Arizonans and The Nation Torn On Immigration Bill

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

No, I'm not saying that's it's okay for employers to break the law. Not at all. I am saying that if it's matter of food on the table for the employee, he will just not care as much. I doubt your acquaintance was outraged. He/she probably was like "meh, this guy is a jerk but whateves. I need this job."

Similarly, say this law is passed and is being enforced strictly. A couple of months from now one of you have a very important business meeting in Arizona. Chances are that you will go there and you will take your passport/GC along with you 'cause you no matter how much you protest from your armchair on annonymous internet message boards, if something that is important to you comes up and it is imperative that it go well, you will toe the line instead of shouting slogans and picketing the lines.

I doubt you'd be saying, "Oh, ** the Arizona police. Let them dare ask me for proof of citizenship/residency. I'll show them. I'm not gonna carry sh*t. ** that." No, that business meeting is important to you and you're not going to risk being thrown into jail for no goddamned reason.

You may call me wimpy or submissive for meekly following the law. However, I just think of that as being cautious and not taking any chances.

Sachinky, you may feel however you like about the issue and you may do whatever you like about it.

I would kindly ask though that you do not immediately assume my concerns about immigration issues are limited to the armchair. Or other issues that I think are unjust in this country, for that matter.

[sachinky 465]

Sachinky, you may feel however you like about the issue and you may do whatever you like about it.

I would kindly ask though that you do not immediately assume my concerns about immigration issues are limited to the armchair. Or other issues that I think are unjust in this country, for that matter.

My post wasn't directed solely at you. I'm sure you're actively involved in the issues you care passionately about. I also know a lot of people who supposedly feel very deeply about a range of issues and the only extent of their participation is joining Facebook groups and signing petitions. That's the lot I can't stand.

Edited April 27, 2010 by sachinky

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The reason it doesn't get my goat is because there are always different rules in play.

For example, LPRs are supposed to carry their GC on their person at all times. USCs don't have to carry an ID.

Natural born USCs can run for POTUS while naturalized USCs are ineligible to run for the same office.

Why? Where's the logic in this?

You keep bringing this back to LPRs when you stated quite explicitly that you wouldn't mind overmuch if you, as an Indian woman, were subject to more rigorous scrutiny to determine your identity than a white person.

When it comes to LPRs, everyone is subject to the same burden of proof - that is a Green Card or the Visa stamp in your passport.

When I am in India, I get all the rights and privileges as an Indian citizen as accorded by the Indian Constitution. An American in India doesn't and has to play by a different set of rules.

When I'm in the U.S., I expect to have to follow their laws. I understand that my legal status is not written on my face and could possibly be called into question. If it needs to be clarified through a piece of paper that I presumably have on me any way, it doesn't inconvenience me to produce it to a law enforcement officer in order to prove my identity. That takes five seconds of my time and I'm not about to go around shouting "DISCRIMINATION" to all and sundry.

So again - what happens if you produce your GC and are told that this isn't enough proof to satisfy scrutiny? How much extra proof do you feel it is prudent or necessary to carry about with you?

As for USCs, maybe it's time to institute a National ID of some sort or have the legal status included on the D/L?

Oh it's been floated about, but there is no love for that idea in this country.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I have empathy for those that deserve it. It depends on the how, why, what, when. I don't make blanket assumptions based on race ... I know all about carrying a 'book of life' and being subjected to different rules simply because of race.

So where do you stand on the issue of human rights?

If you are an illegal alien, does this mean you forfeit your right to a fair trial? to be innocent until proven guilty? to not be subject to torture and arbitrary imprisonment? Freedom of expression?

[sachinky 465]

You keep bringing this back to LPRs when you stated quite explicitly that you wouldn't mind overmuch if you, as an Indian woman, were subject to more rigorous scrutiny to determine your identity than a white person.

So again - what happens if you produce your GC and are told that this isn't enough proof to satisfy scrutiny? How much extra proof do you feel it is prudent or necessary to carry about with you?

The "additional rigorous scruntiny" that I mentioned I wouldn't mind being subjected to is to produce the GC if/when I'm called upon to do so (by a cop, since JQ has made it clear that it would be illegal for an employer to demand it). I don't see that as discrimination.

Why wouldn't the GC be enough? It is all I'm required to carry under Federal law. Unless you come up with more hypothetical situations where I'm stopped because I was speeding, asked for an ID, produce my GC, and the cops say NOT GOOD ENOUGH, you're coming to with us! Yes, THEN you can bet I'd probably start kicking and screaming. Because THAT would actually BE unfair since I had followed the law.

I'm curious -- why is there no love for a national ID? What's the big deal? Seems like it would be a good solution. How about having your status listed on the driver's license? Pretty much everyone has to carry that around.

Edited April 27, 2010 by sachinky

[Deb+Steve 13]

So where do you stand on the issue of human rights?

If you are an illegal alien, does this mean you forfeit your right to a fair trial? to be innocent until proven guilty? to not be subject to torture and arbitrary imprisonment? Freedom of expression?

Oh, please ... what's this? You're preaching to the choir. Where is my right to freedom of expression? See, you came along and picked it apart.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

The "additional rigorous scruntiny" that I mentioned I wouldn't mind being subjected to is to produce the GC if/when I'm called upon to do so (by a cop, since JQ has made it clear that it would be illegal for an employer to demand it). I don't see that as discrimination.

Why wouldn't the GC be enough? It is all I'm required to carry under Federal law. Unless you come up with more hypothetical situations where I'm stopped because I was speeding, asked for an ID, produce my GC, and the cops say NOT GOOD ENOUGH, you're coming to with us! Yes, THEN you can bet I'd probably start kicking and screaming. Because THAT would actually BE unfair since I had followed the law.

I'm curious -- why is there no love for a national ID? What's the big deal? Seems like it would be a good solution. How about having your status listed on the driver's license? Pretty much everyone has to carry that around.

I believe Madhouse's reference to additional rigorous scrutiny is a reference to you being asked to show your green card because you are brown, as opposed to say, a white Canadian managing to get a pass on the same document.

[sachinky 465]

Say there was no law that stopped employers from asking for a GC, inspite of having a D/L and an unrestricted SSN.

I apply for a job and so does a white American girl.

She looks/behaves/sounds like an American. There is absolutely no reason to think that she's in the U.S. illegally.

I look/behave/sound like an Indian. There is a slight possibility that my status in the U.S. isn't exactly kosher.

So the employer asks to see my Green Card to make sure he's not hiring an illegal alien. So I show it to him because I am not one.

Where is the need to be mortally offended in this scenario? Or throw my arms up and start screaming about discrimination? It seems totally reasonable to me, in fact.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Oh, please ... what's this? You're preaching to the choir. Where is my right to freedom of expression? See, you came along and picked it apart.

How is having a conversation infringing your right to freedom of expression?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Say there was no law that stopped employers from asking for a GC, inspite of having a D/L and an unrestricted SSN.

I apply for a job and so does a white American girl.

She looks/behaves/sounds like an American. There is absolutely no reason to think that she's in the U.S. illegally.

I look/behave/sound like an Indian. There is a slight possibility that my status in the U.S. isn't exactly kosher.

So the employer asks to see my Green Card to make sure he's not hiring an illegal alien. So I show it to him because I am not one.

Where is the need to be mortally offended in this scenario? Or throw my arms up and start screaming about discrimination? It seems totally reasonable to me, in fact.

As I said, the question here is how far you must be pushed before it becomes discriminatory and offensive to you.

Just how much of this kind of thing are you prepared to accept?

[Craneman 2]

I have carried an ID since I can rember.

As a teenager ave had friends detained for not providing Identification, detained until the parents were called and identification established.

If you are stooped for a traffic infraction and cannot provide Identification, it is reasonable to be detained to establish identity.My wife does not leave the house without her Green Card and is proud to show it to anyone, she has a problem with illegals because they are illegal, were is the problem?

in many states they are required to carry at all times. again, if its the law & you choose not to carry it. it your dumbass fault. yes its OK.

As I said, the question here is how far you must be pushed before it becomes discriminatory and offensive to you.

Just how much of this kind of thing are you prepared to accept?

If you are asked, by the authorities, for an ID and do not produce it, you are in the wrong.

[sachinky 465]

As I said, the question here is how far you must be pushed before it becomes discriminatory and offensive to you.

Just how much of this kind of thing are you prepared to accept?

How about you come up with more hypothetical situations and I'll tell you what's acceptable to me or not.

In fact, I answered it before but here's it again. Say I'm stopped because I was speeding, asked for an ID, produce my GC, and the cops say NOT GOOD ENOUGH, you look like an illegal Mexican--you're coming to with us! Yes, THEN you can bet I'd probably start kicking and screaming. Because THAT would actually BE unfair since I had followed the law and carried my Green Card with me as mandated to do so by Federal law. Furthermore, there's no reason to believe that that wouldn't be a sufficient proof of ID.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If you are asked, by the authorities, for an ID and do not produce it, you are in the wrong.

I'm not disputing that, but you missed missed the entire thread of this conversation. It has nothing to do with what is ordinarily required of people.

She said that as an indian woman she would be prepared to be subjected to more scrutiny to verify her identity than a white person. And there was no indication to believe that the discussion was restricted solely to Green Cards.

[sachinky 465]

I'm not disputing that, but you missed missed the entire thread of this conversation. It has nothing to do with what is ordinarily required of people.

She said that as an indian woman she would be prepared to be subjected to more scrutiny to verify her identity than a white person. And there was no indication to believe that the discussion was restricted solely to Green Cards.

Yes, my comment was solely restricted to Green Cards in response to JQ's original hypothetical situation of an employer asking me to produce a GC despite an unrestricted SSN and a D/L (which I get is illegal) which might not have been asked of another white American person applying for the same job.

I also laid out my reasons for not having any objections to it in post #488

Edited April 27, 2010 by sachinky

[sachinky 465]

My husband is a white, blue-eyed and redheaded, natural born American citizen. After one year of our marriage, he will be entitled to a Person of Indian Origin card based on his marriage to me. He can come and leave India whenever he feels like, work here, go to university, hold bank accounts, buy property etc. Now do you think if he just walks into a bank, they'll simply let him open an account without asking for his PIO card? Or if he starts a job, the employers won't want to check his IDs and verify it? At every step his papers will be checked, to ensure he is not in violation of any rules. Even though he has his PIO card, it is quite apparent simply by virtue of his skin color, hair color, and eye color that he is NOT a person of Indian origin and unless the authorities check his papers there is no reason to think he is anything else other than an American tourist in India who'd be breaking laws if he were working without his card.