Messageboard - Politics

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Drudge Report Sets Targets on Mayor Coleman

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Politics Drudge Report Sets Targets on Mayor Coleman

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 257 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #372426
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Klablut wrote >>
    You know like, OFFICER: You ran a stop sign. BROWN-COLORED CITIZEN: No I did not. OFFICER: Papers please.

    You really have a problem with a cop asking for a drivers license at a traffic stop?

    #372427

    Klablut
    Member

    …and the fact that Americans from European descent are calling some people “illegals” in a land that used to belong to Mexico is well a whole ‘nother story all together….

    #372428

    Klablut
    Member

    rus wrote >>

    Klablut wrote >>
    You know like, OFFICER: You ran a stop sign. BROWN-COLORED CITIZEN: No I did not. OFFICER: Papers please.

    You really have a problem with a cop asking for a drivers license at a traffic stop?

    If you think that will be the only time an officer asks “papers please”, you are sadly mistaken. The example is to illustrate what could happen to people who may look like an “illegal”. Driving while brown, walking down the street being brown, etc etc. Racial-based harassment.

    #372429

    Aaron Marshall
    Participant

    cory wrote >>

    Aaron Marshall wrote >>

    cory wrote >>

    Aaron Marshall wrote >>

    cory wrote >>
    The law is constitutional. If the Feds did their job and secured our borders, Arizona wouldn’t have to make laws at a state level. It’s easy for Coleman to say what’s best for Arizona when Huh? Columbus is not faced with the same problems as Arizona. Like the attorney general, I bet Coleman hasn’t even read the law. I won’t be voting for his re-election.

    Whether you agree with this Arizona law or not, it obviously is a violation of the 14th Amendment. That’s the one that includes the equal protection clause, you know “no state shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
    Put another way, you can’t pass laws that apply only to certain segments of the population. Such as, you know, laws that target people who look like illegal immigrants.</blockquote
    The 14th admendment protects the rights of citizens, not illegal immigrants who are hindering our economy and commiting crimes against our country. The law isn’t about how someone “looks,” it gives police the right to question the legal status of someone who has given them propable cause to believe they are in the country illegally. Jan Brewer knows what is best for her state and has said that racial profiling will not be tolerated. Maybe a better solution would be a national ID card that is linked to someone’s social security number and can be used to check the legal status of ANYONE in the US.

    The 14th Amendment protects the rights of all citizens including those who you might have “reasonable suspicion” to be illegal immigrants based on how they look.
    The law is about how people look. What other grounds would police have to “reasonably” suspect someone is an illegal immigrant? Do they wear big shirts that say “I’m here illegally?”
    No, they have brown skin.
    The law written in AZ tries to get around this by saying that it bans racial profiling–because the people that wrote it know the 14th Amendment is a huge hurdle for the law–but in practice they will be doing just that.
    Please educate me, Cory. How can you have “suspicion” of someone being an illegal immigrant if it’s not based on skin color and ethnicity?

    You’re right Aaron, the laws are designed to protect the rights of citizens here. Including the citizens who live here legally. Immigration from Mexico is a problem that has to be dealt with somehow. It’s affecting the economy in America, not just Arizona, so my hat is off to them. They didn’t write this law because the illegals are sneaking across the border to volunteer at homeless shelters; They are coming here to traffick drugs and people at a dangerous rate. There is a kidnapping every 36 hours in Phoenix, many of which are cartels forcing people into modern day slavery. Our already unstable economy is being stifled by workers who come here and work at sub-premium rates then deport our money to Mexico, and taxpayers are forced to deal with the financial burden resulting from illegal immigrants’ use of community resources. First off, you need to recognize that illegal immigration is a problem. We don’t see it as much here in Columbus, but talk to someone from Phoenix about the effects of illegal immigration.
    As far as profiling, obviously someone’s ethnic background is something that is noticeable, but the law does not give the police the right to ask someone for their state issued ID (which is an acceptable form of proof) just because they are a Mexican walking down the street. If another offense is already being commited it gives the police propable cause to inquire about someone’s status. Additionally, the law demands that someone who is an illegal immigrant face criminal charges by the state instead of a civil deportation. Sorry you take offense to that. Other examples of reasonable suspicion would be someone fleeing the scene of a crime like a hit and skip accident, someone caught with illegal drugs (which was one of the first laws enacted to discriminate against Mexicans) beyond personal use, someone who sees the police and runs the other way… That is propable cause. Here’s a link to the proposal.
    http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/summary/s.1070pshs.doc.htm

    I’ve read the proposal, Cory. That’s why I’m so sure it violates the 14th Amendment.
    I’m not going to engage you in emotional arguments about whether or not illegal immigration is a problem. I’ve never offered any commentary one way or another on that, and it’s not germane to my point.
    My point: There is no problem in the USA that is worth drawing up laws that violate the US Constitution to solve. Period.

    Just to be clear because you are obviously confused: What the law says is that a police officer can ask for ID when they have “lawful contact” with a person who they have “reasonable suspicion” to be an illegal immigrant.
    “Lawful contact” doesn’t have to mean someone may have committed a crime, it could mean any of a number of things.
    A police canvass of a neighborhood to find witnesses to a crime or an investigation of housing code violations are two examples of lawful contact with law enforcement. Neither would involve asking someone for ID who may have committed a crime.
    Both would involve asking people who look like (you know, the reasonable suspicion standard) illegal immigrants to produce ID.

    This is absolutely unconstitutional in my humble opinion, and I’m confident that the courts will ultimately agree with me.

    #372430
    Snarf
    Snarf
    Participant

    kit444 wrote >>

    Snarf wrote >>
    True. I don’t know what the hell it means either, I just thought it was interesting and perhaps relevant – or at least more relevant than berating someones use of CAPS.
    Yay, go internet!

    You have an issue with people making tangential snarky comments?

    Only when they’re not funny.

    #372431
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Klablut wrote >>

    rus wrote >>

    Klablut wrote >>
    You know like, OFFICER: You ran a stop sign. BROWN-COLORED CITIZEN: No I did not. OFFICER: Papers please.

    You really have a problem with a cop asking for a drivers license at a traffic stop?

    If you think that will be the only time an officer asks “papers please”, you are sadly mistaken.

    Just using your example.

    Why wouldn’t you expect to show your drivers license at a traffic stop?

    #372432

    Klablut
    Member

    rus wrote >>

    Klablut wrote >>

    rus wrote >>

    Klablut wrote >>
    You know like, OFFICER: You ran a stop sign. BROWN-COLORED CITIZEN: No I did not. OFFICER: Papers please.

    You really have a problem with a cop asking for a drivers license at a traffic stop?

    If you think that will be the only time an officer asks “papers please”, you are sadly mistaken.

    Just using your example.
    Why wouldn’t you expect to show your drivers license at a traffic stop?

    re-read the post kind poster.

    #372433
    Snarf
    Snarf
    Participant

    Klablut wrote >>
    …and the fact that Americans from European descent are calling some people “illegals” in a land that used to belong to Mexico is well a whole ‘nother story all together….

    the whole “well the land actually used to belong to mexico, blah blah” argument is totally ridiculous, you know that right?

    #372434

    Nitsud Regnifloh
    Participant

    France was once controlled by Nazi’s too…

    #372435

    gramarye
    Participant

    Klablut wrote >>
    …and the fact that Americans from European descent are calling some people “illegals” in a land that used to belong to Mexico is well a whole ‘nother story all together….

    Are you seriously going there? That was a long time ago, and even if it weren’t, the operative phrase in there is still “used to.”

    #372436
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Aaron Marshall wrote >>
    “Lawful contact” doesn’t have to mean someone may have committed a crime, it could mean any of a number of things.
    .

    The “lawful contact” language was amended.

    Arizona governor signs changes into immigration law

    Under the law, police would be able to detain an individual based merely on the suspicion that he or she entered the country illegally. But one of the changes — which had been adopted by state lawmakers Thursday night — says police could stop suspected illegal immigrants only while enforcing some other law or ordinance.
    An officer could only ask about an immigrant’s legal status, for example, while investigating that person for speeding, loitering or some other offense.

    #372437

    misskitty
    Participant

    <blockquote

    Klablut wrote >>

    rus wrote >>

    Klablut wrote >>
    You know like, OFFICER: You ran a stop sign. BROWN-COLORED CITIZEN: No I did not. OFFICER: Papers please.

    You really have a problem with a cop asking for a drivers license at a traffic stop?

    If you think that will be the only time an officer asks “papers please”, you are sadly mistaken.

    This is true I have been asked for my ID and such many times a lot of the time not during a traffic stop. It’s a pretty common thing when you interact with an officer at any level.
    I have even been asked for ID reporting my car stolen at my house. When the officer ran it and saw that I had an old seatbelt warrant from 7 years prior he took me to pay it.

    #372438

    myliftkk
    Participant

    Can I get a show of hands as to people who’ve actually been profiled by the police at some point who are contributing here?

    I’ve been profiled twice, and both times I can say with certainty shaped my apprehensive view of law enforcement. Not because I was initially selected by the profile mechanism, but because everything that occurred after that initial selection was not what you want to experience as a law-abiding citizen.

    ETA: Now that’s not the totality of my experience with law enforcement, but’s its certainly the most negative of all of the experiences I had with authorities.

    #372439
    Snarf
    Snarf
    Participant

    myliftkk wrote >>
    Can I get a show of hands as to people who’ve actually been profiled by the police at some point who are contributing here?
    I’ve been profiled twice, and both times I can say with certainty shaped my apprehensive view of law enforcement. Not because I was initially selected by the profile mechanism, but because everything that occurred after that initial selection was not what you want to experience as a law-abiding citizen.

    sounds scary and vague!

    #372440

    Nitsud Regnifloh
    Participant

    a man, who was jaywalking, was asked for his ID the other day. is that “papers”? if so, i see nothing wrong with it.

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 257 total)

The forum ‘Politics’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: