Feds: Yeah, Joe Arpaio is kind of a dick

[NiggaFromHarlem]

Doesn't sound like anyone was arrested.

Doesn't sound like you read the article, actually. You must have missed the part about unconstitutional stops, detainments, and arrests. To be fair though the article above was sort of unclear.

The DOJ press release is a bit more explicit:

http://www.justice.gov/crt/opa/pr/sp...ch-111215.html

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

And what "specific and articulable facts" constitute reasonable suspicion should've been codified into the law so that it's not up for extremely broad interpretation by redneck asshole sheriffs.

As long as racial profiling isn't a part of it, why does it matter?

[archibaldcrane]

As long as racial profiling isn't a part of it, why does it matter?

Because this is america, and "carrying papers" isn't part of being a legal resident. If that's part of it, it still matters to me.

[Yuri-G]

These seem to be the key paragraphs to me since they outline specifically what he did.

"The civil rights report said federal authorities will continue to investigate complaints of deputies using excessive force against Latinos, whether the sheriff's office failed to provide adequately police services in Hispanic communities and a large number of sex-crimes cases that were assigned to the agency but weren't followed up on or investigated at all.

The report took the sheriff's office to task for launching immigration patrols, known as "sweeps," based on complaints that Latinos were merely gathering near a business without committing crimes. Federal authorities single out Arpaio himself and said his office, known as MCSO, has no clear policies to guard against the violations, even after he changed some of his top aides earlier this year."

Notice anything about the first paragraph? He didn't do anything wrong, they'll just keep investigating.
Notice anything about the 2nd paragraph? He didn't take any action, he just sent out patrols. Doesn't sound like anyone was arrested.

Where's the Latino abuse?

I said a pattern of racial profiling and discrimination has been established, and whether or not that was the intent of the law, that is what is happening. you replied with some bullshit that makes no sense, such as "he's being investigated for all sorts of abuse - but he didn't do anything wrong" and "he's sending out patrols to investigate Latinos solely based on their skin color - but he didn't actually take action himself." good job.

I apologize, but it is so hard to reply to you in a calm and rational manner when you pull out shit like that.

[Lestat]

exactly. he is profiling, and profiling is illegal, whether it works or not.

.......doesnt answer the question and as usual only ignores the problem which if not solved will only get worse, but hey if feelings can be saved who am i to judge?

[Yuri-G]

.......doesnt answer the question and as usual only ignores the problem which if not solved will only get worse, but hey if feelings can be saved who am i to judge?

racial. profiling. is. illegal. if you don't like it, work to get the law changed. until then, what they are doing is illegal. whether you think it's ethical or not is another story entirely and I've already stated that as long as you are not hypocritical about being treated the same way yourself, I can't fault you for it.

[Headspace]

So wait, legal Americans should be discriminated against because there are so many illegal aliens?

GREATER GOOD GREATER GOOD

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Because this is america, and "carrying papers" isn't part of being a legal resident. If that's part of it, it still matters to me.

Actually it is. The Fed just doesn't enforce it. And unfortunately, you will never be happy with any immigration law.

[Jonny]

Since when did i say all people with brown skin cannot speak english? Sure half the state is a bit much but trust me its not far off. I live here, i think i would know better then most, im sure jonny could attest to this.

how is %29 half? also in response to your knee jerk reactions on crime and kidnappings i have these for you.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2011-02-17/news/news/
they were GREATLY exaggerating the numbers and if any kidnappings were happening by Illegal immigrants its the Coyotes doing it to people that pay to come over (so not your precious little white children).

and on Crime... and this is before SB1070
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/22/eveningnews/main6703953.shtml

[Lestat]

racial. profiling. is. illegal. if you don't like it, work to get the law changed. until then, what they are doing is illegal. whether you think it's ethical or not is another story entirely and I've already stated that as long as you are not hypocritical about being treated the same way yourself, I can't fault you for it.

Illegal. Immigration. is. illegal. do something about it.

i'm not saying profiling is ok but it is nearly impossible if not at all impossible to call out racism when trying to detain a mexican.

I keep saying to come up with something that can persecute Illegal immigrants which solves everyones problems? For some reason people seem to throw away the notion that the illegal immigration law was made only to harm and not there to help those from being used and abused which by the way was rampant until a recent law that severely punished businesses that hired illegals.

[Jonny]

Actually it is. The Fed just doesn't enforce it. And unfortunately, you will never be happy with any immigration law.

pre 2000 era "making shit tons of money because of cheap labor YEAH!"

financial meltdown "fuck lets find someone to blame! the IMMIGRANTS!"
idk man sounds kinda like Nazi era Germany to me.

[archibaldcrane]

Actually it is. The Fed just doesn't enforce it. And unfortunately, you will never be happy with any immigration law.

If this law specified what reasonable suspicion of breaking immigration laws are, and at the same time aggressive racial profilers like Arpaio were treated like the criminals they are, I wouldn't have a problem with this immigration law. So don't fucking tell me what I won't be happy with.

And if you're going to say "Actually it is. The Fed just doesn't enforce it." regarding carrying citizenship papers, you'd better sauce that for me.

[Jonny]

us brown people are the only ones that break laws duh

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

If this law specified what reasonable suspicion of breaking immigration laws are, and at the same time aggressive racial profilers like Arpaio were treated like the criminals they are, I wouldn't have a problem with this immigration law. So don't fucking tell me what I won't be happy with.

And if you're going to say "Actually it is. The Fed just doesn't enforce it." regarding carrying citizenship papers, you'd better sauce that for me.

I read that at the time this law was being debated before it was passed. My best guess as to where I read that is here. http://volokh.com/ If it's not there, maybe it's googlable.

And I don't know how you can quantify RS archi. My best guess would be to do what the governor/legislature did and simply say what isn't. So maybe they could just say, skin color and lack of papers can't be considered RS.

[hey]

99% sure there is no federal requirement to carry ID. Some states require it, others don't.

[archibaldcrane]

I read that at the time this law was being debated before it was passed. My best guess as to where I read that is here. http://volokh.com/ If it's not there, maybe it's googlable.

And I don't know how you can quantify RS archi. My best guess would be to do what the governor/legislature did and simply say what isn't. So maybe they could just say, skin color and lack of papers can't be considered RS.

What if those papers are a "lack of drivers license while operating a vehicle" - that is common behavior of illegals. How about "not speaking english?" Also common, and not race/papers issue. It really shouldn't be that hard to delineate and advertise "what behavior will get you flagged"?

[archibaldcrane]

99% sure there is no federal requirement to carry ID. Some states require it, others don't.

pretty sure that this isn't true either.

[hey]

pretty sure that this isn't true either.

You're right. I was thinking of requirements to identify yourself to a cop, which is required in some states, and others you can refuse. My mistake.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Well, if I'm right or wrong, I remember talking about it in the original thread, so the answer will be there.

[Lestat]

how is %29 half? also in response to your knee jerk reactions on crime and kidnappings i have these for you.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2011-02-17/news/news/
they were GREATLY exaggerating the numbers and if any kidnappings were happening by Illegal immigrants its the Coyotes doing it to people that pay to come over (so not your precious little white children).

and on Crime... and this is before SB1070
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/22/eveningnews/main6703953.shtml

This is from your phoenixnewtimes link

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2011-02-17/news/news/

"Phoenix police reported 358 kidnapping calls during 2008"

" However, of the 264 available police reports reviewed by New Times, 64 had discernible ties to human smuggling and kidnapping. This means that Phoenix was dealing with Mexican-style kidnap-for-ransom cases an average of once a week, not daily."

That's in one year! Even after that ONE YEAR was reviewed back in 2008 about once a week in kidnappings is still really bad.

So this one year is your stance that all is ok with Arizona? Not even going to try for statistics in the past decade? How about before they made tougher laws

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6703953.shtml

You do realize there has been more then one law to prevent crime before SB1070 yes yes even before the year 2000 to help curb crime.

As for your precious little white children statement, i'm sure you already know this but your a fucking racist.