The Arizona Law and The Truth

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

The Arizona Law and The Truth

Written By : Kathleen McKinley

I can’t tell you how I hate the illegal immigration debate. As someone who has great respect for the Mexican American community, has close Hispanic friends, and have personally helped a friend and employee become a citizen, I hate how it divides us. I hate how so many try to make it about Hispanics v. those who fight illegal immigration.

What many on the side of fighting illegal immigration cannot seem to grasp, is that deporting illegals that have been here for decades and decades means deporting loved ones of American citizens. That includes mothers, grandparents, and fathers. No matter how legally right that is, it is humanly wrong.

What many on the side of illegals cannot seem to grasp, is that allowing illegals to take advantage of our health care, education, welfare, and food stamps is not only draining the border states, but it is, once again, creating a sub culture of the poor dependent on the government. Not to mention that our policies have allowed the exploitation of Mexican workers.

Because of decades of our government ignoring this problem and refusing compromise on either side, we are now seeing a despicable display of hate from both sides. Here we have an Hispanic Ad firm offering “Gringo Mask” to Mexicans in Az. Here we have a fake Corona ad disparaging Mexican workers.

It’s time to stop calling each other names. Those who fight illegal immigration are not racist. All illegals are not evil.

What happened with the law in Arizona, whether you love it or hate it, happened because our government refuses to deal with the problem in any effective way. It isn’t just illegals that are the problem in Arizona. There is a deadly drug cartel whose business is to smuggle drugs into our country. Arizona has been their gateway. In 2009 Phoenix became the nation’s kidnapping capital. All tied to the drug trade. Can anyone seriously blame Arizona for taking action??

In addition, illegals in Arizona’s prisons cost taxpayers in the state $150 million a year. As much as those on the left want to make this about racial profiling, it isn’t.

Here Gov. Brewer gives us some facts about the new law.The new law prohibits police from considering race, color or national origin in implementing the new statue. The Governor issued an executive order that requires proper training and enforcement protocols so that the the intent of the language could not be misunderstood.

The new law creates a state penalty the MIRRORS the federal law. It is ALREADY a federal requirement for legals to carry their green cared or other immigration documents. This law only enforces what has been a federal crime since before World War II.

Police cannot randomly ask anyone about their immigration status. There must first be reasonable suspicion that you are breaking some other non immigraition law before an officer can ask about their legal status. And even then, the person’s behavior has to provide “reasonable suspicion” that that person is here illegally.

This “reasonable suspicion” cannot be race, skin color, or national origin. So a person cannot be stopped for “walking while brown” as so many on the left have falsely stated. “Examples of reasonable suspicion include: a person running away when approached by law enforcement officers, or a car failing to stop when the police turn on their lights and siren.”

This is the law.

So those on the left, like Al Sharpton and Pres. Obama with his ice cream remark, can stop the false rhetoric that divides us. What we need is solutions that work.

Isn’t the one thing that we can all agree on is that the human smuggling and drug smuggling are a horror and must be stopped? We don’t even have to create new laws. We only have to enforce the ones already in place!

It seems to me that most people agree that border security must be a priority. Why aren’t we making it one?

UFKA_Smithwick

I heard the bill officially renamed the state as “Nazizonia” and require police to arrest anyone darker than a certain shade and send them to death camps being constructed in the Grand Canyon.

That's why I'm boycotting canyons.

D-Vega

If Arizona was really serious, they would make English the official language of the state…

and rename the state “Dry Zone”.

baoxian

Like this has ever been about the facts of the law? The liberals were enraged and immediately launched a propaganda campaign against the law because they knew it would humiliate Obama and Congress, and would make a huge dent in their drive for amnesty without securing the border. The whole “papers, please” meme has been BS from the beginning, and the liberals have displayed flagrant ignorance of the law and the Constitution.

The liberals are *angry* about this law. Their Million Illegal March last weekend was a bust because the rallies were too violent and radical to give much media exposure too. The truth is coming out about the Mexican drug war and its consequences. Democrats are being exposed as pro-cartel and pro-anarchy, and questions are being asked about who might be on the take. The opposition to the law is knee-jerk reactionary nonsense based on lies, and public support is firmly in support of Arizona.

illmunkeys

The Mexican Drug War has nothing to do with immigration and this law. You do point out something the conservative base wants us to ignore: drugs, not immigrants, are the main cause of violence at the border.

Want a solution to the drug war? Legalize the use and sell of drugs. The street value would plummet in moments and all those drug dealers would be out of a job.

http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

Well except when the illegals are used as mules to carry the drugs in trade for assistance getting over the border.
StanW

Want a solution to the drug war? Legalize the use and sell of drugs.

Hey, we can also solve the prison overcrowding problem by legalizing rape, murder, and bank robbery.

The drug war is spilling into the US. And between our pourous border and Liberals insistance that even the barest of enforcement amounts to the dreaded 'racial profiling', it has become a major issue.

illmunkeys

I am saying the this “barest of enforcement” will not do anything to prevent illegal immigration. It is a political band-aid. We need a real solution and one that doesn't lead our country to a National biometric ID, such as a REAL ID or just recently BELIEVE.

If an Arizona police officer can only ask for ID after a lawful contact (which has now been defined as suspicion of breaking the law other than illegal immigration) then they've tied their hands as firmly as the Feds. Since the majority of illegal immigrants aren't committing any other crime other than being here illegally, Arizona police are going to find it awful difficult to put a dent in the number of immigrants pouring into their state.

http://conservativebootcamp.com Martin Hale

The Mexican Drug War has nothing to do with immigration and this law. You do point out something the conservative base wants us to ignore: drugs, not immigrants, are the main cause of violence at the border.

Uh, not to be a contrarian here, but I lived in San Diego county from 2004 to 2009 and the violence at the border and surrounding it is not all from drugs by any stretch of the imagination. There are the rapes, the drinks-driving fatalities, the kidnappings, the rock/bottle/gun attacks on border patrol, etc. Nothing to do with drugs whatsoever – everything to do with illegal immigration.

Also, inre your comment about solving the drugs war, I think you've perhaps oversimplified the issue a bit. Firstly, the value of the drugs market is big enough (~$320Bn worldwide in 2003) that the people who currently control that market will aggressively attempt to continue their control of it in order to guarantee their future income. I've read several estimates that the drugs market is valued at around 1% of total global commerce, and I don't think that the people who're profiting the most from that kind of money are going to just fold up their tents and peacefully find another line of work.

We all know that these are ruthless organisations, whether in Mexico, Columbia, Afghanistan, India, Cambodia, etc, and as a result, I think it's fair to guess that at least part of the drugs cartels response to legalisation would be to push back as hard as they can in a couple of directions. The first would be aimed at competitors. I think the cartels would kill as many competitors as they can. Secondly, I have to believe that another of the reactions of the cartels to legalisation would be to institute a campaign of violence aimed at convincing lawmakers, the judiciary and the people that legalisation isn't what they want. It's not as though that's really new territory for them, they been doing this in South America, Afghanistan and the Golden Triangle for decades. So I'd expect a wave of violence against judges, and lawmakers who supported legalisation. It is further my belief that the owners of the cartels have paid significant sums of money to some politicians and judges wherever they operate as part of their business plan. Were some of these judges and politicians to decide to become “unbought”, I wouldn't give you a plugged nickle for the value of their lives.

In short, I suspect that full-on overnight legalisation would be accompanied by a wave of violence which would make the current mess look like a day in the park. And I think that wave of violence would cause most Americans to seriously doubt the value of legalisation.

D-Vega

Good post, martin. And I agree. You can't ever hope to stem the tide of people coming over the border if you can't stop the drugs.

And the cartels will indeed engage border patrol and cops. They have no fear of them.

If we made attempts to serious interfere with the Zetas or the cartels, the wave of violence will be nothing like we've seen on the border since Pancho Villa.

baoxian

Look like Tom Clancy was right again. Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 took place in 2014, which sounds about right for President Palin or Jindal to finally send troops into Mexico to keep the government from completely collapsing.
D-Vega

Hahaha… president Palin or Jindal…
TheDickNixon

Can't be any worse than Obumbles.
D-Vega

Only if you care more about hot air than substance.
Mediumheadboy

Sure because Obama's all about substance.

BWAH-HA-HA-HA!!!!

illmunkeys

When one actually says not to be contrarian, one is getting ready to be so.

I'm fine with contrary. I don't think I'd read and post on a blog with a tagline of “Kneecapping Barack Obama at every opportunity” if I wasn't interested in opposing opinions.

Trench_Raider

I don't want to derail this thread with a drug discussion, but you are a user, right? You probably just want to legimize your own criminal behavior, right?

TR

illmunkeys

Actually, no. I detest the very idea of using drugs, but I see no real reason to stop someone else from it.

The most potent drug I ever put in my system was 1 pill of Vicodin after getting my wisdom teeth removed. I threw the rest away because I was lucky in only having 1 day of pain.

illmunkeys

Once again, you're informing us of the new language in the law. The previous language was ambiguous and even Morrissey from Hot Air has acknowledged that the controversy is Arizona's own fault for not defining “lawful contact” in the first place.

The new language will make Arizona's enforcement of immigration as effective as Federal enforcement of immigration.

However, the true solution to immigration “problem” is not asking for ID, but in making it financially infeasible for an illegal to work in this country. This solution includes an increase of penalties on companies that knowingly hire illegals, drop the federal income tax and introduce a flat sales tax, and give a tax rebate to essentially waive the first $5000/family member spending. This would have the added bonus of dealing a death blow to the IRS, which I think we can all get behind.

UFKA_Smithwick

Border enforcement can never be 100% effective. Nor can going after after companies hiring illegals. The only solution that will work is to go after both.

So yes, hit companies hard with fines for hiring illegals. But also secure the border and remove those illegals caught in the country.

illmunkeys

A border clampdown, no matter how tall we build the wall, no matter how many eyes we put on it, will fail to stop all illegals from coming into the country and once they're here, and not committing any crime, its impossible for any of them to ever get caught except by pure dumb luck.

So, the solution I outlined above is the closest we'd ever come to 100%. Illegals would actually be forced to pay more taxes than people working in the country legally because they wouldn't be eligible for a rebate (well, in my plan they wouldn't be eligible for a rebate but I'll acknowledge that there are certain liberals who would try and sneak in a rebate to everyone).

I think we're saying the same thing here: illegal immigrants are a problem. We just butt heads on how we should go about it. Historically, a wall is useless, expensive, and ridiculous: people still somehow manage to get through them.

UFKA_Smithwick

A border clampdown, no matter how tall we build the wall, no matter how many eyes we put on it, will fail to stop all illegals from coming into the country and once they're here, and not committing any crime, its impossible for any of them to ever get caught except by pure dumb luck.

Correct. Which is why I said “Border enforcement can never be 100% effective.”

But neither can going after companies. It's not really feasible to check and monitor every single hire in the US.

A multipronged solution is our best bet. Cut off the demand and the supply instead of trying to tackle only one. There will always be people hiring illegals. It's hard to crack down on individuals hiring someone, in cash to mow their lawns. Impossible to get every single one in a country of over 300 million.

Why not go for both? Is there a legitimate reason to leave the borders open?

And I never said a wall, although walls do work or else humanity would have stopped building them a long time ago. There are better ways to patrol the border.

I would say:

1) more money for the border patrol including funds for better surveillance equipment and more agents.
2) harsh fines for companies hiring illegals and a renewed effort to root out such businesses (and the fine should increase exponentially after each bust).
3) increased efforts by law enforcement to identify, detain and deport illegals who already crossed the border and are living here. Greater cooperation between state, local and national resources in this regard.
4) revamp the immigration process so that it is simpler and fair. No criminal records, some economic benefit from your entry, learning the language and laws of your new home, etc etc. People are not entitled to become US citizens but we should make the whole process more transparent to those wishing to enter.

There are more facets but thats the gist of what I'd like to see done.

D-Vega

You cannot stop a supply of something until you address the demand. That is basic economics.

We have seen this with the drug war, and now over the past few decades immigration.

Our laws for legal immigration are too strict and complex, we need to make that much easier and then make illegal immig much harder.

Otherwise, you will send more illegals home and more will arrive the next day. Just like the drug trade, just like prohibition. As long as illegals can be employed in this country they will stay and more will come.

They hide from the authorities consistently anyways. Employment is THE key thing, because it is the #1 reason why they come here.

UFKA_Smithwick

Why take only one route? It makes little sense to only go after the supply or demand when you can tackle both.

On drug enforcement we don't only target drug sellers and let their clients go free. Nor do we only target drug users and let their connection walk away.

We hit both.

I see no reason to go exclusively after employers and do nothing directly to the illegals.

Both are breaking the law, both should be held accountable.

D-Vega

The thing is there is an unlimited supply of people willing to come here illegally or stay past their visa.

Whereas there is only a finite number of employers willing to hire illegals.

You dry up the jobs, that's checkmate.

Whereas if you just keep asking people if they are citizens (in AZ's case Hispanics) you're gonna piss off actual citizens, while the illegals will just go more underground and avoid the police.
UFKA_Smithwick

There is not an unlimited supply of people willing to come here illegally. There is a large number, but not unlimited. Not all or even most of Central and South America is trying to come here illegally. A minority are willing to take the risk.

And the ease with which they can enter will certainly affect the amount of people who try it in the future.

Consider: you are surviving in one of these third world nations. Not doing well but getting by. You get a letter from your uncle Paco who came to America illegally. He states that it is so easy to get here, practically no one is checking the border, you can walk right across. 99% of the people who set out make it just fine. And once here the cops aren't allowed to ask your immigration status so you can walk right up to one and tell him you're an illegal and he can't do a thing about it. vs. Uncle Paco writes to inform you that it is very difficult to get across. There are border agents and cameras everywhere. Most don't even get close to making it and the ones that do have to leave in constant fear of being deported once here as police and INS are busily looking for illegals.

Which scenario do you suppose encourages more people to try to come here illegally?

Whereas there is only a finite number of employers willing to hire illegals. You dry up the jobs, that's checkmate.

Why go after only one aspect of it? That makes zero sense. Do you suppose we will be able to catch 100% of employers? Hell no. Why guarantee that some will slip through when we can work to reduce both.

It's not actually as difficult as people make it out to be to regulate our borders. People just don't want to do it for a variety of selfish reasons.
D-Vega

I didn't say go after one aspect. I said it has to be #1.

And you mention South and Central America. You ever wonder about the amount of Chinese immigrants in this country?

There is an unlimited number when you compare how many are here now. 10 million? There are probably 100 million more.
UFKA_Smithwick

Ok, so if shutting down the border is a close 2nd then I would agree with that principle.

And you mention South and Central America. You ever wonder about the amount of Chinese immigrants in this country?

First off it's illegals that are the problem Not immigrants. Second the vast majority are hispanic: http://laht.com/usa/Graph-2.jpg

And third there is a rather large ocean between us and china, a somewhat smaller dried up creek between us and mexico. Makes a big difference. No doubt if we shared a huge unprotected land border with china then we'd see our country filling up with illegal chinese immigrants. But that isn't the case.

As all immigrants from overseas will be coming either by plane or boat they are a little easier to regulate.

There is an unlimited number when you compare how many are here now. 10 million? There are probably 100 million more.

I think we have a different definition of unlimited. It doesn't mean “a large number”.

StanW

Liberals response to the Arizona law has NEVER had anything to do with the truth. D-Vega unquestioningly proved that for us all yesterday.

The truth is that this is a reasonable and measured approach to trying to control the flood of illegal aliens (ie CRIMINALS) into Arizona.

The hyperbole and paranoia of the Left in this debate has been typical.

D-Vega

As the author states, both sides have some responsibility in this.

http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

To a limited degree the right does have some responsibility here, but the left was in histrionics from day one, and you were among the worst here.

D-Vega

And I was right. I may have just been a little too harsh with my rhetoric. I feel a little better with the clarification in the law, but I am still not satisfied.

http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

No because the clarification was EXACTLY what I was saying it meant, you just weren't willing to accept that. So you were going batty over something that taking a deep breathe and applying some common sense would have avoided.
D-Vega

Oh please, wolf. “Lawful Contact” is not the same as “Lawful STOP, DETENTION OR ARREST.” Crap the crap. That's why the law was revised.
StanW

And I was right.

Exceuse me?

The law targets Hispanics? WRONG
The law will lead to racial profiling? WRONG
The law will allow LEO's to stop people on the street and ask for their papers? WRONG
The law will never be used against whites or blacks? WRONG

Vega, you were not correct on any of your complaints about this law.

StanW

Yes, some on the Right do think that criminals are criminals and should be treated as such, with little wiggle room for established persons in this country. We should work on that perception.

That is infantisimal compared to the litaney of lies and paranoia spread by the Left on this issue.

huckupchuck

“It is ALREADY a federal requirement for illegals to carry their green cared or other immigration documents.”

On the whole, a reasonable and sensible posting. Some critical comments, though. In the citation above, you betray your bias here. Federal or state requirements that “illegals” carry their green card or other immigration documents makes absolutely no sense. If they did carry their green cards or other immigration documents, they wouldn't be “illegals” at all. They would be very much “legal.” And that is part of the problem with this legislation: in an effort to deal with the problem of the undocumented, the law targets specifically those who are also here quite legally. That includes legal Hispanic immigrants/residents as well as any other citizen or legal resident. That means you and me. So the subject then becomes whether or not all of us should be required to travel with documentary proof of citizenship. How many of us travel around with our Passports or with certified birth certificates (and if we want to be all birtherist about it, we could ask how many of us travel around with long-form certificates of live birth)? To avoid the use of race or ethnicity as a profiling measure, we all should travel around with such documentation, and cops should require to see this documentation of everyone they stop on the road for any reason. Otherwise, I don't see how, all explanatory rhetoric notwithstanding, ethnicity or race wouldn't be the reason or cause of suspicion regarding immigration status. That's where I think you are wrong, Kathleen. While I understand that it is unfair and incorrect to paint most supporters of stricter border enforcement as advocates of racial/ethnic profiling, I don't see how supporting the Arizona law avoids accepting and justifying the inevitability of racial/ethnic profiling to effectively implement the law. If I am stopped on “reasonable suspicion” of breaking some other law (which, in itself, is a very subjective determination), say DUI, what would cause the officer to then ask me about my immigration status and demand proof of citizenship? Do officers have any discretion to demand or not demand proof of my citizenship if they are stopping me for a suspected DUI incident? If they do, then that discretion will be conditioned by some kind of discernment that goes beyond the suspected “non-immigrant status” illegal behavior. What would shape that discernment? How would an officer determine that I, with the name of Huck and a New Orleans Yat accent, am not likely an illegal immigrant, but someone with a surname of Martinez and a Spanish accent is more likely?

Rightwingsparkle

The “Illegal” in the sentence about green cards is a misprint. It is supposed to say “Legal.” I'll go change it.

I'll just say that we can't avoid tough solutions and tough legislation on the notion that some police officer might not adhere to the racial profiling ban. We have to deal with it if any do, but it's not a reason to abandon the law.

Kathleen

huckupchuck

Kathleen – But don't you see that you are arguing that tough solutions and tough legislation are tolerable (i.e. perhaps a necessary evil), even if it produces racial profiling? I am curious, though, how you can explain an officer's ability to determine suspicion of being an illegal immigrant without racial/ethnic profiling. I imagine a citizen wanted on failure to pay child support might seek to avoid encounters with law enforcement officers. I imagine a citizen with a history of drug dealing might run from law enforcement officers in a “sweep.” I just fail to understand what kind of illegal behavior raises suspicion of not being a legal citizen of this country? Is it loitering in Home Depot parking lots? Is it speeding in a School Zone? I just want to know what specific illegal behavior constitutes a suspicion of immigration status irregularities.

D-Vega

Good job, huck.

Trench_Raider

The truth does not matter to those whining about the AZ law. They are just playing the tired old game of cynically using accusations of “racism” to further their political ends. It's faux outrage and hypocrisy at it's finest. Even though there is language in the bill which specificly prohibits profiling, statements by the author of the bill, and the simple fact that the police are going to be walking on eggshells when enforcing this due to it's high profile nature the fools who oppose this are still going to lie about it and continue their attacks.
Some of this is based upon the inate hatred and mistrust of law enforcement by the left who will automaticly assume the worst about cops. But it's mostly just a willful and cynical mis-use of false claims of “racism” by the usual suspects.

Too bad for them that the law will most likely stand up to the coming baseless legal challenges and that when that occurs copoes ot are likely to pop up in other border states.

TR

Trench_Raider

By the by, Jared Taylor over at AmRen has an interesting piece on the foolishness and hypocrasy of those opposing the law:
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/05/ar…

TR
TheDickNixon

outstanding post as always.

Trench_Raider

Thanks.

TR

D-Vega

we'll see, Trench. They already had to revise it once.

Trench_Raider

I don't know about the “had to”part. But they did indeed clarify some of the language in an attempt to counter some of the idiocy and lies being spread by the opponents of the bill as well as help make sure it would make it through the inevitiable (yet baseless) legal challenges.

TR

D-Vega

Of course they had to, Trench. You should know that “lawful contact” is too broad a phrase for this type of intrusion of American citizens.

“You know that “Stop, Dentention or Arrest” is a distinct legal difference.

It's not idiocy, it's common sense. So I feel better about it, but it's still too ass-backwards an idea.

Pithicanthus

I want to point out that we are not debating about illegal immigration, we are debating about illegal aliens …. aliens have no rights … the pro amnesty crowd would like to make it seem that this is about immigration, but it is about illegal aliens, and the crime of entering the United States illegally.

We can't give them a pass, but I agree with you about the complication because many of these illegals are family members of legal immigrants.. that does not make it ok to smuggle illegal people into the USA and get grandfathered in because we don't want to deal with it.

We must find a solution and it isn't for American Citizens or states like Arizona to shut up and let the Mexican community have their way. This is America and we need to enforce the law. Period!
Christopher_Taylor

It is interesting, and true, that generally speaking Hispanic people and conservatives see eye to eye more often than not. Culturally, the Mexican people are more socially conservative in a lot of ways then the general US population, and fiscal conservatism tends to play well with most people across all cultures. Its just when the left's smears, lies, and misinformation about the right infects people's understanding that the suspicion and dismissal begins.

D-Vega

I can assure you that Hispanics can tell the difference between lies and the truth, CT. They know the difference between right and left. They know the immigration laws in their home country and they know what their rights and values are here. They know what this law said and says currently.

And even though Hispanics on the whole are more conservative, the American conservatives are doing serious harm to any support from the Hispanic communities in this country going forward. Their approach the immigration debate has been childish, stubborn and very anti-Hispanic.

Trench_Raider

Wow….
So caring about the law is childish. That's just great.
Actually a strong case could be made that it's the selfish folks who care more about giving amnesty to their criminal friends and relatives than the harm it causes to the country and about following the law are the childish ones.

Come on Vega. I'm going to take you to task here. You used to be able to do better than this.

As to the “very anti-Hispanic” crap, that's just the “minority victim complex” talking.

TR

D-Vega

No, passing a law that not only virtually targets one segment of society and then claiming anyone who opposes supports criminals is childish.

Not willing to compromise on a path to citizenship, even when it include penalties thereby not being amnesty, is childish.

Thinking the southern border is predominently the place where illegal immigration comes from is childish, considering half of illegals entered legally but overstayed their visa is, you guessed it…

If I Was Your President (Boyfriend Spoof)

Premium Right Ads

Blogads Right

Previous Features

40 Of The Most Bad-Ass, Masculine, Manly, Alpha Male Quotes Of All Time

Why Men Are Becoming Wimpy, Video Game Playing Slackers Who Don’t Want To Get Married

Horror You Will Never Get Out Of Your Brain Again: Bronies

The 10 Best Obama Ate A Dog Images From Around The Web

User Info

Features

Archives Best of RWN Humor John Hawkins Interviews Quotes Special to RWN