Joe vs. the Latina - a twit forces a woman to give birth in shackles

[xotoxi]

I wonder if he would have kept shakled a white woman who had been arrested for shoplifting?

I'd say it depends on if she was here legally or not.

So, is the shackling for criminals in general? Or only for illegals?

And if so, does this guy consider being an illegal immigrant to be the most heinous of all crimes?

 

[Anguille]

If she hadn't broken our laws, she would not have been shackled. To be honest, I don't really care very much about her discomfort. Send her, and her anchor baby back to whereever they come from.

So what exactly did this newborn baby do to deserve being treated this way?

 

[Anguille]

Video: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Forces Woman to Give Birth While Shackled

She was in the country illegal around the time she was set to give birth, so her child would be a US citizen and receive free healthcare on the tax payers dime.

I am getting sick and tired of people jumping all over BRAVE, COURAGOUS and PARTRIOTIC Joe Arpaio! Granted shackling the womant was beyond excessive! But he is a patriot standing up agains the illegal immigrant juggeranut!

While it is true she isn't a legal resident, she's been in the country since she was sixteen.

Mistreating people isn't patriotism, twit. And it certainly isn't brave or courageous to force a woman to give birth in this manner.

If this was some conservative woman or Sarah Palin being treated this way, most of these goons would be up in arms about it.

 

[Saladin]

She's a criminal anyway, so personally, I don't care.

Legal and ethical standards are divergent (i.e. slavery was legal but unethical; slave liberation was ethical, but illegal), so a mere comment on criminality doesn't constitute an ethical comment in and of itself.

 

[chanel]

I wonder if he would have kept shakled a white woman who had been arrested for shoplifting?

I'd say it depends on if she was here legally or not.

So, is the shackling for criminals in general? Or only for illegals?

And if so, does this guy consider being an illegal immigrant to be the most heinous of all crimes?

Not heinous; but certainly expensive. What's an anchor baby cost? A couple mil? They should charge her with grand theft.

For the purposes of punishment theft is divided into two separate offences by section 334 depending on the value and nature of the goods stolen. If the thing stolen is worth more than $5000 or is a testamentary instrument the offence is commonly referred to as Theft Over $5000 and is an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment.

Theft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Saladin]

Are you proposing violation of the Fourteenth Amendment? I thought we were holding that legal standard were supreme.

 

[Saladin]

Incidentally, can anyone point me to any peer-reviewed empirical literature indicating that illegal immigrants use a higher percentage of public services than their native counterparts with similar human capital levels? I mean, not that the dehumanizing and unconstitutional proposal was unsound or anything, but just so we can be sure.

 

[chanel]

Nope. I don't think it was right (if it's even true). But having an anchor baby is only a "blessing" to the thief. It is a crime that is far more expensive than shoplifting.

 

[Saladin]

Nope. I don't think it was right (if it's even true). But having an anchor baby is only a "blessing" to the thief. It is a crime that is far more expensive than shoplifting.

Not especially. Given that a higher population will stimulate an increased demand for goods and services, and given that the presence of naturalized Americans will ensure greater human capital investment among their ranks than life elsewhere would, I'm certain that their presence is hardly an ultimate financial cost...though that does seem to be a common misconception born of economic misunderstandings.

Of course, there's also the fact that most illegal immigrants from Latin America are dispossessed Native Americans still under the boot of a racial caste system, since Latin America is still dominated by primarily white political and financial classes. If I were an American (of any country in America, but particularly the U.S.), I wouldn't be too keen on sustaining race-based injustice.

 

[chanel]

Incidentally, can anyone point me to any peer-reviewed empirical literature indicating that illegal immigrants use a higher percentage of public services than their native counterparts with similar human capital levels? I mean, not that the dehumanizing and unconstitutional proposal was unsound or anything, but just so we can be sure.

A higher percentage? That is not the point. They are ENTITLED TO 100% of ZERO!

It is common knowledge that Hispanics now have a higher rate of out of wedlock birth than blacks. Of course "Hispanics" can include both legal and illegal. Purposefully obtuse. I imagine any "peer reviewed empirical literature" would not include such "racist" distinctions.

 

[Saladin]

A higher percentage? That is not the point. They are ENTITLED TO 100% of ZERO!

That's not especially meritocratic. After all, if productivity is to be maintained, labor must be rewarded, and labor is not rewarded through the preservation of artificially low wages, particularly when illegal immigrants contribute substantial amounts to state and federal coffers that they will never gain from. Immigration will never cause the drastic problems you seem to be mistakenly believe that it does; the U.S.'s demand for low-skilled labor remains too high for immigration to cause widespread unemployment, after all. The most significant problems are caused by the original coercion that forced migration bred through adverse economic conditions...a lack of agrarian subsidization in Oaxaca, the absence of safe mining protocols in the industrial sector of Sonora, etc...all enabled by U.S.-led trade liberalization.

It is common knowledge that Hispanics now have a higher rate of out of wedlock birth than blacks. Of course "Hispanics" can include both legal and illegal. Purposefully obtuse. I imagine any "peer reviewed empirical literature" would not include such "racist" distinctions.

Not only can "Hispanics" include both "legal" and "illegal," it can also include anyone of any race, since Hispanics are not a race. The "Hispanics" that most U.S. citizens assume constitute the race are Indians of mixed or full descent, but there are of course also Hispanic whites and blacks and have been for centuries (the term is derived from the European Spaniards and Portuguese, after all), so no racial characteristics can be defined at all from any such measurements, not that mere out of wedlock birth rates would have yielded much of substance anyway.

 

[chanel]

Out of wedlock births yield plenty of substance. Check the child poverty stats.

 

[Saladin]

Out of wedlock births yield plenty of substance. Check the child poverty stats.

Can you refer to any peer-reviewed empirical research yielding evidence of a specifically causative effect between out of wedlock childbearing and increased usage of social welfare programs that is not present among those that are wed and of similar socioeconomic status and with similar human capital and employment levels? Considering that the empirical literature is decidedly contradictory to the fallacious idea that there are an abundance of "welfare queens" that coordinate their childbearing patterns simply to collect welfare, I don't believe what you describe exists in any substantial way in that literature either.

 

[chanel]

Those that are wed don't GENERALLY share the same socioeconomic status. Look it up.

Most people don't need peer reviewed empirical research to know the sky is blue. I don't have to eat shit to know what it tastes like.

Good try though.

 

[California Girl]

If she hadn't broken our laws, she would not have been shackled. To be honest, I don't really care very much about her discomfort. Send her, and her anchor baby back to whereever they come from.

So what exactly did this newborn baby do to deserve being treated this way?

I couldn't give a shit about a 'newborn baby' other than it's mother is here illegally. Little baby is welcome to live a long and happy life - in it's country, not ours.

 

[Ravi]

Gotta love the conservative love of Latinos.

 

[Saladin]

Those that are wed don't GENERALLY share the same socioeconomic status. Look it up.

I'm quite familiar with the empirical literature on the topic. That's why I was somewhat surprised by your claim and requested a specific peer-reviewed reference.

Most people don't need peer reviewed empirical research to know the sky is blue. I don't have to eat shit to know what it tastes like.

Good try though.

I apologize. It's merely that there are many misconceptions about social welfare programs that exist among economic rightists, and demanding that sound empirical research be produced to support some of their more dubious assertions usually helps them realize this more quickly than a direct statement ever could.

I couldn't give a shit about a 'newborn baby' other than it's mother is here illegally. Little baby is welcome to live a long and happy life - in it's country, not ours.

How exactly is it that a baby has national affiliations? Babies don't consciously choose which countries they're born in; it doesn't constitute an accomplishment on their part. And considering the fact that "your" country was gained through unjust acquisition of land and productive resources from an indigenous population that most Latin American illegal immigrants are part of, you're on fickle ethical grounds anyway.

 

[California Girl]

Gotta love the conservative love of Latinos.

Gotta love the idiots who make it about race. It's about the law, Ravi.... they aren't just guidelines. If someone is here illegally, I don't give a shit where they come from - they go home. Simples.

Gotta love the lefties who are incapable of working out the difference between racism and abiding by the law.

 

[Saladin]

Gotta love the idiots who make it about race. It's about the law, Ravi.... they aren't just guidelines. If someone is here illegally, I don't give a shit where they come from - they go home. Simples.

Gotta love the lefties who are incapable of working out the difference between racism and abiding by the law.

Aside from the fact that "Latinos" are not a race, have you considered the earlier observation that "[l]egal and ethical standards are divergent (i.e. slavery was legal but unethical; slave liberation was ethical, but illegal), so a mere comment on criminality doesn't constitute an ethical comment in and of itself"?

 

[California Girl]

Gotta love the idiots who make it about race. It's about the law, Ravi.... they aren't just guidelines. If someone is here illegally, I don't give a shit where they come from - they go home. Simples.

Gotta love the lefties who are incapable of working out the difference between racism and abiding by the law.

Aside from the fact that "Latinos" are not a race, have you considered the earlier observation that "[l]egal and ethical standards are divergent (i.e. slavery was legal but unethical; slave liberation was ethical, but illegal), so a mere comment on criminality doesn't constitute an ethical comment in and of itself"?

Nope, not interested in the debate of ethics, only in the law in this instance. Ravi assumes that some of us want her out because she's latino. I find that accusation offensive. Only issue: was she here legally - if not, then she and her baby go home. And I don't really care whether she was shackled while she gave birth - that was her choice - she broke the law of the US, then I have no sympathy for her.