Arizona's "immagration" law

[mmarsh]

Senorjekips

I don't think you are understanding me. I am not arguing against a policeman right to search a vehicle regardless of whose driving it, they have the right to ask and you have the right to refuse such a search.

I am arguing against the fact that police do not have the right to suspect someone is an illegal alien simply based on their skin color. This is known as racial profiling.

So far NONE of the videos have shown a Caucasian being stopped and asked for proof of citizenship. Whereas I did show you case of LEO stopping a truck driver for driving while Brown and even though he did provide proof of his citizenship he was still detained. Thats immoral and mostly likely illegal.

My point is that as Caucasians you and my chances of being stopped and ordered to provide proof of our legal status is absolutely zero, even in states with laws as Draconian as Arizona. Whereas a Hispanic persons had better have who whole family tree on his persons at all times because without it he is liable to be harassed by the police without it.

What this law is subtly stating is that Hispanics must have a Birth certificate with them at all times as proof of their citizenship. If this sounds slightly familiar its because we have been on this road before. In the 1940s the Nazis made Jews had to wear the Star of David as proof of their NON-citizenship.

The court has stated that the police can stop someone with "reasonable doubt". The Arizona law provides for "reasonable suspicion" but without clarifying what that suspicion actually is. Whats the difference between Doubt and Suspicion. A police officer needs a criteria checklist to see if someone fits under "reasonable doubt". There is no such checklist under "reasonable suspicion", only a police officers gut instinct.

Let me make it even more plain. A police officer does not have the right to say "oh, there is a person with brown skin driving a Lexus I am going to pull him over and make sure hes not a Mexican Drug Dealer whose in the country illegally". Maybe he is an illegal drug dealer, or maybe its just someone driving a car he bought legally home from work. Since police officers are not clairvoyant and cannot tell the difference between a legal and a illegal he has absolutely no right to stop the car.

The constitution is very specific, Amendment 14 states "all people are equal under the law". That means that the police cannot give "special treatment" to a certain group of people. The constitution says PEOPLE not CITIZENS, which means everybody is covered by this law.

Therefore, the only way this law would be legal would be if the Arizona police stopped every single person on the roads and demanded to see their birth certificates. But ONLY demanding it from Hispanics and no one else is a violation of their civil rights and why I am almost certain this law will be struck down.

 

[Chukpike]

Correction: I hate supplying sources TO YOU SPECIFICALLY because whenever a source is given to you will find ANY excuse to avoid admitting you were wrong like with the drivers license business which your are (not surprisingly) very silent on. What I don't like is people who are determined to waste my time because they are to LAZY and IGNORANT to research things themselves because they are terrified it might shatter the glass house they live in. And I don't give a s*** if you don't like it...cry me a river.

Who's wrong?

"wrong like with the drivers license business which your are (not surprisingly) very silent on."quote mmarsh

Being a little dishonest here, aren't we mmarsh?

From my post #15:
"The article says he showed his commercial drivers license. It says nothing about it being a valid license.
With out a valid license additional proof of residence would be required."quote chukpike

Your whole example was off topic because it had absolutely nothing to do with the Arizona immigration law.

So, because racism isn't explicitly stated means it doesn't exist right? Are you really that naive? Get out of that glass house you live in.

Don't comprehend much do you? As I stated in Post # 15:
"you make the point that profiling is still being carried out throughout the country.
So the Arizona law has not changed anything for the better are worse." quote chukpike

Profiling can be a problem anywhere, it is why law enforcement spends a lot of time and money in training their officers.

It will remain a problem despite laws. Why? Because LEOs are people also. The training and professionalism greatly reduce the amount of profiling.

Is profiling all bad? As you can see from the arrest of the suspected NYC bomber. He is a Pakistani, if a NYC LEO had seen him in the alley acting suspicious could the officer arrest him? Or would that be profiling.

Can a LEO use his professional judgement in dealing with the public?

And you are as guilty of prejudice as anyone on these forums as you quite often announce your hatred for the views of others.
That is a definition of prejudice.

You want to debate the subject of this thread, which is the Arizona immigration law fine. But don't start bringing your prejudices in to the thread.

 

[mmarsh]

Who's wrong?

"wrong like with the drivers license business which your are (not surprisingly) very silent on."quote mmarsh

Being a little dishonest here, aren't we mmarsh?

From my post #15:
"The article says he showed his commercial drivers license. It says nothing about it being a valid license.
With out a valid license additional proof of residence would be required."quote chukpike

Your whole example was off topic because it had absolutely nothing to do with the Arizona immigration law.




Don't comprehend much do you? As I stated in Post # 15:
"you make the point that profiling is still being carried out throughout the country.
So the Arizona law has not changed anything for the better are worse." quote chukpike

Profiling can be a problem anywhere, it is why law enforcement spends a lot of time and money in training their officers.

It will remain a problem despite laws. Why? Because LEOs are people also. The training and professionalism greatly reduce the amount of profiling.

Is profiling all bad? As you can see from the arrest of the suspected NYC bomber. He is a Pakistani, if a NYC LEO had seen him in the alley acting suspicious could the officer arrest him? Or would that be profiling.

Can a LEO use his professional judgement in dealing with the public?

And you are as guilty of prejudice as anyone on these forums as you quite often announce your hatred for the views of others.
That is a definition of prejudice.

You want to debate the subject of this thread, which is the Arizona immigration law fine. But don't start bringing your prejudices in to the thread.

Because the article doesn't explicit say that it was "Valid" Drivers License therefore in your mind it was automatically means its a "invalid" license???
The reason it wasn't mention was because for most of us normal human beings out there this called "common sense", something you appear to be lacking.

Seriously, how old are you really? You cannot be 58 because thats the response of a 9 year old. You've made many pitiful comments in the past to avoid being wrong but this attempt at grasping at straws is simply sad even for you.

And you are right, I really don't comprehend you at all. My problem is that I cannot decide if you are really so self-absorbed that you will continue to argue a unwinnable battle over some insignificant detail, or are you simply an internet troll trying to start a argument. Its pathetic either way.

Oh so police training reduces profiling? Oh Really? Victims of police profiling might disagree. Why don't you go into the South Bronx or Compton and ask people there about the recent reduction in police harassment, not that I suspect you have much contact with people of color.

Profiling is a problem everywhere, you are right on that. But then riddle me this? How does passing a law that facilitates racial profiling stem the problem? I think you would have a VERY different opinion about this law if it were YOU being constantly stopped.

Concerning the lastest arrest in NYC. I believe it was the fact he was seen fleeing on video tape fleeing a burning car, changing his appearance and the fact that his name was on the bill of sale of the van had more to do with his arrest than of his skin color. Which proves that you don't need to use skin color in order to determine guilt.

I find it hilarious that you talk about me not tolerating your views without taking a giant look in the mirror, but that goes back to the glass house I was referring to previously. But OK Ill play along...

Let me be perfectly honest since we are talking about prejudice. Its true I am prejudice. There, I admit it! Surprised? But its not peoples views I have a problem with. For example I have the utmost respect for the views of people who disagree with me such as Wolfen, Senorjekips, USMC03, George, Hmmm, DTOP to name a few. I think they are often wrong but that they are honorable, decent, people who are just IMHO are mistaken.

And its not even your opinions I don't like. I have heard them all before its nothing new. What I don't like, or rather WHO I don't like is you specifically. And trust me, (since, remember, I am being totally honest here) that I am not alone amongst those here who don't like you. And in case you are wondering why we don't like you: It has to do with your past poor treatment of other members here which i think most people here have experienced at on time or another.

I hope that clarified "mmarsh prejudices" situation for you. Have a Nice day!

 

[senojekips]

Senorjekips

I don't think you are understanding me.

I am sure that I do not understand you.

You made the implication that I had nothing to fear from being questioned by the authorities, because I was Caucasian....

Senojekips ---snip--- Its always Caucasians who think such laws are just, because they are NEVER the subject of such laws.

I posted the clips to demonstrate that your statement was clearly untrue and that Caucasians were subjected to the same scrutiny as everyone else.

The world is full of people who rely on truisms to support their views, the main trouble being that, as in this example, they are just not factual, and therefore their argument is flawed before they begin.

 

[wolfen]

Wolfen

What the law is saying is that Hispanics in Arizona must carry a birth certificate with them at all times. Thats a violation of the 14th Amendment, all citizens being equal under the law. And I almost guarantee you this law, unless its amended to clearly define "reasonable suspicion" will be struck down on those grounds.

This law is so unjust its actually creating bipartisanship. Even Republicans are speaking out against it including Jeb Bush, Rick Perry, Mark Rubio amongst many.

theres a hellofa difference between visiting and refusing to learn the language of the country they move to. Which countries can I move to and NOT have to learn a different language? the ones I know of are England, Wales, Scotland, New Zealand and Australia, and maybe a few islands in the carib, EVERY NON English speaking country will NOT cater to me if I move there, to communicate I need to learn THEIR language, so it should be the same here, you move here SPEAK ENGLISH! I'm in Virginia Beach, Virginia, I live so far away from Arizona its not even funny, and yet my kids have to learn Spanish because the Illegal people who get free education and pay no taxes here, are either too dam lazy to learn English or feel that they shouldn't have to. Hell I had to learn enough Spanish to tell a job applicant at my work that he didn't get the job because he didn't speak English, WTF is wrong with THAT picture?
Any cop should NOT arrest anybody just because they look like a certain race, but if you ARE detained, arrested or otherwise asked, you SHOULD be able to at least provide a ssn, which would prove that you are here legally. If you can't prove that you should be sent back to wherever you came from.

Oh and just for the record I am WHITE, not any other race, but I was in San Diego naval station once, and we went to Mexico for a weekend, on eth way back we were stopped (car full of white men in uniform) for 4 hours, our car dismantled, we were searched in VERY hard detail and we had to PROVE that we weer both American and in the Navy, so I have no problem at all with anybody being asked to do the same.

 

[pixiedustboo]

* 12 - AND THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY'S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON'T GET ENOUGH RESPECT.

You forgot to put, "and burn."

 

[Chukpike]

I am sure that I do not understand you.

You made the implication that I had nothing to fear from being questioned by the authorities, because I was Caucasian....
I posted the clips to demonstrate that your statement was clearly untrue and that Caucasians were subjected to the same scrutiny as everyone else.

The world is full of people who rely on truisms to support their views, the main trouble being that, as in this example, they are just not factual, and therefore their argument is flawed before they begin.

Should be obvious by now that mmarsh does not deal in facts. He gives us a biased video and tries to pass it off as fact.

mmarsh assumes the man had a valid license, so why wasn't it shown. We get to see part of a birth certificate, where was the license?

mmarsh says the guy was pulled over for being brown.
Not true, he had stopped at an inspection station. What do they do there? Well gee they inspect.

He tries to say the Arizona law was used.
Not true, it has not gone into effect
Not, true the arresting officers where ICE and not Arizona LEOs.

Mmarsh outright misleads everyone by saying I was silent on the license, but anyone can read my post and see I did address the license.

No, mmarsh does not like to supply sources because he is going to express his opinion and pass it off as fact.

His signature should be, "Don't confuse me with facts, my minds made up.":-D

 

[mmarsh]

Chukpike

Would you like some cheese for your Whine?

Let me ask you a question. Why should we provide evidence because you are so dishonest that you nitpick everything on the flimsiest excuse like you are doing right now? And how come nobody else seems to have a problem with my (or anyone else for that matter) source...it ALWAYS seems to be just you who complains? Its no coincidence. Watching you try and squirm your way out of an argument is like watching a fish suffocate when its out of water. You feel sorry for it, but ultimately you wish somebody would put it out of its misery. You've been told this before by others here as well. You are merely continuing to argue because you have painted yourself into a corner and you simple cannot admit to yourself that you are wrong. My niece is just like you, she can never own up to a mistake either. The difference between the two of you is that shes 6 years old and maturing, you are 58 and like Benjamin Button you are Regressing with age.

I know perfectly well that if I presented the moon landing you would question its authenticity just for the principal of causing an argument. As a debater your intellectual honesty and credibility is ZERO. That's why I will continue to IGNORE both your requests, and you in general because your simply a waste of my time.

Oh, I have an idea for a new sig for you too: "I find myself fascinating". It Describes you perfectly.

Now run along, this thread is really meant for adults.

Senorjekips

But your videos were based on Border checkpoints not random stops. The difference is that *everyone* is stopped at border crossings. That IS NOT the point I was making. I was not saying that Caucasians don't get stopped, but that no Caucasian is going to get specifically pulled over on Interstate 10 on suspicion of being an illegal immigrant from Mexico.

I have been stopped in AZ (for speeding) the officer never asked us to provide proof that we were legally in the country. I thinks its obvious as to why (I'm white). The only thing Chukpike said that was actually accurate was that Racial profiling always existed even prior to this law. The problem is that this the law only expands a practice that was already not officially done.

What Arizona is saying: "We dont racially profile, but we are enacting this law so that the police have greater powers to racial profile".

And heres the most damning evidence. The AZ police never asked for this new power, I law a interview with a Arizona Sheriff saying the tools that the state and Federal government gave him were sufficient to the task. It was in the link I posted a few lengths above. In other words this law was passed by politicans (for publicity reasons) who didn't bother to ask their own agencies if they needed it or not.

Seriously, can you honestly tell me that in AZ that I now risk getting stopped, asked to provide proof about my actual citizenship, and arrested if I don't have enough satisfactory proof like a Birth Certificate? Remember that law in AZ is based SOLELY at the arresting officers opinion, there is no guideline he has to follow. This means if you provide a drivers license, family album, birth certificate, an actual video of your birth in a US hospital he can still LEGALLY detain you based on his definition of what "reasonable suspicion" is. That is entirely the center of the problem.

Wolfen

You totally missing the point. I am not arguing for leniency for illegals. My problem are laws that are designed to target illegals but that are so broad they wind up targeted legal immigrants and citizens with tan skin as well as illegals. Thats immoral and illegal.

As for your anecdote, I think its fair to say that if the cops stopped you and took your car apart is wasn't because they thought you were illegal, but that they suspected you were running drugs which is a entirely different kettle of fish. If I were to guess they probabaly based this suspicion was a culmination of factors such as the shortness of your stay, and the fact you were in a military uniform (there is a unfortunate history of drug smuggling amongst military service personnel) AND you were white (Mexican drug dealers often use Caucasians as Mules). Mules try and pass themselves off as ordinary people, you fit the bill. There may have been other factors as well, maybe a police dog sensed something in your car...I am speculating.

But you see that proves my point. For a drug search the officers must have fit a suspect with certain criteria they are looking for. The problem with this AZ law is that there is no criteria, just an officers suspicion. Thats the entire problem. An officer can be suspicious of an Illegal based on a persons race, be it can't be the ONLY reason.

 

[A Can of Man]

Mmarsh does have a good point.
The potential for abuse is there.

 

[senojekips]

Senorjekips

But your videos were based on Border checkpoints not random stops. The difference is that *everyone* is stopped at border crossings.

Nice try. except that neither of these checkpoints were within 100 miles of the border. AND the bloke in the first video was NOT a Hispanic as your subtle ear detected. Watch the series and you'll find out more.

That is what the stinko in the videos is all about, supposed flouting of peoples 4th Amendment Rights. (Search and detainment without reasonable cause, I believe) Now Remember I'm noy vaguely interesdted in whether the searches are legal or otherwise, I'm just showing that Hispanics per se are not being "targeted" in the hunt for "Illegals". If you are in doubt I'll get you some more videos of Non Hispanics being stopped and detained.

 

[mmarsh]

Nice try. except that neither of these checkpoints were within 100 miles of the border. AND the bloke in the first video was NOT a Hispanic as your subtle ear detected. Watch the series and you'll find out more.

That is what the stinko in the videos is all about, supposed flouting of peoples 4th Amendment Rights. (Search and detainment without reasonable cause, I believe) Now Remember I'm noy vaguely interesdted in whether the searches are legal or otherwise, I'm just showing that Hispanics per se are not being "targeted" in the hunt for "Illegals". If you are in doubt I'll get you some more videos of Non Hispanics being stopped and detained.

My friend, we are arguing in circles. I'll listen to the video again later when I can, if you are right ill tell you so. Unlike Chukpike here, I am man enough to admit to being wrong.

But you still didn't mention my point. Tell me honestly what are my chances as a Caucasian of being suspected of being an illegal immigrant vs what would be my chances if I were Hispanic? I think its fair to say that Hispanics are overwhelming more likely to be stopped and that is racial profiling.

As for your assertion that hispanics (or blacks) are not systematically targeted I think you will just need to ask them. When I was was living in NYC they complained almost on a daily basis about being racially targeted by the police.

 

[HokieMSG]

...
The court has stated that the police can stop someone with "reasonable doubt". The Arizona law provides for "reasonable suspicion" but without clarifying what that suspicion actually is. Whats the difference between Doubt and Suspicion. A police officer needs a criteria checklist to see if someone fits under "reasonable doubt". There is no such checklist under "reasonable suspicion", only a police officers gut instinct.

Proving reasonable suspicion is simple. If the case goes to court, the arresting officer can present the suspicions he has and a "reasonable" person (in this case the jury or judge) would consider them valid.

It is UNREASONABLE to attempt to list suspicious actions. There is an element of trust here. We have to trust that the LEO is doing the right thing. We have the courts as a check against abuse of this.

Let me make it even more plain. A police officer does not have the right to say "oh, there is a person with brown skin driving a Lexus I am going to pull him over and make sure hes not a Mexican Drug Dealer whose in the country illegally". Maybe he is an illegal drug dealer, or maybe its just someone driving a car he bought legally home from work. Since police officers are not clairvoyant and cannot tell the difference between a legal and a illegal he has absolutely no right to stop the car.

No they do not, but they do have the right to enforce laws. If the driver commits a driving infraction, the LEO has PC (Probable cause) to stop the vehicle. If during the traffic stop the LEO observes or the driver admits to another crime the driver can be prosecuted.

The constitution is very specific, Amendment 14 states "all people are equal under the law". That means that the police cannot give "special treatment" to a certain group of people. The constitution says PEOPLE not CITIZENS, which means everybody is covered by this law.

Therefore, the only way this law would be legal would be if the Arizona police stopped every single person on the roads and demanded to see their birth certificates. But ONLY demanding it from Hispanics and no one else is a violation of their civil rights and why I am almost certain this law will be struck down.

Doing that would violate the civil rights of everyone they stopped. LEO's cannot stop individuals WITHOUT PC.

Senojekips is trying to explain that if a person, in this case bank robber, was identified as having only one leg. It would be perfectly legal for the police to question every one legged person they ran into. It would not be legal for the police to detain other people in the course of investingating the bank robbery.

If a LEO stopped people for "driving while brown" (your words not mine) without PC, the case would be thrown out. Even if the detained person admitted to killing Kennedy and 27 coeds. Any evidence gained during detention would be inadmissable.

In most cases the police are too busy to hassle people just because they are brown or black or yellow. They are trying to investigate crimes that have been comitted. I'm sick and tired of people hiding behind race when they have clearly comitted a crime.

I do agree with Chuckpike. You have not PROVEN that this AZ law is being abused.

 

[senojekips]

But you still didn't mention my point. Tell me honestly what are my chances as a Caucasian of being suspected of being an illegal immigrant vs what would be my chances if I were Hispanic? I think its fair to say that Hispanics are overwhelming more likely to be stopped and that is racial profiling.

That was neither what the question or what my answer was about. Read again what you said initially, and my answer.

Its always Caucasians who think such laws are just, because they are NEVER the subject of such laws.

My videos clearly demonstrate that this is not the case. And I think that the law is just, not because i'm Caucasian, but because I'm not an Illegal Immigrant. Note the first word of that title, ILLEGAL, It's just that I feel that it is the responsibility of the authorities to catch criminals.

If you wish to find out whether the person in the first video is a Caucasian or not, I suggest you send him a PM, It's far easier and much more reliable than your ear for Hispanic sounding voices.

 

[mmarsh]

HokieMSG

We are not talking about going to court, the issue is whether a LEO has even the legal justification to stop someone in the first place. Do you know what happens when something goes to a grand jury and its determined that the police did NOT have ample cause to arrest the individual? The suspect gets released and the PD gets sued. Which is yet another argument why this law is a bad idea and is fact one of the reasons why some sheriffs wont comply with it -they don't want to get sued.

My friend, I think you are being very naive. Do you really think that cops need for PC actually stops them? The sad fact is if they want to stop you they WILL stop you, PC or no PC. I have actually been the victim of such a stop over a BS speeding ticket. Long story short, if you were to accept the officers version of events as the truth you would have to rewrite the basic laws of physics concerning speed, time, and distance.

I am saying, and what certain state laws have as well, is that the police do not have the right to systematically stop every single person with one leg that they see. They need other criteria to collaborate it. Like a physical description, the clothes he was wearing, the car he was driving etc. Simply Picking up every one-legged person they see is a no-no. Its also unmanageable. If the police arrested every single latino that didnt have a birth certificate on him you would need to be jails and courts the size of California.

Its true people do hide behind race to disguise crimes, but its also true that police unfairly target minorities. As I stated I had a high school friend who was CONSTANTLY harassed and he was a honor student from a good family. He was harassed because he was a large black teenager who drove a car. We had to wear shirt and ties in school and that still didn't stop the cops from busting him. Thats what commonly called in NYC DWB = Driving while Black (I didnt make it up, the Brown part was just a little of minor creativity).

Finally a friendly word of caution since you bring it up. A lot of people disagree with me (as you can see above) and all of them are perfectly decent people. We all get along even if we do disagree. I have agreed with both Senorjekips and Wolfen on different subjects in the past. Chukpike however, has a long history here of trolling here, its why everyone gives him a wide berth even when they agree with him. Its your choice, but I'd be very wary when quoting him. He relished intellectual dishonesty. Case in point, I never claimed AZ law is being abused, my whole argument was I think the new AZ law is violating the US constitution concerning the 14th Amendment under equal protection clause.

Senojekips

As I said before, you didn't understand me. It was PRECISELY my entire point. Ill try and summarize it to you again. The fact that this law which allows LEO to demand proof of citizenship based on a very broad definition of "suspicion" does deliberately target Latinos AND the fact those people who think such laws are fair are those who will never be subject to them. I can say with absolutely certainty that no cop is ever going to ask me to prove my citizenship by asking for my BC for proof of my legal status. Your a intelligent person I doubt even you would deny this.
The only time i am ever asked to prove my nationality is when I am leaving or entering the country. Why? Sadly its because I am white, I speak like someone from with East Coast, I don't even speak Spanish. It would have to be the dumbest cop on planet Earth to even think that I was from Mexico.

So its reasonable to conclude therefore that the police will not be looking at people like me as being an illegal but people with a darker complexion or a Spanish accent. Which as I said is normal as long as the police dont a persons race as a SOLE criteria for suspicion. If they do its racial profiling.

The problem with this law that it provides nothing to distinguish a Hispanic legally in the country from one that is here illegally. The AZ law is asking that police become clairvoyant which they are not. I have no problem with cracking down on illegals but it has to be done in a way that doesn't risk legal citizens. The risk of abuse as it stands now is enormous.

 

[HokieMSG]

mmarsh
Police DO have the authority to stop people. This is the basis for the APB system. If you fit the description of someone they are looking for who has comitted a crime, and they see you, it is likely that they will stop you to ask you a few questions. I cannot believe that the new law gives police the authority to stop people for being hispanic. No sane person could belive that it would survive the court system.

If sherrifs won't comply, fire them. Their job is to enforce existing laws, they don't get to pick and choose which ones to enforce. If they don't feel correct enforcing it. Quit.

As far as needing PC, LEO's won't stop you without it. They understand the implications of a stop without it.

I cannot believe that the new law would make being latino a primary offense. Likely it is a secondary offense (being here illegally) and will add more fuel to the fire.

When you are in LE, you end up dealing with the same 5% of the population.

If your friend was doing nothing wrong, I think what happened is unjust and should never happened. When an officer stops you he will tell you what you were stopped for. (See the 6th Ammendment). If your friend was speeding, ran a stopsign or comitted any other driving infraction then the police have every right to stop him and it would NOT be harrasment.

A very good friend of mine, who is a LEO with 25+ years of experience, used to say that there are 3 sides to every story...
1. What he saw happen
2. What she saw happen
3. What really happened

I appreciate the warning. I too have had many heated discussions with Chuckpike. I was away for a little over a year in Iraq, but I still remember him, and you as well as many others.

 

[Chukpike]

HokieMSG
My friend, I think you are being very naive. Do you really think that cops need for PC actually stops them? The sad fact is if they want to stop you they WILL stop you, PC or no PC. I have actually been the victim of such a stop over a BS speeding ticket. Long story short, if you were to accept the officers version of events as the truth you would have to rewrite the basic laws of physics concerning speed, time, and distance.

Good example of a Caucasian being profiled.
Everyone knows Caucasians speed. Here we have mmarsh, a Caucasian, being pulled over for no reason other than he is white and driving a car.
Obvious case of DWW= Driving While White (the White part was just a little of minor creativity):wink:

Senojekips, mmarsh is admitting that Caucasians are stopped for no reason other than they are white. He has proved your point, there is no profiling since it happens to eveyone.

HokieMSG join the club. mmarsh thinks I am naive also. It seems anyone who disagrees with him is naive.

He also thinks you should let him pick who you should agree with.

"its why everyone gives him a wide berth even when they agree with him....." quote mmarsh

And finally a friendly word of advise, just follow mmarsh and you will be OK.

He will pick your friends, pick how you think, and probably pick you nose for you.

"The fact that this law which allows LEO to demand proof of citizenship....." quote mmarsh

Contrary to what mmarsh states their is nothing in the Arizona Law that requires people to supply proof of citizenship. Legal aliens only need to supply proof they are here legally, they do not have to be citizens to go to Arizona.:roll:

Just shows his lack of honesty and integrity in distorting what is written.

 

[mmarsh]

Where did I say that I was stopped because I was white? What I said that there was no PC, I didn't say anything about being white. I also never said it was me driving the car I just said I was there...another deliberate misinterpretation of the facts. Remind me again whose being intellectually dishonest?

May I ask another question? Why are you here? Its clear you only love hearing yourself talk and not anyone else. Wouldn't it be easier to get a very large Mirror so that you can keep reminding yourself how brilliant you are? Think of the possibilities! You save money on electricity for not running your PC and you wouldn't have to worry about us pesky morals challenging your divine godhood.

And Correction: I was mistaken, you are not naive, you're just spineless coward on the internet. A keyboard commando who wouldn't have the guts to talk to people in real life as rudely as you do here. I know your type all too well, you think your lack of bravery and lack of self-worth are hidden by your username. But I can still spot a coward when I see one, that big yellow stripe running down your back can be seen miles away.

But your are correct on this point, people here would be far better of listening to me than listening to you. The reason being I will respect his beliefs without ridiculing them, I wont insult him, I wont disrespect him, I wont twist his words around into spaghetti. I wont split hairs on a argument to avoid being wrong. I wont treat him like he was garbage because he DARED disagree with me. These are things I promise I wont do to him. Can you say the same? I have already called you a coward, you want me to add liar to it as well? I don't know HokieMSG that well, but I do know you. BTW, what I promised to Hokie I make no such promise to you. I plan to be as rude to you as you are to everyone else.

Everyone is free to make up there own mind. People can come with me and be one of my many, many friends here, and agreeing with me is not an obligation. Or you can be with Chukpike who *SHOCKINGLY* has no friends here at all.

 

[sky2979]

I think police agencies SHOULD be able to ask for documentation from ALL persons believed to be illegal. And those who can't produce papers proving they are here legally, should be immediately jailed and deported. Illegals have more rights than citizens, which I find appalling. I despise them all, and, as I said, am all for shooting them on sight and showing them no mercy whatsoever.

LMAO,..Perhaps, you should make the southwest your new home??? That way you can personally shoot 95% of the southwest population and show no mercy ...hehehee...crazy.

 

[A Can of Man]

For some reason I find it difficult to believe how illegals have more rights than citizens. Are we conveniently ignoring all the things that are stacked up against them? Granted, being illegally present in the country, they shouldn't be here in the first place but to claim they have it BETTER... I think it might be a bit of a stretch.

 

[senojekips]

Senojekips

As I said before, you didn't understand me.

I'm damned sure of the fact that i do not understand you. Forget all the padding and extraneous material. You made a statement which I have now quoted THREE times. This statement is quite clear and concise.

Its always Caucasians who think such laws are just, because they are NEVER the subject of such laws.

I posted two videos showing quite clearly that this statement was incorrect.

I'm not interested in whether the people in the video are having their 4th Amendment Rights violated, I'm not interested in your personal experiences nor am I really interested even if it is true that Hispanics are being targeted, after all the suspected Illegal Immigrants would normally be expected to be Hispanic, which does narrow down the list of suspects.

You clearly implied that it was only Non Caucasians being targeted, (see the quote above) I showed that this statement (nothing else) was not true and that the Authorities were stopping and questioning people without regard to their race. What is it that I have not understood in regard to THIS statement,... nothing else.