HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #141  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2010, 5:21 PM
phoenixboi08's Avatar
phoenixboi08 phoenixboi08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 451
You can bet the Supreme Court will be hearing this...
It's technically unconstitutional, as far as I can tell, because it creates a "suspect class" because it isn't narrowly tailored.
Basically, there's NO POSSIBLE way to look at an individual and judge whether they're an "illegal immigrant" or not, thus authorities HAVE to racially profile.

The funny thing is, the state officials KNOW this. I think they're just trying to pull attention towards this issue, but I fear we'll get burned for this. In fact, we (or rather, Arizonans - because I no longer live there) are already suffering from this. Pretty disgusting if you ask me.

We have a habitual need to deal with these kinds of issues in this way. Look at the Japanese and the Internment Camps, the Red Scare, citizens of Middle-Eastern descent and Muslims...on a legal level, this is highly interesting, and I'm happy it happened, ONLY because it means the Supreme Court can now rule on it and set a precedent...meaning that we won't be seeing anything similar from many other states in the future. Also, it's interesting that we now have Justice Sotomayor.
__________________
________FANTASY?_______


Wow... I have a mac that is useful! My life is complete!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #142  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2010, 5:51 PM
phoenixboi08's Avatar
phoenixboi08 phoenixboi08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ayreonaut View Post
People are going to smoke anyway, whether or not it's legal. I know many people that smoke pot, some are students, some are very successful business men. I'm guessing you've never lit up, because if so, surely you'd understand that it doesn't automatically transform you into a deadbeat that never gets off the couch. I don't smoke (I have, but it's a very rare occasion), but I'd say 95% of my friends do, and they are all very productive, and believe it or not, none of them have mowed down any pedestrians!

Like I said, people are going to smoke pot. This is just reality, and the government is missing out on millions in potential tax revenue.
Exactly! The government has this strange mentality that if they legalize it, we'll ALL be high ALL the time. It's the same logic that they used during prohibition. It costs more to try to STOP people from doing something they will do anyways, than to just charge them to do it...
__________________
________FANTASY?_______


Wow... I have a mac that is useful! My life is complete!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #143  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2010, 12:22 AM
azliam azliam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenixboi08 View Post
You can bet the Supreme Court will be hearing this...
It's technically unconstitutional, as far as I can tell, because it creates a "suspect class" because it isn't narrowly tailored.
Basically, there's NO POSSIBLE way to look at an individual and judge whether they're an "illegal immigrant" or not, thus authorities HAVE to racially profile.

The funny thing is, the state officials KNOW this. I think they're just trying to pull attention towards this issue, but I fear we'll get burned for this. In fact, we (or rather, Arizonans - because I no longer live there) are already suffering from this. Pretty disgusting if you ask me.

We have a habitual need to deal with these kinds of issues in this way. Look at the Japanese and the Internment Camps, the Red Scare, citizens of Middle-Eastern descent and Muslims...on a legal level, this is highly interesting, and I'm happy it happened, ONLY because it means the Supreme Court can now rule on it and set a precedent...meaning that we won't be seeing anything similar from many other states in the future. Also, it's interesting that we now have Justice Sotomayor.
As far as you can tell...can you tell us what your understanding is of SB1070? Have you read it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #144  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2010, 11:32 AM
phoenixboi08's Avatar
phoenixboi08 phoenixboi08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 451
No. That's why I said as far as I can tell. Judging from what Brewer said, anyways.
__________________
________FANTASY?_______


Wow... I have a mac that is useful! My life is complete!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #145  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2010, 9:29 PM
azliam azliam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenixboi08 View Post
No. That's why I said as far as I can tell. Judging from what Brewer said, anyways.
Well, you seem to be highly opinionated about something you don't know all the facts about.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #146  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2010, 2:00 PM
phoenixboi08's Avatar
phoenixboi08 phoenixboi08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by azliam View Post
Well, you seem to be highly opinionated about something you don't know all the facts about.
Jeeze, excuse me....
I don't have to read the entire document in order to form a basic opinion about this...I read what Brewer wrote, what everyone else has said, and several other news reports. I never claimed to be right. I'm basing my judgment on previous court cases involving statutes and laws similar in their application.
Furthermore, my opinion was concerning the application of the law, not the document (law itself)...
Besides, based upon that logic, VERY few people should have an opinion about the health care legislation...
__________________
________FANTASY?_______


Wow... I have a mac that is useful! My life is complete!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #147  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2010, 10:11 PM
azliam azliam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenixboi08 View Post
Jeeze, excuse me....
I don't have to read the entire document in order to form a basic opinion about this...I read what Brewer wrote, what everyone else has said, and several other news reports. I never claimed to be right. I'm basing my judgment on previous court cases involving statutes and laws similar in their application.
Furthermore, my opinion was concerning the application of the law, not the document (law itself)...
Besides, based upon that logic, VERY few people should have an opinion about the health care legislation...
OK...you're basing your judgment on previous court cases, yet you don't know what you are comparing those to simply because you haven't bothered to read SB1070. At the same time, you are being critical about the application of the law that you, again, are not completely familiar with. In addition, I'm not sure what you mean by "what Brewer wrote", but if you're basing your opinion on what others have said, are you sure they too have read the bill? Janet Napolitano had an opinion also, yet even she hadn't read the bill. I won't bother arguing with you about the slanted media coverage as it has mostly been limited to which next city has decided to boycott AZ because many of them, too, are unfamiliar with the law. IF you decide to read it and come up with a good argument, then I'd love to hear it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #148  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2010, 2:23 PM
phoenixboi08's Avatar
phoenixboi08 phoenixboi08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by azliam View Post
OK...you're basing your judgment on previous court cases, yet you don't know what you are comparing those to simply because you haven't bothered to read SB1070. At the same time, you are being critical about the application of the law that you, again, are not completely familiar with. In addition, I'm not sure what you mean by "what Brewer wrote", but if you're basing your opinion on what others have said, are you sure they too have read the bill? Janet Napolitano had an opinion also, yet even she hadn't read the bill. I won't bother arguing with you about the slanted media coverage as it has mostly been limited to which next city has decided to boycott AZ because many of them, too, are unfamiliar with the law. IF you decide to read it and come up with a good argument, then I'd love to hear it.
Now, I see why the thread was locked to begin with. You're only upset because my opinion doesn't mesh with yours...sorry. Go look somewhere else for affirmation.
__________________
________FANTASY?_______


Wow... I have a mac that is useful! My life is complete!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #149  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2010, 3:51 PM
azliam azliam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenixboi08 View Post
Now, I see why the thread was locked to begin with. You're only upset because my opinion doesn't mesh with yours...sorry. Go look somewhere else for affirmation.
Wrong.

I do not have an issue with people posting their opinions (whether I agree or disagree with them) as long as they know all of the facts. You just basically decided to throw out your opinion based on misinformation before knowing all of the facts.

Like I state, IF you decide to read it and come up with a good argument, then I'd love to hear it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #150  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2010, 6:45 PM
phoenixboi08's Avatar
phoenixboi08 phoenixboi08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by azliam View Post
Wrong.

I do not have an issue with people posting their opinions (whether I agree or disagree with them) as long as they know all of the facts. You just basically decided to throw out your opinion based on misinformation before knowing all of the facts.

Like I state, IF you decide to read it and come up with a good argument, then I'd love to hear it.
Quote:
Arizona governor: Boycott is misguided
By Gov. Jan Brewer
Special to ESPN.com

In my 28 years of public service, I have made a lot of tough calls. But with a federal government unwilling to secure our border for years and years, Arizona is left with little choice. Imagine a sporting event in which rules have been agreed to for 70 years, but the umpires refuse to enforce those rules. It makes no sense. Although I recognize that Arizona Senate Bill 1070, as amended, is not the entire solution to our illegal immigration problem in Arizona, most people are united in the hope that it will finally inspire the politicians in Washington, D.C., to stop talking and to start action now.

By now, sports fans everywhere have heard something about the passage of Senate Bill 1070, a measure I signed into law. It has resulted in protests outside ballparks hosting our Arizona Diamondbacks and has led to calls on Major League Baseball commissioner Bud Selig to strip the City of Phoenix's opportunity to host baseball's Midsummer Classic in July 2011.

Urging Major League Baseball to take away next year's All-Star Game from Phoenix is the wrong play. In Arizona, both proponents and opponents of Senate Bill 1070 have stated that economic boycotts are an inappropriate and misguided response to an issue that is clearly worthy of proper public debate and discourse. Put simply, history shows that boycotts backfire and harm innocent people. Boycotts are just more politics and manipulation by out-of-state interests. As a border state, Arizona has already paid a heavy price for the federal government's failure -- hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in unreimbursed costs -- and its citizens should not be punished further.

It is critically important that all Americans understand the impetus for this new law and have a clear understanding of the law itself. Our neighbor to the south, Mexico, is in a massive battle with well-organized drug cartels. Because of Washington's failure to secure our southern border, Arizona has become the superhighway of illegal drug and human smuggling activity. In December 2008, the U.S. Justice Department said that Mexican gangs are the "biggest organized crime threat to the United States." In 2009, Phoenix had 316 kidnapping cases, turning the city into our nation's kidnapping capital. Almost all of the persons kidnapped were illegal immigrants or linked to the drug trade.

Essentially, our border leaks like a team with a last-place defense. The very same week that I signed the new law, a major drug ring was broken up and Mexican cartel operatives suspected of running 40,000 pounds of marijuana through southern Arizona were indicted.

While drug smuggling is the principal cause of our massive border-violence problem, many of the same criminal organizations also smuggle people. Busts of drop houses, where illegal immigrants are often held for ransom or otherwise severely abused, are not uncommon occurrences in Arizona neighborhoods.

Today, Arizona has approximately 6,000 prison inmates who are foreign nationals, representing a cost to our state of roughly $150 million per year. Arizona taxpayers are paying for a vast majority of these incarceration expenses because the federal government refuses to pay what it owes. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, as governor of Arizona, sent numerous requests to the federal government to pay for these prisoners -- only to be given the same answer she and President Barack Obama are now giving Arizona: They will not pay the bill.

The Immigration Issue

Arizona's new immigration law has become a hot-button topic in the world of sports. Over the past several days, ESPN has presented a number of perspectives on the controversy.

When I signed the legislation, I stated clearly I will not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona. My administration worked for weeks with legislators to improve SB 1070, to specifically clarify and strengthen its civil rights protections. I issued an executive order to implement proper training and enforcement protocols for our police so that the intent of the language could not be misconstrued. Although it is already against the law, the new law undeniably prohibits law enforcement officers from considering race, color or national origin in implementing the new statute.

I have worked for years without fail to solve problems diligently and practically. I have done so always with an eye toward civility, and always with the greatest respect for the rule of law.

This new law is no different. As committed as I am to protecting our state from crime associated with illegal immigration, I am equally committed to holding law enforcement accountable should this statute ever be misused to violate an individual's rights.

There have been countless distortions, honest omissions, myths and bad information about Arizona's new law -- many, undoubtedly, spread to create fear or mistrust.

So here are the facts:

1. The new Arizona law creates a state penalty to mirror what already is a federal crime. Despite the most vile and hate-filled portrayals of proponents of the law as "Nazis," actions that have been condemned nationally by the Anti-Defamation League, it is ALREADY a federal requirement for legal aliens in the United States to carry their green card or other immigration document. The new Arizona law enforces what has been a federal crime since before World War II. As anyone who has traveled abroad knows, other nations have similar laws.

2. Contrary to many of the horror stories being spread -- President Obama suggested families risk being pulled over while going out for ice cream -- law enforcement cannot randomly ask anyone about their immigration status. Much like enforcement of seat belt laws in many states, under SB 1070 there must first be reasonable suspicion that you are breaking some OTHER non-immigration law before an officer can ask a person about their legal status. Only then, after law enforcement officers have a "reasonable suspicion" that another law has been broken, can they inquire about immigration status -- but ONLY if that individual's behavior provides "reasonable suspicion" that the person is here illegally.

"Reasonable suspicion" is a well-understood concept that has been thoroughly vetted through numerous federal court cases. Many have asked: What is reasonable suspicion? Is it race, skin color or national origin? No! Racial profiling is prohibited in the new law. Examples of reasonable suspicion include: a person running away when approached by law enforcement officers, or a car failing to stop when the police turn on their lights and siren.

3. Arizona's local law enforcement officers, who already reflect the great diversity of culture in our state, are going to be trained to enforce the new immigration law in a constitutional manner. It is shameful and presumptive for opponents to question the good will and the competence of Arizona's law enforcement personnel. The specter that is raised of rogue, racist police harassing people is insulting to those in Arizona who risk their lives in the name of law enforcement every day.

President Theodore Roosevelt said, "No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor." Arizona has been more than patient waiting for Washington to act. Decades of federal inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation. Arizona has acted to enforce the rule of law equally and without bias toward any person.

It is time for our country to act to resolve our border security problem; an economic boycott in Arizona would only exacerbate it -- and hurt innocent families and businesses merely seeking to survive during these difficult economic times.

A boycott that would actually improve border security would be to boycott illegal drugs. Dramatically less drug use and production would do wonders for the safety of all our communities.

Jan Brewer is the governor of Arizona.

I read this and several other postings and offered my OPINION. Which I'm entitled to regardless of what I've read or haven't read. Like I said, I'm not talking about the law itself, but it's application. So can we please move on!?
__________________
________FANTASY?_______


Wow... I have a mac that is useful! My life is complete!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #151  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2010, 4:43 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Parkmerced, San Francisco, California
Posts: 4,454
I wrote this to an out of work construction worker on Phil Gordon's facebook blaming illegals for the situation in Arizona.

Quote:
Wages in AZ haven't increased since 1980 because nobody in Arizona who's doing the hiring wants to actually pay more for labor regardless of skin color or national origin. Our policies and the biggest reason anyone is here--is because it's cheap. As you probably know, having everything cheap here makes you essentially disposable. Right to work laws aside, somebody will always find some way to can you and have someone else do it cheaper. It's just how things will be until we can change that. Cheap makes us the backoffice of the real world, perpetually relegating ourselves into an economic afterthought. But we can't even get that. Our economy has only gotten worse since 1980 because we constantly let the finicky, pretend real estate economy make it look like things aren't inherently cheap and broken in Az. Absent better times, we blame illegals for economic woes when our boom days were built on their backs. Blame cheap instead. How is someone who's a citizen going to compete with Day Labor? By educating themselves. I've worked in enough cheap tech sweatshops around Phoenix to know it's probably not that much different from standing on a street corner, but when it comes to that point, hopefully I'll have my degree then. But that's particularly difficult here. Arizona constantly cheapens everybody on education with garbage schools, crappy pay, expensive tuition, and limited options up and down every ladder. And if you read my plan Cliff, you'd see that the costs of immigration would be supported by the immigrants themselves rather than having Washington siphon everything away and give little back, cheapening us. You want things to be better here? Stop thinking cheap.
I really wish illegal immigration weren't the red herring it were here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #152  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2010, 3:02 PM
JI5 JI5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central Phoenix
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenixboi08 View Post
there's NO POSSIBLE way to look at an individual and judge whether they're an "illegal immigrant" or not, thus authorities HAVE to racially profile.
That's not entirely true.... if there were 10 people hiding under plywood in the bed of a pickup truck, or 50 people crammed into a drophouse, I think it's fair to have "reasonable suspicion"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #153  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2010, 3:08 PM
JI5 JI5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central Phoenix
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicelord John View Post
What? You mean employers can legally discriminate? I always assumed the same laws as fair housing applied.
You're correct - employers can't discriminate UNLESS your race would interfere with the job... i.e. if I run a clinic where Mexicans can help other Mexicans adjust to life in the US, It's okay for me to hire only Mexicans.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:22 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.