Pixiq

It seems to me that this particular clutch of protesters are using the very tactics that they think this law provides for.

The lady in this video is challenging another person in a public place because she doesn’t want him there, and calls to her friends to back her up.

Yet, she is protesting a law that would allow cops to do the same thing?
Rob´s last blog ..Animals Of Africa

Their cause loses a lot of p0ints with me over stuff like this. Latino protesters have a long history of peaceful (and effective) protests. Putting it in perspective, it was only one person.

If the government wanted a riot, they’d do what they normally do… plant a few ‘troublemakers’ in the crowd and then crack down on the protesters.

The purpose of a protest is to be seen and heard by those who matter and a demonstrate your message and numbers. It’s counteractive to tell media that it can’t show or lend voice to that message. If you want legitimacy, then you have to be able to show that you are legitimate, or capable thereof.

If they’re here illegally, they should be sent home. Plain and simple. Even as a staunch libertarian, a country must protect its borders. I can see having an open border agreement with another libertarian country (if we were one) but not with an otherwise socialist country. Even so, I might be willing to support open borders if our government did provide so much incentive for people to come here illegally from other countries. The government takes money from you and I and gives it to people who jumped the line and are not authorized to be here. I blame our own government for the problem, but that doesn’t excuse the crime of being here illegally. Having spent the better part of the last year down here in Sinaloa, Mexico, I see first hand what socialism and corruption has done to this otherwise wonderful country. Unfortunately, massive amounts of people from one such country will surely push their new home country in the same direction. Look at how the people of Washington and Colorado complained when people from liberal California moved to those areas and destroyed the more conservative values of those places. Now they are two liberal bulwarks. Mass migration will change a place. And we are NOT becoming more liberty minded at all.

1. The government needs to do its job and stop offering these people incentives.
2. The people that are here illegally, need to go home and wait their turn and come here when they are allowed.

I’d like some good documentation of ‘troublemakers’ being planted into a protest to provide an excuse for the police to crack down. I’d REALLY like some documentation showing that is what the “usually” do.

Even worse, here in Iowa we have a candidate for gov who just stated he is for microchipping imigrants like we do dogs and cats.

I don’t really support the law, but as a libertarian, I know why Arizona wants it. What I would propose is this: Arizona should stop providing _any_ government services to illegals, and refer them all to the nearest federal building. If an illegal alien commits a crime, they should take them to the offices of the FBI and leave them there for them to deal with. Basically, dump everything on the feds, since they constantly claim only _they_ are responsible for immigration. Then, when it comes to serving illegals at the ER, the hospitals of the state should band together and file a lawsuit against the federal government to recoup costs associated with treating illegal immigrants, or transport them all to the local VA hospital.

Mexicans in AZ fall into two categories. Hated, and hated and needed. Oh, and criminal or future criminal.

Crime by Mexicans in AZ is epidemic and fearful. And that anyone thinks this should be tolerated within our borders is simply carrying liberal sentiments much too far.

The animals need to be stopped and the people of AZ deserve to have their State free of the craziness that Mexican illegals bring there.

It’s a harsh law I agree, but the Mexicans aren’t exactly using rubber knives and fake bullets in the streets of every AZ town they can infiltrate.

I don’t know what the big deal is about showing a birth certificate. If you were born here, you should be proud of it. Even the President of the United States shows his birth certificate. Well, maybe not him, but most of the rest of us.

Stevo, in which pocket do you carry your birth certificate?

Unbelievable. Many likely illegally here demanding their non-given rights by the constitution (as potential illegals) confronting a man who is totally within the law and protected by the constitution in filming.

Yes, they want their likely not protected freedom of speech, but want to cease that of one who likely has his freedom of speech protected under the constitution of his country.

Regardless of who is and who is not a citizen, this group wants it’s first amendment rights and wants to suppress that of a member of the media or that of a private citizen exercising his freedom of speech.

This was akin to the illegal immigrant protests where they carried Mexican flags while asking to be accepted as citizens.

Agreed. Illegal immigrants should NOT have rights within this country, and should have their asses sent back home. I support immigrant rights, but only when those immigrants go through the proper channels to come here legally. If I need a passport (or Nexus card) to go to Mexico and Canada, they need to have one to come into the United States plain and simple. Close the border to illegals.
Rance´s last blog ..BinaryGravy: RT @technologynew: Zo Personal subwoofer promises 12-inch sub performance in an iPod nano-size package http://bit.ly/aDkoc6

I challenge your self-description as a “staunch libertarian.” You are clearly a more staunch statist.

What makes you a “staunch Libertarian”?! Clearly you support violence against other people.

I’m not hispanic, though I have been mistaken for being hispanic. I carry a wallet sized passport card for myself and my daughter. I go anywhere I please. You should look into it. It is just as good as carrying a birth certificate, though if you lose it, much less likely to be used for identity theft.
Rance´s last blog ..BinaryGravy: RT @technologynew: Zo Personal subwoofer promises 12-inch sub performance in an iPod nano-size package http://bit.ly/aDkoc6

First off, where in the constitution does it say that the rights outlined in it do not apply to non-citizens? The rights are not GIVEN by the constitution, as it is not a magic piece of paper. it simply puts in print the rights all humans have regardless of geography.

What’s up with all of these statists and other assorted “law and order” types classifying themselves as “libertarian”? Is it trendy now?

Believe me, anyone who advocates using violence against peaceful people cannot be a libertarian. Yes, rounding up “illegals” and “dumping” them somewhere is a violent act.

It’s this assumption that every Latino who protests this is an illegal that exposes your ignorance. And why is the Mexican flag offensive to you? On St. Patrick’s Day, there sure are a lot of Irish flags. On Columbus Day, you might see a lot of Italian flags. On Dyngus Day, there are a lot of Polish flags. But nobody is questioning them for being proud of their ethnic heritage.

Note: Dyngus Day is probably unheard of outside of the Northern Midwest.

Minor nitpick: it is the North American Free Trade Agreement, not Atlantic

Harassment and assault… on video to boot. Instigating? Lol, you gotta love it. Seems the only thing these people were afraid of was their pictures being taken… in a PUBLIC place! I guess that’s what happens when you come out of the shadows to have your voice heard. It’s a wonderful country we live in… isn’t it?

Love your blog Carlos, but this is simply not correct:

“I do know that the main reason there was such an increase in illegal immigration during the 1990s was because the United States approved the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, which ended up driving thousands of Mexican farmers and manufacturers out of business while turning thousands of American businessmen into millionaires.”

While changes in trade patterns always create winners and losers, on average your argument is 180 degrees off. Free trade is generally an alternative to immigration. If a US business wants access to Mexican workers, it can do one of two things. Those workers can come here, or the factory can go there. Erecting trade barriers would only increase the pressure on immigration. Mexico would be a much poorer country without the US investment NFTA has enabled. (It is true our uneven compliance with NFTA has hurt both Mexican farmers and truckers, because our strong lobbies in those two areas won’t allow for true free trade that would benefit Mexican producers).

I am perfectly happy to lay the blame for some of Mexico’s problems on the US, but I would blame our insane drug laws, not trade. Our drug laws have helped turn Northern Mexico into a state dominated by warlords that increasingly looks like Afghanistan.

Clearly you’re trolling. I see nothing in his post that supports or condones violence.

It’s a bit telling here Carlos that you spend 90% of your post explaining how the videographer’s viewpoint is wrong, and pay very little attention to his harassment.

In fact the entire post boils down to (token statement against restricting photography) then lots of (here’s how wrong the videographer is) and (here’s where i blanketly malign all libertarians to a closed border agenda without a single or reference link to support this alignment).

In case you missed it click the link

My apologies. On a quick read it did look like you were maligning libertarians. Reading it again I see that it’s a bit of a weird maligning of “so called libertarians”. The only actual libertarian link seems to be one who opposes it.

I think what is really ironic is that the Mexican cartels have secured the border from Mexico to Arizona. Only people who pay them 2500 or so can get across. If they try to cross without permission, somebody from their family gets killed. If they don’t have the money, the cartels will let them smuggle a backpack full of drugs and maybe a little water.

That’s an utterly preposterous statement.

Hogwash.

OH!

In what way?

Just try going to Mexico and exercising your constitutional rights and see how far that gets you!!

“If they’re here illegally, they should be sent home”

How do you figure you can “send them home” without using violence against them?

The issue of crime is a red herring. Look at AZ’s numbers. Nuff said.

On jobs, the prevailing attitude in this country is you keep what you kill (minus the burden society imposes for the benefits received). This is evidenced by notions of hard work and a boot strap mentality. Further, some of the “haves” cry foul when “have-nots” receive aid from the taxes imposed on the “haves”. The mantra is “get a job”, don’t be lazy. Inherent in this argument is the idea that everyone can compete and should compete (maybe even must compete).

But, it seems to me, when true competition emerges in the form of people who are willing to risk their very lives, move hundreds if not thousands of miles and communally work towards a common goal; this degree of competition is too much for the “haves”.

To the poor citizen the message is “work harder” to which the poor citizen replies “unfair playing field”.

To the illegal the message is “unfair playing field” to which the illegal says nothing but continues to work.

We’re not talking about Mexico. Are you arguing that the Bill of Rights only applies to U.S. citizens?

Dude you’re killin’ me. That’s what the INS is here for. Deport them legally, it isn’t rocket science.

“Yes, rounding up “illegals” and “dumping” them somewhere is a violent act.”

If ignorance truly is bliss, you must be one happy sob.
Rance´s last blog ..BinaryGravy: RT @technologynew: Zo Personal subwoofer promises 12-inch sub performance in an iPod nano-size package http://bit.ly/aDkoc6

I have a feeling that hillbilly , red neck sheriff Joe Arpaio will end up as Governor of Arizona, now there is a scary thought.

Lou
http://www.post-anonymously.us.tc

So the INS doesn’t employ violence when forcibly removing peaceful people?

As long as it’s “legal” it’s ok to do?

lol I noticed that too. I’m sure it was a brain fart/typo.

Really, Terrorific.

So illegal immigrants and/or foreigners are protected by the constitution and bill of rights?

So they can run for office/hold a political position, vote, own a gun in America?

All protected items in the bill or rights and the constitution.

So now only certain items are applicable to foreigners and illegal immigrants. Which ones and who says?

The bill of rights actually gives nobody rights but actually regulates the government’s actions towards you,

Mike S

Oh, and illegals don’t have the right to be employed. On the contrary, it’s illegal for them to work here.

The irony here is thick. The lady is protesting for illegals’ rights in America yet she clearly doesn’t understand what the Bill of Rights is by how she treats the photographer. Illustrative on many levels.

She cares nothing about our country, traditions or history – only her financial security.

Why wouldn’t they be protected?

Now, whether modern politicians and judges are interpreting it that way is another thing, but nowhere in the document does it say that non-citizens are excluded.

Are you saying that my wife, who is a Japanese citizen, is not protected by the constitution?

The Bill of Rights outlines HUMAN rights, not U.S. citizen rights.

Well, Rob Molecule, it’s ignorant to assume that a large group of people pro illegal immigration might contain illegal immigrants.

I never said anyone was an illegal immigrant, just that “many likely illegally here” meaning the US. I stand by that statement.

Do many pro-marijuana rallies have many people who don’t use? Do pro gun rallies have many non-gun owners?

As for the Mexican flag at amnesty and citizenship rallies, it doesn’t support their contention that they want to become Americans, but shows their nationalism to their homeland.

And then you jump to comparing immigration rallies to a holiday of heritage, now that’s ignorant.

Mike S

No one has a right to be employed, including lazy white Americans whining about other people taking their jobs.

Just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean that it’s wrong to hire “illegals” though.

Terrorific,

You are grasping at straws.

Nobody has a RIGHT to a job, but illegals are specifically forbidden from being employed.

and this is great, too:

“Just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean that it’s wrong to hire “illegals” though.”

That’s a moral judgement and simply your opinion, but one that can put in jail and cause you to suffer huge fines.

You can believe anything illegal is not “wrong”. To each their own. Society has laws voted on by the representatives of LEGAL citizens.

Expressing your opinion as fact won’t change any laws, but it does derail your argument.

Mike S

Mike S

Sure they’ll use violence if the person(s) they are attempting to deport are violent and they see a reason to use violence. Your straw man argument doesn’t hold water.

So, is it moral to throw me in jail for employing an “illegal”?

Not quite sure what you mean by “expressing my opinion as fact”. Do you mean to say that all laws are morally just simply because some people were elected and then made the laws? I certainly didn’t elect those people.

I think you don’t know what a straw man is.

Either way, then you agree that agents of the state will ultimately use violence against people, even if they peacefully refuse to be deported. I guess that means that your original post calling me a troll is inaccurate.