Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!

Poetic Justice wrote;
By law, he would have to have been
stopped for 'just cause' (like a traffic
infraction).
And then he would *only* be required to
produce his license like everyone else.


[Snip] However, that would be during a
just-cause stop.
The Arizona law makes mere suspicion of
illegal migration status "just Cause".

Hatunen wrote;

Define "reasonable suspicion" of being an
illegal immigrant.

That is twice you have avoided backing-up your claim "The Arizona law
makes mere suspicion of illegal migration status "just Cause".

Plus the new law also *strictly prohibits* that!

I find it extremely odd that the POTUS, the media (oddly not FOX, Beck
just read that section of the law this week *again*), the protesters,
and a resident of AZ all overlook what the law actually says???
Regards, Walter



...And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:
On Fri, 07 May 2010 19:26:27 +0000, "Bill Bonde {Colourless green
ideas don't sleep furiously)"
wrote:



Hatunen wrote:

On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

In Hatunen
wrote:

On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, (Poetic
Justice) wrote:

BTW suspicion/instinct/common sense is an excellent tool of law
enforcement for *all* types of crime. Regards, Walter

It's also been a means of doing whatever the cop wants to do. For
isntance, it's not uncommon for police to decide that any black
person driving a very expensive sports car is suspicious.

All very interesting, but have you looked at the actual text of the law
yet? Does it say what you said it does?

Define "reasonable suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant.

Define "reasonable suspicion" in other contexts. If the person
speaks no English, that's a start.

Perfectly legal immigrants may speak little or no English. And
quite illegal immigrants may speak flawless English. But you
won't find out what the person's speech abilities are until
you've alrteady stopped him.

....and you can't STOP someone without probable cause...
running a traffic light, for instance.

--
"The Nizkor website (secretly financed by the ADL and other Jewish front
organizations) is behind it." (David Irving, whining about Google's
reminder of his disgrace.) The facts:
http://nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irvi...ent-00-00.html

Define "reasonable suspicion" of being an
illegal immigrant.

Define "reasonable suspicion" in other
contexts. If the person speaks no English,
that's a start.

Hatunen wrote;

Perfectly legal immigrants may speak little
or no English. And quite illegal immigrants
may speak flawless English.
But you won't find out what the person's
speech abilities are until you've alrteady
stopped him.

And once that person produces a valid AZ driver's licence any questions
of residency status are *off the table* by this new law regardless of
his "speech abilities".

It has to be a lawful stop even if the person is walking, standing,
riding his bike, etc.

You *need* a photo ID in America even if you don't drive so I would
assume a AZ State photo ID would be exactly like a driving license for
ID purposes.
Regards, Walter



...And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...

On 07 May 2010 21:11:59 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

In Hatunen
wrote:

On 07 May 2010 18:42:33 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

In Hatunen
wrote:

On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

In Hatunen
wrote:

On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, (Poetic
Justice) wrote:

BTW suspicion/instinct/common sense is an excellent tool of law
enforcement for *all* types of crime. Regards, Walter

It's also been a means of doing whatever the cop wants to do. For
isntance, it's not uncommon for police to decide that any black
person driving a very expensive sports car is suspicious.

All very interesting, but have you looked at the actual text of the
law yet? Does it say what you said it does?

Define "reasonable suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant.


Have you looked at the actual text of the law yet? Does it say what
you said it does?

Pretty much.

Does it say what you said it does?

Wouldn't it serve your purposes better for you to read it
yourself?

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Fri, 07 May 2010 16:31:43 -0500, (Kenneth
McVay OBC) wrote:

In article ,
Hatunen wrote:
On Fri, 07 May 2010 19:26:27 +0000, "Bill Bonde {Colourless green
ideas don't sleep furiously)"
wrote:



Hatunen wrote:

On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

In Hatunen
wrote:

On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, (Poetic
Justice) wrote:

BTW suspicion/instinct/common sense is an excellent tool of law
enforcement for *all* types of crime. Regards, Walter

It's also been a means of doing whatever the cop wants to do. For
isntance, it's not uncommon for police to decide that any black
person driving a very expensive sports car is suspicious.

All very interesting, but have you looked at the actual text of the law
yet? Does it say what you said it does?

Define "reasonable suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant.

Define "reasonable suspicion" in other contexts. If the person
speaks no English, that's a start.

Perfectly legal immigrants may speak little or no English. And
quite illegal immigrants may speak flawless English. But you
won't find out what the person's speech abilities are until
you've alrteady stopped him.

...and you can't STOP someone without probable cause...
running a traffic light, for instance.

So far we've been addressing illeal aliens who happen to be
drivng a car. Most of them are too poor to own a car. And even
then, most of them will be on foot, at your supermarket, on the
bus, in schoolyards, working on your landscaping, etc.



--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Fri, 7 May 2010 17:54:25 -0400, (Poetic
Justice) wrote:

Define "reasonable suspicion" of being an
illegal immigrant.

Define "reasonable suspicion" in other
contexts. If the person speaks no English,
that's a start.

Hatunen wrote;

Perfectly legal immigrants may speak little
or no English. And quite illegal immigrants
may speak flawless English.
But you won't find out what the person's
speech abilities are until you've alrteady
stopped him.

And once that person produces a valid AZ driver's licence any questions
of residency status are *off the table* by this new law regardless of
his "speech abilities".

Indeed. But there are evn more illegal immigrants who are only
passengers in the car or who are on foot.

It has to be a lawful stop even if the person is walking, standing,
riding his bike, etc.

You *need* a photo ID in America even if you don't drive so I would
assume a AZ State photo ID would be exactly like a driving license for
ID purposes.

There is no national requirement for a citizen to have a photo
ID. Many states do issue a non-driving driver license as a state
identity card for those who don't drive but would like to pay for
things with a check and for younger people over 21 but who might
not look it so that they can buy alcoholic beverages.

I've not seen such an ID for awhile, but I believe in Arizona
they are arranged in portrait mode while DLs are in landscape
mode.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Fri, 7 May 2010 17:14:04 -0400, (Poetic
Justice) wrote:

Poetic Justice wrote;
By law, he would have to have been
stopped for 'just cause' (like a traffic
infraction).
And then he would *only* be required to
produce his license like everyone else.


[Snip] However, that would be during a
just-cause stop.
The Arizona law makes mere suspicion of
illegal migration status "just Cause".

Hatunen wrote;

Define "reasonable suspicion" of being an
illegal immigrant.

That is twice you have avoided backing-up your claim "The Arizona law
makes mere suspicion of illegal migration status "just Cause".

Plus the new law also *strictly prohibits* that!

I find it extremely odd that the POTUS, the media (oddly not FOX, Beck
just read that section of the law this week *again*), the protesters,
and a resident of AZ all overlook what the law actually says???
Regards, Walter

You have to know that teh language of the original bill was toned
down due to tehse complaints and the new low eill contain less
harsh language. So now it's down to interpretation of the
provisions as stated.

There's a very good summary at
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2...70pshs.doc.htm

The bill provides that there must be a "legitimate contact" with
the person but fails to define it.

Notice at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/08...5----000-.html
that federal law provides only a civil penalty for not being
documented while Arizona defines it as "criminal trespass"


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

In Hatunen
wrote:

Wouldn't it serve your purposes better for you to read it
yourself?

Should I take that to mean that now that you've actually read the law,
you find that it doesn't actually say what you were claiming it said?

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN

Hatunen wrote:

On Fri, 07 May 2010 16:31:43 -0500, (Kenneth
McVay OBC) wrote:



...and you can't STOP someone without probable cause...
running a traffic light, for instance.

So far we've been addressing illeal aliens who happen to be
drivng a car. Most of them are too poor to own a car. And even
then, most of them will be on foot, at your supermarket, on the
bus, in schoolyards, working on your landscaping, etc.

And the cops show up and they, get this, they run. That's
reasonable suspicion.

On Sat, 08 May 2010 00:24:36 +0000, "Bill Bonde {Colourless green
ideas don't sleep furiously)"
wrote:



Hatunen wrote:

On Fri, 07 May 2010 16:31:43 -0500, (Kenneth
McVay OBC) wrote:



...and you can't STOP someone without probable cause...
running a traffic light, for instance.

So far we've been addressing illeal aliens who happen to be
drivng a car. Most of them are too poor to own a car. And even
then, most of them will be on foot, at your supermarket, on the
bus, in schoolyards, working on your landscaping, etc.

And the cops show up and they, get this, they run. That's
reasonable suspicion.

Running could lead to suspicion of almost any crime.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *