Arizona Official Threatens to Cut Off Los Angeles Power as Payback for Boycott

[defector]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Do you carry your Passport or birth certificate with you?

When I am in another country I do.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Tmall

I agree. Racial profiling is against the law. That doesn't change the fact that Arizona has a problem with illegal immigration. I can't even decide if I agree with their solution, but at least it's a solution for now.

It's no solution at all.

It's a desperation move, to draw attention to the fact that the Federal government has done exactly dick to solve the problem.

Arizona will go completely broke, fending off the shit ton of civil rights lawsuits that will spring from this, if in fact, they even enforce this law.

JC

[shmike]

Originally Posted by azoomm

ORLY?

From the bill:


That is line 37. So, don't do anything wrong and they won't bother you.... seems rather subjective, doesn't it?

I'm not sure I get your point.

[azoomm]

Originally Posted by shmike

I'm not sure I get your point.

They don't need a warrant.

[shmike]

Originally Posted by azoomm

They don't need a warrant.

Nobody said they did. Warrants are not needed to make an arrest for citizens either.

If I am walking out of a bank in my hamburglar mask and carrying a bag of money while the bank alarm is wailing, does the cop need a warrant to arrest me?

No, he has probable cause that I have committed a crime. He can and will arrest me.

I'm trying to connect the "unreasonable search or seizure" line to asking a driver for their driver's license.

[Homeslice]

Originally Posted by shmike

Nobody said they did. Warrants are not needed to make an arrest for citizens either.

If I am walking out of a bank in my hamburglar mask and carrying a bag of money while the bank alarm is wailing, does the cop need a warrant to arrest me?

No, he has probable cause that I have committed a crime. He can and will arrest me.

I'm trying to connect the "unreasonable search or seizure" line to asking a driver for their driver's license.

What they're saying is that in order to ask someone for their driver's license, you first need to stop/detain them for some reason. Ordinarily that is because you saw them doing something wrong, like run a red light........Now it could be just because they're Hispanic.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by shmike

Nobody said they did. Warrants are not needed to make an arrest for citizens either.

If I am walking out of a bank in my hamburglar mask and carrying a bag of money while the bank alarm is wailing, does the cop need a warrant to arrest me?

Of course not. That's perfect definition of reasonable suspicion.

Originally Posted by shmike

I'm trying to connect the "unreasonable search or seizure" line to asking a driver for their driver's license.

From Wiki:

Courts have ruled (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)) that a stop on reasonable suspicion may be appropriate in the following cases: when a person possesses many unusual items which would be useful in a crime like a wire hanger and is looking into car windows at 2am, when a person matches a description of a suspect given by another police officer over department radio, or when a person runs away at the sight of police officers who are at common law right of inquiry (founded suspicion). However, reasonable suspicion may not apply merely because a person refuses to answer questions, declines to allow a voluntary search, or is of a suspected race or ethnicity.

JC

[shmike]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

What they're saying is that in order to ask someone for their driver's license, you first need to stop/detain them for some reason. Ordinarily that is because you saw them doing something wrong, like run a red light........Now it could be just because they're Hispanic.

I agree the profiling issue is sticky.

I'm with Tmall on this. I don't like it but I'm not sure of any better options.

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

However, reasonable suspicion may not apply merely because a person refuses to answer questions, declines to allow a voluntary search, or is of a suspected race or ethnicity.

JC

See above.

I don't necessarily agree with profiling.

However, if Jose is pulled over for a headlight out, he needs to have a DL on him.

Do we agree on that?

[goof2]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

That's great, if you happen to be from Arizona.

Last time I checked, Arizona was not an island.

JC

Arizona has recognized this and as a result the law also states any federal, state, or local government issued ID is acceptable as long as proof of legal residence in America is a required condition for its issuance.

Originally Posted by Homeslice

What they're saying is that in order to ask someone for their driver's license, you first need to stop/detain them for some reason. Ordinarily that is because you saw them doing something wrong, like run a red light........Now it could be just because they're Hispanic.

No it can't. Right on the first page of the law it states:

A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR ARIZONA CONSTITUTION.

What you describe is prohibited. There must at the very least be some other pretext for pulling the person over besides their being Hispanic.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by shmike

I don't necessarily agree with profiling.

However, if Jose is pulled over for a headlight out, he needs to have a DL on him.

Do we agree on that?

Yes, that's what I've been saying all along.

JC