Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Arizona Immigration Law; Governor signed it into law today
Topic Started: Apr 23 2010, 02:49 PM (2,020 Views)
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Mark
Apr 26 2010, 02:46 PM
Um Passports are voluntary. I do not have one and suspect I never will have one. I have no desire to have one.
It's no bloody wonder you think America is so awful - you never go anywhere else!

:lol:
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:52 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 03:02 PM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 10:12 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:07 AM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 06:10 AM
Certainly, my driver's license wouldn't (or to my mind, shouldn't) suffice. It carries no evidence of legal residence in the US, only the state of Pennsylvania.

Big Al
Last I checked, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was part of the United States.
My point was that Pennsylvania required no evidence of citizenship or immigration status at the time I secured my Pennsylvania driver's license so it can not (or at least should not) be considered evidence of legal residence in the USA. Furthermore, there have been ongoing disputes in several states as to whether or not to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Big Al
A driver's license is certainly considered a valid form of identification for Federal purposes, such as TSA security checks, so I don't see why a State should not be entitled to the presumption of validity -- unless of course you for some other reason don't want the State to be entitled to the presumption of validity.

The whole point of the new Arizona law is to give state/local law enforcement officials the power to verify citizenship/immigration status. Driver's license from most states give no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.

Get it?
Obviously you don't get it. There is a presumption that a holder of a valid government issued ID is entitled to have that ID. A simple display of a State issued driver's license should reasonably obviate any concern about "reasonable suspicion" under the Arizona Law.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 04:25 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:52 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 03:02 PM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 10:12 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:07 AM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 06:10 AM
Certainly, my driver's license wouldn't (or to my mind, shouldn't) suffice. It carries no evidence of legal residence in the US, only the state of Pennsylvania.

Big Al
Last I checked, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was part of the United States.
My point was that Pennsylvania required no evidence of citizenship or immigration status at the time I secured my Pennsylvania driver's license so it can not (or at least should not) be considered evidence of legal residence in the USA. Furthermore, there have been ongoing disputes in several states as to whether or not to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Big Al
A driver's license is certainly considered a valid form of identification for Federal purposes, such as TSA security checks, so I don't see why a State should not be entitled to the presumption of validity -- unless of course you for some other reason don't want the State to be entitled to the presumption of validity.

The whole point of the new Arizona law is to give state/local law enforcement officials the power to verify citizenship/immigration status. Driver's license from most states give no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.

Get it?
Obviously you don't get it. There is a presumption that a holder of a valid government issued ID is entitled to have that ID. A simple display of a State issued driver's license should reasonably obviate any concern about "reasonable suspicion" under the Arizona Law.
No ... a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
big al
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
My point exactly. Ax seems to be able to get it; I can only wonder why IT cannot.

Big Al
Location: Western PA

"jesu, der simcha fun der man's farlangen."
-bachophile
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Since it's apparently not been possible to satisfy beyond all reasonable doubt whether the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has a right to be there, I find that it taxes my imagination to be told that the display of a simple driving licence will be enough to satisfy certain groups regarding the legality or otherwise of Manuel the local gardening consultant.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:54 PM
Mark, one national ID card system can replace all 50 states' 50 different systems. Any one whose job function is to check IDs then only needs to be trained to check one type of ID instead of 50 types. Think of all the savings!
Not only that, but with a magnetic stripe on it you could replace all of the other cards we carry around now - credit cards, debit cards, licenses, etc.

Heinlein predicted this 60 years ago.
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kenny
HOLY CARP!!!
Mark
Apr 26 2010, 04:19 PM
No thank you!

Stop forcing your views on me through the government.
Oh, like denying gays marriage.

Every wants to force their view on everyone else, so vote.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1hp
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp

As someone already pointed out - a passport is a national ID. We don't need a second one.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those that understand binary and................
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
1hp
Apr 26 2010, 08:21 PM
As someone already pointed out - a passport is a national ID. We don't need a second one.
You missed the key word "mandatory" -- meaning every one must have one, including legal immigrants who are not citizens. If you think every person residing in the US legally must be issued a US passport (of course, said passport can indicate whether the holder is a US citizen, legal permanent resident, legitimate refugee, or some one otherwise authorized to stay in the US), then we are in substantive agreement. Otherwise, we're not -- your notion of "passport" does't match my notion of "mandatory national ID."

The provision that it is "mandatory," that every one must have one, is key. Otherwise, you'd still be left with people without ID or only with local or regional (e.g., state-issued) ID -- which is exactly the same problem we have now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 05:23 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 04:25 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:52 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 03:02 PM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 10:12 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:07 AM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 06:10 AM
Certainly, my driver's license wouldn't (or to my mind, shouldn't) suffice. It carries no evidence of legal residence in the US, only the state of Pennsylvania.

Big Al
Last I checked, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was part of the United States.
My point was that Pennsylvania required no evidence of citizenship or immigration status at the time I secured my Pennsylvania driver's license so it can not (or at least should not) be considered evidence of legal residence in the USA. Furthermore, there have been ongoing disputes in several states as to whether or not to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Big Al
A driver's license is certainly considered a valid form of identification for Federal purposes, such as TSA security checks, so I don't see why a State should not be entitled to the presumption of validity -- unless of course you for some other reason don't want the State to be entitled to the presumption of validity.

The whole point of the new Arizona law is to give state/local law enforcement officials the power to verify citizenship/immigration status. Driver's license from most states give no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.

Get it?
Obviously you don't get it. There is a presumption that a holder of a valid government issued ID is entitled to have that ID. A simple display of a State issued driver's license should reasonably obviate any concern about "reasonable suspicion" under the Arizona Law.
No ... a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
It can for reasonable persons, such as law enforcement officers who are obligated to act in good faith under this law. I am sorry if you and Big Al don't qualify on that account.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:05 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 05:23 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 04:25 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:52 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 03:02 PM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 10:12 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:07 AM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 06:10 AM
Certainly, my driver's license wouldn't (or to my mind, shouldn't) suffice. It carries no evidence of legal residence in the US, only the state of Pennsylvania.

Big Al
Last I checked, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was part of the United States.
My point was that Pennsylvania required no evidence of citizenship or immigration status at the time I secured my Pennsylvania driver's license so it can not (or at least should not) be considered evidence of legal residence in the USA. Furthermore, there have been ongoing disputes in several states as to whether or not to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Big Al
A driver's license is certainly considered a valid form of identification for Federal purposes, such as TSA security checks, so I don't see why a State should not be entitled to the presumption of validity -- unless of course you for some other reason don't want the State to be entitled to the presumption of validity.

The whole point of the new Arizona law is to give state/local law enforcement officials the power to verify citizenship/immigration status. Driver's license from most states give no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.

Get it?
Obviously you don't get it. There is a presumption that a holder of a valid government issued ID is entitled to have that ID. A simple display of a State issued driver's license should reasonably obviate any concern about "reasonable suspicion" under the Arizona Law.
No ... a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
It can for reasonable persons, such as law enforcement officers who are obligated to act in good faith under this law. I am sorry if you and Big Al don't qualify on that account.
Regardless of how much good faith and/or reason with which a law enforcement officer acts, a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 09:24 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:05 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 05:23 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 04:25 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:52 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 03:02 PM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 10:12 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:07 AM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 06:10 AM
Certainly, my driver's license wouldn't (or to my mind, shouldn't) suffice. It carries no evidence of legal residence in the US, only the state of Pennsylvania.

Big Al
Last I checked, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was part of the United States.
My point was that Pennsylvania required no evidence of citizenship or immigration status at the time I secured my Pennsylvania driver's license so it can not (or at least should not) be considered evidence of legal residence in the USA. Furthermore, there have been ongoing disputes in several states as to whether or not to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Big Al
A driver's license is certainly considered a valid form of identification for Federal purposes, such as TSA security checks, so I don't see why a State should not be entitled to the presumption of validity -- unless of course you for some other reason don't want the State to be entitled to the presumption of validity.

The whole point of the new Arizona law is to give state/local law enforcement officials the power to verify citizenship/immigration status. Driver's license from most states give no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.

Get it?
Obviously you don't get it. There is a presumption that a holder of a valid government issued ID is entitled to have that ID. A simple display of a State issued driver's license should reasonably obviate any concern about "reasonable suspicion" under the Arizona Law.
No ... a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
It can for reasonable persons, such as law enforcement officers who are obligated to act in good faith under this law. I am sorry if you and Big Al don't qualify on that account.
Regardless of how much good faith and/or reason with which a law enforcement officer acts, a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
Yes it can, for reasonable people. Absence of any form of government ID can conversely raise reasonable doubt.

But I already explained that to you and you don't accept that, so your repetition of your previous argument is kind of pointless.

Policeman: May I see your driver's license?

Person: Yes officer, it is from the State of Minnesota.

Policeman: I don't believe you, you did not say "Minnesoooooota". Get out of the car.
Edited by ivorythumper, Apr 26 2010, 10:57 PM.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
Dewey
Apr 26 2010, 09:32 AM
Having said that, the real problem is the ridiculous immigration system, at least as it is applied to Hispanic nations. We need secure borders, but we also need realistic immigration policy that makes people who want to come to this country able to do so legally, and in the numbers which our economy apparently requires.

Make them legal, so they aren't so terrified of deportation (almost impossible, but a fear nonetheless) that they'll die of appendicitis, sitting in their apartment with their 16 roommates, rather than going to the hospital for treatment.

Make them legal, so they're not only paying their FICA taxes (and realize that most of them are paying into FICA, using fake SSNs, into a system that they'll never access), but they're also paying federal, state, and local income taxes.

Make them legal, so they don't have to pay outrageous amounts of money to coyotes to get them across the border, or risk being robbed, raped, beaten, or killed, in dozens of ways just trying to travel from their own country into ours. To be honest, the dangers that many illegal immigrants from Central and South America face just to get here so they can put food on the table for their families back home, are much more than the dangers faced by so many of our legal, supposedly more acceptable forebears coming from other places in other times. We should really understand what most of them have gone through just to get here, and respect that.

Make them legal, so employers can't knowingly and willingly exploit them, making them nothing more than slave labor.

Make them legal, because it's the right thing to do.

If someone is here illegally *after* we set our immigration policy right and secure our border, then they should be put on the first bus or plane home. But at present, our arguments against legalizing many, if not most, of those already here illegally ring a bit hollow when our country has stacked the deck in order to make legal immigration almost impossible, while there are no jobs available int heir home countries, and there are jobs here.

I can tell you that if I were in their shoes, I would do everything I could to get across that border and find work to support my family. And I wouldn't lose a minute's sleep if, because the system was set up to make it so, I had to get here illegally.
Well put.
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
Dewey
Apr 26 2010, 02:03 PM
I've been in the tight moral spot of receiving a phone call from Tijuana from a Honduran friend, asking if I could send him $200 to help him pay his coyote to get him across the border. I know this man; I've been a guest in his home (which, to call it "humble" would be a gross understatement). On my first trip to Honduras, I hurt myself (nothing too serious; smashed my hand with a hammer). He was working right beside me, he grabbed my hand and rubbed it until the pain went away. He's the pastor of a small house church that occupies half of his 20x20 house. I know his two sons - he's that rarest of Hondurans - a male single parent. I know that he can't afford to feed them, much less pay for their uniforms and books that they need in order to attend school. And I know that he's already literally risked his life just to get from Honduras to Tijuana, still with no guarantee he'll make it across the border and find work to support his boys.

Getting phone calls like that put your larger geopolitical political views to the real test.
What did you do?

(had that happened to me, i would send the money)
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
jon-nyc
Apr 27 2010, 01:54 AM
Dewey
Apr 26 2010, 02:03 PM
I've been in the tight moral spot of receiving a phone call from Tijuana from a Honduran friend, asking if I could send him $200 to help him pay his coyote to get him across the border. I know this man; I've been a guest in his home (which, to call it "humble" would be a gross understatement). On my first trip to Honduras, I hurt myself (nothing too serious; smashed my hand with a hammer). He was working right beside me, he grabbed my hand and rubbed it until the pain went away. He's the pastor of a small house church that occupies half of his 20x20 house. I know his two sons - he's that rarest of Hondurans - a male single parent. I know that he can't afford to feed them, much less pay for their uniforms and books that they need in order to attend school. And I know that he's already literally risked his life just to get from Honduras to Tijuana, still with no guarantee he'll make it across the border and find work to support his boys.

Getting phone calls like that put your larger geopolitical political views to the real test.
What did you do?

(had that happened to me, i would send the money)
I didn't send him the money. And I've hated myself for it ever since it happened.

I rationalized it in my head by saying that while I wouldn't help them across the border, I would help them if they actually got across. In fact, I have done so. Several people from Honduras whom I know have made it here and worked for a time before going home, and while they've been here friends and I have taken them out for meals.

In the end I realized I was just trying to fool myself into feeling better about what I'd done, and it wasn't working. I realized that I'd failed miserably when I had a chance to do the right thing, even if it meant helping him break the law. And ever since, I've wished for an opportunity to fix the really stupid and awful decision I made when my friend called me for help. I'll never make that mistake again.
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeff
Senior Carp
1hp
Apr 26 2010, 10:36 AM
Funny how no one sees the solution as forcing the Mexican government to work on making a better life for Mexicans in Mexico. There is, after all, a reason that Mexicans are in the US. Why is it that the US is expected to bend over backwards for what is a Mexico problem?

You are mistaken. Immigration helps the whole US economy. Cato Institute calculates that legalization would add 180 billion to the US economy: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20100427_U_S__needs_to_let_more_workers_in.html

The key to reducing illegal immigration will be a strong temporary-worker program. This has been the missing ingredient of past efforts.

The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act legalized almost three million illegal immigrants. It also ramped up enforcement through increased border patrols and sanctions against those employing illegal workers. Yet it contained no provision for expanding legal immigration. Today, everybody agrees the act was a failure.

We know from experience that expanding opportunities for legal immigration can sharply reduce illegal immigration. In the 1950s, Congress dramatically expanded the number of temporary-worker visas through the Bracero Program. The result was a 95 percent drop in arrests at the border. If Mexican and Central American workers know they can enter the country legally to fill jobs, they will be far less likely to enter illegally.

A workable temporary-visa program would allow border agents to concentrate their efforts on intercepting real criminals and terrorists at the border. It would also reduce the temptation to hire illegal workers, in turn reducing the need to raid workplaces and impose national ID cards, employment verification systems, and other burdens on American citizens.

Allowing more legal workers to enter the country would also boost the productive capacity of our economy by allowing important sectors to expand, creating more middle-class employment opportunities for Americans. A 2009 Cato Institute study predicted that a sufficient temporary-worker program would boost the real income of U.S. households by $180 billion a year. A January study by the Center for American Progress came to a similar conclusion.
Edited by Jeff, Apr 27 2010, 05:36 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OperaTenor
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
jon-nyc
Apr 27 2010, 01:53 AM
Dewey
Apr 26 2010, 09:32 AM
Having said that, the real problem is the ridiculous immigration system, at least as it is applied to Hispanic nations. We need secure borders, but we also need realistic immigration policy that makes people who want to come to this country able to do so legally, and in the numbers which our economy apparently requires.

Make them legal, so they aren't so terrified of deportation (almost impossible, but a fear nonetheless) that they'll die of appendicitis, sitting in their apartment with their 16 roommates, rather than going to the hospital for treatment.

Make them legal, so they're not only paying their FICA taxes (and realize that most of them are paying into FICA, using fake SSNs, into a system that they'll never access), but they're also paying federal, state, and local income taxes.

Make them legal, so they don't have to pay outrageous amounts of money to coyotes to get them across the border, or risk being robbed, raped, beaten, or killed, in dozens of ways just trying to travel from their own country into ours. To be honest, the dangers that many illegal immigrants from Central and South America face just to get here so they can put food on the table for their families back home, are much more than the dangers faced by so many of our legal, supposedly more acceptable forebears coming from other places in other times. We should really understand what most of them have gone through just to get here, and respect that.

Make them legal, so employers can't knowingly and willingly exploit them, making them nothing more than slave labor.

Make them legal, because it's the right thing to do.

If someone is here illegally *after* we set our immigration policy right and secure our border, then they should be put on the first bus or plane home. But at present, our arguments against legalizing many, if not most, of those already here illegally ring a bit hollow when our country has stacked the deck in order to make legal immigration almost impossible, while there are no jobs available int heir home countries, and there are jobs here.

I can tell you that if I were in their shoes, I would do everything I could to get across that border and find work to support my family. And I wouldn't lose a minute's sleep if, because the system was set up to make it so, I had to get here illegally.
Well put.
+1


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeff
Senior Carp
Dewey
Apr 27 2010, 02:39 AM
jon-nyc
Apr 27 2010, 01:54 AM
Dewey
Apr 26 2010, 02:03 PM
I've been in the tight moral spot of receiving a phone call from Tijuana from a Honduran friend, asking if I could send him $200 to help him pay his coyote to get him across the border. I know this man; I've been a guest in his home (which, to call it "humble" would be a gross understatement). On my first trip to Honduras, I hurt myself (nothing too serious; smashed my hand with a hammer). He was working right beside me, he grabbed my hand and rubbed it until the pain went away. He's the pastor of a small house church that occupies half of his 20x20 house. I know his two sons - he's that rarest of Hondurans - a male single parent. I know that he can't afford to feed them, much less pay for their uniforms and books that they need in order to attend school. And I know that he's already literally risked his life just to get from Honduras to Tijuana, still with no guarantee he'll make it across the border and find work to support his boys.

Getting phone calls like that put your larger geopolitical political views to the real test.
What did you do?

(had that happened to me, i would send the money)
I didn't send him the money. And I've hated myself for it ever since it happened.

I rationalized it in my head by saying that while I wouldn't help them across the border, I would help them if they actually got across. In fact, I have done so. Several people from Honduras whom I know have made it here and worked for a time before going home, and while they've been here friends and I have taken them out for meals.

In the end I realized I was just trying to fool myself into feeling better about what I'd done, and it wasn't working. I realized that I'd failed miserably when I had a chance to do the right thing, even if it meant helping him break the law. And ever since, I've wished for an opportunity to fix the really stupid and awful decision I made when my friend called me for help. I'll never make that mistake again.
We need his sort of pluck and energy in our economy. Immigrants come here to improve their lot in life. We should give them the same opportunities our ancestors had to join this country.

Lower the drawbridge.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1hp
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp

Jeff, we seem to be talking at cross purposes. Here's what I wrote in another thread: Are you aware of the Mexican truckers in the US debate

Quote:
 
I believe that an official Guest worker program should have been set up a long time ago. Why people believe that this system of paying coyotes to get illegals across the border so they can work in the US is a good thing, is beyond me. However, I do not believe the guest worker program should in anyway lead to citizenship. If I understand the system correctly, foreigners have to leave the country and then apply for entry into the process that leads to citizenship.


This is an issue that the Federal government has ignored forever. Instead, the talk always seems to revolve around legalising the illegals already in the US (the number is much larger than your quoted 1986 Act). As you yourself wrote, the 1986 act was a failure, so why would legalising them this time around work?


The State of Arizona, of course, has a significant problem and has taken steps to alleviate it themselves. Good for them, more States should take matters into their own hands at this point as the Feds are failing miserably.

You also didn't answer my comment in any sensible manner.

I questioned:
Quote:
 
Funny how no one sees the solution as forcing the Mexican government to work on making a better life for Mexicans in Mexico. There is, after all, a reason that Mexicans are in the US. Why is it that the US is expected to bend over backwards for what is a Mexico problem?


To which you replied:
Quote:
 
You are mistaken. Immigration helps the whole US economy. Cato Institute calculates that legalization would add 180 billion to the US economy:


Frankly, you come across as more interested in yourself than in the plight of those who chose to illegally enter the US due to poor conditions in their own country. Salivating over the potential dollars that they are estimated to pump into the US economy, while ignoring the reason that they come here, does not give me a very good impression of you.

There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those that understand binary and................
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mark
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
kenny
Apr 26 2010, 06:29 PM
Mark
Apr 26 2010, 04:19 PM
No thank you!

Stop forcing your views on me through the government.
Oh, like denying gays marriage.

Every wants to force their view on everyone else, so vote.
I don't want to force my views on anyone through government force. Quite the opposite actually.

What makes you say that?

I am completely un-represented in the government.

Dems and Repubs are always wanting to force people to do this or not do that according to what they think is right.

I am not like that at all and I am saddened that you would think that about me.

And yeah, how is that whole voting for democrats working out for the gay marriage thing anyway?
___.___
(_]===*
o 0
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mark
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
John D'Oh
Apr 26 2010, 04:22 PM
Mark
Apr 26 2010, 02:46 PM
Um Passports are voluntary. I do not have one and suspect I never will have one. I have no desire to have one.
It's no bloody wonder you think America is so awful - you never go anywhere else!

:lol:
Just because this country may or may not be "the best place to live on the planet" does not mean that it could not stand some improvement.

I get so sick of people saying, "well it's as good as it gets so stop complaining!".

It's not good enough.

For me.

I would love to go to Europe. I would like to visit Italy, Germany and England, Sweden, Estonia, et al.

But I refuse to fly anywhere including anywhere inside the borders of this country. Why? Because the scared little minded masses who put all their faith in over powering government to protect them from some boogeyman that may or may not kill them stops me dead in my tracks because I refuse to be treated like a criminal just because I exist.

What a ridiculous world we live in.
___.___
(_]===*
o 0
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 10:54 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 09:24 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:05 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 05:23 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 04:25 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:52 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 03:02 PM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 10:12 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:07 AM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 06:10 AM
Certainly, my driver's license wouldn't (or to my mind, shouldn't) suffice. It carries no evidence of legal residence in the US, only the state of Pennsylvania.

Big Al
Last I checked, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was part of the United States.
My point was that Pennsylvania required no evidence of citizenship or immigration status at the time I secured my Pennsylvania driver's license so it can not (or at least should not) be considered evidence of legal residence in the USA. Furthermore, there have been ongoing disputes in several states as to whether or not to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Big Al
A driver's license is certainly considered a valid form of identification for Federal purposes, such as TSA security checks, so I don't see why a State should not be entitled to the presumption of validity -- unless of course you for some other reason don't want the State to be entitled to the presumption of validity.

The whole point of the new Arizona law is to give state/local law enforcement officials the power to verify citizenship/immigration status. Driver's license from most states give no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.

Get it?
Obviously you don't get it. There is a presumption that a holder of a valid government issued ID is entitled to have that ID. A simple display of a State issued driver's license should reasonably obviate any concern about "reasonable suspicion" under the Arizona Law.
No ... a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
It can for reasonable persons, such as law enforcement officers who are obligated to act in good faith under this law. I am sorry if you and Big Al don't qualify on that account.
Regardless of how much good faith and/or reason with which a law enforcement officer acts, a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
Yes it can, for reasonable people. Absence of any form of government ID can conversely raise reasonable doubt.

But I already explained that to you and you don't accept that, so your repetition of your previous argument is kind of pointless.

Policeman: May I see your driver's license?

Person: Yes officer, it is from the State of Minnesota.

Policeman: I don't believe you, you did not say "Minnesoooooota". Get out of the car.
No ...

If you read the CRS congressional report, you will see that there are a bunch of states that do not have "lawful presence requirement" when it comes to the issuance of driver's license. These states issue driver's license to citizens, legal immigrants, as well as illegal immigrants/aliens alike. A driver's license from any such state gives no indication as to its holder's citizenship/immigration status. No reasonable person who has, no matter of much good faith with which he acts, can look at one of such state's driver's license and make any determination as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mark
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
It's a good law. Yes, after some research, I changed my mind about it.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/A-carefully-crafted-immigration-law-in-Arizona-92136104.html
___.___
(_]===*
o 0
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Axtremus
Apr 27 2010, 08:32 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 10:54 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 09:24 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:05 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 05:23 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 04:25 PM
Axtremus
Apr 26 2010, 03:52 PM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 03:02 PM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 10:12 AM
ivorythumper
Apr 26 2010, 09:07 AM
big al
Apr 26 2010, 06:10 AM
Certainly, my driver's license wouldn't (or to my mind, shouldn't) suffice. It carries no evidence of legal residence in the US, only the state of Pennsylvania.

Big Al
Last I checked, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was part of the United States.
My point was that Pennsylvania required no evidence of citizenship or immigration status at the time I secured my Pennsylvania driver's license so it can not (or at least should not) be considered evidence of legal residence in the USA. Furthermore, there have been ongoing disputes in several states as to whether or not to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Big Al
A driver's license is certainly considered a valid form of identification for Federal purposes, such as TSA security checks, so I don't see why a State should not be entitled to the presumption of validity -- unless of course you for some other reason don't want the State to be entitled to the presumption of validity.

The whole point of the new Arizona law is to give state/local law enforcement officials the power to verify citizenship/immigration status. Driver's license from most states give no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.

Get it?
Obviously you don't get it. There is a presumption that a holder of a valid government issued ID is entitled to have that ID. A simple display of a State issued driver's license should reasonably obviate any concern about "reasonable suspicion" under the Arizona Law.
No ... a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
It can for reasonable persons, such as law enforcement officers who are obligated to act in good faith under this law. I am sorry if you and Big Al don't qualify on that account.
Regardless of how much good faith and/or reason with which a law enforcement officer acts, a state-issued ID that gives no indication as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status cannot obviate any concert about "reasonable suspicion about one's immigration status" under Arizona law.
Yes it can, for reasonable people. Absence of any form of government ID can conversely raise reasonable doubt.

But I already explained that to you and you don't accept that, so your repetition of your previous argument is kind of pointless.

Policeman: May I see your driver's license?

Person: Yes officer, it is from the State of Minnesota.

Policeman: I don't believe you, you did not say "Minnesoooooota". Get out of the car.
No ...

If you read the CRS congressional report, you will see that there are a bunch of states that do not have "lawful presence requirement" when it comes to the issuance of driver's license. These states issue driver's license to citizens, legal immigrants, as well as illegal immigrants/aliens alike. A driver's license from any such state gives no indication as to its holder's citizenship/immigration status. No reasonable person who has, no matter of much good faith with which he acts, can look at one of such state's driver's license and make any determination as to the holder's citizenship/immigration status.
Thanks for that link, Ax -- you've just been hoisted on your own petard. :thumb:

Arizona Revised Statute 28-3153 (D) is a lawful presence statute. So anyone displaying a valid AZ driver's license to an Arizona law enforcement officer can reasonably be assumed to be a lawful resident. California has the same requirement. Big Al should rest assured the PA also has that law on the books.

I am sure that Law Enforcement personnel in Arizona are trained in these matters. Again, reasonable people understand what reasonable grounds are.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
It is actually written into the law we are discussing that anyone who can produce a valid Arizona drivers license or state ID card shall be presumed to be in the US legally.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply