Let's set up some examples. I am walking down the street. Can a policeman stop me and ask me for proof of immigration status? (I say no). I am at home, and the dog catcher comes in my yard. Can he ask me for proof of immigration status? (I say no). I am stopped for running a red light, and cannot produce ANY documentation on who I am. Can I be asked for proof of immigration status? (I say yes, as one mechanism to find out who I am, since I broke a law AND broke a law (no license)). I am stopped for running a red light, and realize my wallet is on my dresser. Can I be asked for proof of immigration status? (I say no, if the can look me up, and find out who I am) I am in a jammed in a van with 25 other men, non of which can produce any papers, stopped by a cop for speeding on the hiway. Can he ask me for proof of immigration status? (I say maybe) I am in jail for car theft, about to be released. Can I be asked for my immigration status? (I say yes). When applying for a driver's license, the SSN I give is from a 75 year old black man from Ohio. Can I be asked my immigration status? (I say yes)
It all for me gets back to reasonable suspicion. I may be proved wrong, and the police may overreach. If so, we should nail them to the cross. But that does not make this a bad law, but bad policing. And if it turns out that police are just not capable of being reasonable, we would then need to take the tool away from them. This law was not passed in a vacuum, it was passed in AZ, in direct response to efforts many cities and towns have taken over the last few years to PREVENT identification of immigrant status. Towns like Phoenix have passed local ordinances to forbid ANY city employee from noticing immigration status in the course of their duty, even when they have incontrovertible proof of illegal immigration. Forbidding any mention of immigration status on any official document or record. And these same towns have allowed and encouraged sanctuaries, where not only are illegals protected from ICE to avoid deportation, but are also hidden from police looking for them on other criminal charges, like kidnapping, drugs, rape and murder, in order to prevent their deportation. I am not judging their desire to get rid of ALL ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. But, with that as a goal, I believe this package has a pretty good balance between that goal, and lack of impact for everyone else. ASSUMING that the police do their jobs correctly. Whether the goal of getting rid of all illegals is a good one, I admit to being very conflicted. With this law in place, AZ is doing what it thinks it needs to. Want to stop this law in its tracks? Make all the people in violation of the Federal immigrations no longer violating the law. The entire AZ law is based on Federal Immigration status of people. The moment they are no longer Federally illegal, they are de facto no longer AZ illegal. On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]>wrote: > > Uh, Jerry, the purpose of requiring someone to produce papers is to > see if they are a citizen (or legal immigrant) or not. If you already > know that a person is legally here, there is no reason to ask. So of > course people who are here legally will be required to produce papers, > otherwise the rule would be meaningless. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:316720 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
