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.
The real issue here in not the fact that he wants to give them the "right" to a drivers license but that he , the Chief is in doing this violating all of you constitutional rights along with violating his oath of office he took. So I say ok give them a license and then give the chief the door. Along with that he also is discrinating against al of us LEGAL American citizens by inpounding our cars for violating one of their codes.
Everyone need to check out California Vehicle codes 17459 & 17460. Is states first that we consent to them taking us to court for violating one of their "CODES". Funny, when I was in California I don't remember seeing anything on any of the forms informing me of that ! So now isn't that a violation of the "FEDERAL FULL DISCLOSURE LAWS ". I would have to guess that although they take the Oath of Office ,like lots of thing with them it doesn't matter or mean anything. Don't do as I do ,but do as I say ! The only right's we have left is Our "left" hand and" left" foot.
I think this illustrates well the difference between pragmatic (the chief) and idealistic (those on this forum) thinking.
Pragmatic thinking seeks to bring about the most beneficial solution for a community, even if "ideals" are sometimes violated. The chief's stated purpose is not to aid illegal immigrants, but to reduce the ills of unlicensed driving. One could theoretically hold this opinion even if they were staunchly opposed to illegal immigration: it's a "lesser evil" to have drivers at least licensed and insured, even if they shouldn't be here in the first place, than to have them lack both and insurance rates rise, police work become more difficult, etc. as a result.
However, for the idealistic thinker, none of this matters. Even if there is nothing the police chief himself could do to ebb the flow of illegal immigrants into his city and stop them from bringing their cars or buying them, the city should NOT grant illegals licenses, because they are plainly breaking the law by their very presence.
The same pragmatist vs. idealist dichotomy plays out in other debates: whether prostitution should be legalized and regulated or not, whether "harm reduction" clinics should be set up to deal with drug addicts, etc.
I think this illustrates well the difference between pragmatic (the chief) and idealistic (those on this forum) thinking.
Pragmatic thinking seeks to bring about the most beneficial solution for a community, even if "ideals" are sometimes violated. The chief's stated purpose is not to aid illegal immigrants, but to reduce the ills of unlicensed driving. One could theoretically hold this opinion even if they were staunchly opposed to illegal immigration: it's a "lesser evil" to have drivers at least licensed and insured, even if they shouldn't be here in the first place, than to have them lack both and insurance rates rise, police work become more difficult, etc. as a result.
However, for the idealistic thinker, none of this matters. Even if there is nothing the police chief himself could do to ebb the flow of illegal immigrants into his city and stop them from bringing their cars or buying them, the city should NOT grant illegals licenses, because they are plainly breaking the law by their very presence.
The same pragmatist vs. idealist dichotomy plays out in other debates: whether prostitution should be legalized and regulated or not, whether "harm reduction" clinics should be set up to deal with drug addicts, etc.
IF the LAPD chief wanted to play: he could REQUIRE his cops to check immigration status of EVERYONE they stop and if there's probable cause, take them in and let ICE deal with them. No driver's license in the computer if stopped: take them in.
There's gonna be a showdown real soon cause people are getting madder and madder especially if Calif goes into the toilet moneywise.
Ok first read and comment on my post in this forum on "Hit and run drivers". Second the Chief is a political pawn who apparently is cowering to the Mayor Viaconquistador.
The southern half of this state is in the toilet. I see signs that people are finally getting fed up but probably too little too late.
We meed to start by getting rid of every dem who is running this State, out they go, and don't let them back in.
The Chief is problably on the Mayor's payroll!
I do still love my State, however in saying this, when will the idiots running it, take a hike.
This crap does **** me the hell off. Yes i write letters and i email, and i make phone calls, think they listen!
We meed to start by getting rid of every dem who is running this State, out they go, and don't let them back in.
The Chief is problably on the Mayor's payroll!
I do still love my State, however in saying this, when will the idiots running it, take a hike.
This crap does **** me the hell off. Yes i write letters and i email, and i make phone calls, think they listen!
H-ll no! They won't listen to anyone who is not contributing major $$$ to them.
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.
