wolfwings: (Default)
[personal profile] wolfwings
Someone that's worked in this country for a decade, payed their taxes, is flying home in a couple weeks because nobody can hire them because they've been unable to be allowed to immigrate.

It disgusts me that this happens, while those that bum-rush across the border by any means they can and disregard our laws entirely are now being given a free pass.

Both aspects disgust me, that they both in effect mean the same thing: It doesn't pay to even try to obey the immigration laws in this country anymore, a country that is one of the most immigrant-based countries of a large size I know of, second only to Australia.

No, we can't afford to actually 'secure our borders' like people keep preaching, I hold no illusion on that. And deporting them doesn't slow anything down, if anything I'd be all for imprisioning them for 30 days before deportation just to delay the flow of them back in and impact the money going back out to discourage things.

The core problem to me is simply the unfairness that someone perfectly willing to pay taxes and obey the laws of the land is banned from working here, but those that flaunt our laws and flip the bird to us, get in and get work.

Unless you can justify why my friend I've known for years is having to fly home after living in this country for a decade working at a single job for the majority of that, but was unable to immigrate despite their proven work ethic and ability and willingness to obey our laws and regulations, don't try to convince me that this ruling is a good one. Save your typing. I'll leave comments enabled for now though.

Date: 2010-07-29 08:50 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] otana.livejournal.com
It's a shame that he hasn't changed the ruling, but this is nothing new, Wolf. This bullshit's been going on for decades.

I should know better than anyone. :|

Date: 2010-07-29 09:20 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wolfwings.livejournal.com
In this case, I actually mean the recent ruling by the judge banning Arizona from implementing any of their new immigration law, being the one I'm so annoyed at. My friend got used to the denials, which is the sadder part. :-/

Date: 2010-07-29 11:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] guitar-stitch.livejournal.com
A law that makes it a crime to be illegal? Who ever heard of such things! I mean really, just because you're doing something illegal doesn't make you a criminal. /Sarcasm

I ought to try that sometime... go break into someone's house, eat their food, watch their TV, etc, then when they do call the cops, I'll just say that it's not a crime to be somewhere I'm not authorized to be.... I'm just an undocumented house guest.

Honestly, it seems the union mentality has struck the officials 'running' our nation. Reward those that mess up and break policy, but stick it to those that actually make a positive contribution to the organization.


Date: 2010-07-29 02:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
The issue is, under the way the law was written, you would be detained without arrest, thus no records, until you could prove your a citizen.

Happen to be walking down the street and hispanic, a cop gets itchy? Why, to jail with you, until someone from your family can prove that you're a US citizen. Better have a copy of your birth certificate on hand or you could be in the slammer for days just because you didn't have your 'papers' which is not legal.

We are NOT a 'papers please' state.

Date: 2010-07-29 02:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wolfwings.livejournal.com
Thank you, I was rather emotional realizing that I would rarely if ever see a friend I've known for years again after they flew back across the pond, and this post was the result.

I try to swear by never turning off comments and trying to have reasonable discourse so I can learn where my viewpoint is incorrect and/or incomplete, and mine was one as a result of the other. I admit I didn't research things deeply before making that post from my cell-phone, but the timing of the news stories combined with just leaving visiting my friend this last Mon/Tue/Wed struck hard on me.

Based on your additional information, I was able to do some more targetted searches and I agree on why this law has had sections whack-a-moled into the ground for the time being. While I still appreciate the idea I take away from this law's concept (allow state/local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws) I see how it's a nasty rats-nest in it's current wording.

Thank you for taking the time to screw my head back on straight, Pathia. =^.^=

Date: 2010-07-29 03:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
I think there's a real problem, something needs to be done, I'm just not really sure that laws like this one are the right way to go about solving the issues. Part of the issue is, border states inherently have different problems than non-border states, which means federal law isn't going to be ideal no matter what, because it has to apply to every situation, not specifics.

Date: 2010-07-29 11:59 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com

Based on the things you got wrong in your post, you should probably read this: Text: S.B. 1070 as enacted (http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf)

Date: 2010-07-30 01:51 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
Well without saying what I got wrong, I can't really reply to this, I've read the bill several times.

Date: 2010-07-30 02:15 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
The most glaring error is that anyone can be held incommunicado. There is nothing in the bill that supersedes state and federal law requiring access to a phone and an attorney. Nor is there anything in law that permits an undocumented (no booking) arrest.

Another fairly brilliant error is your suggestion that simply walking down the road while Hispanic is enough to get you tossed in the slammer. The officer has to be in contact with the subject on another legitimate matter before he can inquire about the immigration status.

But not to worry. The Justice Department under pressure from White House will do their best to shut down Arizona's attempts to maintain control of their state. While the law is in limbo, President Calderon will continue his remarkably effective business model of exporting poverty to the US.

Date: 2010-07-30 04:23 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
The law says 'detain' not arrest. You can be held for a certain amount of time without being charged with anything. I know this, because it's happened to me on two occasions. I was accused of being a prostitute with no evidence, arrested and they kept me for 24hours just for the fucking hell of it.

You're talking to the wrong person if you expect me to believe that every cop in Arizona is going to be fair, just and not abuse the law.

As for walking down the road while Hispanic. That *IS* enough. I have hispanic family, american citizen family, that have been harassed for being hispanic in Arizona. They're leaving the state and they're citizens because of the harassment by police, with no charges and this is BEFORE this law ever went into effect.

I'm not speaking out of my ass here, I'm talking about things that have happened to family. Things I've heard about over the phone not long after they happened.
Edited Date: 2010-07-30 04:26 am (UTC)

Date: 2010-07-30 04:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
Dear Lady,

It troubles me that your experience was with bad police officers. However if your "detention" was unjust there is recourse. You should have pursued it. There are a couple things in your story that need clearing up. Were you held without access to a phone or legal counsel? Did they fail to book you? (Prints, pictures and personal data.) If either of those are true you stand to become remarkably well off after the judge is done with them.

However, we are not talking anecdotal war stories here. No law is going to stop bad police officers. We are talking what is actually written in the law.

What the law is designed to do is curtail the flow of illegal aliens that are destroying the way of life for people living near the US-Mexican border. The law is to partially step into the gap created when the Untied States abdicated their responsibility to secure the borders. The shooting death of Robert Krentz by illegal immigrants crossing his ranch is the final straw a string of high profile events that brought this law into being.

And the law was already having the desired effect even before it took effect. The flow of illegals coming into the US through Arizona already fell off dramatically. Illegals already in the state left.

But like I said, the Obama White House and the Justice Department will fight to the bitter end. So the Mexican business model of exporting their poor to the United States will continue for quite some time.

Don't get me wrong here. I do not begrudge the poor coming south for work. I think we need a guest worker program and a legal path to citizenship. But the unions have Obama in their pocket so that is never going to happen.

Date: 2010-07-30 04:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
I was fully booked, at the time I was disowned by my family, so I really didn't have alot of options on that phone call. I'm transsexual, so there was no legal recourse, it's not a recognized status in the state it happened in (Virginia). I talked to the ACLU, but they said there was absolutely no grounds to even try a lawsuit.

To this day the arrest record costs me jobs and promotions as it's a matter of public record.

Apparently being transsexual and walking down the street after a night class automatically makes you a prostitute, even if you're wearing jeans and a t-shirt like every other young adult in the country.

As for what happened to my uncle in Arizona that's making them move.

First, he had his wallet stolen.
Second, he was pulled over for DWB, they didn't give a reason.
Three, of course as his wallet was stolen they assumed he was an illegal, because he was brown.
Four, since he had lost all his identification, they had to same-day air/process a copy of his birth certificate from Virginia all the way to Arizona before they'd let him out. They didn't believe any of the identification his wife brought, or their marriage license etc. They required a birth cert. Refused to make any phone calls to verify anything, they only wanted paper docs.
Edited Date: 2010-07-30 05:40 pm (UTC)

Date: 2010-07-30 09:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
The ACLU is right, procedure was followed. The law allows you to communicate with the outside world. The does not require there be someone for you to communicate with. So none of that has any bearing on the Arizona law.

But there is something wrong here. Did you actually charged and went to court or were you kicked loose without charges? The problem I'm seeing is that an arrest record shouldn't be showing up on public record searches. We cannot even pull arrest records on a general search. We have to go to the specific agency(s) and ask. About half that time they won't release those records anyway unless there is a conviction to go with them.

People are arrested all the time, but not everyone is convicted. Those that are not convicted shouldn't have to explain away a false arrest. In many states that is the law as well.

Date: 2010-07-30 09:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
No charges were ever filed, but the arrest records still show if you dig deep enough, especially when they try to check for security clearances.

What about my uncle's case? That was *IN* Arizona.

Date: 2010-07-30 09:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
What about it? They followed procedure. I'm getting the impression you don't deal with law enforcement on a regular basis. They don't do anything on a phone call. It was a perfect storm for your uncle and I'm sorry for that. But without the paper work to prove who he was, let alone his citizenship, they weren't about to let him go.

I know it doesn't help mend angry feelings toward law enforcement. But you need to try to understand that law enforcement has heard every line you can think of and a lot you never even dreamed of more then once before. They simply are not going kick someone lose because that person or someone close to them says there is a mistake. Nor are they going to kick someone lose with out a paper trail documenting why they did it.

None of them wants to the be the officer that kicked the serial rapist/killer lose because someone on the other end of a phone said it was ok. (More then likely that someone will deny the call later.)

But again, none of this has anything to do with the Arizona law. You uncle was taken in to custody for some other reason. The immigration law was not in place and I am willing to bet a great deal he was being held for positive identification rather then proof of his citizenship.

Date: 2010-07-30 09:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
Um...his wife came by in person with the documents, she wasn't on the phone.
and did you read this case? http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2009/08/30/917007/nc-native-wrongly-deported-to.html

As for cops, no I do not trust them. I was assaulted in an attempted rape and they threatened to arrest me instead, because I was 'hysterical' and intoxicated as I stood there with my clothing ripped up and bleeding in several places.

See, they thought it was really funny that someone would try to rape a 'man'.
Edited Date: 2010-07-30 09:39 pm (UTC)

Date: 2010-07-31 12:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
Yes I read it. No question about it, the article you linked details a system gone awry. But I can't help but wonder if you read it. The article clearly states he told the ICE agent that he was Mexican.

I ignored that article because it has zero to do with the Arizona law. As near as I can tell, Lyttle never set foot in Arizona. If he had set foot there, it still wouldn't matter because the law was not in effect at this time.

It is too bad you feel that way about the police. They are not all bad. It is sad that the officers you dealt with are so narrow minded and dealt with you so badly. As a former paramedic, I can assure there is an enormous amount of gallows humor that goes with both both jobs. It is inexcusable these officers chose to drag out in front of you. That humor is a safety valve to be kept among the family. Without it many would crack up, maybe even suicide.

I spent a great deal of time working in New Orleans right after Katrina. I now know from personal experience what happens when you and everyone else knows that dialing 911 will no longer bring help. That gives you an entirely different view on police officers and what they really do for this society.

But none of this has any bearing on the Arizona Immigration law. There are going to be good cops, average cops and bad cops. The bad ones are going to be bad ones regardless of what laws are or are not on the books. The Arizona law is a good one and will in fact go a long way toward bridging the gap left by Federal dereliction of duty along the southern the border.

I'm beginning to repeat myself here so you get the last word. Thank you for the debate.

Date: 2010-07-31 03:51 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] finnkveldulfr.livejournal.com
Way too many police officers are hopped up a**holes with a badge on a power trip. There are way too many examples of bad cops in front of society every day. There are way too many ways for Law Enforcement officers to abuse the new Arizona law, and for all the good cops that may or may not exist in Arizona, there are going to be a lot of police officers out there who *ARE* going to abuse the law to the maximum extent. Your rose-colored glasses view of police isn't going to change that.

Furthermore-- hmmmmm.... guess I just didn't have my eyes open when I spent 3 months in SE Arizona (based at Ft Huachuca, but spent plenty of time out in the local communities-- Sierra Vista, Bisbee, Tombstone, etc-- VERY close to the US/Mexico border), but I just didn't see or hear about problems with illegal immigrants out there.

Date: 2010-07-30 04:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
Make that North. It seems I can't edit my posts here.

Date: 2010-07-29 01:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
Uh...not all of the law was struck down...

Date: 2010-07-29 01:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
I have family in Arizona, hispanic. They're having to leave the state because they are harassed at least once a week by the cops about being illegal. They're terrified to go anywhere and accidentally forget their wallet, because they'd be thrown in jail until otherwise proven. They can't even just take a random walk down the street without this shit happening. It's fucking ridiculous.

Date: 2010-07-29 03:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jaffa-tamarin.livejournal.com
I support eliminating national borders as an artificial restriction on where people are allowed to live and work.

Date: 2010-07-30 12:00 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
So you support a one world government and economy?

Date: 2010-07-30 03:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jaffa-tamarin.livejournal.com
One world government is not necessary. One world economy we already have.

Date: 2010-07-30 04:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
If the borders come down, we will end up with a one world government. If for no other reason then to ensure that one nation's legal substance doesn't migrate to another nation's population where it is considered illegal.

That brings us to the problem. Who's laws or what combination of laws do we want to follow?

We in the United States favor the US Constitution with the Bill of Rights. Predominantly Muslim countries following Sharia law aren't going to find that very palatable. Clearly the Chinese methods of criminal justice won't sit well here or in most of Europe.

So if we drop the borders and allow free travel anywhere, how do we in maintain our sovereignty and defend our borders?

Date: 2010-07-30 06:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jaffa-tamarin.livejournal.com
I have no objection to having border controls to enforce anti-smuggling laws, keep out potential threats, and track movement of people across national borders.

People living in the US would be expected to follow US law, obviously. People that wanted to live under Sharia law could move to a country that enforced it. And people that didn't, could leave those countries.

Would dictators like Saddam Hussein have been able to hold power for so long if the population they ruled was free to leave at any time?

Date: 2010-07-30 08:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
I got it now. We're on the same page. I thought you were coming from a different direction.

Alas, dictators like Sadam and Kim aren't going to let their subjects hit the road. If they did there wouldn't be anyone left to dictate to.

Date: 2010-07-29 03:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
Also, god forbid you look vaguely hispanic and be off your medications (Because immigration officials took it away from you when you were arrested).

You can even get deported when you are a US citizen to a country you don't even speak the language.


Date: 2010-07-29 04:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jurann.livejournal.com
I'll just point out that Obama is just one man, he's only been in office for 2 years, and he's been slowed down and stymied by right-wingers at every turn. I think he's making incredible progress given the challenges he faces, and he'll keep working on the immigration policy as time permits. This has been an issue for many, many years now, far before Obama took office, and it's not going to get corrected overnight. It's definitely a socialist/liberal issue and the conservatives are happy letting border-jumpers in to work jobs for below minimum wage - the more the merrier because the big pigs save a lot of expense by hiring illegals who have no morals, no standards, and are so desperate for money that they'll take any wage. I see THAT as the biggest issue, immigrants need to stand up for themselves and demand fair wages...

Date: 2010-07-30 06:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wolfwings.livejournal.com
Sorry, as I said above in my appology to [livejournal.com profile] pathia as well, I was rather emotional when I first wrote this post. And I was too busy at work the last two days to monitor this post or replies to it either.

The subject line was actually a play on several other posts that were far more negative about Obama, and I spun it into the opening of the article which grants it all an inappropriate tone.

Date: 2010-07-29 10:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] shepherdwolf.livejournal.com
So why doesn't your friend just immigrate illegally?

Date: 2010-07-30 06:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wolfwings.livejournal.com
Because he's law-abiding, that's kinda the real point of the original post when I wrote it. :-)

Date: 2010-07-29 10:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pistolpup.livejournal.com
It's sad that this happens, but it does. The paper work has to go through DHS now and it's harder to maintain sponsorship and work visas. He could re-apply for a visa if a company is willing to sponsor him. My friend at work can't get his family here because they won't give citizenship to his wife even though they are married and he's fathered kids with her. 12 grand later and 7 years of fighting it and he gave up. One day he'll rejoin his family. Our borders are not only locking out threats, but good people who can be productive to society.

The Arizona law is harsh. Out in Cali, theres a program on takeourjobs.com though for those willing to take jobs in fields that many illegals take. To date only a few (3 or 4 at the time it on TV) had even volunteered and worked in that program. For labor jobs that are rough conditions, lower pay, they will continue to attract folks from Mexico. If those jobs ever get taken by US citizens, then there would be fewer folks trying for them as illegals from the border. Many of the jobs aren't ones folks want to do. I heard the same arguments during the lay offs at the furniture factories in NC when I lived there. Folks that would complain how theres no jobs in that area, how the mexicans take them. I brought up how Tysons was hiring at 12 an hr and 300 bucks starting bonus. They laughed and said anyone would be nuts to work in chicken processing or farms. Folks do work those jobs, and make it happen. Mostly from the border. With tech jobs and higher labor jobs, its tough. I also see it from the side where there are fewer qualified folks showing up. Or a general disinterest in working hard at those jobs and sacrificing things to make a career move forward. Many of the folks on visas work harder and do well. It's just tough times though and expensive to bring them in.

Date: 2010-07-30 03:03 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] arcturax.livejournal.com
I see this happen way too often.

Date: 2010-07-30 05:33 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ruggels.livejournal.com
Sorry to see that as well.

But it's been part of the ideology of his party to reward failure, and punish success. He's just the last oen to be able to put it into practice as thoroughly as LBJ did int he past. Redistribution is wrong, and leads to evil. Leveling is an unsound principle as it is ultimately anti -freedom.

The Immigration question though is not one but both sides on this one. As the embattled Sheriff of Cochise county in AZ has said. "Why inst' it being taken care of? It's that the companies want cheap labor, and the Politicians want the Hispanic vote. I thought ti was obvious." I wish we had a policy similar to Canada's where getting in is easy if you have an education and job skills and your relatives aren't automatically added in. and illegals are deported. But its not because there are too many votes on either side.

But the thing thst I find most infuriating is the lack of respect for laws in this administration. eric Holder is the worst A.G. we have ever had. And this rule by decree, is not the way sthings should be, He's ruling agaisnt the will of the people. This article was an eye opener.


[livejournal.com profile] jaffa_tamarin is feeble minded to hold to such an idea, because that will jsut serve to bring the third world into our front yards, and end the U.S.

Sorry about your friend.


Date: 2010-07-31 12:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] uplinktruck.livejournal.com
Hey Wolfwings...

Just curious, how long does your friend have before he has to leave? What steps, if any, has he taken to remain? What kind of work does he do and is he eligible to be sponsored again?

Date: 2010-07-31 04:04 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] finnkveldulfr.livejournal.com
Thought I'd mention-- though it appears that you've already realized it-- a lot of the problems going on are NOT Obama's fault--

*Congress* has to enact the laws, budgets, etc-- Too many things concerning immigration and everything else require Congressional action, and/or are specifically powers of Congress-- no President, Obama or Bush or anyone else, can do this s*** while Congress stays locked up in partisan BS and Senatorial filibusters.

Date: 2010-07-31 07:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] changa.livejournal.com
If they were serious about slowing down illegals they would crack down on companies hiring them.


wolfwings: (Default)

July 2015

5678910 11

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 19th, 2019 10:34 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios