I call your boycott and raise you your lights

however, there is a flip side to some of the points made in the article. the parts that read:

obviously the feds know there is a problem and the border patrol agents are overwhelmed, or there wouldnt be a program to allow local officers to be trained by homeland security in the first place. and in the charges (later quoted) that arpaio's department is abusing that program and profiling, etc...., well, maybe that's an indication that the feds cant even handle training and monitoring in their own program. who knows, maybe the state can do a better job. if they cant, the lawsuits will happen. if they can, it was worth taking the chance.

the other side of the argument is if you have more local and state officers the tools to fight illegal immigration and help out with this, it takes part of the load away from the maricopa sheriff's office so they can respond to other crimes. its kinda like if the feds were doing their freakin job in the first place, that sheriff's department would not even have to be part of a program to arrest illegals.

so now we are gonna get picky about the "quality" of illegal arrested? ummm... ok.

so when a department abuses the system, or the attitude set from the top is less than stellar, you just throw everything out instead of cleaning up the department and making them play by the rules? that is the "throw the baby out with the bathwater" that i mentioned.

i have no problem with bad apples getting put down the garbage disposal. but all apples arent bad. to paint all law enforcement with the same brush, or to say "but but they might", isnt an argument. you clean up the bad and you let the good do the job properly.

 

You mean it's not classy like this:

 

that means reasonable suspicion

 

I suspected your lack of computer knowledge earlier with the iPhone/WiFi discussion, but this confirms it. She knows the administrator password in case she needs to install something. Having administrator access has nothing to do with restricting access to porn. That's done with modifying the host file.

Have you modified your host file? No? Nice parenting there...

Yes. That's exactly what I said. I don't want police officers questioning suspects. Your attempt to make a point is asinine.

Sure, if they have the appropriate identification. Someone can have their wallet stolen and they're detained because a cop thinks they look "illegal". I doubt you're really concerned since you're white.

Yes, that's exactly what I teach my daughter. I also teach her to play with broken glass, drink from spray bottles under the kitchen sink and to play in the street.

Please try to add something intelligent to the discussion. If that's too tall of an order, then just stand aside and let the adults talk.

Congratulations on your new brown friends. I bet they're the cool black people with lighter skin and nice hair. The "Spanish kids" probably aren't from Spain I bet, either. That's okay because they all look alike, right? Dominican, Mexican, Spanish, Italian, Moroccan, etc. They're all Spanish...

I'm not sure why you feel the need to tell me about it, how it applies to this discussion or why you think I care.

What makes it expensive is that it has taken money to pass the legislation. It takes time, effort, lobbying, etc. to pass any legislation. Time that could be better spent on passing non-xenophobic legislation that actually matters.

The law is constitutional, but racial profiling is not. Police Departments will be sued for racial profiling, regardless of whether or not they actually did it. They'll be forced to spend money defending their officers, regardless of whether or not they actually did it. This will cost money.

This law does nothing to secure borders or enforce laws. It's pure appeasement to the fringe that will make zero positive impact on illegal immigration. Federal law already requires immigrants to do this. Why do people think that because the State of Arizona slaps their state seal on it that it will change anything?

They would have been just as well served passing a new law that prohibits murder...

 

So the citizens of Arizona entrust their law enforcement officers with the power of arrest (suspension of a citizens FREEDOM) should they deem a need or even deploy deadly force should they deem it necessary, but you can’t trust them to know when they can ask someone to show them their drivers license or state issued ID?

This is as dumb as the argument that you should have to show proof of ID in order to vote.

If you take the profiling issue out of the equation, do you think everyone in this country (above the age of 18) should have to be able to prove who they are?

The professor in Connecticut that refused to produce an ID claiming he actually belonged in the house he was breaking into? What is wrong with that?

 

I won't get into a lengthy circular debate, but I will point out that this is the core issue. In the other thread, I offered a way to implement tools to protect legals and citizens and to rid the system of bad apples. Just stating intentions is not protections. Just putting in a training course is not protection. A feedback loop is essential if you are at all serious. BP's stated intentions of safety first and training everybody's ass off didn't do a lot of good either because when it got down to it safety appears to have come in second when practical decisions had to be made.

Reality is that Arpaio is currently operating directly under equivalent US Law and his men have been extensively trained and you're still have massive civil rights violations and nothing is being done (other than lawsuits) to stop it. The reason is simple. The majority of AZ doesn't care about the violations. Arpaio is very popular and this gives him imunity inside the state. Others will see that he can get away with it with impunity and they will mimick. This law is ripe for abuse and the goverment simply promising only good intentions is ludricrous.

The question is are you like BP? Do you only care about making lofty idealistic intentions and turn your back on what actually happening? This law is an abomination that needs to go away.




(side note: So this doesn't jump into a discussion about BP, I want to be clear that I don't accuse BP of intentionally causing this leak. I suspect that at the end of the day the cause will be due to a whole series of practical and not really perceived to be risky or even related decisions. However in each case the safest option will have taken a backseat to practical expediency and the combined effect is what set us up for winning this **** lottery)

 

No. Only if there is reason to prove who you are. Being Mexican is not legitimate reason.