U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-02-2010, 05:32 PM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
2,212 posts, read 4,506,184 times
Reputation: 2363

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
I just bought some property and they took a copy of my DL as my ID.
I was told to bring proof of identity to closing.
Plus, didn't they have run a credit report in order to get a mortgage? Your credit report is done by entering your Social Security Number.

Last edited by the3Ds; 05-02-2010 at 05:50 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-02-2010, 05:51 PM
 
Location: TX
1,098 posts, read 1,544,543 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by the3Ds View Post
The law never said that (even in the first draft), but now that it's been revised, it very specifically says you have to be stopped for a reason.
Exactly. Just another opponent of the law that either failed to read the law, failed to understand what they read, or just focuses on the parts of the law they want to. I'm not picking on this individual - I mean there are so many that fit the category.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tyanger View Post
juiciest parts of the revisions:

The changes include one strengthening restrictions against using race or ethnicity as the basis for questioning by police and inserts those same restrictions in other parts of the law. (HB 2162, 11-1051, B - strike word "solely")

Another change states that immigration-status questions would follow a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law. The earlier law had referred to a "contact" with police. (HB 2162, 11-1051, B - strike word "contact" insert words "stop, detention or arrest")

Another change specifies that possible violations of local civil ordinances can trigger questioning on immigration status. (HB 2162, 11-1051, B - insert the words "in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state")

Shakira provision? (not exactly sure about this one - maybe it was for the grammar police on CD forums?) (HB 2162, 11-1051, B - strike word "who" and insert word "and" to read ... the person is an alien AND is unlawfully present in the United States)

- - - - - - -

lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact = a law enforcement officer's stopping, detaining or arresting a person while enforcing another law = lawful contact

but whatever it takes I guess.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Link to full text of new bill (HB 2162):
Format Document
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 06:06 PM
 
Location: SouthCentral Texas
3,855 posts, read 4,096,271 times
Reputation: 957
r
Quote:
Originally Posted by the3Ds View Post
So, time and again, we've heard about how horribly racist this new law in Arizona is. Asking people to provide "papers" to prove they're legal. If you listen to enough of the protestors, you'd think there would be a run on 3-ring binders, the paperwork is so extensive. Yes, that darn driver's license or green card or work visa is just SO cumbersome! I can actually FEEL it in my sock and it takes up so much space in my wallet! We just had our house painted and three of the painters came immediately up to my husband to show them their 3x5 cards saying they were allowed to work. My husband was sort of taken aback that they thought he was some sort of ICE agent, but the point was that they had those papers ON them.

So, if these papers are so horribly inconvenient to carry around and having to show proof of them is so "racist", then I'd like to know people's thoughts on THESE papers:

Senator Harry Reid and a handful of other senators just crafted a supposed bi-partisan bill that will address immigration reform. Among the 26 page bill are certain things like border agent increases and high-tech devises along the border...but also...wait for it...a "fraud-resistant, tamper-resistant biometric Social Security card". SAY IT ISN'T SO!!! Yet another thing to put in my wallet. That thing better be able to hook on a key-chain like my Albertson's card or I'm going to be angry!

Senate Democrats to push new immigration reform plan - CNN.com

The new health bill that was just passed is going to allow IRS agents to verify you've got health insurance or you will be fined. Yet another paper...that darn cumbersome insurance card. AND we're going to have to mail a copy in with our tax records. This is getting ridiculous!

Health bills could expand IRS role - USATODAY.com

And, now, for the greatest insult of all...the law that requires anyone who is not a citizen to carry papers with them at all times anyway. That's been the law since 1940...I'm no math genius, but I think that's at least 70 years before this horrible Arizona law was signed. Not to mention having to have my driver's license, insurance and current registration just to get behind the wheel of a car.

When will it end? Tell me!!! BTW, have you ever applied for a mortgage, enrolled your kid in school, gone to a doctor's office for the first time, taken your dog to the vet and gotten their tags, signed up for a cell phone plan, have a membership card to Best Buy? The list goes on. There's paperwork for everything and asking someone to carry proof they're here legally that is the same size as my Best Buy card is not something to scream "racism" over.
you thik this law is about showing papars? where did you get that idea?
Have you read the law, what happens when a person is asked immigration status? at that point is the person arrested or free to go?

can a person refuse to answer the question of their immigration status.

they will have to go to the station for a immigration verification, if the Cop doesnt believe you, is it ok that the cop take you to the station to preform a check. Are you arrested at this point? at what point do you get to call your lawyer? When do you get to call your lawyer?

can you answer any of these question from the law? oh- but it will never happen to you or any body else right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 06:26 PM
 
1,650 posts, read 3,374,069 times
Reputation: 1121
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHartphotog View Post
If I were traveling in a foreign country, I wouldn't be the least insulted if I were asked by the local authorities to show my passport. And if I moved there, I certainly would expect to produce appropriate paperwork if the local authorities noticed I didn't look like the natives. So why the big fuss, when we have a huge problem with immigration that is bankrupting states, to do the same here?
Me too. If I moved to another country or just went on vacation to Europe or somewhere, I would carry all documentation with me and be prepared to verify my status. I actually visited Mexico a few years ago and had to show my birth certificate and driver's license before I could enter the country. Passports weren't required yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 06:30 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,077 posts, read 99,155,665 times
Reputation: 31559
Quote:
Originally Posted by the3Ds View Post
The law never said that (even in the first draft), but now that it's been revised, it very specifically says you have to be stopped for a reason.

We also aren't talking about a place where there are a small number of Hispanics living in the city. It's Phoenix...the police who do their jobs every day have never been labeled as "racist" and even Sheriff Joe Arpaio (the master of self-promotion and the person all the lefties love to hate) has been undergoing an investigation for a year to determine whether he's been racially profiling and they've found nothing.

The police in Phoenix aren't going to turn into racists if they weren't before...the law doesn't change the fact that they've been doing their job well before it was signed and will continue to do their jobs well after. The police haven't been sitting around waiting for this law to be passed so they can walk around and start terrorizing Hispanics for no reason. They have responsibilities too and know that asking a guy out for ice cream if he has papers is stupid.
You're right, the law didn't explicity say that police could just ask people randomly, however, it said police could question anyone they thought was in the country illegally, without having any other reason to question them. So it amounted to the same thing. If it hadn't, there would have been no reason to change the law to say they had to have another reason to stop someone.

It sounds like it is Hispanics that they're targeting, according to your statement that Phoenix has a large number of Hispanics, and your reference to "terrorizing" Hispanics. You do know that Hispanics aren't the only group of people with a lot of illegal immigrants? In fact, a lot of illegals are people who entered this country legally, to go to school, for example, and over-stayed their visas. These people can be of any race and/or color. The fact that the chief of police has been under investigation for a year is reason enough to be suspicious, with all due respect for "innocent until proven guilty".

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
I just bought some property and they took a copy of my DL as my ID.
I was told to bring proof of identity to closing.
What's that got to do with this law? A: Nothing.

You weren't told to bring something that shows you are in the country legally. You were told to bring ID, proof of who you are, to prevent identity theft.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 07:12 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,176,297 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
You're right, the law didn't explicity say that police could just ask people randomly, however, it said police could question anyone they thought was in the country illegally, without having any other reason to question them. So it amounted to the same thing. If it hadn't, there would have been no reason to change the law to say they had to have another reason to stop someone.

It sounds like it is Hispanics that they're targeting, according to your statement that Phoenix has a large number of Hispanics, and your reference to "terrorizing" Hispanics. You do know that Hispanics aren't the only group of people with a lot of illegal immigrants? In fact, a lot of illegals are people who entered this country legally, to go to school, for example, and over-stayed their visas. These people can be of any race and/or color. The fact that the chief of police has been under investigation for a year is reason enough to be suspicious, with all due respect for "innocent until proven guilty".



What's that got to do with this law? A: Nothing.

You weren't told to bring something that shows you are in the country legally. You were told to bring ID, proof of who you are, to prevent identity theft.
No, you are wrong. The police cannot question anyone they may think is in this country illegally as the sole reason for questioning them. There first has to have been a law violated by the person and then valid I.D. asked for and if they can't produce it then and only then can their status in this country be questioned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 08:16 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,077 posts, read 99,155,665 times
Reputation: 31559
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
No, you are wrong. The police cannot question anyone they may think is in this country illegally as the sole reason for questioning them. There first has to have been a law violated by the person and then valid I.D. asked for and if they can't produce it then and only then can their status in this country be questioned.
The bold is the way the amended law reads. Prior to amendment, they could stop people for suspicion of being in the country illegally. However, the law has not yet gone into effect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 08:48 PM
 
Location: TX
1,098 posts, read 1,544,543 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
The bold is the way the amended law reads. Prior to amendment, they could stop people for suspicion of being in the country illegally. However, the law has not yet gone into effect.
Again, here's an obvious display of either not reading the law, not understanding what was read, or just cherry-picking the portions to focus on.


-----------------
Here is the pertinent section of the actual law - both original and revised:

RED text = original language stricken
BLUE text = revised/new language

HB 2162, 11-1051, B
B. For any lawful contact stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. Any person who is arrested shall have the person's immigration status determined before the person is released. The person's immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States code section 1373(c). A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely 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. A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:
1. A valid Arizona driver license.
2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local government issued identification.
-----------------


"lawful contact" and "lawful stop, detention or arrest" are synonymous
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 08:55 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,077 posts, read 99,155,665 times
Reputation: 31559
Well, "contact" is way different from "stop, detention or arrest", isn't it? Contact can mean just being out on the street and a cop walks up to you and asks for your ID. The section on "in the enforcement of any other law" is significant. The issue goes from "primary" (in other words someone can be stopped for suspicion of being in the country illegally) to secondary (you have to stop them for something else, then you can ask if they are in the country legally). Taking out "solely" is significant, too. With that in, it means race can be considered, along with other things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2010, 09:05 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,176,297 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Well, "contact" is way different from "stop, detention or arrest", isn't it? Contact can mean just being out on the street and a cop walks up to you and asks for your ID. The section on "in the enforcement of any other law" is significant. The issue goes from "primary" (in other words someone can be stopped for suspicion of being in the country illegally) to secondary (you have to stop them for something else, then you can ask if they are in the country legally). Taking out "solely" is significant, too. With that in, it means race can be considered, along with other things.
Look, none of this should be a problem if you are in this country legally no matter what race you are and that is the bottom line that the screechers about racial profiling just can't make a valid argument about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top