I'm sorry, I can't just take your word for it over what is actually written in the law.
If what you are saying were actually the case, it would be a clear 4th amendment violation and not worth the paper its written on.

You shouildnt take my word or the city attorney's word....but it is the interpretation of many attorneys.

The DOJ is currently reviewing the law for just that reason.

It is not unheard of for states to pass laws that clearly violate the Constitution....one only needs to look at many recent state abortion laws that have been thrown out.

Abortion is not mentioned in the constitution. Illegal search and seizure is.

Agreed.

It is not a perfect analogy...but abortion is a protected Constitutional right (within limits).

States often enact laws that they hope are written in such a manner as to stand the test..but suspect might be unconstitutional (but popular), with the intent of getting a federal ruling on exactly how far a state law can go before crossing the legal line.

I'm not suggesting that is the case here, but it is not unheard of.

And that's a fact.

:lol: what bs....

Blame the violent protests by the Hispanic support groups who oppose any kind of control.

What violent protests in Cali?

Cite?

Seizing the Post Office, stealing the American flag, and running up the Mexican flag.

I dont recall that.

Was it one person? a group?

Cite?

I do recall the immigration rally in Los Angeles a few years ago...one of the largest ever....half a million people.....no violence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Un...eform_protests

What is more violent....waving a Mexican flag or the backlash by the opposition of burning a Mexican flag in front of the Mexican embassy?

You are supposed to, but the cost and hassle of replacing it if it gets lost/stolen by some illegals wanting papers to doctor means most legal immigrants lock them safely away. Fortunately for me, I'm white and I have a Michigan Driver's licence. Well I did until I got it stolen in Santa Fe. Then I was lucky that I had my passport/greencard with me when I was stopped by a cop. Maybe i was also lucky that my whiteness wasn't stolen :rolleyes:

Remember the number? no wai. Wouldn't help anyway.


(I don't even know my social security number.)

How many people were injured or killed?

Meanwhile, in 2010 .... an economic boycott of Arizona is cooking up. The first cancellation? The annual conference of the National Immigration Lawyers Association. Yah really. :lol:

85% of them

85% of all of them, or just upper management?

Mom's leaving the damn state, and taking her small business and not-inconsiderable retirement dollars with her. She's writing letters to that effect to all her duly elected representatives.

She got a postcard in her mailbox addressed to "resident" that said:
Arizona is for White Christians! GOD AND GUNS!

She can't wait to leave that backwards shithole.

Of course you don't, it's not in your talking points.

Her leaving is good. It makes room for all the bigots who will be rushing to AZ.

Thanks for the link. Those who did that broke the law and should have been arrested.

But I dont see a pattern of violence or even any violence...quite the opposite in most demonstrations.

And your disparaging comment about talking points was very helpful as well.

So do you think that one event in Maywood is responsible for California not opting in to enforce the federal law?

Its a shame you dont hold your boy Merc to the same standards regarding talking points.

Once again, you demonstrated your double standards.

So, Fuck You...Mr. Fair and Balanced Moderator.

No, fuck you. Why can't you get it through your thick head being a moderator has nothing to do with what I post. I'm not fair and balanced, I'm opinionated, and they're my own like every other poster.
Don't try to lump me in with Merc and his wacko right wing nonsense, any more than you and your wacko left wing nonsense. You are both so fucking predictable I can skip pages of posts and pick right up where your pissing match left off.

As much as I like living in Scottsdale, AZ and working for MAW, this has gotten me to seriously think about leaving the state.

Thanks for the feedback!

I guess you only use your Mod privileges to delete a post of your own that was offensive to some....beyond the period when others have the same privileges.

Right...You're not predictable at all.. Keep doing what you do and I will keep pointing out your double standards.

Oh OK, you do that Mr Professional (as in paid to endorse) left wing poster.

AZ officials are probably more concerned about the real possibility of losing the 2011 All Star game...much like they lost the Super Bowl in the early 90s as a result of being the only state not to adopt the Martin Luther King Holiday.

That boycott cost the state $hundreds of millions in lost conventions, tourism, etc.
And for the record, I am not paid to endorse any position and never have been since my short stint in the US Senate staff in the early 80s.

Damn those Latino sluggers, taking jobs from good, white AMERICAN boys!!

It wasn't just one event. There have been others.

Again and again, until we secure our borders and do this properly then nothing is going to change. This just adds fire to the extremists on both sides.

Link
Good - stay in CA and fix your own problems.

"secure the borders." what an absolutely nonsensical phrase.

Oh please elaborate...

Do you say this because you think it would be too hard, or because you disagree with the concept?

A sovereign nation would not remain as such for very long without defined and defended borders, don't you think?

Wiki
I'll readily admit I don't know how to get it done, but I don't understand why wanting secure borders is nonsensical.

Good for her, Pie.

It's amazing to me that your posts here about your mother's experiences have gone virtually ignored. I guess real life instances, events happening to someone (the mother of someone) we know are not admissible as evidence of how fucked up the whole thing is.

Maybe you're just racist in your unsettled and disgusted feeling that all of this is the wrong way to go. Maybe you're being reactionary, without knowing the facts? Facts, as we must define them here, do not include actual events. Or something.

http://cellar.org/attachment.php?att...1&d=1272470067


People want their land back.:3_eyes:...2 hundred 50 some odd years later. It is a grand excuse to live off the benefits of the American government without even attempting,I'm assuming, to become a citizen FIRST.

Lame lame lame..... "Hey I'm illegal but hey umm this country was ours first...so .......we are going to stand up for principles" [is truly weird logic]

Do you think signs like this are representative of the immigration reform protest movement as a whole..rather than representing a minority of the fringe protesters?

It seems to me to be tarring the larger movement based on the actions of a few....much like the criticism of tarring the Tea Party based on the few extremists signs at their rallies.

Remember, guys, I live on the border, so my viewpoint may be different than yours.

First, it's nonsensical because the border between Mexico and the US has been "secured" in the ordinary understanding of the term. Fences, a river, ports of entry, checkpoints, guards on both sides--the whole nine yards. BUT -- there's really no way to physically cut off the entire border. It's just not practical--The Fence notwithstanding. There's too much of it, it's too isolated, fences can be dug under, guards avoided. It's nonsensical to imagine that we can totally "secure" it.

Second, the glib phrase "secure the border" is pissing me off, because it demonstrates absolutely no understanding of the reality here, or compassion for the people involved. The border is a fictional construct that neither reflects the past or the present. Just because Texas fought with Mexico and established a line in the sand, does not mean that the people who live here, and have always lived here, should have no rights. The region is a geographical and cultural whole. The reality is the people in question, the Mexicans, Mexican-Americans, and Americans of Mexican, Spanish, and Native American descent, were here first. They live a bi-national life, and have done so for centuries. Families and jobs are bi-national here. They are hurting, big time, because of the violence which we have, in part contributed to, and they need help, not a door slammed in their faces.

So, to me, that phrase is just a sound bite for the white people to rally about. To me, it's rude, naive, and self-righteous, not to mention impractical and lacking in compassion.

Having said all that, I agree that immigration reform is needed. I am not trying to make excuses for illegals or support them. I agree that people here illegally should not be using our services, or taking advantage of the rights of citizens. I agree that drug fueled violence is partly our problem (but not all). I agree that better border security is needed. But believing that "securing" the borders is an answer to all the current problems is, well . . . nonsensical. It's just a pat phrase that lends nothing to any solution.

Assume away. Most anecdotal evidence is that illegals are the people in the service sector working for less than minimum wage, with no employer-provided benefits or employer-withheld taxes. They're the people who work long hours, since it's at low wages, mowing your lawn, washing dishes at your restaurant, emptying your septic tank, cleaning your hotel room, etc.

I have said "secure the border" repeatedly, so I'll respond in kind.

I do not know how to do it - no idea. well maybe one - There is this great wall I've heard about in China. Only problem is it would take a lot of people and resources and with the economy doing so well and unemployment so low - oh wait, never mind.

To this little tidbit
rude - Why/how?
self-righteous - You are smarter than that.
impractical - see below.
lacking in compassion - for whom? The criminals who have been coming here illegally? Perhaps. For Americans - not in the least.

Now regarding your - Reality rant. That was settled a long time ago.

Perhaps its the phraseology you don't like. Instead of secure - I'll try it this way; "Control our Borders" and by that I mean to control the influx of illegal immigrants, which are by definition criminals, from coming here. I know you see it differently, but coming here illegally makes one a criminal - period. That part of this IS that simple.
Has the problem gotten completely out of hand due to the lack of inaction over the last half dozen administration - YES.
But doing nothing now doesn't change that trend. We simply CAN NOT afford the status quo.
I wholeheartedly welcome and respect all those who chose to uproot their families and their lives to come here LEGALLY. Please do not mistake the two - at least from me.

Cloud, that was a damn fine post.

You mean the legally mandated wage?

I gotta bookmark this post.

Obviously not. Why would anyone see THAT as the whole of the problem? I don't know anyone that dumb. Now if the people protesting had put the wording of spexxies quote ( shown below )on that poster board maybe it would have seemed less than a fringe protest. It might get a little more empathy.

I changed the wording from 'they're to we're'. A great post for ? what? Empathy? What are comments like that suppose to do for the issue?
http://cellar.org/showpost.php?p=652299&postcount=97

Don't forget the ones that fly in. :p:
[conspiracy]Those unemployed folks might like to make some cash building a wall between Mexico and the US of A. And I'll bet they'll do it for cheap! Wasn't that the plan when they wire terminated from their employment?[/theory]
Interesting... Who is breaking the law - the employer who pays less than minimum wage or the employee who accepts minimum wage? I say the employer is breaking the law (surprise).

I'm glad you find it humorous - Whats the percentage that fly in versus every other means?

I'm all for prosecuting and penalizing both parties.

Agreed

I agree with this. I might be completely wrong in this situation, but from my personal experience, any time the police seem to get new powers that could hypothetically be abused, it rarely happens because it is not worth the police officer's time. There will be a few cases of abuse by a racist cop or two but I am guessing this law will not have a much impact in stopping illegal immigration or lead to increase of police abuse from racial profiling.

Laws like this tend to have other, more logical reasons, behind it. But, from an opposition standpoint, a good argument I've heard is that with the lack of funding to Arizona's police officers, this will probably not do much because of a lack of training and other things.

BTW, there are roadblocks between cities checking papers. There are Border Patrol check stations; there's one between here and Albuquerque, for instance. Everyone must stop and be inspected. They check for drugs, for terrorist activities, and for human trafficking (I assume--don't know exactly what their mandate is).

No, they never check my papers, because I'm a middle aged white woman.

furthermore, there are "roving patrols grabbing brown people." What do you think the Border Patrol does?

caveat: I live in Texas, not Arizona.

Why do percentages matter? Gotta get them all.

Thirded.

I was pretty impressed by it as well.

Really? If we solved, hypothetically 90% of this problem you'd still be dissatisfied? :eyebrow:

"Controlling" the borders is fine, and worthwhile. Compassion showed, yes, even to illegals, who are almost always between a rock and a hard place, and their families, who are often legal, is essential.

This is more than an abstract political question to me. It directly affects 100% of the people around me. My life has been intimately entwined with Mexico, with Mexicans, with Mexican Americans forever. I'm a Western girl, brought up in the areas of the US that used to belong to Spain. I've visited Mexico since I was very small, I speak Spanish. My parents sponsored entire families to get their green cards and subsequent citizenship. My parents retired in Mexico, I went to college there, I fell in love with a Mexican and had a child with him who had dual citizenship until she was 21. I'm about as Mexican as I can get without actually being one. So, yeah--I'm empathetic to the problem.

Presently, I am seeing families torn apart, and people fleeing from violence. I am seeing the complex, and completely intertwined relationships--business, economic, social, and familial that form across the border. I don't particularly want illegal aliens here, but I decry the simplistic approach of just "securing the borders" or "sending them all back to where they came from."

Am I for "control" of the border? Am I for a better immigration scheme? Sure! But I urge everyone to consider that no single phrase or simple approach is sensible to apply to this very difficult and heartrending problem.

Add me to this growing list!

Good Gawd--we need to assign a special task force to this problem ASAP: we need a better catchphrase!!!1

We agree.

That was obvious from your first post. You have a perspective that is very different than mine. Thats one of the things I love about interacting here. The diversity.
BUT - and yes thats a big butt. Something has to be done. We cannot just grant them all immunity. Nor can we just send them all back.
We have to get a handle on the vast numbers of them coming here illegally. Until that takes place, there are no real solutions.
One of the positives I see out of this law is that it has brought this back to the forefront and may force the current administration to address the problem. Unfortunately, I think it will be more of a politically motivated policy.
AGREED!

(happy)

Don't forget it's not just Mexicans. Mexico is the highway into the US for people from all over Central and South America.

You're right, it would be more racially sensitive and politically correct to use the inclusive term "brown people" in this case.

I can get pretty brown in the summer. I object!