enforced…is that about right? Or is it that you don’t want them enforced effectively?
Translation, please. (And, no, not the typo.)
Which one? If you’re talking about Reagan’s amnesty, it was one of the biggest mistakes a modern-day President has made. Doing so after securing the border, might be defensible. Doing so while leaving the border porous—a travesty.
Not if you are. Unless you mean that it won’t sink in. Which, using you as a sample, may mean you’re right.
The problem with electing people to the school board who will improve the La Raza program is that being a member of the school board is a full-time unpaid position. The last time a position was open, there was only one person willing to be on the school board, so there wasn’t any competition at all.
I have no idea of Ward and if he was really a teacher or any of the details. I just live here.
Proposition 100 is a 1 cent sales tax increase to improve schools. “According to the conditional budget, if Proposition 100 fails to pass the following cuts to education funding would occur: $428 million loss to K-12, $107 million loss to universities, $15 million loss to community colleges” I find our school district flawed, but all of my 4 kids attend public schools and I want them to be as good as possible.
As to why it has to be a state law if it’s just a local issue, basically the state superintendent of schools doesn’t like what our local school board is doing and this is the only way he can influence it.
The only reason I phrased it that way is because frankly…that’s what we’re talking about. Undocumented, illegal “aliens” ( I hate that term) that are Hispanic in origin. It seems that Canadians that patriate to the US don’t have that problem of illegal status (or don’t wish to come here at all) and…well, what other illegal “aliens” flood into our country like people of Hispanic origin do? There aren’t any.
If profiling is your main concern, and if you give a shit about illegal immigration, what do YOU propose the USA as a country do?
Even Hispanics that are conservative did go for the crackdowns because it was said by people like McCain that the “carrot”: immigration reform, was going to happen also. What I have noticed that many Hispanic conservatives are not swallowing that this time.
So, citizens like me are a travesty? In any case you are still wrong, it was not a mistake as many families were united and now they are looking to a better future.
To clarify, it is idiotic to say that you are right.
Why, who would dare? Everyone knows that once you have entered the lists, the matter will be brought to the truest of tests, the technical legality of the thing. Its often said, the argument is over once Bricker gets you in his cites.
I don’t see why the two have to necessarily by tied together. I’m a strong advocate of immigration form. I’m also a strong advocate of stopping and reversing illegal immigration. Both of those things benefit the country. We should do them both, but one is better then nothing. and you can’t do the first one until you do the second one and have secure borders. So, would you advocate taking that first step? If not, why not?
Oh, don’t take things so personally. I’m sure it was very good for you, and for many, many people. But it was bad for the U.S. Both those scenarios can be true, you know. It would be really great if a magellan01 national sales tax of 3% was instituted. That would be GREAT for me. Not so great for the country. (Not until I used my riches to buy my way into the Presidency, convert it to an Emperorship and solve all the country’s ills.)
In the GD thread, I provided substantial information that contradicted this claim. And now the state legislature has amended the law to provide that checks can be made only after a valid stop for some other reason.
Yet you continue to insist that this law will result in people being pulled over just because of their race.
