Conquer Club

It has come to the point now. Government officials in Arizona, because the Federal Gov't has refused to uphold it's obligation to protect the countries borders, and because said illegals are overburdening the education and health care systems in AZ, the state is going to be cracking down on illegal immigrants. This might be an inconvenience for any individual wrongly questioned, but is it not more important to allow children an education and citizens health care? The system just can not handle servicing so many non-tax payers. So it has come to this, which is more Important. The possibility of being questioned by immigration officials, or the possibility of closing down school after school and hospital after hospital?

Riot scene in Arizona http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c6KB_hwzf4

Phatscotty wrote:It has come to the point now. Government officials in Arizona, because the Federal Gov't has refused to uphold it's obligation to protect the countries borders, and because said illegals are overburdening the education and health care systems in AZ, the state is going to be cracking down on illegal immigrants. This might be an inconvenience for any individual wrongly questioned, but is it not more important to allow children an education and citizens health care? The system just can not handle servicing so many non-tax payers. So it has come to this, which is more Important. The possibility of being questioned by immigration officials, or the possibility of closing down school after school and hospital after hospital?

Riot scene in Arizona http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c6KB_hwzf4

And what is the reasoning for going from one extreme to the other?

Bones2484 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:It has come to the point now. Government officials in Arizona, because the Federal Gov't has refused to uphold it's obligation to protect the countries borders, and because said illegals are overburdening the education and health care systems in AZ, the state is going to be cracking down on illegal immigrants. This might be an inconvenience for any individual wrongly questioned, but is it not more important to allow children an education and citizens health care? The system just can not handle servicing so many non-tax payers. So it has come to this, which is more Important. The possibility of being questioned by immigration officials, or the possibility of closing down school after school and hospital after hospital?

Riot scene in Arizona http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c6KB_hwzf4

And what is the reasoning for going from one extreme to the other?

schools and hospitals closing is the extreme? I thought that was the reality. I guess I would agree that is the extreme reality Arizona is facing

Reality is fucking extreme

Deal with it

How will they find illegal immigrants? Will they simply question Hispanic people? If so, do you think 10% of the people questioned will be arrested?

You forgot option #3 -- none of the above. Tax the employers who have benefitted for so long from this cheap labor. Fine them sufficiently to both fund the services AND act as a real and true deterrant. Also mandate that anyone coming into Arizona have medical insurance, sufficient to cover emergency care and transport home.

john9blue wrote:How will they find illegal immigrants? Will they simply question Hispanic people? If so, do you think 10% of the people questioned will be arrested?

From what I hear, down in the border towns, it is very easy to spot a likely illegal simply by behavior. Exactly the same if a police officer observes a person acting like they might be high on drugs, extremely nervous about something, or lying about what should be very simple information.

PLAYER57832 wrote:You forgot option #3 -- none of the above. Tax the employers who have benefitted for so long from this cheap labor. Fine them sufficiently to both fund the services AND act as a real and true deterrant. Also mandate that anyone coming into Arizona have medical insurance, sufficient to cover emergency care and transport home.

yes but both of them are happening. while you offer worthwhile ideas that can certainly be debated further, you can not say "none of the above"

As I understand it, the police have been given the right to stop anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant and to demand papers, under threat of arrest.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they won't be stopping many white people. Effectively, if you're hispanic in Arizona, it's now an arrestable offence not to carry full papers and ID.

Or am I reading this wrong?

Symmetry wrote:As I understand it, the police have been given the right to stop anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant and to demand papers, under threat of arrest.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they won't be stopping many white people. Effectively, if you're hispanic in Arizona, it's now an arrestable offence not to carry full papers and ID.

Or am I reading this wrong?

what are the statistics of illegal whites in Arizona? or should that not be considered on the issue of "who/what to suspect"

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:As I understand it, the police have been given the right to stop anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant and to demand papers, under threat of arrest.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they won't be stopping many white people. Effectively, if you're hispanic in Arizona, it's now an arrestable offence not to carry full papers and ID.

Or am I reading this wrong?

what are the statistics of illegal whites in Arizona? or should that not be considered on the issue of "who/what to suspect"

No idea- you tell me. I'd say that racial profiling is a dodgy issue, and I know that you've reacted very badly in the past when right wing protest groups have been racially profiled and subject to government scrutiny.

Does libertarianism really limit its dislike of government interference to non-hispanic citizens?

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:As I understand it, the police have been given the right to stop anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant and to demand papers, under threat of arrest.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they won't be stopping many white people. Effectively, if you're hispanic in Arizona, it's now an arrestable offence not to carry full papers and ID.

Or am I reading this wrong?

what are the statistics of illegal whites in Arizona? or should that not be considered on the issue of "who/what to suspect"

No idea- you tell me. I'd say that racial profiling is a dodgy issue, and I know that you've reacted very badly in the past when right wing protest groups have been racially profiled and subject to government scrutiny.

Does libertarianism really limit it's dislike of government interference to non-hispanic citizens?

you brought it up... the fact that you have no idea makes me wonder....well, in fairness, you did state it was a wild guess.

your Q on libertarianism, may I ask you to rephrase please?

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:As I understand it, the police have been given the right to stop anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant and to demand papers, under threat of arrest.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they won't be stopping many white people. Effectively, if you're hispanic in Arizona, it's now an arrestable offence not to carry full papers and ID.

Or am I reading this wrong?

what are the statistics of illegal whites in Arizona? or should that not be considered on the issue of "who/what to suspect"

No idea- you tell me. I'd say that racial profiling is a dodgy issue, and I know that you've reacted very badly in the past when right wing protest groups have been racially profiled and subject to government scrutiny.

Does libertarianism really limit it's dislike of government interference to non-hispanic citizens?

you brought it up... the fact that you have no idea makes me wonder....well, in fairness, you did state it was a wild guess.

your Q on libertarianism, may I ask you to rephrase please?

I'll rephrase both, I guess. Although hispanic people make up a majority of illegal immigrants, this law unfairly targets hispanic people in practice. In effect, a white citizen would not be stopped, and a hispanic citizen would (in terms on sheer likelihood, and racial profiling). A hispanic citizen would always need full identification papers, and, purely talking in practice, how many people always carry ID? Do you see how the law discriminates in its practical application?

On the libertarianism front, and bearing in mind that this law effectively allows a certain group of citizens to be stopped based on appearance (i.e. they are hispanic) rather than actual evidence of crime, and bearing in mind that they can be arrested or detained for not carrying sufficient documentation, how can that not be a significant infringement on a citizen's liberties by the government? There should be an outcry by anyone who opposes unwarranted government interference in the lives of its citizens.

Phatscotty wrote:

john9blue wrote:How will they find illegal immigrants? Will they simply question Hispanic people? If so, do you think 10% of the people questioned will be arrested?

From what I hear, down in the border towns, it is very easy to spot a likely illegal simply by behavior. Exactly the same if a police officer observes a person acting like they might be high on drugs, extremely nervous about something, or lying about what should be very simple information.

You have obviously not been around many illegal aliens.

Phatscotty wrote:your Q on libertarianism, may I ask you to rephrase please?

The idea of Libertarianism doesn't seem to follow closely with the idea of racial profiling. How do you juxtapose the two?

ooops wrong thread

It's not "racial profiling" to assume that illegal immigrants from Mexico look like Mexicans. If you wanted to fight this "racial profiling" with some kind of white-person quota, then THAT would be against libertarianism.

Phatscotty wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:You forgot option #3 -- none of the above. Tax the employers who have benefitted for so long from this cheap labor. Fine them sufficiently to both fund the services AND act as a real and true deterrant. Also mandate that anyone coming into Arizona have medical insurance, sufficient to cover emergency care and transport home.

yes but both of them are happening. while you offer worthwhile ideas that can certainly be debated further, you can not say "none of the above"

The two things I suggested are not really happening. If they were, there would be no problem. That is the point.

john9blue wrote:It's not "racial profiling" to assume that illegal immigrants from Mexico look like Mexicans. If you wanted to fight this "racial profiling" with some kind of white-person quota, then THAT would be against libertarianism.

I always thought Libertarianism had to do with individuals' ACTIONS, not their APPEARANCES...

john9blue wrote:It's not "racial profiling" to assume that illegal immigrants from Mexico look like Mexicans. If you wanted to fight this "racial profiling" with some kind of white-person quota, then THAT would be against libertarianism.

So libertarians aren't bothered by the government assuming criminality and detaining citizens without proof?

I don't want any kind of racial quota.

I'm not sure how a libertarian can argue that quotas or profiles should exist only for non whites, or that whites should have a quota. Libertarianism shouldn't demand the kind of quota system that you seem to passively accept as natural.

Woodruff wrote:I always thought Libertarianism had to do with individuals' ACTIONS, not their APPEARANCES...

Libertarianism allows people to be racists. Assuming that most illegal immigrants are Hispanic is racism, but it's also completely reasonable.

Libertarians are against racial quotas, and are bothered by detainment without proof, Symmetry. But nothing's perfect.

I say "libertarians" here but I'm making assumptions... I don't know the official positions of the party. I assume they would be close to these.

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:As I understand it, the police have been given the right to stop anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant and to demand papers, under threat of arrest.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they won't be stopping many white people. Effectively, if you're hispanic in Arizona, it's now an arrestable offence not to carry full papers and ID.

Or am I reading this wrong?

what are the statistics of illegal whites in Arizona? or should that not be considered on the issue of "who/what to suspect"

No idea- you tell me. I'd say that racial profiling is a dodgy issue, and I know that you've reacted very badly in the past when right wing protest groups have been racially profiled and subject to government scrutiny.

Does libertarianism really limit it's dislike of government interference to non-hispanic citizens?

you brought it up... the fact that you have no idea makes me wonder....well, in fairness, you did state it was a wild guess.

your Q on libertarianism, may I ask you to rephrase please?

I'll rephrase both, I guess. Although hispanic people make up a majority of illegal immigrants, this law unfairly targets hispanic people in practice. In effect, a white citizen would not be stopped, and a hispanic citizen would (in terms on sheer likelihood, and racial profiling). A hispanic citizen would always need full identification papers, and, purely talking in practice, how many people always carry ID? Do you see how the law discriminates in its practical application?

On the libertarianism front, and bearing in mind that this law effectively allows a certain group of citizens to be stopped based on appearance (i.e. they are hispanic) rather than actual evidence of crime, and bearing in mind that they can be arrested or detained for not carrying sufficient documentation, how can that not be a significant infringement on a citizen's liberties by the government? There should be an outcry by anyone who opposes unwarranted government interference in the lives of its citizens.

Very good questions and I promise to address them soon. The show is starting now and hell of an introduction by President Obama

john9blue wrote:

Woodruff wrote:I always thought Libertarianism had to do with individuals' ACTIONS, not their APPEARANCES...

Libertarianism allows people to be racists. Assuming that most illegal immigrants are Hispanic is racism, but it's also completely reasonable.

Libertarians are against racial quotas, and are bothered by detainment without proof, Symmetry. But nothing's perfect.

I say "libertarians" here but I'm making assumptions... I don't know the official positions of the party. I assume they would be close to these.

I see this, but I don't see the libertarian aspect of the government of a state allowing the racial profiling and detainment of a group of citizens based entirely on arguments that people of their racial background are predisposed towards a certain type of crime.

Agree with it if you want, but don't say that it's libertarian.

Symmetry wrote:I see this, but I don't see the libertarian aspect of the government of a state allowing the racial profiling and detainment of a group of citizens based entirely on arguments that people of their racial background are predisposed towards a certain type of crime.

Agree with it if you want, but don't say that it's libertarian.

Libertarians want the government to allow things. It may not be "right", but some would argue that it's better than having to arrest people of all races in an effort to find people from Mexico.

john9blue wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I see this, but I don't see the libertarian aspect of the government of a state allowing the racial profiling and detainment of a group of citizens based entirely on arguments that people of their racial background are predisposed towards a certain type of crime.

Agree with it if you want, but don't say that it's libertarian.

Libertarians want the government to allow things. It may not be "right", but some would argue that it's better than having to arrest people of all races in an effort to find people from Mexico.

How about the idea that we not arrest ANYONE UNLESS we have an actual REASON to arrest them? That seems like a pretty good workaround...and guess what, it's even the way things are supposed to work already!