I am on the verge of..

[subi-crosser]

Originally Posted by dbarnblatt

But your "papers" are used to allow you to drive on the roads of your state... by choice. And you should be willing to show these to an officer, because it is a privilege and a choice you have made. And by making this choice you agree to abide by certain rules that are far more stringent than the laws citizens abide by that do not drive.

Would YOU freely provide your US Passport on demand to an officer because he alone "thought" you "might" be a national within the boarders of the US illegally... and you have done nothing wrong?

I have no 'passport' since I have no DESIRE to go anywhere else.
I had to 'produce' a birth certificate to recieve that document. My wife had to produce her divorce papers, birth certificate and marrage license to get HER drivers licence. Not too tough. We had our 'papers' in order.

[dbarnblatt]

Originally Posted by subi-crosser

I have no 'passport' since I have no DESIRE to go anywhere else.
I had to 'produce' a birth certificate to recieve that document. My wife had to produce her divorce papers, birth certificate and marrage license to get HER drivers licence. Not too tough. We had our 'papers' in order.

Once again you 'produce' your papers by CHOICE to acquire a certificate or other document for your own personal reasons.

So I go back to my original question:
"Would you provide your Passport (or birth certificate) to an officer because he demanded it, for no reason other than what his opinion or observation is?"

Everyone should have a passport... it really is the 'only' document that proves your citizenship.

[subi-crosser]

Originally Posted by dbarnblatt

Once again you 'produce' your papers by CHOICE to acquire a certificate or other document for your own personal reasons.

So I go back to my original question:
"Would you provide your Passport (or birth certificate) to an officer because he demanded it, for no reason other than what his opinion or observation is?"

Everyone should have a passport... it really is the 'only' document that proves your citizenship.

I would produce my Drivers Licence that required ALL necessary documentation to aquire. If that was not enough they would have to give me an 'all expense paid' vacation to Ireland, that I have never seen, but my great Grandfather came by boat from 200 years ago.

[sowise]

Originally Posted by benebob

Not so fast, ever here of them thar Amish? The don't have drivers licenses and their legal i.d. has no picture on it.

As for your beer and smokes, YOU choose to buy them. The Arizona law is poorly written and WILL NOT stand up in court. Lets say you're having a picnic with your family. The law says that an officer can ask for your id because you're playing that sissy unamerican football. That's their reasonable suspicion. No red blooded American would play soccer right?

I believe in the Constitution, just because someone passes a crappy law doesn't give them the right to ask for my id without cause. That is unamerican, and Arizona should shove its unamerican law right back where it belongs, up McCain's wife's A$$, honestly, I believe he was behind this illegal law just to show the tea baggers that he's not so bad and deserves another 6 years... Oh and before you get offended by my tea bagger comment you should look at all of my posts as I have no affection (just like our founding fathers had no affection for organized political parties and movements). They simply don't belong in a free society.

Honestly I don't think I will ever see things your way, however your arguement for the Amish is weak. They choose to live the way they do and because of that they get alot of religious exemptions and tax write offs for their way of life. The drive horse and buggy seriously except for when they do Rumspringa which allows the young men and women to explore the outside and technology with out repercussions before chosing to devote themselves to the Amish life or leave it and be shunned. During that time those that buy cars DO get a driver's license. How do they get that? With a BIRTH CERTIFICATE and Social Security Card!
You really think they will check your ID because you play soccer? Seriously?
Have you ever been to Arizona? It isn't you that has to pay their taxes and deal with the illegals in the same way they are because they are a border state. You are playing arm chair quarterback without a playbook.
I also don't see how it is a crappy law? It is a state law not necessarily a federal law so therefore it isn't subject to the same constitutional guidelines that is why each state has a state constitution as well. It must convey ATLEAST as many rights as the Federal constitution. If the federal law did a decent job of keeping out the illegals then the states would not have to take it upon themselves. California is being over run and one of the many reasons they can't balance their budget. Not sure what you have against the tea bag movement likely you don't understand it because you seem to throw Rush and Beck out as often as you can as though it makes your argument all by itself. Well it doesn't it just deflects because you have no argument and no facts to back it up. Really who cares if you have to prove you are a citizen? I swear I can't see what the big deal is, unless you are illegal. Really your self righteous outrage towards Arizonas immigration law that makes a federal crime a State crime is kind of pathetic. As a legal citizen it doesn't affect you directly and indirectly you would benefit from this stricter law.

[dbarnblatt]

Originally Posted by sowise

You really think they will check your ID because you play soccer? Seriously?
Have you ever been to Arizona? It isn't you that has to pay their taxes and deal with the illegals in the same way they are because they are a border state. You are playing arm chair quarterback without a playbook.
I also don't see how it is a crappy law? It is a state law not necessarily a federal law so therefore it isn't subject to the same constitutional guidelines that is why each state has a state constitution as well. It must convey ATLEAST as many rights as the Federal constitution. If the federal law did a decent job of keeping out the illegals then the states would not have to take it upon themselves. California is being over run and one of the many reasons they can't balance their budget. Not sure what you have against the tea bag movement likely you don't understand it because you seem to throw Rush and Beck out as often as you can as though it makes your argument all by itself. Well it doesn't it just deflects because you have no argument and no facts to back it up. Really who cares if you have to prove you are a citizen? I swear I can't see what the big deal is, unless you are illegal. Really your self righteous outrage towards Arizonas immigration law that makes a federal crime a State crime is kind of pathetic. As a legal citizen it doesn't affect you directly and indirectly you would benefit from this stricter law.

Everybody says "hey whatever... if they want to ID me then no problem... I'll show them my ID." Really? Now where do you draw the line... would you show your 'papers' anytime, anywhere, to any government official that demands it? Would you REALLY want to live in place that does this?

This isn't really about illegal immigration -- this is about Arizona throwing down a "states' rights" gauntlet to the Federal government, staring it down and daring it with a, "Just try and stop us!" declaration. Will the Fed ignore this and set a precedent for other states to pass similar laws superseding... or invalidating other Federal initiatives. It could be a start of further action. And the foundation of this country will not allow it, because we have the US constitution.

Arizona's law will get shot down by the fed simply because it is unconstitutional. It will happen indirectly though private litigants challenging the law. It's unconstitutional because, for one, it overshadows already existing federal statutes and two, it is a violation of the 4th amendment of the constitution.
The states do not have the right to implement laws that attribute to foreign affairs, and this law is most certainly within that language.

Americans should learn to cherish our constitution and realize how great a document it is. I for one have recently revisited it since high school and I am now learning again it's importance.

[sowise]

Originally Posted by dbarnblatt

Everybody says "hey whatever... if they want to ID me then no problem... I'll show them my ID." Really? Now where do you draw the line... would you show your 'papers' anytime, anywhere, to any government official that demands it? Would you REALLY want to live in place that does this?

This isn't really about illegal immigration -- this is about Arizona throwing down a "states' rights" gauntlet to the Federal government, staring it down and daring it with a, "Just try and stop us!" declaration. Will the Fed ignore this and set a precedent for other states to pass similar laws superseding... or invalidating other Federal initiatives. It could be a start of further action. And the foundation of this country will not allow it, because we have the US constitution.

Arizona's law will get shot down by the fed simply because it is unconstitutional. It will happen indirectly though private litigants challenging the law. It's unconstitutional because, for one, it overshadows already existing federal statutes and two, it is a violation of the 4th amendment of the constitution.
The states do not have the right to implement laws that attribute to foreign affairs, and this law is most certainly within that language.

Americans should learn to cherish our constitution and realize how great a document it is. I for one have recently revisited it since high school and I am now learning again it's importance.

I don't know why people are thinking that just anyone will be able to ask for proof of citizenship, there will have to be a legitimate concern or cause to believe that a person is here illegally. Such as a traffic stop based upon a major/minor violation, if the person can't provide a drivers license and insurance then there is reasonable cause and concern to verify citizenship. (This is for border towns and cities or even Maryland and PA for that matter).

The States are only pushing for enforcement of the Federal law. They have made the Federal law a state law, illegal is illegal. Since the Feds have less than a stellar record for upholding that law the State has now taken it upon themselves to not only provide the personnel capable of enforcing the law but also have the local man power to make it effective. I wonder how many of the current known gang members, drug dealers, and other local criminals are known illegals but local authorities can do nothing to have them deported they can fine them or prosecute them maybe even get some short prison sentences out of them but then they have to release them back out on our streets? Does that make sense to you? I am not saying the law was written perfectly but it is the principle that the states are now saying Hey we have a problem with illegals and the Fed is not doing anything about it and we the states are having to pay the price. I really don't think it is going to be a police task force that walks or drives around checking for citizenship. I wouldn't have a problem if they did it similar to DUI check points as long as they don't expect you to carry an obscure ID that most people don't carry on them at all times.

To me this is no different that when the give a policeman the authority to inspect or search a vehicle based on whether he smells alcohol on someone or suspects they are drunk or thinks he may have a whiff of pot. Reasonable cause.

[zavikan]

I was around 14 when I came to the realization that if everybody (who wasnt already partial to me) disagreed with me entirely, statistically, I must be wrong. This of course leaves a large % where you ARE right....but for a betting man, the odds are against you...

In my opinion, both these threads are full of fail. How can people slather on support unless they see the offending area? Your just egging him on blindly.

Cause really? ya got a car in a car port and the town freaked out? (does this sound logical to anyone?)

First, I call BS. Second, I call for:

:

Put ur money where your mouth is. Nice wide angle shots. Blind support is useless anyways, ya might as well go sex chat on the net and call it love.

[sowise]

Originally Posted by zavikan

I was around 14 when I came to the realization that if everybody (who wasnt already partial to me) disagreed with me entirely, statistically, I must be wrong. This of course leaves a large % where you ARE right....but for a betting man, the odds are against you...

In my opinion, both these threads are full of fail. How can people slather on support unless they see the offending area? Your just egging him on blindly.

Cause really? ya got a car in a car port and the town freaked out? (does this sound logical to anyone?)

First, I call BS. Second, I call for:

:

Put ur money where your mouth is. Nice wide angle shots. Blind support is useless anyways, ya might as well go sex chat on the net and call it love.

I am pretty sure he had a photobucket link on one of the posts in either this thread or the other down near the signature area. But even if you see all the photos of his property you would really need other photos from around the area that aren't his property for comparison. Hard to say after seeing only pics of one property whether it is the best property in the neighborhood or the worst.

[subi-crosser]

Originally Posted by sowise

I am pretty sure he had a photobucket link on one of the posts in either this thread or the other down near the signature area. But even if you see all the photos of his property you would really need other photos from around the area that aren't his property for comparison. Hard to say after seeing only pics of one property whether it is the best property in the neighborhood or the worst.

After taking some 'time off' I have returned to 'respond'.

The 'pics' on my bucket are taken on 6 diffrent properties, 3 I own, 3 that I work out of.

Ben made a 'comment' that he has seen my yard. I do not recall Ben ever havng been here. He must have 'assumed' that all the pics were taken here.
I have never included pics of the neighbors places.
I should do an 'ALBUM' on the bucket on that topic.
This comes down to a 'pi$$ing contest with a woman that does not even talk to her own son. Her son was here a few weeks ago borrowing my tools and space to do a brake job on a neighbor's car. She came down the alley and stopped 40 feet away from her son. She stopped, then saw him and moved on another 40 feet. She talked to the guy that owned the car, she ignored her son and me.

Her son told me that she wants to 'ruin' me. PERIOD!
No 'cause', she just was a PITA$$ as an 8th grader and never grew up.
Her 'family' has KILLED 14 old cars with neglect and I still drive the 47 Dodge that I drove in here 23 years ago. (and it still shines)

My house is the oldest in the neighborhood, but has the 'most recent' paint, roof and windows. This shack was built in 1856. The pics I have seen from 1906 show NO other house in the area.
I have had cars scratched and dented from neighbors roof-pieces and tree branches blowing onto me. I have had BIG pieces of 'roof' knock out windows on my house. There are 6 houses and garages in this BLOCK that have big holes in the roofs. One house had a blue tarp on it for over a year before it was replaced, (with 'renters' living in it). The house 3 doors down has carpet nailed over the windows. (As I replaced mine, I gave him my old ones so he could fix his. He let them sit till they rotted away. The guy that started with this house built most of the others, so my windows would have fit)
I am the only guy that actually CARES what the street looks like. I trim the bushes, cut the weeds, shovel the snow, dig out the fire hydrants, clean up the trash that the passers-by throw out, plant flowers, and cut the weeds on any property that boarders me.
I have been mowing the 'cities' property and had drunken a$$holes throw beer bottles over my head to smash on railroad property. 6 of them sat on the porch watching me work, then threw trash!

I cannot understand how I am causing a problem with a 'rat rod' in my carport! Next year, this will be a $20,000 truck! It's only 'rat' this year because they are MESSING with me! I would have started the 'pretty' part by now. It will not become 'pretty' till this goes away.

I have driven all over the city. There are 5 vehicles under covers. There are over 50 vehicles parked in back yards with no tags or covers. Some have been sitting there for well over 10 years. I will not 'tell' them where they are. I just will not be the FIRST to be pushed. The 'offending' truck was a bare frame in October of last year. Now it is stiitng in a carport that my son and I built last fall, has a NEW aluminum bed, a 455 Buick engine and RACING tires on all 4 corners. It is sitting on MY land that I pay TAXES on. I am working on it several days per week. I have not started it yet, so the 'noise' thing is not a factor.

SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT!! Because a useless person 'complained' about my truck, I'm getting grief! (Even though you have to drive down my ally to SEE it!)
I could drag it away, but then I would have to drive somewhere else to work on it, after I payed over $25,000 for a 'former warehouse' in my back yard, so I could play with it here!

[benebob]

Originally Posted by sowise

I don't know why people are thinking that just anyone will be able to ask for proof of citizenship, there will have to be a legitimate concern or cause to believe that a person is here illegally.

Obviously, this would make the law more almost Constitutional. Might want to read the law before you assume that a cop can't simply decide you are illegal and come to your house for proof at 4am. The problem is THERE IS NO legitimate concern or cause written into the law, it leaves it in the hands of the officer and therefore without an actual crime or violation being committed leading to the asking for i.d.

It is an illegal law, it will be struck down and shame on Arizona for passing a blatantly illegal law which denies its citizens their Constitutional rights.

The states have ho right to pass laws regarding foreign affairs nor do they have the right to infringe on the freedoms granted by the Constitution. Just look at gun laws. Every time a City or State tries to limit the number, type or ability to carry a weapon in certain areas. Again, you could make the argument that the Federal Gov't has not had a stellar enforcement of its own laws in this area as well but it has still been struck down in federal court time and time and time and time and time and time again.

Problem is, as opposed to a cop smelling alcohol, someone who looks "illegal" and isn't here illegally is entitled to the same rights as someone who isn't illegal and looks like American pie. Show me the litmus test or STFU! There isn't one, this law is illegal, and you my friend are either ignorant of your rights or anti-American for supporting such a law.

[sowise]

Originally Posted by benebob

Obviously, this would make the law more almost Constitutional. Might want to read the law before you assume that a cop can't simply decide you are illegal and come to your house for proof at 4am. The problem is THERE IS NO legitimate concern or cause written into the law, it leaves it in the hands of the officer and therefore without an actual crime or violation being committed leading to the asking for i.d.

It is an illegal law, it will be struck down and shame on Arizona for passing a blatantly illegal law which denies its citizens their Constitutional rights.

The states have ho right to pass laws regarding foreign affairs nor do they have the right to infringe on the freedoms granted by the Constitution. Just look at gun laws. Every time a City or State tries to limit the number, type or ability to carry a weapon in certain areas. Again, you could make the argument that the Federal Gov't has not had a stellar enforcement of its own laws in this area as well but it has still been struck down in federal court time and time and time and time and time and time again.

Problem is, as opposed to a cop smelling alcohol, someone who looks "illegal" and isn't here illegally is entitled to the same rights as someone who isn't illegal and looks like American pie. Show me the litmus test or STFU! There isn't one, this law is illegal, and you my friend are either ignorant of your rights or anti-American for supporting such a law.

I was civil with you I openly expressed disagreement I stated my points and you go to the whole STFU and calling me anti american and ignorant. I have served in the military, what have you done? I work with the government every day, what do you do? I pay my fair share of taxes as well. So, being called unamerican by you means squat to me. There will always be some justifiable reason to check someone for citizenship whether you believe it or not. They are still making amendments to the law, and this is something that does directly affect Arizona. You can worry to death that you might have to prove you are american (oh the horror), I am not worried about it at all because I am one.

[benebob]

Originally Posted by sowise

I was civil with you I openly expressed disagreement I stated my points and you go to the whole STFU and calling me anti american and ignorant. I have served in the military, what have you done? I work with the government every day, what do you do? I pay my fair share of taxes as well. So, being called unamerican by you means squat to me. There will always be some justifiable reason to check someone for citizenship whether you believe it or not. They are still making amendments to the law, and this is something that does directly affect Arizona. You can worry to death that you might have to prove you are american (oh the horror), I am not worried about it at all because I am one.

Sorry, I'm on vacation and the sarcastic smilie didn't take. The law is anti-american and anyone who supports it is ignorant of the Constitution and what it permits and what it doesn't. Thanks for your service and FYI I also work for part of the Government, had ss follow me around for quite some time when my father retired from his civil service Army job 15 years ago or so now, and I would suspect that I have paid just as high of a percentage of taxes as anyone my age this side of the Tiger Woods of the world.

Making amendments is just proving my point that it is nothing more than a John McCain political stunt to show how big, bad and tough he is to the tea baggers. It is an unconstitutional law! How many bottles of white out do you need to erase it? Then the amendments will work. It reminds me of the McCarthy era and brings to mind the best book I read on the subject "Naming Names".

As I already stated, the first people who should be arrested are the hard working Americans who HIRE illegals as they are not following the laws of the land and are costing TAXPAYERS like you and me billions to fail at keeping their workers out. Once these non tax paying but contributing illegals are unemployed there is no reason or them to stay, no reason for more to come, no culture for the illegals who engage in criminal activities to hide in. Sadly, the good people of Arizona will not support their fellow citizens being arrested for their ILLEGAL hiring nor will their politicians pass the proper and legal steps to make manitory hiring background checks a reality even though it is perfectly legal to do for a state and does not enfringe on the rights of that Constitution you swore to uphold.

[K_Dub]

I love history...

Just think, if Indian Will had the authority to stop anyone who looked "illegal" entering his valley we wouldn't be having this discussion about Cumberland, MD.

Also, let's not forget who McCarthy's biggest informant of them all was: Ronald Reagan. Be careful what you call "Un-American", as those words tend to be missused.

As for testing prior to voter registration, nothing new here either.

...It always sheds light on the darkest of debates.

[subi-crosser]

Originally Posted by K_Dub

I love history...

Just think, if Indian Will had the authority to stop anyone who looked "illegal" entering his valley we wouldn't be having this discussion about Cumberland, MD.

Also, let's not forget who McCarthy's biggest informant of them all was: Ronald Reagan. Be careful what you call "Un-American", as those words tend to be missused.

As for testing prior to voter registration, nothing new here either.

...It always sheds light on the darkest of debates.

LINKEE!!! Beautiful pics of the 'hood' that my rat rod is desicrating. (From the foot of Chief Will's mountain. (How did someone in California KNOW about our local legend?)http://s306.photobucket.com/albums/n...sser/fighting/