I hope the families of every one of these victims sues the federal government.

[JRDelirious]

@jtgain

One look at me and hear one sentence from me and you know that I am a citizen.

Really? You want to go there?

ETA: And Magiver, I think sh1bu1 may be whooshing y’all

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@Magiver

We have immigration laws that are not only ignored by the Federal Government, any attempt to enforce them by State governments are met with Federal litigation.

Since it is the function of a government to enforce it’s own laws I’d say a lawsuit is warranted.

And a state can’t go after it’s employers who hire undcoumented works because why?

It’d be too effective and less prone to racial profiling?

[TravisFromOR]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

And a state can’t go after it’s employers who hire undcoumented works because why?

It’d be too effective and less prone to racial profiling?

Plus, it would put rich people in jail.

If we had a ten year prison term for each undocumented worker an employer knowingly hired, there would be no jobs for illegal aliens.

[Magiver]

@TravisFromOR

Plus, it would put rich people in jail.

If we had a ten year prison term for each undocumented worker an employer knowingly hired, there would be no jobs for illegal aliens.

false ID’s are a dime a dozen. Hiring a detective to ferret out the criminals would be profiling. It’s the governments job to deal with illegal immigration.

[magellan01]

@sh1bu1

I have a friend who died from choking at a restaurant. Tragically, Juan Gozales, a busboy trained in the Heimlich maneuver had been arrested and deported the day before and was unable to save my friend. I am trying to find a lawyer to help the widow sue the INS as well as the Tea Party for aiding and abetting.

:rolleyes:

(That’s all it’s worth)

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@Magiver

false ID’s are a dime a dozen.

So what do you believe was the point of Arizona’s racial profiling encouraging law then? If fake IDs are so easy, and considering the amount of innocent people this could harass, why bother?

Here’s a chilling affected of that law from either the brain dead or bigots:

Shelters fear SB1070 could prevent domestic violence victims from seeking help.

“Every three days there is a domestic violence related death in Arizona,” says Sarah Jones, the director at Emerge.

Jones says abused women are reluctant to get help to begin with, and SB 1070 could be another roadblock. “Anytime you put a barrier up to someone accessing services, the likelihood that they’re going to access services and leave an abusive situation goes down,” according to Jones.

Emerge has 120 shelter beds for women and their children. Already, Jones believes women are dropping out of programs, adding that shelter workers have seen a drop in people attending groups.

How many other people are suffering afraid to get help over this law?
Per your own argument ID is ineffective, so considering negative effects it has, why do you support this law again? Do you retract that point?

Hiring a detective to ferret out the criminals would be profiling.

Really? If you give me a name I can look up right where that person lives, if their alive, and their age, for starters for free. If you give me a social security number there are services to tell if it’s valid with the associated name.

None of that requires profiling, and would catch most "fake ID"s.

It’s the governments job to deal with illegal immigration.

Why is that? If someone buys weed they’re supposed to go to jail, even though it’s “the government’s job” to enforce the prohibition. If I buy Cuban cigars I’m breaking the law, even though it’s the government’s embargo. Clearly there are some prohibitions that it’s incumbent on normal people to be part of the enforcement.

[Bricker]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

So what do you believe was the point of Arizona’s racial profiling encouraging law then? If fake IDs are so easy, and considering the amount of innocent people this could harass, why bother?

Here’s a chilling affected of that law from either the brain dead or bigots:

Shelters fear SB1070 could prevent domestic violence victims from seeking help.
How many other people are suffering afraid to get help over this law?

That article doesn’t explain why shelters fear SB1070 could prevent domestic violence victims from seeking help, and the law itself contains no provisions that would or should prevent domestic violence victims from seeking help.

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@Bricker

That article doesn’t explain why shelters fear SB1070 could prevent domestic violence victims from seeking help, and the law itself contains no provisions that would or should prevent domestic violence victims from seeking help.

That’s a good point. What I think is going on is some victims of domestic violence are not documented and are afraid going to authorities to seek help. You’d be fair to disagree with their being here, but it isn’t fair to expect them to be victims of abuse for it. Not everyone knows their rights and someone in that kind of situation may be confused enough already.

Further I think the article hints at another problem with the law. Let’s say you’re an undocumented worker who has been victimized. Maybe someone stole your stuff, maybe they assaulted, raped, vandalized or did any number of wrongs to you.

Do you go to the cops, or not? If you go you might get justice, or you might deported. Further let’s say you witnessed or have evidence concerning a crime. Do you report what you know and risk being deported or keep quiet?

[kidchameleon]

@Giraffe

If they had repaired the pothole near my house faster, my tires might have lasted a bit longer and not gotten a flat until I was right next to the tire center.

Actually, you can get reimbursed from the city and state in Illinois for tire or wheel damage caused by unrepaired potholes. It’s a bitch to find who to contact, but it can be done. Not exactly what you were talking about, but handy to know.

[Bricker]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

That’s a good point. What I think is going on is some victims of domestic violence are not documented and are afraid going to authorities to seek help. You’d be fair to disagree with their being here, but it isn’t fair to expect them to be victims of abuse for it. Not everyone knows their rights and someone in that kind of situation may be confused enough already.

Further I think the article hints at another problem with the law. Let’s say you’re an undocumented worker who has been victimized. Maybe someone stole your stuff, maybe they assaulted, raped, vandalized or did any number of wrongs to you.

Do you go to the cops, or not? If you go you might get justice, or you might deported. Further let’s say you witnessed or have evidence concerning a crime. Do you report what you know and risk being deported or keep quiet?

But there’s no aspect of the law that could cause that result to be reached. The law doesn’t have anything to do with people who report crimes to the cops, either when they are the victims or when a third party is the victim.

I absolutely agree it isn’t fair to expect anyone to be a victim without legal redress, but SB1070 doesn’t do that at all.

[magellan01]

@kidchameleon

Actually, you can get reimbursed from the city and state in Illinois for tire or wheel damage caused by unrepaired potholes. It’s a bitch to find who to contact, but it can be done. Not exactly what you were talking about, but handy to know.

I’ve heard that that is the case in San Francisco also.

Bricker, would you mind addressing my questions in Post 47?

[Uzi]

@Bryan_Ekers

I’ll hazard a guess that while politicians get mileage from saying they want to crack down on illegals, they’re rather less keen to allocate the necessary funding to do so, including building the hundreds (if not thousands) of new prisons and detention facilities to try to hold hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people whose main reason for being in the U.S. is that Americans are willing (indeed, eager) to hire them.

You should be only holding them long enough to put them on a boat or plane back to wherever they came from. No prisons required.

[Saint_Cad]

@Uzi

You should be only holding them long enough to put them on a boat or plane back to wherever they came from. No prisons required.

I say send them to Chad.

Pay Chad $10 (IIRC that is 92% of Chadian Annual GDP) to take them in. US gets off cheap and it makes it harder for them to get back in.

[kidchameleon]

@Saint_Cad

I say send them to Chad.

Pay Chad $10 (IIRC that is 92% of Chadian Annual GDP) to take them in. US gets off cheap and it makes it harder for them to get back in.

Offshoring our illegals?!?

[Bricker]

@magellan01

Bricker, would you mind addressing my questions in Post 47?

Sure!

@magellan01

Bricker, I accept your opinion on the law. But let me present this for your opinion: let’s say I’m walking dow the steps outside a courtroom and fall. I’d assume that as long as the stairs were in good repair, the fault is mine. But lets say that there is a big chunk missing from the stairs, and I fall because of it, does that change things. And let’s then also say that there is a chunk missing from the stairs, and the building management knew about it and was supposed to fix it, or at least cordon it off until it was fixed, but didn’t, does that change things.

I’ll give another example, that might be different. Let’s say that people have fallen on the long rise of steps, so the building management install handrails for people to use. I use that handrail, to catch myself, and it comes loose and a fall badly, does that change things as far as the ability to sue? In my mind (non-lawyer) it seems that if the government takes steps to ensure our safety, and we depend on them, and they fail or are negligent in some way, that they should be held accountable.

Does that make sense? Or is Sovereign Immunity so sweeping as to protect from them from even what I described?

Sovereign immunity is so sweeping that it protects the government even in that case.

But let’s remember what sovereign immunity is: it’s the immunity of the government from lawsuits, except where it consents to be sued. Assuming the federal government or a state government was directly liable for the disrepair of the building, there will be a law that allows people to sue the government in that sort of case.

This isn’t my area of law, but I can give a brief overview. The federal government has waived its immunity for torts committed by federal employees thought the passage of the Federal Tort Claims Act (PDF).

The Federal Tort Claims Act is the statute by which the United States authorizes
tort suits to be brought against itself. With exceptions, it makes the United States
liable for injuries caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any federal
employee acting within the scope of his employment, in accordance with the law of
the state where the act or omission occurred. Three major exceptions, under which
the United States may not be held liable, even in circumstances where a private
person could be held liable under state law, are the Feres doctrine, which prohibits
suits by military personnel for injuries sustained incident to service; the discretionary
function exception, which immunizes the United States for acts or omissions of its
employees that involve policy decisions; and the intentional tort exception, which
precludes suits against the United States for assault and battery, among some other
intentional torts, unless they are committed by federal law enforcement or
investigative officials.

States have similar laws allowing citizen to sue them, and there’s also a federal law (42 USC § 1983) making states amenable to suits for violating federal civil rights.

[villa]

@Saint_Cad

I say send them to Chad.

Pay Chad $10 (IIRC that is 92% of Chadian Annual GDP) to take them in. US gets off cheap and it makes it harder for them to get back in.

First, I am assuming you mean per capita GDP. Because the idea that the entire GDP of Chad is $11 is a little disturbing.

Even if you do mean per capita, you are off by a factor of well over 100. Chad’s per capita GDP is $1500

[Lemur866]

@Uzi

You should be only holding them long enough to put them on a boat or plane back to wherever they came from. No prisons required.

Where did they come from? You can’t just drop them all off in Tijuana or Juarez, because they aren’t all Mexicans.

It takes a while to determine the exact legal status of every detainee. Are they American citizens with no documentation? Are they foreign nationals but have the right to stay in this country? Where should they be deported to? What if their supposed home country refuses to take them? What if processing the legal status of the detainee requires government workers, and the budget has been cut so the government workers have a 2 year backlog? And the voters have voted for money to keep detainees in prison, but no money to determine what should be done with them?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@TravisFromOR

Does the OP realize that when someone sues the federal government, they are, in fact, suing him?

What? Is this true? So much for my plan for total prosperity; Everyone sue the government for $1 million. We’ll all live like kings!

[Acsenray]

@Kearsen

The personal responsibility of not deporting them is who exactly? I think this follows that the government is the one shirking the personal responsibility here.

You’re skipping some more proximate responsibilities. For example, I gather from the thread on banning peanut butter in schools that it’s primarily the responsibility of the victim to ensure that he or she doesn’t get killed in the first place.

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@Bricker

But there’s no aspect of the law that could cause that result to be reached. The law doesn’t have anything to do with people who report crimes to the cops, either when they are the victims or when a third party is the victim.

I absolutely agree it isn’t fair to expect anyone to be a victim without legal redress, but SB1070 doesn’t do that at all.

Arizona needed to get the word out about what the law really meant, then. As I said people, particularly people in troubled situations, don’t necessarily understand their rights. Further the government recognizes this on some level, otherwise what’s the point of the Miranda rights?