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

Welp.. then they would be breaking the law. You don't make laws based on the assumption that other laws will be broke. We have a court system here that addresses illegally obtained evidence.

.. and harassment.

Shahter wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Welp.. then they would be breaking the law. You don't make laws based on the assumption that other laws will be broke. We have a court system here that addresses illegally obtained evidence.

and they aren't now, huh? nobody's going to take it to the court - everything's going to be set on the spot using them portreits of american presidents. you are breeding corruption with this, nothing more.

You sound more bitter than anything else. They aren't what? Why wouldn't they take it to court?

What do you mean they (illegals) can't? They already do.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hea … 54458.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,244193,00.html

Shahter wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

What do you mean they (illegals) can't? They already do.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hea … 54458.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,244193,00.html

oh, for crying out loud, do you honestly beleave there are many people who are going to risk it just to save a hundred bucks?

Risk what? You said they can't take them to court and I gave you two examples when they have.

Wait, you're worried about illegals being harassed by asking for papers?

Are you ready to admit that you were wrong about their ability to prosecute? Remember, you said they can't.

If it was legal citizens vs illegal citizens would it be a race war?

Or would it be an U.S.A. vs. Mexico war?

Shat, I beg you.

I was hoping my man kman might start posting again. I have sort of been following you and this, and it seems to me as if kman is using you as a tool to demonstrate how...foundationaly vapid the people opposed to this are. Now, I may be drunk and my spelling bad but jeeze dude, I can read between the lines.


You would be doing favor to those advocating for essentially a borderless country if you simply curtailed from pontificating about that which either you have some sort of psychological issue or pathology about to the extent that you sound like a bleating bovine who has utters that are too full of milk that is spoiling.


What I am trying to say that, it is as if somebody sliced open your head, used a saw too circumsize the skull, tiped the lid and poured some sort of acid on the part of your brain where common sense should enaminate.

Or more simply, will you kindly shut the fuck up for Gods sake???

At the risk of sounding racist, I really hate Mexicans.

And the law doesn't stipulate anything beyond that? Just permits officers to request ID if they have reasonable suspicion someone is not here legally?

Last edited by nukchebi0 (2010-05-03 18:48:21)

JohnG@lt wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

How hard is it to produce an ID provided you legally have one?

It's not. As was stated previously, most people walk around with multiple forms of identification on them every single day. Whether it's in a wallet or a purse we carry it around and produce it as necessary without complaint. I don't make a big stink about my civil rights when I walk into a bank and they ask for my license before handing me money from my bank account. To do so would make me look like a silly ass.

This entire infantile argument centers around people not wanting to be 'required' to carry ID. They do it anyway, they just don't want to be told they have to. I personally feel naked without my wallet and carry it around with me everywhere I go so I honestly don't have a clue what the big deal is.

Its not of itself a big deal, but Europeans see it as the thin end of the wedge, exactly as Americans see gun registration as the thin end.

Would gun registration make the slightest difference to the average American? No.  Are the arguments against it infantile? Yes. You have to show ID and have a background check when you buy a gun already, how is an entry on a database recording that a big deal?
Do you want to see it happen? I doubt it.

We pay to taxes so Police officers can be hired to keep the peace, not so they can poke their nose into our daily business or harass us.

Dilbert_X wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

How hard is it to produce an ID provided you legally have one?

It's not. As was stated previously, most people walk around with multiple forms of identification on them every single day. Whether it's in a wallet or a purse we carry it around and produce it as necessary without complaint. I don't make a big stink about my civil rights when I walk into a bank and they ask for my license before handing me money from my bank account. To do so would make me look like a silly ass.

This entire infantile argument centers around people not wanting to be 'required' to carry ID. They do it anyway, they just don't want to be told they have to. I personally feel naked without my wallet and carry it around with me everywhere I go so I honestly don't have a clue what the big deal is.

Its not of itself a big deal, but Europeans see it as the thin end of the wedge, exactly as Americans see gun registration as the thin end.

Would gun registration make the slightest difference to the average American? No.  Are the arguments against it infantile? Yes. You have to show ID and have a background check when you buy a gun already, how is an entry on a database recording that a big deal?
Do you want to see it happen? I doubt it.

We pay to taxes so Police officers can be hired to keep the peace, not so they can poke their nose into our daily business or harass us.

The difference between the two is that one is a set of inanimate objects while the other is people. The argument against a database is that in the event of a gun banning, it would make them that much easier to confiscate. In the case of people, their info is already tabulated via census and the fact that your address, social security number, date of birth etc is all recorded by the DMV when you get your ID in the first place. I even needed a copy of my birth certificate. So... there already are multiple databases used to record our data anyway. The law doesn't add anything new. It's not like they're going to start going through DMV records, see who has a Mexican sounding last name and then go raid their house at random.

Yes, it's kind of a stupid argument, but the odds of a gun banning are far more likely than a repeat of the Japanese Internment camps that existed during WWII. Shit like that doesn't fly with 24/7 media coverage.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-05-03 21:01:30)

Dilbert_X wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

The difference between the two is that one is a set of inanimate objects while the other is people. The argument against a database is that in the event of a gun banning, it would make them that much easier to confiscate. In the case of people, their info is already tabulated via census and the fact that your address, social security number, date of birth etc is all recorded by the DMV when you get your ID in the first place. I even needed a copy of my birth certificate. So... there already are multiple databases used to record our data anyway. The law doesn't add anything new.
Yes, it's kind of a stupid argument, but the odds of a gun banning are far more likely than a repeat of the Japanese Internment camps that existed during WWII. Shit like that doesn't fly with 24/7 media coverage.

The point is gun registration and compulsory carrying of IDs are two focal issues, one for the US and the other for Europe. Each can be viewed as infantile or not.

You see gun registration as the first step towards a fascist state, we've seen IDs used as the first step in Europe being under the swastika or hammer and sickle.

It's not like they're going to start going through DMV records, see who has a Mexican sounding last name and then go raid their house at random.

But they are going to be pulling over random people in the street who look vaguely Mexican and putting them under threat of being arrested.
If their house were raided and the have the right papers they won't be arrested.
If they are pulled over and have the right papers they won't be arrested.
Don't you see the similarity?

Are you not required to carry a driver's license while operating a motor vehicle? Do you not carry ID around every day anyway? How exactly does it cross the line to require you to carry something that you would have on your person regardless?

And I don't care about gun registration. Doesn't bother me but I do understand the argument.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-05-03 21:17:06)

Seems strange that you need to carry your driving license a all times, register your car etc and have no issue with it but get all uppity over your firearms, thats the argument.

If I drive a car I'm required to have a license, but not carry it. In the UK I think its still the case I'd have seven days to show it to Police.
If I'm in possession of a firearm I'm required to register with the Police and carry my license, its no big deal.
If I'm walking to the pub I don't need to carry ID. If the Police ask to see ID I'm free to tell them to get bent. Unless I'm suspected of a crime they CAN get bent.

I'm just making the point these are two touchstone issues which make no sense to the other side of the pond, but each side sees them as cornerstones of free society. Probably irrationally but there you go.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-05-03 21:29:02)

You buy a gun, fill out the paperwork and it's registered with the ATF.

And they maintain a database open to all law-enforcement bodies?

Entering a private establishment and walking along the street minding your own business are two different things.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-05-03 21:36:19)