Illegal aliens are not criminals

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Also, Federal agents are NOT allowed to make a warrantless arrests of them based on probable cause of illegal presence alone. The Arizona law grants that power to state leos. If the Arizona law were in compliance with the federal laws on this my argument goes away.

Get a warrant, go round them up and ship them out. I have no problem with that.

bullshit...they can arrest them based on illegal presence alone

it can simply be for being here while violating immigation laws, all your bantering about entering is nonsense

8 CFR PART 287 -- FIELD OFFICERS; POWERS AND DUTIES \ § Sec. 287.3 Disposition of cases of aliens arrested without warrant. (Section revised effective 4/1/97; 62 FR 10312)
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/...1261/0-0-0-29853/0-0-0-29896.html#0-0-0-19015

(c) Conduct of arrests -- (1) Authority . Only designated immigration officers are authorized to make an arrest. The list of designated immigration officers varies depending on the type of arrest as listed in 8 CFR 287.5(c)(1) through (c)(5).

(2) General procedures . (i) An arrest shall be made only when the designated immigration officer has reason to believe that the person to be arrested has committed an offense against the United States or is an alien illegally in the United States.

(ii) A warrant of arrest shall be obtained except when the designated immigration officer has reason to believe that the person is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/us...-0-1/0-0-0-11261/0-0-0-29853/0-0-0-30176.html

 

[Timshel]

Everything has to spelled out to you over and over again. They can not make a warrantless arrests away from the border based on lack of documentation alone unless they have reasonable grounds to believe the person will escape. The Arizona law allows it.

Here is the relevant section.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-9505.html#0-0-0-7383

Sec. 287. [8 U.S.C. 1357]

(a) Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant-


(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;


(2) to arrest any alien who in his presence or view is entering or attempting to enter the United States in violation of any law or regulation made in pursuance of law regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, or to arrest any alien in the United States, if he has reason to believe that the alien so arrested is in the United States in violation of any such law or regulation and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest, but the alien arrested sh all be taken without unnecessary delay for examination before an officer of the Service having authority to examine aliens as to their right to enter or remain in the United States;


(3) within a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States, to board and search for aliens any vessel within the territorial waters of the United States and any railway car, aircraft, conveyance, or vehicle, and within a distance of twenty-five miles from any such external boundary to have access to private lands, but not dwellings for the purpose of patrolling the border to prevent the illegal entry of aliens into the United States;

(4) to make arrests for felonies which have been committed and which are cognizable under any law of the United States regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, if he has reason to believe that the person so arrested is guilty of such felony and if there is likelihood of the person escaping before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest, but the person arrested shall be taken without unnecessary delay before the nearest available officer empowered to commit persons char ged with offenses against the laws of the United States; and


(5) to make arrests-


(A) for any offense against the United States, if the offense is committed in the officer's or employee's presence, or


(B) for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States, if the officer or employee has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such a felony, if the officer or employee is performing duties relating to the enforcement of the immigration laws at the time of the arrest and if there is a likelihood of the person escaping before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest.

 

[Timshel]

Why would you look up the disposition of warrantless arrest and not who can be arrested? I am starting to wonder if you are setting yourself up to be knocked over.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Everything has to spelled out to you over and over again. They can not make a warrantless arrests away from the border based on lack of documentation alone unless they have reasonable grounds to believe the person will escape. The Arizona law allows it.

Here is the relevant section.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-9505.html#0-0-0-7383

Sec. 287. [8 U.S.C. 1357]

(a) Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant-


(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;


(2) to arrest any alien who in his presence or view is entering or attempting to enter the United States in violation of any law or regulation made in pursuance of law regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, or to arrest any alien in the United States, if he has reason to believe that the alien so arrested is in the United States in violation of any such law or regulation and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest, but the alien arrested sh all be taken without unnecessary delay for examination before an officer of the Service having authority to examine aliens as to their right to enter or remain in the United States;


(3) within a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States, to board and search for aliens any vessel within the territorial waters of the United States and any railway car, aircraft, conveyance, or vehicle, and within a distance of twenty-five miles from any such external boundary to have access to private lands, but not dwellings for the purpose of patrolling the border to prevent the illegal entry of aliens into the United States;

(4) to make arrests for felonies which have been committed and which are cognizable under any law of the United States regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, if he has reason to believe that the person so arrested is guilty of such felony and if there is likelihood of the person escaping before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest, but the person arrested shall be taken without unnecessary delay before the nearest available officer empowered to commit persons char ged with offenses against the laws of the United States; and


(5) to make arrests-


(A) for any offense against the United States, if the offense is committed in the officer's or employee's presence, or


(B) for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States, if the officer or employee has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such a felony, if the officer or employee is performing duties relating to the enforcement of the immigration laws at the time of the arrest and if there is a likelihood of the person escaping before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest.

that is exactly what i cited with the CFR's.....

 

[Timshel]

Uhhh, you still having trouble. The part you highlighted says, "and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest."

Does that help you any? I doubt it. They have to have a legitimate reason to believe the person will escape. There is no such requirement in the Arizona law.

 

[Don Quixote]

That has to be the most stupid argument ever. It's so stupid you can't even argue with someone that takes that position. They're unreasonable.

They lack reason, in case you need to have the big word defined for you.

So, it's pointless to argue with someone that stupid. No matter what arguments and proofs you provide, there is nothing that will sway a mind that thinks this way.

about as dumb as this post

anything that you do not want to be legal you make criminal QED

before long what is not excluded will become required

the border between the u s of a and mexico used to be crossed regularly both by law and custom...in both directions - for quite a while women would cross back into mexico to have their babies because the midwives were better than doctors

mexico and the u s of a have a long history and not all or even most of it oppositional - we used to be friends with open borders

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Uhhh, you still having trouble. The part you highlighted says, "and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest."

Does that help you any? I doubt it. They have to have a legitimate reason to believe the person will escape. There is no such requirement in the Arizona law.

good lord...you originally said:

Federal agents are NOT allowed to make a warrantless arrests of them based on probable cause of illegal presence alone.

i showed you that was false...just admit it and move on

 

[Timshel]

good lord...you originally said:



i showed you that was false...just admit it and move on

What you quoted is still correct. They cannot arrest them based on probable cause of illegal presence ALONE. And I was more detailed on my original post on the subject, but you guys ignore details anyway.

What little error you might spin out of my numerous comments on this rather complex subject does not matter. The point has been and remains, the Arizona law grants powers to state leos not enjoyed by federal agents. Still true and all you have done is shown that.

You go ahead and find some little crack in that if you like, dumbass. But the facts are the facts.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

illegal = crime = criminal

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

illegal = crime = criminal

no, only if there are criminal penalties is it criminal

 

[Sammy Jankis]

no, only if there are criminal penalties is it criminal

I don't believe that's how it works.

 

[Timshel]

It is a crime if the accused is subject to jail or prison time. It's pretty simple. Just because you are not sentenced to jail or prison does not mean it is not a crime. You can be punished with jail or prison time.

It's really astounding to me that you guys are unaware of the difference and believe it is trivial. According to our laws, common law and international law it is not trivial. It determines how cops may interact with you, what rights you will be afforded in court, the burden of proof on the state and how they can punish you. The distinction is EXTREMELY important.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

It is a crime if the accused is subject to jail or prison time. It's pretty simple. Just because you are not sentenced to jail or prison does not mean it is not a crime. You can be punished with jail or prison time.

It's really astounding to me that you guys are unaware of the difference and believe it is trivial. According to our laws, common law and international law it is not trivial. It determines how cops may interact with you, what rights you will be afforded in court, the burden of proof on the state and how they can punish you. The distinction is EXTREMELY important.

It is a crime. Your made up distinctions are just to support your open border agenda.

 

[Timshel]

It is a crime. Your made up distinctions are just to support your open border agenda.

See my signature. It is not a crime. Speeding, in most cases, is not a crime. Failing to come to a complete stop is not a crime. Failing to comply with the census is not a crime. Many violations of the law are not crimes.

Ignore the truth and continue in ignorance if you wish.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

See my signature. It is not a crime. Speeding, in most cases, is not a crime. Failing to come to a complete stop is not a crime. Failing to comply with the census is not a crime. Many violations of the law are not crimes.

Ignore the truth and continue in ignorance if you wish.

Nevertheless, it's an infraction worthy of deportation. You can call it pretty polly if you wish.

 

[Timshel]

Nevertheless, it's an infraction worthy of deportation. You can call it pretty polly if you wish.

I have said over and over again that they can deport you, dumbfuck. Still not a crime. They cannot imprison you and they cannot arrest you without a warrant or cause to believe you will escape.

Deportation is not really punishment. The illegally present don't have a legal right to be here. They can be tossed without much of a fuss.

If they turned an immigrant around at the border because he did not have all his ducks in a row, have they punished him or deprived him of any legal right? No. He did not have a legal right to enter or be present in the US. You cannot be stripped of a right you do not have.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

I have said over and over again that they can deport you, dumbfuck. Still not a crime. They cannot imprison you and they cannot arrest you without a warrant or cause to believe you will escape.

Deportation is not really punishment. The illegally present don't have a legal right to be here. They can be tossed without much of a fuss.

If they turned an immigrant around at the border because he did not have all his ducks in a row, have they punished him or deprived him of any legal right? No. He did not have a legal right to enter or be present in the US. You cannot be stripped of a right you do not have.

It's a violation worthy of instant deportation. That's basically being arrested. So the consequence does, in fact, make it a crime.

 

[Timshel]

It's a violation worthy of instant deportation. That's basically being arrested. So the consequence does, in fact, make it a crime.

I don't know why I bother. You have, absolutely, no understanding of our laws. But I will try again...

Instant deportation? Not sure what you mean by that. They have to have some sort of hearing to determine legal presence.

The fact that you can be arrested (with a warrant) does not make it a crime. You are apparently confusing being arrested with meeting the requirement to be subject to a SENTENCE of jail or prison time. Sorry, it does not.

You can be arrested for having unpaid parking tickets. The court will issue a warrant. I am not sure, but I believe cops might even be able to arrest you without a warrant if you have many unpaid parking tickets, because by not paying them you show that you are likely to escape, abscond or otherwise avoid the courts jurisdiction. You cannot be arrested for a simple parking violation. You can't be sentenced to prison or jail. It's not a crime.

Being deported is a consequence, but it is not prison or jail time, nor is it a deprivation of any legal right guaranteed to those guilty of illegal presence. It's less a punishment than stripping you of your driving privileges. You have a license to drive. They don't have a license to be here. It's less than a fine.

You pretend that somebody cares about the illegally present. Nope. The protections are there for the innocent. This country was not founded on the concept that the state can arrest whoever they want and sort the innocent out later. See the 4th amendment and the reasons behind it.

The police should not be arresting people based on probable cause of a civil violation. Get a warrant. It's not that difficult.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Being deported is a consequence, but it is not prison or jail time, nor is it a deprivation of any legal right guaranteed to those guilty of illegal presence. It's less a punishment than stripping you of your driving privileges.

Why all the fuss about deportation then? If it's so nothing it should be just fine with all involved.


Most of your legal understanding is quit off, however.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

What is the process whereby a deportation could ever occur? How can an officer legally obtain that information?