O GOD YOU CRACK ME UP... This article is from a real article posted on the 21st... God!
http://www.azfamily.com/news/91769419.html On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > Here's a link to a news story about it... > http://coloradoindependent.com/52039/the-new-birthers-arizona-truck-driver-a > rrested-forced-to-show-birth-certificate > > -----Original Message----- > From: Judah McAuley [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 4:13 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Closing the border > > > First off, the link to the bill presented here was not a link to the > bill, but rather to its legislative summary. And hopefully we all know > that a legislative summary does not necessarily have anything to do > with the actual contents of the bill. Here is the final text of the > Senate version of the bill: > http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070 > s.htm > > Next, getting to your question about where in the bill it allows the > demand of identification: > > Sec. 2. Title 11, chapter 7, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by > adding article 8, to read: > ... > B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR > AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL > SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE > PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A > REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE > IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS > SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED > STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). > > And then further amends Sec. 4. Section 13-2319, Arizona Revised > Statutes, is amended to read: > > E. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A PEACE OFFICER MAY LAWFULLY STOP > ANY PERSON WHO IS OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE IF THE OFFICER HAS > REASONABLE SUSPICION TO BELIEVE THE PERSON IS IN VIOLATION OF ANY > CIVIL TRAFFIC LAW AND THIS SECTION. > > So, any sort of lawful contact by any law enforcement official or any > agency of any part of any section of the government in the state of > Arizona can result in checking immigration status. That means a health > inspector at a restaurant, that means a cop checking on a suspicious > noise that someone heard, that means parking meter attendant who talks > to you as they are writing up a parking ticket for your car. And a cop > who pulls you over for anything at all, "you look like you were > swerving to me" or "the light on your license plate isn't bright > enough" can pull you over and check your immigration status. > > So yeah, the law does, indeed, say exactly what I said it said. And as > for the rest of your questions, yes, I would say that their approach > is quite hamfisted. > > Judah > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Jerry Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Judah, >> >> Where in the text of the bill does it allow the cops to pull over and > demand >> identification from anyone? Everyone keeps saying that, but I don't see > it. >> >> But, regardless of whether that ability for police exists (I don't think > the >> bill allows that - nor SHOULD the bill allow that, demanding papers > randomly >> is NOT American), let us set that aside for the moment. We will come back > to >> it, I promise. >> >> How about the other provisions? >> 1. no hiring >> 2. no aiding illegal entry >> 3. no transporting >> 4. cities and churches no longer being able to create sanctuaries >> 5. not releasing illegals from jail without checking. >> 6. making being illegal a misdemeanor. >> 7. making false documents illegal >> 8. no causing traffic jams at day labor pickup spots. >> >> Are they also hamfisted for you? >> >> But, even before that, I would love to know how each person here would >> answer these questions: >> >> 1. is it illegal to be "undocumented"? >> 2. is it a crime? >> 3. should it be a crime? >> 4. is it wrong? >> 5. should illegal immigrants be given a plaque? ignored? fined? deported? >> jailed and then deported? >> 6. should there be a border? >> >> my answers: >> 1. yes >> 2. yes >> 3. yes >> 4. no. and yes. do the crime, do the time. but it may still be right for >> some people, even with the penalties. >> 5. deport except in unique circumstances. >> 6. yes >> >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >>> >>> Out of curiosity, which parts of the bill do you like? It seems like a >>> rather hamfisted attempt at dealing with immigration issues. >>> >>> I mean, come on, empowering the cops to pull over and demand >>> identification from anyone they might suspect is an illegal immigrant? >>> How, exactly, does one reasonably decide that a person might be an >>> illegal immigrant? Is it what they look like or wear? Some sort of >>> furtive movement like they use as a pretext for drug searches? What >>> makes you say, "that person is an illegal immigrant"? >>> >>> I'm genuinely curious. >>> >> >> >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:316678 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
