Nope, it says “illegal aliens.” Big surprise, from the article, it clearly states the majority of immigrants are Hispanic. Unfortunately, bigots are getting more and more subtle about their bigotry and couching their language broader and more generalized. Which makes it that much more difficult to prove they’re bigotted, but easier for them to stay that way. Nice, huh?
Where did I say it only applies to brown people? I said it targets them; it does! Hispanics represent the majority of immigrants in the town. If the vast majority of immigrants were Pakistanis, I’d say they were being bigotted against Pakistanis. Keeping up now?
I’m lying because I can’t prove the police will target people on what is commonly called here “susupicion of being Black/Mexican”? Well, no I can’t prove they will; I have no way of predicting the future. Can you prove they won’t? And of course, no honest, good American police officer would stoop to harrassing or beating a minority! It’s unheard of in this country! Never happened, not in Oakland, or Los Angeles, or Philadelphia or New York…oh, wait…
What if they’re not immigrants, Dave? Sorry to break it to you, but not everyone that’s of some other descent than white is born in a different country! How the hell do you know, just looking at someone, that they’re an immigrant? If they’re not breaking a law, then you have no excuse to demand their credentials other than “suspicion of being illegal.”
It isn’t up to that person to prove their innocence, it’s up to the cop/DA to prove their guilt. THAT is the civil right of which I speak. Innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around. Got it now? I know you must, you know EVERYTHING about what’s true and false. Except, apparently, when I’m lying.
How does it not require profiling?
Then you are pretty fuckin stupid.
Lessee, lots more stupid, self righteous bullshit, then…
So if it’s not overt racism it MUST be subtle racism, because it MUST still be racism.
And doesn’t that make sense? As opposed, for example for scrutiniziing a group that you know is not responsible for most of the problem?
Oh give me a break. If you can show that a substantial % of stoppages are the product of what you say and result in the type of treatment you cite, fine. Otherwise, you present a flimsy argument. At best.
You don’t think “The rise in crime is due to illegal immigrants” without providing any supporting evidence is racist? There’s been an increase in the population by 8,000 over the past six years. The rise in crime is ALL due to illegal immigrants? Really? And that’s not racist. Okey dokey.
Yes. When I finished grad school, I got a work permit valid for a year, and a job. In that order. My lawyer and the company I worked for decided that they were not going to run the paperwork required to increase the permit’s length; by law, I could stay in the country for 3 months after the end of my permit (the same amount I would be able to come in as a tourist, incidentally) but not work. At least, not legally.
The HR manager (who hadn’t been with the company much longer than me) called me and told me “oh, but the lawyers tell me you can stay”. I replied “stay, yes. But have they actually told you in so many works that I could still work legally, or have they let you… deducce it?” Silence, then “I’ll call you back.”
She didn’t call me back, but my labmate told me she’d investigated, found out that, at any time, 2/3 of the company’s employees were working without a permit, and gone ballistic on the legal department. Having you work without a permit was just step one of a blackmail scheme: if you ever said “I’ve got a better offer, I’m leaving”, they said “oh, I have Immigration’s phone number here…”
We risked prison. They risked a fine per illegal worker that was less than I made in a week.
To break down on illegal immigration, what’s needed, from the point of view of someone who’s worked in 10 countries other than hers and always legally, is:
Workable legal procedures. Why is it so easy to find information on how to become a US citizen once you’re a resident, but so hard to find it on how to become a resident? The procedures have to be easy to find out, not impossible to carry out. When a migrant submits any kind of paperwork to be considered, they should get some kind of receipt, which should in turn be valid proof that “I’m legal until and unless the government says I’m not, they’re still processing me.” Last time I was in the US, SS took four months to replace my card!
Cracking down on the people who take advantage of the illegals. I wouldn’t say the renters (it’s not really their business to determine whether people looking for a house are “legal” - we don’t expect them to ensure no-one borrow’s Mom’s sleeping pills, do we?), but definitely employers.
Making it possible for immigrants, both legal and illegal, to contact the police safely if they are in a situation where they should. The white slave trade won’t end if the girls are afraid of getting beaten - by the cops. It’s bad enough they’re afraid for their families back home.
I was responding to your specific comment. You added a lot if mind-reading and wiggle room for feelings and motives you want to assign to those you don’t agree with.
But let me ask you this. What would you propose. We can starte with your idea of serioulsy funding the INS, but that will take quite a bit of time for the funding to get allocated and then for to see the results of it. So what would you propose in the meantime? Anything? Nothing?
This thing, like most “illegal immigrants” threads, has gone in a number of directions that have badly polemicized it. So let me ask some questions, in hopes that participants will give valid answers:
Do you favor or oppose enforcing substantial criminal sanctions against those who knowingly employ illegal immigrants? Why or why not?
Do you favor or oppose revisions to the immigration policy that would make it easier for persons of Mexican citizenship to enter and work in the U.S. legally? Why or why not?
Do you favor or oppose the offering of services to persons who are in the U.S. without reference to their immigration status? If not a flat yes or no, what services? And again why or why not?
Well, when I hire someone, I must (and I’m using the pronoun “I” here in its indefinite sense) verify that they are legally present and entitled to work in the United States. There is a list of documents that can do this. In Virginia, applying for or renewing a driver’s license creates a similar requirement: before the new license is issued or the old license renewed, the applicant must prove both his identity and that that he is legally present in the United States.
Are such measures racist?
I certainly reject the suggestion that they are, and it seems obvious to me that if they are not racist when applied to private employers and the public DMV, showing that they ARE racist when applied to private landlords is an uphill battle.
Disclosure, for what it’s worth: my father was born in El Salvador, and came to this country as an immigrant.
I hate to give comfort to the idiots, but that’s not true. Hispanics are a minority, but not a race. I worked on the last census, and the pertinient questions went:
Both questions were asked of all respondents. I can’t tell you how someone caould not know what they consider themselves, but those were the responses.
Favor. I’m all for legal immigration. If it was easier to immigrate, maybe some of the problem with illegal immigration would be resolved.
Offer sevices to legal immigrants. That is an incentive to follow through with legal immigration. If illegal immigrants get the same services as legal immigrants, there is less incentive to follow legal immigration channels.
Let me get this straight - Weirddave started an argument over whether Hispanic people constitute a race. And people actually wasted their time discussing it with him?
Absolutely. If religiously enforced this may be the most effective tool to prevent further illegal migration.
Yes. But only to some numeric point. We should set our own immigration policy based on how many immigrants we think it wise to accept in any given year. I think that right now there should be a moratorium on all low-skilled immigration. After we get a handle on things, my guess is that the number should be higher than it has been, and the process should be much simpler. I also favor work visas that allow for migration for seasonal work. But these need to be enforced stringently and the people made sure to return to their country of origin. Failure to do so should result in serious fines AND immediate legal proceedings to jail them, deport them, and restrict their future migration.
Unclear question. I will answer it for people here illegaly, which is what I think yoiu mean. I favor offering only the most minimum emergency medical services. That’s it.
As long as there is a specific way that an employer or landlord can demonstrate that he tried to comply with the law as much as was reasonable, I wouldn’t say so. But I don’t see anything in the law that says how they can do this. In that case, the law certainly is racist.
Well, in all honesty, this is my first encounter with Dave. I’ve read a few of his posts, they didn’t make much of an impression. I couldn’t even tell you what subject they were on. Til now, I’ve never actually had a discussion with him. I’m finding the experience…almost fun, in an interactive Twilight Zone episode kind of way. I think it’s hilarious that he believes differing opinion=lie, because it doens’t fit in to what he personally knows to be true.
I will say this. Dave, it didn’t occur to me til this morning, re-reading all this, that you didn’t read the linked article. But I believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt; maybe you just wandered in here, saw it was about illegal immigration, and decided to show what a shining example you are by stating you would have no problem proving your citizenship (as if that would ever be a problem for a mid thirties white guy walking through a mostly Hispanic neighborhood at 10pm).
For the record and your personal edification.
Here is why I think this mayor is a bigot:
Anyone making that kind of broad statement, basing a ten percent rise in crime on one incident (see later in the article, when the mayor’s “eyes were opened” when an illegal immigrant was involved in a violent crime) is either a racist, or is using xenophobic fear to get re-elected, which is bigotry as well. I also pointed this out.
Here is why I think he is specifically targeting Hispanics:
Now. Leaving aside the fact that this guy probably wouldn’t know a Cuban from a Mexican (more than likely they all look the same to him), how can you read those two quotes and continue to insist he is not targeting Hispanics?
Point taken, and I agree with you, but in this thread Maureen has repeatedly mentioned profiling, stopping people on the streets for their papers, civil rights violations and other stuff without ever providing a cite. I called her on it and she still refused to provide a cite. That takes it very clearly into the realm of Incorrect statement + knowledge that it is incorrect = lie
So you admit that the law doesn’t discriminate at all, and all of this is just hullabaloo to feed your feelings of persecution. Like Magellen said, "So if it’s not overt racism it MUST be subtle racism, because it MUST still be racism. " Grow up.
If the law requires every renter to provide proof that they are legal to rent, than it is not bigoted toward anyone at all. Keeping up now?
At least you admit you’re full of shit, that’s progress.
I didn’t make the statement, it’s not up to me to provide proof, it’s up to you, and as you just admitted, you have none.
And you have proof that these police abuses that you are referring to (and I have no doubt that they have occurred, none whatsoever, I am not challenging you on that at all) are the result of the laws in that particular jurisdiction and not due to certain individuals abusing their authority? Present it. Please.
Bullshit. Bull fucking shit. Requiring proof of legitimacy to rent has nothing to do with being “white” or not. Unless you can provide a cite stating that this law would not require everyone to provide proof, then you’re full of shit. Again.
YOU ARE LYING! BLATANTLY! You haven’t provided a single cite that anyone will be “assumed guilty until proven innocent”. You haven’t even come close. There are no civil rights violations here, there is no profiling, there is nobody stopping people on the street demanding “papers!”. There is simply a requirement that a renter prove s/he is legal to rent or a worker prove s/he is legal to work. That’s it. Nothing more.
I’ll say this slowly so that you have a shot at understanding it:
If. everyone. is. required. to. provide. documentation. then. nobody. is. being. profiled. Got it?
I think you are confusing one stupid statement from one stupid mayor with the actual law being passed.
#1 Favor. Doing so would make employers much less likely to hire illegals, which would remove much of the incentive for them to illegally come here in the first place
#2 I can’t answer unless I know why you a singling out Mexican people. Laws should apply to all peoples equally.
#3 Oppose. All services. (I’m assuming that you mean things like welfare, education, medical treatment, etc…) Those services are provided by the state using the money derived from taxes from legal residents of the US for other legal residents of the US. Illegals using these services are thieves, pure and simple. Fuck 'em.
Since I’m the one who was discussing this particular point with Miller, I can’t help but conclude that I am the “idiot” you are referring to here. You haven’t been involved in this discussion, so I have no context to go on, might I ask you why you would classify me thusly?
Well, I think he’s simply mistaken. It’s not a waste of time to correct misapprehensions, especially on bord that has the mission this one does.
In the Dominican Republic, you find multi-generation natives who speak nothign but Spanish, and are fairly described as “Hispanic” in every sense of the word. They range from the very-dark-skinned folks whose ancestors probably slipped over from Haiti a hundred years ago, to lily-white folks whose ancestors slipped over from Spain a hundred years ago.
I don’t believe that fits any usual definition of “race” – but all are Hispanic.
It’s not Weirddave I was talking about, it was the absolute irrelevance of the argument. Though it says something about Dave, obviously, that he decided to start an argument over something so stupid.
It seemed obvious to me that the whole hispanic/race thing was a side issue and I treated it as such while still addressing it, but if you want to pretend that that’s what this thread is all about, go right ahead.
Does the name “Rodney King” mean anything to you? How about the Watts riots? The recent carjacking case in Philadelphia, Thomas Jones. To suggest that you’ve never heard that any of these were racially motivated is either living in a bubble or just flat out ignoring what you don’t like hearing.
And you are frothing. Ravingly. Check the post above yours. I showed you why I think this law is targeting Hispanics. It’s in the OP. I’m going to give you a little time to go take your meds and calm down.
Maureen, I did read the linked article. And it was quite clear to me that you took a dislike to the mayor of that town based upon his quotes. That’s fine, and if you read back I have condemned his statements and refereed to him as a “stupid mayor”. If you had limited your pit thread to the mayor and his stupid statements, I probably wouldn’t even have posted here.
But you didn’t do that.
You have offered unsupported statements about profiling, discrimination, bigotry in law, harassment and other things that you have made up out of whole cloth. THAT is what I have been calling you on. Either provide cites for these statements, or retract them, or restrict your pitting to the mayor’s statements.