tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post4184280167683826903..comments2024-03-28T08:58:27.412-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: Driving While Mexican, or it's no fun being an illegal alien (or looking like one either)Victor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-28127694703057013522010-05-02T15:53:19.977-07:002010-05-02T15:53:19.977-07:00Steve I think your analogy with age is a really in...Steve I think your analogy with age is a really interesting one I'd be curious to see a response.<br /><br />I'll try to come up with one, but I think it isn't very compelling. For age, the law is explicit that you can't do XYZ if you are of a certain age. Hence, if it appears you are doing XYZ <i>and</i> you are in that age group, that is sufficient cause for a request for ID.<br /><br />In the case of illegal immigration, the law is not explicit about any particular ethnic group, so there is no a priori reason to target a particular ethnic group. <br /><br />If the law were, 'It is illegal to be green-skinned and drive a car' then police would be justified (at least in the narrow legal sense, not moral sense obviously) in stopping all green-skinned drivers. But in this case, there is no phenotypic trait that indicates being here illegally with enough certainty to justify the search.<br /><br />Is that convincing at all? <br /><br />If that is right, then perhaps we should go with MC Evers nice idea, and inconvenience everyone equally.<br /><br />For instance, in my town, they recently stopped <i>everyone</i> driving down a certain road, checking for immigration status (I have to admit thoug, that when they stopped my wife and I, and saw and spoke with us, they waved us through without any concern and didn't actually ask us for any papers, so they didn't exactly inconvience us the same as the darker-skinned couple I saw with the woman crying in the car parked on the side of the road).<br /><br />But at any rate, regardless of how the Durham PD implemented it, it seems they were striving for an appearance of impartiality, much as they do for those stops looking for drunk drivers.<br /><br />The concern is the assumption that someone with brown skin and mexican accent immediately deserves suspicion. If the posterior probability of being illegal, given you are brown-skinned and speak with an accent, is above some threshold, then I would be all for the Arizona law, without reservation. Given that the posterior probability is probably extremely low, that suggests to me the concern has some merit that the law may be too intrusive.<br /><br />Not sure, just throwing it out there this is a very interesting topic for me. My hunch is if we had more latino readers here we'd get some really good responses. I'm just a spoiled white guy after all so haven't seen this from all the same angles as those most likely to be affected.<br /><br />Another variable to consider in the calculations is how bad the crime is. If we were talking about rapists or murderers, I'd be happy to grant the police these powers. But we're talking about people here illegally trying to improve their lot in life. An economic strain on the states they are in, yes, but is that enough to justify such measures? It isn't clear to me. People can say "We should have the power to enforce laws already on the books", yes. But to put a whole lot of resources into enforcing a law without dire consequences would be a silly use of limited resources.<br /><br />To sum up, whether it is justified depends on a few factors that people tend to have implicit assumptions about:<br />1) How bad is the crime, is it worth devoting X economic and law enforcement resources to enforcing it vigorously?<br />2) Does the law, and enforcing the law, place undue suspicion on people with a certain appearance, given that the law doesn't explicitly specify any particular ethnic group?<br /><br />Some people focus on what I consider a red herring, which is whether the state has jurisdiction on such matters. That seems to be a legal quibble that doesn't get at the underlying ethical issues.<br /><br />God I hope this makes sense it is a rambling thing isn't it.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-77208043791531161052010-05-01T16:53:20.827-07:002010-05-01T16:53:20.827-07:00In fairness, I don't think the police should b...In fairness, I don't think the police should be allowed to check the driver's license of any driver who appears to be underage. That would be agist profiling. And that would perpetuate an injustice against older teens who look younger than their true age. <br /><br />Likewise, liquor store cashiers should not be allowed to demand ID from customers who appear to be underage, for that would be another case of agist profiling, not to mention the grave injustice to older customers who look younger than their true age. <br /><br />By the same token, we should abolish statutory rape, since enforcing the age of consent is agist profiling.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-68300076217285948352010-05-01T16:07:02.888-07:002010-05-01T16:07:02.888-07:00Victor Reppert said...
"I think you have to ...Victor Reppert said...<br /><br />"I think you have to develop non-racial criteria for immigration status investigation."<br /><br />Since when did Mexicans become the Mexican "race"?stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-45414346718997215562010-05-01T16:05:12.271-07:002010-05-01T16:05:12.271-07:00Victor Reppert said...
"I think you have to ...Victor Reppert said...<br /><br />"I think you have to develop non-racial criteria for immigration status investigation."<br /><br />How about profiling registered Democrats?stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-26281582652644722512010-05-01T14:42:36.363-07:002010-05-01T14:42:36.363-07:00I think you have to develop non-racial criteria fo...I think you have to develop non-racial criteria for immigration status investigation, and I think this is where it is going to have to end up. So anybody can be detained if they left their wallet at home and got stopped. Whether this will tax police resources beyond reason is another matter, but given the large numbers of Hispanics in our state, it is hard to believe that this would tax our resources unduly, but the law, if it allows police to profile, will not.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-73054422738780731552010-04-30T11:07:34.672-07:002010-04-30T11:07:34.672-07:00Sorry if double-posted.
My question is, why not j...Sorry if double-posted.<br /><br />My question is, why not just inconvenience everybody? Seriously, how long does it take to ask everybody who's pulled over/detained (i.e. cops already have reasonable suspicion of something else) for proof of legal residency? If you ask everyone, regardless of who they are, for proof, then the problem will fix itself without any ability to levy charges of profiling.M. C. Evershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00514967652907935080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-58496142265527346492010-04-30T10:13:15.328-07:002010-04-30T10:13:15.328-07:00"The problem is that certain subgroups will b..."The problem is that certain subgroups will be disproportionately inconvenienced."<br /><br />It would be disproportionate if you thought that enforcing a law should always spread inconvenience equally across ethnicities, but why think that? It is proportionate relative to stopping illegal immigration, since 99% of them will be Mexicans.<br /><br />I agree that if the problems visited on the minority are too crazy then they shouldn't be implemented, but again that has nothing to do with race. If 99% of illegals were Porsche owners rather than Mexicans, then nothing about the principles of the debate should change.Humdingernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-42482983697543083672010-04-29T23:21:52.094-07:002010-04-29T23:21:52.094-07:00"We can project the number of people inconven..."We can project the number of people inconvenienced without even bringing color into it. It should just be about the numbers, not the ethnicity of the people that the numbers represent."<br /><br />I predict you are not black. :)<br /><br />The problem is that certain subgroups will be disproportionately inconvenienced. If we just take some weighted sum ignoring race, that could easily wash out the crazy problems created for a small but noticeable minority. A point of pride in US states should be that our law enforcement officials don't selectively target certain groups, even if they are a small minority (e.g., guarding against the "tyranny of the majority"). <br /><br />Note I am sympathetic to this law, I am not convinced it errs on the side of intrusiveness. It may strike a nice balance between jack-booted-thuggery and "let the immigrants bloom" utopianism.<br /><br />I'm agnostic, waiting to see the practical consequences (this is easy for me to say as a white male living in North Carolina, but I think I can be somewhat objective about this).<br /><br />Plus, when Al Sharpton is against something, that biases me strongly to be for it. :OBlue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-39632768867846909542010-04-29T14:09:34.349-07:002010-04-29T14:09:34.349-07:00Gregory said...
Steve said this:
"Suppose th...Gregory said...<br />Steve said this:<br /><br />"Suppose there was a law cracking down on the KKK. Should the police target white dudes donning bed sheets, or would that be illegal profiling?"<br /><br />This is not a good analogy. In the case of the "KKK", only "white" people can be included in this category. Any search for Ku Klux Klan members, by definition, rules out "non-whites". So the search domain is very narrow. And, of course, if a white man is donning a hood and outfit with a Klan symbol upon the breast, then it would appear that the search for wanted KKK members has turned out successful. <br /><br />In the case of "illegal" immigrants, the category is much broader than a single ethnic group. <br /><br />******************************************<br /><br />To the contrary, it's a perfectly sound analogy. Perhaps you're just too inattentive to notice how Reppert framed the issue: "Driving while Mexican...Looking like one...brown skin...speak Spanish...or English with a Mexican accent...."stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-48456680661943681762010-04-29T11:49:18.694-07:002010-04-29T11:49:18.694-07:00"The problem with this law, according to its ..."The problem with this law, according to its critics, is that it errs on the side of government intrusiveness."<br /><br />Right, so the issue is whether or not the good resulting from enforcing the law this way will outweigh the bad of government intrusiveness against a number of individuals.<br /><br />Fair enough.<br /><br />But then all this talk about racism looks like a complete red herring. We can project the number of people inconvenienced without even bringing color into it. It should just be about the numbers, not the ethnicity of the people that the numbers represent.Humdingerhttp://(optional)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-64732184303615179402010-04-29T08:24:52.114-07:002010-04-29T08:24:52.114-07:00"the government has a right to inconvenience ..."the government has a right to inconvenience its citizens if its the best way to enforce the law."<br /><br />Not in the United States. In practice, enforcing the law requires striking a delicate balance between individual liberties and government intrusiveness. The problem with this law, according to its critics, is that it errs on the side of government intrusiveness.<br /><br />Typically the US prides itself in its striving to err on the side of protecting liberties versus erring on the side of government intrusiveness.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-16304277915223720682010-04-29T02:40:53.824-07:002010-04-29T02:40:53.824-07:00Steve said this:
"Suppose there was a law cr...Steve said this:<br /><br />"Suppose there was a law cracking down on the KKK. Should the police target white dudes donning bed sheets, or would that be illegal profiling?"<br /><br />This is not a good analogy. In the case of the "KKK", only "white" people can be included in this category. Any search for Ku Klux Klan members, by definition, rules out "non-whites". So the search domain is very narrow. And, of course, if a white man is donning a hood and outfit with a Klan symbol upon the breast, then it would appear that the search for wanted KKK members has turned out successful. <br /><br />In the case of "illegal" immigrants, the category is much broader than a single ethnic group. It is precisely because of the ethnically inclusive nature of "immigrant", whether legal or not, to which an impartial observation of skin color, in and of itself, fails to narrow the search domain.<br /><br />And so the criterion developed for assisting the Police identify persons suspected of illegal immigration must become much more abstract. And, in that case, gives Police Officers a lot of leeway in interpretation. So, even if you happen to be a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S., a Policeman would automatically be granted the authority to pull you over, and search your vehicle, on account of the all-inclusive nature of the "probable cause" criterion (i.e. criterion based solely on skin color). <br /><br />What this amounts to is the expansion of the authority and powers of Government....and any significant expansion of Government would fly in the face of "conservative" values (i.e. less Government). <br /><br />Other side of the coin:<br /><br />Historically, the influx of immigrants to the U.S. has helped plant mafia and crime cartels inside the States. We are reminded of this every time we watch "Mafia" films. But I recommend watching the documentary "Cocaine Cowboys", which chronicles the stranglehold Cuban cartels had on Miami via Castro's move to deport/exile "unwanted" Cuban citizenry (i.e. criminals, sick people, socially unacceptable people, etc.). "Scarface" and "Miami Vice" were the two most popular and culturally significant fictional accounts of 1980's era Miami. At the very least, "Cocaine Cowboys" will help contextualize those 2 shows. But....as hindsight <i>may</i> be 20/20, I think this documentary does raise important concerns about the consequences of lax immigration Laws.Gregorynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-52244362891435849802010-04-28T19:12:56.553-07:002010-04-28T19:12:56.553-07:00Regarding the Mayor's comment: Does the new l...Regarding the Mayor's comment: Does the new law do away with court hearings? Will legals and illegals be sent to their country of origin without a hearing? Unless that provision is actually in the new law, than the comments by the Mayor can be dismissed as fanning the flames of extreme political rhetoric.Mr. Guthriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13789464810788711789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-41520942749127464862010-04-28T17:13:55.613-07:002010-04-28T17:13:55.613-07:00According to Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, this law r...According to Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, this law reverses the burden of evidence for people suspected of being here illegally. You have to prove that you are legal, they don't have to prove you are illegal. <br /><br />I suppose that's the way the do it in Mexico. That is why people get stuck in the Tijuana jail unable to prove their innocence. But that's not the American way.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-31748169942442754352010-04-28T10:28:06.641-07:002010-04-28T10:28:06.641-07:00Illegal immigration is a serious problem. This is ...<i>Illegal immigration is a serious problem. This is a preposterous way to go about stopping it.</i><br /><br />Correcto. Something needs to be done (like more effective patrolling of the border via the Fed. govt.), but this strong-arm solution was not the appropriate something--it just gave more power to street cops.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-64024976350057902992010-04-28T08:49:59.320-07:002010-04-28T08:49:59.320-07:00To me it seems obvious to go for racial profiles. ...To me it seems obvious to go for racial profiles. If 99% of illegals are Mexicans, then, by all means, target Mexicans.<br /><br />It's a no-brainer.<br /><br />Is this to perpetrate an injustice against all the legals? Well, it might inconvenience them a bit, but the government has a right to inconvenience its citizens if its the best way to enforce the law.Humdingerhttp://(optional)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-69154626745958565242010-04-27T13:31:21.811-07:002010-04-27T13:31:21.811-07:00A DL would be proof of legal citizenship.
Yes, I...A DL would be proof of legal citizenship. <br /><br />Yes, I think probably you could catch more illegal immigrants if you were to profile. But that would perpetrate an injustice on citizens and legal immigrants who happen to be ethnically similar to the majority of illegal immigrants.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-88008580480040947452010-04-27T11:37:53.073-07:002010-04-27T11:37:53.073-07:00Do you have to be here legally to get a driver'...Do you have to be here legally to get a driver's license in Arizona?Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-4725594341998821412010-04-27T09:54:44.395-07:002010-04-27T09:54:44.395-07:00Victor--In that case then I don't know how &qu...Victor--In that case then I don't know how "reasonable suspicion" could be defined in any way that makes this law work. If it were revised so that EVERYONE was asked for proof of legal residence, then I think it would make total sense (and I don't understand why we're not doing THAT already).<br /><br />Anonymous--I think Victor means that if "reasonable suspicion" remains in the bill, such that only SOME people are asked for proof and not all, then what non-race-based criteria could they come up with? (Maybe there are some, but I don't know yet what that would be.) Whereas if the bill were revised so that EVERYONE is asked, cops wouldn't have to worry about accusations of profiling any more than they do when they ask to see your proof of car insurance. No judgment call is then necessary--it's just standard procedure for everyone. But when you get these sorts of judgment calls on what ought to be a simple question asked of everyone, then it does add a LOT of complication no matter how good the intentions of those who have to enforce this law are.M. C. Evershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00514967652907935080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-48903225887158939892010-04-27T03:42:00.072-07:002010-04-27T03:42:00.072-07:00Victor,
Did you just imply that racial profiling ...Victor,<br /><br />Did you just imply that racial profiling would the jobs of people enforcing immigration laws effective and more easy?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-84614311978385147902010-04-27T00:03:25.729-07:002010-04-27T00:03:25.729-07:00Well, a valid driver's license is going to be ...Well, a valid driver's license is going to be sufficient grounds for supposing that a person is here legally. But there is a "reasonable suspicion" clause for asking for immigration papers, but we are told that the police will comply with the anti-profiling laws. But are there any reasonable, non-racial criteria that will constitute reasonable suspicion? <br /><br />If it isn't used as a rationale for profiling, I suspect that this part of the bill will prove simply ineffective at best, and grounds for a million lawsuits going both ways at worst. Which still makes it poorly crafted legislation, even if our worst fears are not realized.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-13291529274840620052010-04-26T20:09:45.114-07:002010-04-26T20:09:45.114-07:00One thing I haven't been able to get a clear a...One thing I haven't been able to get a clear answer on about this bill is this: just who gets asked for proof of right to be in this country? Can you actually pull someone over because you think they're illegal, or does there have to be reasonable suspicion that you're doing something ELSE illegal (let's say, for instance, a traffic violation).<br /><br />Will it be standard procedure that EVERYONE who is stopped will be asked for their proof of right to be here (equivalent to all people in a traffic stop being asked for license, registration, and proof of insurance), or just those the police feel like asking?<br /><br />To me, the former makes sense. Back to the traffic stop example, <i>everyone</i> who commits a traffic violation is asked to provide proof of insurance and registration, not just those the cops might think (for instance) look economically disadvantaged/unable to afford insurance, or who might belong to a demographic that has a higher incidence of not carrying proper insurance. Nobody is targeted...everyone is subjected to the same thing and there is no profiling.<br /><br />So what I would have to know is which scenario actually plays out with this law, before I come down on one side or the other--because profiling makes me uncomfortable, but an even-handed requirement does not.M. C. Evershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00514967652907935080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-73519395954356940582010-04-26T16:18:37.100-07:002010-04-26T16:18:37.100-07:00[VR] "Last I checked, that was called racial ...[VR] "Last I checked, that was called racial profiling, which is illegal."<br /><br />Suppose there was a law cracking down on the KKK. Should the police target white dudes donning bed sheets, or would that be illegal profiling?stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-76260517859529418082010-04-26T16:13:56.366-07:002010-04-26T16:13:56.366-07:00[VR] "On every police force there are some Ma...[VR] "On every police force there are some Mark Fuhrmans."<br /><br />And on every college campus there are some Ward Churchills. (Indeed, I'd venture to say the latter outnumber the former.) Beware of college profs.!stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-21545825963911630942010-04-25T09:58:49.234-07:002010-04-25T09:58:49.234-07:00I think people might be overreacting.
Clearly in ...I think people might be overreacting.<br /><br />Clearly in Arizona the problem is with Mexican illegal immigration, so using Bayesian kind of reasoning I would expect Mexican-looking/speaking types to be targeted.<br /><br />Am I being too callous? I worry hat the liberals would have us not enforce immigration laws, just let illegal immigrants stay here once they are here. How do you find out if someone is here legally without asking them for some verification? I realize this is a tricky problem, but does anyone have a better solution?<br /><br />Incidentally, my police officer friends don't even stop Mexican-looking drivers that are speeding, as they don't even want to deal with the paperwork that would result if they don't have a license and are here illegally.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.com