Arizona Immigration law in court today.

[f.sciarrillo]

You have yet to prove your statement about the ss$'s ... And I was complaining about it before obama. Illegal immigration is something that I have always been against.

That's o.k .. You think what you want, we all know that you just spew broken rhetoric of nonsense. When you get some proof of what you say to back it up I will respond to it and let you know my thoughts ...

And I was right, you did bookmark about Ron Paul. I can only imagine how many posts on here you bookmarked ...

I just posted sources to back up my statements about SS. Did you miss it ?
Back up a couple of posts.

I have nothing bookmarked. I have a gift of remembering what each of you say relative to politics. Sorry, but I did catch you in a lie, and attempting to lie again.

I pasted the actual bill. Tell me where I'm wrong. Pasting the actual bill is not spewing broken rhetoric.
But why NOW, instead of during Bush, are you posting about illegals ?

Posting sources and pasting the actual bill is about as close to proof as I can get for you.

A. NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR
17 OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR
18 RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL
19 EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.
20 B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY
21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS
22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS
23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE
25 PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).
27 C. IF AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES IS
28 CONVICTED OF A VIOLATION OF STATE OR LOCAL LAW, ON DISCHARGE FROM
29 IMPRISONMENT OR ASSESSMENT OF ANY FINE THAT IS IMPOSED, THE ALIEN SHALL BE
30 TRANSFERRED IMMEDIATELY TO THE CUSTODY OF THE UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND
31 CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT OR THE UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION.
32 D. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY MAY
33 SECURELY TRANSPORT AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES
34 AND WHO IS IN THE AGENCY'S CUSTODY TO A FEDERAL FACILITY IN THIS STATE OR TO
35 ANY OTHER POINT OF TRANSFER INTO FEDERAL CUSTODY THAT IS OUTSIDE THE
36 JURISDICTION OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
37 E. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITHOUT A WARRANT, MAY ARREST A PERSON
38 IF THE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON HAS COMMITTED
39 ANY PUBLIC OFFENSE THAT MAKES THE PERSON REMOVABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES.
40 F. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN FEDERAL LAW, OFFICIALS OR AGENCIES OF THIS
41 STATE AND COUNTIES, CITIES, TOWNS AND OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF THIS
42 STATE MAY NOT BE PROHIBITED OR IN ANY WAY BE RESTRICTED FROM SENDING,
43 RECEIVING OR MAINTAINING INFORMATION RELATING TO THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF
44 ANY INDIVIDUAL OR EXCHANGING THAT INFORMATION WITH ANY OTHER FEDERAL, STATE

There is nothing in there that says to single out people or harass people because of what they look like. Show me the lines that state it?

I wasn't paying too much attention to the politics on here when Bush was Pres. That and I just don't like Obama, I didn't care for Bush either, but I have more loathness for Obama than I did for Bush ..

I did see you links above. I edited my last post after seeing it ....

I also seriously do not remember saying that I voted for Ron Paul, and i am not going to look for it either ..

[f.sciarrillo]

Bill, I love fact check. It is obvious that you didn't look for Bill 1070 on it ...

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/arizon ... lease-law/

[Hawk]

Bill, I love fact check. It is obvious that you didn't look for Bill 1070 on it ...

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/arizon ... lease-law/

■The amended law allows police to consider "race, color or national origin" when deciding whether to ask somebody for proof of citizenship, but only to the extent already deemed constitutional by the courts.
■It remains to be seen how police will interpret the law’s anti-profiling language in practice. State officials tell us they have yet to work out what factors police should be trained to use to establish "reasonable suspicion" of illegal status.

Yeah ? My point MADE for me . Thanks. I got this info from you're source. So either you can't read or you don't read.

[Hawk]

I also seriously do not remember saying that I voted for Ron Paul, and i am not going to look for it either ..

You know what they say, if you tell the truth it's easy to remember. I don't feel like looking for it either, but I will if you persist. You have made posts saying you did not vote for Ron Paul and you made a post saying you did vote for Ron Paul. You are the only one who knows the truth.

But either way, one is a lie, and yes, that makes your credibility suck. Sorry.

[f.sciarrillo]

Bill, I love fact check. It is obvious that you didn't look for Bill 1070 on it ...

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/arizon ... lease-law/

■The amended law allows police to consider "race, color or national origin" when deciding whether to ask somebody for proof of citizenship, but only to the extent already deemed constitutional by the courts.
■It remains to be seen how police will interpret the law’s anti-profiling language in practice. State officials tell us they have yet to work out what factors police should be trained to use to establish "reasonable suspicion" of illegal status.

Yeah ? My point MADE for me . Thanks. I got this info from you're source. So either you can't read or you don't read.

You might as well blame the Obama admin then. That is the federal law...

If you want to keep taking it out of context and put your spin to it, go ahead. That is your choice. What you did here was just show me to not trust what you say because you will do the same with everything you read or hear. The only time you will agree with it is when it supports your agenda.

Oh one more note: Polls show the measure is backed by a solid majority of Americans and by 65 percent of Arizona voters in this election year for some state governors, all of the U.S. House of Representatives and about a third of the 100-seat Senate. I guess they can't read either eh? Maybe you should ask Keith Olbermann, as he seems to be the only person you will listen to.

Also, Obamas approval rating is 44%. Congress's is 11%. What does that tell you? Maybe you should ask olbermann that also. Then you can parrot it back to the rest of us. Oh wait, you can't ask him. He is on vacation this week. I guess we will have to wait till he gets back. Here, I will ask him for you and let you know what he says. Don't worry, I will tell him his biggest fan (you) said hello

[Hawk]

Bill, I love fact check. It is obvious that you didn't look for Bill 1070 on it ...

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/06/arizon ... lease-law/

■The amended law allows police to consider "race, color or national origin" when deciding whether to ask somebody for proof of citizenship, but only to the extent already deemed constitutional by the courts.
■It remains to be seen how police will interpret the law’s anti-profiling language in practice. State officials tell us they have yet to work out what factors police should be trained to use to establish "reasonable suspicion" of illegal status.

Yeah ? My point MADE for me . Thanks. I got this info from you're source. So either you can't read or you don't read.

You might as well blame the Obama admin then. That is the federal law...

If you want to keep taking it out of context and put your spin to it, go ahead. That is your choice. What you did here was just show me to not trust what you say because you will do the same with everything you read or hear. The only time you will agree with it is when it supports your agenda.

Oh one more note: Polls show the measure is backed by a solid majority of Americans and by 65 percent of Arizona voters in this election year for some state governors, all of the U.S. House of Representatives and about a third of the 100-seat Senate. I guess they can't read either eh? Maybe you should ask Keith Olbermann, as he seems to be the only person you will listen to.

Also, Obamas approval rating is 44%. Congress's is 11%. What does that tell you? Maybe you should ask olbermann that also. Then you can parrot it back to the rest of us. Oh wait, you can't ask him. He is on vacation this week. I guess we will have to wait till he gets back. Here, I will ask him for you and let you know what he says. Don't worry, I will tell him his biggest fan (you) said hello

Unlike you, I think for myself. Does Olberman think like me ?

The country is not run by polls. How stupud would that be? My guess is that the polls were for segregation in the 1960's. Should we live by the polls Frank ?

Why don't you get it? That I want rid of illegals too. I just don't like racial profiling. I read the bill and I see room for racial profiling. I don't care if a state takes on the mission to rid them on it's own. I don't like racial profiling.

[Hawk]

Okay Frank. Cut and pasted from your source and not out of context. Make an attempt to read it all. There is a reasonable chance that the state law could be used to promote racial profiling.

You know what's funny Frank. I read the same bill before you gave me this link, and I came to the same conclusion as your source.



Does the law allow racial or ethnic profiling?

There’s been so much controversy about this question that the legislature went back and amended the law the week after it was signed by the governor. The final version requires police to try to determine the immigration status of any person who has been stopped, detained, or arrested and "reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien." Could reasonable suspicion be based on skin color or a Mexican accent? Here’s what it says:

Senate Bill 1070: A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.

The unamended version said race et al., couldn’t be the "sole" factors. But the statute doesn’t detail what "reasonable suspicion" might include. And the phrase "except to the extent permitted" by the federal or state constitutions leaves even more ambiguity, because courts have upheld the use of race or ethnicity in some circumstances. In an annotated version of the law reprinted by The Arizona Republic, University of Arizona law professor Gabriel Chin writes that there are "many open questions" regarding whether race could be used in enforcing S.B. 1070. But he also said, "I am deeply surprised that anyone construes this law to prohibit racial profiling."

Ediberto Roman, a professor of law at Florida International University, goes even farther. "It’s pretext to try to suggest that there is no discriminatory purpose," he told us. "Given that there is a lack of any other basis in terms of how they’re going to enforce it, it’s pretty clear that we’re looking to focus on a particular target group."

Though the law only allows officials to ask for proof of citizenship in the case of "legal stop, detention or arrest," this doesn’t limit the questioning to suspected criminals — it can include those who are detained as victims of or witnesses to a crime, or people accused of violating local ordinances like noise laws or loitering laws. Roman is concerned that police will be more likely to both stop and to question those who they think look like immigrants. "The legislature was pretty careful in following criminal procedure notions, but it’s the discretion in how the law enforcement will use criminal procedure [that] is how the racial profiling comes into play," he said.

Lyle Mann, director of the state government’s Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AzPOST), which provides curricula and standards for law enforcement training, assured us that Arizona’s law enforcement officials will be instructed in the letter of the law, which prohibits considering race or ethnicity as a factor. AzPOST is developing a training curriculum for law enforcement departments on how to go about enforcing S.B. 1070. The outline for the program shows that AzPOST will be laying out guidelines for what constitutes "reasonable suspicion," but Mann wasn’t able to tell us yet what they will be. He did say, however, that they would focus on how to avoid profiling while upholding the law. "While I can’t tell you what will be the list of factors for reasonable suspicion," he said, "I can tell you one factor that will not be listed is race, nationality or ethnicity." Still, ultimately individual departments will have control over what they consider "reasonable." Mann told us: "Making use of the training is individual agencies’ decision. But we happen to believe that everybody will use our product, because it’s a good product."

Some of the same criticism that is aimed at state law enforcement on the subject of profiling also can be leveled at the feds. Under section 287(g) of the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local officials can be authorized to enforce federal immigration law after receiving four weeks of training. But listed in the training manual for that program, according to the New York Times, are several factors that authorities can use to begin questioning an individual’s immigration status that include: "Does the subject have a thick foreign accent or appear not to speak English?" and "Does the subject’s appearance look like it is ‘out of place’?" According to the Times, federal officials said they were revising the manual and that several other factors must be considered.

The Arizona law also prohibits state or local officials from prosecuting illegal immigration “to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.” As Chin and three other Arizona law professors wrote in a recent report: "Since federal law permits race to be a ‘relevant factor’ in determining reasonable suspicion for stops and inquiries, the combined effect of these provisions may be to require state actors to use race to the full extent permitted by federal law."

According to the Supreme Court case United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, "Mexican appearance" can be a factor justifying an immigration stop. But 24 years later the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in United States v. Montero-Camargo, ruled that “Hispanic appearance is not, in general, an appropriate factor” for determining suspicion, especially in areas with large Hispanic populations. “This makes it more complex whether race can be a factor in an immigration stop in the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction, which includes Arizona,” Johnson told us.

So, does the law allow racial or ethnic profiling? It may, though no more than it’s already allowed under current law. But that’s a different question from whether or not such profiling will be used to a greater extent by Arizona law enforcement as a result of the legislation, which remains to be seen.

[f.sciarrillo]

Okay Frank. Cut and pasted from your source and not out of context. Make an attempt to read it all. There is a reasonable chance that the state law could be used to promote racial profiling.

You know what's funny Frank. I read the same bill before you gave me this link, and I came to the same conclusion as your source.



Does the law allow racial or ethnic profiling?

There’s been so much controversy about this question that the legislature went back and amended the law the week after it was signed by the governor. The final version requires police to try to determine the immigration status of any person who has been stopped, detained, or arrested and "reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien." Could reasonable suspicion be based on skin color or a Mexican accent? Here’s what it says:

Senate Bill 1070: A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.

The unamended version said race et al., couldn’t be the "sole" factors. But the statute doesn’t detail what "reasonable suspicion" might include. And the phrase "except to the extent permitted" by the federal or state constitutions leaves even more ambiguity, because courts have upheld the use of race or ethnicity in some circumstances. In an annotated version of the law reprinted by The Arizona Republic, University of Arizona law professor Gabriel Chin writes that there are "many open questions" regarding whether race could be used in enforcing S.B. 1070. But he also said, "I am deeply surprised that anyone construes this law to prohibit racial profiling."

Ediberto Roman, a professor of law at Florida International University, goes even farther. "It’s pretext to try to suggest that there is no discriminatory purpose," he told us. "Given that there is a lack of any other basis in terms of how they’re going to enforce it, it’s pretty clear that we’re looking to focus on a particular target group."

Though the law only allows officials to ask for proof of citizenship in the case of "legal stop, detention or arrest," this doesn’t limit the questioning to suspected criminals — it can include those who are detained as victims of or witnesses to a crime, or people accused of violating local ordinances like noise laws or loitering laws. Roman is concerned that police will be more likely to both stop and to question those who they think look like immigrants. "The legislature was pretty careful in following criminal procedure notions, but it’s the discretion in how the law enforcement will use criminal procedure [that] is how the racial profiling comes into play," he said.

Lyle Mann, director of the state government’s Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AzPOST), which provides curricula and standards for law enforcement training, assured us that Arizona’s law enforcement officials will be instructed in the letter of the law, which prohibits considering race or ethnicity as a factor. AzPOST is developing a training curriculum for law enforcement departments on how to go about enforcing S.B. 1070. The outline for the program shows that AzPOST will be laying out guidelines for what constitutes "reasonable suspicion," but Mann wasn’t able to tell us yet what they will be. He did say, however, that they would focus on how to avoid profiling while upholding the law. "While I can’t tell you what will be the list of factors for reasonable suspicion," he said, "I can tell you one factor that will not be listed is race, nationality or ethnicity." Still, ultimately individual departments will have control over what they consider "reasonable." Mann told us: "Making use of the training is individual agencies’ decision. But we happen to believe that everybody will use our product, because it’s a good product."

Some of the same criticism that is aimed at state law enforcement on the subject of profiling also can be leveled at the feds. Under section 287(g) of the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local officials can be authorized to enforce federal immigration law after receiving four weeks of training. But listed in the training manual for that program, according to the New York Times, are several factors that authorities can use to begin questioning an individual’s immigration status that include: "Does the subject have a thick foreign accent or appear not to speak English?" and "Does the subject’s appearance look like it is ‘out of place’?" According to the Times, federal officials said they were revising the manual and that several other factors must be considered.

The Arizona law also prohibits state or local officials from prosecuting illegal immigration “to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.” As Chin and three other Arizona law professors wrote in a recent report: "Since federal law permits race to be a ‘relevant factor’ in determining reasonable suspicion for stops and inquiries, the combined effect of these provisions may be to require state actors to use race to the full extent permitted by federal law."

According to the Supreme Court case United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, "Mexican appearance" can be a factor justifying an immigration stop. But 24 years later the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in United States v. Montero-Camargo, ruled that “Hispanic appearance is not, in general, an appropriate factor” for determining suspicion, especially in areas with large Hispanic populations. “This makes it more complex whether race can be a factor in an immigration stop in the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction, which includes Arizona,” Johnson told us.

So, does the law allow racial or ethnic profiling? It may, though no more than it’s already allowed under current law. But that’s a different question from whether or not such profiling will be used to a greater extent by Arizona law enforcement as a result of the legislation, which remains to be seen.

A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.

It says right there that it is not allowed except as permitted by the FEDERAL LAW and ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. The rest of it is just a bunch of blow hards who don't agree with it spouting their opinion about how it is interpreted.

The state is upholdiing the federal law, you apparently do not want them to do that. You don't care about the laws of this country? You and Barry are one in the same then.

As for Olbermann - You don't think like him. You take what he says as a truth of all things relevant. You listen to know one but him.

[Hawk]

It says right there that it is not allowed except as permitted by the FEDERAL LAW and ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. The rest of it is just a bunch of blow hards who don't agree with it spouting their opinion about how it is interpreted.

The state is upholdiing the federal law, you apparently do not want them to do that. You don't care about the laws of this country? You and Barry are one in the same then.

As for Olbermann - You don't think like him. You take what he says as a truth of all things relevant. You listen to know one but him.

I have left you go on and on with the Olberman thing. I have not watched him for a while. I did not know he was on vacation. So if I seem to be repeating what is said on his show...

In the statute it says "reasonable suspicion" . If someone looks Hispanic that in and of itself can be reasonable suspicion. The state DOES NOT detail what "reasonable suspicion" is.

It also (in the quote you just gave to me) says "EXCEPT". "...except as permitted by Federal Law and the Arizona Constitution. What does "except" mean to you ?

They cannot use ethnic profiling EXCEPT...

Courts have previously upheld race and ethnicity in some circumstances as legal.

So according to the paragraph you quote. there is an EXCEPTION to the rule. That exception (as upheld by some courts) IS racial and ethnic profiling.

I can't figure out if you don't get it OR you don't want to get it.

I want rid of illegals. I don't lie like you would. I stand by what I say and I remember what you say. I would rather have compromise than do nothing at all. Those like you, who don't want compromise, are the cause that nothing has ever been done. Good one.

[f.sciarrillo]

It says right there that it is not allowed except as permitted by the FEDERAL LAW and ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. The rest of it is just a bunch of blow hards who don't agree with it spouting their opinion about how it is interpreted.

The state is upholdiing the federal law, you apparently do not want them to do that. You don't care about the laws of this country? You and Barry are one in the same then.

As for Olbermann - You don't think like him. You take what he says as a truth of all things relevant. You listen to know one but him.

I have left you go on and on with the Olberman thing. I have not watched him for a while. I did not know he was on vacation. So if I seem to be repeating what is said on his show...

In the statute it says "reasonable suspicion" . If someone looks Hispanic that in and of itself can be reasonable suspicion. The state DOES NOT detail what "reasonable suspicion" is.

It also (in the quote you just gave to me) says "EXCEPT". "...except as permitted by Federal Law and the Arizona Constitution. What does "except" mean to you ?

They cannot use ethnic profiling EXCEPT...

Courts have previously upheld race and ethnicity in some circumstances as legal.

So according to the paragraph you quote. there is an EXCEPTION to the rule. That exception (as upheld by some courts) IS racial and ethnic profiling.

I can't figure out if you don't get it OR you don't want to get it.

I want rid of illegals. I don't lie like you would. I stand by what I say and I remember what you say. I would rather have compromise than do nothing at all. Those like you, who don't want compromise, are the cause that nothing has ever been done. Good one.

"Except" means that if the federal laws says it is allowed then they can do it. How hard is that to understand? I do get it, along with the majority of the country and states who also get it.

Yes, I do want all illegals out of this country. I will stand by it, they don't come in the proper way, then they don't deserve to be here period. You want to give them all amnesty, I don't .. Never have , never will.

You can say I lie all you want, frankly that doesn't bother me. Any time someone doesn't agree with something the left is doing or wants, they are lying - or of course Racists.

I don't care how you look at it. It is a federal law that is being upheld. If you don't like it then you should try to change the federal law itself.

[Hawk]

"Except" means that if the federal laws says it is allowed then they can do it. How hard is that to understand? I do get it, along with the majority of the country and states who also get it.

Yes, I do want all illegals out of this country. I will stand by it, they don't come in the proper way, then they don't deserve to be here period. You want to give them all amnesty, I don't .. Never have , never will.

You can say I lie all you want, frankly that doesn't bother me. Any time someone doesn't agree with something the left is doing or wants, they are lying - or of course Racists.

I don't care how you look at it. It is a federal law that is being upheld. If you don't like it then you should try to change the federal law itself.

You have claimed non stop that the Arizona statute does not permit racial profiling. Now you admit that it does (according to your first paragraph. So you are for ethnic and racial profiling ?

Yeah, if any law allows racial profiling, I think it's wrong. What do you think ?

I do not want to give ALL of them amnesty. Only the ones who have lived here for a long time, don't break any other laws, and are raising a family of LEGAL children who ARE US citizens.

Wrong on the lie thing. I'm claiming I didn't lie relative to the Olberman issue.

I also gave you sources relative to the illegal aliens paying taxes. So far, it seems you were wrong an all counts.

[f.sciarrillo]

"Except" means that if the federal laws says it is allowed then they can do it. How hard is that to understand? I do get it, along with the majority of the country and states who also get it.

Yes, I do want all illegals out of this country. I will stand by it, they don't come in the proper way, then they don't deserve to be here period. You want to give them all amnesty, I don't .. Never have , never will.

You can say I lie all you want, frankly that doesn't bother me. Any time someone doesn't agree with something the left is doing or wants, they are lying - or of course Racists.

I don't care how you look at it. It is a federal law that is being upheld. If you don't like it then you should try to change the federal law itself.

You have claimed non stop that the Arizona statute does not permit racial profiling. Now you admit that it does (according to your first paragraph. So you are for ethnic and racial profiling ?

Yeah, if any law allows racial profiling, I think it's wrong. What do you think ?

I do not want to give ALL of them amnesty. Only the ones who have lived here for a long time, don't break any other laws, and are raising a family of LEGAL children who ARE US citizens.

Wrong on the lie thing. I'm claiming I didn't lie relative to the Olberman issue.

I also gave you sources relative to the illegal aliens paying taxes. So far, it seems you were wrong an all counts.

/smacks his head off the wall

I'm done with you. You are putting words into my mouth and not listening to a thing. You are one lost individual. You are also not going to listen to anything. You way or the highway. You are not always right, in this case you are dead wrong. Nothing you say of the matter has any merit, you can think what you want. You are doing nothing but giving me a head ache.

[Hawk]

"Except" means that if the federal laws says it is allowed then they can do it. How hard is that to understand? I do get it, along with the majority of the country and states who also get it.

Yes, I do want all illegals out of this country. I will stand by it, they don't come in the proper way, then they don't deserve to be here period. You want to give them all amnesty, I don't .. Never have , never will.

You can say I lie all you want, frankly that doesn't bother me. Any time someone doesn't agree with something the left is doing or wants, they are lying - or of course Racists.

I don't care how you look at it. It is a federal law that is being upheld. If you don't like it then you should try to change the federal law itself.

You have claimed non stop that the Arizona statute does not permit racial profiling. Now you admit that it does (according to your first paragraph. So you are for ethnic and racial profiling ?

Yeah, if any law allows racial profiling, I think it's wrong. What do you think ?

I do not want to give ALL of them amnesty. Only the ones who have lived here for a long time, don't break any other laws, and are raising a family of LEGAL children who ARE US citizens.

Wrong on the lie thing. I'm claiming I didn't lie relative to the Olberman issue.

I also gave you sources relative to the illegal aliens paying taxes. So far, it seems you were wrong an all counts.

/smacks his head off the wall

I'm done with you. You are putting words into my mouth and not listening to a thing. You are one lost individual. You are also not going to listen to anything. You way or the highway. You are not always right, in this case you are dead wrong. Nothing you say of the matter has any merit, you can think what you want. You are doing nothing but giving me a head ache.

Good comeback.
I provide opinions based on the facts. You base your opinions on the opinions of others, which is why you always lose. Then after you lose you follow up with something stupid (see your quote above).

[Hawk]

I would be fine with the Arizona law if they remove "except..." Which is the exception allowing racial and ethnic profiling.

How about you ?

[lonewolf]

Ist off, nobody wants to sneak into China. Unless you need a $4 a day job.

Oh yeah? Tell that to the North Koreans getting shot every day.

[f.sciarrillo]

You have claimed non stop that the Arizona statute does not permit racial profiling. Now you admit that it does (according to your first paragraph. So you are for ethnic and racial profiling ?

Yeah, if any law allows racial profiling, I think it's wrong. What do you think ?

I do not want to give ALL of them amnesty. Only the ones who have lived here for a long time, don't break any other laws, and are raising a family of LEGAL children who ARE US citizens.

Wrong on the lie thing. I'm claiming I didn't lie relative to the Olberman issue.

I also gave you sources relative to the illegal aliens paying taxes. So far, it seems you were wrong an all counts.

/smacks his head off the wall

I'm done with you. You are putting words into my mouth and not listening to a thing. You are one lost individual. You are also not going to listen to anything. You way or the highway. You are not always right, in this case you are dead wrong. Nothing you say of the matter has any merit, you can think what you want. You are doing nothing but giving me a head ache.

Good comeback.
I provide opinions based on the facts. You base your opinions on the opinions of others, which is why you always lose. Then after you lose you follow up with something stupid (see your quote above).

It is not an opinion, it is written in the law - You are taking it out of context because you do not agree with it and are trying to find anyway possible way to do just that. You will not agree with it. So why don't you just come out and say that you don't agree with it and nothing will change that.

Sure you say that if they take "Except" out you would. I don't believe that for a second - The main reason you do not agree with it is is because a Republican Governor came up with it. If a Liberal Governor would have came up with it, you would be saying the complete opposite you are now. Giving him high fives and saying he is the best thing since Jesus. One side Bill, listen to everything Liberal and nothing down the center - Once left always left. Good one there, skippy.

Like I said, if you don't like the federal law, then go to DC and try to get them to change it - And good luck with that.

[lonewolf]

I would be fine with the Arizona law if they remove "except..." Which is the exception allowing racial and ethnic profiling.

How about you ?

The exception (for the state & federal constitutions) is actually there to prevent the law from being overturned by the supremacy clause in the unlikely event that the Supreme Court or AZ Supreme Court would rule that legal authorities have the right to engage in racial profiling.

If either court was to rule in favor of racial profiling, anybody who is against it would be royally screwed a lot worse than this AZ law you are arguing about.

Besides, its a moot point in this case because that issue will be addressed in another suit to be heard later in the year.

[Charltor]

there's an estimated 15 million illegals and 15 million unemployed...do the math ...'nuf said...GTFO!!!!NOW!!!!

[Merge]

How could Arizona be so heartless as to actually want to enforce the law!!! Don't they know there are millions of illegals out there that are entitled to welfare and food stamps??

[songsmith]

State College has a growing problem with illegals from the former USSR. They should start pulling over white guys in upmarket Beamers and Lexii.

Which reminds me, since the vast majority of clubgoers locally drive to the club themselves, wouldn't it make perfect sense to simply station a cop outside every bar with a breathalyzer? Let's face it, drunk driving causes HUGE harm to everyone involved, and profiling and targeting drinkers is the most efficient way to curb it. I mean, they already have drunk-driving laws, this would just help enforce them, and keep this great nation safe for our children, and children's children. If you don't agree with me on this, you don't want to protect our children (and children's children ). Founding Fathers. Constitution. I don't know what those last two mean, but they get cited in every conservative response now, so you can't argue with me on this. --->JMS

[Hawk]

State College has a growing problem with illegals from the former USSR. They should start pulling over white guys in upmarket Beamers and Lexii.

Which reminds me, since the vast majority of clubgoers locally drive to the club themselves, wouldn't it make perfect sense to simply station a cop outside every bar with a breathalyzer? Let's face it, drunk driving causes HUGE harm to everyone involved, and profiling and targeting drinkers is the most efficient way to curb it. I mean, they already have drunk-driving laws, this would just help enforce them, and keep this great nation safe for our children, and children's children. If you don't agree with me on this, you don't want to protect our children (and children's children ). Founding Fathers. Constitution. I don't know what those last two mean, but they get cited in every conservative response now, so you can't argue with me on this. --->JMS

The nail struck firmly on the head.

[f.sciarrillo]

Amnesty for all, even the terrorists. Make them all citizens, then lets make our national language Spanish. Hell, why don't we just make this country part of Mexico and let them run the country. Better yet, how about we all bow to mecca and let the Islamic fanatics come in and take over, convert us all to Muslim and force everyone to swear allegiance to Mohammad.

Or how about we just make this a complete socialist country. We can bring Stalin back from the dead and have him run it. Hail Stalin! Hail, Hail, Hail !! Welcome the USSA !! Hail! Hail! Stalin! Stalin in the king, Stalin is the master! Hail Hail Hail! Everyone!

We are a socialist society, we are a Muslim society, we honor Mohammad and Stalin! We are the the country of sheep afraid to do what we want and do what we are told. Hail Hail! Hail!

Excuse me, I have to go pray for the fifth time today. *bows towards mecca* ..

/end rant - HAHAHA!

[bassist_25]

Amnesty for all, even the terrorists. Make them all citizens, then lets make our national language Spanish. Hell, why don't we just make this country part of Mexico and let them run the country. Better yet, how about we all bow to mecca and let the Islamic fanatics come in and take over, convert us all to Muslim and force everyone to swear allegiance to Mohammad.

Or how about we just make this a complete socialist country. We can bring Stalin back from the dead and have him run it. Hail Stalin! Hail, Hail, Hail !! Welcome the USSA !! Hail! Hail! Stalin! Stalin in the king, Stalin is the master! Hail Hail Hail! Everyone!

We are a socialist society, we are a Muslim society, we honor Mohammad and Stalin! We are the the country of sheep afraid to do what we want and do what we are told. Hail Hail! Hail!

Excuse me, I have to go pray for the fifth time today. *bows towards mecca* ..

/end rant - HAHAHA!

Dude, I think this thread is about immigration.

[f.sciarrillo]

Amnesty for all, even the terrorists. Make them all citizens, then lets make our national language Spanish. Hell, why don't we just make this country part of Mexico and let them run the country. Better yet, how about we all bow to mecca and let the Islamic fanatics come in and take over, convert us all to Muslim and force everyone to swear allegiance to Mohammad.

Or how about we just make this a complete socialist country. We can bring Stalin back from the dead and have him run it. Hail Stalin! Hail, Hail, Hail !! Welcome the USSA !! Hail! Hail! Stalin! Stalin in the king, Stalin is the master! Hail Hail Hail! Everyone!

We are a socialist society, we are a Muslim society, we honor Mohammad and Stalin! We are the the country of sheep afraid to do what we want and do what we are told. Hail Hail! Hail!

Excuse me, I have to go pray for the fifth time today. *bows towards mecca* ..

/end rant - HAHAHA!

Dude, I think this thread is about immigration.

HAHA! .. I know, I just thought I would throw that out there and see where it goes lol

[Hawk]

Amnesty for all, even the terrorists. Make them all citizens, then lets make our national language Spanish. Hell, why don't we just make this country part of Mexico and let them run the country. Better yet, how about we all bow to mecca and let the Islamic fanatics come in and take over, convert us all to Muslim and force everyone to swear allegiance to Mohammad.

Or how about we just make this a complete socialist country. We can bring Stalin back from the dead and have him run it. Hail Stalin! Hail, Hail, Hail !! Welcome the USSA !! Hail! Hail! Stalin! Stalin in the king, Stalin is the master! Hail Hail Hail! Everyone!

We are a socialist society, we are a Muslim society, we honor Mohammad and Stalin! We are the the country of sheep afraid to do what we want and do what we are told. Hail Hail! Hail!

Excuse me, I have to go pray for the fifth time today. *bows towards mecca* ..

/end rant - HAHAHA!

Dude, I think this thread is about immigration.

HAHA! .. I know, I just thought I would throw that out there and see where it goes lol

That's called Trolling. WTF