I really really wanted to keep this off topic for a while but it has been killing me to release my opinion unto the blogging world. That's right, I said opinion. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on their views or anything, I'm just giving my own opinion. Now that my disclaimer is out of the way, let me start.....
I wasn't really upset about the right wing talking crap about how other people are interpreting this law, but if you push something negative and mostly untrue, then you are going to get a response, most likely hostile because you are speaking for a whole group based on a couple of people's responses, which is ironic since this law is said to be based off of racial profiling, or stereotyping someone and conservatives are saying this is not the case with the bill and that it's just enforcing laws that have been in place for decades.
Have I read this law? Have I read 10 pages of some of the most controversial legislation in the U.S.? Damn right I did, after all it's only 10 pages. Did I read and watch news/YouTube videos/blogs on the subject before I read it? Yes. Most of what I read is a pretty good summary of the actual bill. I read it as part of this blog. I want to answer the question before you ask it, since that's the first thing the majority of people ask on opponents of the bill.
First of all I agree with the bill on the majority of its parts. Shocker huh? I'm not going to argue that if you are here illegally and are caught you should be brought back to country of origin. The thing that irks me the most about this bill, and why I think it's so controversial is Sec. 2 Title 11, Chapter 7, Article 8, Paragraph E. Here is word for word what it says:
"E. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITHOUT A WARRANT, MAY ARREST A PERSON IF THE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON HAS COMMITTED ANY PUBLIC OFFENSE THAT MAKES THE PERSON REMOVABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES."
Tricky writing huh? Who is to say what probable cause is? Sure, some people out there will say that the law is the law and any law should be enforced, even the "don't dance on Wednesdays while wearing hiking boots and riding a horse backwards". Granted that is made up, but if you Google "bizarre U.S. laws" you will see some really crazy laws out there. I'm definitely not inclined to believe everything I read but when 1 site after another is posting these laws, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Before I stray too far away from the point I'm trying to make, according to numerous websites, there is a law in New Jersey that makes it "illegal to frown at a police officer". I never lived in New Jersey but I can definitely seeing this be a real law, not only to promote positive attitudes toward police, but as I would call it, it's a B.S. law. A law out there to say, "okay, they frowned at me and I know it's illegal, so let's detain them to see if they have anything on them that they shouldn't have".
Since that is New Jersey and this law in question is in Arizona, let's look at some of the dumb laws in Arizona, according to multiple websites. I am not going to find the actual text in the legislation, and if these laws are not indeed true, consider it an example like my backwards horse riding, hiking boots on Wednesdays law. According to the site
(it has a disclaimer on top in case you are too busy to copy and paste the link that says "I'm sure that each of these laws served some sort of purpose when they were made, but now we can all look back at them and say, "What the heck were they thinking?"
The laws look like they were taken from other sites because most of the different sites have similar text and order of law. With that being said here's an example of supposed "bizarre laws"
-In Glendale, it is illegal to drive a car in reverse.
-In Nogales, it is illegal to wear suspenders.
-In Tucson, it is illegal for women to wear pants.
I'm pretty sure some of these had to be amended and may not exist anymore, or they still may be active. Either way, if the officer that detains a person for driving in reverse or for wearing suspenders, they better be pulling everyone over that does a California stop through a stop sign, 1 mile per hour over the speed limit, and any other law that is broken. I can imagine that even, or maybe especially small towns, cops nitpick at everything. Hell, I was pulled over and issued a ticket for windows that were tinted.
My point is that an officer, under this law, can basically detain you for anything. If it just rained and the roads are a little slick and you accidentally spin your tires, you can get pulled over for reckless driving and must prove your status. If you are walking and cross the street in front of a cop and go outside the said designated white walking lines, you can be detained for jaywalking. There's no limit and it's your word against the cops.
The reason that this law makes people cringe and shout about racial profiling is because there's no reason not to believe that it's not going to happen. You are begging for it to happen and the AZ government thinks this is the right way about going on immigration reform.
There are a lot of Spanish speaking, ESL legal resident aliens and citizens all over the country. My opposition of this law is that these legal residents are going to be the target in AZ. I think more Hispanic people will be the target for police investigations based on this law and there's not much anyone can do about it. You must prove you are a legal resident of the U.S. or else.
I spent way too much time on this particular blog and I don't want to make it seem like I'm trying to persuade anyone from their beliefs. If you believe this law is just then great, if not, then that's great too. The following video is pretty interesting. If you just skipped ahead without reading the entire post, at least watch the video. I'm not saying that widespread panic of whites versus mexicans is going to happen, but this happening already is going to put more of a strain on white peoples relationship with everyone else.