[jc_lbc]

Actually, isn't the debate about racial profiling? I think we need immigration reform, not laws specifically designed to scare Mexicans away.

[AUS1969]

Is there anybody who believes the current immigration system works? Fix it.

[BlueZ4AZ]

Originally Posted by jc_lbc

Actually, isn't the debate about racial profiling? I think we need immigration reform, not laws specifically designed to scare Mexicans away.

The new AZ law scares away illegal immigrants, not Mexicans. The word "Mexican" does not appear in the law. The law specifically states - no racial profiling. I'm not sure what part of that people are just not getting.

[jc_lbc]

So becuase the word Mexican does not appear in the law, then it obviously has nothing specifically to do with Mexicans. Duh. Why didn't I think of that sooner?

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by jc_lbc

So becuase the word Mexican does not appear in the law, then it obviously has nothing specifically to do with Mexicans. Duh. Why didn't I think of that sooner?

Is the law targeted at Mexicans, or just enacted in a region where a vast majority of the illegal immigrants happen to come from Mexico? There's a big difference, and there's nothing in the law that specifically mentions Mexicans.

We can't get shit done in this country because there's always that group of people looking to create victims.

[Couch]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

Is the law targeted at Mexicans, or just enacted in a region where a vast majority of the illegal immigrants happen to come from Mexico? There's a big difference, and there's nothing in the law that specifically mentions Mexicans.

We can't get shit done in this country because there's always that group of people looking to create victims.

And defends criminals.

I also find it humorous that every protesting the law with the signs "i'm illegal" also have signs using the words "give" and "free". A whole new style of welfare.

[BlueZ4AZ]

Originally Posted by jc_lbc

So becuase the word Mexican does not appear in the law, then it obviously has nothing specifically to do with Mexicans. Duh. Why didn't I think of that sooner?

I don't really care any more about the opposers to the law. I'm done and I believe the governor of AZ is done trying to explain the law to the hard headed people that oppose it.

At this point, me and the 70% that approve the law could really care less what your interpretation of the law is. Our patience is growing thin. So YOU, along with the 30% that oppose the law will just have to GET OVER it I guess, because the law will be enacted in July, whether you like it or not.

[xbook]

Here is an interesting take on this subject from Greg Palast:

http://www.gregpalast.com/behind-the...mber-election/

[scollins]

Originally Posted by BlueZ4AZ

I don't really care any more about the opposers to the law. I'm done and I believe the governor of AZ is done trying to explain the law to the hard headed people that oppose it.

At this point, me and the 70% that approve the law could really care less what your interpretation of the law is. Our patience is growing thin. So YOU, along with the 30% that oppose the law will just have to GET OVER it I guess, because the law will be enacted in July, whether you like it or not. Deal with it.

My friend proposed a slight adjustment to the Arizona law, a supplemental clause as it were:

"Any illegal found in Arizona under this law will have 2 choices:
1.) Deportation back to where they originated from *OR*
2.) A free bus/train ticket to Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, NYC, Chicago or any other city outside Arizona where people are protesting the Arizona law."

[BlueZ4AZ]

Originally Posted by scollins

My friend proposed a slight adjustment to the Arizona law, a supplemental clause as it were:

"Any illegal found in Arizona under this law will have 2 choices:
1.) Deportation back to where they originated from *OR*
2.) A free bus/train ticket to Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, NYC, Chicago or any other city outside Arizona where people are protesting the Arizona law."

Lets get that added ASAP

[scollins]

Originally Posted by xbook

Here is an interesting take on this subject from Greg Palast:

http://www.gregpalast.com/behind-the...mber-election/

Interesting? Really? And liberals are always calling conservatives the "conspiracy theory kooks"!

[lkw15]

Originally Posted by xbook

Here is an interesting take on this subject from Greg Palast:

http://www.gregpalast.com/behind-the...mber-election/

Here's an interesting poll from Pew: http://people-press.org/report/613/a...mmigration-law

Here's the summary:

Barack Obama and the Democrats keep trying to paint the new law in Arizona on immigration as some sort of misguided effort by a frustrated fringe. Unfortunately for them, a new poll from Pew Research shows that they’re the fringe — even in their own party. Almost three-quarters of Americans support Arizona’s new law, and almost two-thirds of Democrats support the already-law requirement for immigrants to carry ID:

The public broadly supports a new Arizona law aimed at dealing with illegal immigration and the law’s provisions giving police increased powers to stop and detain people who are suspected of being in the country illegally.

Fully 73% say they approve of requiring people to produce documents verifying their legal status if police ask for them. Two-thirds (67%) approve of allowing police to detain anyone who cannot verify their legal status, while 62% approve of allowing police to question people they think may be in the country illegally.

But that’s just those nutty Republicans, right? Wrong. While Democrats split evenly on the law itself, the two provisions that caused the most controversy get broad support from Obama’s own party:

However, majorities of Democrats approve of two of the law’s principal provisions: requiring people to produce documents verifying legal status (65%) and allowing police to detain anyone unable to verify their legal status (55%).

[BlueZ4AZ]

Originally Posted by scollins

Interesting? Really? And liberals are always calling conservatives the "conspiracy theory kooks"!

Scollins,
xbook is just a follower. Go easy on him. He can't be held responsible for viewing that liberal stuff on video and then posing it, hoping that the rest will follow blindly as well. He has a real big picture of himself he likes to post too, that proves what a "follower" he really is.

xbook,
Why don't you share that PICTURE with us here on THIS thread?

[xbook]

Originally Posted by lkw15

Here's an interesting poll from Pew: http://people-press.org/report/613/a...mmigration-law

Here's the summary:

Barack Obama and the Democrats keep trying to paint the new law in Arizona on immigration as some sort of misguided effort by a frustrated fringe. Unfortunately for them, a new poll from Pew Research shows that they’re the fringe — even in their own party. Almost three-quarters of Americans support Arizona’s new law, and almost two-thirds of Democrats support the already-law requirement for immigrants to carry ID:

The public broadly supports a new Arizona law aimed at dealing with illegal immigration and the law’s provisions giving police increased powers to stop and detain people who are suspected of being in the country illegally.

Fully 73% say they approve of requiring people to produce documents verifying their legal status if police ask for them. Two-thirds (67%) approve of allowing police to detain anyone who cannot verify their legal status, while 62% approve of allowing police to question people they think may be in the country illegally.

But that’s just those nutty Republicans, right? Wrong. While Democrats split evenly on the law itself, the two provisions that caused the most controversy get broad support from Obama’s own party:

However, majorities of Democrats approve of two of the law’s principal provisions: requiring people to produce documents verifying legal status (65%) and allowing police to detain anyone unable to verify their legal status (55%).

So are you trying to say that I have to get my opinion on the subject to be in line with my party affiliation? That my voice should just be that of the majority? That I should just join the group think?

No, I am opposed to this law because, like so much other legislation, it really isn't going to do much to actually cause real change in the situation. There are already plenty of laws on the books that address immigration. Why is one needed that puts the police force as another agency that has to deal with immigration. I am not sure what is going on in Arizona, but in CA we barely have enough police to do the job of basic policing, without them having to go join the good fight against illegal immigration.

Enforce existing laws, and have the proper agencies deal with this.

edit for add'l rant:

This isn't a conspiracy theory that is too far from reality. The republican party did this exact thing in Florida for the 2000 election. Go look up Katherine Harris, caging lists, and ChoicePoint.

[bolinp78]

Originally Posted by scollins

Interesting? Really? And liberals are always calling conservatives the "conspiracy theory kooks"!

I believe you are referring to the tin foil hat.

[bolinp78]

Originally Posted by xbook

This isn't a conspiracy theory that is too far from reality.

By who's estimate? Oh that's right, yours! I think we all know what that means.

[lkw15]

Originally Posted by xbook

So are you trying to say that I have to get my opinion on the subject to be in line with my party affiliation? That my voice should just be that of the majority? That I should just join the group think?

No, I am opposed to this law because, like so much other legislation, it really isn't going to do much to actually cause real change in the situation. There are already plenty of laws on the books that address immigration. Why is one needed that puts the police force as another agency that has to deal with immigration. I am not sure what is going on in Arizona, but in CA we barely have enough police to do the job of basic policing, without them having to go join the good fight against illegal immigration.

Enforce existing laws, and have the proper agencies deal with this.

edit for add'l rant:

This isn't a conspiracy theory that is too far from reality. The republican party did this exact thing in Florida for the 2000 election. Go look up Katherine Harris, caging lists, and ChoicePoint.

Nope, that's not what I'm saying. But you put up and article and said it was interesting, and I thought the poll was interesting. That's all.

The whole reason that Arizona passed this law is because the federal laws that "are already on the books" weren't being enforced. And in Arizona a lot of times fighting illegal immigration and crime are unfortunately two things that intricately linked (close to 320 kidnappings in Phoenix last year, almost all were related to drug trafficking from Mexico).

Now I'll be the first to admit that I'm not expert on immigration - and I'm not in a border state so frankly I don't think I'm even remotely equipped to argue one way or another on this - but it bugs me when people's arguments hypocritical. To say that Republicans (but not Democrats) are jockeying for the electoral upper hand is disingenuous (whether the method is trying to mitigate or motivate the hispanic base). The reason immigration reform hasn't happened is because both Republicans and Democrats don't want to alienate what will be the largest voting bloc in the next decade.

[xbook]

Originally Posted by lkw15

...The whole reason that Arizona passed this law is because the federal laws that "are already on the books" weren't being enforced. And in Arizona a lot of times fighting illegal immigration and crime are unfortunately two things that intricately linked (close to 320 kidnappings in Phoenix last year, almost all were related to drug trafficking from Mexico)....

I hear what you are saying. And what it sounds like is that there are many many factors in this debate. The drug trafficking angle is one to consider as well, for sure. But, if the illegals stop coming, will that halt the kidnappings? Probably not, because the drug traffickers will still have a need for kidnappings, even after the illegal immigrants are gone. The kidnappings aren't to do with the immigration, but they use the immigrants to do their bidding. If those immigrants were legal, they might still be vulnerable enough to be used by the drug traffickers. It's all about the almighty dollar. And if the immigrants don't have any, whether they are here legally or not, they can still be brought into the fold of the drug cartels. Having them have proper immigration papers won't stop the drug traffickers from using them.

And, I did look @ that poll, but it didn't really address the information that I brought up, it just gave stats on who thinks what about this law.

[lkw15]

Originally Posted by xbook

I hear what you are saying. And what it sounds like is that there are many many factors in this debate. The drug trafficking angle is one to consider as well, for sure. But, if the illegals stop coming, will that halt the kidnappings? Probably not, because the drug traffickers will still have a need for kidnappings, even after the illegal immigrants are gone. The kidnappings aren't to do with the immigration, but they use the immigrants to do their bidding. If those immigrants were legal, they might still be vulnerable enough to be used by the drug traffickers. It's all about the almighty dollar. And if the immigrants don't have any, whether they are here legally or not, they can still be brought into the fold of the drug cartels. Having them have proper immigration papers won't stop the drug traffickers from using them.

And, I did look @ that poll, but it didn't really address the information that I brought up, it just gave stats on who thinks what about this law.

Valid point. At the end of the day I don't really think the law will do much - it's too big a problem for one state to handle.

My GF is from Arizona and she was telling me how the perception is so different there than here (on the east coast). The only Mexican people I encounter are probably the hardest working, nicest people around.

On a side note, if I was a legal immigrant I would be pretty pissed that all of the illegal immigrants are giving 'us' a bad name. Hmmm. Maybe that's just me.

[AUS1969]

We need the workers. If it were easy for people to immigrate, on a temporary or permanent basis, the workers we need would unquestionably take the legal route. The real criminals, the undesirables, would be easier to catch and deport. We need to make immigration much easier and screen the immigrants.

[mfeltiii]

Originally Posted by AUS1969

We need the workers. If it were easy for people to immigrate, on a temporary or permanent basis, the workers we need would unquestionably take the legal route. The real criminals, the undesirables, would be easier to catch and deport. We need to make immigration much easier and screen the immigrants.

Ya! And then immediately sign them all up for free health care!

[bimmertt]

Originally Posted by scollins

My friend proposed a slight adjustment to the Arizona law, a supplemental clause as it were:

"Any illegal found in Arizona under this law will have 2 choices:
1.) Deportation back to where they originated from *OR*
2.) A free bus/train ticket to Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, NYC, Chicago or any other city outside Arizona where people are protesting the Arizona law."

The LA boycott is a joke...don't they have more important things to focus on other then Arizona law?