The AZ illegals just got screwed

[PostmodernProphet]

Uh yeah. Not everyone in this country illegally entered illegally. A very large number of illegals entered through proper channels then over stayed. This is a fact. Those deported cannot reenter through legal channels. It does not make their entry impossible, as I clearly noted, just harder. They can still enter illegally, as noted.

Do some research and quit making a show of your ignorance.

/pretends it makes a difference.....

 

[TuTu Monroe]

It's like when a guy is smitten with a gal. She keeps sending him away and he keeps coming back to the "land of milk and honey".

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Your anecdote is not verifiable and therefore of no value.

A deportation order bars future entry for 10 years whether the person leaves or the feds round him up and ship him out. 8 U.S.C. 1182.

But there is no deportation order, if the person tells ICE that they will voluntarily deport.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Sure, you can fight them.

Are you unfrozen caveman lawyer? You apparently don't know the first thing about our legal system.

Charging someone with a crime requires a higher burden of proof as well as more rights being afforded to the accused. This is basic shit, and you can argue against it all you like, but it is a fact and has long been one.

No need to get upset; just because you aren't smart enough to argue your tickets and win.

 

[Timshel]

/pretends it makes a difference.....

It does not make a difference to you whether they enter legally or illegally?

Of course, it makes a difference. Which route would you prefer? Going through the border, getting all your papers so you get jobs easier and all the other things that legal entry opens to you or hiking through the desert and living under the table. If it is not easier to go the legal route then the legal route is far more heavily burdened then I imagined and I already believe it needs to be made easier.

Deportation makes entry harder, regardless of your ignorant comments. It certainly keeps some from ever coming back. It costs us very little and if they do come back we can treat them more harshly.

 

[christiefan915]

Oh, you don't support using correct grammar?

 

[TuTu Monroe]

Not if they self-deport and that's where a lot of them just keep returning.
There was a recent case where if I remmeber correctly a young girl was kidnapped, raped, and then murdered.
The person that did this had been caught 7 times and had returned 7 times.

Your statement is true. It happens a lot. Hey, if they want to get back in, they will get back in and do.....talk to the border patrol for some real eye-openers.

 

[tinfoil]

No. An English teacher should speak correctly.

LOL touche

 

[Timshel]

No need to get upset; just because you aren't smart enough to argue your tickets and win.

It's beside the point. The point is that the plaintiff faces a much lower burden in civil cases than the prosecution in criminal cases. There is no point debating it. It's a fact.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

It's beside the point. The point is that the plaintiff faces a much lower burden in civil cases than the prosecution in criminal cases. There is no point debating it. It's a fact.

Once again, only because you seemed to fail to understand it the first time:
1. Are you a legal citizen of the United States.
1A. NO - Deportation
1B. Yes - Case dismissed

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Here's how I explained it to Bravo

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sho...6&postcount=29

/shrugs......your explanation was insufficient the first time around, it doesn't get better with age.....the MSNBC statement was simply ignorant.....the Arizona statute didn't MAKE being illegal, illegal......

Obviously, you didn't READ CAREFULLY the explanation....do it again, least you want me to pablum feed it to you.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Now if you instituted the new Arizona law in Manhattan, you'd have cops bringing Times Square to a stand still! Wild stuff!

Southern Man Quote:

And now, the Truth:

* The new Arizona law mirrors federal law, which already requires aliens (non-citizens) to register and carry their documents with them (8 USC 1304(e) and 8 USC 1306(a)). The new Arizona law simply states that violating federal immigration law is now a state crime as well.
* The law avoids the legal pitfall of “pre-emption,” which means a state can’t adopt laws that conflict with federal laws. By making what is a federal violation also a state violation, the Arizona law avoids this problem.
* The law only allows police to ask about immigration status in the normal course of “lawful contact” with a person, such as a traffic stop or if they have committed a crime.
* Estimates from the federal government indicate that more than 80 percent of illegal immigrants come from Latin America.
* Before asking a person about immigration status, law enforcement officials are required by the law to have “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal immigrant. The concept of “reasonable suspicion” is well established by court rulings. Since Arizona does not issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, having a valid license creates a presumption of legal status. Examples of reasonable suspicion include:
o A driver stopped for a traffic violation has no license, or record of a driver's license or other form of federal or state identification.
o A police officer observes someone buying fraudulent identity documents or crossing the border illegally.
o A police officer recognizes a gang member back on the street who he knows has been previously deported by the federal government.
* The law specifically states that police, “may not solely consider race, color or national origin” when implementing SB 1070.

http://www.redcounty.com/reasoned-fa...tion-law/39293

But you're missing the point....the new Arizona law gives the average beat cop the go-ahead to determine not only probable cause, but to determine citizenship by requesting documents NOT NORMALLY REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IDENTIFICATION AS A CITIZEN OF A STATE OR OWNER OF AN AUTOMOBILE.

Let me give you an example: Guy walking down the street carelessly tosses his fast food wrappers on the ground. Cop, who thinks the guy is an illegal day laborer, pulls him over and cites litering and proceeds to write up a ticket. Cop then asks the guy for ID...the guy gives him a non-drivers ID. Cop then askes for a birth certificate and/or visa. Guy doesn't have it, and the cop takes him downtown to "sort things out".

I've already posted documented evidence of a similar occurence BEFORE the new Arizona law......so the potential for abuse has now been given a boost.

 

[NOVA]

Obviously, you didn't READ CAREFULLY the explanation....do it again, least you want me to pablum feed it to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
But not all illegals are criminals....they are just guilty of entering the country illegally and working under the radar and/or with false credentials.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bravo
Only a pinhead can say that you can consciously break the law and not be a criminal......

I forgot I can't speak in general terms around you, as you get easily confused and take everything literally.

Let me dumb it down for you: not all illegal aliens from Mexico cross the border to start/continue a life of crime.....the majority illegally enter the country to take good jobs to build a better life for themselves and/or send money home to relatives. Mind you, THEY ARE ILLEGAL AND THEREFORE ARE GUILTY OF THAT CRIME ALONE. But they are not dope dealers or B & E artists, etc.

Hope this clears things up for you.
==============================

Note the 2 posts above and TC_LP's "dumbed down" explanation....

How absolutely insane....HE AGREES WITH ME correcting his stupid post claiming not all illegals are criminals....then posts " THEY ARE ILLEGAL AND THEREFORE ARE GUILTY OF THAT CRIME ALONE,..... and then has the audacity to say " Hope this clears things up for you"

How utterly clueless is he ?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Bravo's subject title reflects the PMP attitude....

do you actually know what my attitude is regarding immigration?.....I have stated it several times on this board.....why don't you explain it to everyone so we can see if you really know wtf you're posting about.......

You are right....I've confused your original statements with someone elses ( I did a search on your posts regarding immigration reform...which are actually logical). I stand corrected and apologize on this point.


Now, what's your take on the Arizona law just passed?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

But you're missing the point....the new Arizona law gives the average beat cop the go-ahead to determine not only probable cause, but to determine citizenship by requesting documents NOT NORMALLY REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IDENTIFICATION AS A CITIZEN OF A STATE OR OWNER OF AN AUTOMOBILE.

Let me give you an example: Guy walking down the street carelessly tosses his fast food wrappers on the ground. Cop, who thinks the guy is an illegal day laborer, pulls him over and cites litering and proceeds to write up a ticket. Cop then asks the guy for ID...the guy gives him a non-drivers ID. Cop then askes for a birth certificate and/or visa. Guy doesn't have it, and the cop takes him downtown to "sort things out".

I've already posted documented evidence of a similar occurence BEFORE the new Arizona law......so the potential for abuse has now been given a boost.

You're an idiot.
Let's put some REALITY to your asinine scenario:
1. Guy walking down the street carelessly tosses his fast food wrappers on the ground.
2. Cop pulls him over and cites litering and proceeds to write up a ticket.
3. Cop then asks the guy for ID:
3A. The guy gives him a legally acceptable non-drivers picture ID.
3A.1 Guy gets a ticket and goes his merry way
3B. The guy is unable to provide a legally acceptable non-drivers picture ID.
3B.1 The officer then is required to detain the person, until he can prove who he is.
3B.1.a Guy is able to prove who he is, through other means, and is cited an released
3B.1.b Guy is unable to prove who he is and in the investigation, it is then discovered that he is here illeagally. Guy is arrested.

Why do you hate Hispanics??

 

[Timshel]

Once again, only because you seemed to fail to understand it the first time:
1. Are you a legal citizen of the United States.
1A. NO - Deportation
1B. Yes - Case dismissed

Not even close. Your example is not even correct for your own point. The question is not whether they are citizens but whether they have a legal right to be present.

Since you failed to understand it the first time...

Is the defendant present and does he have proper legal counsel to answer the charges of illegal presence? No.

Under criminal law... get the fuck out of here.

Under civil law... Is he here illegally. Yes. Issue a deportation order.

And that is just one example. I already said that the case is fairly easy to prove. That does not mean you can ignore the other rights that must be afforded to a criminal defendant. And for what? So you can deport them anyway? Or are you advocating that we lock people up for all infractions of the immigration law?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Not even close. Your example is not even correct for your own point. The question is not whether they are citizens but whether they have a legal right to be present.

Since you failed to understand it the first time...

Is the defendant present and does he have proper legal counsel to answer the charges of illegal presence? No.

Under criminal law... get the fuck out of here.

Under civil law... Is he here illegally. Yes. Issue a deportation order.

And that is just one example. I already said that the case is fairly easy to prove. That does not mean you can ignore the other rights that must be afforded to a criminal defendant. And for what? So you can deport them anyway? Or are you advocating that we lock people up for all infractions of the immigration law?

But you can defend yourself, in a criminal case, and if the person is here legally, this would be discovered looooooooooooong before it was ever filed.
OOOPS, did I say filed??
Because if proof is provided, no Prosecuting Attny is going to file charges.

For some reason you seem to have presented that this will go from detention immediately to trial.

You're throwing up as many strawmen arguments that you can, just so you can try to extract yourself from the corner you painted yourself into.

But then looking at your posts, it is very apparent that it is you who has no clue as to how the judicial system works, let alone ICE, deportations, or probably very little else.

 

[Canceled2]

But you can defend yourself, in a criminal case, and if the person is here legally, this would be discovered looooooooooooong before it was ever filed.
OOOPS, did I say filed??
Because if proof is provided, no Prosecuting Attny is going to file charges.

For some reason you seem to have presented that this will go from detention immediately to trial.

You're throwing up as many strawmen arguments that you can, just so you can try to extract yourself from the corner you painted yourself into.

But then looking at your posts, it is very apparent that it is you who has no clue as to how the judicial system works, let alone ICE, deportations, or probably very little else.

Most illegals who are detained are detained because they have committed a crime besides the crime of illegal entry! This posters arguments are spurious at best.

 

[DamnYankee]

But you're missing the point....the new Arizona law gives the average beat cop the go-ahead to determine not only probable cause, but to determine citizenship by requesting documents NOT NORMALLY REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IDENTIFICATION AS A CITIZEN OF A STATE OR OWNER OF AN AUTOMOBILE.

Let me give you an example: Guy walking down the street carelessly tosses his fast food wrappers on the ground. Cop, who thinks the guy is an illegal day laborer, pulls him over and cites litering and proceeds to write up a ticket. Cop then asks the guy for ID...the guy gives him a non-drivers ID. Cop then askes for a birth certificate and/or visa. Guy doesn't have it, and the cop takes him downtown to "sort things out".

I've already posted documented evidence of a similar occurence BEFORE the new Arizona law......so the potential for abuse has now been given a boost.

Average beat cops already determine probable cause Libbie, so I don't see your point.

 

[Timshel]

But you can defend yourself, in a criminal case,

Only upon the defendants request and only if the court believes you can do so sufficiently. Given the inability to speak the language and the low education level of most illegal immigrants I doubt the court is gonna let many of the few that requests defend themselves.

And you are not even guaranteed your own legal counsel in a civil case. You don't show up, they are going to issue a deportation order.

and if the person is here legally, this would be discovered
looooooooooooong before it was ever filed.
OOOPS, did I say filed??
Because if proof is provided, no Prosecuting Attny is going to file charges.

??? Again, I did not bring up appeals. I am just trying to answer your irrelevant question, not trying to prove it matters.

For some reason you seem to have presented that this will go from detention immediately to trial.

Where?

You're throwing up as many strawmen arguments that you can, just so you can try to extract yourself from the corner you painted yourself into.

LOL, you are using a straw man of a straw man. I said nothing about going from detention to an immediate trial. However, if you charge them as criminals they will be guaranteed a right to a speedy trial, in addition to other things.

But then looking at your posts, it is very apparent that it is you who has no clue as to how the judicial system works, let alone ICE, deportations, or probably very little else.

You have not highlighted one error on my part while you dumbfucks are neck deep in them.