For all those who oppose Arizona's immigration law

[fusion]

Diversity is fucking myth. If you're a citizen, you're an American. Go to Germany sometime, or Italy, or Spain and tell me again about the "diversity" they DON'T have

I'm not sure what that means unless you think all Americans look a certain way. Are you sure you even know what diversity really means?

Ahh, but if a black guy with braids did the crime, they aren't going to be pulling over blonde haired, blue eyed guys in the interest of "fairness".

Wait now he has braids?

Dude, have you really never, ever been detained by the police? Ever been pulled over while driving? Yes, you REALLY do have to identify yourself and PROVE who the fuck you are. If you dont/wont/cant they'll haul your ass off until they can prove who you are.

Errr so EVERYONE ALREADY has to show valid identification anyway or risk jail when pulled over? What is the point of this law then exactly? Why not take the identification process another level with federal guidelines that could result in jailing and deportation for being here illegally if that's what it ends up boiling down to?

Did you forget the whole "Henry-Gates-Cambridge-Cops-are-Stupid-Teachable-Moment-Beer-Summit Issue with your boy last year?

Who's my boy? Oh that's right. You're another one of those morons who assumes I'm a liberal or democrat because I don't agree with all of their views.

[Todd#43]

I'm not sure what that means unless you think all Americans look a certain way. Are you sure you even know what diversity really means?

Wait now he has braids?

Errr so EVERYONE ALREADY has to show valid identification anyway or risk jail when pulled over? What is the point of this law then exactly? Why not take the identification process another level with federal guidelines that could result in jailing and deportation for being here illegally if that's what it ends up boiling down to?

Who's my boy? Oh that's right. You're another one of those morons who assumes I'm a liberal or democrat because I don't agree with all of their views.

Wow...you sure do know how to dance around some relatively pointed questions.

The point of the law is to allow local and state law enforcement agencies to lawfully detain someone for a violation of immigration laws.

Keep dancing fuck-o, you're doing a great job. If you get tired maybe your buddy JRMiiiiiiiiiii will come in and bail you out with a really cool cartoon.

[r1crusher]

Perhaps when the are caught put them in a facility that meets the bare minimum of human rights organizational standards. As it stands now, they don't have any reason to fear getting arrested and deported, other than it is a hassle.

I will agree with this statement.

I say we start some midnight raids into Mexico and start taking back that stuff which was purchased with money from illegals working in our country.

[fusion]

Wow...you sure do know how to dance around some relatively pointed questions.

The point of the law is to allow local and state law enforcement agencies to lawfully detain someone for a violation of immigration laws.

Keep dancing fuck-o, you're doing a great job. If you get tired maybe your buddy JRMiiiiiiiiiii will come in and bail you out with a really cool cartoon.

Nice try. The only one dancing around the points is you.

[Todd#43]

Nice try. The only one dancing around the points is you.

Lemme guess...you can't read either?

[fusion]

Lemme guess...you can't read either?

It doesn't seem I'm the one with a reading comprehension problem. Let me know when the black guy with braids gets an even more accurate description.

[Todd#43]

It doesn't seem I'm the one with a reading comprehension problem. Let me know when the black guy with braids gets an even more accurate description.

How about a black guy with braids, wearing a red shirt and blue pants? Happy now?

You're missing the point, fuck-o.

The point is that profiling exists. Always has, always will. You do it, and everyone else does too.

Right now Mexicans account for nearly 60% of the people here illegally - roughly 6,000,000 people. Other Latin American immigrants account for over 20% more. Almost 90% of the illegal immigrants are from Spanish Speaking countries. The odds say that if you pull over a person who doesn't have a driver's license or passport and doesn't speak English, they are probably illegal. What the fuck in your small mind tells you that its wrong to question that??

[Disclaimer]

If you get tired maybe your buddy JRMiiiiiiiiiii will come in and bail you out with a really cool cartoon.

No cartoons, but I did find someone modeling your favorite Tshirt.

***That was a bad pic mang****

I'm glad you took time out from sheltering your kids to come and have, what used to be, a moderate debate with us.

Edited May 21, 2010 by yotaman88210

[Todd#43]

No cartoons, but I did find someone modeling your favorite Tshirt.

I'm glad you took time out from sheltering your kids to come and have, what used to be, a moderate debate with us.

Moderate debate?

Takes a lot of balls to refer to this thread that way when your first post has a photo of a guy sporting a T-Shirt that has the word "******" on it.

Class act, man. Class act. Although I suppose you get a pass on playing with that word because you're you're so "enlightened" and liberal.

[Disclaimer]

What? I'm just profiling how I think you think.

The point is that profiling exists. Always has, always will. You do it, and everyone else does too.

[fusion]

How about a black guy with braids, wearing a red shirt and blue pants? Happy now?

You're missing the point, fuck-o.

The point is that profiling exists. Always has, always will. You do it, and everyone else does too.

Right now Mexicans account for nearly 60% of the people here illegally - roughly 6,000,000 people. Other Latin American immigrants account for over 20% more. Almost 90% of the illegal immigrants are from Spanish Speaking countries. The odds say that if you pull over a person who doesn't have a driver's license or passport and doesn't speak English, they are probably illegal. What the fuck in your small mind tells you that its wrong to question that??

No dumb fuck, let me help you.

Anyone looking Hispanic might be an illegal = profiling

Pulled over, no driver's license and doesn't speak English != profiling

Are you really too fucking stupid to understand the difference?

[Todd#43]

What? I'm just profiling how I think you think.

Of course you are. You'd be something less than human if you didn't.

No dumb fuck, let me help you.

Anyone looking Hispanic might be an illegal = profiling

Pulled over, no driver's license and doesn't speak English != profiling

Are you really too fucking stupid to understand the difference?

The difference between what - profiling and profiling? Those were the only two examples you gave.

Unless you missed my point, its that profiling exists, and it should.

If most of the illegal immigrants, or drug dealers, or criminals in the country were over 6' tall, good looking, with brown hair and blue eyes, I expect I'd see my share of issues with the law. Fact is that they aren't. The statistics say that nearly 90% of the illegal immigrants are Latin American in appearance and don't speak English. So when an officer pulls over someone that doesn't speak English and has no identification there's a good chance that they are here illegally.

I'm not sure I understand why you have such a problem with someone being asked for identification during lawful contact. Tell you what, next time someone asks you for an ID why dont you tell them to fuck off straight away - see how far your "constitutional rights" gets you.

[r1crusher]

I say "profile" away. If you have nothing to worry about you'll be only slightly inconvenienced. It'll be no more of a hassle than going through security at the airport.

Also, I'm sick of going to the damn ATM and having to push "English" when I want to get some Pesos...I mean cash.

[fusion]

I get where you're coming from but you keep saying profiling then giving an example that isn't.

I've never said I have a problem with having to show id when lawful contact is made.

[AOW]

the "governor" of the Arizona bordering Mexican town of Sonora, released a statement complaining about all the illegals that left AZ and went back home to Sonora, MX! He stated that all of those Mexicans returning home without U.S. money is putting a strain on his town....

I've always advocated "gun line" borders. I knew things were bad when I was in Cranberry Twp, PA, went to Dunkin Donuts on a Sunday morning, and had to translate a customer's order for the cashier... I grew up in PA and never seen a Mexican there until that day!

[jblosser]

I get where you're coming from but you keep saying profiling then giving an example that isn't....

Far be it from me to speak for Todd (and I'll probably get blasted by him...) but I <think> that his example of the "black man with braids" was meant to show that the police "profile" all the time. They're looking for a suspect who fits a certain description.

Sometimes we the public appreciate "profiling" - when a criminal is caught; and sometimes certain portions of the public don't appreciate "profiling" - when it doesn't fit their idea of "right and wrong", or their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and the the rights conveyed within.

[bambam]

Just curious - did this occur at a border crossing from Mexico into the States? If so, random searches at border crossings are pretty typical. It happens at the airports all the time too.

If it happened in another scenario, why did you consent to the search?

Todd, this happened some time after crossing the state line entering NM from Texas. It didn't occur to me to refuse the officer - I complied with the search because they had guns and I believe when dealing with authorities, that discretion is the better part of valor.

This is obviously only tangentially related to the original post, but I felt the search was unwarranted. Mind you I was driving on the left side of the road, as I'm wont to do from time to time - makes those long drives so much more interesting.

[Todd#43]

Far be it from me to speak for Todd (and I'll probably get blasted by him...) but I <think> that his example of the "black man with braids" was meant to show that the police "profile" all the time. They're looking for a suspect who fits a certain description.

Sometimes we the public appreciate "profiling" - when a criminal is caught; and sometimes certain portions of the public don't appreciate "profiling" - when it doesn't fit their idea of "right and wrong", or their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and the the rights conveyed within.

Actually, you hit the nail on the head, and explained it a little better than I was.

Thanks for the assist

Todd, this happened some time after crossing the state line entering NM from Texas. It didn't occur to me to refuse the officer - I complied with the search because they had guns and I believe when dealing with authorities, that discretion is the better part of valor.

This is obviously only tangentially related to the original post, but I felt the search was unwarranted. Mind you I was driving on the left side of the road, as I'm wont to do from time to time - makes those long drives so much more interesting.

Bill, if you were driving on the left side of the road I'm quite certain they had "probable cause" to stop you. Of course, consenting to the search 9if you knew you were clean) was probably the best choice.

[jporter12]

I've been profiled, because my car was rusty, primered, etc... and the cop said I looked at him like a scared deer. I WAS driving with my license suspended.

Hindsight... The LEO looked through my car during that stop, without consent. I had nothing to hide, and nothing came of it, but is that allowed?

Sorry for taking this OT, but I think of it every time profiling gets mentioned.

I know where some LEO's can sit and catch them some illegals by profiling... jussayin'...

[Todd#43]

Lulz.. pretty sure Bam was kidding about the wrong side of the road business. (at least' date=' I hope so...)[/quote']

I met him a couple of times. I dont think he was kidding.

[chevysoldier]

Hindsight... The LEO looked through my car during that stop, without consent. I had nothing to hide, and nothing came of it, but is that allowed?

Only if he had reasonable suspicion, like you had a bong or an empty 12 pack on the seat next to you. IIRC there was a supreme court case that ruled just the smell of marijuana isn't enough cause to search a vehicle without consent.

I will not consent to a search even if I do have nothing to hide.

[jporter12]

Only if he had reasonable suspicion, like you had a bong or an empty 12 pack on the seat next to you. IIRC there was a supreme court case that ruled just the smell of marijuana isn't enough cause to search a vehicle without consent.

I will not consent to a search even if I do have nothing to hide.

I was too stressed (intimidated, scared?), and didn't know any better at the time, otherwise I would have asked about it then.

[jblosser]

The Supreme Court of Washington State, in State v. Grande, ruled on 17 July, 2008, that "...police cannot arrest passengers simply for being in a car that smells of marijuana. The unanimous decision overturned a 29-year-old precedent allowing police to search or arrest passengers if they smelled pot near a car."

Read more about it here - warning: lots of legalese (click)

The Ohio Supremes ruled in September 2000 that the smell of burning (or burnt) hippie lettuce is enough to justify the search of a vehicle and its occupants. That case stemmed from a Pickerington man running a red light on Rt. 33 in Lancaster.

A quick Google search seems to show that most state's supreme courts have ruled that the smell of marijuana smoke emanating from a vehicle constitutes probable cause to search the vehicle, but not to matter-of-factly arrest the occupants of the vehicle.

So, don't hit the chronic when driving. Drugs are bad, mmkay?

Edited May 22, 2010 by jblosser
added Rt. 33

[chevysoldier]

The Supreme Court of Washington State, in State v. Grande, ruled on 17 July, 2008, that "...police cannot arrest passengers simply for being in a car that smells of marijuana. The unanimous decision overturned a 29-year-old precedent allowing police to search or arrest passengers if they smelled pot near a car."

Read more about it here - warning: lots of legalese (click)

The Ohio Supremes ruled in September 2000 that the smell of burning (or burnt) hippie lettuce is enough to justify the search of a vehicle and its occupants. That case stemmed from a Pickerington man running a red light in Lancaster.

A quick Google search seems to show that most state's supreme courts have ruled that the smell of marijuana smoke emanating from a vehicle constitutes probable cause to search the vehicle, but not to matter-of-factly arrest the occupants of the vehicle.

So, don't hit the chronic when driving. Drugs are bad, mmkay?

Ah , that's what is was. Thanks for looking out and the clarification. It's way too early to be researching anything.

[jporter12]

Ah , that's what is was. Thanks for looking out and the clarification. It's way too early to be researching anything.

The innanet runs 24/7... Jussayin'