• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Calls to boycott Arizona are spreading like a virus

jpccusa said:
And by the way, CA is not telling AZ what to do. It is simply avoiding to do business at a state with which it doesn't agree with its laws.
It is like me not wanting to visit you because I don't agree with the way you live. It is not like me telling you how to live.
Click to expand...

So where is CA going to get its power from? Its fine if you don't want to visit me because you don't like the way I live, I just hope you don't expect to be able to judge me and still have me plug in your extension cord to the outlet in my judged home.
 
That is bull JP. I have stayed away from this thread because it makes me mad. My wife is out of town and you are my entertainment tonight. How does that make you feel big boy?

Every one talks about what the AZ police are going to be doing? Going to be doing. What have they done. Have they harassed innocent citizens? Have the arrested the pillars of the community? If this law is unconstitutional as you claim, won't that be proven in a court of law (that's the way we do things in the US)? What wrongs has AZ committed?

CA is spending a lot of time and energy worrying about something that is none of their business. If states start passing judgement on every law some other state proposes the interstate commerce will come to an end. CA can't support themselves for a week. Where do you think all of their power and water comes from? CA is not a contributor. CA is an over populated state that cannot support itself. The rest of the nation does not need their input on how to live their lives.

I am not being an antagonist here. Tell me about something that has actually happened. Quit giving us all these opinions about what might happen. Quit telling us about the monstrosity you can dream up. Lets hear some actual news about actual events.

So far I have heard nothing beyond fear mongering.
 
Sorry I can't be your entertainment. I'm actually not at my computer and typing all I want on a tiny screen (iPhone) is really hard. You'll have to find another "big boy" to be your entertainment while your wife is away. ;)
Talk to you later.
 
I am really disappointed JP. The first time I really say what I think and I get no response. I thought you had more than that.
 
Wade, I was not mad AT ALL. I was out and about and all I had was my phone to answer to this thread... It was just too hard to type. Besides, it was rude for me to be on the phone with friends around.

And so you don't think I don't have what you thought I did, watch this:

U.S. government joins Arizona boycott

Two federal agencies have cancelled scheduled conferences in Arizona because of that state’s new crackdown on illegal aliens. Both the Department of Education and the U.S. Border Patrol have joined those protesting the new law…That’s right, even the agency charged with preventing illegal immigration is apparently now opposed to any law designed to do just that!

The Department of Education told Fox News that they cancelled their 2010 North American Mobility program convention in October, at a Tucson resort “at the request of one of our trilateral partners.”

What does that mean exactly?

According to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Department of Education officials made the decision after the Mexican government, whose representatives were set to attend the meeting, said they would not come if it was held in Arizona. The event has been moved to Minnesota.

The U.S. Border Patrol decided to cancel a conference which was to be held in May, at a resort in Prescott, after it appeared that SB1070 would become law. The agency had booked 40 rooms for the meeting.

Rep. Giffords told fox News: “It is very troubling when the federal government becomes involved in a boycott against our state. Although I personally disagree with the immigration law, it came about because of growing frustration over the federal government's unwillingness to secure the border. The federal government's participation in this boycott only adds to that frustration.”

In a written statement, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) said the cancellations illustrate how the Obama administration is using “federal agencies as political tools” to “harm our state's economy for having the audacity to protect our citizens.”

Franks continued: “These boycotts completely disprove the Obama administration's disingenuous claims that they are in any way interested in strengthening border security.”

What are we to conclude of our own government, when they join forces with those who are invading this nation?

As Americans, we are truly on our own. It would seem that the U.S. government has abandoned we the people, in the same way they long ago abandoned the rule of law.
Click to expand...

;)
 
I think I have it now...

The Federal government abandons its responsibility (one of the FEW it is supposed to be doing, instead of all of the micromanaging it is, in fact, doing). Then a state tries to take over its job by passing a state law that is exactly the same as the Federal law that is not being enforced. Then the Feds, instead of enforcing their own laws, making the state law unneeded, decides to punish the state by suing it, and by having Federal agencies boycott the state.

Is that an accurate synopsis of the situation, or am I missing something?
 
kathylove said:
The Federal government abandons its responsibility (one of the FEW it is supposed to be doing, instead of all of the micromanaging it is, in fact, doing). Then a state tries to take over its job by passing a state law that is exactly the same as the Federal law that is not being enforced. Then the Feds, instead of enforcing their own laws, making the state law unneeded, decides to punish the state by suing it, and by having Federal agencies boycott the state.

Is that an accurate synopsis of the situation, or am I missing something?
Click to expand...
That's the way it reads to me Kathy. As ridiculously absurd as it sounds that's what DC is trying to do.
 
What happened to our Canadian friend that thought the injustice of this law as just too much for the citizens to bear?

TORONTO — The McGuinty Liberal government secretly passed a law giving police sweeping new powers for the duration of the G8 and G20 summits.

The law gives police the power to jail anyone who refuses to furnish identification and submit to a search while within five metres of a designated security zone in downtown Toronto.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association said it was “extremely concerned” about the measures which, according to the group, violate constitutional safeguards.
Click to expand...

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/S...t+failing+show+near+summit/3201082/story.html
 
kathylove said:
The Federal government abandons its responsibility (one of the FEW it is supposed to be doing, instead of all of the micromanaging it is, in fact, doing). Then a state tries to take over its job by passing a state law that is exactly the same as the Federal law that is not being enforced. Then the Feds, instead of enforcing their own laws, making the state law unneeded, decides to punish the state by suing it, and by having Federal agencies boycott the state.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the govt's logic is dizzying isn't it. :spinner:
 
I try to avoid things that make me angry. This topic has really gotten under my skin lately. The illogical attitude of the Federal Government and other state governments just defies understanding. This is really frustrating when the solution seems so obvious.
 
I think that is due in large part to confusion as to what the problem actually is. I think the problem is illegal aliens. Solving that problem is simple. Secure the boarder. Identify the illegals that are all ready hear and kick them out.
 
Because I am not in law enforcement...

I probably don't understand the subtle differences in the layers of "being stopped" for various degrees of suspicion by LE people. And I have never been stopped for anything other than traffic or car related stops, so have no other experience. But as I understand it, nobody will be stopped just to see if they are legal residents or not. They will only be asked to "show their papers" if they are stopped for some other reason. But as I also understand it, people ALWAYS have to show ID when they are stopped for some other reason, whether a traffic stop, or whatever (that is the first thing I have always been asked for when stopped for traffic reasons).

So, in practice, what is the difference between the way police will operate after the law goes into effect, compared to the way it is right now? I really can't see how it will be different, unless the law is different than what I am reading about it (I have not read the actual law, and won't - until I actually move to Az).
 
kathylove said:
But as I also understand it, people ALWAYS have to show ID when they are stopped for some other reason, whether a traffic stop, or whatever (that is the first thing I have always been asked for when stopped for traffic reasons).

So, in practice, what is the difference between the way police will operate after the law goes into effect, compared to the way it is right now? I really can't see how it will be different, unless the law is different than what I am reading about it (I have not read the actual law, and won't - until I actually move to Az).
Click to expand...

To my understanding regarding identifying yourself to any law enforcement officer the law is that

You are required to identify yourself to an officer if he or she asks, but you are not always required by law to have identification to provide to an officer. So you would have to answer the question of what is your name but you are not necessarily required in the US to own an ID card or to carry it on your person. However if you are operating a motor vehicle then you do have to have your drivers license and you do have to present it to an officer if you are stopped in your car. This only applies to people who choose to exercise the privilege of driving an automobile and only to them when they are operating the automobile. If I am stopped on my bike and an officer asks me to identify myself I am required to answer truthfully with my name and all but I am not required to have a drivers license and so therefore I am not required to have ID on me to present to him/her. Likewise if I were walking or at the beach or most anything else not car related I would not be engaged in an activity that requires me to carry ID on my person, and I would not be required to show my ID card to an officer if I choose not to so long as I was honest and truthful about identifying myself.

That is my understanding at least about ID and law enforcement

So the change I guess is that now in AZ you would need to always carry ID with you.
 
Nellie, I am not sure that is correct. I just did a little searching and couldn't find anything to document my statement but it is my understanding that in "most states" any adult in public is required by law to have some form of identification on their person. If you cannot identify yourself positively, you are considered a vagrant. I know that any legal alien is required to carry their papers at all times.

I also know for a fact that in Utah and I suspect else where it is a crime to incorrectly identify yourself to a LEO either verbally or with a false ID.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top