Ragnar
<--- Pic is not me
Well well well...
Calif. penal code pertaining to immigration similar to Ariz.'s SB 1070 - Water Cooler - Washington Times
By Kerry Picket on May 15, 2010
Wow. OK there was a voice of sanity in La La Land. But there was also the voice of... well this guy...
Link to audio interview:
http://media.washingtontimes.com/media/audio/2010/May/14/City_Councilman_Reyes_LA.wav
Lets see if we can't follow the argument of Mr. Reyes. He thinks it's wrong to ask of someone, already legaly detained, weather or not they have broken additional laws in reguard to their immigration, because the fears the police may not follow the law.
Picket also speaks with Becca Doten, who is the communications director for LACC Richard Alarcon (a democrat). While he "doesn't believe that Arizona Police are inherently racist" he does not think they are capable of doing the job due to poor training. This begs the question, what kind of traning do the California police get, who also may not be inherently racist one hopes, in reguards to California immigration law. Why?
Here is "the kicker" as they day... they are stikingly similar:
CA Codes (pen:833-851.90)
California Penal Code 834b:
834b. (a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully
cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization
Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is
suspected of being present in the United States in violation of
federal immigration laws.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected
of being present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the
following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen
of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent
resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time
or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of
immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not
be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and
place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding
documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien
who is present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal
justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or
leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United
States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal
status and provide any additional information that may be requested
by any other public entity.
(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city,
county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with
jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent
or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly
prohibited.
Should we be laughing or crying at this point? Is Arizona worse than California, thus deserving of boycotts, for no better reason than they intend to enforce the law. How long before President Obama goes on TV to call California immigration law "misguided"? Maybe he does not have to because illegal immigrants in Cali are walking around listning to "I fought the law, and the law gave up" on their Ipods.
Or maybe, just maybe... the Arizona law, similar as it is to most others, is just an excuse for political grandstanding, the PC police and the rest of the noise machine. Something Obama himself might call, "a distraction".
Calif. penal code pertaining to immigration similar to Ariz.'s SB 1070 - Water Cooler - Washington Times
By Kerry Picket on May 15, 2010
The Los Angeles City Council's vote to boycott Arizona caused more consternation than anything else. L.A. City Council members voted an overwhelming 13-1 to terminate any city contracts with Arizona (worth about $7.7 million) as did other American cities who have considered resolutions to protest the Arizona law or seek boycotts. Among these cities are San Francisco and St. Paul, Minn.
The lone dissenter on the council, Republican Greig Smith, said in an e-mail statement:
"The Hahn motion is not in the economic best interests of the City of Los Angeles. I have always opposed using the Los Angeles City Council to weigh in on non-related social issues that are not within the purview of Los Angeles. I voted no on the motion to boycott Arizona."
Wow. OK there was a voice of sanity in La La Land. But there was also the voice of... well this guy...
"I cannot go to Arizona today without a passport," Los Angeles Councilman Ed Reyes, a Democrat, said before the vote. "If I come across an officer who's had a bad day and feels the picture on my ID is not me, I could be summarily deported -- no questions asked. That is not American."
Oh really? I interviewed Mr. Reyes (ENTIRE AUDIO INTERVIEW) on Friday about his thinking on Arizona's immigration law, known as SB 1070. While Mr. Reyes insisted he read the 16-page law and is aware that the law prohibits law enforcement officers from asking individuals their legal status based on their race, national origin, and color, he said that the law would not stop law enforcement officers from racially profiling anyway.
Link to audio interview:
http://media.washingtontimes.com/media/audio/2010/May/14/City_Councilman_Reyes_LA.wav
Lets see if we can't follow the argument of Mr. Reyes. He thinks it's wrong to ask of someone, already legaly detained, weather or not they have broken additional laws in reguard to their immigration, because the fears the police may not follow the law.
Picket also speaks with Becca Doten, who is the communications director for LACC Richard Alarcon (a democrat). While he "doesn't believe that Arizona Police are inherently racist" he does not think they are capable of doing the job due to poor training. This begs the question, what kind of traning do the California police get, who also may not be inherently racist one hopes, in reguards to California immigration law. Why?
Here is "the kicker" as they day... they are stikingly similar:
CA Codes (pen:833-851.90)
California Penal Code 834b:
834b. (a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully
cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization
Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is
suspected of being present in the United States in violation of
federal immigration laws.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected
of being present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the
following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen
of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent
resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time
or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of
immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not
be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and
place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding
documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien
who is present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal
justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or
leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United
States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal
status and provide any additional information that may be requested
by any other public entity.
(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city,
county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with
jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent
or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly
prohibited.
The Los Angeles City Council and cities currently boycotting Arizona might want to re-examine their own immigration laws before they start nitpicking at others.
Should we be laughing or crying at this point? Is Arizona worse than California, thus deserving of boycotts, for no better reason than they intend to enforce the law. How long before President Obama goes on TV to call California immigration law "misguided"? Maybe he does not have to because illegal immigrants in Cali are walking around listning to "I fought the law, and the law gave up" on their Ipods.
Or maybe, just maybe... the Arizona law, similar as it is to most others, is just an excuse for political grandstanding, the PC police and the rest of the noise machine. Something Obama himself might call, "a distraction".