Tucson Shop Owner & Employee Kill One Intruder, Wound Three

[tecolote]

BTW, this is probably is the worst hijacking of a thread I have ever seen.

Arizona man defends himself against some thugs and somehow we are talking about immigration and Federal Legislation :laugh2: .

I think we should devote this thread to all things Arizona .

:laugh2:

The PZ refuses to go quietly into the night.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

This post should be required reading on the subject, it is as unbiased, eloquent and without hidden agendas as I have read on this very complicated issue.

Great post BP.

Thank you good sir but I would not go so far as to say it is without any hidden agendas...although it might not be what people who disagree with it might think. There are many other areas I would go into but can not.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Washington refuses to do it. Right now local law enforcement can't do anything only ICE can and they are completely out numbered. Local law enforcement right now if they pull over an illegal with no id all they can do is write a citation that is never paid because the person is never going to show up in court to begin with and there is no known location they do not exist.

Let me say right now if a cop sees a reason to pull you over he can do that right now and when he comes to your window he will ask you for your driver licenses if you produce it you have no problem. Face it you have to have ID for almost anything you do, get on a plane you need ID asking people any person for ID is not against the law nor does that violate anyone’s rights.

I would also like to say I agree with you 1st post I have nothing against any person who comes here be it on a work visa or to become a US citizen. I do expect those who come to this country to abide by our laws and if you are found here illegally then you need to be returned to your country of origin.

So the bill is NOT the same as the federal one...even though you argued before that it was. Nice to see we are on the same page now.

I have no problem if the law pulls over someone for a ticket if they are speeding, have a taillight out, runs a red light or any other thing that breaks the law. I don't have a problem if someone is pulled over on suspicion that they are under the influence of something because they are all over the road. And in those cases I have no problem with the police asking for ID.

I have no problem if a business is busted on a tip that they are employing illegal aliens and they go in and check everyone's identification.

By and large I don't have a problem with the majority of those issues. What I do have a problem with is people claiming that this bill is the same law as the federal one when it is clear it is not.

What I worry about with laws when put into place is the vagueness of some the wording that places not only peoples rights into question but it also can come back and bite the police, towns, counties and state in the butt over this. This could cost the state, county or town down the road.

Furthermore we have a situation where we give our ID out for things we might want. We do this by choice. But what happens when you know you have done nothing wrong, have broken no laws, have given no reason for an officer to have a suspicion of you doing something wrong...what happens when you decide that you don't want to give an officer your id. What happens when you ask him why he wants to see it because you have done nothing wrong?

This again slides down a slippery slope just like some other laws have and I have a feeling it is going to cost them down the road for it.

Now on a completely different angle of all of this, since it has been in the thread. I have no problem if people or groups of people want to boycott the state over this issue. I think that is the correct, legal, way to go about things. If you have a problem with something you can boycott a business, you can petition as long as you do so in a legal manner. Now it might be stupid to boycott or petition this or that but you have that right as american citizens. Just like how people started boycotting things in some california towns due to them not allowing the military to come into schools to recruit.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

So the bill is NOT the same as the federal one...even though you argued before that it was. Nice to see we are on the same page now.

I have no problem if the law pulls over someone for a ticket if they are speeding, have a taillight out, runs a red light or any other thing that breaks the law. I don't have a problem if someone is pulled over on suspicion that they are under the influence of something because they are all over the road. And in those cases I have no problem with the police asking for ID.

I have no problem if a business is busted on a tip that they are employing illegal aliens and they go in and check everyone's identification.

By and large I don't have a problem with the majority of those issues. What I do have a problem with is people claiming that this bill is the same law as the federal one when it is clear it is not.

What I worry about with laws when put into place is the vagueness of some the wording that places not only peoples rights into question but it also can come back and bite the police, towns, counties and state in the butt over this. This could cost the state, county or town down the road.

Furthermore we have a situation where we give our ID out for things we might want. We do this by choice. But what happens when you know you have done nothing wrong, have broken no laws, have given no reason for an officer to have a suspicion of you doing something wrong...what happens when you decide that you don't want to give an officer your id. What happens when you ask him why he wants to see it because you have done nothing wrong?

This again slides down a slippery slope just like some other laws have and I have a feeling it is going to cost them down the road for it.

Now on a completely different angle of all of this, since it has been in the thread. I have no problem if people or groups of people want to boycott the state over this issue. I think that is the correct, legal, way to go about things. If you have a problem with something you can boycott a business, you can petition as long as you do so in a legal manner. Now it might be stupid to boycott or petition this or that but you have that right as american citizens. Just like how people started boycotting things in some california towns due to them not allowing the military to come into schools to recruit.

Bingo, catching an illegal after a legitimate stop and them not being able to provide immigration papers is one thing, just stopping them because you think they might be illegal is another.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

To all those who oppose this law on grounds that it's innately "racist" or involves "profiling", I have a question: How would you propose we identify and remove illegal immigrants?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

To all those who oppose this law on grounds that it's innately "racist" or involves "profiling", I have a question: How would you propose we identify and remove illegal immigrants?

If you are for this bill/law and you think profiling is a way to achieve it and have problems or questions for anyone that is against profiling...maybe you should write to the Governor of Arizona...

From her own statement she released...

Let me be clear, though: My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law —
both AGAINST illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.

I will NOT tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.

So from her own statement she is trying to make sure people know that she is against racial profiling. But so many, even in here, seem to think that it is ok and the only way to go.

Hmm...interesting.:laugh2:

 

[ScipioCowboy]

If you are for this bill/law and you think profiling is a way to achieve it and have problems or questions for anyone that is against profiling...maybe you should write to the Governor of Arizona...

From her own statement she released...

Let me be clear, though: My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law —
both AGAINST illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.

I will NOT tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.

So from her own statement she is trying to make sure people know that she is against racial profiling. But so many, even in here, seem to think that it is ok and the only way to go.

Hmm...interesting.:laugh2:

That's not an answer. It's an evasion.

Opponents are arguing that the bill involves profiling; therefore, they clearly have a different definition for profiling than does the Arizona Governor.

My question still stands: How do the people who oppose this bill on "profiling" grounds suggest we identify and remove illegal immigrants? If the question is too challenging for you, just admit it. We won't laugh...too hard.

 

[Doomsday101]

So the bill is NOT the same as the federal one...even though you argued before that it was. Nice to see we are on the same page now.

I have no problem if the law pulls over someone for a ticket if they are speeding, have a taillight out, runs a red light or any other thing that breaks the law. I don't have a problem if someone is pulled over on suspicion that they are under the influence of something because they are all over the road. And in those cases I have no problem with the police asking for ID.

I have no problem if a business is busted on a tip that they are employing illegal aliens and they go in and check everyone's identification.

By and large I don't have a problem with the majority of those issues. What I do have a problem with is people claiming that this bill is the same law as the federal one when it is clear it is not.

What I worry about with laws when put into place is the vagueness of some the wording that places not only peoples rights into question but it also can come back and bite the police, towns, counties and state in the butt over this. This could cost the state, county or town down the road.

Furthermore we have a situation where we give our ID out for things we might want. We do this by choice. But what happens when you know you have done nothing wrong, have broken no laws, have given no reason for an officer to have a suspicion of you doing something wrong...what happens when you decide that you don't want to give an officer your id. What happens when you ask him why he wants to see it because you have done nothing wrong?

This again slides down a slippery slope just like some other laws have and I have a feeling it is going to cost them down the road for it.

Now on a completely different angle of all of this, since it has been in the thread. I have no problem if people or groups of people want to boycott the state over this issue. I think that is the correct, legal, way to go about things. If you have a problem with something you can boycott a business, you can petition as long as you do so in a legal manner. Now it might be stupid to boycott or petition this or that but you have that right as american citizens. Just like how people started boycotting things in some california towns due to them not allowing the military to come into schools to recruit.

It is the same law as the FED law the only difference it local police can enforce it allowing the locals to enforce the law does not change the law.

As for business I have no problem raiding them and fining them yet when ICE has done that these same groups against the Arz law get upset because the workers are hauled in as well.

Come to the US legally I have no issue with that but I'm not going to sit here and act like oh we are so cruel and mean because many of us want our damn borders secured we have that right why is that right not being upheld? Why should my community pay the cost we do for those here illegally I don't hear anyone crying about our rights. As for boycott you are right anyone can do it for whatever reason they choose

 

[Doomsday101]

If you are for this bill/law and you think profiling is a way to achieve it and have problems or questions for anyone that is against profiling...maybe you should write to the Governor of Arizona...

From her own statement she released...

Let me be clear, though: My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law —
both AGAINST illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.

I will NOT tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.

So from her own statement she is trying to make sure people know that she is against racial profiling. But so many, even in here, seem to think that it is ok and the only way to go.

Hmm...interesting.:laugh2:

I remember that next time a KKK member or skinhead is being sought after you can't look for white people that would be wrong even though the only members of the KKK and skinheads are white. How about the Muslim extremist? Hey lets to look for 80 year old Hispanic women. People holler about profiling yet it is done and yes can be abused but let’s not act naive. Swedish people are not coming across the border to the US.

 

[Hostile]

Hey Hos, look, I have read parts of the bill, and it does make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime, and it does give police officers the power to ask for those papers to anyone they think could be in the US illegaly.

I'm mexican, and illegal immigration is the result of dacades of corrupt mexican governments that can't provide it's citizens with basic living wages, I hate it when people here try to blame our ills on the US, it's all our doing and you guys have every right to protect your borders.

Having said that, I do thing this law crosses the line.

I repeat to you sir, with all due respect, that no law enforcement officer in Arizona can pull over someone just to check these papers.

In any type of encounter with law enforcement they are going to ask for ID. That is true whether you are White, Black, Brown, Yellow, Red or polka dotted. If you have proper ID, there is no issue.

If I do not have proper ID they are going to be more cautious, just like they would anyone of any race or color. In other words, immigrants from Europe, Africa, or the Orient also need to carry proper ID. Not just those of Hispanic descent.

Anyone who thinks Police in Arizona are going to become Border Patrol or that they are going to pull over those of Hispanic descent just to check for ID are reacting to propaganda, not the truth.

The law is merely an enforcement of already in place Federal laws. How is it crossing the line?

 

[Doomsday101]

I repeat to you sir, with all due respect, that no law enforcement officer in Arizona can pull over someone just to check these papers.

In any type of encounter with law enforcement they are going to ask for ID. That is true whether you are White, Black, Brown, Yellow, Red or polka dotted. If you have proper ID, there is no issue.

If I do not have proper ID they are going to be more cautious, just like they would anyone of any race or color. In other words, immigrants from Europe, Africa, or the Orient also need to carry proper ID. Not just those of Hispanic descent.

Anyone who thinks Police in Arizona are going to become Border Patrol or that they are going to pull over those of Hispanic descent just to check for ID are reacting to propaganda, not the truth.

The law is merely an enforcement of already in place Federal laws. How is it crossing the line?

It is crossing the line because it just may work and the groups opposed to it do not want it to work.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

That's not an answer. It's an evasion.

Opponents are arguing that the bill involves profiling; therefore, they clearly have a different definition for profiling than does the Arizona Governor.

My question still stands: How do the people who oppose this bill on "profiling" grounds suggest we identify and remove illegal immigrants? If the question is too challenging for you, just admit it. We won't laugh...too hard.

I don't understand because it seems as if You, and others, are all in favor of profiling. Where the direct opposite seems to be in play for the Governor.

So which is it...are you for it or against it?

I have given plenty of reasons to pull someone over and check ID...you seem to only be talking about profiling.

 

[Hostile]

but they cannot just stop you just well because you look different right, you will have allegedly broken a traffic rule?

to say you can be stopped for no other reason than you might be illegal gives police a bit too much power.

I know I hate it when I am driving down the street and a cop is behind me and typing in his computer, he might be running my licence for no other reason than he can which is not a good reason.

We have 800+ years of freedoms in the English speaking world dating back to the Magna Carta in 1215, we should not allow them to be trampled on.

We face the same crap up here, oh if you have nothing to hide, why care if they ask stupid questions at airports, if you are stopped, asked to produce stuff etc. The whole thing is it is up to the govt to prove you are hiding, not you to prove you aren't hiding.

I suspect most here who have no problem with the law probably aren't hispanic so they have nothing to worry about.

No, they cannot. It is not martial law, nor is it a police state. It is merely an enforcement of already enacted Federal Law.

If someone is here legally they have nothing to fear. If someone is here illegally and doing nothing suspicious or wrong, they have nothing to fear. Act suspicious, do something illegal, or in some way alert officers and they will be looking to make sure you are here legally. Even if you are Scandinavian descent, blue eyes, blond hair, and look like the all American profile.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

I don't understand because it seems as if You, and others, are all in favor of profiling. Where the direct opposite seems to be in play for the Governor.

So which is it...are you for it or against it?

I have given plenty of reasons to pull someone over and check ID...you seem to only be talking about profiling.

Once again, you're evading the question.

There are quite clearly two different definitions of profiling in play here -- the definition held by the Arizona governor and the definition espoused by opponents of the bill.

I'm addressing the latter definition, and my question still remains -- and, I suspect, will continue to remain.

 

[Hostile]

oh bite me, I didn't say it was a big issue for me, frankly you can give up all your rights, I don't care one iota. Fact is though, you wouldn't be so in favour if you were someone who might get pulled over or who might suffer from the law. Then again, maybe you are someone who won't mind being pulled over just because.

Yes, I would. I have traveled in other countries and I respect their rights to know that people are in their country legally. The fact is America has long been too soft on this issue, and my state has decided we can't afford to be soft any more. It costs us in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year in lost taxes, unpaid medical bills, uninsured drivers, and dozens of other issues.

 

[Doomsday101]

I don't understand because it seems as if You, and others, are all in favor of profiling. Where the direct opposite seems to be in play for the Governor.

So which is it...are you for it or against it?

I have given plenty of reasons to pull someone over and check ID...you seem to only be talking about profiling.

Not so much in favor of profile but come on when it comes to illegals coming from mexico what nationality are you looking at? Lets don't be stupid. If a cop pulls any of us over Black, White, Hispanic or Asian they are going to ask for ID. If a person is at the store the cop is not going to come in and ask for you to produce ID they are not going to your house asking for ID in the course of their duty they will ask for ID just as they ask if of any of us.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Yes, I would. I have traveled in other countries and I respect their rights to know that people are in their country legally. The fact is America has long been too soft on this issue, and my state has decided we can't afford to be soft any more. It costs us in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year in lost taxes, unpaid medical bills, uninsured drivers, and dozens of other issues.

Incidentally, Hos, I love New Mexico. It's one of my favorite states, and I vacation there whenever possible.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Not so much in favor of profile but come on when it comes to illegals coming from mexico what nationality are you looking at? Lets don't be stupid. If a cop pulls any of us over Black, White, Hispanic or Asian they are going to ask for ID. If a person is at the store the cop is not going to come in and ask for you to produce ID they are not going to your house asking for ID in the course of their duty they will ask for ID just as they ask if of any of us.

So you basically are for the police doing racial profiling but kind of don't want to admit to it.

Interesting.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Once again, you're evading the question.

There are quite clearly two different definitions of profiling in play here -- the definition held by the Arizona governor and the definition espoused by opponents of the bill.

I'm addressing the latter definition, and my question still remains -- and, I suspect, will continue to remain.

I have already given examples in other threads of how they can find illegal immigrants. So the question was answered before it was even asked if you ever cared to read things.

Now answer my question...Are you for profiling or against it.

 

[Doomsday101]

So you basically are for the police doing racial profiling but kind of don't want to admit to it.

Interesting.

No I don't think the cops have a right to pull you over because of the color of your skins. In the course of their duty if they pull over a person no ID, no prove of who they are no insurance and can't speak English I think they have a right to see if you are here legally or not.