Yep, with all that you wrote in the post before mine and then mine we are good.

If all people in Arizona are willing to prove they are citizens at every interaction with the police, there can be no complaints from those like me.

Do it.

I condone it and will support it and will stop my anti-Arizona pledge on the internet since the law passed.

Ok Next step. How do we "the people" get this accomplished? And please do not say to contact our representatives to put in their two cents. The PEOPLE need to find a way to do it on our own. Again, to show that we will be heard...we are tired of being ignored and misrepresented.

I would think that getting someone to write the bill or prospective law would be a good start and maybe starting a petition to get the new one on the ballot would be another avenue.

It will all end up with the representatives in the end anyway though so you can't avoid the government, it is the government after all.

the problem I see with a mandate, is although a few on here claim they would not mind,, the healthcare reform makes me think differently,,,,,,when you MANDATE people purchase something(in this case a photo ID) , you are going to get a national uproar

but good luck

i just cannot see what you think is so bad about this. according to what you've been saying, cops don't have the right to ask if someone is from our country or not. if they do, they are racist. our counrty is not worth the price of what you call "racial profiling", just to make our kids future a little better. people that were born here, or came here the legal way don't have the right to have a good paying job, because someone that did not do things the legal way is more important. am i right so far?

Just FYI in case you didnt see it last night here is a transcipt link from the department of defense.

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4654


Honestly, "I think" its only a bandaid. Basically sounds like there will be more eyes to watch out for illegals by the border. And they will be trying to help with strategies. We shall see what effects occur. Crossing fingers

being here illegally is a crime
robbing a bank is a crime
killing someone is a crime
selling drugs (without a license) is a crime

so, tantamount to asking if someone is 'from our country' is kind of like asking 'are you a bank robber', or 'are you a murderer', or 'are you a thief'

from a police officer(or anyone else) thats a pretty INSULTING and unwarranted question to ask just for the hell of it,,,,people shouldnt be treated like SUSPECTS just because they can

I guess some people dont mind being followed around a store or asked to empty their purse when they have not done anything wrong, perhaps some feel its worth it to stop people who steal,,,,I find it insulting though which is why I do relate to the concern people have about who will be targeted as being 'suspicious' under this law

I never said any such thing.

The law promotes racial profiling and should be struck down.

ok, i understand - good luck with that, we agree to disagree, i guess

My suggestions regarding how immigration ‘might’ be handled better follows my introduction.

In the USA no one is exempt from Federal Constitutional law because that law was created on the basis of human ethics. Representative government means just that – it doesn’t say ‘representative of US citizens only’ – it says and means representative, which is why we have seen a trend toward redistricting. Our public administrations, and our courts, uphold the ethics contained in the Constitution to assure that the civil rights of every human in the USA is protected. WE THE PEOPLE love that constitution, and no elected or appointed official is given more praise than those who fight in the battlefields to protect it.

So all those who piss and moan about how much of our tax dollars are going to medical costs, schooling, food, housing and law suits in support of immigrants are out of order here. No one can whole heartedly and unconditionally adore our troops and what they fight for and then turn around and declare that what they fight for is wrong…..!(the Constitution)

So Civil Rights laws that prohibit racial profiling, refer to everyone in the USA? But what is racial profiling? If a man or woman is questioned as a witness at a crime scene and that person has a very strong Asian, Hindu, German, Zulu, or any other kind of accent and when asked for ID that person cannot a single shred, does it fall under “Reasonable Suspicion”? Or is it racial profiling for a law enforcement officer to follow up? Perhaps take the person a few blocks to where they are staying to get this information? If it can’t be supplied is it racial profiling to detain the person for say, 24 hours while the effort is made to access the proper information?

I don’t think so.

Is it racial profiling to question any of the documents a worker must present to an employer, proving their legal status? Perhaps not, but companies have been sued and lost in court for having done so. Was it lack of training of the H/R personnel?


My suggestion: If the federal government alone understands the policy of this country pertaining to immigration, why are they keeping it secret? They must be keeping it secret because that's partially what their lawsuit agains Arizona is about.

SO - Why not have the fed set up a public administration whose job it is to ‘train’ law enforcement agents and H/R personnel in every state about policy and the proper way to administer it. (it would then be the feds policy and they wouldn't have to worry that it was being upheld.

THEN – let the States enforce immigration law through their law enforcement agencies. AND – while we’re at it, why not have a separate state administrative bureau strictly for “Immigration Status” in every state – RUN by the state to take care of the paper work, keep track of individuals and lapsing visas – seeing as how the federal administration can’t seem to do it. Some 30% of illegals are here on lapsed visas.

Then the States could share funding for the administrations with the Fed to do these jobs. This would create jobs in each state through state government and the Federal gov could focus more time, effort and money on the borders.

Before you comment on my suggestion try skimming the following report by the League of Women Voters – a couple years old but it’s a real eye opener. The Federal government does not want any state taking over any part of immigration – why? Read the report and see if you can figure it out.

http://emporia.lwv.org/files/ImmigrationStudy_Enforcement.pdf
FEDERAL IMMIGRATION POLICY: ENFORCEMENT ISSUES
By Barbara Margerum


My suggestions are not to return power over immigration to the states but to have the federal government relinquish some of the administrative aspects and involve local law for enforcement. It is less expensive to have state involved at this level than to have the fed handling it all. It also allows for more jobs at State level and more tax revenue from the new jobs. It would also reassure the public to know that their state has some control.

I would agree with you Redy if I had not seen Arizona attempt to approve a very racially biased law. They toned it down but it still promotes racial profiling.

Showing that white folks in government are ignorant to what constitutes racism still to this day.
That is a big concern.

Showing that the federal government needs to babysit at this level to prevent a return to our good ole racist days in this country.

I forgot to tell you I cannot access the website you provided.

They are not suing on the grounds of racial profiling, only that "its the federal governments job to handle immigration!" If I or anyone else in the private sector did our job the way the feds have "done" there's I would be fired in a hummingbird heart beat.

I got a fix a ticket Friday and guess what happened????? The cop asked for my ID because he wanted to know who I am and you know what? I don't have a problem with that, I was more bent that he stopped me for flickering tail lights.

In 1968 I was told I would have carry ID to show Law Enforcement.State ID and a Draft Card. In 1969 They took my Draft Card at R and O.
I've been stopped while driving, the only thing that has changed since 1966 is now you have to show a Photo Drivers License and Proof of Insurance.
If I don't have my License with me he doesn't say have a nice day and send me down the road. I have to a least prove who I am before he gives me my ticket.
Lets take a short poll here. Who thinks the cop should let me just drive away. Who thinks the cop should verify who I am.

I think anyone DRIVING A VEHICLE should have to carry a drivers license(permission to drive), registration(proof of ownership), and insurance card (proof of insurance)

pedestrians and passengers should not have to

I think that because we as a society have allowed so criminals to have rights it is now necessary for EVRYONE to carry ID, not only so the po po can know who you are (not including criminal immigrants because they all have fake ID's anyway if any at all) but also in case they need to identify your body.

I think thats a nice prerequisite for promoting a NATIONAL ID chip or card,, I say no thanx,,survived this long without one, they have plenty of methods to identify people the old fashioned way

by asking them, getting a ss number, dental records, fingerprints, etc,,,

Well because of illegals biometric ID cards are gonna be on congress' agenda here in the future.

whats an *** number?

i understand why you don't think we need to carry an id, but with all the crazies out there, i really feel that cops need to know who they are dealing with. by what you are saying, anyone that is wanted for a crime just have to tell a cop that they don't have an id, and the cop should let them go. then they go on to rob, murder,and rape as soon as the police tells them to have a nice day. i'm not saying have a police on the corners stopping everyone and saying "let me see your papers like the nazi's did, but when they stop a car for whatever reason, they should be able to check all the id's of everyone in the car.