BF2S Forums AZ immigration law could lead to possible race war?

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

phffffft
not under this law, that's obvious. you forgot the part about being equal before and under the law.

hmm, If I didn't speak English that would allow for them to check my immigration status IF I WAS DETAINED FOR SOME OTHER REASON.. and I would be ok with it. They already run your record as it is. This would allow them to check your immigration status as well.. basically to see if you are breaking any other laws. Like immigration.

You keep talking immigration, who cares if illegals get asked for papers, that's a red herring, I'm talking about citizens. Do you have anything else to contribute except to show that you want to get at illegals even if it hurts other citizens?

I've contributed what the law actually says. I explained under what circumstance papers can even be asked for. You've contributed nothing but the word irrational about 70 times now.

ATG wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

hmm, If I didn't speak English that would allow for them to check my immigration status IF I WAS DETAINED FOR SOME OTHER REASON.. and I would be ok with it. They already run your record as it is. This would allow them to check your immigration status as well.. basically to see if you are breaking any other laws. Like immigration.

You keep talking immigration, who cares if illegals get asked for papers, that's a red herring, I'm talking about citizens. Do you have anything else to contribute except to show that you want to get at illegals even if it hurts other citizens?

Dude, you sound dumb. kman isn't like that.

I'm trying to focus the debate. A lot of people are supporting the law without even considering who it will impact other citizens. They seem all too willing to say, its all right to do it when it won't or will never have a negative imapct on them. OR another false argument is "that's all right I wouldn't mind. You don't that right to give up someone elses rights. And you don't have to "be like that" and to be blind to all the effects this law will have. I find it surprising that I am receiving a lot of resitance to that idea.. to me its a very very simple point. But to say "but but immigration law makes it okay", or we just have to do it this way because x,y and z. Sorry those arguments don't fly. this law is irrational, its over broad and its bolstered by false support from people who will never feel its negative effects... like people who live out of state.

Its populist mumbo jumbo and easy popcorm to digest... but its going to give the country diarrhea

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Arizona doesn't want to be annexed by Mexico, apparently, and the Feds haven't been controlling the border.

The locals have been trying .. at least.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/30/ar … ities-say/
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/upda … elicopter/

It's all out war waiting to erupt in some border towns. If asking for papers when being detained on another offense is a problem then we've got a serious, serious, problem.

Turquoise wrote:

I still don't see how the law itself is irrational.

The picture the opposition paints is that anyone can be detained for any reason.. when in fact it only pertains to people who have been stopped for another crime. They run a background check to see if I'm wanted for murder if I'm stopped. Does this mean I am being unfairly accused of murder? The 'o you don't care about innocent people argument is so far out there that it doesn't even constitute a real response. Yes I put myself in the position of the accused because I truly believe in do unto others as you would have others do unto you. We all pass judgment based on how we ourselves would feel. Diesel_dyk thinks it's a false argument. I think it's the greatest honor you can give to a stranger.

Kmarion wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

hmm, If I didn't speak English that would allow for them to check my immigration status IF I WAS DETAINED FOR SOME OTHER REASON.. and I would be ok with it. They already run your record as it is. This would allow them to check your immigration status as well.. basically to see if you are breaking any other laws. Like immigration.

You keep talking immigration, who cares if illegals get asked for papers, that's a red herring, I'm talking about citizens. Do you have anything else to contribute except to show that you want to get at illegals even if it hurts other citizens?

I've contributed what the law actually says. I explained under what circumstance papers can even be asked for. You've contributed nothing but the word irrational about 70 times now.

I think it's time for a WORD COUNTER!!! At one quote per post:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

irrational

1

Diesel_dyk wrote:

irrational

2

Diesel_dyk wrote:

irrational...irrational

3

Diesel_dyk wrote:

irrational...irrational

5

Diesel_dyk wrote:

irrational

6

Turquoise wrote:

irrational...irrationality...irrationality...irrational...irrational

11 (!!!)

Diesel_dyk wrote:

irrational...irrational

13

Kmarion wrote:

irrational

14

Diesel_dyk wrote:

irrational

15 (lolz)

Turquoise wrote:

irrational

16

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-05-02 17:50:29)

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I still don't see how the law itself is irrational.

The picture the opposition paints is that anyone can be detained for any reason.. when in fact it only pertains to people who have been stopped for another crime. They run a background check to see if I'm wanted for murder if I'm stopped. Does this mean I am being unfairly accused of murder? The 'o you don't care about innocent people argument is so far out there that it doesn't even constitute a real response. Yes I put myself in the position of the accused because I truly believe in do unto others as you would have others do unto you. We all pass judgment based on how we ourselves would feel. Diesel_dyk thinks it's a false argument. I think it's the greatest honor you can give to a stranger.

M'kay... its pretty funny, you can't make a rational argument to save yourself so you attack the messenger.

Anyway you state
"Yes I put myself in the position of the accused because I truly believe in do unto others as you would have others do unto you. We all pass judgment based on how we ourselves would feel. Diesel_dyk thinks it's a false argument. I think it's the greatest honor you can give to a stranger."

You can't be serious, you cannot possibly think that you have a holy argument. Its more like a holey argument. Fine let's see if your "idea" of how you portray yourself holds up.


well you posted this they took out “lawful contact” from the bill and replaced it with “lawful stop, detention or arrest.”

Scenerio 1: So you could be riding in a car and the person weaves, hits the white line, speeds, misses a stop sign, whatever, then the cop pulls over the car and asks everyone in that car for their ID because they look like illegals. turns out one citizen doesn't have an ID on him at the time and he gets arrested for not having an ID even though everyone in the case tells the cop that he's a citizen. The cop takes him in. Now that's a negative effect.

scenario 2: Same facts, but the people in the car don't look like illegals so the cop never asks for ID and the one citizen in the car sitting in the car doesn't get arrested. no negative effect because he doesn't look illegal.

You tell me which citizen you are doing unto and giving the greatest honor to. Fact is I'm the one who is saying do unto others and showing how this law separates out some citizens for negative treatment. and if you take as a principle of American society that all citizens are to be treated equally then this law is irrational towards that goal. Doing unto others is not a false argument, what is false is that you think that that is what you are doing. You have a false argument because your "ideals" don't hold to your own thoughts on whether this law is appropriate for America. You have a false view of self and its led you to buy into a false argument.


If other people actually think like this, I have to say I am shocked.... its so irrational.


I also find it amusing that you bothered to count up the number of times I said irrational instead of taking that time to try to come up with a rational argument... attacking the messenger spells l-o-s-e-r.


Here let me throw you a bone... if you want to pass a law like this then you need to have an honest debate, politicians need to engage the public and say that the law will negatively impact some citizens, but that its some what necessary to get a handle on the problem of illegal immigration. To ignore the fact that its going to have a negative impact on some citizens is disingenuous. And fact is I think that the law could have been better tailored... I can't believe the a$$holes in AZ were going to leave it at "lawful contact" so that if a cop said hello to you and you said hello back than that would be grounds to ask for ID... tells you all you need to know about the mindset of the people who authored the bill. Do unto others... indeed, might as well rename the police force the gestapo and be done with it.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I still don't see how the law itself is irrational.

The picture the opposition paints is that anyone can be detained for any reason.. when in fact it only pertains to people who have been stopped for another crime. They run a background check to see if I'm wanted for murder if I'm stopped. Does this mean I am being unfairly accused of murder? The 'o you don't care about innocent people argument is so far out there that it doesn't even constitute a real response. Yes I put myself in the position of the accused because I truly believe in do unto others as you would have others do unto you. We all pass judgment based on how we ourselves would feel. Diesel_dyk thinks it's a false argument. I think it's the greatest honor you can give to a stranger.

M'kay... its pretty funny, you can't make a rational argument to save yourself so you attack the messenger.

Anyway you state
"Yes I put myself in the position of the accused because I truly believe in do unto others as you would have others do unto you. We all pass judgment based on how we ourselves would feel. Diesel_dyk thinks it's a false argument. I think it's the greatest honor you can give to a stranger."

You can't be serious, you cannot possibly think that you have a holy argument. Its more like a holey argument. Fine let's see if your "idea" of how you portray yourself holds up.


well you posted this they took out “lawful contact” from the bill and replaced it with “lawful stop, detention or arrest.”

Scenerio 1: So you could be riding in a car and the person weaves, hits the white line, speeds, misses a stop sign, whatever, then the cop pulls over the car and asks everyone in that car for their ID because they look like illegals. turns out one citizen doesn't have an ID on him at the time and he gets arrested for not having an ID even though everyone in the case tells the cop that he's a citizen. The cop takes him in. Now that's a negative effect.

scenario 2: Same facts, but the people in the car don't look like illegals so the cop never asks for ID and the one citizen in the car sitting in the car doesn't get arrested. no negative effect because he doesn't look illegal.

You tell me which citizen you are doing unto and giving the greatest honor to. Fact is I'm the one who is saying do unto others and showing how this law separates out some citizens for negative treatment. and if you take as a principle of American society that all citizens are to be treated equally then this law is irrational towards that goal. Doing unto others is not a false argument, what is false is that you think that that is what you are doing. You have a false argument because your "ideals" don't hold to your own thoughts on whether this law is appropriate for America. You have a false view of self and its led you to buy into a false argument.


If other people actually think like this, I have to say I am shocked.... its so irrational.


I also find it amusing that you bothered to count up the number of times I said irrational instead of taking that time to try to come up with a rational argument... attacking the messenger spells l-o-s-e-r.


Here let me throw you a bone... if you want to pass a law like this then you need to have an honest debate, politicians need to engage the public and say that the law will negatively impact some citizens, but that its some what necessary to get a handle on the problem of illegal immigration. To ignore the fact that its going to have a negative impact on some citizens is disingenuous. And fact is I think that the law could have been better tailored... I can't believe the a$$holes in AZ were going to leave it at "lawful contact" so that if a cop said hello to you and you said hello back than that would be grounds to ask for ID... tells you all you need to know about the mindset of the people who authored the bill. Do unto others... indeed, might as well rename the police force the gestapo and be done with it.

Scenerio 1: So you could be riding in a car and the person weaves, hits the white line, speeds, misses a stop sign, whatever, then the cop pulls over the car and asks everyone in that car for their ID because they look like illegals. turns out one citizen doesn't have an ID on him at the time and he gets arrested for not having an ID even though everyone in the case tells the cop that he's a citizen. The cop takes him in. Now that's a negative effect.

This, in a nutshell is all the haters argument.  Somebody might get their feelings hurt.

Well you know what?

Fuck them.

Planes, trains or freight cars, I don't really give a rip. I am fine with all illegal aliens of any color being deported immediately. The mexicans illegals have ruined honest illegal immigration for everybody by being bad neighbors and exploiters.

It is their own fault, or our fault for complacency.

But they overdid it by a country mile and now it is in our faces and out of control.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

If you're white or you live outside of Arizona then your support for the law is utterly meaningless because you will never suffer the negative effects of its enforcement. So y'all should spare us the "I wouldn't mind if they checked my ID." If you fit into that category perhaps you should sit and ponder what life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is supposed to mean to ALL citizens.

How about if you're one of the majority of Arizona voters who approve of the law?

I believe the statistics I heard yesterday went something like this: 70% approve of the law, even though 51% suspect it will result in some level of civil rights violations of US citizens.

That is the situation Arizonans are dealing with WRT illegal immigration. They are willing to deal with having their 4th Amendment rights infringed (as opposed to being taken away) by having their immigration status questioned in order to get illegals taken care of. Now...who would that apply to in the Arizona demographic, exactly?

Those are the responses from the people in Arizona themselves, not those who are "white or...live outside of Arizona".

Kmarion wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote wrote:

You tell me which citizen you are doing unto and giving the greatest honor to.

The ones who come here legally and carry their papers like they are supposed to.. like they have supposed to have been doing long before this new law.

I didn't know JC required you to show paper work.
It obvious that you want to stay on message, that this about immigration and illegals. I've clearly pointed out a debate about the negative  impact on citizens that this going to have. You want to dismiss it a prophecy or speculation or whatever, for the most part because you and many others here don't want to admit that this law will have negative consequences on citizens. And even if a majority of citizens approve of the law, its not their right to place a burden on "political minority" group of citizens who happen to look like illegals, all citizens are supposed to be equal in the application of the law. NOTICE how I said "political minority" that's so you don't go cackling back to your reverse racism argument. The side you are arguing from only has a few arguments and all of them are designed to evoke an emotional response from the mob.

As far as doing unto others, you are confused. I wouldn't want to be stopped by police and then asked for papers based on the fact that I happen to look like and illegal. And since I don't want that to happen to me, I do unto others and don't wish it to happen to them. But I guess you see nothing wrong with cops asking citizens who look like illegals for papers and then arresting citizens because they can't produce the papers. I guess that means that you wouldn't mind being arrested then and that since you are willing to make that sacrifice that other should be willing to do that too. I doubt your veracity on that one, will this law ever affect you? do you look like an illegal? do you even live in AZ? I doubt it, its false bravado.

Now you can be a positivist and say but the law applies equally, and those aren't intended consequences, and that if the law prevents something from happening then it won't happen. But you know that's BS, and cops never beat people or use traffic stops to take you their rage on someone /sarcasm. The multitude of youtube videos out there prove you wrong on that point, there will be consequences whether or not they are intended by the state legislature. You're not being realistic, you are simply digging in your heels because you like the law, you obviously won't listen to a rational argument that opens an honest debate about this law and its affects on citizens, and you even go so far as to cite religious teachings to falsely claim that they accord with your position. "Jee-zus" nice touch, a true believer blasphemer.

its like reasoning with a brick wall,  the law is overly broad and has a negative impact on American citizens, its the "us versus them" mob that really don't care if citizens who happen to look like illegals will be arrested under this law, but then again this law is designed to placate the "us versus them" mob. Truthfully, I never come into a debate believing that I can change an entrenched dogmatic point of view. I only draw you out to show everyone else the fallacy of your argument. Personally I can't stand the "us versus them" mob, they are unAmerican and they are ruining this country.

I've made my points
Its over.

i cant get over how purposefully naive some of you guys are showing yourselves to be

Sounds like Moscow could have used the ACLU. er... RCLU

Asking for proof of immigration status won't fix anything?