Arizonan restrictive law backfires

[DawnFalcon]

Really? So talking accurately about American police's shortcomings - well documented by your own libertarians - is racial hatred? If I was talking about another country's police failings, I'd have different things to say, based on the documentation there.

Why would I take offence when you've just shot your own argument in the foot again? This is comedy.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

It works just fine. But okay, DOI 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00706.x

There, no more excuse.

all I get is Social Science Quarterly, no article

anyone?

[SameOldStory]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

....

towns near the Mexican border with very high illegal immigrant populations, and among the very safest places to live. Try some basic intellectual honesty.
....

From where I live, Phoenix, is about a thousand miles closer to the border than I am. AND it does have a slightly elevated population of "illegals".

It was probably just me. I thought that you were saying how much better it was to have a large population of illegals.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

all I get is Social Science Quarterly, no article

anyone?

so I messed around with it and finally got here;

Is Immigration Responsible for the Crime Drop? An Assessment of the Influence of Immigration on Changes in Violent Crime Between 1990 and 2000*
Tim Wadsworth 1 ,
1 University of Colorado at Boulder
*Direct correspondence to Tim Wadsworth, Department of Sociology, UCB 327, Boulder, CO 80309 〈tim.wadsworth@colorado.edu〉. I will share all data and coding information with those wishing to replicate the study. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2007 American Criminological Society Annual Meeting. I thank Robert Brame, Richard Rogers, and Jerald R. Herting, as well as the anonymous reviewers, for comments on earlier drafts of the article.

Copyright © 2010 Southwestern Social Science Association
ABSTRACT
Objectives. The idea that immigration increases crime rates has historically occupied an important role in criminological theory and has been central to the public and political discourses and debates on immigration policy. In contrast to the common sentiment, some scholars have recently questioned whether the increase in immigration between 1990 and 2000 may have actually been responsible for part of the national decrease in crime during the 1990s. The current work evaluates the influence of immigration on crime in urban areas across the United States between 1990 and 2000.

Methods. Drawing on U.S. Census and Uniform Crime Report data, I first use ordinary least squares regression models to assess the cross-sectional relationship between immigration patterns and rates of homicide and robbery among U.S. cities with populations of at least 50,000. Second, I employ pooled cross-sectional time-series models to determine how changes in immigration influenced changes in homicide and robbery rates between 1990 and 2000.

Results. In the ordinary least squares models, immigration is associated with higher levels of homicide and robbery. However, the pooled cross-sectional time-series models suggest that cities with the largest increases in immigration between 1990 and 2000 experienced the largest decreases in homicide and robbery during the same time period.

Conclusion. The findings offer insights into the complex relationship between immigration and crime and suggest that growth in immigration may have been responsible for part of the precipitous crime drop of the 1990s.

btw, great school CU GO BUFFS!!!!


I was born in Boulder, went to school at CU as well. that's where I did my ROTC. anyway... do you think you could link to something I don't have to pay for?

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

From where I live, Phoenix, is about a thousand miles closer to the border than I am. AND it does have a slightly elevated population of "illegals".

It was probably just me. I thought that you were saying how much better it was to have a large population of illegals.

I was giving specific examples of high illegal populations and low crime rates.


Oh, and if you want to be happy with reported figures...erm...

(In 2009) The incidence of violent crimes such as murder, rape and aggravated assault ...plunged 16.6% in Phoenix

Mr. Crump said Phoenix's most recent data for 2010 indicated still lower crime. For the first quarter of 2010, violent crime was down 17% overall in the city, while homicides were down 38% and robberies 27%, compared with the same period in 2009.

Arizona's major cities all registered declines.



Kindlekitten - "do you think you could link to something I don't have to pay for?"

It gave me the article straight. I have no idea why it tried to charge you, I'm not logged into ATHENS (the UK academic portal for papers) on this PC. All I can do in that situation, without quoting the paper - which can be legally problematical - is to give the DOI. Which I did.

[Iphinome]

Mods, before you flay me remember you didn't say one word when I was personally attacked.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

we'll try pink, bold even in case the visuals aren't getting through to you. that wasn't a personal attack. that was a statement. too many people run about with this sense of entitlement infringing on everyone elses rights. your attitude embodies that manifestation by everything you post here.

Well this is a statement... Too many people have narrow minded views. They see things and they react and they never take the time to think through what they're defending. Without any understanding of slippery slopes these dregs of humanity blindly accept the word of any authority figure blind to any potential for abuse because they feel it'll never be used against them.

Basically cowards these people will not only sell out their own interests but gladly restrict the liberties of others not for safety, not for king and country, not for family but for the short term appearance of doing something. Wishing for daddy to hold and hug them and tell them everything's okay while the sky is falling these people lash out against anyone who dares to say that the emperor has no clothes.

While cowering in a corner crying out don't hurt me. These scumbags demand oppressive measures against everyone else. They're the hawks who shout out for wars. They're the hypocrites who call out for the government to provide tanks, armies, police, prisons, executions and in turn cry about their tax burden and refer to any attempt to provide real protection of life like heath care as communism.

When these vile pissant pimples on the arse of society speak it is always about other people being a problem and how they should happy accept any restriction on themselves so long as it makes said pissant happy. Therein lies the rub for like every petty tyrant in history they are never happy. Much like the puritans of old who could not quite get over the idea that someone somewhere might be having fun, these inbred trolls object to the idea that someone somewhere might be unmonitored. They have nothing on the party in Orwell's 1984.

In the end of course as cowards hypocrites and fools when the abuses they advocate come back to bite them on the ass these are persons who cry the loudest. These laws were meant for other people, the bad ones who don't agree with me is their cry. Censor only that which I don't approve of! Detain only the brown people! If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about but stay out of my private life! Keep your government hands off my medicare! Me! Me! Me! Sure, everyone will be tracked, their movements recorded. Sure anyone who dresses funny or has a different skin color will be stopped by every passing policeman. Sure political opponents will never be able to move without being followed. Sure people will be caught in dragnets for the most minor of infractions but it'll never touch me and I'll feel ever so warm and cozy not like in a free society where there's a chance someone might do something I don't like or even worse look different form me. Why won't you conform and be a good little mindless tool like I am! Bleet! Bleet! Bleet!

Anyone who values liberty or even diversity sees these petulant children as dangerous of course but the sad fact is the mindless always seem to outnumber the thinking people.

Kindlekitten your attitude embodies that manifestation by everything you post here.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I agree. except regarding prisoners. if you have been convicted of a crime I do not believe that your jail time should be cushy. and yeah, I've seen how Maricopa county deals. looks a lot like basic training. and I went there voluntarily

In boot camp sufficient nutrition and medical care are made available. The ability to make phone calls home is not so restricted. Jail need not be summer camp but when you consider that jail and prison are not the same thing and when you consider the complaints that have been lodged over the years I'm forced to conclude that the prisoners are not being humanly treated.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

negative laws come about because too many people abuse the system. if you want to buy alcohol, you have to show ID. if you want to buy cold meds that contain whatever goes into meth you have to show id, AND they are locked up behind the counter. as a farm owner when I buy a gallon of iodine (that is farm size) I have to show ID AND sign a form. why is this? because CRIMINALS abused the system. there have been too many criminal illegal aliens that abused the system. so yeah, one bad apple DOES spoil the whole barrel.

Ain't liberty a bitch? People might do bad things. However an age requirement for alcohol doesn't affect anyone not in the process of purchasing it. A license for the privilege to drive on public roads does not affect the right to walk on public sidewalks. If you want to show your ID to anyone who asks go ahead. Who I am or where I'm going is really no one's buisness unless I choose otherwise, you don't get to choose for me.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

because I want to live

Then go cower in your basement and hope there's no fire or meteor. As long as you are breathing you're going to be taking the risk that you'll stop doing so. Certainty one day you will stop. Showing ID won't change that. You might be hit by a truck today. You might be mugged. A farm girl from Kansas might drop a house on you. Shit happens get used to it.

Spend forever worried that something might kill you today or relax go to 7-11 and pick up some milk. The choice is yours. Aren't choices nice?

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

the posession of legal ID is NOT intimidation. intimidation is being stopped at road blocks with klieg lights shining on your car and sub-machine guns pointed in your window. welcome to Germany and Mexico. never had that happen here, but been through it in both places numerous times

What's the difference? You're stopped there's the threat of force and a demand made of you for no other reason than you happened to be passing by and the state decided to turn its attention to you. Is the threat of a submachine gun worse than the threat from a handgun? Both carry the power of the state, both make a demand. Both have unfortunate consequences if you don't carry and give them what they want on demand. I rather not the US become a place where this happens. You've yet to explain why a police offcer stopping anyone and demanding ID is different from or won't lead to checkpoints and automatic weapons. Allow one and why not the other? I mean all you have to do is carry ID right?

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

you should know and understand the topic before parroting it. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. this refers more to intellectual property ie; writings, than anything else. this was due to vast criticism of the king, and these writings could be actionable upon the author. this had nothing to do with producing an identification paper. that leads to PROBABLE CAUSE. in this case if a person of authority asks for identification to be produced because there is a suspicion of illegal access, whether that be to a government building, a strip club, a university, or the United States, the refusal to produce such paperwork engenders probable cause for the person in the position of authority to restrain the freedoms of the person making the refusal

Are you thick? the 4'th amendment has nothing to do with so-called intellectual property. Papers means just that. Bookkeeping records. Deeds. Birth certificates. Diaries. Whatever records you happened to have. Your personal data to be as sacred as your person. Not the protection of writing means for publication it's absurd to think something intended to be public would be listed under protection for private spaces. To search your house, your things, your paperwork or your person requires probable cause. The while idea of papers please comrade violates this.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

that's not germane to this conversation

I have not brought that up anywhere and it has nothing to do with this issue

Then why did you reply about it? Someone else brought it up, I answered. you jumped in. If you consider the whole thing off topic stop replying to it.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I supplied my birth certificate to get my passport. I carry my passport at all times. bringing privacy issues such as the bathroom into the conversation is absolutely ridiculous

Let's see that posted scan then, and of your passport. Come on comrade nothing to hide after all. People should be forced to show ID after all. Let's see some.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

once again, carrying ID is not that onerous. but, at the end of the day, it is YOUR right whether or not to carry it. if your lack of carry ends you up incarcerated, that is your right as well. it is NOT your right to threaten my personal safety by refusing to identify yourself

Oh how cute. You feel so threatened by not knowing my name and address. You must be terrified when walking on a public street. All those people not showing you their identification why they might hurt you. Better check out the window and see if there are any nearby who knows what they might do? Or of course you could know their names and they could just kill you so you don't identify them later. You should probably know this by now but you're not safe. No one is. Planes crash. Cars crash. Extremest nut-jobs blow things up. People get cancer and they fall down stairs and they choke on food. There are earthquakes volcano floods blizzards hurricanes. The universe is trying to kill you and one day it will succeed. Making me carry identification won't change that it'll just bring us all one step closer to a police state. While you're waiting for the universe to get you what do you prefer liberty or oppression?

If you think there's an immigration problem find some other way to solve it. The Arizona way is a load of fascist bullshit, much like your arguments.

[obs20]

I really hope this straightens up some of the confusion. It seems balanced to me because it will upset whatever argument you're trying to make

Monday, May 3, 2010 - Page updated at 11:30 AM

Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo, other than personal use, must be obtained from The Seattle Times. Call 206-464-3113 or e-mail resale@seattletimes.com with your request.

GREGORY BULL / AP

In this photo taken April 28, men look for a place to sleep in a crowded shelter for migrants deported from the U.S., in the border city of Nogales, Mexico. The tough new Arizona immigration law has reignited resentment among Mexicans living along the Mexico-U.S. border.

Ariz. immigration: Both sides use crime argument

By Nicholas Riccardi

Los Angeles Times

PHOENIX — By many measures, Arizona has become safer since illegal immigrants began pouring into this state in the 1990s.

Crime has dropped all across the country since then, but the decrease has been as fast or faster in Arizona. The rate of property crimes in the state, for example, has plummeted by 43 percent since 1995, compared with 30 percent nationwide.

That's no surprise to those who study immigration; both sides, whether for or against increased immigration, agree that immigrants tend to commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans.

Nonetheless, authors of a controversial new law against illegal immigration here have long cited the need to fight crime as a key reason behind SB 1070, or the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act. The law makes it a state crime to lack immigration papers and requires police to determine whether people they stop are in the United States illegally.

Backers repeatedly have cited the killing of two Phoenix police officers by illegal immigrants since 2007, or the recent slaying of a cattle rancher near the Mexican border by a drug smuggler. State Rep. John Kavanagh, a co-sponsor of the law, said of illegal immigrants: "They bring a lot of crime with them." On Friday, their argument got more momentum when a deputy sheriff was wounded in a gunbattle with men suspected of being drug smugglers from Mexico.

The SB 1070 proponents also point to incarceration rates as a sign that illegal immigrants may contribute excessively to crime in Arizona.

While Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris said only about 10 percent of his department's arrests are illegal immigrants — a number close to the estimated percentage of undocumented migrants in the local population — the Maricopa County sheriff's office, which runs the jail for Phoenix and surrounding cities, says 20 percent of its inmates are illegal immigrants. Fifteen percent of state prisoners are also illegal immigrants.

The bill's proponents contend that criminals in Mexico are increasingly heading north through Arizona.

"A large portion of (illegal immigrants) are coming here seeking a life and, quite frankly, fleeing the violence in Mexico," said Brian Livingston, executive director of the Arizona Police Association, who added he was persuaded to back SB 1070 by calls from a Latina complaining that no one arrested illegal-immigrant gang members in her neighborhood. "Amongst those people are criminal elements who prey on those people," he said.

"Those are what we're targeting with this bill," Livingston said. "We're targeting the smugglers who prey on the good element of the Mexican population."

Phoenix has become a hub of human trafficking, and now it has kidnapping numbers that rival cities in Mexico because of smugglers who hold illegal immigrants hostage in drop houses hidden in the city. The city's crime rates are comparable with those of other big cities, but the presence of well-armed trafficking groups colors the picture.

"It may be safer in Beirut than Phoenix," said Mark Spencer of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, citing a report that some illegal immigrants were selling grenades on the black market.

Phoenix Police Chief Harris, who opposes SB 1070, said proponents of cracking down on illegal immigrants vastly overstate that population's criminality. "Saying that if you get rid of the illegal immigrants, you'll get rid of 80 percent of the crime, which I've heard, that's not true," he said, dismissing the rhetoric as political opportunism. "All you have to do in Arizona is come out with anything that's anti-immigrant and you will be in good shape in the polls."

What most in law enforcement here do agree on is that the victims of crime by illegal immigrants tend to be other immigrants. Community activists argue that the new law will make it worse for law-abiding immigrants because few immigrants, whether documented or not, will want to deal with police.

"No one's going to call the cops," said Alfredo Gutierrez, a former state Senate majority leader who opposed the bill. He said law-abiding immigrants of all types are now fleeing the state for fear of being subject to racial profiling.

"They're getting rid of the folks who would report the crooks," Gutierrez said. "The crooks are staying. This is like heaven for them."

John Garcia, a political-science professor at the University of Arizona who studies immigration and crime, said that illegal immigrants' disproportionate numbers in the criminal-justice system may reflect steps Arizona has long taken to criminalize their presence — steps that have peaked with SB 1070.

In 2006, Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio interpreted a state law making human smuggling a felony as making it a crime to be smuggled, and he began prosecuting truckloads of illegal immigrants being transported through the state. Arpaio has also made catching illegal immigrants a top priority.

Gutierrez said he's not surprised to find a greater proportion of illegal immigrants committing crimes. "There's a greater mix of bad folks coming up who don't care if they're caught," he said.

Of the lawmakers who warn of illegal immigrants committing more and more crimes, Gutierrez said: "They're creating a self-fulfilling prophecy."

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

I was giving specific examples of high illegal populations and low crime rates.


Oh, and if you want to be happy with reported figures...erm...

(In 2009) The incidence of violent crimes such as murder, rape and aggravated assault ...plunged 16.6% in Phoenix

Mr. Crump said Phoenix's most recent data for 2010 indicated still lower crime. For the first quarter of 2010, violent crime was down 17% overall in the city, while homicides were down 38% and robberies 27%, compared with the same period in 2009.

Arizona's major cities all registered declines.



Kindlekitten - "do you think you could link to something I don't have to pay for?"

It gave me the article straight. I have no idea why it tried to charge you, I'm not logged into ATHENS (the UK academic portal for papers) on this PC. All I can do in that situation, without quoting the paper - which can be legally problematical - is to give the DOI. Which I did.

Look... I gave you directly the FBI stats. I did not tweak or twiddle them. residents of Arizona, law enforcement of Arizona are fed up. they are living the nightmare. convince them there isn't a problem

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by obs20

I really hope this straightens up some of the confusion. It seems balanced to me because it will upset whatever argument you're trying to make

Hmm it doesn't seem to do anything to my arguments that calling someone illegal brings bad connotations and a different term should be used. Or the one that says allowing police to demand the papers of anyone they encounter is a really bad thing.

But still it does seem interesting and balanced. Drug smugglers and human traffickers are icky bad people. Hotel maids and busboys just want to keep their heads down and work not shoot people. Fair enough.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

Mods, before you flay me remember you didn't say one word when I was personally attacked.

Well this is a statement... Too many people have narrow minded views. They see things and they react and they never take the time to think through what they're defending. Without any understanding of slippery slopes these dregs of humanity blindly accept the word of any authority figure blind to any potential for abuse because they feel it'll never be used against them.

Basically cowards these people will not only sell out their own interests but gladly restrict the liberties of others not for safety, not for king and country, not for family but for the short term appearance of doing something. Wishing for daddy to hold and hug them and tell them everything's okay while the sky is falling these people lash out against anyone who dares to say that the emperor has no clothes.

While cowering in a corner crying out don't hurt me. These scumbags demand oppressive measures against everyone else. They're the hawks who shout out for wars. They're the hypocrites who call out for the government to provide tanks, armies, police, prisons, executions and in turn cry about their tax burden and refer to any attempt to provide real protection of life like heath care as communism.

When these vile pissant pimples on the arse of society speak it is always about other people being a problem and how they should happy accept any restriction on themselves so long as it makes said pissant happy. Therein lies the rub for like every petty tyrant in history they are never happy. Much like the puritans of old who could not quite get over the idea that someone somewhere might be having fun, these inbred trolls object to the idea that someone somewhere might be unmonitored. They have nothing on the party in Orwell's 1984.

In the end of course as cowards hypocrites and fools when the abuses they advocate come back to bite them on the ass these are persons who cry the loudest. These laws were meant for other people, the bad ones who don't agree with me is their cry. Censor only that which I don't approve of! Detain only the brown people! If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about but stay out of my private life! Keep your government hands off my medicare! Me! Me! Me! Sure, everyone will be tracked, their movements recorded. Sure anyone who dresses funny or has a different skin color will be stopped by every passing policeman. Sure political opponents will never be able to move without being followed. Sure people will be caught in dragnets for the most minor of infractions but it'll never touch me and I'll feel ever so warm and cozy not like in a free society where there's a chance someone might do something I don't like or even worse look different form me. Why won't you conform and be a good little mindless tool like I am! Bleet! Bleet! Bleet!

Anyone who values liberty or even diversity sees these petulant children as dangerous of course but the sad fact is the mindless always seem to outnumber the thinking people.

Kindlekitten your attitude embodies that manifestation by everything you post here.

other than a rant, I'm not really sure what your point was.

I've worn the uniform of this country. you?
I've been in combat. you?
I have a son that became a Navy SEAL and now works as a threat analyst for the US Government. you?
I have a daughter that saved a woman's life at the age of 16, was honored for it, received her Girl Scout Gold Award, is finishing her degree in Physical Therapy while married to her submariner husband. you?
I am active in Girl Scouting, training adults how to become leaders, specializing in troop camp training, and intervening with troubled troops. you?
I am active in Search and Rescue, have been the primary rescuer in 10 finds. you?
present a program called "Hug a Tree" to youth, which gives them tools to not become lost in the woods, and then teaches them what to do if they are. you?



In boot camp sufficient nutrition and medical care are made available.
and it is in prison as well. might not taste very good though. The ability to make phone calls home is not so restricted. I was able to call home exactly twice except when I was in the hospitalJail need not be summer camp but when you consider that jail and prison are not the same thing and when you consider the complaints that have been lodged over the years I'm forced to conclude that the prisoners are not being humanly treated.
then they should have actively ensured that they remained out of jail. ie; not comitted crimes. for those few that are incorrectly imprisoned, I am truly sorry.

Ain't liberty a bitch? People might do bad things. However an age requirement for alcohol doesn't affect anyone not in the process of purchasing it. A license for the privilege to drive on public roads does not affect the right to walk on public sidewalks. If you want to show your ID to anyone who asks go ahead. Who I am or where I'm going is really no one's buisness unless I choose otherwise, you don't get to choose for me.
you missed the point. the point was people had broken the law in various activities, now everyone pays the consequences

Then go cower in your basement and hope there's no fire or meteor. As long as you are breathing you're going to be taking the risk that you'll stop doing so. Certainty one day you will stop. Showing ID won't change that. You might be hit by a truck today. You might be mugged. A farm girl from Kansas might drop a house on you. Shit happens get used to it.
yes, life's a bitch, then you die. in the interim, there are ways to ensure that we remain as safe as possible and don't let the criminals take advantage of us
Spend forever worried that something might kill you today or relax go to 7-11 and pick up some milk. The choice is yours. Aren't choices nice?

What's the difference? You're stopped there's the threat of force and a demand made of you for no other reason than you happened to be passing by and the state decided to turn its attention to you. Is the threat of a submachine gun worse than the threat from a handgun? Both carry the power of the state, both make a demand. Both have unfortunate consequences if you don't carry and give them what they want on demand. I rather not the US become a place where this happens. You've yet to explain why a police offcer stopping anyone and demanding ID is different from or won't lead to checkpoints and automatic weapons.
now what you are eluding to IS illegal search and seizure, and except under Marshal Law, will not happen Allow one and why not the other? I mean all you have to do is carry ID right?

Are you thick? the 4'th amendment has nothing to do with so-called intellectual property. Papers means just that. Bookkeeping records. Deeds. Birth certificates. Diaries. Whatever records you happened to have. Your personal data to be as sacred as your person. Not the protection of writing means for publication it's absurd to think something intended to be public would be listed under protection for private spaces. To search your house, your things, your paperwork or your person requires probable cause. The while idea of papers please comrade violates this.
try taking a COnstitutional Law class. you simply are not getting it

Then why did you reply about it? Someone else brought it up, I answered. you jumped in. If you consider the whole thing off topic stop replying to it.

I'm not sure what this is in reference to

Let's see that posted scan then, and of your passport. Come on comrade nothing to hide after all. People should be forced to show ID after all. Let's see some.

oh you're funny

Oh how cute. You feel so threatened by not knowing my name and address. You must be terrified when walking on a public street. All those people not showing you their identification why they might hurt you. Better check out the window and see if there are any nearby who knows what they might do? Or of course you could know their names and they could just kill you so you don't identify them later. You should probably know this by now but you're not safe. No one is. Planes crash. Cars crash. Extremest nut-jobs blow things up. People get cancer and they fall down stairs and they choke on food. There are earthquakes volcano floods blizzards hurricanes. The universe is trying to kill you and one day it will succeed. Making me carry identification won't change that it'll just bring us all one step closer to a police state. While you're waiting for the universe to get you what do you prefer liberty or oppression?

If you think there's an immigration problem find some other way to solve it. The Arizona way is a load of fascist bullshit, much like your arguments.

wow! just wow! first I'm a socialist, then I'm a facist.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by obs20

I really hope this straightens up some of the confusion. It seems balanced to me because it will upset whatever argument you're trying to make

that quote about "crime dropping" to the immigrants gets bandied about everywhere, yet not once have I seen any supporting documentation. and the FBI stats I used before sure do not support it

[SameOldStory]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Really? So talking accurately about American police's shortcomings - well documented by your own libertarians - is racial hatred? If I was talking about another country's police failings, I'd have different things to say, based on the documentation there.

Why would I take offence when you've just shot your own argument in the foot again? This is comedy.

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

....

Oh, and if you want to be happy with reported figures...erm...

(In 2009) The incidence of violent crimes such as murder, rape and aggravated assault ...plunged 16.6% in Phoenix

....

Reading that and other news stories it seems that the police have been cracking down on drug and gang crime. Good for the police.


So are the police doing a good job, or are you saying that the police are corrupt and crushing down on illegal aliens?

[SameOldStory]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

Well this is a statement... Too many people have narrow minded views. They see things and they react and they never take the time to think through what they're defending. Without any understanding of slippery slopes these dregs of humanity blindly accept the word of any authority figure blind to any potential for abuse because they feel it'll never be used against them.

Basically cowards these people will not only sell out their own interests but gladly restrict the liberties of others not for safety, not for king and country, not for family but for the short term appearance of doing something. Wishing for daddy to hold and hug them and tell them everything's okay while the sky is falling these people lash out against anyone who dares to say that the emperor has no clothes.

While cowering in a corner crying out don't hurt me. These scumbags demand oppressive measures against everyone else. They're the hawks who shout out for wars. They're the hypocrites who call out for the government to provide tanks, armies, police, prisons, executions and in turn cry about their tax burden and refer to any attempt to provide real protection of life like heath care as communism.

When these vile pissant pimples on the arse of society speak it is always about other people being a problem and how they should happy accept any restriction on themselves so long as it makes said pissant happy. Therein lies the rub for like every petty tyrant in history they are never happy. Much like the puritans of old who could not quite get over the idea that someone somewhere might be having fun, these inbred trolls object to the idea that someone somewhere might be unmonitored. They have nothing on the party in Orwell's 1984.

In the end of course as cowards hypocrites and fools when the abuses they advocate come back to bite them on the ass these are persons who cry the loudest. These laws were meant for other people, the bad ones who don't agree with me is their cry. Censor only that which I don't approve of! Detain only the brown people! If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about but stay out of my private life! Keep your government hands off my medicare! Me! Me! Me! Sure, everyone will be tracked, their movements recorded. Sure anyone who dresses funny or has a different skin color will be stopped by every passing policeman. Sure political opponents will never be able to move without being followed. Sure people will be caught in dragnets for the most minor of infractions but it'll never touch me and I'll feel ever so warm and cozy not like in a free society where there's a chance someone might do something I don't like or even worse look different form me. Why won't you conform and be a good little mindless tool like I am! Bleet! Bleet! Bleet!

Anyone who values liberty or even diversity sees these petulant children as dangerous of course but the sad fact is the mindless always seem to outnumber the thinking people.

Kindlekitten your attitude embodies that manifestation by everything you post here.

Iphinome, I'm glad that you ended the above that with Kindlekitten's name.

I didn't read it all, but I thought you were trashing what passes for liberalism today. Just so you aren’t dis-ing Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, George Soros, and the other greats of America.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

other than a rant, I'm not really sure what your point was.

I've worn the uniform of this country. you?
I've been in combat. you?
I have a son that became a Navy SEAL and now works as a threat analyst for the US Government. you?
I have a daughter that saved a woman's life at the age of 16, was honored for it, received her Girl Scout Gold Award, is finishing her degree in Physical Therapy while married to her submariner husband. you?
I am active in Girl Scouting, training adults how to become leaders, specializing in troop camp training, and intervening with troubled troops. you?
I am active in Search and Rescue, have been the primary rescuer in 10 finds. you?
present a program called "Hug a Tree" to youth, which gives them tools to not become lost in the woods, and then teaches them what to do if they are. you?

So the hell what? None of your damn buisness. That's sort of the point here, NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUISNESS. other people don't need to inform you of what they do where they go who they are or why no matter how much you wish otherwise.

Nothing will make you right. Maybe you and your ilk will manage to get together the naked force to make everyone conform to your wishes but nothing you did in the past changes that you stand against liberty.

By the way, last I checked the US doesn't put women in combat so out of intellectual curiosity and the chance to catch you in a lie, how did you manage it?

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

In boot camp sufficient nutrition and medical care are made available.
and it is in prison as well. might not taste very good though. The ability to make phone calls home is not so restricted. I was able to call home exactly twice except when I was in the hospital

We're not talking of prison we're talking of jail. And there have been complaints of insufficient and spoiled food served as a cost cutting measure. Lawsuits were filed find the old thread about it I linked citations there.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

then they should have actively ensured that they remained out of jail. ie; not comitted crimes. for those few that are incorrectly imprisoned, I am truly sorry.

You'll be sorry when you step out the door without ID one day and end up in custody for it. that is the world you want isn't it?

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

you missed the point. the point was people had broken the law in various activities, now everyone pays the consequences

You missed the point. Our founders valued liberty over tyranny, everyone pays the consequences by having to accept that there's going to be some anti-social asshats who break the social contract. If you can find them without violating anyone's civil rights then the state has the power to put them in the penalty box. You don't punish everyone.

not being punished for acts you had no part in was a big deal when they were writing the constitution they even forbid attainder. That's not exactly punishing the whole society but the concept of not punishing others for the acts of one is why attainder is forbidden.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

now what you are eluding to IS illegal search and seizure, and except under Marshal Law, will not happen.

why not? You're support standing us right on the edge of a slippery slope. Why should a demand for ID not be a demand to turn out your pockets. Why should a demand of ID be done one on one when you can set up a checkpoint. Why set up one checkpoint when you can do it every half mile. Why just check ID when you can record the data at the same time? You think the police just won't do it? They're people, they're flawed as anyone else, it's all about catching criminals right who cares about a few abuses?

No thanks. I'd rather not trust human goodness to prevent police harassment. I'd rather laws be written to prevent abuse not encourage it.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

try taking a COnstitutional Law class. you simply are not getting it

says the person who thinks being secure in your papers means IP instead of data.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I'm not sure what this is in reference to

don't ask don't tell and the mini-thread that popped up around it. I answered someone else and you jumped in with a reply and then called me out for it not being relevant when I replied to your reply. I'm basically saying if you don't want to talk about it then stop replying about it, all i did was answer someone else.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

oh you're funny

only funny looking, now how about that data? Is showing ID only for everyone else? Cough up.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

just wow! first I'm a socialist, then I'm a facist.

No I don't think you're a socialist, while papers please is something I've felt pride about us not having as opposed to the eastern bloc during the cold war it isn't a socialist measure just an authoritarian one. No you really come off more as a fascist.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

Iphinome, I'm glad that you ended the above that with Kindlekitten's name.

I didn't read it all, but I thought you were trashing what passes for liberalism today. Just so you aren’t dis-ing Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, George Soros, and the other greats of America.

Perish the thought. Those people are heroes. Well unless they disagree with me on copyright then no holds barred.