I'm thinking the distinction will be lost on someone it happens to. In this particular government, according to the document that set it all up, we are secure in our homes and persons against unreasonable search and seizure, and that includes jackbooted thugs demanding our identity papers for whatever reason.

Is it really a bad law? It addresses a need and might shake up congress to come up with a real immigration law.



With over 50% of the illegal immigrants coming from Mexico and another quarter from Latin America, we need control over who comes in. Our nation is flooded with lower skilled workers.

A NYTimes editorial observes that:


Our southern neighbor is not very open about the USA dumping it's citizens SOB. To stay for extended lengths of time you have to prove that you have a minimum of $1200 a month being deposited in a bank. If you cannot meet that requirement you must cross the border every six months and then return. You cannot expect free medical, free schooling or even the right to compete for jobs unless you are a higher-skilled applicant.

I live amongst these people. They are wonderful and their government has a more realistic immigration plan than the USA.

Arizona's laws are passed because the USA refuses to do its job and keep our borders safe and control immigration. They are hardly bad laws if they force the US and congress to do their jobs.

But the AZ law isn't limited to border issues. While white people will probably get far less scrutiny than any brown person, under AZ law, a European naturalized citizen who still has an accent could be arrested while visiting the Grand Canyon. My Norwegian-born dad could have been arrested while traveling through AZ because he never lost his accent even though he became a citizen in '55 (give or take a year). Ridiculous!

And if someone heard him speak, called the police to have him investigated, and the police failed to respond or failed to arrest, this person can sue that police department. Even more ridiculous!

This law has nothing to do with border patrol. It is all about making harassing people legal.

You are wrong. This just gives police the means to question people who may be here illegally. Armed illegals who are part of the cartels are killing people in the US now and they are getting bolder. I wouldn't live in a border town in the US or in Mexico. This is going to get horrible unless we find a way to fix it.

On the state level what is Arizona to do? They haven't the means to patrol the borders. The only thing they can do is identify a suspected group which, in the cartel case, just happens to be Hispanic. They repeat over and over again that it will not be wholesale racial profiling. They sure as heck can question a group of possible illegals that appear to be very well off with no visible means of supporting themselves and ask to see if they are here legally. I would think that is a pretty valuable tool in crime prevention.

I don't think migrant workers are the target here.

There's a simple way to fix it - end prohibition.

You really do seem to have a sky is falling attitude.

The cartels have taken on the Mexican government. Why not the USA? The border patrols are becoming nothing but combat soldiers who are often outgunned.

You kill a policeman and it becomes pretty easy to shoot another. That is what is coming across the border besides drugs - the attitude that they are more powerful than the law.

Do you want to buy some cheap properties on the US side of the border? They are going to be plenty available.



Agreed. The reality is that the government cannot even sign off on medical marijuana. If drug legalization is going to happen it is years and years away.

I was referring to your notions on a variety of issues (i.e. the economy, the state of our public discourse, and etc).

The violence in Mexico is primarily directed at those involved in organized crime, including many of the police officers who have been killed. The violence is attributable to Calderon's decision to crack down. The same phenomena occurred in Colombia and in the USA during prohibition.

The Miami Herald carried a report in late April entitled "Study links drug enforcement to more violence".

No, what it does is violate the Constitution.

Arizona wants to do more to prevent illegal immigration, good on them. Let them find a way to do it that is not a direct violation of the Bill of Rights.

So far as I understand the AZ law, it seems there is just no way that it will not invite ethnic profiling and put police officers in a tough position between two causes of legal actions aimed against them. One for not enforcing the ridiculous law and the other for profiling.

It's just a really ignorant piece of legislation.

The upside to the legislation, though, is that the republican party continues to alienate Hispanic voters.

As Ron Brownstein, of the National Journal, observes.

I have read similar reports but that statement always brings the question to mind, "If we give in to people who threaten violence if we don't give them what they want, what is law enforcement about?"