Arizona Immigration Law Backed by Most Americans, Survey Finds
May 12, 2010, 12:52 PM EDT
By Chris Dolmetsch
May 12 (Bloomberg) -- Almost three-quarters of Americans support a provision of a new Arizona immigration law that requires people to produce documents verifying they are in the U.S. legally, a survey said.
About 73 percent of those polled by the Washington-based Pew Research Center for the People & the Press said they approve of the plan, while 23 percent said they disapproved, according to the survey released today. About 67 percent said they agree with letting police detain anyone who can't verify their legal status, compared with 29 percent who disapproved.
When asked if police should be allowed to question anyone they think may be in the country illegally, about 62 percent said they approved and 35 percent disapproved. More than half, 59 percent, said they supported the new Arizona law as a whole, while 32 percent said they don't support the legislation.
Governor Jan Brewer signed legislation last month that makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally and requires local police to determine the immigration status of anyone suspected of being in the country without proper documentation. The action sparked protests and calls for boycotts of Arizona.
The law was supported by a majority of Republicans (82 percent), less than half of Democrats (45 percent) and 64 percent of independents, according to the survey. Among adults younger than 30 years old, 45 percent said they approved of the legislation, compared with 57 percent of those ages 30-49, 65 percent of those 50-64 and 74 percent of those over 65.
The survey of 994 adults was conducted by telephone from May 6 to May 9 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
--Editors: Mark Schoifet, Bill Schmick
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-12/arizona-immigration-law-backed-by-most-americans-survey-finds.html
Okay.... after reading AZ Gov. Jan Brewers' Immigration Law, I totally agree with it. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, is to be commended for her stance on illegal immigration, and her refusal to back down, in the face of all the threats and criticism, thrown her way. The lame street media ,(MSNBC, CNN, NY Times} and other liberal leaning media nuts, including our great Law Professor President Obuthead, all who seem to determined to profess the new law, as an affront and an insult to our country. Well... golly gee.... how do they reconcile the fact that it is (mostly) a mirror image of US Federal law on Illegal immigration? Its hard to believe, that all of these experts, would either fail to know this, or have even read the Arizona Immigration law, before remarking negatively about it. Keep up the good work Governor Brewer, that is the message we should all be sending her !!!
Now lets see.... what other laws are being ignored? Oh Yeah! Take a minute to check out California Penal code 113, 114 and 115, (and 834B, which was modified in March 2010). There wasn't any negative comments from the media, left or right, on that law, oops... guess what... its not being enforced anyway... is it just for show? What the hell is with the CA Atty. Gen.? Here he wants to boycott Arizona for Gov. Brewer's Law and he hasn't the guts to enforce his own law. Very typical stupid, stupid, Califonia politics! No wonder they let themselves go into the toilet over the 3.2M illegal aliens in their state!
We need to get LarryJ on the CA Atty Gen ass. Go get 'em, Larry! Straighten 'em out. :police: ....Warph
The following is the "Voter Approved" CA Law aimed at dealing with illegal aliens, you know, the one the Atty.Gen. is not enforcing:
CALIFORNIA PENAL CODES PERTAINING TO ILLEGALS
SECTION 113
113. ......(a) Any person who manufactures or sells any false government document with the intent to conceal the true citizenship or resident alien status of another person is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for one year. Every false government document that is manufactured or sold in violation of this section may be charged and prosecuted as a separate and distinct violation, and consecutive sentences may be imposed for each violation.
......(b) A prosecuting attorney shall have discretion to charge a defendant with a violation of this section or any other law that applies.
......(c) As used in this section, "government document" means any document issued by the United States government or any state or local government, including, but not limited to, any passport, immigration visa, employment authorization card, birth certificate, driver's license, identification card, or social security card.
113. Any person who manufactures, distributes or sells false documents to conceal the true citizenship or resident alien status of another person is guilty of a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for five years or by a fine of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000).
SECTION 114
114. Any person who uses false documents to conceal his or her true citizenship or resident alien status is guilty of a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for five years or by a fine of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000).
SECTION 115
115 ...... (a) Every person who knowingly procures or offers any false or forged instrument to be filed, registered, or recorded in any public office within this state, which instrument, if genuine, might be filed, registered, or recorded under any law of this state or of the United States, is guilty of a felony.
......(b) Each instrument which is procured or offered to be filed, registered, or recorded in violation of subdivision (a) shall constitute a separate violation of this section.
......(c) Except in unusual cases where the interests of justice would best be served if probation is granted, probation shall not be granted to, nor shall the execution or imposition of sentence be suspended for, any of the following persons:
(1) Any person with a prior conviction under this section who is again convicted of a violation of this section in a separate proceeding.
(2) Any person who is convicted of more than one violation of this section in a single proceeding, with intent to defraud another, and where the violations resulted in a cumulative financial loss exceeding one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).
......(d) For purposes of prosecution under this section, each act of procurement or of offering a false or forged instrument to be filed, registered, or recorded shall be considered a separately punishable offense.
115.1 ...... (a) The Legislature finds and declares that the voters of California are entitled to accurate representations in materials that are directed to them in efforts to influence how they vote.
......(b) No person shall publish or cause to be published, with intent to deceive, any campaign advertisement containing a signature that the person knows to be unauthorized.
......(c) For purposes of this section, "campaign advertisement" means any communication directed to voters by means of a mass mailing as defined in Section 82041.5 of the Government Code, a paid television, radio, or newspaper advertisement, an outdoor advertisement, or any other printed matter, if the expenditures for that communication are required to be reported by Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 84100) of Title 9 of the Government Code.
......(d) For purposes of this section, an authorization to use a signature shall be oral or written.
......(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a person from publishing or causing to be published a reproduction of all or part of a document containing an actual or authorized signature, provided that the signature so reproduced shall not, with the intent to deceive, be incorporated into another document in a manner that falsely suggests that the person whose signature is reproduced has signed the other document.
......(f) Any knowing or willful violation of this section is a public offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison or in a county jail, or by a fine not to exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.
......(g) As used in this section, "signature" means either of the following:
(1) A handwritten or mechanical signature, or a copy thereof.
(2) Any representation of a person's name, including, but not limited to, a printed or typewritten representation, that serves the same purpose as a handwritten or mechanical signature.
115.2 ...... (a) No person shall publish or cause to be published, with actual knowledge, and intent to deceive, any campaign advertisement containing false or fraudulent depictions, or false or fraudulent representations, of official public documents or purported official public documents.
......(b) For purposes of this section, "campaign advertisement" means any communication directed to voters by means of a mass mailing as defined in Section 82041.5 of the Government Code, a paid newspaper advertisement, an outdoor advertisement, or any other printed matter, if the expenditures for that communication are required to be reported by Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 84100) of Title 9 of the Government Code.
......(c) Any violation of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail, or by a fine not to exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), or both.
115.25 ...... (a) No person or entity shall authorize the production or distribution, or participate in the authorization of the production or distribution, of any document, including, but not limited to, any campaign advertisement, as defined in subdivision (d), that the person or entity knows contains inaccurate emergency service phone numbers for various emergency services, including, but not limited to, police, fire, or ambulance services.
......(b) A violation of subdivision (a) shall be an infraction, punishable by a fine not exceeding two hundred fifty dollars ($250).
......(c) A violation of subdivision (a) resulting in the serious injury or death of persons who innocently rely on the erroneous phone numbers contained in the document is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
......(d) For purposes of this section, "campaign advertisement" means any communication directed to voters by means of a mass mailing, as defined in Section 82041.5 of the Government Code, a paid television, radio, or newspaper advertisement, an outdoor advertisement, or any other printed matter, if the expenditures for that communication are required to be reported by Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 84100) of Title 9 of the Government Code.
115.3 ...... Any person who alters a certified copy of an official record, or knowingly furnishes an altered certified copy of an official record, of this state, including the executive, legislative, and judicial branches thereof, or of any city, county, city and county, district, or political subdivision thereof, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
115.5 ...... (a) Every person who files any false or forged document or instrument with the county recorder which affects title to, places an encumbrance on, or places an interest secured by a mortgage or deed of trust on, real property consisting of a single-family residence containing not more than four dwelling units, with knowledge that the document is false or forged, is punishable, in addition to any other punishment, by a fine not exceeding seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000).
......(b) Every person who makes a false sworn statement to a notary public, with knowledge that the statement is false, to induce the notary public to perform an improper notarial act on an instrument or document affecting title to, or placing an encumbrance on, real property consisting of a single-family residence containing not more than four dwelling units is guilty of a felony.
and the new section 834b which was added last month:
SECTION 834b
03/20/10
834b ......(a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
......(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity.
......(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.
Good Morning, Warph!
I will do my best about the Atty. Gen thingie. There is, after all, a primary election coming in which we shall elect an Atty. Gen.
The state of California and the City of Lost Angeles have come out as against the law passed in Arizona. Even yesterday, the city of Los Angeles voted to keep city employees from doing business with Arizona and canceling some contracts it has with the state. Any city of Los Angeles business shall be curtailed and city employees will no longer be allowed to drive or fly to Arizona to conduct city business. (Personally, I think that these measures are designed not so much to protest Arizona's law, but to insure that all those illegal immigrants will not move to California to get away from Arizona.)
California, as briefly mentioned in the articles above, has a similar law. Our law enforcement officers can't pull over someone simply because they might be illegal. They can, however, pull someone over for an infraction of the law and then check their immigration status, and then turn them over to the INS. California does not have a specific law that imposes fines or jail time just for being in the state illegally because they let the INS do the work.
Personally, I kinda, sorta agree with the law in Arizona now that I have learned of the scope of the problems there. What bothers me most is that the state has to take such actions because the Feds aren't doing their job. Our government can spend billions in bailout moneys or in aid to foreign countries. But, they say they can't spend more money to protect our own borders. And, the government frowns on civilian groups who volunteer their time to go south and stand guard because they don't want vigilante rule.
What's next? Will a faction of attorneys get together and file a lawsuit in the Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of this law? Will the Feds slap Arizona's hand and say they have committed a "no-no"? Will the State of Arizona get really ticked and try to secede from the Union? Will Arizona, in the future, make it legal for landowners on the border to "shoot first and ask questions later" when they see people on their land? Or, will landowners on the border just take the law into their own hands and just shoot anyone on their land and dig a deep hole for them?
Larryj
I like the shoot first and ask questions later idea. We've got enough scum and freeloaders of our own without having to worry about the shit coming over the border.
I have received an answer to one of the questions I asked above and I had prepared a lengthy reply, but with the announcement that Arizona supplies 25% of California's electricity, I have to stop now and go to the garage in search of my camping equipment such as lanterns, camp stove, etc. I also need to go to the store for more flashlights, batteries, etc. However, this prompts new questions------------Will California and Arizona declare war on each other? Should California attack Arizona in order to secure it's energy supply? Can Arizona defend two borders, i.e., California and Mexico? Has nobody realized that the natural gas lines from Texas run through Arizona? Should I have a third cup of coffee this morning?
Sheeeeeeeeeeesh.
Larryj
Larry, my friend. You worry too much. Have you forgot about the bunker I've been building ? If the sun shines tomorrow we are going to pour the roof on it. With all this rain I'm expecting a bumper crop of green beans that will stock the shelves, along with canned carp so we can have meat with our veggies. R.A.M.B.O. does like green beans with his fish---if not I will start gathering road kill armadillos for him.
I think the LA powers that be jumped into this without thinking at all. Looks like Arizona has California by the shorthairs!!!
CARP?????? :P Cat yes, carp, ICK. One can only eat so much gefilte fish! ;D
Diane,
You don't know what you're missing if you've never ate carp-----if it's dressed and cooked right. Their biggest downfall is the "Y" bones they are full of but remove the dark meat called the mud vien,put a tad of salt---a dallop of Catalina dressing and pressure cook them puppies and the "Y" bones dissolve and sit back and enjoy. If it's a big carp, filet the belly meat off and just fry it. It's boneless. Now if you think I'm blowing smoke up your bohunkes just ask ol Sarge and I bet he'll tell you the same thing. :)
The grass carp, or moss eaters or what ever they are called are excellant eating. Not near as much "red meat" as the ol river carp and you take a 25-30 pounder of them and the "Y" bones are big enough to pull out as you eat it. I smoke the filets in my smoker over hickory and it's ever bit as good as smoked steelhead.
Danged, Jarhead, you still building that thing? It oughta be the size of a three-story Motel 6 by now. R.A.M.B.O. is still working on his, you know, the one he started over a month ago. He is moving right along considering his small paws. His bunker is now about the size of the bath tub. He doesn't work steadily at it, cuz of his tanning time, surfing lessons, etiquette classes and his 18 hour sleep schedule. Green beans and a good carp sound deliciouso (sorry, been watching too much Dora with the granddaughter). Didn't know there were armadillos there.
Srkruzich, you are absolutely right. Kinda gives you the impression or picture of someone walking across a cow pasture without looking down.
Larryj
I'll take your word for the carp, Jar.
not too sure that AZ has CA by the the shorthairs considering CA is a shareholder in that power generation company.
Quote from: jerry wagner on May 21, 2010, 11:28:56 AM
not too sure that AZ has CA by the the shorthairs considering CA is a shareholder in that power generation company.
So what do you suggest Arizona do, Jerry? I believe LA Dept of water and powers small shareholdings could be replaced by other states involved with Palo Verde. Southern California Edison doesn't want to get involved in this. Here's a thought.... how about cutting off LA's water, too?
Quote from: jerry wagner on May 21, 2010, 11:28:56 AM
not too sure that AZ has CA by the the shorthairs considering CA is a shareholder in that power generation company.
Possession is 9/10ths of the law, and what is California going to do about it? They sure aren't going to go in there and take the powerplants.
Quote from: Warph on May 21, 2010, 11:49:25 AM
So what do you suggest Arizona do, Jerry? I believe LA Dept of water and powers small shareholdings could be replaced by other states involved with Palo Verde. Southern California Edison doesn't want to get involved in this. Here's a thought.... how about cutting off LA's water, too?
That is true warph, their water comes through Arizona too. Shut down the hoover and LA is screwed.
Didn't the whole pack of them sign contracts with each other? This whole thing is ridiculous.
Quote from: Warph on May 21, 2010, 11:49:25 AM
So what do you suggest Arizona do, Jerry? I believe LA Dept of water and powers small shareholdings could be replaced by other states involved with Palo Verde. Southern California Edison doesn't want to get involved in this. Here's a thought.... how about cutting off LA's water, too?
You are going to replace shareholders now? Sounds rather socialist. How would you go about doing so?
Quote from: jerry wagner on May 21, 2010, 02:54:48 PM
You are going to replace shareholders now? Sounds rather socialist. How would you go about doing so?
Gee jerry, it must hurt awful bad with the fence riding up your ass.
Quote from: srkruzich on May 21, 2010, 04:02:11 PM
Gee jerry, it must hurt awful bad with the fence riding up your ass.
Excellent work addressing the issue as opposed to tossing off insults.
Oh I think the issue has been thoroughly addressed Jerry...
By the way.......how DOES that feel? ;D
and uhhhh.... that would be Mistress Bitch to you. ;)
I talked to my sister in law last night and she says the police in AZ will only be checking papers if they come in contact with someone for some other reason, such as a traffic stop or accident, complaint at a home or business, loud party, fight or that kind of thing. She is very sympathetic to AZ's problem and hopes this will knock our Gov't into doing something. She thinks the boycott business is nothing and will soon disappear.
Can you imagine being here? This was given right after The President of Mexico tried to tell us all about Immigration. He was still in the room.
Bravo, Mr McClintock
Quote from: Teresa on May 25, 2010, 12:53:42 PM
Oh I think the issue has been thoroughly addressed Jerry...
By the way.......how DOES that feel? ;D
and uhhhh.... that would be Mistress Bitch to you. ;)
ROTFLMBO
I don't think that anyone could have said it any better than Rep. McClintock did.
(snicker, snicker)
Did you hear the latest? Los Angeles has "discovered" the those red light cameras designed to catch those who would "step on it" through an orange light turning red, are made and serviced by a company in Arizona. This has come to light because the contract with that company runs out soon or I should say, is up for renewal. Now, those lights generate a huge chunk of change for the city of Los Angeles which has boycotted doing any business with any company in Arizona. The fine? $430 for running the light. The solution? Find another company (not in Arizona) that provides the same service or lose a whole lot of money. Betcha they (LA) didn't think about that in their great rush to do the "PC" thing in boycotting city business with Arizona.
(snicker, snicker)
Larryj
Quote from: larryJ on June 23, 2010, 12:34:03 PM
(snicker, snicker)
Did you hear the latest? Los Angeles has "discovered" the those red light cameras designed to catch those who would "step on it" through an orange light turning red, are made and serviced by a company in Arizona. This has come to light because the contract with that company runs out soon or I should say, is up for renewal. Now, those lights generate a huge chunk of change for the city of Los Angeles which has boycotted doing any business with any company in Arizona. The fine? $430 for running the light. The solution? Find another company (not in Arizona) that provides the same service or lose a whole lot of money. Betcha they (LA) didn't think about that in their great rush to do the "PC" thing in boycotting city business with Arizona.
(snicker, snicker)
Larryj
wanna bet they will come up with a "exception" to allow renewal of the contract. Call it uhmm public safety issue/cuttin into their revenue issue....
430 dollars for a red light?? You gotta be kidding.....
Monday, June 21, 2010 7:41 PM
Homeland Security officials were holding inmates from Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Lebanon, and the Sudan inside the Pinal County Jail of Arizona
by Steve Irvin
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_central_southern_az/other/terrorists-crossing-az-border-into-u.s.%3F
PINAL COUNTY, AZ - On a single day in April, in a special cell block deep inside the Pinal County Jail, nearly 400 inmates sat awaiting trial or extradition after being detained trying to cross the Arizona border from Mexico.
Only about half of them were actually from Mexico.
The cell block, owned by Pinal County, but contracted with the Department of Homeland Security, is a way station in the immigration process, where inmates are held after they are detained by the Border Patrol or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
But it's where the inmates are from that causes concern for some critics and lawmakers.
On that one day in April, according to records obtained by ABC 15 (Phoenix), Homeland Security officials were holding inmates from Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Lebanon, and the Sudan.
"They're coming from all over," Arizona Senator Jon Kyl said. "And one wonders whether some of them are coming in here to commit acts of terror."
Kyl has been tracking the problem since 2002, not long after the September 11 attacks. Since that time, according to an investigation by the House Committee on Homeland Security, intelligence officials have determined members of the terror group Hezbollah have already infiltrated the U.S. by crossing at the southern border.
ICE officials told congressional investigators, undocumented immigrants were smuggled from the Middle East to staging areas in Central and South America, before being smuggled into the U.S.
The report says officials are also concerned about Venezuela emerging as a terrorist "hub," with the government there issuing travel documents that can be used to obtain a U.S. visa.
Border patrol agents have also recovered military-style patches on clothing near the border. One patch contains the word "martyr" in Arabic. Another depicts a plane appearing to fly into sky scrapers.
In 2009, according to Homeland Security documents obtained by ABC 15, ICE officials detained 45,279 undocumented immigrants classified as OTM. While the vast majority were from other Central American countries like El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, officials also arrested 10 undocumented immigrants from Iran, 10 from Iraq, six from Lebanon and 19 from Pakistan.
Through May of this year, officials had detained more than 25,000 OTM border crossers.
Officials interviewed for this story expressed frustration, because U.S. intelligence officials have known for the better part of a decade about terror groups' willingness to smuggle people across the southern border, yet little has been done to substantially increase border security.
Officials also note the nightmarish scenario involved with returning detainees to their home countries. The Mexican government won't accept a border crosser if they aren't from Mexico, and many countries lack any diplomatic mechanism for repatriating a detainee.
"There's a procedure which takes place, where, in effect, if we can't send them back, they're let go," Senator Kyl said. "Obviously that creates an illegal immigration problem, but it could... create a problem of terrorism as well."
Check out the video on ABC15 site.
Quote from: larryJ on June 23, 2010, 12:34:03 PM
(snicker, snicker)
Did you hear the latest? Los Angeles has "discovered" the those red light cameras designed to catch those who would "step on it" through an orange light turning red, are made and serviced by a company in Arizona. This has come to light because the contract with that company runs out soon or I should say, is up for renewal. Now, those lights generate a huge chunk of change for the city of Los Angeles which has boycotted doing any business with any company in Arizona. The fine? $430 for running the light. The solution? Find another company (not in Arizona) that provides the same service or lose a whole lot of money. Betcha they (LA) didn't think about that in their great rush to do the "PC" thing in boycotting city business with Arizona.
(snicker, snicker)
Larryj
Yeah... we in AZ love this one. The cameras are made in Scottsdale. More info on AZ companies doing business with LA will be coming out soon and most are dropping contracts. Most of them do business with LA's infrastructure.
yeah, Steve, what with the current state of the economy in this state, revenues are hard to come by. Only a few years ago, driving in a carpool lane by yourself would cost you $187 if caught. Now, it is over 300. Arnie needs money and raises the price of the fines as a way to do it. People just don't change their driving habits overnight so in the meantime, more money is rolling in.
One of the unfortunate things about those red light cameras is that they are not perfect. There is one located at a major intersection near my house. I used to grab some lunch at the burger stand on the corner and go sit in my car to eat it. I noticed that the average time for the light to change going westbound was about 30 seconds. Except every third light change the timing dropped to 10 seconds. I watched this for several minutes and saw cars going through getting their picture taken. You can't beat this system as it takes a photo of your license plate and sometimes a real candid photo of the driver. I also saw the light and camera take pictures of cars that were going through the intersection legally.
Larryj