58% in Pennsylvania Favor Immigration Law Like Arizona's

[nick1985]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/older_content/home/top_stories/most_recent_articles

Interesting.

What state do you think will be the next to adopt a similar law to Arizona's?

 

[ArizonaSteve]

Hopefully New Mexico and Texas, I don't see California doing anything until they're flooded with the illegals that move there from Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Which ever of our other fifty states are idiotic enough not to know their local police can question and hold anyone they consider suspicious (you don't look legal) under our present laws, right now. But that fact will not keep idiots from vanity legislation.

 

[Freshgeardude]

Which ever of our other fifty states are idiotic enough not to know their local police can question and hold anyone they consider suspicious (you don't look legal) under our present laws, right now. But that fact will not keep idiots from vanity legislation.

Yet another idiot failing to actually know the law, which states that it is illegal for them to racially profile anyone and they can only ask them AFTER they are stopped for breaking another law.


Stop listening to obama, he is being an idiot politician, and holder, who didnt even read the law, thats being obama's puppet

 

[nick1985]

Which ever of our other fifty states are idiotic enough not to know their local police can question and hold anyone they consider suspicious (you don't look legal) under our present laws, right now. But that fact will not keep idiots from vanity legislation.

lol you dont know the law. Is your last name Holder?

 

[palehorse]

I want to see the same law passed in all 50 states and D.C.

Then again, it would be even better to see the Federal Government do their fucking jobs and enforce the same law that is already on the Federal books. Wouldn't that be a hoot!?

Grrrr....

 

[dammitgibs]

somewhere between 60-70% of all American's support the law, depending on who you ask, it's only the media and some select politicians acting like it's a small population in support of it, when in reality it's the majority of the country that is supportive of this law.

 

[Venix]

I want to see the same law passed in all 50 states and D.C.

Then again, it would be even better to see the Federal Government do their fucking jobs and enforce the same law that is already on the Federal books. Wouldn't that be a hoot!?

Grrrr....

People who claim that the Arizona law is identical to federal law are just as bad as the race baiters whining about profiling.

While federal law does require aliens to carry their registration information, a US citizen incorrectly asked for such documentation can simply assert his citizenship and then be free from harassment unless probable cause for an arrest exists. Conversely, Arizona law requires the US citizen to prove his innocence by presenting his papers or otherwise proving his citizenship. Agree with this Soviet nonsense if you like, but don't misrepresent it as being identical to existing law.

For the record, I agree with much of the rest of the law.

 

[irishScott]

Good.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

People who claim that the Arizona law is identical to federal law are just as bad as the race baiters whining about profiling.

While federal law does require aliens to carry their registration information, a US citizen incorrectly asked for such documentation can simply assert his citizenship and then be free from harassment unless probable cause for an arrest exists. Conversely, Arizona law requires the US citizen to prove his innocence by presenting his papers or otherwise proving his citizenship. Agree with this Soviet nonsense if you like, but don't misrepresent it as being identical to existing law.

For the record, I agree with much of the rest of the law.

LOL! WTF kind of papers are they asking that a person who is a legal US citizen would not having in any other state?

The law in Arizona asks for either one of these 3 forms of ID.

1.) Drivers license - Anyone driving a car should have one (driving is not a right, its a privilege which requires you to be able to present a valid drivers license along with proof of insurance) and is asked for one when stopped in a vehicle by police officer regardless.

2.) State Issued ID -In the progressive state of CA you need to carry some form of ID to be able to identify yourself or else you can be held by a police officer until they prove your identity. In the AZ law a state issued ID or a drivers license (see above) is sufficient to prove your identity and citizenship.

3.) Native American Reservation ID - Issued to tribes people living on Reservations.


The exaggeration of "Show me your papers" is ridicules.

 

[Venix]

LOL! WTF kind of papers are they asking that a person who is a legal US citizen would not having in any other state?

The law in Arizona asks for either one of these 3 forms of ID.

1.) Drivers license - Anyone driving a car should have one (driving is not a right, its a privilege which requires you to be able to present a valid drivers license along with proof of insurance) and is asked for one when stopped in a vehicle by police officer regardless.

2.) State Issued ID -In the progressive state of CA you need to carry some form of ID to be able to identify yourself or else you can be held by a police officer until they prove your identity. In the AZ law a state issued ID or a drivers license (see above) is sufficient to prove your identity and citizenship.

3.) Native American Reservation ID - Issued to tribes people living on Reservations.


The exaggeration of "Show me your papers" is ridicules.

You are full of shit. California absolutely does not require a US citizen to carry papers, and I challenge you to prove otherwise. Even in states with stop-and-identify statutes--to my knowledge, California is not among them--the Supreme Court has ruled that merely verbally providing one's name is enough.

I have a drivers license that I carry only when driving, as required by law. Fuck you and anyone else who expects me to carry some form of identification just to walk down the street.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

You are full of shit. California absolutely does not require a US citizen to carry papers, and I challenge you to prove otherwise. Even in states with stop-and-identify statutes--to my knowledge, California is not among them--the Supreme Court has ruled that merely verbally providing one's name is enough.


I have a drivers license that I carry only when driving, as required by law. Fuck you and anyone else who expects me to carry some form of identification just to walk down the street.

You are correct in that CA does not have a "Stop and Identify" law but police in CA do have the right to detain anyone during the course of an investigation (for example stopping someone after they receive a call from dispatch about a suspected thief in the area) and they have the ability to charge people with hindering an investigation if they are not cooperative in the course of this questioning which can include refusing to identify yourself.

 

[palehorse]

People who claim that the Arizona law is identical to federal law are just as bad as the race baiters whining about profiling.

While federal law does require aliens to carry their registration information, a US citizen incorrectly asked for such documentation can simply assert his citizenship and then be free from harassment unless probable cause for an arrest exists. Conversely, Arizona law requires the US citizen to prove his innocence by presenting his papers or otherwise proving his citizenship. Agree with this Soviet nonsense if you like, but don't misrepresent it as being identical to existing law.

For the record, I agree with much of the rest of the law.

You've obviously never been through a Border Patrol checkpoint. Hell, the Feds don't even require "reasonable suspicion" to demand every ID from every passenger in any vehicle; and their jurisdiction stretches across the entire country, not just at the border.

Could you please point out exactly how/where the AZ law differs from existing Federal statutes?

 

[Imported]

Wish California would.. don't think it'll happen though.

 

[Venix]

You are correct in that CA does not have a "Stop and Identify" law but police in CA do have the right to detain anyone during the course of an investigation (for example stopping someone after they receive a call from dispatch about a suspected thief in the area) and they have the ability to charge people with hindering an investigation if they are not cooperative in the course of this questioning which can include refusing to identify yourself.

The Supreme Court says that identifying yourself means verbally stating your name. Even if California does have such a statute--thus far no evidence of this law's existence has been presented--it does not and cannot require a person to carry and present written identification.

You've obviously never been through a Border Patrol checkpoint. Hell, the Feds don't even require "reasonable suspicion" to demand every ID from every passenger in any vehicle; and their jurisdiction stretches across the entire country, not just at the border.

Could you please point out exactly how/where the AZ law differs from existing Federal statutes?

According to the ACLU, US citizens are not required to prove their citizenship at Border Patrol checkpoints. This is also consistent with my experience when I was in Arizona and Nevada in 2008; I respectfully declined to provide ID as I was only a passenger in the car, and we were simply waved through. The officers at the Hoover Dam highway checkpoint didn't even ask for it, though I'm not sure if they were Border Patrol.

In any case, it's largely irrelevant because the courts have ruled that immigration and DUI checkpoints are special situations in which violating certain civil rights is acceptable. On the other hand, the Arizona law applies everywhere in the state and targets people who may be walking or may even be in their own homes. Even if we assume that the feds can require identification at their checkpoints, that's still a far cry from enforcing the same requirement everywhere.

Of course, I also think the checkpoints are a load of garbage and that Sitz is among the worst SCOTUS decisions in recent memory. Luckily, my state's Constitution and Supreme Court prohibit suspicionless checkpoints, so at least I don't have to deal with that nonsense.

 

[Tristicus]

So, I heard California's law is almost identical to Arizona's law about immigration...just not enforced.

 

[jonks]

Could you please point out exactly how/where the AZ law differs from existing Federal statutes?

I am a US citizen. If a federal officer stops me and asks if I'm a citizen, all I have to do is say yes, I don't have to produce documentation. If an AZ cop stops someone who can't prove through documentation that they are a citizen, that person can be arrested, even if they are a US citizen, merely for not proving their citizenship through documentation.

This is essentially a theoretical exercise for caucasians since no AZ cop will arrest a white guy who speaks english under this law. The only people likely to get arrested or even questioned about their citizenship will be latinos (basically b/c the "problem" illegals in AZ are latino), and that's the objectionable part of the law.

The interesting thing is that polls show that while over 60% of americans support the law, roughly the same number also admit that it will lead to discrimination of latinos who are legal citizens. You'd think small gov't conservatives would be outraged at this expansion of govt power and intrusion into civil liberties and private information, but generally, nope.