Virgina already has AZ illegal immigration law

by moshe 46 Replies latest jw friends

  • moshe
    moshe

    http://www.taftindependent.com/News/ViewArticle/2163

    -

    Other Places Already Have Arizona Law
    by Harold Pease - July 23, 2010
    If anyone wonders how the new Arizona illegal immigration law, coming on board July 29, will affect Arizona, they need only to look at Prince William County, Virginia. They have had virtually the same law in effect for three years. Commissioner Cory Stewart who spearheaded that law said, "We had some of the same problems Arizona did. We had so many illegal immigrants coming into the county causing trouble, causing crime, and exploding the number of English as a Second Language students in our school system. We passed a pretty strict measure in 2007 and it has had great results."
    Under their law, Stewart said police must check the immigration status of persons "for a small crime, shoplifting, DUI, being drunk in public-any of those crimes." They are then taken to a magistrate who normally "holds them in jail pending trial, because they are illegal immigrants and obviously there is a high risk of flight. They serve their sentences and we hand them over to federal authorities for deportation."
    The benefits of the new law were immediate and clear. The county experienced a 38% reduction in violent crimes, in the number of uninsured illegals giving birth in hospitals, and in English as a Second Language enrollment. All of this resulted in a drastic taxpayer cut, and popularity of the law soon soared to 80%. The law has saved lives with the drop in violent crimes. Illegals tended to move on to other Virginia counties, thus increasing their problems. As a result, and in spite of the fact that they initially ridiculed the new law, Fairfax county, and Montgomery County, MD soon implemented the same law as Prince William county.
    When asked how many lawsuits were filed against the police or county by citizens claiming discrimination after the law went into effect, the answer was none. "There has not been one substantiated claim of racial profiling," Stewart argued.
    Of some note is the lack of national attention when a county was enforcing federal law, largely neglected by the Feds. It has also not been of particular interest to the Media. But when Arizona wanted to put an end to the violence spilling over the border (Phoenix is now the kidnapping capitol of North America) all hell turned on them. Now the Federal Government, who is supposed to protect the states, is suing its own state because the state is doing the job the government is constitutionally required to do.
    In response to this suit, thousands of small contributors are sending money to support Arizona. Most contributors are retirees who cannot believe in their country's unwillingness to defend it's citizens. This money is coming from every state in the Union, and thus far amounts to over a half a million dollars- pocket change to the lobbying groups defending the President's suit. The Feds are seen as the national bully and are not likely to merit well in the PR game as they pick on a state that is finally willing to stand up to them- even with a favorable (virtually managed) establishment press.
    Unfortunately should the Federal Government be victorious in making the Arizona law null and void it will do so for Prince William, Fairfax, and Montgomery counties as well. This will return additional crime and taxes to places that some time ago greatly reduced these problems. It will also leave us all much less defended, as no other state will dare to protect it's citizens again.
    If you wish to contribute to help Arizona defend herself from the Federal Government, please visit KeepAZSafe.com.
    Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College.

  • AGuest
    AGuest
    "We had so many illegal immigrants coming into the county causing trouble, causing crime, and exploding the number of English as a Second Language students in our school system."

    Considering who was onboard... and what they did and brought with them (you know, little things like... plague... pox... crime... massacre... etc.), I wonder if that's what the Native Americans thought after a couple few years with Columbus' and Cortez' crews... or perhaps the Pilgrims...

    Under their law, Stewart said police must check the immigration status of persons "for a small crime, shoplifting, DUI, being drunk in public-any of those crimes."

    Did I forget to mention wine and distilled spirits, above? And that the difference with the AZ law is that no crime actually has to have been committed... but that "probable cause" (i.e., a broken taillight) would suffice?

    "There has not been one substantiated claim of racial profiling,"

    It's VIRGINIA. Of COURSE none of the claims have been "substantiated." Whose in charge of "substantiating" them????

    I'm thinking that we really should stop selling "wolf tickets" and just do away with hypocrisy once and for all. Well, okay, if not in the U.S., then at least here. Otherwise, we might as well turn right on back to the WTBTS... or at least stop pointing fingers at them...

    Peace to you, regardless of your country of origin... or "legal" status.

    A slave of Christ, who doesn't recognize national boundaries...

    SA

  • miseryloveselders
    miseryloveselders

    It's VIRGINIA. Of COURSE none of the claims have been "substantiated."

    I gotta kick out of this. I love how on the Best Buy ad in the Sunday paper, there are speed detectors. There is an asterix beside the product that states not sold or legal in Virginia. To me that says mountains about Virginia's law enforcement. I would't ever want to get pulled over down there.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    I was born in Virginia, dear Misery (peace to you!), and though I have not been back there since 1994 (praise Jah!), I have a great deal of family who live there (Richmond, Virgina Beach, and in the "country"). My parents and one sibling were born in the "country" (my mother went to school with Roy Clark in Meherrin). When I was there last (1994), I felt no different than I did when I passed through Georgia (which is another story - some of "us" don't really wanna be caught too far outside of Hot'lanta, methinks). I promise you, I NEEDED to get back to California because if another... ummmmm... person... looked at me cockeyed or spoken to me so condescendingly I was probably going to end up in jail... or dead. Hated it. Came to the conclusion that I am just too "California-nized" to live almost anywhere else in this "great" country.

    Anyway, given the back-and-forth-between-absolute-and-angry-rebellion-but-we-really-are-in-subjection conduct I witnessed from my family (i.e., they're either all out against white folks... or almost dropping to their knees when one approaches them), I believe I am much better off on the West Coast. Even more so, in California. Specifically, in Oakland.

    Again, peace to you!

    A slave of Christ,

    SA

  • beksbks
    beksbks
    Under their law, Stewart said police must check the immigration status of persons "for a small crime, shoplifting, DUI, being drunk in public-any of those crimes." They are then taken to a magistrate who normally "holds them in jail pending trial, because they are illegal immigrants and obviously there is a high risk of flight.

    And herein lies the difference. Don't you folks get it?? These are people who have been ARRESTED, as opposed to people who have been STOPPED for any given infraction. These are not cops on the street checking status.

  • moshe
    moshe

    We got into this mess, because profit motivated employers gave illegals jobs. Using E-Verify has allowed honest employers to weed out 50% of the illegals using fake SS numbers, but now law enforcement has seen a rise in illegals just stealing peoples identities. My neighbor had her identity stolen (hispanic surname) by an illegal in another state and they were even so brazen as to file for her $3000+ tax refund, before she did and the IRS gave it to them! Now she had to prove that she was the real Garcia and not the illegal. Meanwhile, she was needing that refund for her family and can't get it until the Govt figures out who is who.

  • AGuest
    AGuest
    We got into this mess, because profit motivated employers gave illegals jobs.

    Methinks you didn't bother to read my first responses, dear Moshe (peace to you!). The truth is that "we" got into this "mess" long before illegal immigrants were to blame. Again, the hypocrisy should just stop.

    Again, peace to you!

    A slave of Christ,

    SA

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    I gotta kick out of this. I love how on the Best Buy ad in the Sunday paper, there are speed detectors. There is an asterix beside the product that states not sold or legal in Virginia.

    Yeah, but Virginia is open carry...one of only a few states and the only one in that part of the country.

    BTS

  • JWoods
    JWoods
    Considering who was onboard... and what they did and brought with them (you know, little things like... plague... pox... crime... massacre... etc.), I wonder if that's what the Native Americans thought after a couple few years with Columbus' and Cortez' crews... or perhaps the Pilgrims...

    AGuest - you are opposing immigration law, and yet you illogically have posted above the very reason why civilized nations have immigration laws.

    The Native Americans had no national identity, no immigration law, no border enforcement. Your philosophy would place the modern United States in this same position.

  • moshe
    moshe

    It is only a civil offense and a $100 fine to be in the country illegally- first offense. This penalty has been on the books for 70 years now. Obviously, the penalty is out of date today and needs to be revised.

    Jwoods- the Native Americans could have done very well, if only someone had explained to them the concept of the 99 year land lease.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit