On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Jerry Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't believe the dog catcher has the right to ask for papers. None. > I don't believe the dog catcher has the ability to make an arrest, or even a > detention.
How do you reconcile this belief the with the text of the bill? Why would the bill specifically include every agent of any governmental agency in the state if this is not exactly what they meant? If they just meant police, they could have said that easily. I still would have had some philosophical differences, particularly the burden of proof, but I would not be nearly as opposed. They went for every single governmental employee with the lowest burden of proof possible. The dog catcher probably won't make an arrest, but under this law the dog catcher will be required to try and ascertain their immigration status. That is just how it is written. > But I do understand it, in response to the complete inaction of the Federal > government, and the intentional attempts by local jurisdictions to prevent > such a report. > > Do I think it has the potential to be abused? Sure. > If it is abused, do I think it will go unnoticed? not a chance. > If it is abused, do I think it will stand? not a chance. I can understand some frustration, yes. But passing such a blatantly abusive law? And trying to defend it by saying, "well, people will protest and then the courts will invalidate it"...hundreds of thousands, millions, of people have been marching, across the country, trying to highlight the abuses visited upon legal and illegal immigrants, upon US Citizens, in the name of anti-illegal immigration efforts and to demand comprehensive immigration reform. Abuses have been happening and yes, they are standing. > Do I think there are going to be cranky old busybodies who call in constant > reports that everyone on the street corner is an illegal? Yep. Because right > now they are already making those calls. And now the state has given them broad permission to file lawsuits in addition to calling. Oh joy! I am not so sanguine as you in the belief that these lawsuits will be lessened by potential frivolous lawsuit charges. When the state says, "please sue us to make sure we are doing our job" it is pretty hard to argue that the lawsuit saying, "I don't think you are doing your job" is frivolous. > Regardless of abuse, do I think the Fed is going to get hot on the issue, > and take the initiative away from AZ? count on it. Tough to say. A subset of Democrats have been pushing it for awhile on the national level. McCain was pro-immigration reform for some time but seems to have changed his tune. The Tea Party seems, in general, to be against anything that has anything that sounds like amnesty or a path to citizenship in it, which may make it difficult for Republicans to line up behind reform for fear of facing a primary challenge from the right or a 3rd party challenge. This bill is definitely pushing a national agenda right now. If financial reform finishes up in the next week or two, there may be time for another major piece of legislation before the midterm elections. I don't think that, in general, most politicians want that subject to be immigration reform, but they may not get much of a choice. There is also the fact that the Senate will be busy for a couple months with Obama's Supreme Court pick, so I'm not sure when things will get pushed through. > I admit that my dislike of ILLEGAL immigrants, who to me broke the most > basic covenant of living in this society - fairness and doing the right > thing - overbalances my distrust of government on this issue. They STARTED > OFF by cheating, which to me makes them ineligible to keep playing. I have a > real, deep, abiding problem with illegal immigration. This is one of my > hottest-button issues. Unreasonably so. I know that. Which is why I am > talking about this so much. Hoping I can think my way through some of the > visceral feelings by talking to a group of people who disagree as strongly, > but who's opinions I respect. I can understand that dislike. Growing up in the environment I did, I have some residual dislike and mistrust of hispanic folks. I worked on that as I grew older and came to realize that a lot of the things I disliked wasn't about them being hispanic, their immigration status, etc, it was about the drugs and alcohol and violence I saw and that I saw that amongst the white people in that area as well. I know that you aren't injecting race into this and I don't mean to imply that you have lingering racist attitudes or anything. I'm just acknowledging my own issues and understanding how various not-so-rational biases can influence our thinking on these things. The notion of the basic covenant, the fairness, of illegal immigration is important. But then I look at the situation that most illegal immigrants are involved in...they are fleeing abject poverty, they don't have a realistic opportunity for legal immigration under our current system, they are trying to find a way to work and make a better life for themselves and their families. The initial act is illegal and unfair, I agree. My dislike of it is tempered by my compassion for their situation (generalized of course). I have more scorn for someone that steals a car stereo because they are bored or it looks cool than I do for someone that shop lifts to pick up food for their kids. Both things are illegal. I have more moral problems with the first than I do the second, however. After an immigrant arrives illegally and settles in, I judge them much as I do other people. Do they work hard? Do they provide for their kids? Are they good neighbors? If an illegal immigrant steals a car stereo, stick him in jail and then deport him (or vice-versa). But if they are otherwise law abiding, working hard, trying to make it in a tough world, then I don't see how they are really doing all that much damage to the social compact. > LEGAL immigrants I actually love more than natural born citizens. They > _sacrificed_ to be here. They know what it all means. They don't take any of > it for granted. Seeing my country through THEIR eyes is a daily pleasure. This is the sort of reason why I'm in favor of mandatory national service. I do believe that people aren't better due to the accident that they were born in the United States. I do believe that we have an obligation to give back to our country in thanks for the sacrifices that others have made to make it what it is. So lets see some comprehensive immigration reform that provides a way for the people that live here, leading good lives, to become citizens and to make it easier for people of all backgrounds to come here legally and join in the grand experiment of this country with us. Judah ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:316727 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
