immigration bill - Page 18

immigration bill

This is a discussion on immigration bill within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Hopyard wrote: Also, Sat Cong wrote: "It's a start, better then we have now." It is a start down the path toward totalitarianism when citizens ...

Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 8141516171819202122 ... LastLast
Results 256 to 270 of 342

Thread: immigration bill

  1. #256
    Ex Member Array BikerRN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    State of Discombobulation
    Posts
    5,253
    Hopyard wrote:
    Also, Sat Cong wrote: "It's a start, better then we have now."

    It is a start down the path toward totalitarianism when citizens are required to carry papers in their daily lives. And that includes all citizens, naturalized or native born.
    It's intellectual self-fornication like this that has put us in the quandary we are in sir.

    Life is not a philisophical discussion to be debated on over coffee. Action needs to be taken if we are to preserve the Republic as we know it. Maybe you don't want to preserve her sir? Maybe you are one of those that want to change her to your version of Utopia? Maybe you want to destroy her from within like a cancer?

    The border needs to be closed and the illegal invasion of the republic needs to be stopped. For those that aren't aware of it, we aren't making any more land, nobody is. There is a limited amount of space, and the country will only sustain so many people. If mexicans want to improve their station in life they need to stay in mexico and fix their country, not ruin mine.

    Biker
    Last edited by BikerRN; May 4th, 2010 at 12:59 PM. Reason: typo


  2. #257
    Senior Member Array hayzor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    777
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    And since when does a credit card show anything about your status in the US? Someone earlier wrote that they always carry ID because it is needed to use their credit card. Not true. The credit card company Merchant Agreements forbid this practice. You are not supposed to be asked for ID to use your card. Report violations to your card company. I do. And without fail the next time I visit the store they have stopped asking.

    Your DL, possibly does mean something about status but it is no sure thing. Anyway, since when do you have to have it when you are engaged in any activity other than driving (or recently getting on a plane). I got through about the first 50 years + of my life with no need for any ID for anything. Even crossing the US border from neighboring countries and the Caribbean Islands required no passport.

    We will all live to regret it if we don't get back away from a papers please culture.

    Also, Sat Cong wrote: "It's a start, better then we have now."

    It is a start down the path toward totalitarianism when citizens are required to carry papers in their daily lives. And that includes all citizens, naturalized or native born.
    Hopyard - Iím seeing a lot of complaining from you about this bill. Fact is, 70% of Arizonians support it. They support it because something has to be done.
    Please tell us your plan to stop illegal immigration. Preferably one that will be as effective as SB-1070 and will be implemented in 90 days.
    The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it. Albert Einstein

    "People in Arizona carry guns," said a Chandler police spokesman. "You better be careful about who you are picking on."

  3. #258
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    And since when does a credit card show anything about your status in the US? Someone earlier wrote that they always carry ID because it is needed to use their credit card. Not true. The credit card company Merchant Agreements forbid this practice. You are not supposed to be asked for ID to use your card. Report violations to your card company. I do. And without fail the next time I visit the store they have stopped asking.

    Your DL, possibly does mean something about status but it is no sure thing. Anyway, since when do you have to have it when you are engaged in any activity other than driving (or recently getting on a plane). I got through about the first 50 years + of my life with no need for any ID for anything. Even crossing the US border from neighboring countries and the Caribbean Islands required no passport.

    We will all live to regret it if we don't get back away from a papers please culture.

    Also, Sat Cong wrote: "It's a start, better then we have now."

    It is a start down the path toward totalitarianism when citizens are required to carry papers in their daily lives. And that includes all citizens, naturalized or native born.
    Supreme Court Ruling:

    Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada

    It is constitutional for the police detain you until you produce proof of your identity if they have reason to believe you might be connected with a crime.

    Anything else you want to argue???

  4. #259
    Distinguished Member Array 21bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    ky.
    Posts
    1,890
    Quote Originally Posted by hayzor View Post
    Hopyard - Iím seeing a lot of complaining from you about this bill. Fact is, 70% of Arizonians support it. They support it because something has to be done.
    Please tell us your plan to stop illegal immigration. Preferably one that will be as effective as SB-1070 and will be implemented in 90 days.
    Do you really think this one bill is going to stop illegal immigration?

  5. #260
    VIP Member Array SatCong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    2,931
    Just got this, good read.
    May.01, 2010, State Senator Sylvia Allen responds to SB1070



    Iím Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070 for which I voted yes. Rancher Robert Krentz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago. I participated in a senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence, here is just some of the highlights from those who testified.
    The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizona/Mexico Border have for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily invasion of humans who cross their property . One Rancher testified that 300 to 1200 people a DAY come across his ranch vandalizing his property, stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Koran bibles. Another rancher testified that daily drugs are brought across his ranch in a military operation. A point man with a machine gun goes in front, 1/2 mile behind are the guards fully armed, 1/2 mile behind them are the drugs, behind the drugs 1/2 mile are more guards. These people are violent and they will kill anyone who gets in the way. This was not the only rancher we heard that day that talked about the drug trains. One man told of two illegalís who came upon his property one shot in the back and the other in the arm by the drug runners who had forced them to carry the drugs and then shot them. Daily they listen to gun fire during the night it is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch and they canít leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.

    The border patrol is not on the border. They have set up 60 miles away with check points that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them, if they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the border. Federal prisons have over 35% illegalís and 20% of Arizona prisons are filled with illegalís. In the last few years 80% of our law enforcement that have been killed or wounded have been by an illegal. The majority of people coming now are people we need to be worried about. The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming they are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.

    The Federal Government has refused for years to do anything to help the border states . We have been over run and once they are here we have the burden of funding state services that they use. Education costs have been over a billion dollars. The healthcare cost billions of dollars. Our State is broke, $3.5 billion deficit and we have many serious decisions to make. One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here legally. It has to stop.

    The border can be secured. We have the technology and we have the ability to stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country and the government which we live under. I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem, we dare not do this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to give them amnesty because thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under? How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico , Canada or any of the other Central American or South American country? We have already lost our language, everything must be printed in Spanish. We have already lost our history, it is no longer taught in our schools, and we have lost our borders.

    The leftist media has distorted what SB 1070 will do. It is not going to set up a Nazi Germany. Are you kidding? The ACLU and the leftist courts will do everything to protect those who are here illegally, but it was an effort to try and stop illegalís from setting up businesses, and employment, and receiving state services and give the ability to local law enforcement when there is probable cause, like a traffic stop, to determine if they are here legally. Federal law is very clear, if you are here on a visa you must have your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona all you need to show you are a legal citizen is a driver license, MVD identification card, Native American Card, or a Military ID. This is what you need to vote or get a hunting license. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is going to be stopped walking down the street. The Socialists who are in power in DC are angry because we dare try and do something.The Socialists wants us to just let them come. They want the ďTransformationĒ to continue.

    Maybe it is too late to save America . Maybe we are not worthy of freedom anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect our Constitutional Republic . Living in America is not a right just because you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution, the law of our land, which says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.

    Senator Sylvia Allen .


    NRA PATRON LIFE
    BROWN WATER NAVY

  6. #261
    AzB
    AzB is offline
    Senior Member Array AzB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    557
    I've travelled to a lot of countries in my long life. Just about any country I've ever been in requires that I carry my passport or some other form of ID while I'm in that country.

    I'm failing to see a problem here.
    Az

    -- Luck favors the well prepared.

  7. #262
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,721

    re:azchevy Hiibel

    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    Supreme Court Ruling:

    Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada

    It is constitutional for the police detain you until you produce proof of your identity if they have reason to believe you might be connected with a crime.

    Anything else you want to argue???
    I don't believe it says what you are claiming, and I read through it
    two days ago.

    What the court said is that you must identify yourself. Hiibel refused to even give his name. The case wasn't about papers. The court did not address the manner in which you must identify yourself at all. It only upheld his arrest because he refused to even so much as speak his own name.*

    Now, I know a man who was born in Iowa, and as such he is as much a US citizen as I am-- and fully eligible to be The President of the USA. He however is of Korean descent, and he was raised in Korea. He looks Korean, and speaks English with a heavy Korean accent.

    Are you trying to claim that he should have to carry papers while you don't? Why? Because he looks different and sounds different? How does that not constitute profiling?

    And reply to Biker RN--- You can't use practicality as an excuse for treading on rights. That is the same error the anti-gun folks use for anti-gun laws. "These laws will make us safer, so never mind 2A."

    What you proponents of the AZ law are saying is-- "These laws wil make us safer, so never mind the 14th." And never mind other aspects of the BOR.

    AZ could easily circumvent all the problems with their law if they required all citizens and all lawful residents to carry their passports all the time; but we all know how everyone here would react if the law actually affected them in that way.
    __________________________________________________ __________________________
    *And the dissenting 4 justices vigorously argued that requiring someone to speak their name was a violation of
    the 5th right against self incrimination. This stuff isn't as cut and dried as some would like to think. The Supremes
    went against some of their own precedents to allow Hiibel's conviction to stand.
    Last edited by Hopyard; May 4th, 2010 at 05:58 PM. Reason: spelling fix

  8. #263
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    I don't believe it says what you are claiming, and I read through it
    two days ago.

    What the court said is that you must identify yourself. Hiibel refused to even give his name. The case wasn't about papers. The court did not address the manner in which you must identify yourself at all. It only upheld his arrest because he refused to even so much as speak his own name.*

    Now, I know a man who was born in Iowa, and as such he is as much a US citizen as I am-- and fully eligible to be The President of the USA. He however is of Korean descent, and he was raised in Korea. He looks Korean, and speaks English with a heavy Korean accent.

    Are you trying to claim that he should have to carry papers while you don't? Why? Because he looks different and sounds different? How does that not constitute profiling?

    And reply to Biker RN--- You can't use practicality as an excuse for treading on rights. That is the same error the anti-gun folks use for anti-gun laws. "These laws will make us safer, so never mind 2A."

    What you proponents of the AZ law are saying is-- "These laws wil make us safer, so never mind the 14th." And never mind other aspects of the BOR.

    AZ could easily circumvent all the problems with their law if they required all citizens and all lawful residents to carry their passports all the time; but we all know how everyone hear would react if the law actually affected them in that way.
    __________________________________________________ __________________________
    *And the dissenting 4 justices vigorously argued that requiring someone to speak their name was a violation of
    the 5th right against self incrimination. This stuff isn't as cut and dried as some would like to think. The Supremes
    went against some of their own precedents to allow Hiibel's conviction to stand.

    I am really starting to think you just don't comprehend the laws as they are today.

    What part of the police can hold you until you identified do you not understand? If they cannot identify you, and you don't have a green card ( which is REQUIRED by law to be carried AT ALL TIMES) then they can assume you are here illegally and deport you. What does this have to do with your Korean friend? If they arrest him for something they can hold him until they identify him. Once he is identified he will be cited or arrested for his crime and released.

    If your korean friend is a non citizen then he is required by law to carry his papers, something HE AGREED UPON before entering this country. If he is here illegally he is gone. Good riddance. If he is a citizen no issue. That is what makes us different. I don't see what accent has to do with anything, I can't understand some Boston or Texan or deep southern accents but that doesn't mean I discriminate against them.

    I don't know how to be more simple in showing you that everything you are ******* and moaning about in this thread about this new law is already in place. It mirrors federal law in place for 50 years.

    My take on this is if you don't like it, renounce your citizenship and leave because more states are going to start doing this and take a stand. Maybe you can find a country that is more lax on immigration laws and papers..... OH WAIT you can't.

    I guess you had no problem with the federal law because it wasn't being enforced.

  9. #264
    Senior Member Array Katana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Clarksville,TN
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by SatCong View Post
    Just got this, good read.
    May.01, 2010, State Senator Sylvia Allen responds to SB1070



    Iím Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070 for which I voted yes. Rancher Robert Krentz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago. I participated in a senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence, here is just some of the highlights from those who testified.
    The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizona/Mexico Border have for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily invasion of humans who cross their property . One Rancher testified that 300 to 1200 people a DAY come across his ranch vandalizing his property, stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Koran bibles. Another rancher testified that daily drugs are brought across his ranch in a military operation. A point man with a machine gun goes in front, 1/2 mile behind are the guards fully armed, 1/2 mile behind them are the drugs, behind the drugs 1/2 mile are more guards. These people are violent and they will kill anyone who gets in the way. This was not the only rancher we heard that day that talked about the drug trains. One man told of two illegalís who came upon his property one shot in the back and the other in the arm by the drug runners who had forced them to carry the drugs and then shot them. Daily they listen to gun fire during the night it is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch and they canít leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.

    The border patrol is not on the border. They have set up 60 miles away with check points that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them, if they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the border. Federal prisons have over 35% illegalís and 20% of Arizona prisons are filled with illegalís. In the last few years 80% of our law enforcement that have been killed or wounded have been by an illegal. The majority of people coming now are people we need to be worried about. The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming they are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.

    The Federal Government has refused for years to do anything to help the border states . We have been over run and once they are here we have the burden of funding state services that they use. Education costs have been over a billion dollars. The healthcare cost billions of dollars. Our State is broke, $3.5 billion deficit and we have many serious decisions to make. One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here legally. It has to stop.

    The border can be secured. We have the technology and we have the ability to stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country and the government which we live under. I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem, we dare not do this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to give them amnesty because thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under? How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico , Canada or any of the other Central American or South American country? We have already lost our language, everything must be printed in Spanish. We have already lost our history, it is no longer taught in our schools, and we have lost our borders.

    The leftist media has distorted what SB 1070 will do. It is not going to set up a Nazi Germany. Are you kidding? The ACLU and the leftist courts will do everything to protect those who are here illegally, but it was an effort to try and stop illegalís from setting up businesses, and employment, and receiving state services and give the ability to local law enforcement when there is probable cause, like a traffic stop, to determine if they are here legally. Federal law is very clear, if you are here on a visa you must have your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona all you need to show you are a legal citizen is a driver license, MVD identification card, Native American Card, or a Military ID. This is what you need to vote or get a hunting license. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is going to be stopped walking down the street. The Socialists who are in power in DC are angry because we dare try and do something.The Socialists wants us to just let them come. They want the ďTransformationĒ to continue.

    Maybe it is too late to save America . Maybe we are not worthy of freedom anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect our Constitutional Republic . Living in America is not a right just because you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution, the law of our land, which says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.

    Senator Sylvia Allen .


    All I can say is, we need more with her mindset in positions of power in this country.
    "Stand your ground, don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here!" - John Parker April 19th, 1775 Lexington, MA

    Μολών λαβέ!

  10. #265
    Member Array DZcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    It mirrors federal law in place for 50 years.
    I'm so sick of hearing this BS.

    Please show me where in federal law it says "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation."

    "Any lawful contact" is not just stops and arrests. It includes arrests and stops, but it also includes someone walking up to an officer to ask a question. It includes someone giving a witness statement to a LEO. It includes someone reporting a crime. A person need not be in breach of a law to have "lawful contact" with a police officer.

    I want to see the federal statue where it says you can be detained because a LEO looks at you and decided you were a suspected illegal alien.

    The Arizona legislature so much as admitted that they went too far when they amended the bill over the weekend to specify that a LEO can only ask for proof of citizenship "for any lawful stop, detention or arrest".

    Federal law states that a lawful immigrant to this country must carry their green card/visa with them at all times.

    Please show me where, in federal immigration law, a Mexican American natural born citizen of the US must carry around their Passport so that they can prove they are a natural born citizen rather than an illegal Mexican immigrant that just hopped the border.

    Section 1 of the 14th amendment states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    Please explain to me how detaining an American citizen without due process because they look or talk a certain way is not a deprivation of their constitutional right to liberty or an abridgment of their immunity as a citizen from having to prove their citizenship to anyone who asks to their papers. Please explain how that same Mexican American natural born citizen had "equal protection of the laws." It seems to be that the only citizens in Arizona that are guaranteed equal protection under this law are those who don't look Mexican.

    This law does not "mirror" federal law. There are parts of it that are similar to federal law, but there are other parts that go beyond federal law. Hence the reason for all the hoopla.

    Arizona could easily make this law conform to the constitution by requiring police officers to ascertain the status of EVERY person they stop, detain, or arrest. Somehow, I don't think that will go over well...
    Proud Lady Blue Dog

  11. #266
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Quote Originally Posted by DZcarry View Post
    I'm so sick of hearing this BS.

    Please show me where in federal law it says "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation."

    "Any lawful contact" is not just stops and arrests. It includes arrests and stops, but it also includes someone walking up to an officer to ask a question. It includes someone giving a witness statement to a LEO. It includes someone reporting a crime. A person need not be in breach of a law to have "lawful contact" with a police officer.

    I want to see the federal statue where it says you can be detained because a LEO looks at you and decided you were a suspected illegal alien.

    The Arizona legislature so much as admitted that they went too far when they amended the bill over the weekend to specify that a LEO can only ask for proof of citizenship "for any lawful stop, detention or arrest".

    Federal law states that a lawful immigrant to this country must carry their green card/visa with them at all times.

    Please show me where, in federal immigration law, a Mexican American natural born citizen of the US must carry around their Passport so that they can prove they are a natural born citizen rather than an illegal Mexican immigrant that just hopped the border.

    Section 1 of the 14th amendment states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    Please explain to me how detaining an American citizen without due process because they look or talk a certain way is not a deprivation of their constitutional right to liberty or an abridgment of their immunity as a citizen from having to prove their citizenship to anyone who asks to their papers. Please explain how that same Mexican American natural born citizen had "equal protection of the laws." It seems to be that the only citizens in Arizona that are guaranteed equal protection under this law are those who don't look Mexican.

    This law does not "mirror" federal law. There are parts of it that are similar to federal law, but there are other parts that go beyond federal law. Hence the reason for all the hoopla.

    Arizona could easily make this law conform to the constitution by requiring police officers to ascertain the status of EVERY person they stop, detain, or arrest. Somehow, I don't think that will go over well...

    Your post just shows how ignorant, uninformed, and uneducated the detractors to this law is.

    Please try to keep up with current events before slamming them blindly. Seriously

    The Arizona House approved several new changes to Arizona's new immigration law

    The phrase "lawful contact" would is changed to "lawful stop, detention or arrest" to clarify that an officer would not need to question a crime victim or witness about their legal status.

    The word "solely" would be eliminated from the sentence "A law enforcement official or agency … may not solely consider race, color or national origin" in establishing reasonable suspicion that someone is in the country illegally.
    is that clear enough for you?

    have a wonderful day

  12. #267
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    There are actually very few jobs that are the responsibility of the Federal Government. If they would take the money and the manpower that they are currently using to meddle in States affairs and use it for the jobs they are constitutionally charged with doing they would have more then enough of each to get the job done.

    Michael

  13. #268
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,721

    re: Azchevy

    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post

    What part of the police can hold you until you identified do you not understand? If they cannot identify you, and you don't have a green card ( which is REQUIRED by law to be carried AT ALL TIMES) then they can assume you are here illegally and deport you.
    So, if they can not identify you and YOU Mr. Azchevy don't have a Green Card then what? They ask for your passport? Well, do you keep your passport with you? Of course not. And they won't bother you because you look a certain way. Now do you understand the problem?

    What does this have to do with your Korean friend? If they arrest him for something they can hold him until they identify him. Once he is identified he will be cited or arrested for his crime and released.

    If your korean friend is a non citizen
    It was already explained that he is a US citizen, born in the United States. He speaks with a heavy accent because he was raised in Korea. He looks "Korean." So when he is stopped, do you expect him to produce "papers?" Does AZ expect him to produce papers? And why him, not you? The only difference is he looks different.


    then he is required by law to carry his papers, something HE AGREED UPON before entering this country.
    Read with some comprehension sir. I told you he is a native born U.S. citizen, just like you are I presume. He is eligible to be President, unlike naturalized citizens. Yet, under AZ law he could and would be singled out.

    I don't know how to be more simple in showing you that everything you are ******* and moaning about in this thread about this new law is already in place. It mirrors federal law in place for 50 years.
    It clearly does not, because my friend and my wife are not required to walk around with papers any more than you are.

    My take on this is if you don't like it, renounce your citizenship being enforced.
    How about you gain some understanding of the way the world really is instead of the way you imagine it to be.

    DZCarry states it succinctly. "Please show me where, in federal immigration law, a Mexican American natural born citizen of the US must carry around their Passport so that they can prove they are a natural born citizen rather than an illegal Mexican immigrant that just hopped the border. "

    I'll go further. Please show me anywhere in any law other than AZ's present misguided one, that any US citizen must carry any papers when just walking down the street.

    That's not what the Hiibs ruling was about.

  14. #269
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,980
    Living in America is not a right just because you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution, the law of our land, which says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.
    If we don't get a grip on the border, eventually we wont have to. There will be no border.

    We cannot sustain the present rate of infiltration by illegals. What hasn't been addressed here but is a very valid concern is not only the Mexicans that sneak across, but sworn enemies of the U.S...people that want to kill us because we speak English or worship a different God than they do. In the Senator's speech,she mentions a rancher that finds not only dead bodies, but two Korans.

    Now think people, how many does two discarded books really represent? I can assure you that it is more than two people.

    The border is unsecured. There are spots on it that a tank division could sneak across. What little border patrols we have are outgunned, out-manned, and out politicked.

    This isn't about profiling or any other of the buzzwords used by idiots that cant figure it out. This is about the security of our country and our homes...yet some would have me do nothing because I might hurt the feelings of someone that looks Mexican.

    Since the Feds wont do it, then get them out of the way and let the states do it. California wont do it, they are already lost and have been for years. Let Arizona,New Mexico and Texas do what they need to do to protect their citizens so at least they are secure in their homes and properties. Right now, many of our citizens are not. They scream for relief and nothing is done because of double speak,political correctness and mamby-pamby liberalists that care only about themselves.

    I applaud the efforts of Arizona and pray that other states follow.

    I say either lead, follow or get the heck out of the way.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  15. #270
    New Member Array Pocketcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa
    Posts
    12
    when was the last time you walked across the border into Mexico? When in Mexico you had better have your id on you or you could and will be taken to jail. When you come back across, you state your country and name. Don't joke around and answere the questions. Wake up America, its time to take the county back. We have done it before and we can and will do it again. I am 70 years old and do not mind standing and fighting for my rights.
    Stupidity on YOUR part will not necessarily constitute an emergency on MINE!

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Arizona Immigration Bill Poll
    By ErnieNWillis in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: May 5th, 2010, 01:14 PM
  2. New Oklahoma Immigration Law
    By AirMech74 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 15th, 2007, 05:52 PM
  3. New Gun Control/Immigration Bill
    By stalker_us2000 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2007, 11:58 PM
  4. Immigration
    By TonyW in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2007, 05:48 PM

Search tags for this page

can dianne feinstein be sued

,

feinstein misinterpreting immigration

,

guatemalans in brazos county

,

immigration bill fines companies for hiring natural born citizens

,

page 20 in immigration bill

Click on a term to search for related topics.