Arizona "Papers Please" Law Applies to Everyone

[signalmankenneth]

What people who support Arizona's new immigration law don't understand is that it's not a law that applies to illegal immigrants. This law applies to everyone and it's a huge expansion of government power to oppress all people equally, including people who are visiting Arizona from other states. So if you get pulled over for using a cell phone you might find yourself detained while you prove that you're a legal citizen.

This isn't just a law that applies to people who look Mexican. The worst part about it is that it it opens the door to the idea that the government agents can walk up to citizens and make demands that the people have to comply with. It's a big step towards the formation of a police state.

By Marc Perkel

 

[Don Quixote]

What people who support Arizona's new immigration law don't understand is that it's not a law that applies to illegal immigrants. This law applies to everyone and it's a huge expansion of government power to oppress all people equally, including people who are visiting Arizona from other states. So if you get pulled over for using a cell phone you might find yourself detained while you prove that you're a legal citizen.

This isn't just a law that applies to people who look Mexican. The worst part about it is that it it opens the door to the idea that the government agents can walk up to citizens and make demands that the people have to comply with. It's a big step towards the formation of a police state.

By Marc Perkel

we plan on avoiding az and most of the south

 

[Damocles]

When was the last time you got pulled over by a cop who didn't ask you for your ID?

 

[leaningright]

Usually coupled with a demand for proof of insurance.

 

[Rationalist]

I am so tired of the bullshit and outright lies from the left on this issue.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Usually coupled with a demand for proof of insurance.

Let's not forget your registration.

 

[Howey]

When was the last time you got pulled over by a cop who didn't ask you for your ID?

That's not the problem. They want to pull people over for no other reason than the fact that they are brown. That's why the SCOTUS shot it down.

 

[Damocles]

That's not the problem. They want to pull people over for no other reason than the fact that they are brown. That's why the SCOTUS shot it down.

Um... first, this portion was upheld. And second, no they could only ask for that stuff if they had already pulled them over for something else. Educate yourself. Basically, if they pull somebody over for speeding and ask for DL, etc. the person can only speak Russian but has no passport, DL, etc. they can then inquire if that person is legally in the nation.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

That's not the problem. They want to pull people over for no other reason than the fact that they are brown. That's why the SCOTUS shot it down.

You are nothing more then a bigotted racist, if that's what you believe.
I have more relatives that can claim being "Brown", then those that can claim "White" and not a single one of them has ever been pulled over for the "fact that they are brown".

Beyond that, you're just an idiot.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Um... first, this portion was upheld. And second, no they could only ask for that stuff if they had already pulled them over for something else. Educate yourself. Basically, if they pull somebody over for speeding and ask for DL, etc. the person can only speak Russian but has no passport, DL, etc. they can then inquire if that person is legally in the nation.

The first things that is asked for, when someone is pulled over, is ID, Registration, and Proof of Insurance.

When someone has no ID, then how are they supposed to prove that they are who they say they are?

Every person who continues to refer to this as a "Your Papers Please" bill, is fucking stupid and should seek help for the reason they're so stupid.

 

[Howey]

Um... first, this portion was upheld. And second, no they could only ask for that stuff if they had already pulled them over for something else. Educate yourself. Basically, if they pull somebody over for speeding and ask for DL, etc. the person can only speak Russian but has no passport, DL, etc. they can then inquire if that person is legally in the nation.

The portion that was upheld was only upheld because it hasn't been tested yet. Additionally, Arizona and Alabama are the only states that ask for a passport. Thirdly, if you think this law came to life to prevent Russians from driving in Arizona, I'm afraid you are the one who needs to be educted.

You are nothing more then a bigotted racist, if that's what you believe.
I have more relatives that can claim being "Brown", then those that can claim "White" and not a single one of them has ever been pulled over for the "fact that they are brown".

Beyond that, you're just an idiot.

Nah...nobody in Arizona would ever participate in racial profiling!

Escalating a long-running battle with the outspoken sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, the Justice Department on Thursday sued him, his office and the county over civil rights issues involving racial profiling.

"The police are supposed to protect and serve our communities, not divide them. This is an abuse of power case," said Tom Perez, the head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.

"If you look Latino, you are fair game," he said.

The county has refused to impose a program, proposed by the Obama administration, that would train deputies on how to make traffic stops without improperly targeting Latinos. "They're telling me how to run my organization. I'm not going to give up my authority to the federal government," Sheriff Joe Arpaio said Wednesday before the lawsuit was filed.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

That's not the problem. They want to pull people over for no other reason than the fact that they are brown. That's why the SCOTUS shot it down.

You are nothing more then a bigotted racist, if that's what you believe.
I have more relatives that can claim being "Brown", then those that can claim "White" and not a single one of them has ever been pulled over for the "fact that they are brown".

Beyond that, you're just an idiot.

Howie:
There's no need to groan me; because you're so stupid.
It's not my fault.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

it is actually not an expansion of government. i've cited older case law that states quite clearly the states can enforce federal law concerning immigration.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

You are nothing more then a bigotted racist, if that's what you believe.
I have more relatives that can claim being "Brown", then those that can claim "White" and not a single one of them has ever been pulled over for the "fact that they are brown".

Beyond that, you're just an idiot.

Howie:
There's no need to groan me; because you're so stupid.
It's not my fault.

Just curious, Howard; are you groaning be me because I called you stupid, or are you groaning me because you are stupid.
Both situations appear to be possible.

 

[Don Quixote]

When was the last time you got pulled over by a cop who didn't ask you for your ID?

the standard request from a cop stopping you is license, insurance and registration, without which you should not be driving...

 

[Howey]

Just curious, Howard; are you groaning be me because I called you stupid, or are you groaning me because you are stupid.
Both situations appear to be possible.

I groaned you because you don't recognize sarcasm.

 

[Damocles]

The portion that was upheld was only upheld because it hasn't been tested yet. Additionally, Arizona and Alabama are the only states that ask for a passport. Thirdly, if you think this law came to life to prevent Russians from driving in Arizona, I'm afraid you are the one who needs to be educted.

So now that you recognize that this part of the law was upheld, contrary to your first false claim, we can start getting into the reality of the law, it is as I posted it earlier.

Nah...nobody in Arizona would ever participate in racial profiling!

Accusation is not evidence. The Feds decided to sue because he would not do as they ordered.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I groaned you because you don't recognize sarcasm.

Just because I don't acknowledge it; doesn't mean that I don't recognize it.

 

[Howey]

So now that you recognize that this part of the law was upheld, contrary to your first false claim, we can start getting into the reality of the law, it is as I posted it earlier.

You do know why that one part of the law was upheld, right? Or are you just feeding the ignorant? Once it's tested, it too will be deemed unconstitutional.

Accusation is not evidence. The Feds decided to sue because he would not do as they ordered.

The Feds "decided" to sue because of his extensive history of racial profiling, racial prejudice and his propensity to ignore federal law.

 

[Damocles]

You do know why that one part of the law was upheld, right? Or are you just feeding the ignorant? Once it's tested, it too will be deemed unconstitutional.



The Feds "decided" to sue because of his extensive history of racial profiling, racial prejudice and his propensity to ignore federal law.

According to the story you posted they "decided" to sue because he would not do what they wanted him to do. Once again, accusation is not evidence. And you are either pretending to be incapable of reading comprehension or you haven't bothered to read what I posted. When I said, "this part of the law" I meant "this part of the law"...

Unlike your original false claim that the entire law was not upheld.