az illegal immigrant law (Columbus, Empire: hotel, home, buy)

[OhioIstheBest]

Originally Posted by Droolrockworm

Jim Crow Laws were also a function of geography and nationality yet I doubt you can find many that wouldn't call it racism. The issue of having to show your papers on request is the issue not that you have to have them. When you are pulled over for speeding or any violation of a law you need to show your licence and registration...I have no problem with this. If you pull me over to prove that I have either because of the way I look...that I have a problem with. It goes back to the primary nature of this law...once again none of us needs to prove our citizenship unless there is cause. Perhaps we should tattoo a number on their forearms for clear ID...by all means lets continue to erode our individual rights in this country. The Constitution (Bill of rights) gives you the right to "innocent until proven guilty" and I would rather allow 10 illegals rather that 1 American to lose that right. BTW I seriously doubt that Arizonan's would be nearly as happy to weaken rights if it was the 2nd Amendment that was in question. Do you think for a minute that anyone (including me) would be okay for a policeman coming to your house to see your bill of sale on guns?

I don't know what to tell you. Jim Crow laws were based on race. Illegal entry into a country has nothing to do with race.

And the police can't ask just anyone for proof of citizenship. It is only when someone is held for something else. This law has nothing to do with race. The left has to turn everthing they don't like into nazism and racism. It's predictable and boring.

And it has been federal law since 1940. And nobody ever claimed it was racist. All of a sudden a Republican voting state passes the exact same law that Democrats did 70 years and it is racism? LOLs. Like I said predicatable and boring.

And non-citizens don't have constitutional rights.

[OhioIstheBest]

Originally Posted by mdmagana

Congrats to the Ohio board for discussing this without calling everyone a racist or bigot.

I currently reside in New Mexico. Albuquerque and Santa Fe are both "Sanctuary Cities". Meaning immigration laws are basically just not enforced. Santa Fe has a minimum wage of $10 an hour. (which is ridiculous and a discussion for another time) Unemployment in Santa Fe in particular is high right now and LOTS of illegals are here because it is a sanctuary city and because of the high minimum wage. I couldn't get a job washing dishes here if I needed to! Illegals do not only take undesirable jobs - for example an illegal was a supervisor at a restaurant I used to manage.

While I applaud the Arizona law, I am very worried that illegals will stop going to Arizona, resulting in a huge influx to California and New Mexico. I'm betting that within a year or two crime rates in San Diego, Los Angeles and Albuquerque will be significantly higher.

$10 an hour? No wonder unemployment is high there. And yes, I would suspect that the illegals will be leaving Arizona and going to N.M. and California.

[Droolrockworm]

Originally Posted by OhioIstheBest

I don't know what to tell you. Jim Crow laws were based on race. Illegal entry into a country has nothing to do with race.

And the police can't ask just anyone for proof of citizenship. It is only when someone is held for something else. This law has nothing to do with race. The left has to turn everthing they don't like into nazism and racism. It's predictable and boring.

And it has been federal law since 1940. And nobody ever claimed it was racist. All of a sudden a Republican voting state passes the exact same law that Democrats did 70 years and it is racism? LOLs. Like I said predicatable and boring.

And non-citizens don't have constitutional rights.

First things first...I was unaware that they made this law a secondary law in which case this really isn't a big deal. If I get pulled over I can be asked for my papers (as long as there was an original reason for the pullover). What made the national news however, and I'm guessing the need for this post was the was the way it was made at first.

Secondly, assumming that I am Democrat because I am protecting the Constitution says alot about where your mindset is. I also am not concerned with non-citizens rights (as mentioned in every post I have made in this thread) but with those who are citizens who will be asked for their papers (this would not apply for me...in case someone wants to assume this is personal...no one will mistake me for an immigrant.)

[1watertiger]

if we had 20 million less illegals in this country wouldnt that be an instant boost for the economy? millions of jobs suddenly available. school systems are less burdened. health care system less burdened. not to mention the decrease in fraud regarding social services. do the people against this law know us legal citizens pay for the illegals in one way or another? imo deporting 20 million illegals would have better results for america than spending trillions of our tax dollars on "bail-outs".

[Droolrockworm]

Originally Posted by 1watertiger

if we had 20 million less illegals in this country wouldnt that be an instant boost for the economy? millions of jobs suddenly available. school systems are less burdened. health care system less burdened. not to mention the decrease in fraud regarding social services. do the people against this law know us legal citizens pay for the illegals in one way or another? imo deporting 20 million illegals would have better results for america than spending trillions of our tax dollars on "bail-outs".

I'm not sure anyone is actually listening to the points being made. I haven't seen anyone against deporting illegals. The only problem with the law that I was arguing against was the erosion of individual rights of "citizens" of our country. I don't believe that Ohio has the right to force me to prove that I have car insurance (even though I am fully insured) why should I have to prove it when I have done nothing to require them to look. They should have me show my insurance when renewing my license rather than recieving a letter in the mail. I have been hit by uninsured motorists and I realize my premiums are high because my insurance provider has to pay for the person without it; however why should I as a law abiding citizen be inconvienced. The same issues apply if the Arizona law was a primary one. If I cause an accident the police absolutly have the right to ask me for those papers but I shouldn't have to on demand because a policeman wants to pull me over just to check.

[1watertiger]

havent you noticed during your life we are on a slippery slope of loosing our rights .? red light cameras, dui checkpoints,homeland security,airport checkpoints,etc.etc... the last thing i am concerned about is illegals rights. didnt know they had any. also what happens to legal american citizens when we visit canada? we show "papers" or we dont get to visit.

[Fiddlehead]

Yes, I have several buddies in Canada. Imagine if I headed up there and just stayed without doing any paperwork? Would they be expected to grant me amnesty? I know there is a historical precedent here, with the Vietnam War, but that might have had refugee overtones. Anyone know the story? In any case, on its face, it strikes be as very presumptious to assume that I had a right to stay, and if I could not produce papers at any time, I was being harassed. The erosion of rights goes two ways. People who hang out in groups of their peers (immigrant groups, college kids, old tea party types, retirees, hippies, whatever) often tend to get a sense that their view reflect the whole, and the entitlement mentality kicks in. There are so many illegal immigrants and children of illegal immigrants in this country now that they make their own rights, and we (the larger population) have little to do with it. My wife works in a state agency, and no they refer to the few position that are not bilingual as "monolingual." So, we are losing some freedoms, but such special interest groups are already pushing for freedoms that our founding fathers did not even imagine.

[Droolrockworm]

Water,
I do see the slippery slope and that is what concerns me. Once again let me state "I do not want to protect the rights of illegals!" I want to protect the rights of American citizens...they too can be asked and if this was to be a primary law, which was my position, then anyone could be asked to show their papers legal or not. As for going to another country, that isn't an issue as I have stated there are choices people make that require documentation...walking down the road is not one of them! In the first draft of this law it was required of police to ask anyone who may be an immigrant (legal or otherwise) to produce papers or face legal action themselves. This would have been a violation of anyone who came to this country the right way...Do you really want to punish anyone who looks non-anglo? If so then this would be racism/discrimination. If the law hadn't been altered...would you support the requirement of a Mexican, African, Asian or anyone else that has gone through the process the correct way to become a citizen to comply with this law. Casting a wide net is bound to catch innocents as well. I just refuse to allow any more of these rights that I enjoy to be muddied by anger, fear based laws. If this needs to be done in Arizona then they had to make it a secondary law which apperantly has been done because it would've been unconstitutional.

[rrtechno]

There needs to be some "cleaning up" of the process to acquire those necessary papers for legal immigration. I know of a couple who has filed the paperwork several times to allow one member of the couple to immigrate to the US (from a country that is not to the south). The government agencies always were able to promptly cash the checks that were submitted with the forms, but managed to drag their feet on the first filing so that the application time limit expired, and "misplaced the forms" on the other application. Attempts to remedy the situation have been met with "submit this form with the appropriate fee". If this person were to come to this country (without the appropriate papers) out of frustration, should they be subject to possible deportation, even if they would not be working here or receiving any sort of government assistance?

[mdmagana]

Droolrockworm, I see your point. I have a hispanic last name and would probably be pissed off if someone was asking me for papers all the time - never mind the fact that I don't speak Spanish and my family was living in California before it was even a State. It would **** me off... in fact is pisses me off when the phone company automatically sends me a Spanish telephone book and we get Spanish speaking telemarketing calls.

At the same time though, since Irish / Mexican Catholics are not the ones blowing up airplanes I feel I shouldn't be bothered with extra security at the airport. Middle eastern Muslims should be.

If the world just worked logically I would be a much less angry person. LOL.