The AFL-CIO and one of its civil rights groups has written to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano demanding that all agreements between Arizona law enforcement and DHS cease. AFL-CIO is the largest labor union in the United States. According to the Huffington Post:
On Friday, the union conglomerate AFL-CIO and the civil rights coalition, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, became the latest institutions to urge for the isolation or boycott of Arizona when they requested that Homeland Security terminate its training of local law enforcement officials in the state.
“We write to express our deep concern with the Department of Homeland Security’s continued cooperation with state and local law enforcement in Arizona pursuant to Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (‘the 287(g) program’) in the aftermath of Arizona’s passage of Senate Bill 1070, and we ask that you immediately rescind all 287(g) program agreements in Arizona,” the letter reads.
The message continues:
“We are grateful that President Obama has spoken out to correctly call the Arizona law ‘misguided.’ However, more than words are required from the federal government at this time. As we explain below, the enforcement of Arizona’s law fundamentally depends on the use of federal government resources for the implementation of its racial profiling regime. Unless DHS terminates all 287(g) program agreements in Arizona, the federal government will be complicit in the racial profiling that lies at the heart of the Arizona law. Such a result would place the DHS at odds with this Administration’s stated views on SBI070, and at odds with basic American values of tolerance and non-discrimination.”
The letter is by far the most serious effort to date to make Arizona’s new immigration law untenable for the state. Other groups have urged economic and travel boycotts as a way to target the state government’s tourism revenues. Should DHS adopt the AFL-CIO’s suggestion (and it’s a big question whether the Department will) it would deny the state the type of law enforcement expertise that the immigration law was designed to beef up in the first place.
The legislation passed by Arizona state government would make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime. It would also give law enforcement officials fairly broad powers to detain those suspected of being in the country illegally.
“A review of DHS’s 287(g) program agreements in Arizona makes clear that once SB1070 becomes effective, DHS will be complicit in the enforcement of Arizona’s misguided law,” reads the letter, signed by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Wade Henderson, President and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. “We urgently request that you exercise your authority to immediately rescind all 287(g) program agreements in Arizona and, in this manner, avoid making the federal government complicit in the enforcement of Arizona’s misguided law.”
So what, you might say. PWC and City of Manassas both participate in the 287(g) program. What impact will the dust up in Arizona have on our MOU with Homeland Security?
Meanwhile things show no signs of calming down in Arizona. 9500Liberty is now being shown in Tucson per request of the community. Sarah Palin is out there saying ‘We are all Arizonans now.’ Is that sort of like being a Hokie for the day?
Quoting Huffington Post again:
Jan Brewer and Palin blamed President Barack Obama for the state law, saying the measure is Arizona’s attempt to enforce immigration laws because the federal government won’t do it.
“It’s time for Americans across this great country to stand up and say, ‘We’re all Arizonans now,'” Palin said. “And in clear unison we say, ‘Mr. President: Do your job. Secure our border.'”
The former Alaska governor appeared with Brewer at a brief news conference on Saturday. The event launched a website that Brewer said was an effort to educate America about border security and discourage an economic boycott of the state.
I hate being simple minded but did Mexicans just start coming across the border since President Obama took office? I could have sworn this was an issue before then. Silly me.
To read the full SB1070 click the blue.
@marinm
I see what you mean. However, the AZ law permits LEO’s to check anyone they suspect might be illegal. This means they can stop anyone who looks anything other than “white” even though there are plenty of white illegal aliens living under the radar. So why would it be okay to have minorities checked at any point but not okay for the same thing to be applied to white people?
Question on the gun thing. Do you have to carry your gun license with you when you carry your gun? We have to carry our fishing licenses with us in order to fish or a drivers’ license to drive. I would hope the same thing would apply to guns? Or am I kidding myself?
Pinko,
The AZ law DOES NOT permit LEO’s to check anyone that they suspect might be illegal. The law states that status will be checked anytime that people will be stopped for OTHER legal purposes. And they should check “white” people. If its not an American accent, that’s evidence that they may be from somewhere else.
In Virginia, one does not need to carry ID while openly carrying, only during concealed carry. Or so I think. I haven’t tested that and have not looked it up. Your mileage may vary and I don’t have bail money…..
@Cargo,
As I mentioned above, I have no issue with an officer asking for identification during a consensual stop and even lying that a subject must comply. That is all entirely legal under current US law.
@Pinko,
Yup, and its the only provision of the AZ law that I don’t agree with. I agree that they have the right to pass there own laws but if I was a citizen of AZ I’d be fighting the provision for the stop and ID section of the law. Otherwise, the rest of the AZ law is fine by me as an anchor baby.
The law doesn’t allow whites to go free and browns to be detained. That’s an over simplification and exageration.
There is NO gun license in the Commonwealth of Virginia. You can request a permit to carry a concealed handgun in Virginia that’ll give you the ability to carry concealed in areas that have been carved out into the law. Now, if I am carrying concealed and an officer believes that I am carrying concealed he can ask me to show my CHP at which point I’m obligated to provide that piece of paper (literally it’s a piece of paper off a laser printer) and a government issued ID (I can use my drivers license or my Virginia Defense Force ID).
If I’m carrying openly then no ‘permit’ is required as I’m not carrying concealed. I don’t need my drivers license unless I’m operating a motor vehicle. I’m not hunting or fishing with a pistol (that’s just a funny picture!) so don’t need a hunting or fishing license. The law treats an openly carried firearm on a holster no different than my wifes diamond ring, my shoes, or a messanger bag. It’s just a fashion accessory (I’ve thought about color coordinating outfits with handguns [ex. a glock to an upscale BBQ seems like a faux pas]).
Driving is a privledge granted by the State. The RKBA is a human right and is abhorant to the ideals of our Founders that a ‘license’ would be required to simply excercise that right.
I’m not hunting or fishing with a pistol (that’s just a funny picture!)
Have you seen that S&W .500 revolver? I think that one COULD go fishing with it. The shock in the water might stun a few fish…..
As to hunting…….I prefer a .25 Beretta for my hunting needs. Nothing says “he-man” like polar bear taken with a small caliber weapon……..
Send the picture. I will post it.
LOL! I wasn’t saying you would fish with a pistol! I was just saying that considering we need a license to drive, it would make sense to mandate a license to carry. I guess a permit is the state equivalent to a license.
I gotta tell you–if I saw someone openly walking around with a gun and I wasn’t near a shooting range or a hunting area, I would call the cops because it would scare the hell out of me. I would automatically think, “Damn! Psycho on the loose. Duck and cover.” There are just too many whackos out there for me to believe someone holding a gun in public (outside of police and armed forces) is someone safe to be around, especially if I was with a child.
I am curious if you carry your weapon openly in stores and things like that and if anyone has ever called the cops on you.
Cargo, you just stepped over the legal limit for machismo : )
To make this slighty back on topic. I’m gonna read up on the AZ law. Maybe I misunderstand it so I just want to be able to debate it without having to ‘assume’ something.
.500 S&W? That pistol is CRAZY. A guy that had the cans to open carry one of those, I would lay down my arms and kneel before him and chant, “I’m not worthy!! I’m not worthy!!”
@Pinko, more than likely if you call emergency dispatch they’ll ask you a few questions – What’s the man look like? What’s he doing right now? You mean it’s still holstered? …..Ma’am, he ain’t doin’ anything wrong. But, that kinda proves the point about how police protect people – when you need them they’re too far away to help. If you keep a handgun in your purse (that’s concealed carry btw) if something happens to you or your child you have the option (the ability) to respond as needed.
If you live in PWC especially towards Montclair/Dumfries you’ll see me around. Target, Best Buy, Starbucks, Subway, any food establishment in the county, etc.. I OC everywhere. Never had a bad confrontation except 1 time where a guy threatened to use a baton on me and he claimed he was ‘federal law enforcement’. I asked what agency and he mummbled something and walked away. Manager had no issue with me especially because I made a purchase and didn’t make a scene with the guy.
I almost always get indifference or positive comments. At the Manassas Town Hall I had a lady or two thank me for OC’ing and told me that they had pistols in there purses. 🙂
I’ve OC’d to the playground here at Montclair with my neices. I guess I don’t get hasseled cause I’m generally clean cut and dress well. If I had baggy pants and a pistol jammed into my waist band I wouldn’t trust me either. But, man with a pistol on a holster while wearing dockers? Probably safe. 🙂
And, for what it’s worth. I still get the same crappy customer service that everyone else gets.
Just to save you some time, I have linked to it. See the post. (bottom)
And, since we’re discussing the AZ law and profiling…
Don’t profile me because I have a gun! 😉
@marinm
If you are clean cut and have the gun holstered, I might mistake you for an off-duty cop. So please don’t take advantage of that and try to arrest me now! 🙂
@Elena
Oh Yes You Do!! You know lots of ’em!
Note: CENTREVILLE, VA. — Fairfax County police say a man was shot to death in a confrontation with two intruders at a mansion in the Centreville area. Police say after the gunmen entered the home through the four-car garage Monday morning, someone inside called 911 and screamed for help. As those inside the house fought the intruders, police say at least one shot was fired, striking one man. Police say the man, an acquaintance of the family that lives in the home, was pronounced dead on the scene. His name was not released Monday. The gunmen fled into the woods and escaped.
The gunman would never have left my house, except with the police or in an ambulance.
That sounds pretty sure of yourself, TP. There are no guarantees in life, just increases in likelihood.
I believe Pinko was talking about open carry, not keeping guns in your home for protection.
I am concerned about what is said on here about guns and gun ownership. I don’t think we should ever leave the impression that owning a gun is the answer to everything. Translation, I don’t know who reads the blog. Is there ever a time that this might be a wrong signal to send? I think yes.
I don’t think there are strong enough requirements to get a gun and carry.
PWC, I also don’t know that I would want my handyman toting a gun as he’s fixing my gutters. Household help with guns doesn’t give me warm fuzzies.
Poor guy. RIP, and condolences to the family.
@Posting As Pinko
Nor is it helpful to scream to 911 that there are armed gunmen in your house and you are not. Being prepared and responsibly relying on yourself first requires that my home defense system begins with ADT, down loads to a 120 lb dog and ends with – generically – Smith and Wesson. Open and concealed carry expands that system of defense.
If you are so sure – put out a sign that says “weapons free home.” or to be a little more PC, “Support the Brady Movement.”
Reminds me of that yard sign: My next door neighbor wants to ban all guns! There house is NOT ARMED! Out of respect for his their opinions I promise NOT to use MY GUNS to PROTECT THEM.
Pinko, you may then be concerned about the Constitutional Carry movement – the abolishment of all gun control laws as they infringe upon the 2nd Amendment. No permit, no requirements, no background checks. Basically, treating the 2A just like the first.
Here’s a little humor for ya…
If the first amendment was treated like the second amendment…
Any speech using 10 or more foreign words would be a felony.
(Firearm law 922(r) restricting 10 or more foreign gun parts from the 1989 import ban)
Anyone convicted of a felony or convicted of misdemeanor domestic abuse or assault is not allowed freedom of speech or religion and must rely on the government to provide speech and religion for them.
(1968 gun control act)
Any speech or religions that are done in a scary tone or feel are banned. Any assembly that looks scary is banned.
(1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban that went after mostly cosmetic features)
Before engaging in new free speech you must pass an instant background check by a government authorized free speech dealer. Sorry, if your name is like someone else prohibited from speech and religion, it is up to you to prove you’re not that person.
(NICS instant background check and Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993)
Any speech or work with more than 10 sentences per page is forbidden, any peaceable assembly with more than 10 people is also banned.
(Hi-Capacity Magazine bans in the Assault Weapon Ban and in many states to this day)
‘Freedom of Speech’ was only meant to be applicable to movable type presses. The founding fathers didn’t foresee television, radio, photographs, telephones, film, or the internet.
(The idea that the 2nd amendment only applies to muskets)
You cannot exercise free speech or religion on federal property or at a school.
(Section 930. Title 18, United States Code and the Gun Free School Zone Act of 1990)
Any religions, peaceable assemblies, camera, computer, telephone or free speech enabling device made before 1986 is available to use by the general public. Any made after 1986 is only available to law enforcement.
(Closing of the NFA machine gun registry in 1986 by Regan with the Firearms Owner’s Protection Act)
A legal Polaroid camera from 1972 is now worth over $10,000 because you can’t get any new ones after 1986. Sure you can get an illegal one, but you risk a 10-20 year felony conviction if caught.
(Market effects of the 1986 registry closure)
You can follow any religion, read any book, talk about whatever you like AFTER you pay a $200 tax to the government and pass a background check. If you decide to buy more books, try another religion, or talk about something else, you must pay another $200 and go through another lengthy background check.
(National Firearm Act of 1934)
You CANNOT have free speech no matter what in Washington DC, it has been this way since 1977.
(Washington DC handgun ban)
Concealing free speech/religion is only permissible in some states and only after you have spent $100 and attended a state mandated course on how to speak/worship properly. Though in some states you can’t conceal or display your speech or religion at all outside of your home.
(Conceal Carry Legislation and open carry laws)
You cannot have free speech if you are under 18 and you can’t worship anything until you are 21.
(Age restrictions on buying long guns and handguns)
If you wish to exchange free speech with a citizen in another state you must involve a government sanctioned free speech dealer to ensure they are allowed that type of free speech in their state.
(1968 Gun Control Act which mandates a FFL be needed for interstate gun purchases and transfers)
To get back slightly on topic.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/18/arizona-dares-los-angeles-to-carry-out-boycott/
Doesn’t this make you wish each state could raise it’s own army or militia and just beat the snot out of each other.
CA would quickly fall to AZ. Everyone will be scared of TX. VA could take out MD and keep some of those northern cities like Silver Springs or Bethesda and MD could keep Baltimore and PG County..
I was giggling like a school girl that AZ would threaten to turn off the lights in CA. Thats awesome! 🙂
VA take out MD? Why? Take NC, its got better beaches. If we take MD, then we would surround DC and then where would we be?
With a very, very good start Cargo. 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
NC isn’t too bad but MD has some rich resources we could plunder. C’mon, you can’t tell me the idea of Virginia Militia marching on the Naval Academy doesn’t bring a smile to ya..
Heck, that’s one of the things I want MD to keep. I know too many ring knockers. Give me an ROTC officer or, even better, a Mustang, any day.