Laws come before jobs. If an officer has a reason, then yes they should look into these things, and I see you're in agreement with me as to what at least one of the reasons shouldn't be. I'm thinking the Federal govt. didn't do anything, because the states already passed some sort of immigration legislative. The question isn't, why do they come here, it's how do they come here. One of the probelms is, the quota system.
First I have to apologize to you and BLD. I accidentally used your username when quoting Bullslawdan in the last few parts of my last post. My bad fellas. So... LFMF: Pay special attention to your post before submitting them when you don't have time to sit around waiting for a data base error to clear up.... (not that it would have mattered... I couldn't get back into edit anyway!) What do you mean exactly? Yes I agree that race, in and of itself, should not be enough reason for an officer to question about their status. But, if they are being questioned about any sort of crime, and the officer (regardless of the officers ethnicity) suspects that the person in question could have illegal status, then they should be able to check it out. I think the "why" is equally as important as the "how". Eliminate the "why" (on our end at least) and progress will be made, rightfully so. And with the quota system again... are you referring to the number immigrants legally allowed per year?
How dare you do that to me. You shall soon feel my wraith. The law of the land comes before jobs. You can't make a job, if it's illegal. Depends on the crime. If it's just for pulling somebody over for speeding, not really a great need for id, other than your drivers liscense. The why will always exist, or in this case, will contuine for awhile. The how is more important in this case. Yes I am.
Sorry, I still don't follow. The way I see it, the "why", is because they can. We've created (well, not all of us) the conditions which draw them here, and we haven't adequately enforced existing laws. Do you believe that we don't allow enough immigrants in? Outside of quotas, we have no obligation to let anyone in. We shouldn't adjust our rates because immigrants demand it. They should respect our laws and policies and comply.
I know precisely what irony is. It's leftists, bogged down by a president with ever lower approval ratings, his unconstitutional health plan and about to lose the presidency, calling others "angry bitter losers". It's very ironic.
Can't sell illegal drugs can you? The way I see it, the why is a lot of reasons, and every single immigrant has a differnt reason to be here. I don't want illegal immigration, I'm against it 100%. It's kind of like people trying to reach that last train. They'll do whatever it takes to get aboard, legal or not.
I could if I were willing to take the risk, but I'd rather not poison people. I understand it, but the ball is in our court, we make the rules. We're a sovereign nation and we should always put our own above others.
And liberals being guided by their emotions want to keep piling on passengers till the train is so full that it can't move. So there it sits - poor but equal.
Another conservative law got stopped in Texas today by a Republican judge no less. You know if conservatives ever figure out what basic words actually mean they might actually get a law passed.
If all the people in Guangdong Province in China decided they were going to sneak into America and stay here as long as they want while sending money back to China would you leftists be ok with that? Probably not. Then why do you love Mexicans and Central Americans so much? The Chinese bring something to the table when they sneak into the country. That's not true for the Mexicans and Centros.
It funny how un-American people love to see the left take away there liberty and give it to ingrates.
... That's exactly what these laws intend to empower. The federal government has failed by overregulating immigration, creating a black market. This "War on Immigration" is no more sensible than the failed "War on Drugs". I don't find the Constitution to be "aggravating."
It's presumptuous to assume that these laws simply intend to make racial discrimination possible. Where has anyone proposed that an officer should be able to stop a non-white person on that merit alone? Well, of course the only over regulation to be seen from my perspective is that of the Federal government attacking it's own states for trying to correct the Fed's mistakes. When you say that the Federal government has over regulated immigration, it leads me to believe that you believe there should be little to no immigration controls... because as we can all see, the Federal government has not done so well, with approximately 12 million illegal immigrants living here. 12 million... .....
It's also funny how conservatives decide whether someone is American or not by the color of their skin.
The judicial problem arises when States, fueled by populist hyperbolic outrage try and shortcut Constitutional requirements. Usually, for example, the requirement of Probable Cause. The framers of the Constitution intended a uniform standard in dealing with immigration. The States simply cannot circumvent it; laws that do so will always be found unconstitutional.
You can come out and call it racism, it's alright. Do you realize that around 20 states have endorsed adopting illegal immigration reform since Arizona finally had the courage to speak up? That doesn't speak volumes, it screams it. The reason that so many states have come forward is due to the federal governments failure in enforcing existing immigration laws. True, greedy employers are to blame as well, but the federal government is also responsible for this aspect of illegal immigration. If a police officer is interviewing an individual for a crime, and that individual fits the profile of someone who is potentially an illegal immigrant, the officer should be allowed to investigate. Color should never be reason enough alone, for example "hey Danno, go shake down that brown guy minding his own business over there". On the the topic of unconstitutionality, did you know that the constitution makes no mention of Executive Orders? Yet that doesn't stop Obama from issuing an executive order without even having the approval of congress (not to mention the will of the people)! Our president is abusing his authority to reward those who have already broken our laws... at a time when unemployment is high and the economy is fried... all the while attacking those who are trying to fix the mistakes of the federal government. Not only is that Ironic, it's completely insane.
The law requires the police to check the immigration status of anyone they come into contact with "if" they suspect they are here illegally, in other words if they have a Mexican accent and brown skin. Pathetically, it also requires the same of school teachers and administrators. The officers of the federal government are sworn to defend the Constitution. If the states want to regulate immigration, they should be writing an Amendment. That's correct. That's what I want.
It's nobody's fault that the majority of our illegal population comes from south of the border. If we had a comparable problem with illegals from WASP nations and there were characteristics which set them apart, it would still be acceptable to suspect they're not here legally... once again... if we had that particular problem. It's not racism in either case unless someone is singled out simply by appearance without any reasonable events proceeding it. It's not unreasonable to suspect that someone may be an illegal immigrant if their English is very poor, if their ethnicity appears to be that of the majority illegal immigrant... or whatever type of immigrant is prevalent, or if they have questionable I.D. or documentation, if they don't seem to have permanent residence anywhere. You're right, some amendments need to be written. Hopefully we can get Obama out of the way in 2012, before we're put another four years behind. Why is that?
The irony is the Tea Party xenophobes have crippled the federal budget and hence crippled enforcement. You can't have you tax cut cake and eat it to. But this isn't the real issue anyway. Federal enforcement won't really work until you start throwing CEOs who hire illegal into jail. That's the draw -- illegals come here for work and major industries hire illegals to exploit them and suppress the wages of American workers. It's a perfect circle, fed by the GOP hypocrisy and its phoney policies of building fences and demonizing illegals. Start throwing CEOs into jail for violating the law, and illegals will return to their countries without deportations or demonization. But of course that will mean major industries -- like agribusiness and meat packing -- will actually have to follow employment laws and actually have to raise salaries.
I agree. They suck... for a lack of better words. They rip everyone off. They not only cheat a citizen out of a job, but enrich themselves by hiring cheap illegal labor.
That's great, but they will continue to do what they're doing until we pass laws to criminalize it, we set up a robust enforcement regime with teeth, and we tax people to pay for it so that the federal enforcement has the resources to act. You just can't have your small government low tax cake and eat it too. We need a well-financed robust federal government to take on very wealthy, very powerful companies. It's reality.
