Discussion:
Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
(too old to reply)
O'Donovan, PJ, Himself
2010-05-05 11:11:17 UTC
Permalink
Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
by Paul Theroux


AFP

"Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
how the new law compares to other countries'.

These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
papers?

Chicago White Sox Manager Ozzie Guillen is offended (“as a Latin
American”) by the Arizona law and recently claimed that all illegal
immigrants are “workaholics.” Has he been back to the land of his
birth lately, Venezuela, and expected not to be asked for his papers?
Ozzie, tell the police in Ocumare del Tuy, “I’m a Latin American,” and
see if that will end the interrogation. And spare a thought for the
policeman two days ago who was gunned down in the desert by a
workaholic drug dealer.

The request for papers is not just a line in Casablanca. I have been
hearing the question my whole traveling life. I had an Alien
Registration Card in Britain and got occasional visits from the police
at my home, to make sure I was behaving myself. Seventeen years in
Britain as an alien: papers. Six years in Africa: “Where are your
papers, bwana?” Three years in Singapore: another alien identity card
and immense red tape in that fussy, litigious bureaucracy.

A large proportion of the Brazilians on Cape Cod are illegals, working
off the books, indignant that they would ever be asked to identify
themselves. Ever been to Brazil? I have. “Where are your papers,
meester?”

As for the U.S., it is annoying, but understandable, especially in a
country with 12 million illegal immigrants using the public services.
“Who are you?” is a routine question: The necessity to identify
yourself to authority is something that happens every day. You present
a credit card at the supermarket and they want to see your license to
make sure you’re not a grafter. All over the place, renting a car, at
the bank: “I’ll need to see two forms of ID.”
• Peter Beinart: Fear of Immigrants In Toronto last year I had to show
my passport to check into my hotel. You can’t check into any hotel in
India or China or buy certain railway tickets there without showing
your passport and having all your details recorded. So why should an
Indian or a Chinese in the U.S. be surprised if he or she is stopped
for speeding by a policeman in Flagstaff and asked for a proof of
residence?

Not long ago I was in Italy, traveling by train from the small city of
Udine, in the north, to Venice, a ride of about an hour and a half. I
was sitting in a car among the usual people you find in an Italian
train on a Saturday morning—families with children, old women with
groceries, grubby students, and obvious non-Italians, a scattering of
Asians and West Africans. And yet, when two policemen entered the car,
one of them stood by the door and the other headed directly for me.

I showed him my train ticket. He brushed it aside and said,
“Nazionalitá?”
“Americano.”
“Passaporto.” And he stuck out his hand.
“It’s in my hotel,” I said, in Italian. “Why do I need it?”
“You’re a foreigner,” he said. Straniero is a nice word: alien,
stranger, outsider. “Foreigners have to carry their passports at all
times.”
“Perché la persecuzione?” I said lightly. “What about the other
foreigners here?”
“Non fare farabutto!” he said very sharply. This is not a happy
expression. It means unequivocally, “Don’t be a wise-ass.”
I showed him my Hawaii driver’s license and he spent the next 10
minutes on his cellphone spelling my name and reciting aloud all the
information on my license, including my unpronounceable Hawaii
address, to Headquarters.

My Italian friends were abashed when I told them, but they then moaned
about all the Albanians, Moghrebis, Slovenians, Senegalese,
Pakistanis, and others who had taken illegal residence in that part of
Italy, delightful Friuli. A few might be mopping floors, making
coffee, or catering to the sexual needs of Italian men, but the rest
are ill-assorted, a combination of parasites, takers, layabouts,
moaners, drug dealers, and hard workers.

Many illegal aliens in Italy are also migrant workers, according to
the season, picking grapes in Sicily, olives in Puglia, oranges in
Calabria, and tomatoes in the Campania. Earlier this year thousands of
farm workers from Africa rioted in Calabria, claiming they were being
targeted by racists. Maybe the cop on the Venice train mistook me for
a fruit-picker.

Such exploited labor is common in the U.S., even at the highest
levels. It is always something of a comedy when someone nominated by
an American president for an important Cabinet post, invariably
wealthy, invariably with a law degree, is revealed to have an illegal
nanny, or housecleaner, or gardener in the household. The potential
candidate (Zoe Baird, Kimba Wood, Linda Chavez, and many others)
withdraws in disgrace, and you always wonder: What happened to the
illegal nanny? I assume they go on working. “Our kids adore
Concepcion. They’d be devastated if she was deported.”

After Ireland became more prosperous, and the Irish students stopped
traveling to Cape Cod for the summer to work in motels and
restaurants, a new source of cheap labor was needed. Nantucketers and
Vineyarders and Capies depended on Jamaicans and Brazilians to cut
their grass and take care of their kids. Brazilians comprise the
fastest-growing ethnic community on Cape Cod. They represent the whole
social scale, from God-botherers, roofers, landscapers, and garage
mechanics, to petty thieves and drug dealers. A large proportion of
them are illegals, working off the books, indignant that they would
ever be asked to identify themselves.

Ever been to Brazil? I have. “Where are your papers, meester?”

As for this Arizona law (which is understandable until the federal
government takes a stand), I am delighted to be reassured that there
will be no racial profiling. The illegals in Arizona are not just
Hispanics. Those of you who have read Dark Star Safari, my book about
traveling through Africa, might remember how, in the Sudan, I met a
Sudanese man (on vacation in Khartoum from New York) who explained
very carefully how he had entered the United States illegally, the
best way: Go to Mexico, pay someone some money, and then hide in a
fish truck or a vegetable van and hop the border. Sudanese, Nigerians,
Pakistanis, Chinese, Indians, Bangladeshis, Brazilians. Illegal aliens
come from all over the world to converge on the Arizona, California,
and New Mexico borders. The Hispanics are right to be a little
indignant, but just a little. It is much easier to sneak into the U.S.
than to apply for a residence permit.

My eldest son was born in Uganda, when I was resident there. He has
American nationality, of course; but because he has spent most of his
life traveling and working abroad, his son, my grandson, born in
Britain, of an English mother, does not automatically qualify for U.S.
citizenship. If I can prove that I am an American (my ancestors
arrived here in 1690) then the little boy might have a chance; but it
is not a slam dunk. We have filed the papers; we are into our second
year of waiting. Then he might have his papers. In the meantime, take
a number."

Paul Theroux is a travel writer and novelist whose best known work,
The Great Railway Bazaar, is a travelogue about a train trip from
Britain through Europe, the Middle East, South Asia, and then back
across Russia to his point of origin. In Ghost Train to the Eastern
Star (2008) he retraced that trip. His latest novel is A Dead Hand: A
Crime in Calcutta.
Mitchell Holman
2010-05-05 12:36:21 UTC
Permalink
"O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com> wrote in news:b7b05581-4c76-
4f32-b8e2-***@k19g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:

> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
> by Paul Theroux
>
>
> AFP
>
> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
> how the new law compares to other countries'.


Carrying your ID while travelling is one thing. Being
thrown in jail because you didn't carrying your ID while
out jogging or walking your dog is another.
harry k
2010-05-05 14:08:22 UTC
Permalink
On May 5, 4:11 am, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
> by Paul Theroux
>
>  AFP
>
> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
> how the new law compares to other countries'.
>
> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
> papers?
>
> Chicago White Sox Manager Ozzie Guillen is offended (“as a Latin
> American”) by the Arizona law and recently claimed that all illegal
> immigrants are “workaholics.” Has he been back to the land of his
> birth lately, Venezuela, and expected not to be asked for his papers?
> Ozzie, tell the police in Ocumare del Tuy, “I’m a Latin American,” and
> see if that will end the interrogation. And spare a thought for the
> policeman two days ago who was gunned down in the desert by a
> workaholic drug dealer.
>
> The request for papers is not just a line in Casablanca. I have been
> hearing the question my whole traveling life. I had an Alien
> Registration Card in Britain and got occasional visits from the police
> at my home, to make sure I was behaving myself. Seventeen years in
> Britain as an alien: papers. Six years in Africa: “Where are your
> papers, bwana?” Three years in Singapore: another alien identity card
> and immense red tape in that fussy, litigious bureaucracy.
>
> A large proportion of the Brazilians on Cape Cod are illegals, working
> off the books, indignant that they would ever be asked to identify
> themselves. Ever been to Brazil? I have. “Where are your papers,
> meester?”
>
> As for the U.S., it is annoying, but understandable, especially in a
> country with 12 million illegal immigrants using the public services.
> “Who are you?” is a routine question: The necessity to identify
> yourself to authority is something that happens every day. You present
> a credit card at the supermarket and they want to see your license to
> make sure you’re not a grafter. All over the place, renting a car, at
> the bank: “I’ll need to see two forms of ID.”
> • Peter Beinart: Fear of Immigrants In Toronto last year I had to show
> my passport to check into my hotel. You can’t check into any hotel in
> India or China or buy certain railway tickets there without showing
> your passport and having all your details recorded. So why should an
> Indian or a Chinese in the U.S. be surprised if he or she is stopped
> for speeding by a policeman in Flagstaff and asked for a proof of
> residence?
>
> Not long ago I was in Italy, traveling by train from the small city of
> Udine, in the north, to Venice, a ride of about an hour and a half. I
> was sitting in a car among the usual people you find in an Italian
> train on a Saturday morning—families with children, old women with
> groceries, grubby students, and obvious non-Italians, a scattering of
> Asians and West Africans. And yet, when two policemen entered the car,
> one of them stood by the door and the other headed directly for me.
>
> I showed him my train ticket. He brushed it aside and said,
> “Nazionalitá?”
> “Americano.”
> “Passaporto.” And he stuck out his hand.
> “It’s in my hotel,” I said, in Italian. “Why do I need it?”
> “You’re a foreigner,” he said. Straniero is a nice word: alien,
> stranger, outsider. “Foreigners have to carry their passports at all
> times.”
> “Perché la persecuzione?” I said lightly. “What about the other
> foreigners here?”
> “Non fare farabutto!” he said very sharply. This is not a happy
> expression. It means unequivocally, “Don’t be a wise-ass.”
> I showed him my Hawaii driver’s license and he spent the next 10
> minutes on his cellphone spelling my name and reciting aloud all the
> information on my license, including my unpronounceable Hawaii
> address, to Headquarters.
>
> My Italian friends were abashed when I told them, but they then moaned
> about all the Albanians, Moghrebis, Slovenians, Senegalese,
> Pakistanis, and others who had taken illegal residence in that part of
> Italy, delightful Friuli. A few might be mopping floors, making
> coffee, or catering to the sexual needs of Italian men, but the rest
> are ill-assorted, a combination of parasites, takers, layabouts,
> moaners, drug dealers, and hard workers.
>
> Many illegal aliens in Italy are also migrant workers, according to
> the season, picking grapes in Sicily, olives in Puglia, oranges in
> Calabria, and tomatoes in the Campania. Earlier this year thousands of
> farm workers from Africa rioted in Calabria, claiming they were being
> targeted by racists. Maybe the cop on the Venice train mistook me for
> a fruit-picker.
>
> Such exploited labor is common in the U.S., even at the highest
> levels. It is always something of a comedy when someone nominated by
> an American president for an important Cabinet post, invariably
> wealthy, invariably with a law degree, is revealed to have an illegal
> nanny, or housecleaner, or gardener in the household. The potential
> candidate (Zoe Baird, Kimba Wood, Linda Chavez, and many others)
> withdraws in disgrace, and you always wonder: What happened to the
> illegal nanny? I assume they go on working. “Our kids adore
> Concepcion. They’d be devastated if she was deported.”
>
> After Ireland became more prosperous, and the Irish students stopped
> traveling to Cape Cod for the summer to work in motels and
> restaurants, a new source of cheap labor was needed. Nantucketers and
> Vineyarders and Capies depended on Jamaicans and Brazilians to cut
> their grass and take care of their kids. Brazilians comprise the
> fastest-growing ethnic community on Cape Cod. They represent the whole
> social scale, from God-botherers, roofers, landscapers, and garage
> mechanics, to petty thieves and drug dealers. A large proportion of
> them are illegals, working off the books, indignant that they would
> ever be asked to identify themselves.
>
> Ever been to Brazil? I have. “Where are your papers, meester?”
>
> As for this Arizona law (which is understandable until the federal
> government takes a stand), I am delighted to be reassured that there
> will be no racial profiling. The illegals in Arizona are not just
> Hispanics. Those of you who have read Dark Star Safari, my book about
> traveling through Africa, might remember how, in the Sudan, I met a
> Sudanese man (on vacation in Khartoum from New York) who explained
> very carefully how he had entered the United States illegally, the
> best way: Go to Mexico, pay someone some money, and then hide in a
> fish truck or a vegetable van and hop the border. Sudanese, Nigerians,
> Pakistanis, Chinese, Indians, Bangladeshis, Brazilians. Illegal aliens
> come from all over the world to converge on the Arizona, California,
> and New Mexico borders. The Hispanics are right to be a little
> indignant, but just a little. It is much easier to sneak into the U.S.
> than to apply for a residence permit.
>
> My eldest son was born in Uganda, when I was resident there. He has
> American nationality, of course; but because he has spent most of his
> life traveling and working abroad, his son, my grandson, born in
> Britain, of an English mother, does not automatically qualify for U.S.
> citizenship. If I can prove that I am an American (my ancestors
> arrived here in 1690) then the little boy might have a chance; but it
> is not a slam dunk. We have filed the papers; we are into our second
> year of waiting. Then he might have his papers. In the meantime, take
> a number."
>
> Paul Theroux is a travel writer and novelist whose best known work,
> The Great Railway Bazaar, is a travelogue about a train trip from
> Britain through Europe, the Middle East, South Asia, and then back
> across Russia to his point of origin. In Ghost Train to the Eastern
> Star (2008) he retraced that trip. His latest novel is A Dead Hand: A
> Crime in Calcutta.

Somehow he apparently missed the "prove you are a US citizen" bit.
That law requires much more than just a driver's license. "show me
your papers" brings up instant memories of jack booted thugs, What
comes next? Make every legal Hispanic (and don't even try to tell me
that law is targeted at 'everybody) where a prominent badge of some
type? Maybe get a chip implant?

Harry K
Hatunen
2010-05-05 16:32:02 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 May 2010 07:08:22 -0700 (PDT), harry k
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Somehow he apparently missed the "prove you are a US citizen" bit.
>That law requires much more than just a driver's license.

Not the Arizona law. An Arizona drivers license is acceptable.
And even non-citizen legal immigrants can get an Arizona drivers
license.




--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Mike
2010-05-05 16:38:04 UTC
Permalink
On May 5, 12:32 pm, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 2010 07:08:22 -0700 (PDT), harry k
>
> <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Somehow he apparently missed the "prove you are a US citizen" bit.
> >That law requires much more than just a driver's license.
>
> Not the Arizona law. An Arizona drivers license is acceptable.
> And even non-citizen legal immigrants can get an Arizona drivers
> license.
>

Agreed. Problem solved.
Hatunen
2010-05-05 16:41:12 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 May 2010 09:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Mike
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On May 5, 12:32 pm, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 07:08:22 -0700 (PDT), harry k
>>
>> <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >Somehow he apparently missed the "prove you are a US citizen" bit.
>> >That law requires much more than just a driver's license.
>>
>> Not the Arizona law. An Arizona drivers license is acceptable.
>> And even non-citizen legal immigrants can get an Arizona drivers
>> license.
>>
>
>Agreed. Problem solved.

A lot of people don't have drivers licenses at all...

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Earl Evleth
2010-05-05 16:49:20 UTC
Permalink
On 5/05/10 18:38, in article
a0070539-a40f-45f7-b8bd-***@o14g2000yqb.googlegroups.com, "Mike"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> Not the Arizona law. An Arizona drivers license is acceptable.
>> And even non-citizen legal immigrants can get an Arizona drivers
>> license.
>>
>
> Agreed. Problem solved.



especially since they are easy to forge.


http://www.espionage-store.com/fakeidletter.html

or

How You Can Get A Complete Fake ID & Identity Fast and Easy!

perhaps a scam since payment, with a credit card, exposes
you to a rip off with an unknown outfit.
Donna Evleth
2010-05-05 19:45:16 UTC
Permalink
> From: harry k <***@hotmail.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec.tr
> avel.europe
> Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 07:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>
> Somehow he apparently missed the "prove you are a US citizen" bit.
> That law requires much more than just a driver's license. "show me
> your papers" brings up instant memories of jack booted thugs, What
> comes next? Make every legal Hispanic (and don't even try to tell me
> that law is targeted at 'everybody) where a prominent badge of some
> type? Maybe get a chip implant?
>
> Harry K

I learned from experience that this sort of thing can happen to anybody. In
1983, I wanted to show my French neighbor and best friend my home state of
California. Bad idea. We were burgled in our motel at 1 AM on our second
day in town. I did the best I could to catch up with the burglar - my
friend had alerted me to his presence, inspite of our jet lag - but I
couldn't run quite fast enough, and wasn't willing to let him drag me with
his car. He got away, all our identity papers went with him.

My French friend went to the French consulate in Los Angeles and got a pass
to go home right away. I, as an American, had a whole different problem.

I went to the passport office in LA, where I was told I had to prove I was
an American citizen. Since every identifying document I had had been taken
in the burglary, this was a big problem for me. My problem was compounded
by the fact that the burglary took place on the first day of the three day
fourth of July weekend.

All my relative and friends in LA (my birthplace) who knew me were out of
town. The only piece of good luck I had was that our niece, whom I called
in desperation, and who was also out of town, had a friend who was
monitoring her answering machine. I had met her friend only once, but this
woman, out of the goodness of her heart, was willing to go with me to the
passport office and swear that I was, in fact, an American citizen. She is
dead now, of cancer, and I still grieve.

After this experience, the "prove you are an American citizen" bit still and
forever strikes home. BTW, I am a nice white middle class lady. And as
such, I despise the Arizona law. Been there, done that. I also realize too
well that the folks the Arizona law will be targeting do not have my
advantages of birth.

Donna Evleth
William Black
2010-05-05 14:16:20 UTC
Permalink
On 05/05/10 12:11, O'Donovan, PJ, Himself wrote:

> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
> papers?
>

People do write the silliest stuff.

No-one in the UK has the right to demand to see your papers on the spot.
The police have limited rights to either arrest you if they suspect a
crime has been committed or to request that you produce your papers
within 48 hours at a police station.

In India, where I have 'right of abode', the police have the right to
ask that I produce my papers within 24 hours at a police station.

I have never heard of either case happening.

--
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
Martin
2010-05-05 14:21:13 UTC
Permalink
William Black wrote:
> On 05/05/10 12:11, O'Donovan, PJ, Himself wrote:
>
>> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
>> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
>> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
>> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
>> papers?
>>
>
> People do write the silliest stuff.
>
> No-one in the UK has the right to demand to see your papers on the spot.
> The police have limited rights to either arrest you if they suspect a
> crime has been committed or to request that you produce your papers
> within 48 hours at a police station.
>
> In India, where I have 'right of abode', the police have the right to
> ask that I produce my papers within 24 hours at a police station.
>
> I have never heard of either case happening.

In the Netherlands the police have the right to ask for ID. They
occasionally do. I think thew fine for not carrying ID is EUR60
Runge121
2010-05-05 19:28:13 UTC
Permalink
So what martin ?


"Martin" <***@lnvalid.invalid> a écrit dans le message de groupe de
discussion : hrrusp$jme$***@news.eternal-september.org...
> William Black wrote:
>> On 05/05/10 12:11, O'Donovan, PJ, Himself wrote:
>>
>>> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
>>> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
>>> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
>>> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
>>> papers?
>>>
>>
>> People do write the silliest stuff.
>>
>> No-one in the UK has the right to demand to see your papers on the spot.
>> The police have limited rights to either arrest you if they suspect a
>> crime has been committed or to request that you produce your papers
>> within 48 hours at a police station.
>>
>> In India, where I have 'right of abode', the police have the right to
>> ask that I produce my papers within 24 hours at a police station.
>>
>> I have never heard of either case happening.
>
> In the Netherlands the police have the right to ask for ID. They
> occasionally do. I think thew fine for not carrying ID is EUR60
>
rick++
2010-05-05 15:47:07 UTC
Permalink
The Arizona law is redundant.
The 58-year old resident alien law already requires legal aliens to
carry their green card.
And drivers are required to carry their licenses. A valid license is
sufficient ID under the AZ law.
Donna Evleth
2010-05-05 19:47:10 UTC
Permalink
> From: "rick++" <***@hotmail.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec.tr
> avel.europe
> Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 08:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>
> The Arizona law is redundant.
> The 58-year old resident alien law already requires legal aliens to
> carry their green card.
> And drivers are required to carry their licenses. A valid license is
> sufficient ID under the AZ law.

Does a valid driver's license constitute proof of citizenship in Arizona?

Donna Evleth
Hatunen
2010-05-05 21:29:32 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 05 May 2010 21:47:10 +0200, Donna Evleth
<***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

>
>
>> From: "rick++" <***@hotmail.com>
>> Organization: http://groups.google.com
>> Newsgroups:
>> alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec.tr
>> avel.europe
>> Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 08:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
>> Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>>
>> The Arizona law is redundant.
>> The 58-year old resident alien law already requires legal aliens to
>> carry their green card.
>> And drivers are required to carry their licenses. A valid license is
>> sufficient ID under the AZ law.
>
>Does a valid driver's license constitute proof of citizenship in Arizona?

A birth certificate is now required to obtain a license, so, yes,
the state law accepts it as proof of citizenship. In fact, of
legal residency also, since a non-citizen applicant has to
present a green card.


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Poetic Justice
2010-05-05 22:54:40 UTC
Permalink
Donna Evleth wrote;

>Does a valid driver's license constitute
>proof of citizenship in Arizona?

Hatunen wrote;

>A birth certificate is now required to obtain
>a license, so, yes, the state law accepts it
>as proof of citizenship. In fact, of legal
>residency also, since a non-citizen
>applicant has to present a green card.

And I have have heard countless times in the media that once a person
produces a valid AZ driver's licence any questions of residency status
are off the table by this new law.

So the President was using scare tactics when he said; "If a man is
taking his 2 kids for ice cream..."
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.
Regards, Walter



..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
Hatunen
2010-05-05 23:08:26 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 May 2010 18:54:40 -0400, ***@webtv.net (Poetic
Justice) wrote:

>Donna Evleth wrote;
>
>>Does a valid driver's license constitute
>>proof of citizenship in Arizona?
>
>Hatunen wrote;
>
>>A birth certificate is now required to obtain
>>a license, so, yes, the state law accepts it
>>as proof of citizenship. In fact, of legal
>>residency also, since a non-citizen
>>applicant has to present a green card.
>
> And I have have heard countless times in the media that once a person
>produces a valid AZ driver's licence any questions of residency status
>are off the table by this new law.
>
> So the President was using scare tactics when he said; "If a man is
>taking his 2 kids for ice cream..."
> 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.

I'm a bit unclear on how much of that is actual quote of
presidential speech, but in Arizona, yes. However, that would be
during a just-cause stop. The Arizona law makes mere suspicion of
illegal migration status "just Cause".


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Bert Hyman
2010-05-05 23:14:28 UTC
Permalink
In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
<***@cox.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 5 May 2010 18:54:40 -0400, ***@webtv.net (Poetic
> Justice) wrote:
>>
>> So the President was using scare tactics when he said; "If a man is
>>taking his 2 kids for ice cream..."
>> 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.
>
> I'm a bit unclear on how much of that is actual quote of
> presidential speech,

But you can imagine, if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona
-- your great-grandparents may have been there before Arizona
was even a state. But now, suddenly, if you don't have your
papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you're going
to be harassed. That's something that could potentially happen.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-ottumwa-iowa-town-hall

> but in Arizona, yes. However, that would be during a just-cause stop.
> The Arizona law makes mere suspicion of illegal migration status "just
> Cause".

Don't think so; if you can find that in the text of the law, I'd like to see it.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN ***@iphouse.com
Poetic Justice
2010-05-06 01:29:58 UTC
Permalink
Hatunen wrote;
>but in Arizona, yes. However, that would
>be during a just-cause stop. The Arizona
>law makes mere suspicion of illegal
>migration status "just Cause".

Burt Hyman wrote;
>Don't think so; if you can find that in the
>text of the law, I'd like to see it.

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



..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
Hatunen
2010-05-07 16:52:01 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (Poetic
Justice) wrote:

>Hatunen wrote;
>>but in Arizona, yes. However, that would
>>be during a just-cause stop. The Arizona
>>law makes mere suspicion of illegal
>>migration status "just Cause".
>
>Burt Hyman wrote;
>>Don't think so; if you can find that in the
>>text of the law, I'd like to see it.
>
>Ditto.
> 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.


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Bert Hyman
2010-05-07 18:23:37 UTC
Permalink
In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
<***@cox.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (Poetic
> Justice) wrote:
>
>>Hatunen wrote;
>>>but in Arizona, yes. However, that would
>>>be during a just-cause stop. The Arizona
>>>law makes mere suspicion of illegal
>>>migration status "just Cause".
>>
>>Burt Hyman wrote;
>>>Don't think so; if you can find that in the
>>>text of the law, I'd like to see it.
>>
>>Ditto.
>> 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?

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN ***@iphouse.com
Hatunen
2010-05-07 18:38:43 UTC
Permalink
On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:

>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
><***@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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.


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Bert Hyman
2010-05-07 18:42:33 UTC
Permalink
In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
<***@cox.net> wrote:

> On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
>>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>><***@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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?

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN ***@iphouse.com
Hatunen
2010-05-07 21:06:45 UTC
Permalink
On 07 May 2010 18:42:33 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:

>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
><***@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>>><***@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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. (It's not a law, though. Not yet.) It is in a second
revision and some of the flakeier langauge has been altered.



--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Bert Hyman
2010-05-07 21:11:59 UTC
Permalink
In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
<***@cox.net> wrote:

> On 07 May 2010 18:42:33 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
>>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>><***@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>>>><***@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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?

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN ***@iphouse.com
Hatunen
2010-05-07 22:28:49 UTC
Permalink
On 07 May 2010 21:11:59 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:

>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
><***@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 07 May 2010 18:42:33 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>>><***@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>>>>><***@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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 (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Bert Hyman
2010-05-07 23:28:58 UTC
Permalink
In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
<***@cox.net> 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 ***@iphouse.com
Donna Evleth
2010-05-07 19:45:39 UTC
Permalink
> From: Hatunen <***@cox.net>
> Organization: As little as possible
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec.tr
> avel.europe
> Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 11:38:43 -0700
> Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>
> On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
>> In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>> <***@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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.

In a previous post you mentioned the roadblock checks that take place inland
from the border. In 1983 my French neighbor and I ran into one of these,
coming up from San Diego to Los Angeles on the freeway. We, like all the
other northbound drivers, were pulled over. Our visit with the patrolman
was very brief. He took one look at us, saw that we were white blondes of
northern European origin, and waved us on. The irony of the story is that
at that time we were, in fact, undocumented. I was an American citizen, but
could not prove it. My French neighbor was a visitor on a tourist visa
which had not expired, but could not prove it. The reason we were
undocumented was because all our documents had been stolen in an 1 AM
burglary of our motel room in a suburb of Los Angeles. All we had to prove
what we said was the police report of the burglary (no arrest). But in our
case, there was apparently no "reasonable suspicion".

I too would like a definition.

Donna Evleth
>
>
> --
> ************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
> * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
> * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Hatunen
2010-05-07 21:14:00 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 07 May 2010 21:45:39 +0200, Donna Evleth
<***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

>
>
>> From: Hatunen <***@cox.net>
>> Organization: As little as possible
>> Newsgroups:
>> alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec.tr
>> avel.europe
>> Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 11:38:43 -0700
>> Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>>
>> On 07 May 2010 18:23:37 GMT, Bert Hyman <***@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In news:***@4ax.com Hatunen
>>> <***@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:29:58 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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.
>
>In a previous post you mentioned the roadblock checks that take place inland
>from the border. In 1983 my French neighbor and I ran into one of these,
>coming up from San Diego to Los Angeles on the freeway.

It's still there on I-5, and it's kind of famous. There are
highway signs with silhouettes of running people on them as a
warning to drivers taht tehre mey be people on the road. The
coyotes bringing in illegals will let them out of thevehicle a
mile or so ahead and tell them to walk to teh other side.

>We, like all the
>other northbound drivers, were pulled over. Our visit with the patrolman
>was very brief. He took one look at us, saw that we were white blondes of
>northern European origin, and waved us on.

Yep. Us, too.

>The irony of the story is that
>at that time we were, in fact, undocumented. I was an American citizen, but
>could not prove it. My French neighbor was a visitor on a tourist visa
>which had not expired, but could not prove it. The reason we were
>undocumented was because all our documents had been stolen in an 1 AM
>burglary of our motel room in a suburb of Los Angeles. All we had to prove
>what we said was the police report of the burglary (no arrest). But in our
>case, there was apparently no "reasonable suspicion".
>
>I too would like a definition.

Yep. Therein lies potential abuse of the law. Here in Tucson in
the winter we get a lot of "snowbirds", people who come from
colder climates with RVs or to leased flats to enjoy the winter
without snow. Many of them drive vehicles with Canadian license
plates. I doubt any of them will ever be stopped to check on the
legality of their presence.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Poetic Justice
2010-05-07 21:14:04 UTC
Permalink
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...
Hatunen
2010-05-07 22:43:04 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 7 May 2010 17:14:04 -0400, ***@webtv.net (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/2r/summary/s.1070pshs.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/usc_sec_08_00001325----000-.html
that federal law provides only a civil penalty for not being
documented while Arizona defines it as "criminal trespass"


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Poetic Justice
2010-05-08 21:31:42 UTC
Permalink
Hatunen wrote;

>You have to know that teh language of the
>original bill [snip]

That Bill has been revised/rewritten/whatever on April 30, 6 days
before this thread even began?

>There's a very good summary at
>http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/su
>mary/s.1070pshs.doc.htm

You're arguing some points that no longer exist in the Bill this thread
is about.

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

This is what the new Bill says, signed 9 days ago;

"Stipulates that a lawful stop, detention or arrest _must be_ in the
enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or
this state".

So your claim of

>"The Arizona law makes mere suspicion
>of illegal migration status "just Cause".

isn't true.


And as far as *police stops*** go the immigration status question ENDS
when one of the following are produced.

"A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in
the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer
or agency any of the
following:

1. A valid Arizona driver license.

2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.

3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal 19
identification.

4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States
before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local
government issued identification".

***Sometimes you can be stopped driving or walking because something
has just happened and you are in the area or fit a description, etc.
And if you are the victim you'd be surprised how fast you want
*everyone* rounded-up:-).
Regards, Walter



..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
harry k
2010-05-08 04:59:48 UTC
Permalink
On May 7, 2:14 pm, ***@webtv.net (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
>
> ..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...

You must have missed the amendment she signed just hte other day. It
requires that there be legal reason for the contact before the
'immigration law' takes effect. Of course that does not stop
'profiling'

"Your honor, I saw him spit on the sidewalk so I...."

Harry K
Earl Evleth
2010-05-08 06:47:24 UTC
Permalink
On 7/05/10 23:14, in article
23569-4BE4829C-***@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net, "Poetic Justice"
<***@webtv.net> wrote:

>
> 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

So far I have only seen the "reasonable suspicion" termed used.

What are the criteria which must be met to constitute "reasonable suspicion"

It sounds a bit vague.
harry k
2010-05-08 14:55:48 UTC
Permalink
On May 7, 11:47 pm, Earl Evleth <***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> On 7/05/10 23:14, in article
> 23569-4BE4829C-***@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net, "Poetic Justice"
>
> <***@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> > 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
>
> So far I have only seen the "reasonable suspicion" termed used.

It was just signed the other day and was in the news reports. It and
I think some other changes were made to take some of the "stink" out
of the law.

> What are the criteria which must be met to constitute "reasonable suspicion"
>
> It sounds a bit vague.

Yes, it is easy to 'work around it'. I saw it done several times
while on dispatch. One big drug bust came as a result of a 'stop'
made by a town cop. He had followed the susupect ("they just looked
suspicious") out of town for 5 miles. That is the limit normally
considered "within reason" for following someone out of jurisdction.
Just before the 5 mile spot he stopped them for "lane travel". The
judge bought it.

Basically the cop has to be able to state in writing what the
violation was and cite the law or code that applies. Thus a brown
person standing on the street corner does not constitue 'reasonable
suspicion'.

Harry K
harry k
2010-05-08 14:59:12 UTC
Permalink
On May 7, 11:47 pm, Earl Evleth <***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> On 7/05/10 23:14, in article
> 23569-4BE4829C-***@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net, "Poetic Justice"
>
> <***@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> > 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
>
> So far I have only seen the "reasonable suspicion" termed used.
>
> What are the criteria which must be met to constitute "reasonable suspicion"
>
> It sounds a bit vague.

Further: Vague? yes a bit but the "reasonalbe man" bit applies.
e.g., a man carrying a TV set down the street at 2 pm is not
suspicious but the same man carrying it down the street at 2 am is
reasonalbe suspicion of burglary and no judge would question it as a
reason for the contact.

Harry K
Donna Evleth
2010-05-06 10:21:22 UTC
Permalink
> From: Hatunen <***@cox.net>
> Organization: As little as possible
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec.tr
> avel.europe
> Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 14:29:32 -0700
> Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>
> On Wed, 05 May 2010 21:47:10 +0200, Donna Evleth
> <***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> From: "rick++" <***@hotmail.com>
>>> Organization: http://groups.google.com
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec.
>>> tr
>>> avel.europe
>>> Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 08:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>>>
>>> The Arizona law is redundant.
>>> The 58-year old resident alien law already requires legal aliens to
>>> carry their green card.
>>> And drivers are required to carry their licenses. A valid license is
>>> sufficient ID under the AZ law.
>>
>> Does a valid driver's license constitute proof of citizenship in Arizona?
>
> A birth certificate is now required to obtain a license, so, yes,
> the state law accepts it as proof of citizenship. In fact, of
> legal residency also, since a non-citizen applicant has to
> present a green card.

Thank you. That is what I wanted to know. I believe this is fairly recent,
I don't remember it when I lived in California 35 years ago.

Donna Evleth
>
>
> --
> ************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
> * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
> * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Mike
2010-05-05 22:24:26 UTC
Permalink
On May 5, 3:47 pm, Donna Evleth <***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > From: "rick++" <***@hotmail.com>
> > Organization:http://groups.google.com
> > Newsgroups:
> > alt.activism.death-penalty,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,soc.retirement,rec­.tr
> > avel.europe
> > Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 08:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
> > Subject: Re: Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>
> > The Arizona law is redundant.
> > The 58-year old resident alien law already requires legal aliens to
> > carry their green card.
> > And drivers are required to carry their licenses.  A valid license is
> > sufficient ID under the AZ law.
>
> Does a valid driver's license constitute proof of citizenship in Arizona?

If you're a legal alien you can still get a license. But you need to
claim residency I believe in order to get one.

>
> Donna Evleth
Hatunen
2010-05-05 22:56:29 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 May 2010 15:24:26 -0700 (PDT), Mike
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On May 5, 3:47 pm, Donna Evleth <***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

>> Does a valid driver's license constitute proof of citizenship in Arizona?
>
>If you're a legal alien you can still get a license. But you need to
>claim residency I believe in order to get one.

When I first moved to Arizona in 1966 I worked for Hughes
Aircraft. Sheriff's deputies patrolled the access road to the
plant looking for out-of-state plates because it meant that an
outstater was working in Arizona, which made him/her a resident
and was required to re-register the car. I expect ditto for the
driver license.

You may have to prove residency to get lower tuition at colleges
and universities, but getting a driver license isn't all that
tough. In fact, getting a license is one piece of evidence for
claiming in-state tuition.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Mike
2010-05-06 10:04:01 UTC
Permalink
On May 5, 6:56 pm, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 2010 15:24:26 -0700 (PDT), Mike
>
> <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On May 5, 3:47 pm, Donna Evleth <***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> >> Does a valid driver's license constitute proof of citizenship in Arizona?
>
> >If you're a legal alien you can still get a license.  But you need to
> >claim residency I believe in order to get one.
>
> When I first moved to Arizona in 1966 I worked for Hughes
> Aircraft. Sheriff's deputies patrolled the access road to the
> plant looking for out-of-state plates because it meant that an
> outstater was working in Arizona, which made him/her a resident
> and was required to re-register the car. I expect ditto for the
> driver license.
>
> You may have to prove residency to get lower tuition at colleges
> and universities, but getting a driver license isn't all that
> tough. In fact, getting a license is one piece of evidence for
> claiming in-state tuition.
>
Around here you need to prove residency.
Tis Odonovan, Himself
2010-05-06 11:29:32 UTC
Permalink
On May 6, 6:04 am, Mike <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 5, 6:56 pm, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 5 May 2010 15:24:26 -0700 (PDT), Mike
>
> > <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >On May 5, 3:47 pm, Donna Evleth <***@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > >> Does a valid driver's license constitute proof of citizenship in Arizona?
>
> > >If you're a legal alien you can still get a license.  But you need to
> > >claim residency I believe in order to get one.
>
> > When I first moved to Arizona in 1966 I worked for Hughes
> > Aircraft. Sheriff's deputies patrolled the access road to the
> > plant looking for out-of-state plates because it meant that an
> > outstater was working in Arizona, which made him/her a resident
> > and was required to re-register the car. I expect ditto for the
> > driver license.
>
> > You may have to prove residency to get lower tuition at colleges
> > and universities, but getting a driver license isn't all that
> > tough. In fact, getting a license is one piece of evidence for
> > claiming in-state tuition.
>
> Around here you need to prove residency.

My wife and I went to a Mexican restaurant for lunch yesterday. We
have been going to the same one periodically of about 6 Mexican
restaurants available in our town here in the Georgia mountains of
about 12000 since we know the menu and everything has always been
satisfactory there.

I've gotten to know the owner. he always greets me with a big grin and
handshake , calling me "amigo". I ran into him as we were both in
supermarket parking lot about a week ago and noticed he traded his
BMW for a brand new Mercedes. Since I have driven and owned German
cars since 72 we chatted about them briefly. His English is not all
that good and my Spanish is non existent but we managed

Based on those new German cars and the gold draped around his neck, it
appears that that Mexican restaurant is doing pretty well for that
Mexican immigrant from Guadaljara (sp?).

I never asked him if he was legal or illegal but since the Hispanic
immigration issue has been on the front burner, I did mention to my
wife yesterday that I noticed for the first time we always see new
faces in his dozen or so wait, bussing, kitchen staff of all young
males appearing to be in their 20s, all struggling with English to
their customers but speaking rapid Spanish to each other.

As the Mexican guys would pass our table my wife would say- "I'v e
seen that guy here before or I don't recognize that one". The owner
without exception mans the checkout register and always asks
"everything OK today amigo?"

After lunch I dropped her off at her nail salon owned by Vietnamese
lady of about 30 which is one of about a dozen in our town, all run by
Vietnamese. I returned to the house which is about 5 miles from town
until my wife called several hours later when she was through. When I
picked her up she mentioned that it was the same thing in the nail
salon- constant new faces of young Vietnamese staff struggling with
Englsh.

We both agreed it was the same thing in a Chinese restaurant we
frequent- always new faces but we didn't kn ow whether they were
ethnic
Chinese or Vietnamese. I do recall the pictures on the walls of the
restaurant depicted what looked like typical scenes from China.

In his typical naive out of touch mentality Evleth deludes himself
that by going after the employers of illegal immigrants he will be
going after only his despised WHITE AMERICAN MALES employing illegals.
Considering the fact the Evleths haven't lived here in the US for
30years or so their simple mindedness about what is happening here
should come as no surprise.
Hatunen
2010-05-05 16:29:47 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 May 2010 04:11:17 -0700 (PDT), "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself"
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>by Paul Theroux
>
>
> AFP
>
>"Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
>asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
>how the new law compares to other countries'.
>
>These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
>Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
>Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
>or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
>papers?

Drivers should have, ipso facto, a drivers license to show, and
are routinely asked for it whenever the police make a stop. Under
the Arizona law, this is sufficient to show legal residency. But
if it weren't for the acceptavbility of my drivers license, I
would not normally have instant any proof that I am a citizen or
legal resident. Nor might other people in the car.

Up until now it has been something of a tradition in the US, UK
and other English heritage countries that we are not required to
carry ID, even though it is a commonplace in many other
countries. The cery concept of a national identity card has been
very controversial.

>Chicago White Sox Manager Ozzie Guillen is offended (“as a Latin
>American”) by the Arizona law and recently claimed that all illegal
>immigrants are “workaholics.” Has he been back to the land of his
>birth lately, Venezuela, and expected not to be asked for his papers?
>Ozzie, tell the police in Ocumare del Tuy, “I’m a Latin American,” and
>see if that will end the interrogation. And spare a thought for the
>policeman two days ago who was gunned down in the desert by a
>workaholic drug dealer.

Gee. Too bad no one stopped and asked the drug dealer for ID. In
fact, though, it is now known that the killing was part of a
well-orchestrated ambush by a group of durg dealers. I seriously
doubt that the new law would have had any affect on the outcome.

>The request for papers is not just a line in Casablanca. I have been
>hearing the question my whole traveling life. I had an Alien
>Registration Card in Britain and got occasional visits from the police
>at my home, to make sure I was behaving myself. Seventeen years in
>Britain as an alien: papers. Six years in Africa: “Where are your
>papers, bwana?” Three years in Singapore: another alien identity card
>and immense red tape in that fussy, litigious bureaucracy.
>
>A large proportion of the Brazilians on Cape Cod are illegals, working
>off the books, indignant that they would ever be asked to identify
>themselves. Ever been to Brazil? I have. “Where are your papers,
>meester?”
>
>As for the U.S., it is annoying, but understandable, especially in a
>country with 12 million illegal immigrants using the public services.
>“Who are you?” is a routine question: The necessity to identify
>yourself to authority is something that happens every day.

Not to me. But of course, I'm a white-haired old man of Nordic
extraction.

>You present
>a credit card at the supermarket and they want to see your license to
>make sure you’re not a grafter.

Nonsense. I just run my credit card through the slot on the card
reader. No one asks to see it nor any ID. My main supermarket is
in the very Mexican part of Tucson and it filled with Latino
shoppers. None of htem have to show ID to scan a credit card.

>All over the place, renting a car, at
>the bank: “I’ll need to see two forms of ID.”

I douubt if many border crossers are renting cars.

[...]

>As for this Arizona law (which is understandable until the federal
>government takes a stand), I am delighted to be reassured that there
>will be no racial profiling. The illegals in Arizona are not just
>Hispanics. Those of you who have read Dark Star Safari, my book about
>traveling through Africa, might remember how, in the Sudan, I met a
>Sudanese man (on vacation in Khartoum from New York) who explained
>very carefully how he had entered the United States illegally, the
>best way: Go to Mexico, pay someone some money, and then hide in a
>fish truck or a vegetable van and hop the border. Sudanese, Nigerians,
>Pakistanis, Chinese, Indians, Bangladeshis, Brazilians. Illegal aliens
>come from all over the world to converge on the Arizona, California,
>and New Mexico borders. The Hispanics are right to be a little
>indignant, but just a little. It is much easier to sneak into the U.S.
>than to apply for a residence permit.

All that means is that better controls are required AT the
border.

As to racial profiling sure the law says "no-no". But all the cop
needs is a suspicion of any sort to as for ID. And everyone here
knows who is going to look suspicious. And it sure ain't going to
be me. This is one of those things that everyone looks innocent
when asked if they believe in racial profiling (noodge noodge),
but they know it's the Mexicans and those of Mexican extraction
who are going to be stopped all the time. t>My eldest son was
born in Uganda, when I was resident there. He has
>American nationality, of course; but because he has spent most of his
>life traveling and working abroad, his son, my grandson, born in
>Britain, of an English mother, does not automatically qualify for U.S.
>citizenship. If I can prove that I am an American (my ancestors
>arrived here in 1690) then the little boy might have a chance; but it
>is not a slam dunk. We have filed the papers; we are into our second
>year of waiting. Then he might have his papers. In the meantime, take
>a number."
>
>Paul Theroux is a travel writer and novelist whose best known work,
>The Great Railway Bazaar, is a travelogue about a train trip from
>Britain through Europe, the Middle East, South Asia, and then back
>across Russia to his point of origin. In Ghost Train to the Eastern
>Star (2008) he retraced that trip. His latest novel is A Dead Hand: A
>Crime in Calcutta.

The problem here in Arizona is that many Mexican families here
became citizens at the time of the Gadsden Purchase but their
descendants are still going to be stopped for DWH (driving while
hispanic).

"Sorry to stop you, sir, but did you know your taillight doesn't
seem to be working? And, by the way, show me some proof of
citizenship. Oh, New Mexico drivers license? Sorry sir but we
don't accept that in Arizona. Please step out of the car..."



--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
DM
2010-05-08 00:10:32 UTC
Permalink
On May 5, 9:11 pm, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
> by Paul Theroux
>
>  AFP
>
> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
> how the new law compares to other countries'.
>
> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
> papers?
[cut]

Why is it that right wingers want to turn free liberal democracies
into police states?
Is this official Republican policy PJ?

DM
Hatunen
2010-05-08 01:24:10 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 7 May 2010 17:10:32 -0700 (PDT), DM <d-***@adfa.edu.au>
wrote:

>On May 5, 9:11 pm, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>> by Paul Theroux
>>
>>  AFP
>>
>> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
>> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
>> how the new law compares to other countries'.
>>
>> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
>> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
>> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
>> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
>> papers?
>[cut]
>
>Why is it that right wingers want to turn free liberal democracies
>into police states?

That does seem ironic.

>Is this official Republican policy PJ?

Not yet, since there is no such thing as "official" Republican
policy. Not for lack of trying, of course, by the rightists.




--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Kenneth McVay OBC
2010-05-08 05:05:55 UTC
Permalink
In article <5f8cea58-ade9-426c-9129-***@s4g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
DM <d-***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>On May 5, 9:11 pm, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>> by Paul Theroux
>>
>>  AFP
>>
>> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
>> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
>> how the new law compares to other countries'.
>>
>> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
>> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
>> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
>> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
>> papers?
>[cut]
>
>Why is it that right wingers want to turn free liberal democracies
>into police states?
>Is this official Republican policy PJ?

Why is it some folks do not believe in enforcing
federal laws?

Why do those folks scream "racism!" at everyone who
advocates for enforcing federal laws?

What is it they are afraid of? A nation of laws?

--
"Hate propaganda is an attack on the truth-seeking process itself.
It is directed to subverting and undermining the search for truth."
(David Matas, Bloody Speech, p. 37)
The Nizkor Project: http://www.nizkor.org
DM
2010-05-08 06:39:31 UTC
Permalink
On May 8, 3:05 pm, ***@shell.vex.net (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
> In article <5f8cea58-ade9-426c-9129-***@s4g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> DM  <d-***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
> >On May 5, 9:11 pm, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
> >> by Paul Theroux
>
> >>  AFP
>
> >> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
> >> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
> >> how the new law compares to other countries'.
>
> >> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
> >> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
> >> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
> >> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
> >> papers?
> >[cut]
>
> >Why is it that right wingers want to turn free liberal democracies
> >into police states?
> >Is this official Republican policy PJ?
>
> Why is it some folks do not believe in enforcing
> federal laws?

Do you really have a federal law that allows police to stop any person
they like (or more likely, don't like) on the street and force them to
perform an act? I don't think you do. If fact I think your
constitution specifically protects people from being arbitrarily
searched, or being forced to provide information to the police.

Why do right wingers in the USA hate their country's constitution so
much?

DM
Hatunen
2010-05-08 16:05:06 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 08 May 2010 00:05:55 -0500, ***@shell.vex.net (Kenneth
McVay OBC) wrote:

>In article <5f8cea58-ade9-426c-9129-***@s4g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>DM <d-***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>On May 5, 9:11 pm, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
>>> by Paul Theroux
>>>
>>>  AFP
>>>
>>> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
>>> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
>>> how the new law compares to other countries'.
>>>
>>> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
>>> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
>>> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
>>> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
>>> papers?
>>[cut]
>>
>>Why is it that right wingers want to turn free liberal democracies
>>into police states?
>>Is this official Republican policy PJ?
>
>Why is it some folks do not believe in enforcing
>federal laws?
>
>Why do those folks scream "racism!" at everyone who
>advocates for enforcing federal laws?
>
>What is it they are afraid of? A nation of laws?

Please notice that the question at hand does not involve
enforcing federal laws. The Arizona statute makes a new Arizona
law for Arizona peace oficers to enforce. Being in the USA
without proper documentation is not a federal criminal offense,
it is a federal civil violation. Oddly enough, a civil action is
easier to enforce since it is not hampered by things like Miranda
readings and habeaus corpus and proceedings can be expedited.

The Arizona bill makes lack of documentation a state criminal
offense and I expect arrests will be heavily challenged because
of this; it is a bit vague on respect for civil rights.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
David Moss
2010-05-10 23:04:42 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 08 May 2010 09:05:06 -0700, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:

>The Arizona bill makes lack of documentation a state criminal
>offense and I expect arrests will be heavily challenged because
>of this; it is a bit vague on respect for civil rights

What happens to a citizen from Texas when he is arrested in Arizona
for not having papers?

What happens to a citizen from Arizona who is noticed by police while
out jogging without any papers on her?

DM
personal opinion only
---------------------
APR - http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
Kenneth McVay OBC
2010-05-10 23:27:41 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>,
David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>On Sat, 08 May 2010 09:05:06 -0700, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>The Arizona bill makes lack of documentation a state criminal
>>offense and I expect arrests will be heavily challenged because
>>of this; it is a bit vague on respect for civil rights
>
>What happens to a citizen from Texas when he is arrested in Arizona
>for not having papers?

What was the citizen doing to give police probable
cause to stop him? What was the reasonable suspicion
police had to request papers?

>What happens to a citizen from Arizona who is noticed by police while
>out jogging without any papers on her?

Since jogging is a legal endeavor, the Arizona police
would not have any reason to stop the citizen.


--
"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/irving-david/judgment-00-00.html
Hatunen
2010-05-11 01:23:53 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 10 May 2010 18:27:41 -0500, ***@shell.vex.net (Kenneth
McVay OBC) wrote:

>In article <***@4ax.com>,
>David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>On Sat, 08 May 2010 09:05:06 -0700, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>The Arizona bill makes lack of documentation a state criminal
>>>offense and I expect arrests will be heavily challenged because
>>>of this; it is a bit vague on respect for civil rights
>>
>>What happens to a citizen from Texas when he is arrested in Arizona
>>for not having papers?
>
>What was the citizen doing to give police probable
>cause to stop him? What was the reasonable suspicion
>police had to request papers?

Perhaps a hispanic person jogging in an almost totally anglo
neighborhood. And don't say it doesn't happen.

>>What happens to a citizen from Arizona who is noticed by police while
>>out jogging without any papers on her?
>
>Since jogging is a legal endeavor, the Arizona police
>would not have any reason to stop the citizen.

There's the old anecdotes about the police stopping people
jogging down the street in places like Beverly Hills.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
David Moss
2010-05-11 13:14:30 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 10 May 2010 18:27:41 -0500, ***@shell.vex.net (Kenneth
McVay OBC) wrote:

>In article <***@4ax.com>,
>David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>On Sat, 08 May 2010 09:05:06 -0700, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>The Arizona bill makes lack of documentation a state criminal
>>>offense and I expect arrests will be heavily challenged because
>>>of this; it is a bit vague on respect for civil rights
>>
>>What happens to a citizen from Texas when he is arrested in Arizona
>>for not having papers?

>What was the citizen doing to give police probable
>cause to stop him? What was the reasonable suspicion
>police had to request papers?

Perhaps he looks Hispanic and can't speak English. That might be
enough for some people.

>>What happens to a citizen from Arizona who is noticed by police while
>>out jogging without any papers on her?
>
>Since jogging is a legal endeavor, the Arizona police
>would not have any reason to stop the citizen.

Do you really think a cop can't think of an excuse to stop *anyone*?

DM
personal opinion only
---------------------
APR - http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
O'Donovan, PJ, Himself
2010-05-11 13:58:10 UTC
Permalink
On May 11, 9:14 am, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:

> Do you really think a cop can't think of an excuse to stop *anyone*?
>
> DM

Even white Europeans like myself get stopped and questioned.

I was born in 1932 but some years ago, visiting family in
Pennsylvania, I was walking at night on my way to a local drug store
to get something or other with only money in my pocket and no wallet.

A police car pulled up and asked for ID. I had to explain I was on my
way to buy something at the drug store and had no wallet but ID was
available at a house of family I was staying at nearby. I had to get
into the car and proceed to the house when I opened the door and
explained to all "cheese it the cops" and proceeded to go to the
upstairs bedroom to retrieve my wallet.

I am 6'2'' 175 lbs now as I was back then. The cops explained that
they had had reports that a tall lanky guy had been exposing himself
to young girls as they were leaving the high school nearby that day
and I fit that description but that was the end of it as one of them
knew a family member well I was staying with who explained who I was
and vouched for my character. Profiling? yep.

We had another incident with my one son on a visit home during his
undergraduate college years at Georgetown University in Washington DC
back in the 1980s. As was the fashion he let his hair grow into a
straggly mess and apparently a girlfriend gave him a stupid earing to
wear with it all.

I had been driving German cars for years and my son borrowed a 77
450SLC Mercedes sports car I had been driving for many years, A cop
stopped him and fortunately he had all the proper paper work handy.
After all was resolved my son asked why he was stopped and the cop
said he was suspicious seeing such a scroungie looking kid driving
such a classy car. It shook my son up a bit but he didn't cut his hair
nor get rid of that stupid earing. Profiling? sure.

That son is now a tenured college professor, married with two kids and
a mortgage. The hair is still long and he still wears a stupid earing
even though in his late 40s now but being in academia, he fits in
very well
harry k
2010-05-11 14:40:00 UTC
Permalink
On May 11, 6:58 am, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On May 11, 9:14 am, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > Do you really think a cop can't think of an excuse to stop *anyone*?
>
> > DM
>
> Even white Europeans like myself get stopped and questioned.
>
> I was born in 1932 but some years ago, visiting family in
> Pennsylvania, I was walking at night on my way to a local drug store
> to get something or other with only money in my pocket and no wallet.
>
> A police car pulled up and asked for ID. I had to explain I was on my
> way to buy something at the drug store and had no wallet but ID was
> available at a house of family I was staying at nearby. I had to get
> into the car and proceed to the house when I opened the door and
> explained to all "cheese it the cops" and proceeded to go to the
> upstairs bedroom to retrieve my wallet.
>
> I am 6'2'' 175 lbs now as I was back then.  The cops explained that
> they had had reports that a tall lanky guy had been exposing himself
> to young girls as they were leaving the high school nearby that day
> and I fit that description but that was the end of it as one of them
> knew a family member well I was staying with who explained who I was
> and vouched for my character. Profiling? yep.
>
> We had another incident with my one son on a visit home during his
> undergraduate college years at Georgetown University in Washington DC
> back in the 1980s. As was the fashion he let his hair grow into a
> straggly mess and apparently a girlfriend gave him a stupid earing to
> wear with it all.
>
> I had been driving German cars for years and my son borrowed a 77
> 450SLC Mercedes sports car I had been driving for many years, A cop
> stopped him and fortunately he had all the proper paper work handy.
> After all was resolved my son asked why he was stopped and the cop
> said he was suspicious seeing such a scroungie looking kid driving
> such a classy car. It shook my son up a bit but he didn't cut his hair
> nor get rid of that stupid earing. Profiling? sure.
>
> That son is now a tenured college professor, married with two kids and
> a mortgage. The hair is still long and he still wears a stupid earing
> even though in his late 40s now but  being in academia, he fits in
> very well

Neither of those examples is "profiling" Both are examples of good
police work. Profiling would be seeing a brownskin standing on the
streetcorner with a 'will work' sign. Or picking a black driving in
daylight hours where blacks are rarely seen.

Stopping a black or brown driving/walking/jogging, whatever at 2 a.m.
in a totally whitebread neighbor hood would not be profiling. Yes,
there is a fine line that really can't be defined between 'good work'
and 'profiling'

That's one of the problems with the stats on traffic enforcement. How
does one prove that they were not profiling when they show you stop
more blacks/browns/greens than whites.

Also, IIANM the supreme courst ruled that 'with legal reason' one must
_identify_ oneself when asked to do so. (Hiibel vs ??) It does _not_
require that you show ID. However if you provide a name/dob that
doesn't check out expect some problems...such as, "Sir, you are being
detained until I can verify your identity".

Harry K
Earl Evleth
2010-05-11 15:11:09 UTC
Permalink
On 11/05/10 16:40, in article
03b0b1ba-63fc-410e-ad89-***@31g2000prc.googlegroups.com, "harry k"
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> Even white Europeans like myself get stopped and questioned.

I have been here 35 years and it never happened except with
regard to controls on the car, and then they are interested
in the car's ID and the driver's, passengers are never questioned.
Poetic Justice
2010-05-11 20:35:32 UTC
Permalink
>Even white Europeans like myself get
>stopped and questioned.

Earl Evleth wrote;

>I have been here 35 years and it never
>happened except with regard to controls
>on the car,[snip]

Earl weren't you stopped and questioned twice(?) by the French
(FBI-type) authorities either in or just outside a Paris internet cafe
years ago because your innocent email had some words that triggered it
as a possible terrorist's email?

I remember it on r.t.e and what struck me the most was how fast they
responded.

Or am I thinking of another poster that this happened too?
Regards, Walter



..And Paradise Was Lost...like teardrops in the rain...
Tis Odonovan, Himself
2010-05-11 16:02:51 UTC
Permalink
On May 11, 10:40 am, harry k <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 11, 6:58 am, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 11, 9:14 am, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > > Do you really think a cop can't think of an excuse to stop *anyone*?
>
> > > DM
>
> > Even white Europeans like myself get stopped and questioned.
>
> > I was born in 1932 but some years ago, visiting family in
> > Pennsylvania, I was walking at night on my way to a local drug store
> > to get something or other with only money in my pocket and no wallet.
>
> > A police car pulled up and asked for ID. I had to explain I was on my
> > way to buy something at the drug store and had no wallet but ID was
> > available at a house of family I was staying at nearby. I had to get
> > into the car and proceed to the house when I opened the door and
> > explained to all "cheese it the cops" and proceeded to go to the
> > upstairs bedroom to retrieve my wallet.
>
> > I am 6'2'' 175 lbs now as I was back then.  The cops explained that
> > they had had reports that a tall lanky guy had been exposing himself
> > to young girls as they were leaving the high school nearby that day
> > and I fit that description but that was the end of it as one of them
> > knew a family member well I was staying with who explained who I was
> > and vouched for my character. Profiling? yep.
>
> > We had another incident with my one son on a visit home during his
> > undergraduate college years at Georgetown University in Washington DC
> > back in the 1980s. As was the fashion he let his hair grow into a
> > straggly mess and apparently a girlfriend gave him a stupid earing to
> > wear with it all.
>
> > I had been driving German cars for years and my son borrowed a 77
> > 450SLC Mercedes sports car I had been driving for many years, A cop
> > stopped him and fortunately he had all the proper paper work handy.
> > After all was resolved my son asked why he was stopped and the cop
> > said he was suspicious seeing such a scroungie looking kid driving
> > such a classy car. It shook my son up a bit but he didn't cut his hair
> > nor get rid of that stupid earing. Profiling? sure.
>
> > That son is now a tenured college professor, married with two kids and
> > a mortgage. The hair is still long and he still wears a stupid earing
> > even though in his late 40s now but  being in academia, he fits in
> > very well
>
> Neither of those examples is "profiling"  Both are examples of good
> police work.  Profiling would be seeing a brownskin standing on the
> streetcorner with a 'will work' sign.  Or picking a black driving in
> daylight hours where blacks are rarely seen.
>
> Stopping a black or brown driving/walking/jogging, whatever at 2 a.m.
> in a totally whitebread neighbor hood would not be profiling.  Yes,
> there is a fine line that really can't be defined between 'good work'
> and 'profiling'
>
> That's one of the problems with the stats on traffic enforcement.  How
> does one prove that they were not profiling when they show you stop
> more blacks/browns/greens than whites.
>
> Also, IIANM the supreme courst ruled that 'with legal reason' one must
> _identify_ oneself when asked to do so.  (Hiibel vs ??) It does _not_
> require that you show ID.  However if you provide a name/dob that
> doesn't check out expect some problems...such as, "Sir, you are being
> detained until I can verify your identity".
>
> Harry K- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I can't remember whether the PA incident with me took place in '59 '60
or '61 thinking back about it
but I do know I never leave the house without a wallet with ID ever
since.

When travelling abroad neither my wife or myself would dare leave the
hotel without our passports. I usually
travel in jeans and western boots, temperarues permitting. The boots
are convenient for slipping in the passport and wallet with
debit/credit cards and cash. I usually have a second wallet for some
handy local currency in a velcro wallet and insert in the thigh pocket
of my jeans so I would probably realize it if somebody was fishing
around for it there.

When we are warmer climes like Hawaii or Australia in their summer I
am usually in cargo shorts or jeans shorts and hiking boots with
passport and wallet in thigh pocket. if we are comfortable where we
are staying the big bucks and redundant credit cards go into a safe
with what little of my wife's jewelry she might be carrying. She
usually limits what jewelry she carries and never flaunts it

We have been travelling the world for over 50 years now and never
pickpocketed and don't even recall an attempt.

The only incident I recall was a guard in the Riksmuseum (sp?) in
Amsterdam warning me I was asking for trouble with a camera and stuff
in a back pack I was carrying
Hatunen
2010-05-11 17:29:28 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 11 May 2010 07:40:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On May 11, 6:58 am, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself" <***@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> On May 11, 9:14 am, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> > Do you really think a cop can't think of an excuse to stop *anyone*?
>>
>> > DM
>>
>> Even white Europeans like myself get stopped and questioned.
>>
>> I was born in 1932 but some years ago, visiting family in
>> Pennsylvania, I was walking at night on my way to a local drug store
>> to get something or other with only money in my pocket and no wallet.
>>
>> A police car pulled up and asked for ID. I had to explain I was on my
>> way to buy something at the drug store and had no wallet but ID was
>> available at a house of family I was staying at nearby. I had to get
>> into the car and proceed to the house when I opened the door and
>> explained to all "cheese it the cops" and proceeded to go to the
>> upstairs bedroom to retrieve my wallet.
>>
>> I am 6'2'' 175 lbs now as I was back then.  The cops explained that
>> they had had reports that a tall lanky guy had been exposing himself
>> to young girls as they were leaving the high school nearby that day
>> and I fit that description but that was the end of it as one of them
>> knew a family member well I was staying with who explained who I was
>> and vouched for my character. Profiling? yep.
>>
>> We had another incident with my one son on a visit home during his
>> undergraduate college years at Georgetown University in Washington DC
>> back in the 1980s. As was the fashion he let his hair grow into a
>> straggly mess and apparently a girlfriend gave him a stupid earing to
>> wear with it all.
>>
>> I had been driving German cars for years and my son borrowed a 77
>> 450SLC Mercedes sports car I had been driving for many years, A cop
>> stopped him and fortunately he had all the proper paper work handy.
>> After all was resolved my son asked why he was stopped and the cop
>> said he was suspicious seeing such a scroungie looking kid driving
>> such a classy car. It shook my son up a bit but he didn't cut his hair
>> nor get rid of that stupid earing. Profiling? sure.
>>
>> That son is now a tenured college professor, married with two kids and
>> a mortgage. The hair is still long and he still wears a stupid earing
>> even though in his late 40s now but  being in academia, he fits in
>> very well
>
>Neither of those examples is "profiling" Both are examples of good
>police work. Profiling would be seeing a brownskin standing on the
>streetcorner with a 'will work' sign. Or picking a black driving in
>daylight hours where blacks are rarely seen.

I didn't ake it as an example of profiling. I took it as an
example of "if it can happen to white people, just imagine how it
can happen to people with darker skin".

>Stopping a black or brown driving/walking/jogging, whatever at 2 a.m.
>in a totally whitebread neighbor hood would not be profiling.

Rubbish.

>Yes,
>there is a fine line that really can't be defined between 'good work'
>and 'profiling'

Indeed



--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Hatunen
2010-05-11 17:27:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:58:10 -0700 (PDT), "O'Donovan, PJ,
Himself" <***@gmail.com> wrote:


>I had been driving German cars for years and my son borrowed a 77
>450SLC Mercedes sports car I had been driving for many years, A cop
>stopped him and fortunately he had all the proper paper work handy.
>After all was resolved my son asked why he was stopped and the cop
>said he was suspicious seeing such a scroungie looking kid driving
>such a classy car. It shook my son up a bit but he didn't cut his hair
>nor get rid of that stupid earing. Profiling? sure.

On an episode of the TV series "The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air"
Carleton was asked by his wealthy father to drive his expensive
car (I think it was a Ferrari) down to him in Palm Springs. So
Carleton and Will drive off, having a great time. They are pulled
over by the police in a small town for no real discernible reason
and it is quickly evident that they were pulled over for DWB
(Driving While Black). Not being able to show the car is his,
Carleton and Will are taken to the poice station to spend the
night until the father comes to spring them.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
David Moss
2010-05-15 07:59:41 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 11 May 2010 10:27:05 -0700, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:58:10 -0700 (PDT), "O'Donovan, PJ,
>Himself" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I had been driving German cars for years and my son borrowed a 77
>>450SLC Mercedes sports car I had been driving for many years, A cop
>>stopped him and fortunately he had all the proper paper work handy.
>>After all was resolved my son asked why he was stopped and the cop
>>said he was suspicious seeing such a scroungie looking kid driving
>>such a classy car. It shook my son up a bit but he didn't cut his hair
>>nor get rid of that stupid earing. Profiling? sure.
>
>On an episode of the TV series "The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air"
>Carleton was asked by his wealthy father to drive his expensive
>car (I think it was a Ferrari) down to him in Palm Springs. So
>Carleton and Will drive off, having a great time. They are pulled
>over by the police in a small town for no real discernible reason
>and it is quickly evident that they were pulled over for DWB
>(Driving While Black). Not being able to show the car is his,
>Carleton and Will are taken to the poice station to spend the
>night until the father comes to spring them.

The flipside of that kind of thing is a trick regularly pulled by a
certain Australian Aboriginal boxer (black, for Americans who don't
know about Oz). He and his friends drive around in an expensive BMW
until they spot a police car then suddenly pull over to the side of
the road, jump out leaving all the doors wide open and run off in
different directions. You can imagine how the police respond. When
they return to the car with anyone they manage to catch they find the
driver waiting with full ownership papers, completely unaffected by
alcohol (he's a practising Muslim) and laughing his head off at them.
Even the cops think its funny after a minute or so!

DM
personal opinion only
---------------------
APR - http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
AZ Nomad
2010-05-15 13:19:22 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 15 May 2010 17:59:41 +1000, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>The flipside of that kind of thing is a trick regularly pulled by a
>certain Australian Aboriginal boxer (black, for Americans who don't
>know about Oz). He and his friends drive around in an expensive BMW
>until they spot a police car then suddenly pull over to the side of
>the road, jump out leaving all the doors wide open and run off in
>different directions. You can imagine how the police respond. When
>they return to the car with anyone they manage to catch they find the
>driver waiting with full ownership papers, completely unaffected by
>alcohol (he's a practising Muslim) and laughing his head off at them.
>Even the cops think its funny after a minute or so!

In AZ, every cop within 30 miles would join in the manhunt, they'd catch them,
beat the shit out of them, leave them in tent prison camps in the 115 degree sun
while awaiting trial, and charge them with resisting arrest if they couldn't
think of anything else.
Hatunen
2010-05-15 16:40:43 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 15 May 2010 08:19:22 -0500, AZ Nomad
<***@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote:

>On Sat, 15 May 2010 17:59:41 +1000, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>The flipside of that kind of thing is a trick regularly pulled by a
>>certain Australian Aboriginal boxer (black, for Americans who don't
>>know about Oz). He and his friends drive around in an expensive BMW
>>until they spot a police car then suddenly pull over to the side of
>>the road, jump out leaving all the doors wide open and run off in
>>different directions. You can imagine how the police respond. When
>>they return to the car with anyone they manage to catch they find the
>>driver waiting with full ownership papers, completely unaffected by
>>alcohol (he's a practising Muslim) and laughing his head off at them.
>>Even the cops think its funny after a minute or so!
>
>In AZ, every cop within 30 miles would join in the manhunt, they'd catch them,
>beat the shit out of them, leave them in tent prison camps in the 115 degree sun
>while awaiting trial, and charge them with resisting arrest if they couldn't
>think of anything else.

No, no. Not in Arizona, just in Maricopa County, where Sheriff
Joe will put them in pink underwear and jumpsuits.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (***@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
David Moss
2010-05-13 14:14:36 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:58:10 -0700 (PDT), "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself"
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>On May 11, 9:14 am, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
>> Do you really think a cop can't think of an excuse to stop *anyone*?
>>
>> DM
>
>Even white Europeans like myself get stopped and questioned.

Would you prefer to have been stopped, questioned and arrested for not
carrying ID?

What sort of police state do you want to turn your country into?

DM
personal opinion only
---------------------
APR - http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
harry k
2010-05-11 04:21:30 UTC
Permalink
On May 10, 4:04 pm, David Moss <***@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
> On Sat, 08 May 2010 09:05:06 -0700, Hatunen <***@cox.net> wrote:
> >The Arizona bill makes lack of documentation a state criminal
> >offense and I expect arrests will be heavily challenged because
> >of this; it is a bit vague on respect for civil rights
>
> What happens to a citizen from Texas when he is arrested in Arizona
> for not having papers?
>
> What happens to a citizen from Arizona who is noticed by police while
> out jogging without any papers on her?
>
> DM
> personal opinion only
> ---------------------
> APR -http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com

Why almost anything the cop cares to make up. I worked dispatch for
10-12 years and handled several stops that resulted in good drug
busts. Most cops are honest but there are a few, one of those busts
smelled to high heaven but the judge bought it. (Wandered in lane).

"Your honor, he spit on the sidewalk".

If you think profiling won't happen...

Harry K
mikeos
2010-05-08 09:52:55 UTC
Permalink
On 05/05/2010 12:11, O'Donovan, PJ, Himself wrote:
> Arizona, Show Your Papers? So What!
> by Paul Theroux
>
>
> AFP
>
> "Is asking drivers for ID in Arizona so different from cops in Italy
> asking train passengers for passports? Travel writer Paul Theroux on
> how the new law compares to other countries'.
>
> These people who are protesting being asked for identification by
> Arizona cops—have they been anywhere lately, like out of the country?
> Like Mexico, or Canada, or India, or Italy, or Tanzania, or Singapore,
> or Britain—places where people in uniforms have routinely demanded my
> papers?

Really? not in Britain in my experience. We don't have national ID
cards. This is one reason the Labour party lost the election, due to a
threta to introduce them.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...