No need for racism here.
Nor in Maricopa County, Arizona. Nevertheless . . .
nor stereotypes.
And, yet, a still-older attitude does seem to hang on in enclaves, here and there.
From The Good Shepherd:
Joseph Palmi [Joe Pesci]: Let me ask you something… we Italians, we got our families, and we got the church; the Irish, they have the homeland, Jews their tradition; even the niggers, they got their music. What about you people, Mr. Wilson, what do you have?
Edward Wilson [Matt Damon]: The United States of America. It’s ours. The rest of you are just visiting.
Need I say more?
You need say considerably more. “Hollywood” is no argument.
don’t need no stinkin’ badges.
If you had one, would you be working for Arpaio?
Seguramente que si. Es que, con este mundo tan rechulado, se tiene que buscar el trabajo mas digno, no?
Mucho gusto conocerte, PPP.
Excuse me, but I pointed out a specific allegation of how his deputies’ actions broke the law. How, in the face of that, do you ask how he’s breaking laws?
Babelfish translates that as:
“Surely that if. It is that, with this so rechulado world, must look for the worthy work but, no? Much taste conocerte, PPP.”
Hard to dispute.
Google stumbles on «rechular», but comes up with the otherwise more nearly accurate
“Surely so. Is that with this world so rechulado, you have to look for work more worthy, no?
Nice to meet you, PPP”
That said, pepe, this is an English language board and aside from very well known foreign phrases, posters are expected to post in English.
Let me help, rechulado comes from “chulo” that means pretty, the “re” is a prefix that means “over” or “double” so in essence, “very beautiful”
And no, zpepelepu, I live in Arizona and I’m Hispanic, what you are saying is really silly, working for Arpaio would only be commendable among people that disregard the law just to pander to the prejudice of others for political gain.
The “people” he serves thinking he is an asset does not tell you much by itself.
I am willing to bet some good-ole boy sheriffs who harassed black people were deemed an “asset” by the people they served and were consistently re-elected.
Arpaio seems to be squarely among this group.
Certainly, under the law as written, it would be stupid to give Scandinavians the same scrutiny as Hispanics. In fact, the law as written requires that Scandinavians be given much more scrutiny: It requires extra scrutiny for people who look like they might be immigrants, and none of the native peoples of Arizona look remotely like Scandinavians, but they do look rather like most Hispanics. Therefore, the law as written requires the extra scrutiny of Scandinavians but not of Hispanics.
Of course, the law as written is racist, and it just points to the idiocy of the people who drafted it that it’s not racist in the same way that they intended. But that’s an argument for repealing it.
When English football fans go abroad en mass for international fixtures they are always targeted by the local LEAs.
Police in riot gear, mounted officers etc. and they’re often coralled to and from the match.
No doubt many of them are perfectly law abiding citizens, and have never commited an act of violence in their lives.
So is this racist/countryist them being singled out for special treatment ?
Shouldn’t American and Japanese tourists receive the same treatment ?
I mean its only fair.
Lets face it, you don’t pull over African Americans, Australians or Koreans, when you’re looking for illegal immigrants, or members of Mexican Drug Cartels; not too far away from the Mexican border.
Except that’s the very kind of profiling that police had been used to do for hundreds of years prior to laws banning the practice finally getting put in the books. Do you know why those laws were put in the books ? Because racial profiling leads to shoddy policing and untold amounts of harassment, abuse and ghettoization under the guise of good ol’ common sense. Do you really want to go back to “Somebody’s been murdered, let’s find the nigger who did it !” ?
Society has ruled that making police work very marginally harder, or at least demanding that law enforcement agencies make the effort to project a veneer of fairness, was worth more than inciting race riots. For some reason.
And on the flip side, if you treat every member of a given ethnicity or culture like criminals who don’t deserve certain rights or respect and should “take one for the team” as it were, well then why shouldn’t they become criminals, or think of cops (or worse, whites) as The Enemy ? What have they got to lose ?
In the U.K. the police are regulated so as to record everyone that they pull over in the street for randoming questioning, and they have to ensure that the same number of ethnicities are questioned as well to ensure no racial bias.
So we had the ridiculous situation that when the I.R.A. were committing atrocities in London, the police had to waste valuable time and money questioning Asians, West Indians etc. to make sure that the quotas were similar in number.
The I.R.A. and their supporters loved it, funnily enough the non Irish ethnicities didn’t.
If you’re going after Yardies then you don’t pull over Chinese people, if you’re going after White Supremicists then you don’t pull over Pakistanis.
Thats not being racist, thats being realist.
And to suggest that you do otherwise in the interest of "fairness is nonsensical.
Its not unknown for people who have a vested interest in abolishing this sort of targeting, to use the “Human Rights”, we’re campaigning out of our deep rooted liberal humanist views etc facade as a pretext to stop the actions that are disrupting their activities. when the fact is they are themselves illegal immigrants or petty criminals, or have friends and or family who are so.
To say that profiling is going to result in a restoration of lynch law, etc in this day and age is absurd.
Let’s see first you post about how you feel people should be harassed for an immutable charteristic, straw man human rights, and then post a bigoted thing about Hispanics.
Reported for hate speech.