What a bizarre post, could you translate it for me please ?
Punctuation and grammar are your friends, Tao. Let me try to fix that:
“Let’s see[:] first you post about how you feel people should be harassed for an immutable char[ac]teristic, [then you create a] straw man [about] human rights, and then [you] post a bigoted thing about Hispanics.”
Which is an assessment of Lust4Life’s post I don’t fundamentally disagree with, although I’m not sure I’d hit the “hate speech” button over it.
Yes, it’s racist, and, obviously, the way to fix this is to treat no one like they are evil outsiders. No civil rights activist advocates for discrimination against everyone to make it fair.
And, yes, you sure as hell do pull over anyone. Otherwise, it becomes easy to just find the darker skinned Latinos who can pass as black. You are aware that Latinos do not all look the same, right?
The police, namely. What would common sense tell you when looking for terrorists at an Israeli airport? What occurred on 30th of May 1972?
The entire notion of “stealing jobs” is absurd anyway. Markets respond to population growth (barring saturation) and there are more employment opportunities. Otherwise literally every other employed person in the country could be accused of stealing a job. Given saturation, the couple refusing to use contraception or abortion caused one’s job to be stolen. There is a nationalist argument that jobs “belong” to the people within the nation, but that form of protectionism is dead in the era of comparative advantage and globalisation.
Good. Then maybe they could feel a little of the plight of all those people getting bothered by the police because they were born a Paddy O’Malley instead of a respectable John Smith like everyone decent. And then maybe, just maybe, they went on to protest against people getting questioned like they were from the IRA without any probable cause whatsoever.
And that’s shoddy police work that criminals can and do use to their advantage.
That’s not thinking things through.
There you have it, folks. All those bleeding heart human rights campaigners ? Criminals.
Is it ? Because that’s pretty much what happens here in France, where the cops aren’t really tied down by anti-profiling laws and many of whom are openly racist. That’s how you get innocent kids shot in the head while inside a police station, handcuffed to a radiator.
Which goes some ways towards explaining why the folks from our ghettos are perma-angry and riot every other year.
To give you an example of what I mean: in France you’re required to have ID on your person at all times, and cops can stop you in the street and request you show it. They also routinely carry searches out in the streets (even though it’s technically illegal - but then if you protest they can haul you in and keep you in the drunk tank for 24 hours so…).
I, white middle class guy, have been stopped like that once in my entire life (for smoking in the subway no less - an actual infraction in plain view). Buddy of mine in college however was a 3rd generation Algerian straight for the cités, tracksuit and all. His family was dirt poor, he’d gotten into this particular college via some scholarship program or other. He got stopped at least once a week by cops assuming that the only reason a kid from the projects would be seen around the campus was to sell drugs or commit mischief. Just good sense to search him over and over, right ?
I think the worst thing about it all was that it didn’t even bother him any more - to him that was just how things were, that’s how they’d always been. If anything, it was worse back in the cité.
Clue me in here: why is Arpaio being sued and not prosecuted?
Right, you go after the right-looking people whether or not they’re guilty. To make absolutely sure they don’t commit future crime, you follow them into tube stops and shoot them in the head.
IANAL but I would guess it is Qualified Immunity:
In general, the practices alleged either don’t rise to the level of criminal activity, or would be difficult to impute criminal liability directly to Arapio. In other words, not only would you have to provbe that a deputy lied to support a probable cause determination, but that Arapio ordered him to tell that lie.
No, not really. In general, qualified immunity is a shield from civil liability, not criminal.
You’re perfectly free to argue that such tactics mnake sense.
However, the question here seems to be: are such tactics legal? In other words, the OP discussed the impending DOJ lawsuit against Sheriff Arapio, which seeks to prove (1) That he did the acts alleged, and (2) They constitute a violation of the law.
I don’t agree that these tactics are wise, but that’s not relevant, any more than your seeming agreement with the proposition that they are wise. The question is: did they happen, and were they legal?
Cite?
Well Bricker I got to hand it to you. You dO this exact dickish legal thing which I hate even when you go against Republicans. You’re a consistent legalistic dick, not a partisan one.
I am not sure why this thread drifted away from Arpaio and into silly claims about racial profiling, but we already have evidence that racial or ethnic profiling fails while behavioral profiling works.
(And lynching is pretty much the natural result of racial profiling, so it is not absurd by any reasonable definition.)
Salon.com: Why Racial profiling doesn’t work
I have no idea whther SCOTUS will eventually strike down or uphold the Arizona law, but the folks in robes are interested in the application of Law, not the effectiveness of police work. To the extent that racial profiling creates antagonism between people and the police while failing to actually accomplish a goal of protecting the public, it is just stupid.
And this is the sort of silly racist nonsense that is used to support failed policies, where you imply that all the people who match the description of your targeted ethnic group are “illegal immigrants or petty criminals, or have friends and or family who are so,” despite the fact that, in Arizona, nearly 30% of the population falls into the category most likely to be searched. You implication is that nearly 1.9 million people (out of about 6.3 million), are “illegal immigrants or petty criminals, or have friends and or family who are so” based on nothing more than their appearance.
Ummm… thanks?
Even as a left-handed compliment, this does not belong in Grerat Debates. Leave the insults for The Pit.
[ /Moderating ]
I don’t actually recall saying that everyone who claims to be a liberal is actually criminally involved with the people who are the subjects of the actions people are complaining about.
But I am saying that people who don’t have a liberal bone in their bodies do routinely jump on the bandwagon and cry crocodile tears to further their own agendas.
And as to the incredible sensitivity by proxy displayed by some people…
For a time I was street homeless, everywhere I went I was looked at suspiciously or with contempt by ordinary members of the public, if I went into a shop I was watched like a hawk in case I stole something, if I approached someone for any reason at all, they’d walk away because they thought that I was going to ask them for money.
As to the police, god knows how many times I was questioned, made to empty my pockets, or moved on, not because I’d actually done anything but because I fell into the image of someone who was likely to perform some sort of criminal behaviour, was looking for the opportunity to do so, or most likely had done so in the past.
The fact is I never begged or stole during my time of misfortune, but I didn’t get all upset and hurt feelings, and whine about my being selected well above the average for police attention.
Because in the first place I’m a big boy now, so I sucked it up, and secondly the fact was that most, if not all of my street bretheren who I got to know really well, would steal at any opportunity, and on ocassion actually rob.
Mostly to pay for their habits, drugs and/ or booze, but some who didn’t actually have a habit, but were in the same boat, did so anyway.
This was a result of profiling, there was no racism involved,it was equal opportunities treatment, us white tramps received exactly the same amount of police “attention” as everyone else.
Which is why I can’t feel an incredible amount of sympathy when people start boo hooing about what a cruel world they live in.
And if you really think that the police should stop West Indians in the street when they’re clamping down on White Supremacists because otherwise then they’re being racist ?
Well I’ll say nothing more about that.
Being a vagrant is not an immutable trait.
Being targeted by police for no more reason than your race is offensive. It is government oppression of a given minority and makes members of that minority scared of the very people who are presumably there to protect them.
Making up arguments to attack is called creating a straw man. It is an example of failed logic–and generally of a failed viewpoint.
Let’s hope not. 
Correct me if I’m wrong, but several of the incidents you cited involve “victims” who refused police officers explicit instructions and got cuffed/arrested because of that. That happens all the time, everywhere, even in the bluest of the states, and seems to be proper procedure. Why single out Arpaio’s department?
I mean: “When she arrived home, they insisted that she stay in the car… After she tried to enter her home, officers took her to the ground, kneed her in the back and handcuffed her.”
Do you see this going differently anywhere else in the country?