Saturday, May 1, 2010

Another Chain in the Fence

Fallout

Just under two weeks ago Arizona signed into law a controversial immigration law that allows police and civil authorities to detain and question suspected illegal immigrants on the grounds of "reasonable suspicion." This is the same level of operation that school systems use to search and seize lockers and students personal affects without any real facts. Yet, as written previously, this bill is a response to the fear and insecurity felt by the people of Arizona who continuously battle things that most other states can't even fathom. Now, two weeks later, the battle lines are drawn. President Obama, Grammy Award Winner Shakira, and the ACLU contend that this bill will lead to racial profiling; while Arizona lawmakers and even legal immigrants see this as needed change. Today, Arizona once again made headlines by signing into effect changes to the immigration bill, even before the bill itself took effect.


Link by Link

The changes, signed into law by AZ Governor Jan Brewer, are designed to show that racial profiling will not be tolerated in Arizona. The changes mandate that officers can only ask an individual about their immigration status only after enforcing some other aspect of the law. This is designed to assuage the tempest of outcries and outrage swirling over this bill. However, opponents of this bill claim the changes are nothing more than a diversion from the real question of the bill, its legality. The ACLU legal director of Arizona, Dan Pochoda, claimed that the fact that those who first sponsored the bill also supports the changes, shows that its ineffective. Now excuse me for a moment, but what? To me that sounds like he's just trying to say well they (the lawmakers) are racist, so these changes are racist too. This logic is so faulty and untrue that its almost disgusting. What difference does it make who supports the changes? They are passed and they tackle the very core of the opponents argument, the system worked! People are kind of ridiculous sometimes.

Originally I was very against this bill, however the more fall out over the bill, the more I am starting to agree with it, especially since the additions were added. This isn't about race, it's about securing the border and easing the stresses being applied to an already overtaxed system. Simply put, the US federal government has failed to designate a border between the US and Mexico and because of that it has been overrun, literally. This is a question of upholding the law. As Arizona state Senator Russel Pearce said, "Illegal is illegal
"Illegal is illegal. Illegal's not a race, it's a crime... And in Arizona we're going to enforce the law."

My aunt used to be an elementary school teacher in Mesa, Arizona, and during her tenure there what she experienced would blow your mind. At least two thirds of her students didn't speak English, on parents night she had no one to entertain because the parents wouldn't show up. Perhaps most terrifyingly of all is the fact that her students, after learning English, would recount their journey from Mexico to the US. The fact that a second grader would have cross scorching deserts yet wear bundles of clothing to protect against snakes, scorpions, and even coyotes, broke her heart. Worse yet is that a second grader could get across our international border without being caught!

Obama and his predecessors have failed to protect our borders and this bill, now with anti-profiling language added to it, attempts to correct those failures. Opponents of this bill have no clue of the fear faced by Arizonans or just do not want the border fixed. Yet it must be done, and this bill looks more and more like a step in the right direction. It's not racial to uphold the law. Just saying.

Later,
Cody

p.s. The song of the day is Airplanes Part II by B.o.B ft. Hayley Williams and Eminem. Love this song!



(Photo: Courtesy of Getty Images)

1 comment:

  1. I think the changes are a great addition to the bill. I never had a major problem with the bill in the first place, and I believe that these changes should quiet some of the bill's criticisms.

    ReplyDelete