Perchoutofwater Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Feds limit Ariz. sheriff's crackdown on illegal immigrantsBuzz up! Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio says he will continue his controversial "crime suppression operations" despite a Department of Homeland Security decision to strip him of authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants based solely on their immigration status, the East Valley Tribune reports. “It’s all politics,” says Arpaio, sheriff of Maricopa County. Arpaio will still have the power to check the immigration status of people booked by his officers, but not the authority to conduct street patrols looking for illegal immigrants. His “crime suppression operations” are saturation patrols in designated areas where deputies would find illegal immigrants by stopping them for traffic infractions and minor violations, the paper says. The Department of Justice and other federal agencies are investigating the sheriff’s office on accusations of racial profiling during the operations, the paper says. Arpaio said he will be able to still conduct the crime sweeps under state human smuggling laws and an obscure federal law that allows local police to arrest illegal immigrants. A spokesman for the Phoenix office of ICE declined to comment until after pending agreements with the country are signed. Link This just pisses me off. The federal government wants to tax the chit out of me to do all kinds of things that it was never intended to do, but refuses to do what it was actually intended to do, such as protect our borders. Then it is going to mandate that we provide education and health care for everyone, but only provide partial funding, but to make matter even worse they are aren't going to allow the local sheriffs to enforce the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Have to agree here!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Taxes = bad Laws = good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) Taxes = badLaws = good Not really. Fair taxation for legitimate services are good. I'm all for federal taxes to pay for what was specifically enumerated in the Constitution. I am all for state and local taxes for items that were left to the states that our state and local governments feel necessary. I'm all for laws that treat all US citizens fairly and do not infringe upon our individual rights as stated in our Federal and State constitutions. Taxes and laws are not bad. Excessive taxes and laws are very bad. Edited October 7, 2009 by Perchoutofwater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Not really. Fair taxation for legitimate services are good. I'm all for federal taxes to pay for what was specifically enumerated in the Constitution. I am all for state and local taxes for items that were left to the states that our state and local governments feel necessary. I'm all for laws that treat all US citizens fairly and do not infringe upon our individual rights as stated in our Federal and State constitutions. Taxes and laws are not bad. Excessive taxes and laws are very bad. This. But get rid of income taxation, welfare and other crap, and I could give 2 chits about illegal immigration. Mr. Obama, tear down that wall! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 This. But get rid of income taxation, welfare and other crap, and I could give 2 chits about illegal immigration. Mr. Obama, tear down that wall! I'd go along with that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 What's his probable cause to check a person's immigration status, excessive browness? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Is he just stormtrooping down the street asking every latino-looking person to present their papers? Or is this a check he's running on people who got pulled over or detained for a legitimate reason? One should be against the law, and the other should be a basic function of the law. Big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Is he just stormtrooping down the street asking every latino-looking person to present their papers? Or is this a check he's running on people who got pulled over or detained for a legitimate reason? One should be against the law, and the other should be a basic function of the law. Big difference. Well it says he still has the right to check the immigration status of anyone booked for something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Well it says he still has the right to check the immigration status of anyone booked for something else. I don't have a problem with that. You get detained for a legitimate reason, you show your drivers license. Unless of course, you're detaining people because "your license plates are going to expire at the end of the month". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 I don't have a problem with that. You get detained for a legitimate reason, you show your drivers license. Unless of course, you're detaining people because "your license plates are going to expire at the end of the month". I don't either. Of course Perch is pissed that the sheriff can't also have the cops driving around asking everyone brown for proof of citizenship for no reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted October 11, 2009 Author Share Posted October 11, 2009 I don't either. Of course Perch is pissed that the sheriff can't also have the cops driving around asking everyone brown for proof of citizenship for no reason. Hey as long as you don't mind having to push the English button on your ATM, there is no reason to verify people are here legitimately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 Link This just pisses me off. It's difficult for me to get pissed off or sympathetic based on the vagueness of the blog that has you Have to agree here'ing. I don't think it's completely implausible the Sheriff is engaging in activity that is unconstitutional. The same Constitution that you supposedly care so much about over the last 8 months. Shouldn't be that difficult for a socially liberal stalwart like yourself to keep these things in perspective or at least provide more information before reacting in such a manner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 What's his probable cause to check a person's immigration status, excessive browness? Racist doesn't exist anymore. And second, how much time you got at work lately Perch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted October 11, 2009 Author Share Posted October 11, 2009 Racist doesn't exist anymore. And second, how much time you got at work lately Perch? I have a bunch of free time right now. I've only got one project that I am personally overseeing right now, and it is in the middle of the project which is the least demanding of my time. I've got another project that will start the first of the year. Ideally I'm overseeing 3 projects personally. This is the first time I've only had one project I'm overseeing in about 5 or 6 years. So right now I'm at the office about 40 hours a week, but only really working about 25 hours or so, the rest of the time I'm just there in case checks need signed or to put out fires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 Hey as long as you don't mind having to push the English button on your ATM, there is no reason to verify people are here legitimately. So if you got pulled over twice a week to prove you were a citizen, you wouldn't mind that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 So if you got pulled over twice a week to prove you were a citizen, you wouldn't mind that? I'm white and I wouldn't mind. The laws on my side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share Posted October 12, 2009 So if you got pulled over twice a week to prove you were a citizen, you wouldn't mind that? I'll admit it is not ideal, but until the federal government starts doing it's job on the border I don't have a problem with it if it done correctly. Correctly being anytime any law is broken no matter how minor, or also having checkpoints where they check everyone for immigration status was well as inebriation status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I'll admit it is not ideal, but until the federal government starts doing it's job on the border I don't have a problem with it if it done correctly. Correctly being anytime any law is broken no matter how minor, or also having checkpoints where they check everyone for immigration status was well as inebriation status. Your status as the principled Constitution watchdog is shot right here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 So if you got pulled over twice a week to prove you were a citizen, you wouldn't mind that? I'm not even sure if I'd know how to prove I was a citizen. I don't carry my birth certificate with me and a driver's license means nothing since Democrats give those out to illegals like shovels and nailguns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Your status as the principled Constitution watchdog is shot right here. +1 - it's the gov't that has the burden of proof for anything, and the BoR is supposed to ensure they can't go fishing just to drum up whatever. Which is why the drug seizure laws are so antithetical to liberty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share Posted October 12, 2009 Your status as the principled Constitution watchdog is shot right here. I never claimed to be a Constitutional watchdog, but how do my comments go against it? I'm assuming you are talking about doing check points. Provided that they are stopping everyone and doing it on public roads, I'm not sure how that is unconstitutional. Also, checkpoints would not be required if the federal government would do what is required by the Constitution to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I never claimed to be a Constitutional watchdog, but how do my comments go against it? I'm assuming you are talking about doing check points. Provided that they are stopping everyone and doing it on public roads, I'm not sure how that is unconstitutional. Holy crap dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I never claimed to be a Constitutional watchdog, but how do my comments go against it? I'm assuming you are talking about doing check points. Provided that they are stopping everyone and doing it on public roads, I'm not sure how that is unconstitutional. Also, checkpoints would not be required if the federal government would do what is required by the Constitution to do. Holy crap dude. Such checkpoints already exist in California. Have you ever driven from San Diego up to L.A.? You'll hit one if you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Such checkpoints already exist in California. Have you ever driven from San Diego up to L.A.? You'll hit one if you do. I'm against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.