Would this be considered racial profiling?

[Vanquish]

Wow. You really need to go do some research on what racial profiling is. Then come back and talk.

 

[Claudette]

Most conservatives support racial profiling. I don't know why they're giving us such a song and dance.

Why don't you cons just argue from the perspective of your true feelings, i.e., that there's nothing wrong with racial profiling, that it ought to be legal, and that it ought to be done?

Enough with the charade.

Well - I am probably a bit different than most people because I could give a crap less about political correctness. Let's be real here. In Arizona it's a safe bet that more than 99.9% of the illegal aliens there are Mexican. What, you think Arizona is being over run by illegal Swedish aliens or something? The vast majority of illegal aliens in this country are Mexican so why not put a strong eye on the biggest offenders? If you happen to be a black guy in an predominently white neighborhood at 2:30 am, driving your car real slow up and down the same street, not only is your driving suspect but your reason for being there and the fact that you are black signals something wrong with the picture. Are you to believe this person is looking for the nearest pizza joint? Everybody is chickenshit about racial profiling but it does have a useful purpose and I believe it should be a tool available to the police or anybody else in law enforcement. I think we would be best served by being a little bit less ignorant about the value of racial profiling. Another big question I have is why aren't people outraged about the illegal Mexican aliens because they have committed a criminal act by being in this country illegally. I don't supose that really matters to those who think they are being "picked" on because they are Mexican. Get real people.

Ditto.

This PC Profilier bs is just that bs.

Racial profiling. What a load of hooey.

Jesus H Christ. If it walks like a duck. Talks like a Duck. Chances are pretty damned good that its a damned duck.

As someone pointed out. 99.9% of those coming across the border are Mexicans. Who the hell else will you be looking for as an illegal???

I'm sure terrotists have come across the boarder as well. These guys are probably darker skined Muslims.

Get the picture.

This PC Bullshit is going to get folks killed some day. What a load of BS.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Recall how the rightwingers have thrown fits whenever someone has said we might need to increase scrutiny of militias after some crimes have occurred involving persons in or associated with militias? Recall that they used every argument that Muslim-Americans, Hispanics, and black Americans have used in similar situations?

It's always different when it's YOUR guys...

 

[Angelhair]

Racial profiling is NEVER okay - but - often times a necesity. Take it or leave it. You want to live in a safe country or a pc country. I vote for SAFE! I for one have faith in our justice system - some what. Mistakes have been made and people thrown in jail and are found to be innocent down the road. But in what other country would they even right the wrong??? Not many! We have to take it as it comes.

 

[Claudette]

No difference in my damned book.

If your breaking the law, your breaking the law and I dont' give a shit what color, ethnic group, religion , creedo or political party your following.

This political correctness and racial profiling needs to take a hike before more people are killed because of it. Jeeze.

 

[Murf76]

Then 'fix' the Constitution. Change the innocent until proven guilty, the protections from searches without cause, rights of privacy, in such a way that if you belong to a certain demographic, whether racial, ethnic, or whatever, that has a disproportionately high percentage of criminal activity

you would not be entitled to those protections, without regard to the possibility of your personal innocence.

Searches without cause?... rights of privacy?

If we look through your posting history, are we going to find dozens of complaints about the government seizure of our medical records, taken on the pretext of "comparative effectiveness research"?

Frankly, today if Big Brother wants a peek at your private medical record, he'd have to get a subpoena to get his hands on it. Whether one argues that it's the property of the doctor or of the patient, one thing it sure as hell is not... is the property of the federal government.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Unlike the government seizure of our medical records, where there is precedent for a subpoena to establish reasonable search and seizure, requests for identification from police officers is largely settled law. Racial profiling is not at issue. It's specifically forbidden by Arizona's new law. And a police officer checking for ID is not an "unreasonable search or seizure" when the officer has probable cause. Arizona does have a "stop and identify" statute on the books, and ID on Terry stops has been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Can an officer arrest a suspect for failing to provide ID?

This law mirrors federal immigration law in most respects. The only thing it really changes is that it allows State and Local authorities to actively address illegal immigration by criminalizing it at the state level.

About 25 Americans die each day at the hands of illegal aliens in crimes of murder and drunken driving. And almost invariably, we find that the perpetrator of these crimes had experienced some form of police contact. These are American citizens who die at the hands of foreign invaders, at the hands of people who had NO RIGHT to be here. And yet, we have folks like you, who seem to hold those lives at no account. And all for some sadly pathetic political agenda.

 

[Nonelitist]

Nothing in the example was not covered by previous laws on the books.

The new law does not change anything except to make it a STATE offense also. which is LEGAL and CONSTITUTIONAL. Nothing in the new law gives them the power to just randomly pull people over. Nothing in the new law allows any NEW powers to the police.

And by the way, provide even a single incident where the new law has been abused.

No, you explain why AZ itself is frantically amending the law to attempt to remedy constitutional issues if the original law was constitutional.

Hey dumbass... they aren't amending any law... they are simply taking a fed statute and making it enforcable on the state level.

THE FEDERAL LAW ALREADY EXISTS... THE FEDS JUST WON'T ENFORCE IT.


Stop your lying... just makes you look stupid.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The new law does not change anything except to make it a STATE offense also. which is LEGAL and CONSTITUTIONAL. Nothing in the new law gives them the power to just randomly pull people over. Nothing in the new law allows any NEW powers to the police.

And by the way, provide even a single incident where the new law has been abused.

No, you explain why AZ itself is frantically amending the law to attempt to remedy constitutional issues if the original law was constitutional.

Hey dumbass... they aren't amending any law... they are simply taking a fed statute and making it enforcable on the state level.

THE FEDERAL LAW ALREADY EXISTS... THE FEDS JUST WON'T ENFORCE IT.


Stop your lying... just makes you look stupid.

Arizona Immigration Law Amended - Crime and Consequences Blog

A story from 4 days ago on Arizona AMENDING THEIR IMMIGRATION LAW.

Lucky you, you win a neg rep for the only reason I ever give them...

falsely accusing me of lying.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Then 'fix' the Constitution. Change the innocent until proven guilty, the protections from searches without cause, rights of privacy, in such a way that if you belong to a certain demographic, whether racial, ethnic, or whatever, that has a disproportionately high percentage of criminal activity

you would not be entitled to those protections, without regard to the possibility of your personal innocence.

Searches without cause?... rights of privacy?

If we look through your posting history, are we going to find dozens of complaints about the government seizure of our medical records, taken on the pretext of "comparative effectiveness research"?

.

Go ahead, look through my posting records. Continue to be irrelevant.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm constantly amazed at the hypocrisy of liberals. They're near hysteria at the prospect that some poor brown-skinned immigrant might be asked to show ID by a police officer in the performance of his/her duties... but couldn't work up a squeak when the federal government SEIZED the medical records of every man, woman, and child in this country bearing legal citizenship.

Some bureaucrat in Washington will have access to the most minute and intimate functions of your very bodies... but your outrage on the matter of privacy is limited to cops asking for ID.

Seriously. The mind boggles.

Why don't you try worrying less about hypocrisy and more about the topic. Is racial profiling constitutional or not?

 

[Nonelitist]

I'm constantly amazed at the hypocrisy of liberals. They're near hysteria at the prospect that some poor brown-skinned immigrant might be asked to show ID by a police officer in the performance of his/her duties... but couldn't work up a squeak when the federal government SEIZED the medical records of every man, woman, and child in this country bearing legal citizenship.

Some bureaucrat in Washington will have access to the most minute and intimate functions of your very bodies... but your outrage on the matter of privacy is limited to cops asking for ID.

Seriously. The mind boggles.

Why don't you try worrying less about hypocrisy and more about the topic. Is racial profiling constitutional or not?

Its unconstitutional and the Governor of Arizona signed into law an Executive order that states this law cannot be used in itself to stop someone.. there has to be another legitimate reason for the stop.

 

[Murf76]

Why don't you try worrying less about hypocrisy and more about the topic. Is racial profiling constitutional or not?

Interesting that you're not troubled by hypocrisy... but whatever. I'm not really planning on bothering with your posting history. I'm just not that bored...and I very much doubt I'd find you raising hell about any intrusion that the Pelosi/Reid Congress chose to engage in.

In reference to your question though...

What he said:

Its unconstitutional and the Governor of Arizona signed into law an Executive order that states this law cannot be used in itself to stop someone.. there has to be another legitimate reason for the stop.

 

[beowolfe]

You've described a situation where there's a valid pre-text for pulling the car over and asking for a driver's license. In that case, there's no racial profiling.

I'd even go so far as to say once the cop pulls the driver over and gets no license, the broken English of the passengers is enough PC to ask them for their IDs.

You know, Vanquish, I don't think hey've read the AZ law and therefore they don't have a clue what's actually in it. According to the law, the police don't need probably cause. They can be on foot patrol, hear someone speaking a foreign language and arrest them. There is no provision in the law that the police officier has to ask for, or even look at the person's ID.

 

[beowolfe]

I'm constantly amazed at the hypocrisy of liberals. They're near hysteria at the prospect that some poor brown-skinned immigrant might be asked to show ID by a police officer in the performance of his/her duties... but couldn't work up a squeak when the federal government SEIZED the medical records of every man, woman, and child in this country bearing legal citizenship.

Some bureaucrat in Washington will have access to the most minute and intimate functions of your very bodies... but your outrage on the matter of privacy is limited to cops asking for ID.

Seriously. The mind boggles.

Why don't you try worrying less about hypocrisy and more about the topic. Is racial profiling constitutional or not?

Its unconstitutional and the Governor of Arizona signed into law an Executive order that states this law cannot be used in itself to stop someone.. there has to be another legitimate reason for the stop.

Really? Here is the link to the executive order. Please show where it says that there has to be a legitimate reason for the stop.

http://azgovernor.gov/dms/upload/EO_201009.pdf

 

[Murf76]

You know, Vanquish, I don't think hey've read the AZ law and therefore they don't have a clue what's actually in it. According to the law, the police don't need probably cause. They can be on foot patrol, hear someone speaking a foreign language and arrest them. There is no provision in the law that the police officier has to ask for, or even look at the person's ID.

They can't arrest people for "speaking in a foreign language". Sheesh.

Fact is, just to clarify the matter further, so that it's completely understood that racial profiling is not to be tolerated, the language of the law has already been tweaked to replace "lawful contact" with "stop, detain, or arrest".
Arizona lawmakers tweak immigration bill; ‘Lawful contact’ out, ’stop, detain or arrest’ in | Raw Story