[Nuclear1]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/08/arizona.sheriff.immigration/#cnnSTCVideo

Federal authorities are moving to rein in the man dubbed "America's Toughest Sheriff" after complaints that immigration raids by his deputies amounted to unconstitutional roundups of Latinos.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the Maricopa County, Arizona, sheriff's department have had an agreement with the Department of Homeland Security since 2007 that allows his department to enforce federal immigration laws. But Arpaio says the federal agency is moving to revise the agreement to limit that power to checking the immigration status of inmates already in his Phoenix jail.

Arpaio has cultivated his image as "America's Toughest Sheriff," a nickname earned by his treatment of Maricopa County inmates. Many of his prisoners are housed in tents and forced to wear pink underwear, and he once boasted of feeding them on less than a dollar a day.

Now he faces a Justice Department investigation into allegations of civil rights abuses, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona is suing the sheriff over immigration raids conducted by his department. The class-action lawsuit alleges that Arpaio has abused the power delegated to him under his agreement with Homeland Security, known as the 287(g) program.

Just...wow.  And the people of Maricopa county keep reelecting this guy?!

[SpardaSon21]

How much crime do you think they have in that county?

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Maybe because the people who elect him don't like their town being overrun by illegals and he does the job they want?  

Besides he still has power under state law to round them up he's just not receiving federal funding to do it.  He is still getting federal money to run a facility to house illegals arrested by the feds.  The feds are the ones looking really stupid on this one.  Pull the funds for enforcing the law by arresting them but renew the funds for holding them?  

[Nuclear1]

He only has the authority to check suspected illegals that are currently in prison.  Meanwhile, this guy's running what can only be described as a racial profiling campaign on the streets so aggressive that legal Latinos are terrified to be out of their homes.  Plus, didn't you read about how his prisons are run essentially as a humiliation and deprivation environment that we see in POW camps?  Yeah, they broke the law, and they should be punished, but that's just unnecessary.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Not true he has the right to check anyone involved in any stop.  You get pulled over for running a stop sign and everyone in the car can be legally searched.  They do it for drugs all the time and it's even in the law in Ohio and other states that they don't need probably cause as it's part of the rules for having a drivers license.  Van has a burned out turn signal or broken tail light it can be pulled over and every person in it searched and questioned and they all better have ID.  May not be right but it's the law and the feds don't seem to have a problem with it being used to stop drug traffic but they do for human trafficking and illegal immigration.  Sounds like the feds have a double standard for what is and isn't a civil rights violation. 

And before you bring up the waling down the street argument where I live 3 kids walking down the street or hanging out in a group is considered a gang and is illegal.  They are also subject to question, citation and better have ID and this is a small town.  Of course it's almost never enforced unless there is some recent vandalism going on in the area. 

[iamzack]

Papers, please.

Carrying ID is not a legal requirement unless you're actually doing something that requires proof of something. Carrying a firearm, driving a car, etc. Walking down the street? Riding in a car? No, you do not need ID for these activities.

[Mars]

It's illegal to have a group more than 3?

That's unconstitutional.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Nope they consider it an unlawful assembly without a permit type of ordinance.  Been on the books for at least 25 years. 

[iamzack]

Chances are nobody gives a **** unless it's a couple black or hispanic kids. Plus, 25 years old? Prolly designed for ease of harrassing black/hispanic kids.

[Nuclear1]

So three kids outside playing ball in the street is illegal.  Four kids walking home is illegal.  Wow, your town is bat**** insane.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Well playing ball in the street isn't a good idea to start with.  But yea 4 kids walking home from school together would technically be a violation of the ordinance. 

Some history:  Activities for kids to do in this town = 0.  Places for kids to go in this town = 0.  Kids (including me at that time) walked the streets at night and hang out a places like pizza shop parking lots etc until curfew.  Neighbors complain, cops have problems with owner of one of the pizza shops at the time because he lets kids hang out.   They enact an ordinance against 3 or more in one group. 

Result:  We all hop in cars and go out into the woods or up to the river and drink.

Never said it was a sane law or I approved of it just said it existed and you can be stopped and cited for it.  You must give your valid name and information to the police which they verify (this was recently upheld by either a federal or the supreme court). If you fail to do so it's a crime and you are arrested for falsification.  You don't give it it's obstruction of justice.  So you better have ID or be able to recite your SSN and other info from memory or your SOL.

[iamzack]

Not everybody has ID. Requiring that everybody has ID or memorize their SSN is just wrong. Creating crimes specifically so that cops can go on their little power trips is also wrong.

[Thaeris]

Not everybody has ID. Requiring that everybody has ID or memorize their SSN is just wrong. Creating crimes specifically so that cops can go on their little power trips is also wrong.

In a rare twist of fate, I'm forced to agree with you entirely. 

[Blue Lion]

The Feds are quite mad at Sheriff Joe and he's making up laws to pretend he can do things.

Things aren't going to end well for him. He's not used to people saying no to him.

[Liberator]

How about you brighteyes tell us how to solve gang problems then, instead of ragging on someone whose solving them the only way he knows how.

And on racial profiling:
If the suspect for a crime is mid-20s, black, 6'4" and 300lbs why should I randomly check a 5'2" latina or a someone's 90 year old granny?  Answer I'm not, I'm going to stop all the mid-20, black males who are 6'4" tall and weigh around 300lbs.  It's not racism, it's looking for your suspect.

[General Battuta]

And the straw goes eveeeeeerywhere!

I thought you fetishized the Constitution. How are you going to let him get away with something unconstitutional?

[Nuclear1]

Cruel and unusual punishment: making inmates wear pink underwear.  Keeping them in crappy Hoovervilles of tents.

Racial profiling:  assuming every single Latino or Latina is an illegal unless proven otherwise, not the opposite as it should be. Want to stop illegal immigration? Sensible border controls.  Getting the Mexican government to uphold its end of securing the border.  Not terrifying American citizens to the point where anyone with an exotic last name or darker skin complexion refuses to go outside.  

Probable cause and justified suspicions do not including investigating home-owning Latina mothers and their children.  Right now it's about the equivalent all of the Japs in camps because some may be spies.  Even the patriotic, innocent ones.

What Sheriff Asshole is doing is running his county under Draconian, fascist measures totally unnecessary in fighting illegal immigration.  Which is why the federal government told him to screw off, and why the mayor of Phoenix is threatening to have him investigated for civil rights violations. We don't need sheriffs running around pulling this crap.  You frankly don't give a damn now because it's not white Anglo-Americans they're hunting down.

And if you want to solve gang problems, fix the root problems:  keep kids in school and raise economic conditions.  Kids that come from better homes and more stable conditions are less likely to get involved in gangs. 

Or you can take the cheap way out and simply arrest any group of kids with more than three people, no matter how unconstitutional it is.  That's the way to do it!

[General Battuta]

And if you want to solve gang problems, fix the root problems:  keep kids in school and raise economic conditions.  Kids that come from better homes and more stable conditions are less likely to get involved in gangs. 

That.

MP-Ryan once gave a great explanation as to why recidivism is so high.

[Blue Lion]

The disconnect between some people with this is great. A certain someone was just arguing in another thread how singling out groups was bad.

Maybe we can come up with a Dharfur reference while we're at it

[Janos]

How about you brighteyes tell us how to solve gang problems then, instead of ragging on someone whose solving them the only way he knows how.

Hey, how about you tell me how racial profiling which is promoted under the flagship of fighting "illegal aliens" has anything to do with gang problems and how talking about nebulous gang problems you just came up with is not a blatant attempt in deflecting attention elsewhere


BRIGHTEYE