Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Arizona Republicans push bill that would legalize killing undocumented migrants accused of trespass


Grim Reaper 6

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, OverSword said:

But they had the Castle Doctrine, not stand your ground, right?

I don't know about the Castle Doctrine but they do have Stand Your Ground on the books.

Arizona a Stand Your Ground State:Is Arizona a Stand Your Ground State? 5 CRUCIAL Insights (chellelaw.com)

See this post for links to all the information!

 

Edited by Grim Reaper 6
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Chances are that this bill is just a political stunt, a 2-page blurb thrown out so the credit can be reaped with the full knowledge that it probably won't even make it to the floor.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

Why are you so focused on race.  I know what the headline says, but this doesn't actually target any certain group of people, unless that group is anyone trying to hurt you on your property.  Prior to this proposal it was only someone in your home or car.  Personally I don't see the need for this legislation, if you need to shoot someone in whos criminal behavior in endangering you in your house then that's plenty for me.  @Grim Reaper 6 you read the legislation is a race or nationality specified in it?

It absolutely is about race.

The people struggling to enter America from the southern border (they're not after people entering via plane, which is actually the route that MORE immigrants take) are all brown skinned.  Do you think that Jose Aquilla (who does our lawns and is an American citizen) constantly carries proof that he's an American citizen with him?  Do you really think that a homeowner with this bill in place will take the time to talk to Jose and find out that he's a 5th generation Texan (or Arizonan) or is the homeowner just going to aim and shoot the brown guy who happens to walk near his property line while getting to a work site at the rear of another house?

If it wasn't about race and it was about fixing migration they'd be actively working to clear up the mess at the border (easier access to work permits, etc.)

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

No, none of that is mentioned. But the new legislation is just a regurgitated version of laws already on the books. Frankly I don't understand why this law was even proposed it makes no sense, and technically it serves no purpose! 

So why are lawmakers proposing it, that is the real question!!:yes:

Because Trump's rhetoric (spouted everywhere) is that migrants are "animals" and "inhuman" (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-expected-highlight-murder-michigan-woman-immigration-speech-2024-04-02/) and "poison the blood of our nation" (ht tps://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-says-immigrants-are-poisoning-blood-country-biden-campaign-liken-rcna130141) and "destroying the fabric of our nation" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/at-iowa-rally-trump-doubles-down-on-comments-about-immigrants-poisoning-the-nations-blood -- and that sort of language and rhetoric is alarming to many people (moreso to Republicans than to Democrats.)

So it is a political action to energize their voting base.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The proposed legislation literally just changes fives words of a law already on the books.l, two of the fives words changed just change and to or and one word change is changing both to either.  

At most all this proposed bill does is make a law use more common english and remove a minor amount of ambiguity that lawyers would argue over.

This is a lot of outrage over nothing.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

It absolutely is about race.

The people struggling to enter America from the southern border (they're not after people entering via plane, which is actually the route that MORE immigrants take) are all brown skinned.  Do you think that Jose Aquilla (who does our lawns and is an American citizen) constantly carries proof that he's an American citizen with him?  Do you really think that a homeowner with this bill in place will take the time to talk to Jose and find out that he's a 5th generation Texan (or Arizonan) or is the homeowner just going to aim and shoot the brown guy who happens to walk near his property line while getting to a work site at the rear of another house?

If it wasn't about race and it was about fixing migration they'd be actively working to clear up the mess at the border (easier access to work permits, etc.)

 

Jose Aquilla who is a 5th Generation Texan has exactly the same rights to be on a person's property as 5th Generation John Smith - if he's not hired to work your property he doesn't belong there. The law as written targets John Smith just as much as it targets Jose Aquilla. You're ignoring that in favour of some caste system where it's ok to shoot a black intruder but you have to call the cops on a white intruder (your words from post #10, a "two tier sytem" I believe you called it - I hope you've at least realised the error in that particular approach).

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kenemet said:

But if this passes, a number of people will use it as an excuse to shoot anyone who vaguely looks Hispanic.

You are making an assumption.  The reason for the legislation isn't because Arizonans want to target practice against brown people.  I think it's just the opposite.  I know that farmers and ranchers in Texas have been complaining for the last couple of years because of illegals using their property to find their way into the country.  If they all just kept going and didn't pose a threat, most people aren't going to go out of their way to start shooting at them.  OTOH, if your family is home and these folks come knocking or stealing or generally threatening your family then using potentially deadly force should be a reasonable action.  Each situation would have to stand on its own, legally, but at least the law would make it possible for the property owner to have the option to defend their home and family when these law breaking non-citizens trespass. 

That was my initial point.  The piece is written to make it sound like AZ wants its citizens to be able to do extra-judicial killings.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Because Trump's rhetoric (spouted everywhere) is that migrants are "animals" and "inhuman" (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-expected-highlight-murder-michigan-woman-immigration-speech-2024-04-02/) and "poison the blood of our nation" (ht tps://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-says-immigrants-are-poisoning-blood-country-biden-campaign-liken-rcna130141) and "destroying the fabric of our nation" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/at-iowa-rally-trump-doubles-down-on-comments-about-immigrants-poisoning-the-nations-blood -- and that sort of language and rhetoric is alarming to many people (moreso to Republicans than to Democrats.)

So it is a political action to energize their voting base.

I agree it is political action designed to energize their voter base, however in this case I can see it blowing up in their collective faces. Like I said before, just because someone can get a concealed carry permit, doesn’t make them responsible enough to have it. Concealed carry carries a great deal of responsibility with it. And unfortunately many people don’t understand the fundamental concept of carrying concealed which makes those who fall into this category a liability and very dangerous.

JIMHO

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, and-then said:

You are making an assumption.  The reason for the legislation isn't because Arizonans want to target practice against brown people.  I think it's just the opposite.  I know that farmers and ranchers in Texas have been complaining for the last couple of years because of illegals using their property to find their way into the country.  If they all just kept going and didn't pose a threat, most people aren't going to go out of their way to start shooting at them.  OTOH, if your family is home and these folks come knocking or stealing or generally threatening your family then using potentially deadly force should be a reasonable action.  Each situation would have to stand on its own, legally, but at least the law would make it possible for the property owner to have the

option to defend their home and family when these law breaking non-citizens trespass. 

That was my initial point.  The piece is written to make it sound like AZ wants its citizens to be able to do extra-judicial killings.  

Remember the people who've shot Black folks doing innocent things (like turning around in their driveways) and using "stand your ground" laws to kill them.  All it takes in defense is "I was afraid they'd hurt me" https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/floridas-stand-your-ground-law-and-when-it-applies

Killing someone for crossing your property is not the same as killing someone who's coming after you and your kids with a rifle.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Zebra3 said:

LMAO.

Not sure why you think that is so funny.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Because Trump's rhetoric (spouted everywhere) is that migrants are "animals" and "inhuman" (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-expected-highlight-murder-michigan-woman-immigration-speech-2024-04-02/) and "poison the blood of our nation" (ht tps://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-says-immigrants-are-poisoning-blood-country-biden-campaign-liken-rcna130141) and "destroying the fabric of our nation" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/at-iowa-rally-trump-doubles-down-on-comments-about-immigrants-poisoning-the-nations-blood -- and that sort of language and rhetoric is alarming to many people (moreso to Republicans than to Democrats.)

So it is a political action to energize their voting base.

You need to stop watching leftist news exclusively.   Trump called the illegal who murdered a person an animal.  Nice try though.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Not sure why you think that is so funny.

I think that member was looking into a Mirror!!!!!!!:lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
10 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Not sure why you think that is so funny.

We know you don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Kenemet said:

It absolutely is about race.

The people struggling to enter America from the southern border (they're not after people entering via plane, which is actually the route that MORE immigrants take) are all brown skinned.  Do you think that Jose Aquilla (who does our lawns and is an American citizen) constantly carries proof that he's an American citizen with him?  Do you really think that a homeowner with this bill in place will take the time to talk to Jose and find out that he's a 5th generation Texan (or Arizonan) or is the homeowner just going to aim and shoot the brown guy who happens to walk near his property line while getting to a work site at the rear of another house?

If it wasn't about race and it was about fixing migration they'd be actively working to clear up the mess at the border (easier access to work permits, etc.)

 

Can you please quote the part of the bill that mentions race or nationality?  

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ANY bill that gives people permission to shoot people is going to be abused, twisted and used incorrectly. Incredibly stupid.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, moonman said:

ANY bill that gives people permission to shoot people is going to be abused, twisted and used incorrectly. Incredibly stupid.

It isn't giving people permission to shoot anyone, all it does is change a few words in the original law.

Screenshot_20240404_124559_SamsungNotes.thumb.jpg.f5d442c94bce3a2e33e9e0a5f4874c14.jpg

It literally just changes and to or, both to either, upon to on, and in to for the purpose of.  Everything going on is literally just manufactured outrage.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zebra3 said:

We know you don't.

Oh that's good.  Well keep that hidden knowledge,  It may prove useful someday.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.