Proof of Citizenship

[Anonymous]

PP here. BTW, it is easy to carry proof of my immigration status and I would do it without hesitation, and show proof to a police officer. It is simply a passport, a legal permanent resident card, or birth certificate. You can hold this easily in your wallet, just like you are required to carry your driver's license while driving.

[Anonymous]

" I remember right after 9-11 getting stopped at the airport all the time for a more thorough security check - yes, it was racial profiling, no doubt about it. Did I like it when it was me? No. Did I understand? Yes. I get it, it's better than checking the little old lady with a cane. That being said, I do not agree with racial profiling, but I can understand the temptation to use it."

Shortly after 9-11, as we were about to board, a white airline employee took an African-American family with two little kids aside to question and search them after they had already been through the security checkpoint. (This was before they had worked out all of the airport security guidelines.) I had not been watching them so I do not know if they were behaving in a suspicious manner. I know a terrorist could be anybody but it did occur to me that the employee might be abusing her authority in selecting only them among the many passengers.

[Anonymous]

They might be scrubbing the shit out of the toilets in the office building where you work, or picking the organic vegetable crops that are so important to feed our oh so special children, or doing yard work in the neighborhood, and we should all be glad they will do it.

Or killing Chandra Levy.

--The crime thing: thinking back on my youth in this area, I don't recall any gang activity and all that implies, until the immigration problem from south of the border got out of hand.

[Anonymous]

Few of these people are fleeing political oppression, for many it is soley for economic reasons. There are few western hemisphere countries that have people starving to death. So the economic plight is relative, not as bad as parts of Africa.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why the pearl-clutchers ("we MUST secure our borders!") act as if immigrants, documented and otherwise, are all take and no give. Well, I do understand it, but it's disingenuous. Undocumented immigrants are responsible for a huge part of the economy in the border states. If they were to magically disappear, states like Arizona would be in a world of hurt. They keep costs low by doing jobs others won't, they pay sales and other use taxes, in many cases their employers pay payroll taxes for them, but the workers never file a return and claim their refunds.

The new AZ situation is flagrantly unconstitutional, and I expect it will be overturned by a higher court.

My inclination is to let the peaceable, hardworking folks come and stay as long as they like. Provide minimal social services, especially those aimed at a better future (like public education). And a felony conviction, even one, gets you tossed for good.

[Anonymous]

I am black and a first generation immigrant and I am really torn about this law. While I agree that AZ may have a problem with immigration I am not sure that this is the correct way to address it. I am really worried about those "brown" people (the police will not be stopping whites) who are legal immigrants or who are citizens who will now have to make sure that they go about their daily activities with "papers" or risk being locked up.

[Anonymous]

I hope when native Arizonans call the cops about real crime that their cops are too busy transporting illegal aliens to come to their aid.

Has anyone thought about the additional burden on local law enforcement? Has anyone considered the fact that both legal and illegal immigrants are likely to avoid cooperating with the police? I think this will make it harder to find the real criminals.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I
Has anyone thought about the additional burden on local law enforcement? Has anyone considered the fact that both legal and illegal immigrants are likely to avoid cooperating with the police? I think this will make it harder to find the real criminals.

The police themselves have been split on this law. Among others, the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police, opposed the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the pearl-clutchers ("we MUST secure our borders!") act as if immigrants, documented and otherwise, are all take and no give. Well, I do understand it, but it's disingenuous. Undocumented immigrants are responsible for a huge part of the economy in the border states. If they were to magically disappear, states like Arizona would be in a world of hurt. They keep costs low by doing jobs others won't, they pay sales and other use taxes, in many cases their employers pay payroll taxes for them, but the workers never file a return and claim their refunds.

The new AZ situation is flagrantly unconstitutional, and I expect it will be overturned by a higher court.

My inclination is to let the peaceable, hardworking folks come and stay as long as they like. Provide minimal social services, especially those aimed at a better future (like public education). And a felony conviction, even one, gets you tossed for good.

The evidence is mixed on this topic. Studies have been done that show that immigrants can be positive for the *overall* national economy (notably because of paying social security taxes but not always collecting), but not that they definitely are. Additionally, the studies show that while there may be a net positive nationally, illegal immigrants are a definite negative drain on STATE finances--it is the states that foot the bill for education and hospitals used by illegal immigrants. So it is perfectly logical for residents of AZ, CA, TX, or other high illegal-immigration states, to resent the drain on their state coffers. IMHO, if the feds are going to require something of the states, they should at least help pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:" I remember right after 9-11 getting stopped at the airport all the time for a more thorough security check - yes, it was racial profiling, no doubt about it. Did I like it when it was me? No. Did I understand? Yes. I get it, it's better than checking the little old lady with a cane. That being said, I do not agree with racial profiling, but I can understand the temptation to use it."

Shortly after 9-11, as we were about to board, a white airline employee took an African-American family with two little kids aside to question and search them after they had already been through the security checkpoint. (This was before they had worked out all of the airport security guidelines.) I had not been watching them so I do not know if they were behaving in a suspicious manner. I know a terrorist could be anybody but it did occur to me that the employee might be abusing her authority in selecting only them among the many passengers.

Returning from a cruise through Miami with a family of 5, 3 out of 5 members of our caucasian family were chosen for additional screening, pulled aside and made to stand in the screening area in these plexiglass closet like structures (clear on all 4 sides). Now maybe that screening employee didn't like the oldest and youngest members of our family, and abused his authority because he felt an affinity for the middle child?

Please, what ifs are so silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" I remember right after 9-11 getting stopped at the airport all the time for a more thorough security check - yes, it was racial profiling, no doubt about it. Did I like it when it was me? No. Did I understand? Yes. I get it, it's better than checking the little old lady with a cane. That being said, I do not agree with racial profiling, but I can understand the temptation to use it."

Shortly after 9-11, as we were about to board, a white airline employee took an African-American family with two little kids aside to question and search them after they had already been through the security checkpoint. (This was before they had worked out all of the airport security guidelines.) I had not been watching them so I do not know if they were behaving in a suspicious manner. I know a terrorist could be anybody but it did occur to me that the employee might be abusing her authority in selecting only them among the many passengers.

Returning from a cruise through Miami with a family of 5, 3 out of 5 members of our caucasian family were chosen for additional screening, pulled aside and made to stand in the screening area in these plexiglass closet like structures (clear on all 4 sides). Now maybe that screening employee didn't like the oldest and youngest members of our family, and abused his authority because he felt an affinity for the middle child?

Please, what ifs are so silly.

Anecdotes may mean nothing, but there is data behind racial profiling.

[Anonymous]

To all those who are against the new law, please let me know at what point our immigration laws should be enforced? Can we support ALL of Latin America in the US?
Also, will the fruit just rot before being picked if we don't have illegal immigrants to pick it? Will lawns go to seed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" I remember right after 9-11 getting stopped at the airport all the time for a more thorough security check - yes, it was racial profiling, no doubt about it. Did I like it when it was me? No. Did I understand? Yes. I get it, it's better than checking the little old lady with a cane. That being said, I do not agree with racial profiling, but I can understand the temptation to use it."

Shortly after 9-11, as we were about to board, a white airline employee took an African-American family with two little kids aside to question and search them after they had already been through the security checkpoint. (This was before they had worked out all of the airport security guidelines.) I had not been watching them so I do not know if they were behaving in a suspicious manner. I know a terrorist could be anybody but it did occur to me that the employee might be abusing her authority in selecting only them among the many passengers.

Returning from a cruise through Miami with a family of 5, 3 out of 5 members of our caucasian family were chosen for additional screening, pulled aside and made to stand in the screening area in these plexiglass closet like structures (clear on all 4 sides). Now maybe that screening employee didn't like the oldest and youngest members of our family, and abused his authority because he felt an affinity for the middle child?

Please, what ifs are so silly.

Were you pulled aside by someone who was not Caucasian? And would you feel differently if you were the only Caucasian people on the cruise and all members of your family were pulled aside?

[Anonymous]

"My inclination is to let the peaceable, hardworking folks come and stay as long as they like. "

This is not a realistic way of looking at immigration policy. It would encourage people from all over the world to cross into our borders. Are you willing to pay the bill for this? Can you imagine the impact upon public services/facilities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To all those who are against the new law, please let me know at what point our immigration laws should be enforced? Can we support ALL of Latin America in the US?
Also, will the fruit just rot before being picked if we don't have illegal immigrants to pick it? Will lawns go to seed?

I want immigration laws to be enforced. But I don't want American citizens pulled off the street and put in jail to make that happen. Is that too much to ask? Apparently.

You think this is no big deal because you cannot imagine anyone hauling you off to jail because you weren't carrying your passport that day. Well, I can. I can imagine it just like I can imagine a police officer pulling me over because my "tail light is out". You can argue with a police officer if he's ticketing you for a parking violation. I can't because I might get tossed in jail out of spite. Your teenagers are out and some officer doesn't like the look of them. Look! Time for a citizenship check. Send 'em all to detention and let their parents bring ID to get them out. It's an opportunity for harassment, plain and simple.

This is just like the drug seizure laws, where anyone suspected of a drug crime could get his car seized, his house taken, etc. It sounded like a good idea. But the practical reality was that the police used it abusively. They seized property on people who they did not really have good evidence. If the person asks for the car back, they say "OK, but we'll charge you and you'll have to get a lawyer and go to trial and risk prison". If they walked away from their property, the police would not charge them because they had no case. A lot of small police departments made good money doing this and selling the property at auction.