Arizona's Illegal Immigration Law

[i_am_i]

I don't mean for this to be a "gotcha," Jackel, but I'm wondering how you reconcile this statement you made on another thread with your hard-line stance on illegal immigrants:

"We are all beautiful unique butterflies to which effect the existing world and order around us. We are equally the stuff that makes a star shine as we are the stuff that thrives on it's energy to survive. We are in a dance of synchrony, like that of a symphony energy. Hence, we are all natural material physical phenomenon, unique as chaotic systems to which give us our own Identities, personalities, and individual uniqueness."

Aren't illegal immigrants also beautiful unique butterflies?

[TheJackel]

Invite Mexico to become the 51st state, problem largely solved?

Somehow I don't think that would work out .

[TheJackel]

I don't mean for this to be a "gotcha," Jackel, but I'm wondering how you reconcile this statement you made on another thread with your hard-line stance on illegal immigrants:

"We are all beautiful unique butterflies to which effect the existing world and order around us. We are equally the stuff that makes a star shine as we are the stuff that thrives on it's energy to survive. We are in a dance of synchrony, like that of a symphony energy. Hence, we are all natural material physical phenomenon, unique as chaotic systems to which give us our own Identities, personalities, and individual uniqueness."

Aren't illegal immigrants also beautiful unique butterflies?

Yes they are.. In no way am I stating illegals are evil or vile people.. As beautiful as we are individually we can still have negative and often un-intended impacts. All I am looking to do is solve the problems within reason, and it's increasingly difficult when illegals don't get directly involved with brokering solutions to the overall problem. When no action is taken the problem gets worse, and eventually leads to far more negative events such as economic collapse, environmental collapse, hate crimes, ectra.. There needs to be real solutions, and I think that is what most people want.

So what kind of Future do you want to see? Another 3rd world country over populated to which it can no longer support? A nation that loses it's natural habitats? Or that reasonable solutions for the Greater Good (not just humans), or overall balance? As chaotic as this world is, we can't save everyone when it's literally beyond our means to do so. Nor can we sustain support for 3k to 4k illegal immigrants everyday for the next unknown number of years.

And no I don't have all the answers, and I can be equally wrong on many points myself. But I do feel that everyone needs to start seriously thinking about confronting these issues and finding ways to solve them, otherwise we are letting something fester into a really big problem that could cost us far more than what we are presently arguing about. So we can't have anarchy, or let law over step reasonable bounds. So this I why I have asked many of you about what kind of solutions you think are viably applicable to solve the problem.

[pinkocommie]

Authorizes local police to make an arrest without a warrant of any person they believe is “removable from the United States.”

So if they see a group of illegals jumping the fence, they ought not be allowed to detain, question, or make an inquiry? Sounds like advocating zero action policy.. I see no problems with allowing police to make judgment calls considering they are a border state where this kind of activity frequently occurs. Now I'm not saying there shouldn't be guidelines or further amendments to ensure accountability and protection for legal citizens. I think you are overstating a conspiracy theory to ethnically target individuals. You do realize that many of the legal immigrants in Arizona support this Bill correct?

Hahaha, well if the instance is a person jumping some fence between Mexico and the US, then questioning them would obviously be a proper application of the law.  However, there are already Federal laws in place which allow for questioning people who are caught crossing the boarder illegally, which makes this new Arizona law redundant and unnecessary in regard to your hypothetical.  

I guarantee you that for every 'so, if a cop sees an illegal raping a baby, he/she SHOULDN'T do anything?  Rabble rabble rabble' I could come up with a hypothetical situation where the law might be abused because of the language in which it is written.  The point is that the language of the law allows for abuse of legal citizens' rights, which I think is unacceptable.  You claim I'm overstating a conspiracy theory, I say you're remaining willfully ignorant of the fact that the law was written in a way that allows for, if not mandates racial profiling.  We obviously disagree.  

Claiming (again, without evidence to back up your claim) that "many" legal immigrants support the bill doesn't really mean anything.  I would argue that legal immigrants might not have as much of an understanding of the spirit of America as those of us who are from here, so it makes sense you might not see anything wrong with the bill.  I do, but again, I was raised here and was told my entire life that America was a place where the rights of the people (even brown ones!) are inalienable.  This bill was written a way that makes it legal for American citizens to be harassed and detained by the police, something I see as an infringement of rights, and so I don't support it.  No amount of legal immigrant support is going to sway me.

[TheJackel]

Authorizes local police to make an arrest without a warrant of any person they believe is “removable from the United States.”

So if they see a group of illegals jumping the fence, they ought not be allowed to detain, question, or make an inquiry? Sounds like advocating zero action policy.. I see no problems with allowing police to make judgment calls considering they are a border state where this kind of activity frequently occurs. Now I'm not saying there shouldn't be guidelines or further amendments to ensure accountability and protection for legal citizens. I think you are overstating a conspiracy theory to ethnically target individuals. You do realize that many of the legal immigrants in Arizona support this Bill correct?

Hahaha, well if the instance is a person jumping some fence between Mexico and the US, then questioning them would obviously be a proper application of the law.  However, there are already Federal laws in place which allow for questioning people who are caught crossing the boarder illegally, which makes this new Arizona law redundant and unnecessary in regard to your hypothetical.  

I guarantee you that for every 'so, if a cop sees an illegal raping a baby, he/she SHOULDN'T do anything?  Rabble rabble rabble' I could come up with a hypothetical situation where the law might be abused because of the language in which it is written.  The point is that the language of the law allows for abuse of legal citizens' rights, which I think is unacceptable.  You claim I'm overstating a conspiracy theory, I say you're remaining willfully ignorant of the fact that the law was written in a way that allows for, if not mandates racial profiling.  We obviously disagree.  

Claiming (again, without evidence to back up your claim) that "many" legal immigrants support the bill doesn't really mean anything.  I would argue that legal immigrants might not have as much of an understanding of the spirit of America as those of us who are from here, so it makes sense you might not see anything wrong with the bill.  I do, but again, I was raised here and was told my entire life that America was a place where the rights of the people (even brown ones!) are inalienable.  This bill was written a way that makes it legal for American citizens to be harassed and detained by the police, something I see as an infringement of rights, and so I don't support it.  No amount of legal immigrant support is going to sway me.

I can see your redundancy argument and I would agree that it appears to be redundant.. Giving the light of that fact, is it then redundant that apparently this bill reflects what is already law? I can also come up with a hypothetical situation to which any law can be abused in the same manner.. Cops could for example only seek out black people jaywalking.. Technically any law can be used to infringe on your rights in that regard. Abuse of the system isn't terribly hard to do if you are some racist cop, or citizen looking to harass someone.

So instead of hypothetical possibilities of abuse, what solutions would you have that couldn't possibly be used in such hypothetical abuse?


I_am_I,
 please refrain from quote mining me out of context.. That was inappropriate.

[pinkocommie]

Actually, if it's shown that a police officer is only handing out tickets to black people for jaywalking, that police officer would himself be in trouble because his actions would be considered racially motivated.

Personally, I don't have any solutions.  I never claimed I did.  However, I don't think supporting a bad law is the answer.

[pinkocommie]

Where did I quote mine you out of context?

[TheJackel]

Where did I quote mine you out of context?

I'm sorry, you didn't I will edit it and fix that

[TheJackel]

Actually, if it's shown that a police officer is only handing out tickets to black people for jaywalking, that police officer would himself be in trouble because his actions would be considered racially motivated.

Personally, I don't have any solutions.  I never claimed I did.  However, I don't think supporting a bad law is the answer.

I will contend that I may be wrong to support this Bill should the above be the case.. I do however strongly feel that something needs to be done, and I don't think that will come without the risks of abuse by people who intend to abuse the system :frown:

[pinkocommie]

Where did I quote mine you out of context?

I'm sorry, you didn't

Hahaha, OK, I kept re-reading what I wrote going 'where did I do that?!?'  :/ So I don't have the magic bullet solution either, and I don't think you can have a 100 percent magic bullet solution to this problem. But it's pretty clear to me that something has got to be done, and done soon.  [/quote]

I agree with you.  I think illegal immigration is an issue that has a lot of people pissed off with the government because it would seem the government isn't doing enough about the problem.  I think that's why states like Arizona and the other 22 states that were planning on following Arizona's example (to a varying extent) are proof that people want a solution or solutions that produce results.  While I think the AZ law is a really bad piece of legislation, if it gets the Federal government more focused on the issues of illegal immigration then at least some good will have come of it.

[Davin]

Davin,

I was aware of why you did it, but I found that suggestive considering it's been used as a common argument against any action against illegal immigrants.. I am only stating the typical rhetoric I get all the time, I find it funny though when I tell someone that does accuse me of being a Nazi that I am Brazilian

I said equally fallacious; what you said is what most people in support of AZ bill say about those that aren't. So I gave the thing said about those that support it. Both statements are equal in every way I can think of, just opposite extremes of the same fallacy.

Sorry, but the boarders need to be closed and the best way to do that is take away what they come here illegally to get at the cost of the taxpayer.. Controlled legal immigrations is the only logical answer to wrestle control of the illegal immigration problem. The Federal Government Failed to do anything, so we are forced to do so on a state level. Some of us are already working to draft similar legislation in Minnesota.

I don't think the borders need to be closed, other than people avoiding responsibility for the crimes they've committed, I say let them in if they want. Give them better access to work visas, tax them, get them documented and make it easier to understand the process and/or provide someone that can explain the process. I think those things will solve a lot of the illegal part of the problem as well as some of the costs you talk about for them living in the country undocumented. In return they get to call the police when they're getting/have been attacked, getting/have been robbed... by providing safety and/or justice to them from paying taxes it may make paying taxes far more appealing and will likely reduce the amount of crimes committed against illegal immigrants. It would give most of them a pay raise as they would then be protected under the U.S. labor laws.

I don't think we need to worry about overpopulation because these people won't be able to afford their own 2-5 acres of land, they'll likely be renting apartments which can be very space friendly by going up to 5-10 stories high. The cost would be offset by the large amount of new taxpayers. The amount of money they'll be spending on food, water, waste, power, shelter and other things will supply more jobs for people to provide those goods and services. Most of the current illegal immigrants are already buying the goods and services, so if they were to magically become U.S. citizens today, those services would still be provided without any problems.

Here's a plan: Not only make the naturalization/work visa process easier, faster and cheaper, but also encourage people from worst countries to immigrate here. When the governments of those countries see their people leaving en mass, they will be forced to do something about their own country to make it appealing for the people that are holding the country up instead of making the country appealing to those that are exploiting the people. This would either cause the other countries to become stronger, fail or go all Kim Jong Il by trapping the people and lying to them. Countries like Mexico have a lot of businesses that have dealings with companies in the U.S. which would make the last option far less likely for many of the countries. The other countries improve or continuously die off until they improve which would make the U.S. far less attractive which would lessen the amount of illegal and legal immigrants while improving a great amount of the world through a Capitalistic approach of supplying the demand for a safe, free place to live.

[TheJackel]

Davin,

I was aware of why you did it, but I found that suggestive considering it's been used as a common argument against any action against illegal immigrants.. I am only stating the typical rhetoric I get all the time, I find it funny though when I tell someone that does accuse me of being a Nazi that I am Brazilian

I said equally fallacious; what you said is what most people in support of AZ bill say about those that aren't. So I gave the thing said about those that support it. Both statements are equal in every way I can think of, just opposite extremes of the same fallacy.

Sorry, but the boarders need to be closed and the best way to do that is take away what they come here illegally to get at the cost of the taxpayer.. Controlled legal immigrations is the only logical answer to wrestle control of the illegal immigration problem. The Federal Government Failed to do anything, so we are forced to do so on a state level. Some of us are already working to draft similar legislation in Minnesota.

I don't think the borders need to be closed, other than people avoiding responsibility for the crimes they've committed, I say let them in if they want. Give them better access to work visas, tax them, get them documented and make it easier to understand the process and/or provide someone that can explain the process. I think those things will solve a lot of the illegal part of the problem as well as some of the costs you talk about for them living in the country undocumented. In return they get to call the police when they're getting/have been attacked, getting/have been robbed... by providing safety and/or justice to them from paying taxes it may make paying taxes far more appealing and will likely reduce the amount of crimes committed against illegal immigrants. It would give most of them a pay raise as they would then be protected under the U.S. labor laws.

I don't think we need to worry about overpopulation because these people won't be able to afford their own 2-5 acres of land, they'll likely be renting apartments which can be very space friendly by going up to 5-10 stories high. The cost would be offset by the large amount of new taxpayers. The amount of money they'll be spending on food, water, waste, power, shelter and other things will supply more jobs for people to provide those goods and services. Most of the current illegal immigrants are already buying the goods and services, so if they were to magically become U.S. citizens today, those services would still be provided without any problems.

Here's a plan: Not only make the naturalization/work visa process easier, faster and cheaper, but also encourage people from worst countries to immigrate here. When the governments of those countries see their people leaving en mass, they will be forced to do something about their own country to make it appealing for the people that are holding the country up instead of making the country appealing to those that are exploiting the people. This would either cause the other countries to become stronger, fail or go all Kim Jong Il by trapping the people and lying to them. Countries like Mexico have a lot of businesses that have dealings with companies in the U.S. which would make the last option far less likely for many of the countries. The other countries improve or continuously die off until they improve which would make the U.S. far less attractive which would lessen the amount of illegal and legal immigrants while improving a great amount of the world through a Capitalistic approach of supplying the demand for a safe, free place to live.

Though I understand your Position here, I don't agree to a doors wide open policy. Also, I think you are not really informed on what kind of environmental effect that would have here because they do end up owning property, and homes. California has been constantly building new schools for example..It does lead to unnecessary urban development and the disappearance of our natural habitats. Some of the most notable is Florida.. There is no way we could afford an open door policy... However, I agree on making legal immigration an easier process and finding a workable solution to those who have been here a while and have made a life for themselves.. Right now America needs to close the borders and really take the time to fix the problems it has before it reopens them.  And there is also no way we could possibly ingest everyone who wants to leave their home nation, I really don't care to see the US population exceed 1 billion, 250 million is already over crowded. 3k to 4k = how many new apartment complexes a day? In 200 years what kind of environmental effect do you think that would have?.. To put this in prespective, go outside and see how far you can look without seeing trash on the ground, or take a drive and see how far you can go before you don't see any trash on the ground.

America's 2nd Largest river that feeds many of US central river systems is nearing what they cal ecological collapse in some areas do to pollution, development, over fishing, and over population.

Wiki:

Biologists from state and federal agencies have warned since the 1970s and 1980s that the build-up of silt and sand will completely destroy the Upper Mississippi River's ecosystem if it is not stopped. However, the expansion of the commercial navigation system is still being pursued due to commercial interests. Biologists warn that an ecological collapse would likely occur of the Upper Mississippi River if the current systems expand or even just continue as is.

And it Gets worse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_zone_%28ecology%29
http://act.americanrivers.org/site/DocS ... ?docID=692

Florida
http://fl.audubon.org/PDFs/pubs_policyd ... t_main.pdf

If you doubled the US population for Example, it would have a drastic effect on the local environment and even possibly induce various ecological collapses or further dead zones.

Some other resources on Americas Habitats:

http://www.fws.gov/birds/documents/HabitatLoss.pdf
http://www.landscope.org/explore/threats/habitat/
http://www.actionbioscience.org/biodiversity/walsh.html
http://www.carryingcapacity.org/DinAlt.htm

[Davin]

Though I understand your Position here, I don't agree to a doors wide open policy. Also, I think you are not really informed on what kind of environmental effect that would have here because they do end up owning property, and homes.

Your condescending language needs to stop. Thinking you're more informed than another is the worst position to be in if your goal is to honestly discover the truth. Almost all of your language so far has been the condescending "I know more than you know, because if you knew as much as I knew you'd take my position." Which is total bullshit, dishonest, illogical and useless. Please can we just have a rational discussion? Just because someone doesn't take the same view as you do, doesn't mean that they're less informed than you or anything else, it just means they've come to a different conclusion than you. Even if someone is less informed than thou art, it doesn't mean you get to automatically be right, reality doesn't work like that. So just stop that, I don't care if you think it, but please be honest and logical in responses.

As far as overpopulation and environmental effects are concerned we can compare the population of the U.S. per square mile to the population per square mile of other countries that are successful in controlling pollution, places to live and many other things.

The U.S. has an estimated population of 309 million people with 3.79 million square miles of land, England has an estimated 51.446 million people on 50,436 square miles of land. U.S. pop per sq mile about: 81.53, England pop per sq mile about: 1020.03. We have a lot of filling up to do before we can even complain about overpopulation and the environmental affects associated with increased population. Maybe you're not very informed

California has been constantly building new schools for example..It does lead to unnecessary urban development and the disappearance of our natural habitats. Some of the most notable is Florida.. There is no way we could afford an open door policy... However, I agree on making legal immigration an easier process and finding a workable solution to those who have been here a while and have made a life for themselves.. Right now America needs to close the borders and really take the time to fix the problems it has before it reopens them.  And there is also no way we could possibly ingest everyone who wants to leave their home nation, I really don't care to see the US population exceed 1 billion, 250 million is already over crowded. 3k to 4k = how many new apartment complexes a day? In 200 years what kind of environmental effect do you think that would have?.. To put this in prespective, go outside and see how far you can look without seeing trash on the ground, or take a drive and see how far you can go before you don't see any trash on the ground.

America's 2nd Largest river that feeds many of US central river systems is nearing what they cal ecological collapse in some areas do to pollution, development, over fishing, and over population.

Wiki:

Biologists from state and federal agencies have warned since the 1970s and 1980s that the build-up of silt and sand will completely destroy the Upper Mississippi River's ecosystem if it is not stopped. However, the expansion of the commercial navigation system is still being pursued due to commercial interests. Biologists warn that an ecological collapse would likely occur of the Upper Mississippi River if the current systems expand or even just continue as is.

And it Gets worse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_zone_%28ecology%29
http://act.americanrivers.org/site/DocS ... ?docID=692

Florida
http://fl.audubon.org/PDFs/pubs_policyd ... t_main.pdf

If you doubled the US population for Example, it would have a drastic effect on the local environment and even possibly induce various ecological collapses or further dead zones.

Some other resources on Americas Habitats:

http://www.fws.gov/birds/documents/HabitatLoss.pdf
http://www.landscope.org/explore/threats/habitat/
http://www.actionbioscience.org/biodiversity/walsh.html

.

Maybe we should see how other countries with more than 10x the people per square ft do things and do it that way instead of acting like we have it bad.

[pinkocommie]

You know what this thread needs?  An adorable puppy.



Yay!  

[Thumpalumpacus]

The only real solution to illegal immigration is to stabilize Mexico.  People don't often leave their homeland unless the circumstances compel it.

That is up the the Mexicans, and you can't expect us to become the Wellfare bank for another country. Especially a country that would likely just take the money and pocket it.

I'm unsure where you got the idea that that was my gist.  My circumspect language is clear.

Also, it should be pointed out that people are required in California to present a government-issue ID card at any request from a peace officer.  The only reason why this doesn't result in co-operation with ICE is because many cities are so-called "sanctuary cities."  The newly-amended law doesn't seem to deviate from that standard, with the exception of requiring follow-up reporting.