double post, sorry

I think I am not being clear. To LIE about drugs , someone must be ASKED about drugs. To Lie about citizenship, someone must be ASKED about citizenship.

Under what circumstances is it REASONABLE to inquire about drugs or citizenship

if everyone is going to be asked these questions, does it require a change to the laws so everyone must always carry proof of CITIZENSHIP(different than proof of identity) whether they are driving or merely RIDING in a vehicle?

thats the point,,,IT IS based upon how one looks

we can only SUSPECT by using our five senses, and from there we ask QUESTIONS based upon what those senses 'observe'

we SUSPECT drug use, because of what we SEE with our eyes the person doing or how we SEE AND HEAR them behaving

we SUSPECT anonymous criminal behavior because of HOW we see and hear a person behaving in response to interaction with a cop

but how do we come to SUSPECT , SPECIFICALLY, that someone does or does not have a document of citizenship?

If, the person is suspected of being an Illegal and has no ID or can't readily prove their status, bring 'em in.

If, it turns out they can prove Legal status, fine 'em for not carrying their MICA.

absolutely, but there is no way around the fact that to SUSPECT them of being illegal requires some visual assessment ,,,,,not of behavior as there is no SPECIFIC behavior that points to not having a document, but a visual assessment of some other sort


if the law included an amendment that all citizens under that jurisdiction must carry proof of citizenship at all times and that all 'routine' stops by police would require the question of drug possession AND the question of citizenship,, Id see it as less prejudicial

but that it is up to the police to determine who seems SUSPICIOUS ENOUGH to be required to have such id, makes it less than just in my opinion

and if this no big deal philosophy were truly believed by most who spew it (not including you of course) there would not be such an uproar about the patriot act or other 'infringements' upon privacy


if you have nothing to hide, seems to mostly apply when the someone in question is NOT the same someone insisting its no big deal

Most big cities have no-loitering laws.

If a group of folks are hanging out on a street corner or outside a home depot, cops have a right to check them out.

If someone gets pulled over and has no license or ID they could be detained.

The catch and release doesn't work.

They just move to somewhere else and start over. Or, buy another ID.

If a group of folks are hanging out on a street corner or outside a home depot, cops have a right to check them out.

If someone gets pulled over and has no license or ID they could be detained.



I agree with this, loitering is an offense in itself, but what questions should be asked at that point and to whom?

if there is a blonde haired blue eyed person in the group, will they also be asked to present proof of citizenship?



Having a license is required to drive as well. So I agree that this is valid interrogation of someone stopped in the drivers seat.

Ask them all for IDs.
The computers cops have in their cars will pull up a picture.
If it doesn't match, then there's concern.

The law in question was obviously aimed at Mexicans or Hispanics. There is no getting around that. If the law will hold up in the supreme court is still in question. But it is racially biased. There is no way you can argue that it's not.

How is it aimed at Mexicans/hispanics? The law can be applied to any illegal alien of any color.

Mexican + no ID + barely (or doesn't) speak English.

That would be the tip off for me.

What about having an accent?

It just makes it that much easier to racially profile someone just because they are non asian. What I am saying is that its not a big deal. I am sorry but if our biggest immigration problem is with Mexico then we are obviously going to target people that look mexican with our immigration efforts. If you are of Mexican decent and legal sure it might be slightly annoying to have to prove your citizenship but its only a slight annoyance. With how many jobs and how much tax dollars we lose to illegal immigration you would think people would want to knuckle down, fix the problem, and then move on.

Anytime I get pulled I must produce ID, anytime I check out a book at either the school or public library I have to produce a card with my name on it, in order to get the card I have to show ID so I don't see what the big deal is.

And for the record the United States (all states) have a right to know who is here, why should we be the only country to not enforce immigration laws? If there is an immigration law on the books it needs to be enforced, had the feds done their job instead of looking the other way while a campaign contribution was handed out Arizona wouldn't have done this.

which accent, southern? proper? urban? latina? in a country with so many cultures, when did everyone start speaking with the same 'accent' and why should we start expecting them to...

I can tell you many situations when I dont have my id(and am not required to)

when Im not planning to purchase anything that requires me to be a certain age

when Im not planning to drive a vehicle which requires me to be a certain age

when Im not 'borrowing, financing, or renting' someone elses property for which I have to provide some guarantee of where they can retrieve it

in other words, if I am a PASSENGER in a car, I dont have to have ID and I dont carry it

If I am going somewhere to buy food where I will use cash, I dont have to have an ID and dont carry it

IF I am taking a walk around my neighborhood or just WINDOW shopping at a store, I dont have to carry an ID and I dont


the bottom line is its not a 'big deal' until you are the one treated suspect MERELY on some physical trait that you have NOTHING to do with

I agree that we should know who is in our home, I want to know who is in mine and each country should be granted a right to know who is in theirs,,,,no argument there

The accent is based on what the typical offender has.
If you are looking for illegal Mexicans then you are not going to question someone with a British accent.

A southern accent is an American accent, most Americans recognize American accents. Obviously they would question foreign accents.

I will tell you you are right if you can tell me how we can identify an illegal alien on sight without being racially or ethnically biased.

The law states they suspect a person of being illegal. How do you do that without being discrimatory?