A video has surfaced of a driver who, in a bit of pre-meditated protest, placed a camera in his car, pulled up to a police checkpoint and refused to prove his U.S. citizenship.
When the cop, who is merely a pawn in a politically conservative game, asks if the driver is a U.S. citizen, the driver replies, “That’s my business.” Bold move. The cop replies that it is his business to ask, and so begins a roughly five minute series of arguments between a driver who thinks it’s un-American, even Nazi-esque, to be asked for papers, while the police are just trying to do their jobs and implement the anti-immigration madness.
No word yet on where this video was filmed, though Arizona is probably the likely location.
Is it valid political protest or douchebaggery? Watch the video below and let us know what you think.
UPDATE: I was able to confirm that the driver is Tempe, Arizona-based pastor Steven Anderson, who is no stranger to confrontation with immigration control measures.
Driver Refuses To Prove US Citzenship – Watch More Funny Videos
July 11, 2012 at 6:36 pm, Jean Mary Margaret Jackson said:
I respect his point of view, but honestly, these cops are just trying to do their job. If he had serious issues with these checkpoints he should go to the law makers.
July 11, 2012 at 6:54 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
"just doing their job" is not a good enough reason. The nazi soldiers could have said the exact samet hing. These men are overstepping their authority, and they should not be hiding behind "just doing my job".
July 11, 2012 at 7:06 pm, Jean Mary Margaret Jackson said:
While I agree with you, this isn't the same as Nazi Germany. We have no idea of the context of this video, maybe they were looking for a criminal and were using check points in a vain attempt to find them. I am not from the west coast/Arizona so I don't maybe fully understand the process. He didn't face any form prosecution or forced searches/violations besides waiting for the police to run his plates. I don't see how they are overstepping authority, when you get pulled over by a cop you have to prove you have a valid drivers license, this is in a similar vain.
July 16, 2012 at 4:08 pm, Michael Rivera said:
Having been through Arizona a couple of times let me paint for you how these checkpoints work. First, you get stuck in traffic, generally 10-30 minutes depending on the day. Once you pull up, the officer will ask you if you are a US citizen, you say yes, they generally ask where you are heading, sort of peek into the car and then let you go. If you are suspicious, they pull you over to the second stage and ask in detail/search your car if necessary. It truly is useless as anybody can lie, and it really only serves profiling purposes and the once in a blue moon drug runner catch.
July 16, 2012 at 7:12 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
not only that, it violates the 4th amendment and the entire premise of probable cause. If they can do this on the road, why can't they stop anyone walking down the sidewalk? Asking you where you're going, what you're going to do there? It's absurd.
July 16, 2012 at 7:24 pm, Jean Mary Margaret Jackson said:
It does feel like the law/checkpoints are flawed, but I still think he is taking a bit of an extreme. I personally have no problem with things such as this, because I know I'm doing nothing wrong. It's in the similar vain of CCTV, which I'm unsure if I agree with it, however if you're doing nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide. The 4th amendment is basically useless now because of the patriot act, as well as SB 1070. We forget that we live in a democracy and instead of actively doing something about it, we complain. While I disagree with this guys' methods, I respect his attempts to shed some light on a situation that obviously needs to be fixed. Instead of comparing this issue to the holocaust, why not make moves to help prevent it? Actively complaining about it and comparing it doesn't make it go away, we're maybe even contributing to a problem more than trying to solve it.
July 11, 2012 at 7:09 pm, Gabriele Cindy Merritt said:
What a GREAT way of showing the idiocy of the whole situation though, and as I recall even if he's undocumented they can only call the feds and hold him for 24 hrs as a result of a "NO" answer… what a waste of resources.
July 11, 2012 at 7:30 pm, Paul Wickliffe said:
Is there a difference between "doing their job" and "just following orders?" If there isn't, then please re-read the Nuremberg Trials and also the Fourth Amendment while you're at.
July 12, 2012 at 3:29 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Oh please. You're seriously going to sit there and compare guarding a border with the systematic extermination of millions of people in death camps?
You need some damn perspective.
July 12, 2012 at 3:42 am, John Williamson said:
Ever heard the term The Banality of Evil, Jeremy?
July 12, 2012 at 3:48 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
I have, and the comparison of this to the Holocaust is beyond absurd and into the realm of the Cloud Cukoolanders and those who read Orwell and see 1984 everywhere.
Is there room to disagree with the law? Hell yes, and I do. But to compare this with Nazi Germany is insanity!
July 12, 2012 at 4:09 am, Paul Wickliffe said:
I'm not comparing road blocks to the Holocaust; that's your projection, Jeremy. The issue is excusing low level functionaries for violating our Constitutional rights just because their bosses told them to do it. That is how the holocaust began, because no one in uniform had the courage to challenge the violation of people's rights, they just followed orders. Get it?
July 12, 2012 at 4:13 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
I'm sorry, did you miss the part where you said "Is there a difference between "doing their job" and "just following orders?""?
Fairly clear that you're drawing a comparison between the guard at the border and members of the Nazi party.
July 12, 2012 at 4:19 am, Paul Wickliffe said:
They both randomly stopped people and asked to see their papers. We're not supposed to do that in America. Read this and pay attention to the words "probable cause." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
July 12, 2012 at 4:19 am, Dan Grodzian said:
The comparison was not to the holocaust, but to the nazi mondset of following orders. For some reason, you took the analogy to the extreme.
July 12, 2012 at 4:22 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Seems to me that questioning someone trying to cross the border would, in fact, be probable cause, at least to confirm that they are who they say they are.
You want to throw out the baby with the bathwater, because the Nazis did it too. Well, I hear that Nazis ate salads. Shall we ban the eating of salads too?
July 12, 2012 at 4:24 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Dan, He referenced the Nuremburg trials that had to do with Nazi crimes against humanity. How else am I supposed to take that?
July 12, 2012 at 4:27 am, Dan Grodzian said:
Down with SALADS! Wait, what? No, salads are good. The problem is that these are not border checkpoints. These are check points by the border patrol WITHIN the US in Arizona. If you watch the video, you'll see that the border patrol lets him go after he tells that that he wants to go on his way. They ask him to pull over and he says no. Watch the vid. Cheerz!
July 12, 2012 at 4:30 am, Dan Grodzian said:
(I guess the trials is where the phrase "I was following orders" comes from.)
July 12, 2012 at 4:35 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Okay, so if these checkpoints are, in fact, within the borders, then yes, no probable cause. That does not make the comparison to Nazi Germany any more valid. Call these laws draconian, heavy handed, unfair, authoritarian, what have you. There is no need to compare this situation with Nazi Germany like the douche in the video or paul did.
And yes, "I was following orders" is most associated with the Nuremburg trials in which members of the Nazi party were tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
July 12, 2012 at 5:20 am, Wayne Stivers said:
you, sir, are a dumbass.
July 12, 2012 at 6:08 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Care to elaborate or are you so intellectually bankrupt that that seems like a perfectly good argument?
July 12, 2012 at 1:56 pm, Caspar Mason said:
@jeremy Whether it leads to great acts of evil or a minor interference in people's right, the 'just following orders' mindset puts people on the path to abdicating their moral responsibility for their actions. It's not ridiculous to point out the danger of an approach.
With respect, your salad example is crap: the eating of salad (even if pickled and served with boiled sausage) was incidental to any evil activity, the mindset that allowed them to do it was not.
July 12, 2012 at 4:40 pm, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Slippery Slope right there. There is still a huge gulf between what's happening in the video and Nazi war crimes, and any comparison between the two shows a serious lack of perspective.
July 12, 2012 at 10:32 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
He's comparing that they demanded to see papers in Nazi Germany, and they are now demanding it on a highway that never touches a national border.
What country would you compare it to?
July 12, 2012 at 11:50 pm, Mey Balboaher said:
Jeremy Jifty Roman
How do you think these kinds of things start? Immediatly go to the death camps? Or perhaps you might look back at the stories of people that found themselves with a bit too much power doing things they looked back on and said "I never thought it would lead to this"
Take your perspective and widen it a bit. Some people would rather stand up and stop things from starting to head a bad direction, like protecting basic civil rights and reminding people what can happen if you start to lose them. The comparison seems to be the only way for some people to realize what they're losing when they just roll over for any authority figure without asking questions. Or by demanding justification for interference by whatever authority group happens to be feeling the need to put on some security theatre that month.
The real insanity is thinking any comparison to what started as a promise of prosperity by a rising leader that lead over many years to a world wide travesty couldn't ever happen again. Then not knowing enough to see the signs.
July 13, 2012 at 6:01 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Except Paul brought up Nuremburg which has to do with Nazi war crimes, not with the checking of papers. Jumping right to the worst possible comparison is what I am really starting to hate about American politics. Some security measure you disagree with? Call them Nazis! Some social program you disagree with? Call them Commies!
It's mentally immature and intellectually bankrupt.
July 13, 2012 at 6:02 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
And I wouldn't compare them with any country, contemporary or historic. Trying to pigeonhole this into a neat little box that doesn't fit is pure laziness.
July 13, 2012 at 8:48 pm, Pq Ribber said:
Stopping citizens for identification ABSOLUTELY STINKS OF NAZIism.
September 02, 2012 at 10:55 pm, Kenneth Rhodes Cmt said:
Oh please yourself. The comparison is not about the slaughter of Jews. It is the fact that the Nazis were killing people if they were not full blood German and making them prove it. These checkpoints are sometimes 50 miles north of the border. Really?? get your ass down there on the border and set up checkpoints, not where it is going to take away my freedom from driving down the roads that MY TAXES paid for, and being delayed for a question. I am a Combat Veteran and fought for this country and the freedom that YOU!!!!!!! and I enjoy. So if you don't mind your freedoms being slowly taken away. THEN BEFORE YOU POST ANY COMMENT YOU HAD BETTER ASK ME PERMISSION TO SPEAK FREELY SINCE I FOUGHT FOR THE VERY WORD "FREEDOM"
December 06, 2012 at 5:19 pm, Alan Leibensperger said:
Paul's comparison is relevant. If you study the history of the Nazi rise to power you'll see that it began with similar events. It happened over a number of years. Little by little, rights were taken away When Germans finally began to pull their heads out of the sand, speaking out against the Nazis meant risking your life.
It's only constant viligance that can prevent such evils.
July 11, 2012 at 7:39 pm, Jason Benignus said:
Looks like border patrol checkpoint to me. What this idiot does not realize is these checkpoints are set up to protect his freedom and this nation from non-citizens who may be determined to destroy our country through terrorism or smuggling drugs. Lucky they didn't rip his car apart looking for something illegal due to him being an ass.
July 11, 2012 at 11:44 pm, John Williamson said:
That's a rather Orwellian argument, Jason. In the meantime, I suggest you look up the term Probable Cause.
July 12, 2012 at 12:27 am, Nathan Byrd said:
Last time I checked, what he was doing and saying was well within the law. Tearing his car apart because he's being an ass isn't lawful, and could result in a nasty lawsuit for the department. But I guess when cops do something unlawful that's totally fine
July 12, 2012 at 1:53 am, Dan Grodzian said:
Great post, Jason. Let's protect his freedoms by taking away his freedoms. Wait, what?!?
July 12, 2012 at 2:53 am, Michael Migliore said:
…terrorism or drug smuggling? WAKE UP!!! The U.S. Government/CIA is the biggest terrorists and drug smugglers on the planet…
July 12, 2012 at 3:59 am, Jason Benignus said:
Ive been going through border patrol checkpoints in South Texas for years. They are set up at permanent points that are several miles from the border that you have to pass if you are driving. They are on highways that there is no possible way to avoid if you are coming from the border. You would have to walk 50 miles through the brush to get around them before getting in a vehicle. In the 30 or so times I have gone through these checkpoints I have never been asked to prove citizenship. They ask, you say yes, they run a dog around your vehicle and look under with a mirror. If nothing seems suspicious…. Have a good day sir. The intention is to stop people that have swam the river or are transporting drugs that came across the river then loaded into vehicles on this side of the border than headed to a city near you to be sold to you kids or to go to work illegally or whatever other plan they may have. If you have watched the news in say the last 5 years and see what kind of violence is going on down there you would be more than willing to keep this stuff out of our country as much as possible.Think of it as going through customs at an airport. You have to remember, if you are not a citizen, you have no legal rights in the USA other than to be treated in a humane manner. A 50' swim does not afford you the rights of a US citizen. As a side note, I have several friends that are hispanic and yes some came here illegally. Most are good people just looking for a better life for themselves and their families.
Now. If you were to randomly set up a checkpoint say in San Antonio or Houston to check to see if people were citizens, I would say BS. That would be an absolute violation of rights. Also, if you were to pull people over just because they were hispanic and demand proof of citizenship…Again BS.
July 12, 2012 at 6:36 am, Jason Benignus said:
I should have elaborated a little more on my thoughts.
First, I am a conservative who owns two businesses and wants government as much out of my business as possible. Government keeps taking our rights away every day and it pisses me off like no other. I am scared to death that one day soon, my guns will be taken away, a politician will decide what my doctor can prescribe as treatment and law enforcement or other government agency could walk in my house at will. The last time I was pulled over the officer asked me where I was coming from I said back there as I pointer toward the back of my truck. Then he asked where i was going in such a hurry and my response was down there as I pointed toward the front of my truck. Yeah…no warning for me that day but it was none of his business where I was coming from or going. And yes Michael, I agree with you to an extent. I am not naive enough to think the government has no hand in the activities of drug smuggling and cartel members and terrorism. Where huge amounts of money and power are involved corruption will always be there. The USA will organize and put weapons in the hands of Muslims to attack their neighbor when it is beneficial to the US then we call it terrorism when they turn on us two decades later because it is not beneficial for them any longer to be a part of our grand scheme any longer.
What I meant by my statement was it looked like a border checkpoint station. They are to catch people smuggling drugs, terrorists, illegal aliens, sex slaves, ect. throughout the United States. I have been going through these in South Texas for years. They are set up permanently in a location where if you are traveling from the border area by vehicle you must pass through them and are several miles from the border. The only way around them is by foot. The ranches in south texas have cameras, alarms, ect. to detect people traveling by foot through the area and if detected a swift response by BP in trucks, atvs, horseback is on the way. The whole purpose of this is to protect our borders. The checkpoints are not to harass citizens. They are to check for illegal aliens and smugglers who have either swam the river or gotten into the US somehow then loaded a vehicle to transport whatever it may be to the rest of the country. As you pull up to them, a dog is ran around your vehicle trained to detect explosives, human scent or drugs, and an agent looks under the vehicle with a mirror. When you stop, an agent asks you if you are a citizen. If you say yes and he sees nothing that would give him probable cause he says have a good day sir and you are on your merry way. If you were to say you were not a citizen, I would then assume he would ask for your papers allowing you to travel within the US. In all my trips down there I have NEVER been asked to prove citizenship even when I had hispanic passengers. I have always looked at it as kind of like going through customs after arriving at an airport when you are on a flight that has been in a foreign country. You have to remember. A 50' swim does not afford you the rights of a US citizen so just because you are in America does not mean you have the rights of a US citizen.
With all that being said, Lets say a random checkpoint was set up on a rural highway outside of San Antonio which has a high hispanic population and they are asking the same questions. That would be absolutely a violation of rights. Lets say Someone is pulled over and the officer wants to search a vehicle because the driver has long hair and tattoos. I say the same. Get a friggen search warrant buddy. I don't agree with TSA and all their incompetent BS. I do not think the CIA or FBI has the right to listen to my phone conversations or monitor my activities. I don't think the US government has any business dealing with the UN on any arms treaty. And I don't think that if this was actually a Border checkpoint the guy in the video is right to be an ass but he does have the right to be an ass. And as far as my comment about tearing his car apart, by refusing to answer if he was a US citizen, it could be considered suspicious and probable cause to search the vehicle to whatever extent they thought necessary. And no I do not think that would be right either but it could happen and be considered justifiable by a judge. I thought the officers acted very professional throughout the video and did not ever abuse their authority in the face of a guy obviously trying to instigate a reaction. Unless I missed it, I did not see them demand papers or physically abuse the guy. They did ask him to move to secondary because HE was creating a traffic jamb by being uncooperative. My thought is the key is whether this was a random checkpoint or an actual border inspection checkpoint.
Everyone wants to secure our borders and be protected but at the same time doesn't want to be bothered. You can't scream about all the "damn Mexicans" taking our jobs and cry about crime in your city tby illegal aliens then get pissed off when you are bothered by a reasonable measure taken by law enforcement to protect against these things. I guess the best way to handle the whole immigration and smuggling problem is to shoot them on site if the are in the water and if they can make it to dry land run over to the man and hand him his citizenship papers and say "WELCOME TO AMERICA!" or make him pay a tax on the bundles of drugs he just floated over. Yeah. That makes since doesn't it.
It is a shame though that the good people of Mexico are in the situation that they are in because of a corrupt government on both sides of the border, greed by the cartel members, willingness to buy and use drugs by US citizens. Its just a real sad situation with no good answer. How do you protect a country without offending anyone. You don't. Everyone has their own limit of what they are willing to accept and I really don't blame anyone for not wanting to answer a question. It is your right and I am not for taking anyones right away. If you don't want to answer a simple question don't. Me, I don't have a problem with it. I have no reason to hide the fact that I am a citizen of the US.
So there you go. I hope you now understand what I meant a little better and if you don't agree, good for you. We are Americans (or maybe you are not) and that's what its all about. The ability to have an express your opinion.
July 12, 2012 at 6:41 am, Dan Grodzian said:
Wow, long post. But these officers are not at the border. They are within the US, inside Arizona. Did you watch the video? Cheerz.
July 12, 2012 at 1:39 pm, Jason Benignus said:
The border checkpoints I am referring to are well within the US too (about 50 miles in) but have a specific legitimate purpose (to check for those that have crossed the border illegally at non designated points making their way North.) If it is as you say a random spot just to check to see if you are living here illegally well that is a complete violation of rights and I support the guy. The whole immigration thing is a huge problem but do not take away US citizens rights with the excuse of trying to fix it.
July 16, 2012 at 7:14 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
Actually no, this is along I-8 which never intersects the Mexican border. These are not border checkpoints, sorry to burst your bubble.
July 17, 2012 at 8:29 pm, Jason Benignus said:
Jeremy,
As I said before in my post, If that is the case, it is a DEFINITE violation of your rights.
July 11, 2012 at 9:09 pm, Renata Oliveira said:
this dudes the man! somebody get him in congress maybe it'll creat some fairness amidst all this so called "freedom" lol.
July 11, 2012 at 6:50 pm, This & That - The Daily What said:
[...] driver refuses to prove U.S. citizenship at a checkpoint, tells police: “That’s my [...]
July 11, 2012 at 11:38 pm, Tom Hrabchak said:
For those making comparisons between the cops and Nazis…seriously? I think there's a bit of a gap between harassing people for citizenship papers and killing truckloads of Jews in gas chambers. Just saying.
That aside I disagree with the law, and as an American I support that citizen's God-and-Country given right; nay, OBLIGATION to protest a law he finds objectionable.
I don't fault the cop for doing his job. I couldn't afford to be fired any more than the next guy, so I can't say what I'd do in his shoes unless I was in his shoes. But that man had every right.
I'm well aware of the illegal immigrant problem in the US, but harassing citizens, racial profiling, and the like? Isn't that the sort of thing we fought against in the first place?
July 11, 2012 at 8:09 pm, This & That | SillyPortal said:
[...] driver refuses to prove U.S. citizenship at a checkpoint, tells police: “That’s my [...]
July 12, 2012 at 2:02 am, Meredith Harner said:
His name is Steven Anderson. I read his wife's blog. They do live in arizona. He's put another video up like this only it's longer.
July 12, 2012 at 2:44 am, Evan Agresti said:
@paul doing the job in the Nazi regime wasn't defined in the same way as it is in ours.
July 12, 2012 at 6:26 am, Jerry Jackson said:
"Can I see your driver's license?" How is this any different?
Much ado about nothing.
July 12, 2012 at 10:36 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
actually no, it is extremely different. An officer has no right to ask for your license or ID unless they have probable cause. Driving a car is not probable cause for asking for proof of citizenship. If he is not driving in any suspicious manner and has no violations or expired registration they have no right to compel him to produce a license either.
Probable cause. Read the 4th amendment- maybe some day you'll appreciate the right hundreds of thousands died to give you.
July 12, 2012 at 3:36 pm, Zach Ahearn said:
I have an idea lets complain about every sensible law in existence and record ourselves protesting it in front of the authorities. So then everyone will see how horrible life is under these laws and then everyone will think we are so cool.
July 16, 2012 at 7:14 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
clearly too young to understand any aspect of inalienable rights under the constitution. You'll get it around 27 or 28, kid.
July 16, 2012 at 7:26 pm, Zach Ahearn said:
Next time lets not blatantly call out someone for being younger too feel superior in our internet posts, don't worry you'll probably stop when you're less pompous. You think I don't know about these things? I'm not going to even initiate an argument here cause I think internet arguments are rather pointless. I will say however my comment was intended to point out how a lot of these videos are annoying to watch. If I really trying to make a political statement I should have been more specific in that I don't think that all laws are sensible and some do violate a lot of our rights but then It's not really funny to read.
July 16, 2012 at 7:31 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
What this guy did is going to start a cascade of resistance to these ridiculous laws. He did you, me, and every other person this country a huge service… and you want to mock it. Cool.
July 16, 2012 at 7:39 pm, Zach Ahearn said:
Yep I mocked him. That is pretty much what this boils down to. I'm not sure a cascade of resistance is going to start with him you might be overselling it. OK are we done? Do I have to explain myself further? Alright w'ere done here.
July 16, 2012 at 7:43 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
Like I said, you'll learn why it's important when you get older. Talking to you is like a 15 year old trying to explain to his 7 year old brother why he wants to see women naked, and predictably the 7 year old is saying "ewwwww!"
You'll get it when you're older.
July 16, 2012 at 7:55 pm, Zach Ahearn said:
There we go with the age thing again, also attempting to be insulting. You know what? I get it, I do understand what this guy was doing I get that he thinks that these border checkpoints are superfluous and unnecessary and that they infringe on his rights as an american he thinks these laws are too strict or perhaps he disagrees with Arizona's notorious treatment of immigrants and anyone who looks like one. I really do get that, in fact I do think it can be quite ridiculous what Arizona is doing with its immigration law. Now I really don't want to argue even though I think that's what I ended up doing anyway, so damn here I am.
July 16, 2012 at 8:00 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
it is not a border checkpoint- that's what you don't seem to understand. This is along I-8 in California, which never intersects with the Mexican border. These are completely random checkpoints, no different than dui checkpoints randomly placed in a city.
They are stopping people, unprompted with no probable cause, to inquire to their citizenship and where they are headed.
This guy objected, and in case they got shitty with him he recorded the whole thing. What he did is nothing short of admirable, and pretty brave to be honest. He could have been arrested and held for who knows how long. They don't even have to let you see a lawyer anymore if they ride the terrorism shit.
July 16, 2012 at 8:14 pm, Zach Ahearn said:
No I know, that's why I was pointing out his problems with Arizona's laws specifically. I don't think he's wrong I'm just tired of this attitude toward the police who just have to do it and this glorification of something that he's not an individual for doing, he's not the first guy to do this and won't be the last this sort of thing happens a lot this guy just recorded it. If the law really is that terrible it won't last forever anyway. now I really am done here.
July 16, 2012 at 8:34 pm, Jeremy Arthur Vandelay said:
that's quite a stretch. There are ridiculous laws still on the books from 100 years ago that were never removed. Almost no one supports the Patriot Act, yet it is still in full effect.
Again, I think when you have a little more personal history under your belt you'll have a better idea of how the police and our government work. The police should be routinely chastised for complying with laws that they know blatantly violates the rights of those they supposedly work for and are sworn to protect.
July 12, 2012 at 7:55 pm, Angol Mois said:
Nazis didn't start off killing millions of Jews right away…it slowly crept up to that level. Hitler was a charismatic character who promised a broken down Germany hope and change, then started to slowly blame Jews for all the problems Germany was having. First it was the star of David, then it was the ghettos, lastly extermination. Remember the Nazis were part of the government and their orders were slowly put into action until the whole world was at war.
July 13, 2012 at 2:58 pm, Jim Hyde said:
good job pointing out how utterly ridiculous this law is…..and those of you who think the comparison to nazi germany is way off, how do you think they rounded up those jews in the first place? they stopped them arbitrarily and CHECKED THEIR PAPERS……morons.
July 14, 2012 at 2:27 am, Jeremy Jifty Roman said:
Yes, and first they got elected. *gasp* BAN ELECTIONS, IT LEADS TO HOLOCAUSTS!
July 14, 2012 at 5:00 pm, Jim Hyde said:
Jeremy, there's no causality between elections and the wholesale roundIng up of individuals based on a set of criteria. there is, however, a direct correlation between the aforementioned criteria and the information on ones "papers". I'll burn down every straw man you build
July 14, 2012 at 2:46 pm, Heading to Arizona soon? Know your constitutional rights | Death and Taxes said:
[...] Your Rights: Supreme Court Rules on Immigration Law.”Arizona police are legally empowered to ask people for their papers (the law is not in effect yet). The Supreme Court confirmed this provision of Arizona’s [...]
July 14, 2012 at 8:21 pm, Joshua Gregory said:
He only got away with it because he's white. If he was Latino he would have been arrested.