That would be racial profiling which is against the law. The new anti-illegal immigration law in Arizona doesn't change that. You and those who marked you "insightful" should read it. It's not long.
Sigh. And you apparently didn't read my posts. I know that is what the law says. That is not what is done in practice. Stop simply reading words on a page and try looking at actual reality for a change. I know that might mean you have to leave your mom's basement, but we all must make sacrifices in the pursuit of facts.
Actually, the cops are in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. If they racially profile, they will likely be sued for that. If Arizona citizens don't think they are getting rid of illegals as well as they should, then Arizona citizens can sue the police. It's terrible legislation.
And I still want to know, why are they not simply going after the businesses that hire illegal immigrants? If you don't want illegal immigrants in the country stop hiring them!
Would it be racist if, say a cop pulled someone over for speeding, and they couldn't produce a Driver's License, and couldn't speak English to say... you know.... prove who they were before being let go?
You're right. In this case, it certainly would not be racist to make someone in this situation prove who they were. But you are forgetting a few important things. There are illegals who fit that description who are also Asian or White. One Latino guy in Arizona (I wish I still had the link) who speaks English fine and had a valid state-issued commercial driver's license was arrested in Arizona because the officer still wasn't satisfied and demanded to see the guy's birth certificate right then and there. They are also getting stopped basically because they are brown. The "broken tail light" is generally just an excuse, and it is amazing how high a percentage of the people stopped for a "broken tail light" are Latino. Do you still not see the problem???
I know, it probably is racist to expect people learn to speak English, like all the Germans, Italians and Chinese before them had to do.
Where the hell did I say anything like that? You sure are full of unfounded assumptions aren't you! My wife had to learn English, and I have aunts and uncles who had to learn English to live here. I have no problem with that. Stop making this a fake two-sided issue.
On top of that, you haven't answered the more important question - why are we not aggressively pursuing the businesses that hire illegals and fining them to the point where it is not worth their while to hire them? Most illegals come here for jobs. If there are no jobs, there will be very few illegals that we have to track down and deport.
Can you breakdown the percentage of people here illegally by geographic origins for me without making it "racial"
It would not be racist if the majority of the people actually deported were Latinos. However, it *is* racist when you are arresting a bunch of people for possibly being illegal immigrants simply because they have brown skin. Basically, what you wind up with, is a situation in which any American, even those with brown skin has to worry about being randomly arrested and harassed.
Or, how would you like it if the police/FBI/etc started randomly arresting white gun owners since violent militia groups are overwhelmingly composed of white gun owners? Do you really not see the problem here?
Besides, there are other non-racist ways to go about combating illegal immigration. You could, for example, go after the companies that hire illegal immigrants. You could make the fines for hiring illegals so high that it is not worth the risk for them to do so. But, no, not in America. We can't go after businesses that do illegal things! That would be un-American!
Well, the immigration law specifically PROHIBITS stopping anyone based on skin color.
While technically the law does prohibit it, racial profiling is what is actually happening (you know, this whole "reality" thing you may have heard of). Hell, they even arrested a guy on suspicion of being an illegal immigrant because he didn't have his *birth certificate* on him. He had a CDL and everything, but that wasn't enough for the authorities.
[the murdoch media like to call this the coalition of the defeated but aslong as i get my electoral reform i don't give a shit]
Looks like what we really need then is a hanged Murdoch rather than a hanged Parliament. If you guys could take care of that, we in the US would be ever so grateful.
Don't forget that the biggest spokesman for AGW, old Al Gore himself, has set himself up to be a carbon billionaire [telegraph.co.uk] and while he tell everyone else to use public transport he flies around in his own private LEAR JET which he has the 500 pound brass balls to say is "carbon neutral" because he pays HIMSELF carbon credits!
So what? All that means is that Al Gore is a pile of shit. That does not have one thing to do with whether man-made global warming is true.
It's embarrassing to me (as a non-climatologist scientist) that a lot of environmentalists (for lack of a better term) are approaching the situation no better than the global warming denialists.
Well, in terms of the public debate, this is really the problem. People are arguing about what Rush Limbaugh and Al Gore are arguing about global warming. It does not matter one whit what either of these idiots think about global warming. What matters are the actual facts and the actual science. Everything else is just mouth-breathers vibrating the wind.
Now I'm not saying the science haters are secretly lizard aliens trying to steal our water and eat our children. But why haven't they denied it? Makes one wonder...
Okay, then I'll say it. The heads of creationist organizations and anti-AGW organizations are secretly lizard aliens trying to steal our water and eat our children. I mean, look at people like Pat Robertson, Laura Bush, and Rush Limbaugh. Don't you think they would devour your children? Hell, how do you think Rush Limbaugh got so fat in the first place? He only slimmed down later because child sacrifice and cannibalism interfered with his Oxycotin habit.
All these ridiculous denials of basic scientific principles reminds me of the Flat Earth Society. It's interesting to read about them because, no matter how much evidence was accumulated, they could always fashion some reason why the Earth was flat and the evidence was misunderstood. Hell, even when satellite images showed a round Earth, Shenton (FES head) remarked: "It's easy to see how a photograph like that could fool the untrained eye."
We have essentially the same thing today. No matter how much evidence is shown for evolution, anthropogenic global warming, and so on, the fundamentalist wackos will rail against it and find some rationale for continuing in their thoroughly disproved ideas. About 25% of the American public cannot in any way be convinced, no matter how much evidence is shown them. These are the same people who think Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, and who still believe Obama is a Kenyan citizen and George W Bush actually cares about them and their Christian religion.
If any fossilized life they find their has the same four nucleotides in its dna sequence (assuming anything like DNA can be recovered), then it is far more likely that the fossils are from Earth and have contaminated the sample. If, however, some sort of dna material can be obtained and there are different base nucleotides, then we have a winner.
For large lectures (>50 people) that are predominantly slides or talking, I never got anything out of them. For some classes I got better grades sitting at home and reading the book during that period. Reading, for me at least, was more engaging than trying to absorb information through osmosis.
Or at the very least, for classes that size, there really is no difference between physically attending the lecture and just watching a video recording of it. Interaction is the key difference between distance learning and in-class lecture. If there is no interaction, there is no difference.
Did he figure out the name of Obama's first pet, where he went to school, his first job, his mother's maiden name, or what? All of those things have got to be fairly easy to work out.
You mean, people put honest answers in those fields??? [boggles]
Daedalus flew too close to the sun, melted his wings, and died.
His father, Icarus, the creator of the wings, then landed and never flew again in mourning over his son, who's death Icarus was in part responsible for.
Was that before or after Laius killed Oedipus and married Jocasta?
It's almost certain that you haven't read the law, since drivers licenses are specifically listed as being documents that prove you aren't here unlawfully.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I remember the last time I got a substantial judgment when a murderer-for-hire killed me.
Dumbass.
Holy shit! You mean, that wasn't a "to do" list?
Sigh. And you apparently didn't read my posts. I know that is what the law says. That is not what is done in practice. Stop simply reading words on a page and try looking at actual reality for a change. I know that might mean you have to leave your mom's basement, but we all must make sacrifices in the pursuit of facts.
And I still want to know, why are they not simply going after the businesses that hire illegal immigrants? If you don't want illegal immigrants in the country stop hiring them!
You're right. In this case, it certainly would not be racist to make someone in this situation prove who they were. But you are forgetting a few important things. There are illegals who fit that description who are also Asian or White. One Latino guy in Arizona (I wish I still had the link) who speaks English fine and had a valid state-issued commercial driver's license was arrested in Arizona because the officer still wasn't satisfied and demanded to see the guy's birth certificate right then and there. They are also getting stopped basically because they are brown. The "broken tail light" is generally just an excuse, and it is amazing how high a percentage of the people stopped for a "broken tail light" are Latino. Do you still not see the problem???
Where the hell did I say anything like that? You sure are full of unfounded assumptions aren't you! My wife had to learn English, and I have aunts and uncles who had to learn English to live here. I have no problem with that. Stop making this a fake two-sided issue.
On top of that, you haven't answered the more important question - why are we not aggressively pursuing the businesses that hire illegals and fining them to the point where it is not worth their while to hire them? Most illegals come here for jobs. If there are no jobs, there will be very few illegals that we have to track down and deport.
It would not be racist if the majority of the people actually deported were Latinos. However, it *is* racist when you are arresting a bunch of people for possibly being illegal immigrants simply because they have brown skin. Basically, what you wind up with, is a situation in which any American, even those with brown skin has to worry about being randomly arrested and harassed.
Or, how would you like it if the police/FBI/etc started randomly arresting white gun owners since violent militia groups are overwhelmingly composed of white gun owners? Do you really not see the problem here?
Besides, there are other non-racist ways to go about combating illegal immigration. You could, for example, go after the companies that hire illegal immigrants. You could make the fines for hiring illegals so high that it is not worth the risk for them to do so. But, no, not in America. We can't go after businesses that do illegal things! That would be un-American!
...even an alcoholic knows excessive drinking is bad for you.
While technically the law does prohibit it, racial profiling is what is actually happening (you know, this whole "reality" thing you may have heard of). Hell, they even arrested a guy on suspicion of being an illegal immigrant because he didn't have his *birth certificate* on him. He had a CDL and everything, but that wasn't enough for the authorities.
We're still having to clean up his mess. Besides, you assholes are *still* complaining about Clinton and even Carter! So please, STFU.
Looks like what we really need then is a hanged Murdoch rather than a hanged Parliament. If you guys could take care of that, we in the US would be ever so grateful.
So what? All that means is that Al Gore is a pile of shit. That does not have one thing to do with whether man-made global warming is true.
Not to mention the damage it is doing to our precious bodily fluids!
Hmmm... Mine too, it would seem ^_^
Well, in terms of the public debate, this is really the problem. People are arguing about what Rush Limbaugh and Al Gore are arguing about global warming. It does not matter one whit what either of these idiots think about global warming. What matters are the actual facts and the actual science. Everything else is just mouth-breathers vibrating the wind.
Okay, then I'll say it. The heads of creationist organizations and anti-AGW organizations are secretly lizard aliens trying to steal our water and eat our children. I mean, look at people like Pat Robertson, Laura Bush, and Rush Limbaugh. Don't you think they would devour your children? Hell, how do you think Rush Limbaugh got so fat in the first place? He only slimmed down later because child sacrifice and cannibalism interfered with his Oxycotin habit.
We have essentially the same thing today. No matter how much evidence is shown for evolution, anthropogenic global warming, and so on, the fundamentalist wackos will rail against it and find some rationale for continuing in their thoroughly disproved ideas. About 25% of the American public cannot in any way be convinced, no matter how much evidence is shown them. These are the same people who think Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, and who still believe Obama is a Kenyan citizen and George W Bush actually cares about them and their Christian religion.
If any fossilized life they find their has the same four nucleotides in its dna sequence (assuming anything like DNA can be recovered), then it is far more likely that the fossils are from Earth and have contaminated the sample. If, however, some sort of dna material can be obtained and there are different base nucleotides, then we have a winner.
Or at the very least, for classes that size, there really is no difference between physically attending the lecture and just watching a video recording of it. Interaction is the key difference between distance learning and in-class lecture. If there is no interaction, there is no difference.
FTFY.
You mean, people put honest answers in those fields??? [boggles]
Followed, of course, by Bill Gates with a bathroom plunger exclaiming: "Exterminate! Exterminate! EXTERMINATE!"
Maybe I just need some sleep...
FTFY.
Was that before or after Laius killed Oedipus and married Jocasta?
Not even just protestants, but a very narrow, crazed faction of protestants. Lutherans, for example, are fairly rational.
Except that, in actual practice (I know how much you right-wing-nuts hate facts) police have demanded not only a license, but an actual birth certificate on-the-spot.
Unfortunately, the case is being held up in a Norwegian court. In other words, it's pining for the fjords!