Seriously thoughtful How do you plan to prove you are a citizen?

[luqmaninbmore]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

It's not an attack. It's a dismissal of an overly-paranoid, content-lacking cliche disguised as an argument.

Hey... now we're getting somewhere!

I don't think that anyone has a right to accost me and demand identity papers if I am not involved in an activity that is: a. a priviledged use of a collective property (i.e. driving) or b. criminal or dangerous to those around me. If am standing on a street corner, minding my own business, I should not have to submit to being accosted by a person in a uniform, regardless of what I am wearing (i.e. my thowb), what I am reading (the Qur'an, the Origin of Species, the Communist Manifesto, all of which I appreciate), or the color of my skin (or the skins of my family, which run to the milk chocolate side). I don't need someone in a badge channeling Zachary Taylor or Daniel Pipes and inconveniencing me or mine. As a matter of ethics, I do not believe they are entitled to so. As a matter of constitutional law, I doubt it is legal. Do I think there is a conspiracy to bring about a totalitarian government? No. Do I think that the tendency of power is to accumulate? Yes. So I oppose the accumulation of power, whether it be in the hands of local officers of the law or Federal or State bureaucrats. Instead, I support the decentralization and democratization of power as much as history, psychology, and technology permit.

Luqman

[luqmaninbmore]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Yes, shame about the legal immigrants whose processing time was delayed, not like they belonged in America anyway.

*sigh*

To be fair, I don't think Steve has said anything that would make me inclined to believe he is anti-immigrant. I assume he is merely reacting to the inclination of people on the intertubes to cry "Big Brother!" every time a new law is passed. We just disagree on whether this law is itself an imposition upon civil rights.

Luqman

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

No, it's not. In a reality of limited resources, people taking advantage of services that weren't intended for them (and that they did not contribute to with taxes), and falsifying identities in order to defraud governments and individuals, there is every good reason to have an ID proving citizenship.

Keep in mind that most of the folks concerned about the ID card think that the (federal) government has no business providing most of the services that it does.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by luqmaninbmore

To be fair...

I don't really care about "fair" (or unfair, to be clear), I care about the legal immigrants it's going to screw over who can do precisely zero about it (you can't speed up processing dates). It's a poorly worded law, quite apart from anything else.

Consequences, not intentions.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by GlennD

Keep in mind that most of the folks concerned about the ID card think that the (federal) government has no business providing most of the services that it does.

That being said, I have contributed, I have spent a lifetime contributing, and now it's my turn to receive.

I carry three different Government issued ID cards which certify my having contributed, and my right to receive. And I regularly show them to people whose job it is to insure that I am who I am, and that I have that right.

When someone who has not contributed, and does not have that right receives anyway, it cheapens and jeopardizes everything I have worked for.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by luqmaninbmore

I don't think that anyone has a right to accost me and demand identity papers if I am not involved in an activity that is: a. a priviledged use of a collective property (i.e. driving) or b. criminal or dangerous to those around me.

Well, despite what alarmists may suggest, there is very little likelihood that the Arizona police will be spending their time walking about, approaching or pulling over everyone who "looks funny" and demanding "zeir paperz." Think about it... they don't have that kind of time on their hands. Which is why I consider this an extreme over-reaction to the issue.

On the other hand, any authority has the right--in fact, the responsibility--to demand ID of someone who appears to be where they do not belong, whether it's an employee in a high-security installation or a citizen on a street. How Arizona expects to be able to tell one from the other... I have no idea. But the reasoning is sound.

And producing an ID (and continuing on your way) isn't so difficult, embarrassing or time-consuming that it deserves all this debate and attention. Public shakedowns, strip-searches and lengthy detainment without due cause, sure... but not this.

Anyway, I guess there isn't anything else I can say about the subject... the discussions seem to have fallen into a continuous loop of argument, anyway.

[McKGrif]

Originally Posted by GlennD

Keep in mind that most of the folks concerned about the ID card think that the (federal) government has no business providing most of the services that it does.

These services are provided by taxpayers like you and me. The government simply takes the credit. Every penny the government spends (local, state, or federal), comes out of a taxpayers pocket. The government is 'providing' NOTHING, as it has NOTHING with which to provide.

If one person is going to receive a taxpayer funded service because of some 'perceived' need or entitlement, than anyone in their situation must also receive said service, or we are guilty of discrimination.

I really don't know why this question was asked in his forum, but it was so;

The ONLY reason for government is to protect the rights of its citizens, not feed you, not clothe you, not put a roof over your heads, not kiss your boo boos.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

[dreams]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

...
If tax is the dividing line, then surely all taxpayers, citizen or not, should have equal access.

The key word.. taxpayers.

Originally Posted by wodin

<snip>
When someone who has not contributed, and does not have that right receives anyway, it cheapens and jeopardizes everything I have worked for.

It's funny how the generations have changed. My father's greatest pride was having a job and paying taxes to the government as a "citizen". He is very vocal about those who "take" and don't "give".

Originally Posted by wodin

Mmmmmmm; tako poki!

Even better sauteed calamari.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Well, despite what alarmists may suggest, there is very little likelihood that the Arizona police will be spending their time...

Yes, because the Arizona's police chief has stated the law is a disgrace and that he won't enforce it.

On the other hand, any authority has the right--in fact, the responsibility--to demand ID of someone who appears to be where they do not belong, whether it's an employee in a high-security installation or a citizen on a street.

Cite the law.

And producing an ID (and continuing on your way) isn't so difficult, embarrassing or time-consuming that it deserves all this debate and attention. Public shakedowns, strip-searches and lengthy detainment without due cause, sure... but not this.

I count "the Federal government have not processed my papers quickly enough" as "without due cause" for arresting someone. Which view the Federal government, but not AZ with this law, share.

Anyway, I guess there isn't anything else I can say about the subject... the discussions seem to have fallen into a continuous loop of argument, anyway.

Yes, ignoring the problems does tend to make them go away. Oh, wait...

[wodin]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Yes, because the Arizona's police chief has stated the law is a disgrace and that he won't enforce it.

Anyone who refuses to do his job because he thinks it's a disgrace should be looking for a new job.

[Robert Minneman]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

I count "the Federal government have not processed my papers quickly enough" as "without due cause" for arresting someone. Which view the Federal government, but not AZ with this law, share.

Yeah well, so we're supposed to let anyone without proper identification just waltz around our nation, doing who knows what, just because they say, "The government is slow with my paperwork"?

Y'know had the Federal government been doing its job and checking up on those without proper paperwork and such, we'd have had a few less 9/11 hijackers. Food for thought.

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by Robert Minneman

Yeah well, so we're supposed to let anyone without proper identification just waltz around our nation, doing who knows what, just because they say, "The government is slow with my paperwork"?

Y'know had the Federal government been doing its job and checking up on those without proper paperwork and such, we'd have had a few less 9/11 hijackers. Food for thought.

Clearly bollocks. I have no paperwork to say I am an American citizen (because I'm not) and I can and have boarded planes on the east coast of the USA.

Quite frankly, incorrectly evoking 9/11 for such a petty reason is just insulting to those that tragically died that day.

[Robert Minneman]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

Clearly bollocks. I have no paperwork to say I am an American citizen (because I'm not) and I can and have boarded planes on the east coast of the USA.

Quite frankly, incorrectly evoking 9/11 for such a petty reason is just insulting to those that tragically died that day.

It's not incorrectly evoking it, at least one of those hijakers was here on a significantly expired student visa, if I remember correctly.

Beyond that, you have to AT LEAST have some form of photo ID to board plane and that's true ANY WHERE within the US. Boarding a plane doesn't require you to be a citizen, nor does it necessarily require legal contact with a state law enforcement entity (even in AZ), so I think your example is poor.

Now, break a law in AZ, get caught by the police, THEN they can ask you whether or not you're here legally... I don't understand what's so wrong about that.

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by Robert Minneman

It's not incorrectly evoking it, at least one of those hijakers was here on a significantly expired student visa, if I remember correctly.

If he had come from another country and boarded a flight in the US the outcome would have been exactly the same. The legislation changes nothing with regard to that.

Originally Posted by Robert Minneman

Beyond that, you have to AT LEAST have some form of photo ID to board plane and that's true ANY WHERE within the US. Boarding a plane doesn't require you to be a citizen, nor does it necessarily require legal contact with a state law enforcement entity (even in AZ), so I think your example is poor.

I didn't give an example of anything so I have no idea what you consider to be poor. I didn't suggest that you don't need photo ID to board a plane - it just doesn't have to be a piece of US ID.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by Robert Minneman

Yeah well, so we're supposed to let anyone without proper identification just waltz around our nation, doing who knows what, just because they say, "The government is slow with my paperwork"?

Y'know had the Federal government been doing its job and checking up on those without proper paperwork and such, we'd have had a few less 9/11 hijackers. Food for thought.

So basically, you have no idea how legal immigration works, do you? This is not a visa (temporary stay) issue, it's an immigration (path to legal residence) one, The Federal government issues you papers. They do get "out of date", but because it's due to their own slow processing times they don't hold this against you. You are still required to update the government if you change anything in your status.

You are calling, directly, for deporting most legal immigrants who have been waiting, in many cases years, to be processed. Just to be clear.

Y'know, if there were less people who were hostile to the idea that people might have beliefs different to them, we might not need to be so paranoid about international terrorists. Cram that where you wish.