freeptop: (Default)
[personal profile] freeptop
I'm a bit late on this one, but right now I've got the right combination of time and anger to write about it.
"The law requires police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person's immigration status if there's reasonable suspicion the person is in the country illegally. It also requires legal immigrants to carry their immigration documents."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_IMMIGRATION_ENFORCEMENT?SITE=PAPIT&SECTION=NATIONAL&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

I'm glad the US Attorney General is not only fighting the law as being unconstitutional all on its own, but also going to keep an eye on making sure there is no racial profiling, because, let's be honest, the only way this law is going to be used is that the police are going to harass Hispanics. If anyone can tell me what would give a police officer a "reasonable suspicion the person is in the country illegally", without using their race, I'd like to know it (and no, anonymous tips don't qualify - those should be sent to INS, so the Federal Government can do its job. The law was designed to allow police officers to go after people they see on the street).

Here's an obvious problem with the law: while it requires legal immigrants to carry their immigration documents, it does not (nor can it) require natural-born citizens from carrying documents that prove they are US Citizens. So, what happens if an Arizona police officer decides a Hispanic person might be in the country illegally, and demands the papers of a natural-born citizen? They won't have them, of course, and suddenly an innocent person is going to jail, until they can prove they were born here. Don't think this won't happen, either.

This law allows police officers to assume people are guilty until proven innocent, with no more basis than their appearance. If it's not obvious how big of a problem that is, I suggest a review of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights is in order.

Date: 2010-07-11 02:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vanessasquest.livejournal.com
Truly, it's so sad that people devalue other human beings as much as this... I could make a smart ass comment about if they saw someone randomly speaking Russian for instance, but I'll avoid it because the law and the attitudes of the law maker just irk me tremendously. It continued to bother me how we have such a problem with people keeping their own sense of heritage if that also includes language, but only when they have a different skin color. If you're French and want to speak French...? SURE! It's beautiful and academic-- oh, wait, you're Haitian? Learn English you lazy SOB... How is that double standard anything MORE than racism veiled thinly by faux-patriotism? They're the least patriotic people in the bunch... anyone who is so adamant about denying another person the same American dream their family struggled for them to have.

Date: 2010-07-11 04:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] talldean.livejournal.com
What's killing me about this is one is that the rest of the anti-illegal-immigration bill... is amazingly sensible, if I'm reading it right.

It makes it a pretty strong crime to hire illegal immigrants, and makes it a pretty strong crime to give illegal immigrants a place to live. Instead of cracking down on the immigrants - they're doing what they gotta do - it's cracking down on the folks who enabled the situation.

That said, Arizona doesn't have a large farm industry, so that law's feasible there. Doing the same thing in California would destroy the economy there, perhaps.

Date: 2010-07-11 06:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vanessasquest.livejournal.com
Well, that's debatable, because the economy of hiring the immigrants in Cali sends the money out even if it is cheaper... if they hired American youths, or anyone else who'd do that labor-intensive work the money would still pool back in, but it would raise cost of living/farm goods.

We should just annex Canada and Mexico and fix it all the easy way. ^_~ Kidding, of course... because no one wants to learn French...? Riiiight.

Date: 2010-07-11 06:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] talldean.livejournal.com
If California raised the cost of goods, the places that *can* use the same labor would push California completely out of the market. Or, rephrased, South America also has cheap hispanic labor, and if our produce cost twice as much to buy locally as it cost to import, Americans would mostly import. Take a look at our manufacturing jobs as a rough example.

We can't lock out immigrants *and* have free trade, basically. We either have free borders and free trade, limited immigration and protective tariffs, or we get boned, boned being a technical word for "slide backwards in quality of life compared to the rest of the world".

Date: 2010-07-11 08:59 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vanessasquest.livejournal.com
I didn't mean it as a practical solution. ^_^ It's just the problem across the board tends to be that the border issue isn't pursued as other Federal Issues are, and it should be, since it's NATIONAL security, not STATE security. I still think pit of fire's a good hollywood solution for it...? (Lies.)

Honestly, the trick would be to make everything very bureaucratically run, have special licenses and enforce it, I do agree that the problem is with the people using the cheap labor and upsetting certain balances, but if there were incentives to do it the right way (how we'd do that, don't ask me) that would reduce key issues.

Date: 2010-07-11 09:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] talldean.livejournal.com
It's not security at all; the illegal immigrants are almost all here for work. National security would be if they were trying to, you know, attack us. They *like* us; we pay their paychecks, which gets food in their kids' mouths. :-)

If we do it "the right way", we can't make goods that are competitive on the world market, and big box stores buy goods that are competitive. If we give these jobs better pay, better conditions, and so on... we lose those jobs entirely.

Dunno. I know how France handles poor low-income immigrants (no so well), I'm wondering how other countries handle this one. Someone's gotta be getting this right, right?

Date: 2010-07-11 09:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vanessasquest.livejournal.com
Probably not, since their existence begs to be labeled as a 'working class' and 'low income' group, and most political groups do their best to alienate those people... some through Communism, others through Capitalism, but exploited is exploited. -_-

Profile

freeptop: (Default)
freeptop

July 2011

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 23rd, 2017 09:01 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios