[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Senior Trump Official Declares War On Far-Left NGOs Sowing Chaos Nationwide White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears Visualizing The Number Of Farms In Each US State Let her cry The Secret Version of the Bible You’re Never Taught - Secret History Rocker defames Charlie Kirk threatens free speech Paramount Has a $1.5 Billion South Park Problem European Warmongers Angry That Trump Did Not Buy Into the ‘Drone Attack in Poland’ Grassley Unveils Declassified Documents From FBI's Alleged 'Political Hit Job' On Trump 2 In 5 Young Adults Are Taking On Debt For Social Image, To Impress Peers, Study Finds Visualizing Global Gold Production By Region RFK Jr. About to DROP the Tylenol–Autism BOMBSHELL & Trump tweets cryptic vaccine message Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March Something BIG is happening (One Assassination Changed Everything) The Truth About This Piece Of Sh*t Breaking: 18,000 Epstein emails just dropped. Memphis: FOUR CHILDREN shot inside a home (National Guard Inbound) Elon Musk gives CHILLING WARNING after Charlie Kirk's DEATH... ActBlue Lawyers Subpoenaed As House GOP Investigation Into Donor Fraud Intensifies Cash Jordan: Gangs EMPTY Chicago Plaza... as Mayor's "LET THEM LOOT" Plan IMPLODES Trump to send troops to Memphis Who really commands China’s military? (Xi Jinping on his way out) Ghee: Is It Better Than Butter? What Is Butyric Acid? 6 Benefits (Dr Horse says eat butter, not margarine!) Illegal Alien Released by Biden Admin Beheads Motel Manager In Dallas, Israel Wants to Unite Itself by Breaking the World - Leavitt Castigates Journalists To Their Faces Over Lack Of Iryna Zarutska Killing Coverage Aussie Students Spend The Most Time In School, Polish Kids The Least Tyler Robinson, 22, Named As Suspect In Charlie Kirk Assassination How They Control the World and Their Secret Weapon

Immigration
See other Immigration Articles

Title: Cops not allowed to request ID? An absurd notion that's never been true
Source: .
URL Source: http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x- ... -notion-thats-never-been-true#
Published: May 29, 2010
Author: .
Post Date: 2010-05-29 17:10:20 by Artisan
Keywords: None
Views: 2218
Comments: 105

LA County Libertarian Examiner

With seemingly never-ending angst and bickering over Arizona's recent immigration law SB 1070, proponents and supporters of the law have used several arguements in defense of it. ''It's 100% Constitutional, it simply mirrors existing federal law'', they insist. They will go on to assure that no 'racial profiling' is involved, that people won't be stopped based on race, and that people can only be asked for ID after they are stopped for legitimate and legal just cause, such as an alleged traffic violation.

This brings me to my question which addresses the very crux of the issue. Do supporters of this law believe that police were, until passage of SB 1070, legally and legitimately prohibited from demanding ID from those whom they lawfully detain?

If so, that is quite an outrageous and absurd contention. The fact is that police have always been lawfully allowed to request identification after legitimately detaining a suspect.

'But they had to do SOMETHING', they'll reply, 'the feds refuse to halt the hoards of illegals!'

While true, that the feds have purposely allowed massive illegal immigration for decades, please stick with the point at hand and simply address the question I am asking. Do you actually believe that cops across the United States have no authority to ask for ID unless each state legislature passes a 'special law' allowing them to do so? If you belive this, why do you believe it? Who taught you such nonsense? [article continues here

Related links:

Ron Paul "has some reservations" about Arizona SB 1070

Judge Andrew Napolitano speaks against SB 1070

Tom Tancredo to be keynote speaker at Arizona SB 1070 rally

Arizona's infamous Russell Pearce shills for traffic cameras, sought to bar photoblocker spray

Does race pimp 'Machete' have the cojones to 'send a message' to U.S. Congress?

Rep. McClintock gives lip service to sovereignty after endorsing open border globalists for years

Obama propagates myth that police 'duty' is to 'keep Americans safe'

Criminalizing the natural right to work, gesture, or nod in Arizona

Illegal immigration opponent Terry Anderson bars mention of 'new world order garbage' on radio show

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 31.

#4. To: Artisan (#0)

Asking for ID is one thing. Asking for documentation of citizenship is something different.

THe simple fact is that not everyone has documentation of citizenship. There are, to be sure, birth certificates, but so many people on this website refuse to believe that Obama's birth certificate is authentic. Some people - including the many elderly who retired to Arizona - either never got their birth certificates from the Health Dept or else misplaced them over the decades. Some might have baptismal certificates from when they were newborns -- but can Arizona cops read a Greek Orthodox Church baptismal certificate written in Greek or a Jewish circumcision certificate written in Hebrew?

Hell, we don't trust the cops to tell the proper time when they ticket us for overtime parking - do we really trust them to make the proper assessment of citizenship papers?!

Shoonra  posted on  2010-05-30   10:21:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

there is a driver in phoenix stopped last month forced to show his birth certificate. he was born here yet ice arrested him, ice said this is standard op. procedure. and still prior to ab 1070 taking effect. yet more proof the law was not legally needed. he was detained by ice until his wife brought his birth certificate. the reason cops never asked illegals for id is because it was policy handed down from top. NOT because it was disallowed.

Artisan  posted on  2010-05-30   11:22:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

am i under the mistaken idea that the citizens of AZ voted for this new law?

christine  posted on  2010-05-30   11:28:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

yes. the legislature voted/ passed it. it was not a referendum. i hope you understand my point though. people are silly and stupid if they think cops could not ask for id until now. they simply didnt want or choose to.

Artisan  posted on  2010-05-30   11:33:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

i do understand your point and that it was not a referendum makes a difference in my mind.

i'd be interested to see the percentage of Arizonians who support the law.

christine  posted on  2010-05-30   11:37:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

There was no public vote however public support is running around 60% once again proof that the majority is always wrong...here's what most are missing with this...because all states have different requirements for getting a drivers license or ID the only solution (which they are working on right now ) is a national bio metric ID card for everyone....those who think this law will do anything to stop the illegal's are dreaming rather it's a case of be careful what you wish for.

robnoel  posted on  2010-05-30   11:58:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

i get it, robby. what i don't get is a solution to the illegal situation. you have to understand the citizens of the states'(especially border states) frustration, anger, helplessness in watching the catastrophic losses they are having to endure because of it.

christine  posted on  2010-05-30   12:39:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

... understand the citizens of the states'(especially border states) frustration, anger, helplessness in watching the catastrophic losses they are having to endure ...

Christine:

This bill was passed by the state legislators of Arizona who, I might add, paid close attention to the sheeple's wishes. At the time the law was passed, several polls showed approval of the public at 70%.

If you read this bill (which I have), you aren't trying to bullshit someone into accepting YOUR point of view, you have paid attention to, or are aware of, just the crime that has come to Arizona with the illegal traffic, and you have personally witnessed the lack of action by the Border Patrol over the past 12 years, then you know full well what created the necessity of Bill 1070. That Bill actually makes it harder to ask someone for identification than the Federal law, yet gives authority to local law enforcement to alleviate a problem not being addressed by the Feds.

Be aware that, during and since Gore ran for president, BOTH parties have been aware of the HUGE voting bloc the Hispanics represent. First the Dems (1987 and 1988) capitalized on the Hispanic vote and, when George W. Bush was campaigning, the Reps (1999 and 2000) played to that group of voters.

During all that time and until today, our Border Patrol agents have had their ability to enforce Federal law minimalized. I have had discussions over the phone, at lunch and in elevators with agents who have announced, "Today is an off day". That means they will NOT be covering illegal traffic, but will keep themselves busy on that particular day with some insignificant duty that keeps them away from the area of such traffic.

Simply put: Having local law enforcement enforce Federal laws will have even a greater negative impact on the voting of Hispanics. It is easy for ME to see that the plan is to negate that impact by turning out whomever they can find to protest such action.

Given the close relationship of buckwheat to the unions, where do you think the protestors come from? They are bussed in and paid a nominal ($10 each) fee. They are told if they don't show up and protest, all the benefits they have gained through union membership will be lost forever. Because most who appear ARE Hispanics, they have little or no knowledge or experience with our language, our culture, our laws and the dishonesty of union hierarchy.

Phant2000  posted on  2010-05-30   13:53:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#32. To: Phant2000 (#31)

First the Dems (1987 and 1988) capitalized on the Hispanic vote and, when George W. Bush was campaigning, the Reps (1999 and 2000) played to that group of voters.

A political view of your statement, is enlightening, in that the two "distinct" parties DO try to maintain a 50/50 balance, therefore sharing the beaners is a natural political move by the establishment.

If all beaners voted dem, there would be an imbalance and the voters just might get wise, so they take a bag of beaners for the pubs, one for the dems and we move merrily along.

Cynicom  posted on  2010-05-30 14:03:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]