The Arizona Bill on ILLEGALS, Answer Me This?

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Annee

I'm telling you - - - when fresh vegetables triple in price - - - no one but those who know - - - will put responsibility where it really belongs - fencing the border.


[edit on 29-4-2010 by Annee]

This is really sick logic.

You think having cheap vegetables - and strawberries I suppose - trumps all the other negatives from allowing illegal immigrants to stay here and continue to pour in?

Just

You are unbelievably totally clueless.

Like I said most people can't see past the nose on their face.

reply to post by mryanbrown


Actually no, that's where you're wrong.

Anyone that is here that had to apply for citizenship has to carry around something that shows that they are a legal citizen, proof to show anyone like a police officer in case they are pulled over. Don't you carry around a drivers license? These people would too if they where legal, what says that they shouldn't? Do they not get to abide by ANY law of ANY land? Do they get to be the people on this planet that have no law affect them at all?



WHOOPEE LETS LET THEM BE FREE. FREE TO DO ANYTHING.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DaddyBare
reply to post by Annee

 

Crime has increased every where. I'm so sure they are all committed by illegal aliens.

Go research drugs on the Canadian border. When's the last time you heard on any MSM about drugs coming from the northern border? Ask yourself why this is not as big an issue as the southern border.

Perhaps because they don't have dark skin.

Agreed it has increased everywhere but i think the huge difference is the kidnappings which are being done by mexicans mainly. When you average one kidnapping a day thats serious and thats why the canadian border isn't near as serious. Besides the Canadians are mainly bringin marijuana which makes everything better but thats a different debate

reply to post by centurion1211


Might be true to an extent, but do not forget that all the revenue from traffic citations and arrests DO NOT come back to us. We do not get raises because we write citations....so the idea that we give tickets for money is wrong to a degree....the only people making $$$ off tickets is the state....thats why atleast around here you see a lot more verbal warnings then issued citations....

That and for any good officer it shouldn't make sense to give a person a ticket for a broken taillight....the taillight probably costs $50 to fix....the ticket is $30 to pay....why not give a warning and let the owner us that money to actually fix the problem....thats the way to handle it IMO....again, believe it or not, we aren't all out to get you..

Originally posted by rcwj1975
Not sure what constitution you read but here you go....

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

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>probable cause

reply to post by Annee


I can tell you from someone that I know who tried to work in that business. The illegals don't like it when others come in and "try and take their jobs"

They threaten them, beat them up. A friend of mine worked there for a while, came home one day talking about being threatened by them. An illegal told him to go away and stop taking their jobs or else they would make him. he didn't listen because he needed the job. less than a week later he quit because the illegals would get into his stuff and ruin it, spit and throw his lunch on the ground. The last straw is when they tried to physically go after him when the bosses and no one was around, even after work.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by rcwj1975

As a LEO I need Probable Cause or atleast Articutable Reasonable Suspicion to make a traffic stop or stop someone on the street.
[edit on 4/28/2010 by rcwj1975]

Hey, I'm generally on your side on the illegal immigration issue, but I want to comment on the statement you made which is quoted above on probable cause.

I know the law SAYS that you need probable cause, but I've also seen LEO's fabricate their "probable cause" and even though there were several witnesses that testify in court to the contrary, the judge will say, "Well, the officer says this, so I'm going with his testimony". I work in state government, BTW, so really do know what I'm talking about.

My point is that the legal system is basically a racket that the average person will never be able to win when going up against it, so why all the angst about using it the way it has been set up to deal with this issue?

Surely, no one is really going to say that for the illegal immigration issue alone we suddenly have to play it by the book?

I do not understand why so many people are saying that police officers will break the law with this bill?

This is all based on assumptions.

The same exact argument could be made for search warrants and the plain view doctrine.

That is why we have courts who decide the constitutionality of a law, and we have the concept of judicial review.

I am in total 100% agreement with the OP.



[edit on 4/29/2010 by Josephus23]

reply to post by Annee


You really should go read my earlier post
www.abovetopsecret.com...
this will explain why Mexico is in the headlines and not Canada

Send these criminal scum back, but only after a good long stint in a really uncomfortable outdoor middle of the desert tent city prison environment, similar to the ones Sherrif Joe Arapaio runs. Put these in the middle of the Arizona desert - unbearably hot during the day and cold at night. No heat or air conditioning supplied, of course.

Life should be made as uncomfortable as possible for illegal immigrants for a year or two before being deported, preferably while giving back to the communities through chain gang style manual labour, being fed subsistence MREs and water ONLY, and being denied any sort of visitation rights. This will give them something to remember about their time in the USA.

It should be well advertised in Mexico that this is what happens when illegals are caught in Arizona. I bet they wouldn't be back.

Can you tell, I'm a supporter of the new law?

reply to post by mryanbrown


Thank GOD because your complete lack of understanding is numbing. That and YOU made the statement "PC isn't even in the Consitution"...well there it is...and PC is the basis for ALL arrests and seizures...that is where your NOT getting it. YOU HAVE TO FIRST HAVE PC TO DO ANYTHING WHEN IT COMES TO ENFORCEING LAWS!!!! You can't collect evidence like you say WITHOUT PC.....again learn criminal procedure then rant...atleast you might have an argument then.

Originally posted by rcwj1975
reply to post by centurion1211

 

Might be true to an extent, but do not forget that all the revenue from traffic citations and arrests DO NOT come back to us. We do not get raises because we write citations....so the idea that we give tickets for money is wrong to a degree....the only people making $$$ off tickets is the state....thats why atleast around here you see a lot more verbal warnings then issued citations....

That and for any good officer it shouldn't make sense to give a person a ticket for a broken taillight....the taillight probably costs $50 to fix....the ticket is $30 to pay....why not give a warning and let the owner us that money to actually fix the problem....thats the way to handle it IMO....again, believe it or not, we aren't all out to get you..

You know I used to live in the south and I'm glad to hear that things might still be right where you are.

Wish it was also true here ...

However, since what you say isn't true out west where a lot of the illegal immigration problem exists, I'll go back to my original premise and say what's the worry? The LEO's can just SAY the "perps" ran a red light, or didn't maintain a lane, etc., etc., etc. GUILTY.

reply to post by Wildbob77


Jail? I work in the county jail here... why should the county, state, etc have to foot the bill for his incarceration at $30,000 a year? Why should we allow them to take up space, clog the legal system and continue to present a financial drain on the local economy???

DEPORT. Let Mexico deal with it.

reply to post by mryanbrown


Actually, my friend, you ARE required to carry an I.D. if you are in possession of cigarrettes and/or alcohol. ALSO, if you take prescription medication, it would be wise, because you CAN and most likely will be detained, NOT ARRESTED, for possession of controlled substances. Trust me, I've been hasselled by patrolmen for this one a few times.

BUT GUESS WHAT, I work with patrolmen at work too... so I know that the ones questioning me are just making sure that I'm not trying to sell them to kids and whatnot. If you think that being asked a few questions, and carrying an ID is too much, maybe you should join the military. That will teach you to better respect the liberties that come with being allowed to carry that ID.

By the way, it weighs less that an ounce, so what is the big issue really? The only people I met the refuse, at all times, to carry an ID are those commiting crimes. I'm not talking about runners and people on a casual stroll, but those that NEVER carry one. Why else would you want to hide who you really are? Is it that big of an issue just to have it on you?

reply to post by rcwj1975

The problem here is not that we support illegal aliens but rather the method used to determine someone's citizenship status. Now being a Law enforcement official you can't deny that among your peers you have some bigoted people. What this law provides is for those bigots to screw with someone just because they don't like the way a person looks and you would get away with it because you could say you were enforcing the law. What will be next?. Stopping people because they're Asian or from an East European country because they're speaking in a language other than English?. Where will we draw the line?.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Annee

I'm telling you - - - when fresh vegetables triple in price - - - no one but those who know - - - will put responsibility where it really belongs - fencing the border.


[edit on 29-4-2010 by Annee]

This is really sick logic.

You think having cheap vegetables - and strawberries I suppose - trumps all the other negatives from allowing illegal immigrants to stay here and continue to pour in?

Just

You are unbelievably totally clueless.

Like I said most people can't see past the nose on their face.

Spoken like a true elitist liberal - the kind that always think THEY KNOW what's best for all of us. Also the kind that MUST take it personal when someone does not agree with their "enlightened thinking".

How about responding to what I said about cheap vegetables vs. all the negatives of illegal immigrants instead of making this about me?



[edit on 4/29/2010 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by rcwj1975
reply to post by mryanbrown

 

Thank GOD because your complete lack of understanding is numbing.

Re-read it man. What is your issue/ You're upset a white man finds the rest of you to be blatant racists?

Re-read YOUR OWN POST. You have zero understanding of what you're citing.

Probable cause, as mentioned in the constitution. Is to be used in conjunction with obtaining a WARRANT TO SEARCH.

It has nothing to do with REASON TO INTERFERE WITHOUT A WARRANT.

Oh man. I have never been angry on ATS. Annoyed sure. But your blatant misreading of something so obvious is beyond aggrevating.

[edit on 29-4-2010 by mryanbrown]

Originally posted by Trudge

Hello grey580

First, if you make 20 million illegals legal you will have 20 million more illegals here by next week.

Second, if you make them legal they will still send money back to mexico and on top of that the new 20 million illegals will now be sending money back to mexico on top of getting free stuff from our states and government.

Third, why reward people who broke our law to get here? Do you reward a child for doing what they were told not to? I don't understand your thinking, why reward someone for something that shouldn't be done it only encourages more of the same behavior.

I made an earlier post and who supports the illegals and i'm sure you fall into on of my categories. You either own your own buisness and want cheap labor, work in politics and want the vote, rich and want cheap house and yard work, or are white and ashamed of being white and feel that whites have done wrong to all minorities and you must right the wrong by supporting anything they do even if its breaking the law.

1. Yes. I'm sure you would. There would have to be a mechanism in place for processing those illegals. You wouldn't just poof insta legalize them.

2. Those legalized would need to also have their immediate families rolled into the immigration process along with the illegal immigrant. We need to fix the issue of why people illegally come into this country. And that's to make money to send back and support their families. If we get the illegals and their families legalized. They now have to pay taxes. Paying into the system and supporting local busineses.

3. We currently have a system in place to handle illegal immigrants. It is glaringly obvious that the system in place does not work. Punishing illegals by deportation doesn't work. They really don't have anything to lose. It's time for a different approach to immigration.

And lastly You are dead wrong. I don't own my own business. I'm not in politics. I'm not rich. While white I'm also hispanic. Both sides of my family came legally to this country back in the 60's. Columbia from my moms side. And Costa Rica from my fathers. Both sides of the family trace back to Spain.

You on the other hand aren't really looking to fix the problem. And the Closing the borders and deporting illegals approach does not work. And it will never work as long as the rewards outweigh the punishment.

Now if you still do not like my approach to solving the issue. Maybe I can offer an alternative.

The reason why most illegals come to this country is to work and send money back to their home country.
How bout we pass legislation that prohibits anyone not a citizen from sending money out of the country.
Make it a 10,000 dollar fine to send money on behalf of an illegal.
Make exceptions for people with travel or student visas or other legal immigrants.

Do this and you can manage some of the influx of illegal immigrants. It's not a perfect solution but it might help a bit.

[edit on 29-4-2010 by grey580]

Originally posted by jbmitch
Umm the movie Judge Dredd comes to mind ..due process for illegals..not sure..what would of been your plan to get an illgeal Mexican back to Mexico from Atlanta Georgia?...Go Dogs!

My agency owns three 50 person buses and it has already been calculated that laoding them up with 150 ILLEGALS, driving them to south texas and unloading would Cost $3200. Housing the same 150 ILLEGALS will cost us $11 a day EACH....thats $1650 a day for them, or $49,500 a month to house 150 ILLEGALS. Or again $3200 for a round trip to TX....so our plan was simple...ROAD TRIP...

So, if we detain them we pay to feed cloth and house them, we make the sacrifice. then they will pay another $200 and be back next week.
If we use them as "slave labor" to pay off what they owe, it is a violation of their civil rights.
My view is, we are in a time of war folks. they are non uniformed insurgents.
I think the Juneva Convention has a perfect solution.

reply to post by mryanbrown


You do understand the 4th Amendment is search AND SEIZURE.....not JUST search. And SEIZURE covers arrests, collection of evidence, or the taking of anything that accuses someone of a crime. Its NOT just about getting a warrant. You need PROBABLE CAUSE to stop people and detain them (i.e. seize them) to investigate a crime....any crime.

It has nothing to do with REASON TO INTERFERE WITHOUT A WARRANT.

Thats exactly what PC is man...to be able to arrest WITHOUT a warrant...again...don't forget the second half of the amendment...SEIZURE!

[edit on 4/29/2010 by rcwj1975]