Thread: Federal Judge Blocks Portions of Arizona Illegal Immigration Law

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

Not much of note was actually allowed through, so I fail to see how the other parts will "drive illegals out." Hell, on the conservative radio show, here in Arizona, they were saying that police still have can check the status of someone when a crime is committed. Which begs the question, what the fuck did this law actually do then? It more and more sounds like it was created and passed for some Arizona politicians to use in campaigning, then actually to do shit to stop illegal immigration in the first place.

If you didnt know what the law did, how can you be opposed to it?

Originally Posted by Toker

Elaborate.

Not sure he can. He doesn't appear to understand what the law did in the first place.

Originally Posted by Consultant

If you didnt know what the law did, how can you be opposed to it?



Not sure he can. He doesn't appear to understand what the law did in the first place.

I did understand the law, and good job taking your time to say i'm "uneducated" without noting it wasn't me saying it, It was from the radio talk show here that was on (and here is Arizona, and it is a conservative show). Which they state that police can still obtain the immigration status of suspects (i.e. you get pulled over for speeding, they can still find out if you are here legally even with that part of the law supposedly "blocked"). And being that was supposed to be the big huge part of the bill, I am perfectly right in asking, what the hell was the point then? If it could already been done, then the bill wasn't really needed.


Or I can take your root and just reply for you

Where did I say uneducated? You've always struck me as relatively educated...if not impressionable, and uninformed on certain issues. That doesn't mean you're uneducated.

Don't beat yourself up!

When you asked ..."what the fuck did this law actually do then?"... I took that to mean you didn't understand what the fuck law actually did if the cops were still allowed to seek immigration status of alleged criminals. Right? Fair assumption...if they blocked this offensive and racist law, but the cops are still allowed to do that, they why have the law...what did the law do? You seemed to ask that question from a perspective of being against the law.

Heres an article that does a pretty good job of outlining what was cut from the law, and items of substance that still remain in the law.

http://azstarnet.com/news/state-and-...cc4c002e0.html

I dont know if this was posted any where else in the few immigration threads that we've had going but, here is a copy of 1070, i think its the original version, not the modified version of July. Its worth reading.

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

Because outside of the that part of the law, there was very little else in their that did anything. And I am against it as it creates more problems then fixes to the issue in the first place. Oddly enough, majority of the people against it (at least on TTP, can't speak for nationwide) seem to be against it for similar reasons.

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

Because outside of the that part of the law, there was very little else in their that did anything. And I am against it as it creates more problems then fixes to the issue in the first place. Oddly enough, majority of the people against it (at least on TTP, can't speak for nationwide) seem to be against it for similar reasons.

Ok, so i really dont see an issue with the whole "asking for proof of citizenship if busted in the commission of what a peace officer reasonalbly believes is a violation of law" part of the law, but it got stalled. But the most vague part, that i believe most closely resembles racial profiling is left in! The part about stopping in traffic to pick up day laborers on a street corner or being a day laborer looking for work on a street corner, (to paraphrase the actual law). WTF? Unless.... and i may be answering my own question here.... it was left in because it can in no way be seen as usurping federal immigration law and is more of a state traffic law. But its still more inviting to profiling than the other parts that were put on hold.

Originally Posted by SpecOpsScott

it was left in because it can in no way be seen as usurping federal immigration law and is more of a state traffic law.

Bingo....anyone who read the law suit, will know the truth. The government did NOT go after AZ because of fears of "racial profiling" it was a pissing match and who swings the bigger dick, that is all...

Originally Posted by SpecOpsScott

Ok, so i really dont see an issue with the whole "asking for proof of citizenship if busted in the commission of what a peace officer reasonalbly believes is a violation of law" part of the law, but it got stalled. But the most vague part, that i believe most closely resembles racial profiling is left in! The part about stopping in traffic to pick up day laborers on a street corner or being a day laborer looking for work on a street corner, (to paraphrase the actual law). WTF? Unless.... and i may be answering my own question here.... it was left in because it can in no way be seen as usurping federal immigration law and is more of a state traffic law. But its still more inviting to profiling than the other parts that were put on hold.

They already did for the most part, afaik, before the law though. My problem is the law won't stop or hinder illegal immigration, as it doesn't treat the causes of why they are coming over to begin with. We already have a law that deals with that (employer sanction law), but it doesn't seem like it is being enforced much (if any), and to be honest I think that law, properly enforced, would do more to curb illegal immigration to Arizona then 1070 would.