1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Arizona lawsuit explained a little differently...

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by noknock1, Aug 14, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. noknock1

    noknock1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,399
    Location:
    Stranger in a Strange Land
    This lawsuit brought by the federal government against Arizona is a reeeeeaaaaalllllly big deal... Too bad the media as usual down plays the precedent this lawsuit sets....
     
  2. Remington STS

    Remington STS TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    144
    A lot of stuff going on out there, but here on the east coast don't hear as much about it.
     
  3. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,642
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    The government is trying to kick State's Rights squarely in the scrotum.

    The problem is you can not have each state having its own set of immigration rules, there has to be some sort of uniformity. 50 different imigration laws would be total chaos. The states gave up that right when they formed the union.

    IMO, AZ should threaten to secede from the Union, I believe this would get them more attention than they have gotten so far.

    The governor of AZ is in charge of the Arizona National guard, and I believe she has the right to militarize the border if she sees fit. In the event of armed border crossers (there are plenty of these), they should have the right to use deadly force.

    For now, they should pick up every illegal they can, and load ICE down with a couple million wetbacks to dispose of. Hopefully they can be in somewhat loose custody so they can attempt escape, prompting sterner measures.

    HM
    Here in Wisconsin they just got a group of 15 or 20 illegals that were growing pot in the National Forests, clear cutting areas, and setting up shelters and maintaining guard operations.

    Northeast wisconsin is almost as far as you can get, but the crime here by illegals is enough for me to have some quite nasty thoughts toward our southern friends.
     
  4. TF

    TF Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    FL
    I can't see any problem what so ever with each state having their own immigration atatutes as long as the states are permitted to enforce them. When these commentators rail against a "patchwork" of laws, it makes you wonder how we survive with 50 state driver and vehicle licenses and regulations, different state and local tax systems, state legislative systems and so on. Bet the feds would love to standardize and take over those varied laws and requirements also.
     
  5. W.P.T.

    W.P.T. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,371
    Obama has gone on another vacation with the family who just got back from a vacation while he was on vacation in Chicago celebrating his birthday ... This boy sure likes to vacation at the tax payers expense ... Obama likes to travel but has yet to come to Arizona probably because he will have to show his papers of go to tent city with the other Bros and a bunch of Illegals now to be known as Undocumented Democrates ... WPT ... (YAC) ...
     
  6. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    Halfmile mentioned "state's rights" and that, to a large extent is the issue. The problem is that this Presidennt, like mist liberals equate "states rights" with racism and Jim Crow.

    However, the reality is that the several states must bear the financial and economic burdens of illegal immigration. The national government mandates that the states provide certain services to illegals but it is up to the state to finance them. This is certainly unfair since the citizens of the state have these burdens imposed on them without their consent. It is "taxation without representation".

    The immportant thing to remember is that the national government, formerly the "federal government", was created by the states and derives its power from the states via the U. S. Constitution which the STATES ratified. Without the STATES ratifying the Constitution, there IS no "federal government"!

    So the national government imposes burdens on the states but does not do what it is charged with by the states; to protect the states. The states send money to the national government for these services but receives little, if any, value for the tax dollars they remit. The Arizona law is an attempt to force the national government to do what the citizens of Arizona pay it to do.

    In this and many othetr matters, the government in Washington is not at all responsive to the rights of the states OR the people. We need a return to the principle of "states rights" which will restore freedom to the citizens of all states and the United States.
     
  7. timberfaller

    timberfaller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,961
    Location:
    Eastern Washington
    State Rights have always been a big deal, the feds don't like playing second fidle. They want to be top dog in everything.

    When this first started(Az.), my first hope was that Arizona WOULD secede, that was the only way they were going to win!

    Of the people,for the people, by the people is how I remember our founding!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.