Welcome to the Just BS - The Best Damn Off Topic Forum.

Just BS - The Best Damn Off Topic Forum (JBS) is the premier place to discuss and debate current topics such as religion or politics in an intelligent manner. You can freely speak your mind about religion, politics or any other topic without anyone censoring what you say or how you say it.

You have to register before you can post in most forums. The exception is the Free For All forum which is open to all users unregistered and registered alike

There are 2 user groups for registered users. One is the registered user group which gives basic privileges.You can post threads and reply to others threads. You can't access the PM system, post profile notes or upload media in the gallery.

This is to curb the spam that message forums get.

Once you have contributed 10 posts you will be moved to a new user group which will allow you to have a signature, upload media to the gallery and send and receive private messages.

To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Disclaimer:

Just BS - The Best Damn Off Topic Forum (JBS) is not responsible for the content of the posts made by the users of this forum. The views of the users will not necessarily be the views of JBS and JBS will not be held responsible for the content of these posts. JBS believes in free speech. That is why this forum is here. To allow people to speak freely about what is wrong in the world today or to just be able to get rid of the days frustrations. JBS will expend every resource available to stand up for a person's right to speak their mind.

What are you waiting for? Go ahead and register today and join the fun.

Arizona State Senator responds to Immigration

Administering the BS
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
2,167
And again, like I originally stated, if they REALLY wanted to do something about it because the feds are so damn incompetent, why don't they secure the borders themselves? Why don't they crack down harder on the people who employ illegals?

I'll tell you why.. BIG MONEY doesn't want to get rid of illegals

 

IWS

Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
6,164
What states should do is do as much as possible to see tax dollars do not go to services to illegal immigrants, including schooling.
The Supreme Court would have to revisit Plyler v. Doe, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Progressive Killer
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
4,067
And again, like I originally stated, if they REALLY wanted to do something about it because the feds are so damn incompetent, why don't they secure the borders themselves? Why don't they crack down harder on the people who employ illegals?

I'll tell you why.. BIG MONEY doesn't want to get rid of illegals
Would not cracking down on the employers also take new laws? Would not closing the border themselves also cost a lot of money?

That said both me and hugo have already said we agree huge penalties should be imposed on anyone who hires illegals but tell me something Phreakwars, how do we impose a fine or jail time if we don't "FIRST" catch the illegal? We have to know where he is working so we can impose the new penalties and that requires people on the ground finding the illegals.

Also, I agree that the Federal Government is mostly incompetent in much of what they do, but this is not a problem caused by incompetence, it is an intentional act to keep the borders open. It has almost nothing to do with business, while one group would be unhappy, another group would step up with their support because this is exactly what they needed to prosper. There is a balancing point in business where you hurt one, and that helps someone else.

***************New study shows that Arizona spent over $2.7 billion on supporting illegals in 2009, obviously a problem Arizons needs to deal with*****************
 

IWS

Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
6,164
If it WASN'T racist, why would it need an amendment saying race can't be used as a factor?

anyone? anyone?
Because of the usual racist, leftist, short sighted, race baiter, race whores, who can't see past their own racism.

Or, in your case, the mirror.
 
I don't like you.
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,125
So if they need to secure the borders, why didn't they do just that instead of create a racist law?

.

.
umm... how can a law be racist?
anyone? anyone?

bueller? bueller?
If it WASN'T racist, why would it need an amendment saying race can't be used as a factor?anyone? anyone?
Did the pre-amendment bill have anything about any specific race?

and again, how can a bill (an inanimate object, mind you) be racist?

implementation of a law can be racist. interpretation of a law can be racist. but if an officer is going to use this or any other law to be a racist, then he was already a racist to begin with and certainly doesn't need this to pick on the poor minorities.
 

IWS

Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
6,164
Did the pre-amendment bill have anything about any specific race?

and again, how can a bill (an inanimate object, mind you) be racist?

implementation of a law can be racist. interpretation of a law can be racist. but if an officer is going to use this or any other law to be a racist, then he was already a racist to begin with and certainly doesn't need this to pick on the poor minorities.
Don't worry, it's the race whores who haven't read the law, and lie about the law that are still bitchin'.

They ignore the specific language against any use of race, ethnicity, or country or origin as a basis for reasonable suspicion and I have yet to hear anyone from the left, because they are too busy being race whores, that recognize the executive order signed by the governor requiring training for all law enforcement officers on how to legally and constitutionally implement and enforce the law.

They just feed off of baseless race baiting.
 
Administering the BS
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
2,167
Oh look, now it's a "THOSE ON THE LEFT" argument. Boy, that sure doesn't help the meme that all right wingers are nothing but a bunch of racist jerks. Seems kinda strange that it's only the right wingers defending the law.

.

.
 
I don't like you.
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,125
Oh look, now it's a "THOSE ON THE LEFT" argument. Boy, that sure doesn't help the meme that all right wingers are nothing but a bunch of racist jerks. Seems kinda strange that it's only the right wingers defending the law.

.

.
probably because they are the ones that are taking the time to actually read the law...

Napalitano

speaking of which, Phreak- have YOU actually read the bill?

if not, here it is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Administering the BS
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
2,167
Yes, I have read it, and like I said before, if it's not a racist law, why the need for an amendment?

.

.
 

IWS

Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
6,164
Oh look, now it's a "THOSE ON THE LEFT" argument. Boy, that sure doesn't help the meme that all right wingers are nothing but a bunch of racist jerks. Seems kinda strange that it's only the right wingers defending the law.

.

.
probably because they are the ones that are taking the time to actually read the law...

Napalitano

Holder
... P. J. Crowley,

President Obama,

Vice-President Biden,

everyone on the left...etc...
 
Progressive Killer
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
4,067
Yes, I have read it, and like I said before, if it's not a racist law, why the need for an amendment?

.

.
To pacify the radical left that are all jumping on the bandwagon attacking a law that they have never read but will gain them what they believe to be political clout just to be seen objecting to it.

Layers of protection Phreakwars, they added a layer of protection "just to be sure" and as IWS said, they are also getting special training as a third layer of protection.

But I have to give special comment to eddo on what he said:

implementation of a law can be racist. interpretation of a law can be racist. but if an officer is going to use this or any other law to be a racist, then he was already a racist to begin with and certainly doesn't need this to pick on the poor minorities.
eddo hit the nail on the head, "if" a police officer wants to be racist, there are more than enough laws and methods already on the books to make it easy for him to push a racist agenda without this law.

As I have said before, this law is an attempt to deal with a massive problem, trying to say this is racist is not making any sense to those who have actually read and understands the law as it is written. Crying "racist" every couple days is starting to become like the little boy who cried wolf, the people are starting to no longer listen because you liberals have abused the word to describe things that have nothing to do with race for far too long. It is time to give the word a rest and start actually dealing with our severe problems instead of sticking our heads in the sand because we are scare of being called racist.
 
Administering the BS
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
2,167
Like I said before, if they REALLY wanted to do something about the problem, then they would secure the borders on their own without crying for the FEDS to do it.

And if this law ISN'T racist, then why are so many Arizona cops against it?

Against it because they know damn well it puts them in a position where they have NO CHOICE but to racially profile people.

Are they "LIBERALS" too?

How about all the Arizona city's who are bringing up lawsuits... more LIBERALS?

YOUR "liberals this liberals that" sh*t gets stale pretty quick.

From Sheriff CLARENCE DUPNIK First of all, the law is totally unnecessary. We already have the authority to stop and detain illegal immigrants and turn them over to the Border Patrol and we do that on a regular daily basis. This law will have no impact whatsoever on illegal immigration. None at all. We already have the authority. We didn’t need it. What the law now does is put us in a position where we are damned if we do and damned if we don’t, because on one hand we get sued by people who think we are illegally profiling and there is a clause in the law which I’ve never heard of in any other law, and I have been the Sheriff here for thirty years, that says any citizen who doesn’t think we are enforcing this law can sue us. That is just outrageous. It’s an anti-law enforcement law in my opinion. Puts us in an impossible situation. It puts us in an impossible situation with the Hispanic community. What they’ve done is driven a wedge between us and the Hispanic community. We depend on our community, Hispanics especially, for information, for cooperation in our crime-fighting efforts. What we really need to stop illegal immigration is more federal assistance on securing that border and we desperately need reform of immigration laws.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Sheriff, what about- you’ve raised, especially, questions about the standard for stopping people, the reasonable suspicion standard. Can you talk about that and your concerns about what that opens the door to?

SHERIFF CLARENCE DUPNIK: You bet. When the law was first passed, which would have been about nine days ago, there was a clause that said 'reasonable suspicion of anybody.' Every Hispanic in this country, especially in Arizona, must have awakened, and I’ve talked to many of them personally, the next day to feel like they’ve been kicked in the teeth, like they’re now second-class citizens, they have a target on their back because when they leave the house they’re going to have to take papers with them and prepare to be stopped and questioned. That, overnight, has made Hispanics second-class citizens.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain what it is you actually are supposed to do if you were to enforce this law? The issue of reasonable suspicion. What do your sheriffs do? What do you do?

SHERIFF CLARENCE DUPNIK: Well, let me tell you what we do now, and I don’t anticipate doing anything differently. I don’t think the new law precludes state and local law enforcement from turning over immigrants, illegal immigrants, to the border patrol. But in the routine course of our duties, when we encounter illegal immigrants, and there are a variety of ways that that happens, especially out in the rural desert areas, once we determine that they are in fact illegal, we call the Border Patrol and turn them over to them. But if we were to enforce this law, what- you know, the people that passed this law are very quick to complain about government overstepping, which is one of their biggest complaints, and the second one is taxation. If we were to start enforcing this law instead of turning them over to the Border Patrol like we do now, we would have to put them the Pima County Jail. We would put the jail into a crisis over night. We would have to overwhelm the rest of the criminal justice system locally here and send the taxpayers a huge bill which is just nonsense, in my opinion. It’s irresponsible of the legislature to do this, and it would be irresponsible of me to do it as well.

JUAN GONZALEZ: but now, your county also includes a significant section of border area right there in southern Arizona. What do you say to those people in Arizona and other parts of the country who say that something has to be done to control the numbers of people who continue to pour into the United Stated over the border from Mexico?

SHERIFF CLARENCE DUPNIK: I would say to them what I just finished saying to you. The federal government needs to do a lot more to stop illegal immigration. One of the things they need to do is illegal reform. I understand that and they understand that as well. This isn’t rocket science. But a few years ago when the Bush administration militarized the border with the National Guardsmen, they put handcuffs on them. They weren’t allowed to do anything related to illegal aliens. They couldn’t even drive a bus that had illegal aliens in it. What we need to do is to put more people on the border to secure it, more technology, and more agents. But we really need reform.

JUAN GONZALEZ: What about the issue that within days the Legislature attempted to amend the bill that had just passed? What were the amendments that they made and did it really have any substantive impact on the original legislation?

SHERIFF CLARENCE DUPNIK: It going to take legal experts with better legal minds than my own to answer that question. But the change that they made a week ago ,Thursday night before they adjourned, was they said you can’t use race, ethnicity, or country of origin solely as a reason for a stop.

AMY GOODMAN: Could you be in legal trouble for not enforcing the law, Sheriff?

SHERIFF CLARENCE DUPNIK: Well, that’s a question that lawyers are going to have to address. But in my opinion is that we are enforcing the law. If we’re arresting illegal aliens and turning them over to the Border Patrol, that seems to be a far better approach from every point of view than what the legislature has done to us.

AMY GOODMAN: Your police chief, the Tucson Police Chief, Roberto Villaseñor, says he’s worried about the impact of the law on investigations with victims and witnesses who might be afraid to come forward. He said he’s opposing the law’s enactment but will work to see that it’s implemented fairly in Tucson. Are you working with Chief Villaseñor?

SHERIFF CLARENCE DUPNIK: All of law enforcement in the state, I think, is working together. There are some of us who are elected officials and are taking political stands. But aside from that, there is a lot of, in my opinion, unanimity as to the problems that this law is causing for law enforcement. It’s an anti-law enforcement law in my opinion.
.

.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Progressive Killer
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
4,067
Like I said before, if they REALLY wanted to do something about the problem, then they would secure the borders on their own without crying for the FEDS to do it.
Just like if Obama wanted to do anything about this problem he would, and considering securing the border is the responsibility of Obama and company now, why should Arizona do what Obama is refusing to do?

Again, what you fail to understand is that this is a problem that exists without this law and the failures of our Federal Government caused this problem. If taking over everything from banks to car companies is considered a priority for Obama when it never was in the past and is certainly not spelled out in our Constitution, why is it Obama is hands off on securing our borders when that is very much a job requirement of the Federal Government?

And if this law ISN'T racist, then why are so many Arizona cops against it?
Some cops don't enforce speeding laws, that does not make speeding laws bad or wrong. A cop is a person and is subject to their own bias and political beliefs, a few cops being against this law does not even make me blink, few cops want more work piled on their desk, they do a tough job but they are still Government employees and the local sheriff has to get elected, in a community where there are a lot of latino voters, the sheriff has to take a possition against it publically even if he agrees with it in private.

Against it because they know damn well it puts them in a position where they have NO CHOICE but to racially profile people.
I worked the streets and still have to do serve on a reserve status to keep my certifications current in case I ever want to go back. A cop could just talk to the people and the ones who can't speak english very well and have no identification when you ask them for it to do a ticket or something are most likely illegal. This is not a big deal, in an area like Arizona a cop could get a few illegals every day if he wanted to. If I was with the INS I would go to construction sites and farms and get hundreds of illegals every week. Finding the illegals is not that hard and it would not require any real thinking to find them.

But for some reason the Federal Government does not "want" to find them, so good people sometimes have to make hard decisions to do what they must to survive, the State of Arizona is fighting for their survival in a time where they do not have the money to pay for the illegals, something has to be done.

Are they "LIBERALS" too?
The vast majority, yes.

How about all the Arizona city's who are bringing up lawsuits... more LIBERALS?
Most yes, almost every single complainer has never actually read the law and are only following liberal trends to resist any restriction to illegals comming to America. Ask these same people if they want the borders closed and they say no....so they are in fact liberals.

YOUR "liberals this liberals that" sh*t gets stale pretty quick.
Not if it is the truth, you liberals call any attempt to restrict illegals comming to America racist, but it has almost nothing to do with race, it is about the law and our inability to pay for them.

Why is it the radical liberals never want to talk about the laws or the severe drain on the taxpayers these illegals represent? Why is it the problem is never discussed but any attempt at a solution is the talk of the town? This kind of law is only in existence because Liberals have blocked every attempt before now to fix the real problem. If Liberals get onboard with solutions and ideas I will respect their complaints but if all they are interested in doing is "blocking" any attempt at dealing with this huge problem then I don't care what they have to say, because they have shown themselves to be part of the problem, not the solution.

Where is Obama on this problem? How about he negotiate with Arizona to drop this law and in turn he will promise to secure the border? Securing the border is his job you know, and it would help fix the problem so a State like Arizona does not feel all alone in the dark and having to take matters into their own hands because of an uncaring Obama Administration.
 
Administering the BS
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
2,167
Oh look, ANOTHER liberal, strange, this one is a tea party favorite and claims to be Republican

http://blogs.tampaba...ration-law.html

How about THIS Republican liberal?

http://www.miamihera...mmigration.html

Or THIS one

http://www.cbsnews.c...549-503544.html

How about KKKarl Rove?

http://blogs.orlando...ration-law.html

Jeb Bush

http://www.politico....0410/36427.html

Yeah... LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS... :rolleyes:

.

.
Come on TJ, How bout these guys? More Liberals? Did THEY not read it too?.

.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Big Time BS'er
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,120
Oh look, ANOTHER liberal, strange, this one is a tea party favorite and claims to be Republican

http://blogs.tampaba...ration-law.html

How about THIS Republican liberal?

http://www.miamihera...mmigration.html

Or THIS one

http://www.cbsnews.c...549-503544.html

How about KKKarl Rove?

http://blogs.orlando...ration-law.html

Jeb Bush

http://www.politico....0410/36427.html

Yeah... LIBERALS, LIBERALS, LIBERALS... :rolleyes:

.

.
Come on TJ, How bout these guys? More Liberals? Did THEY not read it too?.

.
You can add Rick Perry to that list.
 
Top