Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
again... what does an illegal look like?
how do they "suspect" someone of being illegal?
please privide some signifiers, because i dont know of any visual cues that would make me suspect someone is illegal (thus requiring further investigation).
Why is any screaming about "looking like". LE will determine AFTER a stop of suspected crime by investigating re: questioning. What's the beef? Hint: Illegals, if you do not want to get caught being in this country illegally, don't break anymore laws. If you do, expect to be questioned and thrown out. Or, you could just leave...
again... what does an illegal look like?
how do they "suspect" someone of being illegal?
please privide some signifiers, because i dont know of any visual cues that would make me suspect someone is illegal (thus requiring further investigation).
Behavior is more telling than looks. I would check out anyone loitering in a Home Depot parking lot for sure.
It's racism because it requires police to check the immigration status of anyone who they BELIEVE is illegal. With 70 percent of illegal immigrants in this country being from Mexico, it will invite the police to specifically target Hispanic-looking folks.
BP already racially-profiles at their checkpoints. This will exaggerate that practice, which needs to end.
They can only check for immigration status if someone is first stopped because of a crime and can't produce valid I.D. LE cannot stop anyone who just looks Hispanic for no reason or just because they might be in this country illegally. Will you people stop putting your own spin on this law and actually read what it says instead?
again... what does an illegal look like?
how do they "suspect" someone of being illegal?
please privide some signifiers, because i dont know of any visual cues that would make me suspect someone is illegal (thus requiring further investigation).
An illegal doesn't have a certain look and that determination is only made after legal contact is made by LE first and valid I.D. is not provided at that time. This has nothing to do with their looks.
They can only check for immigration status if someone is first stopped because of a crime and can't produce valid I.D. LE cannot stop anyone who just looks Hispanic for no reason or just because they might be in this country illegally. Will you people stop putting your own spin on this law and actually read what it says instead?
THANK YOU chicagonut! Geez! I feel like in HS, start a rumor, by the end elephants are storming New Hampshire carrying little old ladies on it's back dragging babies behind! Grow up!
loitering is already illegal.
so if i understand correctly you are saying that it would have to be based on behaviour.
but the language of the bill speaks to suspicion of being unlawfully present in the US.
loitering does not mean that you are unlawfully present.
had this bill been written differently, (seeking to ascertain citizenship status at point of police contact) i would have no problem with it. i agree that police should question criminals about their citizenship (as they do in CA county jails). but this doesnt do that.
it says if the police suspect you of being an illegal, they can stop you and check you out.
and AGAIN. how do you suspect someone of being an illegal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
Behavior is more telling than looks. I would check out anyone loitering in a Home Depot parking lot for sure.
[quote=miamiman;13925632]It's racism because it requires police to check the immigration status of anyone who they BELIEVE is illegal. With 70 percent of illegal immigrants in this country being from Mexico, it will invite the police to specifically target Hispanic-looking folks.
BP already racially-profiles at their checkpoints. This will exaggerate that practice, which needs to end.[/quote]
There is a difference why Ferderal BP are given a broader powers. but thats the difference in the State Law and Ferderal statute.
Whats the title of this thread, lack of knowledge of the law.
loitering does not mean that you are unlawfully present.
Correct. Likewise, loitering within a group of ten, of whom only one speaks English, being approached by English speaking men in pickups, translating to the other nine, accepting cash from the driver, etc., does not mean you are unlawfully present. It's a good clue, though.
An illegal doesn't have a certain look and that determination is only made after legal contact is made by LE first and valid I.D. is not provided at that time. This has nothing to do with their looks.
Then why use "Illegals". The law states "any person"; it never states illegal. The law is for all persons in Arizona.
They can only check for immigration status if someone is first stopped because of a crime and can't produce valid I.D. LE cannot stop anyone who just looks Hispanic for no reason or just because they might be in this country illegally. Will you people stop putting your own spin on this law and actually read what it says instead?
Thats not correct. Asking immigration status durring the investigation of a crime is one way to check immigration status. A LEO also has the right to ask immigration status when no crime is commited. SEC. 2. B.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
