1. I did fight for your right to speak your mind.
2. You could be wrong.
3. It really is too bad those police unions and Associations don't agree with me.
Please don't challenge anyone but me on my blog. Otherwise you come off as a bully. And I won't defend your right to throw your weight around at bystanders. Are we clear on that?
Next, I maintain that the Arizona law does not pose a threat to law abiding citizens of the USA, regardless of skin color. And those sheriffs who oppose the new law on the basis of "It will detract from Police doing some real crime fighting" I think they are the fear mongers. And your lengthy list of "LAW ENFORCEMENT GROUPS OPPOSED TO 1070 LAW",
Sounds to me like a "WHO'S WHO" OF POLICE GROUPS OPPOSED TO CITIZENS OWNING GUNS. Just another pile of opinions that are out of sync with the reality that is America.
@Spiky Zora Jones, Yes the law makes no mention of race. And as I'll show momentarily, Hispanics and Latinos are not the only people crossing the border from Mexico. And I'll touch on the facts of Immigration laws in Other countries, as well.
But first I would like to say "That it is ALREADY Against U.S. Federal Law to be in Arizona without documentation. And no matter how it plays out in your mind, The Federals are shirking their duty and responsibility to protect Arizona and the other 49 United States."
AND NOW/
___________________________________-
The crime wave of violence is not new.
It is a political issue. And this Citizen gets it.
Amnesty Internationalhas this to say:
The Drug Problem is felt on bth sides of the border.
And if this is RACIST in Arizona, Then it must be racist in Brazil and Paraguay as well!
And once again It is not just Arizona.
And Mexican Border Bandits Prey upon other Latinos.
And if you need papers...
And If you still think it's about RACE...
AND GUNS HEADED SOUTH ARE A CONCERN;
But once those guns get into Mexico! A MIRACLE HAPPENS:
AND THIS SHOWS IT ISN'T JUST LATINOS
Please join me for the Third and final portion of My Outrageous Distortion of the facts. Hopefully tomorrow after Church. BE CAREFUL OUT THERE!
10 comments:
Senorita said...
God Bless you for fighting for our country ! Nothing but respect for you and others that do the same.
Although I agree with you, I can also understand why some police associations may be against your point of view.
Doing volunteer work with immigrant communities (included illegals), undocumented people would not report crimes, nor would they fight back against their offenders because they were afraid of being arrested.
While I agree with having people follow the laws, and come here legally, there is also downside to enforcing these immigration laws. It does create fear, and in my volunteer work, if we didn't have police agencies that are relaxed on illegal immigrants, things such as child molestation, stabbings, rape, domestic violence against illegals and their children would not get reported. In my volunteer work, some of these stories were very deep, and it was a hard pill to swallow, especially when a family member was violating the children. Also, you wouldn't get these people to come out and report crimes if the laws against them were tougher.
In one aspect, these laws make jobs of the police harder, and we are on strained budgets to just keep the peace. Here in CA certain crimes have been demoted from a felony to a misdemeanor because we don't have the resources to handle our criminals and our prisons are overflowing to the max. Then on top of that, more responsibilities have to be added to the already strained officers ?
But when it comes down to it, I agree with you that there should be that law in AZ. There will always be violence and we can't stop everything, and when it comes down to it, the US should take care of their own (the taxpayers and voters) first.
We should be rewarding people that vote and pay taxes, not people that just get here and cause violence and chaos. There are so many contributing members of society that immigrated, and I know the majority of people that come here are hardworking. But we do need to do a better job of being vigilant.
Keep it comin' !
You are awesome!
Hey stoogie boy.
Where are you lurking?
There is nothing so common, as the desire to be remarkable!
And you are so mundane in characterizing KW's post as anecdotal, you simple minded misogynist. Where are you?
Ophilia,
careful Lady. I've got this.
Not touching any of this, but just had to tell ya...your new look is great!
Hi KrippledWarrior. Thanks for your response.
I'm not sure how my responding directly to a comment directed to me personally is bullying if the original comment directed to me is somehow not also bullying, but I will abide by your request.
Yes, I could be wrong. So could any of us. I have convictions just as you do. I don't pretend to see all ends. Since this is law, we get to see how it plays out.
I'm not sure how police chiefs opposed to SB 1070 can be fear mongering. They face an unfunded mandate to enforce a law that citizens can sue them over either way. They can be sued by Arizona citizens if those citizens feel they are not enforcing 1070 strictly enough, and they can be sued by legal immigrants and others stopped by police relying upon this law's expansion of reasonable suspicion. How and to whom are they spreading fear when they make this concern known? Are they supposed to idly take no position when, in fact, they have concerns about their resources? In fact, while opposed to the legislation, the president of the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police said that he will uphold every letter of it. "We are sworn," he said, "to enforce the laws of Arizona." http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1986080,00.html. I don't quite see how that is fear-mongering. Maybe you can explain.
Yes, your articles demonstrate that there is, indeed, a massive drug war going on in Mexico. There have been many casualties. But as I pointed out in my first comment, crime throughout Arizona is down, not up. If you have statistics to the contrary, please supply them. The author of "Wrong focus on Arizona immigration law," is just wrong when he or she writes about a "crime increase" without citing any source.
As for Amnesty International's approach, they are right in that the federal government is responsible for policing America's borders. If it is acting inadequately, it has been doing so for years. That should be rectified. In the meantime, a sweepingly broad state law that diverts police attention away from serious crimes still seems unlikely to do much about crime.
In addition, some of the information in the Amnesty International report is just wrong. For instance, while two Texas lawmakers have said they would look into introducing a bill similar to Arizona's, the governor has already stopped such talk by stating that such a law is not right for Texas for the same reasons given by Arizona's police chiefs. In a written statement, Governor Rick Perry wrote, "I fully recognize and support a state's right and obligation to protect its citizens, but I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas. For example, some aspects of the law turn law enforcement officers into immigration officials by requiring them to determine immigration status during any lawful contact with a suspected alien, taking them away from their existing law enforcement duties, which are critical to keeping citizens safe." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/29/texas-governor-arizona-immigration-law-right-texas/. I suppose he must be fear-mongering too in your opinion, but he's carrying on a tradition of tolerance in Texas that all governors, from former Governor George W. Bush through to Perry, have upheld. In Bush's State of the Union address in 2007, in response to a proposed immigration bill, he said, "We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. We need to resolve the status of the immigrants that are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty." If you want to blame Bush for failing to protect our borders, so be it. If you want to accuse Bush and Governor Perry of fear-mongering because they disagree with you, that may seem justified from your perspective.
I will continue this in a separate comment so that I don't hit your character limit.
Moving right along, though I hardly see how it's relevant to this issue -- maybe you can explain because it seems like a red herring to me -- none of the police chiefs has supported any restriction on gun ownership in Arizona. The Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police, in fact, did not oppose the recent gun carry law passed in Arizona. Police unions also supported that law.
No, just like the United States, Brazil and Paraguay are nations. They are not states within a nation. The Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution prohibits preemption by a state of federal law, especially when it comes to matters like immigration and foreign policy. So, Arizona cannot police US borders or define US immigration policy. The United States, Brazil, and Paraguay are entitled to do so in any way they please.
You have an article about an Oregon man convicted of growing marijuana who wants to demonstrate that he took the rap for a Mexican drug cartel. That's fine. The Mexican drug cartels do import drugs into this country. If they somehow need to grow drugs in this country, too, they don't need illegal immigrants, but I suppose your point is that you believe he is telling the truth. I would point out that he is not an illegal immigrant and was caught and convicted without any law like SB 1070. There is nothing to suggest that a law that allowed police to stop children playing basketball in a park and ask for their papers would somehow have averted his crime. If you believe otherwise, I would be interested in your opinion.
And, yes, as your articles demonstrate, illegal immigrants face incredible dangers and hardships on their path into the US. It's not pretty. SB 1070 alleviates this... how? I am not opposed to a firm immigration policy by any means. But the federal government is responsible for tightening our borders. Nativist laws that require local police to spend their time investigating calls about possible illegal immigrants rather than focusing on the very kidnappings, rapes, and murders you are concerned about don't seem like much of a solution to those problems.
And what, exactly, does SB 1070 do about forged documents? I'm not sure I follow your logic. It looks like, after twenty years, Customs caught this guy.
Yes, the Mérida Initiative instituted by Bush and continued by Obama may indeed be flawed. I don't disagree. All that I'm saying is that SB 1070 is an inappropriate response.
And, sure, guns may be headed south according to the BATF. Again, how does SB 1070 address this concern exactly? Where, in fact, do your articles about guns mention illegal immigrants at all? Do you believe that we will stop the traffic of guns out of this country from places like San Diego by catching illegal aliens in Arizona?
Again, thanks for your response and I look forward to your next post.
From what I understand people are not going to be stopped just because they are of a different race. But they will be asked to prove they are citizens if commiting a crime. I would be asked for Id if I was pulled over too and I am a redhead with green eyes! SO I do not believe this is racial profile.
Post a Comment