Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Is there a single person opposed to the AZ law

who has actually read it? Even one who is capable of answering questions about it with quotes from the law as written?

 
NotPanicking

Asked by NotPanicking at 2:48 PM on Apr. 30, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 51 (421,172 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (75)
  • Yes and I have been pulled over for speeding and asked for ID and registration and so on you know the normal.I have been pulled over for things that might seem very trivial to some and im WHITE and i'm an American..I didn't cry about it and cause a scene...I have legal ID and I am a citizen..so there is no need for me to get all bent out of shape because I was asked for some ID ..it didn't hurt my feelings..it didn't make me feel like I was being picked on ..it's just the way it is we have laws.
    tnmomofive

    Answer by tnmomofive at 4:47 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • You will not change your mind and those of who oppose it won't change ours. And yes I read the bill.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 2:57 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • You will not change your mind and those of who oppose it won't change ours. And yes I read the bill.

    Oh, then please quote the section that says police can stop anyone at any time solely on the basis of race to ask for ID.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 3:00 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • Then you should have no problem pulling something from the bill that supports your arguement against it...right?
    tnmomofive

    Answer by tnmomofive at 3:01 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • np, can't copy and paste the pfd, check out B part, http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf
    older

    Answer by older at 3:05 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • ROFL Older,
    FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY
    21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS
    22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS
    23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
    24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE
    25 PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
    26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

    That specifically says "for any lawful contact" that means they have to have REASON to stop you and only if you are suspicious AFTER they stop you are they authorized to investigate. They've even clarified it for people who don't understand what "lawful contact" means. It means when you are stopped in a vehicle, caught trespassing, reported to CFS, etc.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 3:07 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • Thank you NP...
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:09 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • Alright, here's the deal - for me, anyway.

    I HAVE read the bill, and I do understand that it doesn't say or even promote stopping people on the basis of race alone. That doesn't change the fact, for me, that I am 100% certain that it will happen anyway. I feel that this law will cause a head-hunt for illegals, and will undoubtably cause the harrassment of hispanic-looking legals. I also feel that this is just one step closer to everyone having to carry proof of citizenship (not a driver's license - which, where I live, doesn't count) everywhere they go.

    I've never implied that all cops are dirty, and don't want to be accused of such again.

    If you DO NOT think that this will result in such a way - then I get why you would be supportive. Regardless of the wording of the bill, I don't see it turning out any other way than the way I described, which is why I don't support it.
    DusterMommy

    Answer by DusterMommy at 3:09 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • Oh, then please quote the section that says police can stop anyone at any time solely on the basis of race to ask for ID.



    The problem NP, is that this law leaves too much for interpretation and that is why some of us oppose it. Trusting each and every officer's discretion as to what constitutes reasonable suspicion is not something I would be comfortable with.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:11 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

  • Regardless of the wording of the bill, I don't see it turning out any other way than the way I described, which is why I don't support it.

    But you realize the consequences of that actually happening are so severe they'd be more likely to fire anyone already employed who has that tendency and face his lawsuit than have to pay the fines that would go with letting someone actually get away with it? It's up to $5k per day that the policy that allows that behavior exists, not just the amount of time any individual has been detained. Depending on how long they turned a blind eye to something like that, the fine alone could literally bankrupt a city. Why would they risk that when the law is written in a way that they don't have to? It doesn't make sense. There are racists everywhere, but racists who cost their employers more than they're worth are fired, blue wall or not.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 3:14 PM on Apr. 30, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN