Show Us Your Papers

[hblask 1]

HB,For any lawful contact to be made, a lawful stop has to be made first.The African American Community has complained of being pulled over for DWB - driving while black... But that doesn't mean we stop enforcing the traffic laws does it?We try to educate officers about these issues and discipline officers who don't who don't adhere to them.Can the law be abused - sure, but so could ANY lawWhat is you solution to the issue?

It isn't a question of whether this law will be abused, it is a law that invites, possibly *demands* that rights be abused. Need proof? Look at the defense: "We won't use racial profiling." Bullshit. Double and triple bullshit. Are you going to tell me that white people will be stopped and asked to see their papers? What are the odds that a Hispanic person is going to voluntarily help the police now? This should be called "The Harass any Hispanic who speaks Spanish" law, because anyone who is honest knows that that is what this law is about.What is the solution?Step 1 -- end the Insane War on Drugs. 99.99999% of the criminal activity on the border is due to the insane war on drugs. Not drug use, the war on drugs. End the war, end the incentives for people to evade law enforcement.Step 2 -- implement sensible immigration policies. Conservatives/neocons/Republicans claim to understand the law of supply and demand and to acknowledge economic reality. Yet when it comes to the supply of brown labor crossing the border, they start frothing at the mouth and say that they will, by legislative fiat, change the law of supply and demand. It's insanity. It has never worked in history and never can. An immigration policy that creates pent up demand for labor, and forces otherwise honest people to have to decide between providing for their family or breaking an immoral law, is flawed.Having said that, because the law is so flawed, and pent up demand is so high, we've created a transition problem -- how to get from here to there. I think the answer is to pick some sensible number, as indicated by non-racist economists, of how much of an influx we can handle. Then increase that amount by x% each year until equilibrium has been reached. Step 3 -- fix INS so that they can do background checks and give people a legal right to work here in a reasonable amount of time. Right now, 95% of immigrants have NO path to either working here or becoming citizens. Fix that, now. Then honest people will come through the checkpoints, and will go back when the work dries up. Anyone who tries to sneak across will be there for a reason -- they know they could get through basic background checks. So now you have a lot more resources to deal with a much, much smaller problem.You can't fool economics. Supply and demand will meet. Decide to do it in an orderly manner, or decide to do it at a great cost in morality, humanity, law enforcement, and human resources, and human life. More people die each year on the US border than in all the years of the existence of the Berlin Wall. It's pretty hard to express moral outrage at the failings of other countries when we are out-killing the communists.

[strategy 4]

hblask for president.I'm serious. let's do this.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

It isn't a question of whether this law will be abused, it is a law that invites, possibly *demands* that rights be abused. Need proof? Look at the defense: "We won't use racial profiling." Bullshit. Double and triple bullshit. Are you going to tell me that white people will be stopped and asked to see their papers? What are the odds that a Hispanic person is going to voluntarily help the police now? This should be called "The Harass any Hispanic who speaks Spanish" law, because anyone who is honest knows that that is what this law is about.What is the solution?Step 1 -- end the Insane War on Drugs. 99.99999% of the criminal activity on the border is due to the insane war on drugs. Not drug use, the war on drugs. End the war, end the incentives for people to evade law enforcement.Step 2 -- implement sensible immigration policies. Conservatives/neocons/Republicans claim to understand the law of supply and demand and to acknowledge economic reality. Yet when it comes to the supply of brown labor crossing the border, they start frothing at the mouth and say that they will, by legislative fiat, change the law of supply and demand. It's insanity. It has never worked in history and never can. An immigration policy that creates pent up demand for labor, and forces otherwise honest people to have to decide between providing for their family or breaking an immoral law, is flawed.Having said that, because the law is so flawed, and pent up demand is so high, we've created a transition problem -- how to get from here to there. I think the answer is to pick some sensible number, as indicated by non-racist economists, of how much of an influx we can handle. Then increase that amount by x% each year until equilibrium has been reached. Step 3 -- fix INS so that they can do background checks and give people a legal right to work here in a reasonable amount of time. Right now, 95% of immigrants have NO path to either working here or becoming citizens. Fix that, now. Then honest people will come through the checkpoints, and will go back when the work dries up. Anyone who tries to sneak across will be there for a reason -- they know they could get through basic background checks. So now you have a lot more resources to deal with a much, much smaller problem.You can't fool economics. Supply and demand will meet. Decide to do it in an orderly manner, or decide to do it at a great cost in morality, humanity, law enforcement, and human resources, and human life. More people die each year on the US border than in all the years of the existence of the Berlin Wall. It's pretty hard to express moral outrage at the failings of other countries when we are out-killing the communists.

Nah, let's just build a wall.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

hblask for president.I'm serious. let's do this.

I'm in if he'll let me be the Secretary of Health and Human Services and Other Mushy Liberal Crap.Gotta throw in here that those allegedly non-racist freedom-loving Republicans are the same ones who demand that Obama carry his original birth certificate at all times, because they can't quite wrap their minds around the idea that a non-white person could possibly be a "real American."

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

It isn't a question of whether this law will be abused, it is a law that invites, possibly *demands* that rights be abused. Need proof? Look at the defense: "We won't use racial profiling." Bullshit. Double and triple bullshit. Are you going to tell me that white people will be stopped and asked to see their papers? What are the odds that a Hispanic person is going to voluntarily help the police now? This should be called "The Harass any Hispanic who speaks Spanish" law, because anyone who is honest knows that that is what this law is about.What is the solution?Step 1 -- end the Insane War on Drugs. 99.99999% of the criminal activity on the border is due to the insane war on drugs. Not drug use, the war on drugs. End the war, end the incentives for people to evade law enforcement.Step 2 -- implement sensible immigration policies. Conservatives/neocons/Republicans claim to understand the law of supply and demand and to acknowledge economic reality. Yet when it comes to the supply of brown labor crossing the border, they start frothing at the mouth and say that they will, by legislative fiat, change the law of supply and demand. It's insanity. It has never worked in history and never can. An immigration policy that creates pent up demand for labor, and forces otherwise honest people to have to decide between providing for their family or breaking an immoral law, is flawed.Having said that, because the law is so flawed, and pent up demand is so high, we've created a transition problem -- how to get from here to there. I think the answer is to pick some sensible number, as indicated by non-racist economists, of how much of an influx we can handle. Then increase that amount by x% each year until equilibrium has been reached. Step 3 -- fix INS so that they can do background checks and give people a legal right to work here in a reasonable amount of time. Right now, 95% of immigrants have NO path to either working here or becoming citizens. Fix that, now. Then honest people will come through the checkpoints, and will go back when the work dries up. Anyone who tries to sneak across will be there for a reason -- they know they could get through basic background checks. So now you have a lot more resources to deal with a much, much smaller problem.You can't fool economics. Supply and demand will meet. Decide to do it in an orderly manner, or decide to do it at a great cost in morality, humanity, law enforcement, and human resources, and human life. More people die each year on the US border than in all the years of the existence of the Berlin Wall. It's pretty hard to express moral outrage at the failings of other countries when we are out-killing the communists.

Step 1 - Really? Change the laws because too many people are breaking them? Really?Step 2 - Supply and Demand? The "Supply" in this case is "America", and the demand is from people wanting to tap into that Supply illegally.Step 3 - Gaining US Citizenship isn't supposed to be "Easy", and I don't think there should be some streamlined fast track process to get there. Just because someone wants to come here to work doesn't mean we have some sort of imperative to make that easy or else they HAVE to become criminals. They CHOOSE to become criminals. Again, have you ever tried to go to another country to work? I'm not talking about "third world countries" here. Try the UK or Canada. I can personally attest that it is very difficult to legally enter those countries to work even for a short period of time.

[CaneBrain 95]

Step 1 - Really? Change the laws because too many people are breaking them? Really?Step 2 - Supply and Demand? The "Supply" in this case is "America", and the demand is from people wanting to tap into that Supply illegally.Step 3 - Gaining US Citizenship isn't supposed to be "Easy", and I don't think there should be some streamlined fast track process to get there. Just because someone wants to come here to work doesn't mean we have some sort of imperative to make that easy or else they HAVE to become criminals. They CHOOSE to become criminals. Again, have you ever tried to go to another country to work? I'm not talking about "third world countries" here. Try the UK or Canada. I can personally attest that it is very difficult to legally enter those countries to work even for a short period of time.

I wont touch Steps 2 and 3.....but step 1 is change a bad law that cant ever work because prohibition never does. If too many people are breaking a law AND it continues over a long period of time....that is actually very much a sign that a law sucks.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

If too many people are breaking a law AND it continues over a long period of time....that is actually very much a sign that a law sucks.

I don't completely disagree with that. I've often said the same thing. However that is sort of a smoke-screen in this case. It in this case it isn't that the general population disagrees with the law - there just happens to be a large number of non-citizens that choose to break the law in a violent manner. Many people break speeding and drunk driving laws, few would argue eliminating them.A lot of people hate the Tax Laws, that in itself isn't sufficient to say: "Let's just end the incentives for people to evade the IRS"In Vietnam there is a depressingly large problem in Human Trafficking - including unspeakable abuse of children. But hey, it is all "Supply and Demand" so it is all cool. Americans and other sex tourists going there illegally shouldn't be criminalized.Gary Glitter will be relieved.

[CaneBrain 95]

I don't completely disagree with that. I've often said the same thing. However that is sort of a smoke-screen in this case. It in this case it isn't that the general population disagrees with the law - there just happens to be a large number of non-citizens that choose to break the law in a violent manner. Many people break speeding and drunk driving laws, few would argue eliminating them.A lot of people hate the Tax Laws, that in itself isn't sufficient to say: "Let's just end the incentives for people to evade the IRS"In Vietnam there is a depressingly large problem in Human Trafficking - including unspeakable abuse of children. But hey, it is all "Supply and Demand" so it is all cool. Americans and other sex tourists going there illegally shouldn't be criminalized.Gary Glitter will be relieved.

It's not about eliminating all laws that people break. A shift in drug policy would end a lot of the border violence that gets blamed on immigration policy. How much has to be gained by eliminating a prohibition law where demand has stayed steady for ages before we just do it already?We are also rapidly approaching the point where certain drugs are almost 50/50 in terms of the general population being in favor of legalization. Marijuana would already be well passed that point if there were not generations old lies still bouncing around out there.

[timwakefield 68]

Nah, let's just build a wall.

It worked in China!

[ahosang 0]

I don't completely disagree with that. I've often said the same thing. However that is sort of a smoke-screen in this case. It in this case it isn't that the general population disagrees with the law - there just happens to be a large number of non-citizens that choose to break the law in a violent manner. Many people break speeding and drunk driving laws, few would argue eliminating them.A lot of people hate the Tax Laws, that in itself isn't sufficient to say: "Let's just end the incentives for people to evade the IRS"In Vietnam there is a depressingly large problem in Human Trafficking - including unspeakable abuse of children. But hey, it is all "Supply and Demand" so it is all cool. Americans and other sex tourists going there illegally shouldn't be criminalized.Gary Glitter will be relieved.

Good post but I believe you're wrong on this bolded point. The activity that sex tourists would be carrying out is arguably immoral. The point with a lot of illegal immigrants is they want to work, which is arguably a virtue. Those that would trade drugs would be dealt with the same as home-grown traders.Link welfare entitlement to paid tax(apart from blind, disabled etc) and that solves the problems of shirkers(home-grown or otherwise), as well as addressing supply and demand. Immigrants won't try and get in as much if there is no work or welfare for them, and home-grown will have to go and do the work that immigrants are willing to do, or emigrate to greener pastures. The liberal elites failed to foresee the consequences of allowing welfare to become a cradle-to-grave lifestyle rather than a temporary safety net(at least here in the UK).

[AmScray 355]

If you're legal you have nothing to worry about, our police (I live in az) have the right to ask for your i.d. no matter who you are for any reason, we are required to carry i.d. no matter how white/brown/black we are, so is this really that different.

Can you cite an actual law that mandates people in Arizona must carry ID with them at all times?Because it's one of those things that (stupid) people tend to believe is a law, but really, it isn't- although in the case of Arizona, nothing would surprise me.

[ahosang 0]

"Third World"? Go to London. Look at the wrong cop in the wrong way - or commit some minor infraction. Speak with a Non-British accent. Don't have your passport. Have fun.

I'm not picking on you, but i disagree strongly with this post, especially the bolded parts. A very large minority of London is non-indigenous(non-white for those liberals who don't accept there is an indigenous people of Britain), and it is full of people not speaking English(or speak English in a non-British accent).Seriously - wrong city. Maybe you visited 20 years ago or something, but as a London-dweller, I can tell you you're way wrong...

[antistuff 0]

Can you cite an actual law that mandates people in Arizona must carry ID with them at all times?Because it's one of those things that (stupid) people tend to believe is a law, but really, it isn't- although in the case of Arizona, nothing would surprise me.

i've been told by cops in new york if you don't have id on you they can take you with them until they can verify who you are. wither this is true or its was just cops being cops i have no idea.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

I'm not picking on you, but i disagree strongly with this post, especially the bolded parts. A very large minority of London is non-indigenous(non-white for those liberals who don't accept there is an indigenous people of Britain), and it is full of people not speaking English(or speak English in a non-British accent).Seriously - wrong city. Maybe you visited 20 years ago or something, but as a London-dweller, I can tell you you're way wrong...

Have spent about a month there already this year. Love the town. Felt that the diversity there was even more a part of the City than probably any town I've ever visited - and I've been around. Go into just about any pub and you WILL hear multiple accents and languages. So you're 100% correct: I overstated it, so let me be more specific. I'm not saying it is a problem of any sort or that there are a bunch of cops looking to deport people in London. I'm saying that it IS a risk and that as a visitor I MUST carry my passport (or copy) at all times or risk being detained or even deported. If I was pulled over for a random traffic stop or other minor issue I'd expect that upon hearing my accent, the officer would request my ID, including my passport. If I failed to do so I'd likely be in trouble. And if I was there illegally it would be worse.

[strategy 4]

i've been told by cops in new york if you don't have id on you they can take you with them until they can verify who you are. wither this is true or its was just cops being cops i have no idea.

preface: I don't know if that's true, butcops are completely within the bounds of the law to lie their fucking faces off if it gets a person to incriminate themselves, and they do it often. I don't understand why that's legal.you kinda hinted at this with "cops being cops" but I felt it important to drive this point home.further edification:

[hblask 1]

hblask for president.I'm serious. let's do this.

Step 1. Raise 200 million dollars.Step 2. Get elected.

[hblask 1]

I'm in if he'll let me be the Secretary of Health and Human Services and Other Mushy Liberal Crap.Gotta throw in here that those allegedly non-racist freedom-loving Republicans are the same ones who demand that Obama carry his original birth certificate at all times, because they can't quite wrap their minds around the idea that a non-white person could possibly be a "real American."

Yeah, I can live with this. Social programs such as food stamps and stuff is absolutely last on the list of things that need to be dealt with; any competent person could keep the program running and maybe improve it a bit.

[hblask 1]

Step 1 - Really? Change the laws because too many people are breaking them? Really?

No, we need to change the drug laws because prohibition is ridiculous. It was a failure with alcohol and it's a failure with other drugs. Legalizing drugs doesn't eliminate the problems of drug use (real world experiments show a slight decline in use), it keeps the drug *use* problem about the same. What it eliminates is the problems associated with prohibition: violence, abuse, police corruption, and civil rights violations.

Step 2 - Supply and Demand? The "Supply" in this case is "America", and the demand is from people wanting to tap into that Supply illegally.

No, the "demand" is individual Americans making the choice to create businesses that create jobs and require employers, and the supply is workers willing to take those jobs that Americans are too fat and lazy or greedy to take. Conservatives are supposed to understand this. I'm not sure why their understanding of economics breaks down when applied to people who look and talk differently.

Step 3 - Gaining US Citizenship isn't supposed to be "Easy", and I don't think there should be some streamlined fast track process to get there. Just because someone wants to come here to work doesn't mean we have some sort of imperative to make that easy or else they HAVE to become criminals. They CHOOSE to become criminals. Again, have you ever tried to go to another country to work? I'm not talking about "third world countries" here. Try the UK or Canada. I can personally attest that it is very difficult to legally enter those countries to work even for a short period of time.

We are a country built on the dignity of individuals, on basic human rights, not on some notion of collectivist views of the "common good" (hmmm, where is that phrase from....). Consigning entire countries full of people to poverty because unions know they can't compete with hard workers is immoral. If you had the choice between feeding your child and breaking an immoral and stupid law, which would you choose? And you judge them for that?And no, I don't care what ANY other country is doing. We are supposed to be the model of freedom and liberty. There's a reason we were world leaders for a century, and there is a reason we are slipping now. Freedom works.

[hblask 1]

In Vietnam there is a depressingly large problem in Human Trafficking - including unspeakable abuse of children. But hey, it is all "Supply and Demand" so it is all cool. Americans and other sex tourists going there illegally shouldn't be criminalized.

That's an excellent comparison for people who don't know the difference between voluntary consensual behavior and forcible slavery of children.For the other 99.9% of the population, you are not really helping your case.

[ahosang 0]

Step 1. Raise 200 million dollars.Step 2. Get elected.

What's your elocution like, and how photogenic are you??Cos I got Step 1 covered baby..

[hblask 1]

i've been told by cops in new york if you don't have id on you they can take you with them until they can verify who you are. wither this is true or its was just cops being cops i have no idea.

I think it varies from state to state, and the SCOTUS has given mixed signals, so nobody is quite sure. I believe the Washington state constitution specifically states that you do not need to carry an ID. There was a case lately where a woman got arrested only for that, so it caused quite a stir.

[hblask 1]

What's your elocution like, and how photogenic are you??Cos I got Step 1 covered baby..

I could probably get by on the former, I might need a little extra for plastic surgery on the latter.

[dapokerbum 0]

Step 1. Raise 200 million dollars.Step 2. Get elected.

Ask Goldman Sachs ... I hear they love giving money to politicians.Also, on this issue. I for one back it ... not because I believe in the law, but because I believe it may get washington to finally get off it's ass on this and get some real immigration reform. If this is the doorway to that, then I am all for it. The fact is we DO need immigration reform. As misguided as this may seem, if it passes the legal test AND the federal government does NOTHING then I could see other border states passing similar bills. Immigration is a real issue and it isn't going to go away if we keep ignoring it.EDIT: So I just saw a story on some of the protests and one person was holding a sign that says "We Have Rights". If you are working here illegally or in the country illegally what rights exactly aren't they privy to anymore. Do they have a "right" to work here?

[Balloon guy 158]

They randomly pull people over in Vermont to check for ID because some of the 9-11 terrorist came through Canada ( Makes you think....Canada...hmmmm.....)So far the American's in Vermont have decided carrying their driver's license around isn't the first step to the concentration camps of one of the previous democrat presidential administrations...

[hblask 1]

They randomly pull people over in Vermont to check for ID because some of the 9-11 terrorist came through Canada ( Makes you think....Canada...hmmmm.....)So far the American's in Vermont have decided carrying their driver's license around isn't the first step to the concentration camps of one of the previous democrat presidential administrations...

Bad policy in some states is hardly justification for bad policy in other states. Freedom and individual rights are still the gold standard of governance.