Stand with Arizona
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Sunday, May 16, 2010 21:28
VIEWED: 15979
PAGE 7 of 18
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I hope every Hispanic law enforcement officer in Arizona shows up to demand every white protester's papers. Should be fun.
That's whacha call a 'strawman argument'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
90% of hispanics demand export of hispanic illegal aliens.
Who do you think loses their jobs first?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
So, when it's just a bunch of dirty, low life illegals, it's not really kidnapping ?
Is that what I'm hearing ?
Next you'll be telling us it's not " rape " if the girl is an illegal....
Or it's not torture if they're not a citizen...
... or if you're just drowning them.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"So, when it's just a bunch of dirty, low life illegals, it's not really kidnapping?"
Hello,
Interesting.
Let me see if I can follow the logic.
You want to stem the tide of illegal immigration, citing excessive kidnapping statistics in Phoenix as one reason why.
It turns out that the excessive kidnapping statistics are due to the cayote tactics in smuggling in illegal immigrants.
These criminal smuggling networks are functioning to get past our border security.
If there was no border security, then there would be no need for the criminal smuggling of illegals.
Without criminal smuggling, there would be no kidnapped illegals being ransomed to their families.
Eliminating border security would eliminate the kidnapping problem in Phoenix.
...
I agree with your argument.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Unless something directly affects people, they just don't get it.
25 years ago in CA, drywall companies started going out of business because their competitors were hiring cheap illegal labor. Then the concrete, tile, plumbing and carpentry trades were basically taken over by illegals.
The only trade I know of that hasn't been usurped by the "undocumented" is electrical, because you need to be certified, and that's next.
Don't have any idea what all these legal tradespeople are doing for work now...I guess they found work in fast food.
The ones that can still find work have taken a big pay cut to be able to compete with the illegals.
Just sayin...
Whatever works...Mom
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I find this deeply disturbing. Possible Suspcion of illegal immigration in arizona is a pretty clear racial identifier. What's even more disturbing than the loons who support the idea is the psychos who thought it up in the first place.
Skipping the partisan nonsense, since I know that if a democrat had come up with this, aerator or AURAptor as those who don't have auto spell check on call him, would be picking it apart as an exempt of the inherit racism of the democratic party dating back to the Jackson, instead of extolling the virtues of the bill, should there be any, but seriously folks...
This is madness. Tony nailed it. I don't know if you have to remove the border patrol, lest chavez send an army or alqaeda invade, but stop harassing mexicans, let them cross the border, and also us. I mean, there's no threat here, in fact, the mexican civil war exists entirely because of our war on drugs. We could just let them have their policy we have ours, and have an open border. They do it all over Europe.
And, yes, sure, some non-mexicans will be arrested, but very, very few. As Frem said, its like the fugitive slave act. My great grand father was the only white man ever convicted under the fugitive slave act, and they begged him to take a dismissal. His response: "no, I want to be on the wrong side of this law, because the law is wrong." This law is wrong, and someone is going to have to take the fall for it to get rid of it, someone with enough power to bring the suit that should follow.
Oh, footnote. I find it unsettling that most of these loons are on my side of the aisle. To people who think they should support this because its the right wing thing to do, in say, failing any of the more obvious constitutional and simple moral argument, at least this one should strike home: You know what happens to a political party that is even perceived as attacking or alienating 15% of it's own constituency does best? Loses.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
arch, double post. Oh, and Arizona ice tea is from ny like me, so don't boycott it.;)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
Despite the humor I have tried to inject into this debate, (perhaps poor humor) I actually do take this issue seriously. And no, I don't actually suggest that we eliminate border security.
However, I do suggest that we should make legal immigration and the path to citizenship an exceptionally simple and straightforward process. 'Illegal' people (a term that makes me shake my head) are only able to provide cheap labor because they are illegal. Once legalized, they are recognized by government and are issued rights and responsibilities. This transforms an under-the-table workforce into a legally regulated workforce.
I think that the current strong laws against hiring illegal immigrants (I support these) coupled with easy paths to legal immigration and citizenship would eliminate many of the problems we see.
All without forcing US citizens to whip out proof of citizenship at the whim of police officers.
This solution seems so logical to me that I don't know why it hasn't gained bipartisan support.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by momcarp:
Unless something directly affects people, they just don't get it.
25 years ago in CA, drywall companies started going out of business because their competitors were hiring cheap illegal labor. Then the concrete, tile, plumbing and carpentry trades were basically taken over by illegals.
The only trade I know of that hasn't been usurped by the "undocumented" is electrical, because you need to be certified, and that's next.
Don't have any idea what all these legal tradespeople are doing for work now...I guess they found work in fast food.
The ones that can still find work have taken a big pay cut to be able to compete with the illegals.
Just sayin...
Whatever works...Mom
The mistake you're making, Mom (can I call you "Mom"?) is that you're conflating my not going into absolute total freakout mode for not getting that there's an issue, or not caring.
Illegal immigration IS an issue. Hiring illegals IS an issue. I'm not prepared to go totally batshit over-the-top and throw out Fourth Amendment protections chasing after a tiny percentage of people who MIGHT be doing something illegal.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
The mistake you're making, Mom (can I call you "Mom"?) is that you're conflating my not going into absolute total freakout mode for not getting that there's an issue, or not caring.
Illegal immigration IS an issue. Hiring illegals IS an issue. I'm not prepared to go totally batshit over-the-top and throw out Fourth Amendment protections chasing after a tiny percentage of people who MIGHT be doing something illegal.
It's funny how you say you're not prepared to go batsh*t over - the - top over this new law, yet that's exactly what you do, in claiming it does anything like throwing out the 4th Amendment.
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.
If one's rights are violated, it's not because of this new law.
Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
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.
Find in there where it says "reasonable suspicion" and a "lawful contact" are enough to search and/or seize someone.
Then show me in that new law - OR in its rushed amendments - where it says that before you can stop someone and ask for their papers, you have to have a sworn warrant giving your probably cause.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME