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.
So the law was changed because it was unacceptable to people like me, even though the current law is unacceptable to people like me?
no matter how they write the law...it will always be unacceptable to people like you...
why don't you offer a viable solution that doesnt involve them staying here and doesn't violate they're rights instead of just complaining
I would be glad to hear your input.
I am open to new Ideas
I don't want you to think that because we are having a dispute here it means that I don't like you and wouldn't be interested in hearing your input on a viable solution that doesn't involve me paying taxes for people to get services when they don't belong here.
I even like the other guy
hes got heart!
I respect that
we may just have to agree to disagree later when we are done touting our opinions at each other.
no matter how they write the law...it will always be unacceptable to people like you...
why don't you offer a viable solution that doesnt involve them staying here and doesn't violate they're rights instead of just complaining
I would be glad to hear your input.
I am open to new Ideas
I don't want you to think that because we are having a dispute here it means that I don't like you and wouldn't be interested in hearing your input on a viable solution that doesn't involve me paying taxes for people to get services when they don't belong here.
so people like you changed the law cause people like me thought it was wrong but why people like are doing things people like me disagree with? Why not throw the whole thing to a gabage can if people like me ask for it or istheir really another more logical reason to have changed the wording besides your weak explanation that people like me requested it. what is the criteria for people like you to grant petitions to people like me do you toss a coin?
so people like you changed the law cause people like me thought it was wrong but why people like are doing things people like me disagree with? Why not throw the whole thing to a gabage can if people like me ask for it or istheir really another more logical reason to have changed the wording besides your weak explanation that people like me requested it. what is the criteria for people like you to grant petitions to people like me do you toss a coin?
wasn't people like me that changed it...you have the wrong people...I was merely offering my guess as to an explanation. you assume a lot.
I don't necessarily agree with every point in the law. like "lawful contact"
I think it should be more like "Criminal contact"
don't point fingers at me I didn't write the darned thing...
and I didn't pass it
It was passed by the majority, that's how it works
there were more people (for lack of a better term) not like you...
there weren't enough of you to reject the law.
it's not your fault or my fault
the majority rules
and the people of Arizona wanted change
apparently
very badly..
we can either sit here and complain and do nothing
or we can come up with a better viable solution
that doesn't involve "doing nothing" because that doesn't work either
I dont want to pay taxes so that people who dont belong here can
get government services for free.
Last edited by minesbroken; 05-09-2010 at 01:21 AM..
Laws, their wordings, are changed all the time. New laws go through many many versions before being accepted. Sometimes when certain "what if" scenarios are played out with a law in mind it can reveal things that may not be the intent of the law, so we change it. This is nothing new and it's not a sign of anything in particular. It's always better to start with the best instead of waiting for something unfortunate to happen and then trying not only to change wordings in a law but also restore life and liberty to innocent people who get caught in something they never should have been caught in. It's harder then too because so many of us just want to say "it's the LAW" without giving thougt to why that is.
Laws, their wordings, are changed all the time. New laws go through many many versions before being accepted. Sometimes when certain "what if" scenarios are played out with a law in mind it can reveal things that may not be the intent of the law, so we change it. This is nothing new and it's not a sign of anything in particular.
I made it even longer. I just can't stop typing tonight!! lol
My explanation...much like the law...made some people angry,
which was rather the point of my explanation
some people just couldn't see the point through the content I guess.
next time I will have to be more deliberate it seems.
Laws, their wordings, are changed all the time. New laws go through many many versions before being accepted . Sometimes when certain "what if" scenarios are played out with a law in mind it can reveal things that may not be the intent of the law, so we change it. This is nothing new and it's not a sign of anything in particular. It's always better to start with the best instead of waiting for something unfortunate to happen and then trying not only to change wordings in a law but also restore life and liberty to innocent people who get caught in something they never should have been caught in. It's harder then too because so many of us just want to say "it's the LAW" without giving thougt to why that is.
Do you mean accepted or passed, because the original law was passed, hence the word law and not bill. If you mean accepted, the current law continues to be not accepted by many people. Please clarify
Do you mean accepted or passed, because the original law was passed, hence the word law and not bill. If you mean accepted, the current law is not accepted by many people. Please clarify
yet it seems it was accepted by enough people to get passed doesn't it?
so it was accepted by more people than not
that would be the majority
isn't that what this country is about?
it must really bother you that more people don't agree with you
than do
You still haven't explained why the Arizona legislature/ drafters of this law decided to go with this version and not the version with the words "race". Did they cave in to pressure? Did they have a change of heart?? Like the original law, this law is controversial.
The amendments to the "original law" were done to make sure that the language could not be misconstrued by bigots like you from misinterpreting the fact that the law expressly forbade "racial profiling."
The original law is based on, and in fact mirrors, the federal law it was intended to enforce. That federal law has been on the books for years, and has withstood numerous legal challenges, and is, in fact, a much tougher law than SB1070.
Last edited by Sunshadow; 05-09-2010 at 01:33 AM..
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.
