Arizonan restrictive law backfires

[happy_terd]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

I don't care if the majority want it. History is full of examples of the tyranny of the majority.

History shows more cases of the tyranny of the lone dictator.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

The Mexico law IS the Mexican Government! The laws in Mexico ARE HARSHER ARE HARSHER THAN THE ARAZONA LAWS.

Illegals in Mexico are being kidnapped, beaten, and killed in Mexico, and you don't care? If I say what I think of that I will be kicked of MR.

Illegal Aliens In Mexico Face Kidnap, Rape and Murder: Yet, President Calderon Is Bothered by SB 1070?

“MEXICO CITY – Amnesty International called the abuse of migrants in Mexico a major human rights crisis Wednesday, and accused some officials of turning a blind eye or even participating in the kidnapping, rape and murder of migrants."

Of course it's silly of me to spend my time worrying about a law in the US when I could be crusading against every injustice in the world and ignore when things closer to home go to hell.

Of course there is a better chance that what I type here might reach a voter in Arizona and convince them to try to change things than I'll reach someone with the power to do anything about Mexico.

I chose my battle. If you feel the need to think ill of me for doing so that's your right. I don't think all that highly of myself either.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by happy_terd

History shows more cases of the tyranny of the lone dictator.

Is that supposed to justify tyranny?

[happy_terd]

What don't you get? You say that the majority vote has occasional cases of tyranny in it. I state that there are more cases of tyranny without a majority vote.

Isn't justifying tyranny, but it is pretty much saying majority vote is the better way to go.
-----------

[happy_terd]

besides if we have to argue something as basic as "should the people have the final say / democracy / republic issue" then we have no common ground to even be debating this whole illegal issue.


You cannot take the good without the bad.

In a land where the people vote there will sometimes be an occasional bad decision. BUT democracy is our only (imperfect) freedom. The reason why we have the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion in this country is because our father's all raised our hands and voted on it.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by happy_terd

besides if we have to argue something as basic as "should the people have the final say / democracy / republic issue" then we have no common ground to even be debating this whole illegal issue.

If you think the majority should have the final say on everything then yes there is no common ground. Things like the US bill of rights are there to prevent the tyranny of the majority, the people simply can't vote themselves a law that violates the constitution. By extension no matter how many people vote for tyranny it is still tyranny. If the majority vote for a guilty till proven innocent law for legal residency then the people are wrong.

[happy_terd]

There are already laws voted in that violates the constitution. Google that shit.

Two top of my head examples: My gay buddy cannot join the army and hate crime laws sure do violate it.
---------------

If the majority and the minority are both incapable then I guess you are right...we are screwed. Lets do nothing.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by happy_terd

There are already laws voted in that violates the constitution. Google that shit.

Two top of my head examples: My gay buddy cannot join the army and hate crime laws sure do violate it.
---------------

If the majority and the minority are both incapable then I guess you are right...we are screwed. Lets do nothing.

Well I certainly hope the courts or the congress do something to change that. The law is wrong.

[happy_terd]

Why would they change anything?

The same reason they dont piss off the illegals is the same reason they dont piss off the private citizen, votes.

-------------

We can simply agree to disagree on the issue I guess. I will see you next week when someone else starts up a similar thread.

[SameOldStory]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

Of course it's silly of me to spend my time worrying about a law in the US when I could be crusading against every injustice in the world and ignore when things closer to home go to hell.

"when things closer to home go to hell"?

YOU DON"T KNOW HELL!

Iphinome, I think that you mean well. You have a cause célèbre. Within your own mind. But have you ever seen torn flesh? Death?

Callow is not really a pejorative descriptor. It simply means "lacking experience of life". We all have it. And many of us outgrow that lack.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

"when things closer to home go to hell"?

YOU DON"T KNOW HELL!

Iphinome, I think that you mean well. You have a cause célèbre. Within your own mind. But have you ever seen torn flesh? Death?

Callow is not really a pejorative descriptor. It simply means "lacking experience of life". We all have it. And many of us outgrow that lack.

You are free to dismiss my views but at this point I think you're being rude.

If you won't or can't debate the point fine but how much death and brutality I've personally witnessed really has nothing to do with the Arizona law we've been talking about being unjust and opening the way for a lot of abuse.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

When looking at any law I think it's best to consider what the biggest powertripping asshat you can think of will do with it. Now imagine a bunch of kids skateboarding in a park rounded up and taken down tot he police station because they didn't have proof of citizenship on them. Then imagine someone walking while black in a rich neighborhood. Now imagine someone working on a doughnut shop who accidentally spills some coffee on a cop. Now imagine a reporter with an out of state ID poking around in some rual town run by some polygamous separatist types. Just accepting the inconvenience of having to present your papers on demand is quite bad enough but the way it is sure to be abused opens a huge civil rights can of worms.

How can anyone like the idea of being required to prove on demand at any time that they are innocent of illegal immigration or face arrest?

I'll tell you why they might vote for it. They think oh no it'll never happen to me except of course that it will eventually.

you sound like a spoiled little girl with an overblown sense of a right to entitlement. this attitude that drips lack if respect is becoming the norm. children are not being held accountable for their actions, and this continues into adulthood with attitudes of "just because it is a law, or common sense, because "I" am special, I do not have to do it. if anyone in authority has a problem with it, well then it is their problem and I will make sure that I take up value court time to make sure everyone is aware of MY opinion.

Originally Posted by Iphinome

I wasn't suggesting anything that happened but you can google Maricopa County's sheriff. I'm talking about what could and I predict will happen. This is a law that I promise you will be abused. read my earlier posts for some things I think will happen.

just gotta answer as they come. so you have a problem with people in jail that HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONVICTED OF A CRIME BE TREATED LIEK CRIMINALS????? really? you want them babied or something? treated better than the homeless? the ill?

How much better is Arizona? If the police can stop anyone and demand proof of innocence? People will support this because if they don't have brown skin they think this law will have no effect on them.
it just isn't rocket science sweetie. carry ID. manyEuropean countries have had to for quite awhile. "Your papers please" did not go out with the Nazis.

I don't care if the majority want it. History is full of examples of the tyranny of the majority, I don't even need to godwin this discussion, look back to segregation. The majority are wrong. If they want to control immigration they need to do it another way.

sometimes history needs a lesson. in this case it is that identification has to be looked at. actually in this is so much better than many historical episodes. this is not the "Jews" not the "blacks" not hte "Asians" or any other color. this is so many people do have a righteous right to be here, we need to verify anyone whenever it appears necessary.

Originally Posted by Iphinome

If you think the majority should have the final say on everything then yes there is no common ground. Things like the US bill of rights are there to prevent the tyranny of the majority, the people simply can't vote themselves a law that violates the constitution. By extension no matter how many people vote for tyranny it is still tyranny. If the majority vote for a guilty till proven innocent law for legal residency then the people are wrong.

no matter how you twist it, I don't see how this is violating hte constitution.

Originally Posted by Iphinome

Well I certainly hope the courts or the congress do something to change that. The law is wrong.

how?

Originally Posted by Iphinome

You are free to dismiss my views but at this point I think you're being rude.

If you won't or can't debate the point fine but how much death and brutality I've personally witnessed really has nothing to do with the Arizona law we've been talking about being unjust and opening the way for a lot of abuse.

as for kids running around, people going to the local stop and rob, whatever it takes, there are so many ways to carry an ID that your arguments are laughable. there are neckpouches, wrist wallets, ankle wallets, sock wallets, bra wallets. probably something for jockstraps that I don't want to know about. is a person is LEGALLY here and has nothing to hide, there just is no reason not to carry an ID

and bring on the guest workers!!!! can you imagine how much better they will be treated with laws that will protect them? oh HELL yeah!

[Iphinome]

Now who's adding words to quote boxes?

A proper longer reply will take a few minuites.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

you sound like a spoiled little girl with an overblown sense of a right to entitlement. this attitude that drips lack if respect is becoming the norm. children are not being held accountable for their actions, and this continues into adulthood with attitudes of "just because it is a law, or common sense, because "I" am special, I do not have to do it. if anyone in authority has a problem with it, well then it is their problem and I will make sure that I take up value court time to make sure everyone is aware of MY opinion.

Nice personal attacks there. I'm not arguing only for myself Idon't approve of doing it to anyone else either.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

just gotta answer as they come. so you have a problem with people in jail that HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONVICTED OF A CRIME BE TREATED LIEK CRIMINALS????? really? you want them babied or something? treated better than the homeless? the ill?

I don't approve of treating the homeless and the ill badly. I don't approve of treating prisoners badly. Don't treat people badly, it isn't nice.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

it just isn't rocket science sweetie. carry ID. manyEuropean countries have had to for quite awhile. "Your papers please" did not go out with the Nazis.

Perhaps it should have. No forget perhaps. It should have. Where's the probable cause? Is liberty limited by except when someone in authority decides to single you out? Except when some policeman is having a bad day? If in other places they find that sort of thing acceptable well, that's tragic but that doesn't make it acceptable here.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

sometimes history needs a lesson. in this case it is that identification has to be looked at. actually in this is so much better than many historical episodes. this is not the "Jews" not the "blacks" not hte "Asians" or any other color. this is so many people do have a righteous right to be here, we need to verify anyone whenever it appears necessary.

Why? Why is this ore important than the basic right to go about your lawful buisness without state interference?

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

no matter how you twist it, I don't see how this is violating hte constitution.

1'st 4'th and 14'th amendments. Freedom of assembly is infringed, when people aren't able to go about their businesses without state intimidation.
When the police stop you without cause and make demands that is intimidation. The demand to produce information could be considered a search and while a pat down without a warrant might be acceptable, a person's papers are specially listed in the 4'th amendment. When walking while brown is enough to generate police attention then you're violating the equal protection clause of the 14'th amendment.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

how?

don't ask don't tell which is the law I was replying about in that quote violates equal protection. I'd wager it probably goes against more thana few anti discrimination laws as well but a civil rights lawyer would be the one to consult about that.

And as a matter of my personal morality discriminating against homosexuals is wrong. If you think otherwise I doubt anything anyone here can say will convince you otherwise.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

as for kids running around, people going to the local stop and rob, whatever it takes, there are so many ways to carry an ID that your arguments are laughable. there are neckpouches, wrist wallets, ankle wallets, sock wallets, bra wallets. probably something for jockstraps that I don't want to know about. is a person is LEGALLY here and has nothing to hide, there just is no reason not to carry an ID

of course if you have nothing to hide why do you object to a search... Will you be posting a scan of your birth certificate and tell me when you use the bathroom do you do so with the door open or closed? If you have nothing to hide I assume you never close the door. If you don't value privacy that's your buisness, give yours away. For myself I'd like to decide for myself what I want to make public and what I want to keep to myself.

Everyone can carry ID, not everyone does. People shouldn't have to. One should not risk police detention if they walk out the door without carrying their papers. Anonymity isn't a crime.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

and bring on the guest workers!!!! can you imagine how much better they will be treated with laws that will protect them? oh HELL yeah!

*shrug* probably a good idea. If there's work issue work visas. A bit too common sense for government though.

[dorino]

Gah, the last two pages got me all riled up.

Listen here, you don't fix a problem and violate the constitution in the process just because you need to fix the problem.
We've done it before, that doesn't make it acceptable. By no means. Don't Ask Don't Tell doesn't make it right.

Now, when the "solution" is Stalin-esque policing, it's not a solution. The issue with the law in the public eyes still remains that it encourages profiling, and lays the responsibility on police, whose personal bias is obviously prevalent. Like it or not, "bad cops" are out there.
So are bad ___s, and the blank could be anything you want. But our law enforcement in America is notorious for small-scale corruption... Nothing like Mexico's, but we do it our own way, yes?

Fix the problem at the source, the border and the immigration policy. Not on Arizona's or other state's streets. Protect foreign workers, instead of sicking the dogs on them. Above all else, hold the companies who hire illegals for those minuscule pay liable; It's those employers faults hardworking Arizonians can't get jobs.


EDIT: I started writing this post before the above poster's went through, sorry if there's any redundancy.