Join our Listener Club  Featured Listener Comments Section:   Contents List   Listener Comment

Arizona immigration law & those who know little

Listener: Tom
Category: General
Date: 02 May 2010
Time: 17:37:02 -0700
Remote Name: 64.216.33.206

Comments

Hello Robert,

I've had some interesting email and Facebook conversations with liberal & "moderate" friends who are upset about the Arizona law.  It was a purely reactionary stance and none of them had bothered to actually read the law, so I decided to try to relate this to terms they would understand.  It's a bit long, but here goes:

Why do we want a secure border? 

The easiest way to look at this is to look at the way you and I treat our homes.   In an ideal world, we could leave the doors unlocked and windows open without fear of invasion.  Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world, so we lock our doors to keep our loved ones and property.

Many overly-compassionate types urge us to leave the borders open so the poor from other countries could also enjoy the benefits of living in the US.  If they truly were compassionate, why don't they invite street people into their homes?  They sensibly reject this idea as unsafe, just as we should reject open borders.

Imagine the chaos you'd have if you installed a revolving door in your house with a sight that said "Illegal immigrant shelter".  First, your immediate costs would go up as they ate your food, used more electricity, and phoned home.  Then your long-term costs would go up, too, as your furniture, rugs, and fixtures would have more wear and tear, so you'd need to replace them more often.  Finally and most importantly, you could not guarantee the safety of your loved ones.

There is a limit to what you or the nation can provide.  You don't invite everyone off the street into your house, so why should the nation allow a porous border an entertain amnesty for illegals already here?  The Constitution requires the government to protect the citizens and this certainly is one of the areas in which the government must improve.

You should not construe any of this as anti-immigration.  The United States was built by immigrants and we're continually enriched by them.  If you think about it, even the Native Americans are immigrants from long, long ago.   However, we have every right to control who (and how many) may enter.   If your first act is to enter the US illegally, you are a criminal by definition.

While traveling over seas, I was regularly required to show my passport (or military ID and orders) whenever I had contact with the government or rented a hotel room or had other commercial transactions.  You keep your passport with you at all times because it's checked often, as it should be here, too.

In many countries, I have been regularly pulled aside and asked for my papers because I obviously was a foreigner.  This is all a perfectly normal turn of affairs, so why is it so offensive that the US follow the same acts?

What about the Arizona Law?

I would urge you to actually read the bill, which can be found at www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf
or
http://www.azleg.gov/DocumentsForBill.asp?Bill_Number=1070&image.x=6&image.y=7

The bill is 19 pages long and modifies existing laws.  It will take some time to read it, but you won't need to be a lawyer to understand what the Arizona Senate intended in their bill. 

After reading through it, I'd like to correct some misconceptions and distortions of the law often present in the liberal press and blogs:

1. The civil rights of US citizens are specifically protected. 
   1. Citizens can prove their status with a drivers license or other state or federal IDs.
   2. Visitors with a valid visa are also protected.
2. The bill prohibits racial profiling as the only factor on determining immigration status.
3. The law specifies that it is enacted though "lawful contact":
   1. A police stop for another infraction
   2. Not initial stops for immigration status.
   3. Conducting business in a state agency office, such as requesting services, licenses, or grants.
4. State agencies are required to follow Federal immigration law and cooperate with Federal authorities.  The state does not enforce the laws, but turns illegal aliens over to Federal Authorities.
5. Citizens may sue state or lower government should the government not enforce immigration law.  State agents acting lawfully are specifically protected in such a suit.
6. An employer may not knowingly employ an illegal alien and it is illegal for illegal aliens to apply for work or work as an employee or contractor.
7. It is illegal to transport, hide, or harbor illegal aliens or to induce them to come illegally to the US.
8. An officer may arrest without warrant any person who has committed an deportation-worthy offense.

Nothing in the bill is aimed at a specific race or country. Each section states that these statues follow US immigration laws.  While the Arizona border is with Mexico, many other nationalities, including terrorist nations, infiltrate our porous border.

After visiting and living in about 20 countries as a US service member and playing tourist in a few more, I see nothing in these bills that is out of line with other countries.  In fact, we are by far the most lenient of the countries I have experienced.

In the end, the uproar is simple - Arizona is taking a very active role in defending her borders at a time when liberals would profit most by an increase in the dependent classes.

Thanks much and keep up the good fight.  You, Rush, and Hannibal have helped clarify my already conservative leanings and I am much enriched by the experience.

Tom H.

© 2006	Join our Listener Club here.      *several modified JAVAscripts in this site are courtesy of The JavaScript Directory.                 Webmaster resources and banners for Pratt on Texas        Interested in HD (new high definition) radio? Read a summary here.
Pratt's MySpace