OK, my friends. It’s time for some truth about the law, truth about human nature and some desperately needed perspective.
The civil rights activists are not demonstrating to protect civil rights in Arizona. They are protesting to protect brown-skinned people from getting their feelings hurt.
Once again…I’m not a lawyer. There could exist lots of case law that rolls a grenade under the bed of my arguments. But this is a secession website. I look at EVERYTHING through the liberty-tinted glasses of state liberation from the tyranny of The United States of America. As such, I consider all case law and Federal law irrelevant to the new laws of a new nation.
First: stop listening to all the people telling you what this law says and read it yourself.
All I seem to hear on the various media outlets is how the new Arizona immigration law COULD…not will…result in the dreaded practice of “racial profiling.”
According to the redoubtable Wikipedia, Racial Profiling is “the inclusion of racial or ethnic characteristics in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime or an illegal act or to behave in a “predictable” manner. The fact remains that racial profiling is also targeted against Europeans and others with similar ethnic features when abroad, as the practice has been common throughout the world for centuries.”
Profiling refers to a GENERAL description of a particular type of offender as opposed to listing the physical characteristics or behavioral characteristics of a suspect or group of suspects…like cops do when on the lookout for a criminal (age 20-25, white, blue eyes, brown hair, clean shaven, wearing khaki pants and a red T-shirt).
Another less pejorative word for profiling is “generalize,” which means “to infer trends from particular facts.”
Human beings generalize every day because for the most part…generalization works.
Are farmers “profiling” beetles that eat his corn crop? He learns the particular appearance and behavior of the corn eaters. It ain’t the Monarch butterflies munching on his crop.
You’re on a dark street at night when five young black men approach you. If the young men are heavily tattooed with their pants hanging down, you’ll probably react differently than if you are approached by five young white men in business suits all carrying Bibles. Are you profiling?
Parents see that the neighbor kids have spots all over their skin. Is it profiling to generalize that the kids may have measles or chicken pox? Is it wrong to keep your kids away from the neighbor kids because of what their appearance could mean for your family’s health? Maybe you should keep your children away from ALL the other children, so the children with measles don’t get their feelings hurt.
Consider this scenario: You are driving on a city street. A police car behind you turns on his blue lights, and you pull over. The officer comes to your car window and asks to see your driver’s license, registration and proof of insurance. At this moment, you do not know why he stopped you. Before you ask why you were stopped, answer this question: Has the police officer violated your civil rights by stopping you and asking for your “papers?”
“No,” you say? Why is this not a civil rights violation? Why is it not a civil rights violation for police to request to see your driver’s license without FIRST giving their probable cause, yet it somehow violates a person’s civil rights to ask a person to produce proof of legal residence other than a driver’s license?
The driver’s license serves as your proof of legal residence SOMEWHERE, even if you don’t live in that state. So, unless the police officer suspected that your driver’s license was a forgery, no further inquiry into your citizenship would likely occur.
Here’s another example: You’re a new employee in training at a bank. In training, they show you photos of past bank robbers, and give you a list of the common characteristics of people who rob banks. Is that profiling?
Another: Zimbabwe shares its southern border with South Africa. Let’s posit that southern Zimbabwe has had a long history of criminal vandalism…toilet-papering houses. It is determined after analyzing arrest records that 99% of the crimes were committed by white Afrikaner men coming across the border from South Africa. You’re a Zimbabwean border inspector. When you saw a white Afrikaner man with a backpack coming through the line, would you be profiling if you looked inside the backpack for Ultra Charmin?
Let’s all agree for a moment that the US Constitution still has some relevance, since the majority of Americans still think that it is the highest law of the land. A discussion of constitutional authority is a topic for another day.
The Fourth Amendment says “The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against UNNREASONABLE searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Emphasis mine)
So please notice:
The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 says: All citizens BORN OR NATURALIZED in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor deny to ANY PERSON within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (Emphasis mine)
The Arizona immigration law does not abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. It does not deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.
What the immigration law does is acknowledge that the predominance of illegal immigrants in Arizona are Latinos, and as such, empowers law enforcement personnel to use their common sense to investigate whether any individual Latino human being can proffer verifiable identification and proof of US citizenship. Said another way – if we know that nearly every illegal immigrant in Arizona has Latino physical characteristics, it is not an “unreasonable search” to require that they produce identification and proof of citizenship.
In my never-humble opinion, racial profiling for immigration violations is far superior to the DUI check-points that police like to set up on busy thoroughfares to check EVERY DRIVER for driving under the influence of alcohol. Perhaps civil rights activists would rather have those kinds of random checkpoints scattered throughout Arizona where EVERY DRIVER must produce an ID.
Then, Arizona officials would have embraced the very idiocy that we experience whenever we board a plane at any American airport. Is that what you want?
Speaking of airports and profiling, consider this: EVERY PERSON involved in the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, and EVERY PERSON involved in the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 was a Middle Eastern male Islamist. No grandmas…no children…no blacks…no whites…no Latinos…no Asians…no active duty military personnel. Only Middle Eastern Islamists.
How about we go back to using common sense, and only inspect those people in line who APPEAR MOST LIKELY to pose a threat to public safety?
In conclusion: What is Arizona going to do WHEN…not IF…Washington decides to assert its superiority over Arizona in this immigration matter? Will Arizona kneel and obey? Arizona needs to secede from the Union. Once they secede, they will be free from the Federal idiocy under which they are burdened.
Secession is the Hope For Mankind. Who will be first?
DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.
© Copyright 2010, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.