While I don't get why someone who has served in the military, for three months in the Panama Canal, not appreciate enforcing rules on the books. Instead benefit from them. Then I realized that pro-homeschooling, Pagan reverends don't have much of an immigration concerning in Aurora, IL ... So with that, I don't ask for an apology for your personal derogatory and instead am thankful that not all those who are vets share your opinion nor your desire to aggrandize idiocracy through misinformation and thread hogging.
http://www.sacredcraft.org/ On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's not just resident aliens...but is it also folks where are naturally > born citizens who have to carry positive proof of their citizenship. How do > you reasonably suspect someone is an illegal alien? When you live in a > state that has a large Hispanic and AmerIndian population, the aliens look > like the folks who were born here. Since many Hispanics who were born here > often speak Spanish from birth and are around a lot of Spanish speakers, it > is not odd for them to have an accent as well. > > Eric > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 5:27 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Closing the border > > > I _completely_ agree with that. > > I truthfully don't like the fact that resident aliens have to carry > documentation at all time. that is too much like Hogan's Heroes for me to > like. > > But, this AZ law doesn't CHANGE that. > > Like the story last week about the Seattle security geek that would not give > his name, and was arrested, then lied to by the Seattle police, no, you > needn't talk to them unless you want. I know that not all cops are smart or > good. But they aren't all bad, either. It is our job to give them just > enough leeway to do their jobs, and no more. And, like Reagan said about the > Russians, trust but verify. > > No need to produce your license for driving, unless you violate a statute. > then you need to prove you are allowed to drive, and have insurance. If the > police officer didnt have a good reason for pulling you over, the ACLU and > others would be MORE than happy to talk to you. They live for it. > > Most documentation should only be required by you when there is REASONABLE > SUSPICION of the reason for that document being violated. Fishing license. > Insurance. Bar license. Library card. Gun permit. And REASONABLE SUSPICION > does not mean "suspect", or "hunch", but actual repeatable proof. And any > detention can and should only be made on PROBABLY CAUSE that the REASONABLE > SUSPICION has born out. > > > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Ah, thanks for clarifying that Jerry, I was unaware of that bit of >> federal law. I'm against all provisions of these sorts. If you are >> committing a crime that a police officer can detect and arrest you >> for, then you should go to jail. If you cannot prove your identity >> when arrested, you should have to wait in jail until you can prove >> your identity. I do not think that US Citizens or those here legally >> should be required to carry identity papers on them. >> >> If I'm walking down the street and a cop wants to talk to me, fine. If >> I feel like it, I'll talk back. If they believe I'm doing something >> wrong, they can arrest me. Short of that, my identity is none of their >> business. The same should go for everyone else. >> > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:316709 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
