Police can already demand your identity at any time for any reason while you are out in public. That's why there are state issued IDs for non-drivers. Those have your address on it, too.
And I'm not arguing with you, but just out of curiosity um... how has your freedom been cut in half?
Where can you no longer go that you couldn't before?
I mean, I'm not talking about just dirty looks, here.
I just want to cut past the hyperbole and down to the real issue.
Have you had your freedoms literally cut in half, or was that a figure of speech? How have you been limited?
Police can already demand your identity at any time for any reason while you are out in public. That's why there are state issued IDs for non-drivers.
Not true. Police may ask for the identification of a pedestrian, but that pedestrian is under no obligation to provide it. Non-driver IDs are not a mandatory requirement and one does not need that or a driver's licence to walk down the street in the USA. And they do not have to provide papers to police if they are not operating a motor vehicle and are law abiding.
When a cop has you detained, you really have no rights at that moment. Proving that the police violated your rights can be difficult at best. I was attacked by a police officer once and thrown in jail for questioning him. Peace disturbance? Yeah, well, I paid my way out of the trumped up charge and chalked it up to a learning experience. If video were taken, I'd have a strong case against him and the St. Louis Police Department.
But legally speaking, I don't think that you are required to show ID except in certain circumstances. Now, the police can detain you until they ascertain your identity in many cases, but you are under no obligation to produce ID. So, you may have a point. They have ways to work around restrictions.
I think I may get pounded for this one but I had to offer my opinion. Arizona, unless I'm mistaken enacted laws which were near identical to federal laws and that it was an attempt (seemingly successful) to launch the debate into the forefront of media discussion. The problem with the law or to be more precise, the method used to enforce the law is not based simply on immigrants but who specifically is a more desirable immigrant. The far right see's Mexican immigrants as negative where as there would be little discussion were Canadians to start pouring over the border, those hosers. So the emphasis is on those south of the border many of which are hard working individuals from my personal experience. So as a rough draft possible solution one willfully open to revision: Begin deporting all illegal immigrants while streamlining the process of legalization projecting a "ten?" year plan, during this process there will assuredly still be illegal immigrants but hopefully as the process improves there will not be a need for a wall or more border control. Also a company willfully employing illegals would face hefty fines or be shut down...possibly. Again these idea are just that.
Ok, commence with the attacks
It depends on which law and which version of the law you are speaking of. It has been
Oh bloody hell. Ning cuts off my posts constantly. This is driving me batshit crazy and one of the reasons I don't post that often anymore.
As I was trying to say, the original post is almost a year old. I had more, but fuck it and fuck Ning.