People are tired of it. This is America?
Submitted by James on Mon, 06/02/2008 - 8:20am
Laura Leslie has a story I missed. A good case for IQ testing sheriff candidates.
Recent data shows more unlicensed drivers on NC roads since the state stopped giving licenses to illegal immigrants. The N&O's Kristin Collins has the story - and like her story last week, this one features an angry local official, too.
"It's about high time that the DMV make it more strict," said Johnston County Sheriff Steve Bizzell. "We have bowed down. You go to DMV now and everything is Spanish, and people are tired of it. This is America."
Bizzell said he has a squad of deputies assigned to setting up license checkpoints and "wolfpacking," a term he uses to refer to sending marked cars to drive the streets of a small community. Most of those arrested without licenses are Mexican, he said.
I’ve heard of “wolfpacking” in highway traffic operations, but this sounds like it’s targeting an ethnic community. Is that legal?
Silly Laura. Sheriff Bizzell is too busy bowing down to give a crap if it's legal. He's making 'Merica safe for white people who speak English (more or less). No one cares about a little stretching of the Constitution when you're tryin' to keep the uppity slaves down on the farm pickin' cucumbers for the man.
So self-righteous. These people are so self-righteous.
But, at least we'll be paying for it.
Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me
What a concept
An officer of the law wants the law enforced. What a concept. Unimaginable!
Locomotive Breath has worn out his welcome.
Spamming to start troll wars.
Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me
Almost
Our standard for disinviting people is pretty high. Specifically, they have to be "intolerably obnoxious." I don't think LB is there yet, but then again, I've stopped reading and responding to his comments (which you suggested, thank you).
Not feeding trolls is always good advice.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
Some candidates
scharrison: "jackass"
James: "irredeemable imperialist asshole"
Yes your standard for tossing people is pretty high. I may have ridiculed some of the statements here but you've yet to see me calling people names like this is some kind of grade-school playground.
Patriotism may be the last refuge of scoundrels (which does not imply that all patriots are scoundrels) but name calling is almost always the refuge of the inarticulate.
Riiiight.
That's like calling the Grand Canyon a little hole in the ground.
You've been a member here for over a year, yet you haven't posted a single blog of your own content. You wait until someone else takes a position, and then you try to shit on it.
In case you're not aware, that makes you a Troll. You have questioned the integrity and intelligence of nearly every other member here, many of them numerous times. And now you want to whine about being called names. Tell you what, here's me being exceptionally inarticulate: go fuck yourself with a wide assortment of garden tools.
Lovely
I rest my case.
Now that's what I call..
TruValue!
Breaking the argument into logical chunks
In defense of Locomotive Breath, we should expect our officers to enforce and uphold our law. But the story here is much more complicated, and it is worthwhile to break the argument into logical chunks.
First, let's start with the simple truth: the driver's license is no longer simply a license to drive. It has evolved beyond a mere license to operate a motor vehicle on the roads and highways of our state in accordance with the laws. It is more than a recognition that the duly licensed individual has undergone a basic training (to teach orientation and skills) and a test to drive properly and safely. The driver's license, because of its ubiquity and convenience, is now used to demonstrate (on any given day) identity, age, residence, and now, proof of citizenship.
Second, let's acknowledge the policy implications behind denying a driver's license -- so much more than a mere license to drive -- to illegal immigrants (and I'll use that term to be consistent with the original posting). Automobile insurance requires a driver's license (which makes sense... I wouldn't want to insure someone who hadn't been licensed to drive), but means that denying anyone a driver's license denies them automobile insurance. And that creates a problem if that person is still driving. Moreover, it creates a costs -- through uninsured drivers -- which is passed along to insured drivers.
Third, let's view the Sheriff's enforcement of the law his professional responsibility, but let's examine his tactics of enforcing the law as separate. Roadblocks seem reasonable, but the wolfpacking is a bit much (and his comments on the use of Spanish at DMV seem xenophobic).
So, I think you can fairly discuss any of those three aspects -- the use of a driver's license to establish more than a permission to drive, the intelligence of creating uninsured drivers of any status as a result of citizenship, and the use of "wolfpacking" to enforce the law.
Permission to pass for legal
Dan, thank you for an actual decent reply.
I agree, the state government issuing a license to an illegal alien allows that illegal alien to pass for someone who's here legally. Why should the state of NC help someone to break the law?
The problem would be solved if the Federal Government were to actually enforce their own immigration law. And before someone shouts "Impossible, there's too many!" let me say that a few business executives thrown in jail for hiring illegals off the books would make that employment option dry up real fast. Remove the incentive to be here and the deportation will take care of itself.
Oh, just stuff your self-righteous attitude.
You come to a democratic forum and post comment after comment that is republican/conservative/anti-environmental and you expect us to what, be nice to you? You started this whole thread with this:
As if that wasn't designed to raise hackles and draw exactly the response you got. There is a reason that this is James and Betsy's blog, because if it was up to me you'd be IP blocked and your tripe would be gone. Go away, go chortle about how you excited the liberals over at whatever right-wing swamp you call a home.
Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me
Dissent is patriotic
Or hadn't you heard. If you guys can't justify yourselves to a single adversarial and mocking point of view then you're just running an echo chamber. I don't expect you to be "nice". But I still think it's funny that if I used any of the language that's been directed my way you'd probably use that as an excuse to give me the heave ho.
By the way, my sarcastic reply was just following the tone of the original post.
"A good case for IQ testing sheriff candidates."
Cue picture of Roscoe Coltrane and Boss Hogg.
I just figured that was the way it's done around here.
As I showed with Dan I'm actually willing to talk with people who are willing to talk with me.
Locomotive Breath -- Your
Locomotive Breath --
Your commentary is welcome, but you do yourself a disservice when you write brief, sarcastic, or snarky comments with this audience. This isn't an echo chamber, but we've been besieged during this election season with a colorful collection of drive-by characters, thoughtless drivel and regurgitated nonsense. And heck, that was just for the Democratic presidential primary.
Do yourself a favor (and do me a favor so that I'm not defending the enemy): accept the fact that you're in a hostile neighborhood and engage in discussion. In general, quick sound bites or lengthy cut-and-paste responses, or inflammatory rhetoric won't get far. You don't be able to convey your point and we will dismiss you, appropriate or not, as a troll. You're clearly able to engage... if you engage first (ie, if you provided this policy posting instead of the original one-line response), you'd appear more willing to add to the discussion.
With that said, I believe that both you and I agree that our current immigration system is broken and that its sad state is something that needs to be addressed. The federal government should fix and enforce its immigration law. But I think you're taking the wrong approach if your intent is to "remove the incentive to be here and the deportation will take care of itself."
The article notes:
While the sheriff is doing all he can to create a hostile environment to drive people away, he, along with others like him, is creating more unlicensed drivers and those drivers are driving on back roads to avoid his roadblocks, transferring property into the names of others to avoid detection, and keeping their money outside of our banking system (likely in large cash sums). And that's supposed to strengthen our national security or make our roads safer?
I can understand parts of the rationale, but at some point, you have to realize the effects of what your doing (in the absence of real immigration reform or enforcement).
Fix the actual problem
Well, from my point of view the original post was "brief, sarcastic, snarky" and highly disrespectful. Unless you feel that the Dukes of Hazzard are part of an immigration discussion or that stereotyping a law enforcement official who wants to enforce the law as a dumb-ass redneck having the low IQ of Rosco Coltrane. As you sow so shall you reap.
I prefer to address the disease and the symptom.
People respond to incentives or the lack of them. Dis-incentivize the trip to the U.S and the question of drivers' licenses for illegals becomes moot. In the meantime, since the Federal government won't act, well, all politics is local.
Speaking of local politics, I'm sorry that Mexico sucks so bad, I'd really prefer that the Mexicans fix their own country. Again, the problem goes away when it doesn't suck to live there.
Fair point
I'll concede that the original post wasn't necessarily the world's best post, and I'll also point out that it wasn't successful in eliciting a thoughtful response from you. My point is only that you are better served, regardless of the original post, with a more thoughtful response. You can use this forum to make your voice heard, or you can use the forum to actually persuade and educate people. It's the difference between making a lot of noise and communicating. I've said as much to other participants here on other occasions because I do think it elevates this blog and forum over some of the others that devolve into echo chambers for rants, vents, and the like.
Back to your argument: yes, people respond to incentives and the lack thereof. But, are you arguing that immigration is an incentives problem and that our most effective policy is to make the USA less attractive than Mexico (or any other country in Central America)? Or only that we should make the USA less attractive selectively? Because whatever disincentives we put in place, there are still hordes of people that are willing to risk life, limb, and liberty to get here.
To follow your earlier point, you're probably better off advocating disincentives on the employers. You've addressed one of the issues -- that we allow employers to import undocumented workers with no consequences. From a policy standpoint, you're probably better off going after companies and employers (drying up the demand for labor) than going after individuals that have already demonstrated that the other option -- going back to their home countries -- is not a viable option.
I stand corrected (partially)
I did a little digging for more information and found this article, published in the Miami Herald last Sunday.
The title (and subtitle) of the article note that:
According to the article, the trends aren't entirely clear, but there do appear to be a few factors at work:
The article also notes that:
But it also states:
So, the difficulty is in separating the decreasing number of illegal immigrants due to the economic downturn in "agricultural, construction, food processing and service jobs in which many immigrants work" (which I'd argue offers a temporary fix to the immigration problem, but was entirely unintended), the decrease from increased anti-immigration sentiment (which is where I'd place the Sheriff's wolfpacking), and the decrease due to changes in the person (a larger savings or improved skills) or their home country (better policy).
Okay, I'll roll with this for a while.
It is indeed a complex situation.
If I'm not mistaken, one doesn't have to be a citizen to have a license to drive. He only needs to prove that he's here legally. Is that correct? If that's the case, that shoots the sheriff's complaint about Spanish being everywhere straight to hell. Believe it or not, there are legal residents of the United States for whom Spanish is their first language. For some, it is their only language. Yes, I do know some of these residents. Many of them are spouses of members of the military. They are allowed to be here, and they are allowed to drive here. Xenophobic indeed. It occurs to me that there is a military presence in and around Johnston County as there is in my county as well. I'm thinking someone needs to mail the Sheriff a quarter so he can buy a clue.
This makes me want to go driving around Johnston County looking like I'm up to something. It sounds almost - *almost* - like entrapment, which to my knowlegde is not legal.
I have no problem with law enforcement officers enforcing the law. I do have a problem with them mounting a crusade.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi
Pointing at Naked Emperors
Thanks Linda.
I haven't looked at the actual 2006 legislation, but the N&O article states:
... and
... and
My understanding is that the Social Security Administration issues three types of social security cards: one for US citizens and immigrants legally residing in the US, one for authorized temporary workers, and one for foreigners with non-work purposes (and it states that it is not valid for work purposes).
So, you cannot get a driver's license without a social security number (although, arguably, the two have nothing to do with each other), and you cannot get a social security number without proper legal documents.
For all intents and purposes, the driver's license can be viewed as proof of proper documentation because proper documentation (including SSN, and by extension, proper immigration status) is required to get a driver's license.
I don't need to touch on the immigration debate to find fault with the DMV law. Yes, we have a security interest in knowing who's in our country. However, we have a real problem when unlicensed drivers are driving on the road. I should hope that all drivers can recognize a stop sign or can read a stop sign in plain English (and this includes the the elderly, the visually impaired, the intoxicated, the people driving back from the ophthalmologist's office, or anyone else), but truthfully, if writing ALTO alongside STOP on stop signs in certain areas prevents people from running the stop sign, I'd consider it a good thing.
As for your second comment on wolfpacking, the practice does sound a lot closer to an immigration raid than it does to a sobriety checkpoint.
The last time I renewed my drivers license,
part of the test was for recognition of sign shapes. For example, the yield sign, without the word yield on it. The stop sign, without the word stop on it. This is the most primitive form of reading: the recognition of shapes as symbols. If that's what's required to renew my license, there shouldn't be an issue with someone speaking and reading Spanish. The symbols are uniform through the country - indeed, I believe they are uniform through out the hemisphere.
And I agree, Dan. I am more concerned about an uninspected, uninsured, unlicensed driver on the road when I'm out there, or when my son is out there, than whether or not someone is here illegally. The first case is an accident waiting to happen that will certainly drive up my insurance rates, and possibly hurt me or my family, and/or damage my property. The second is an unknown. Will it hurt me that someone is here illegally? Possibly. But it's not as certain to me as the first case. It's all a gamble, and sometimes you have to make the educated gamble.
Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi
Pointing at Naked Emperors
I have other opinions about the whole
immigration issue.
First, I'm afraid I agree with the notion of removing incentives to risk life and limb to come here, but I'm not at all harsh on separating families and being a country of law enforcing assholes to make a point. I just think that's wrong. To my mind it would be better to fine the bejeebus out of a few repeat offender companies upon inspection of the work force than spend the money to deport people -- For no other reason than we all know they hire folks who they think will work like dogs for low pay and never utter a peep of protest about conditions or hours or file a complaint or an unemployment claim or a workmen's comp claim. That attitude towards workers right there deserves fines out the youknowwhat in my opinion, regardless of who they hire.
Second, the minimum wage has to be raised to "incentivize" Americans to take the hard manual labor jobs that will need to be filled. You and I will pay more for a fryer hen and a rack of ribs and a well manicured lawn and a spic n' span house, but the harsh fact is, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. You want Americans to take those jobs? Then companies have to pay American wages, not third world wages.
Third, get cheap corporate produced American grain out of Mexican markets. NAFTA played a huge part in killing the Mexican farmer's ability to make a living. They are no longer just poor. Now they're hungry, too. They lie awake and listen to their children crying themselves to sleep out of hunger now. I would do anything to feed my kids in that situation, and so would every one of you -- I hope. THIS is a problem that WE created, and so it is a problem -- a major incentive to cross the border undocumented -- that WE can fix.
Fourth. You listening, Steve, eerrrr, Sheriff Bizzell? ;) With all due respect, Sir, my daughter and I went to get our licenses renewed at the Clayton office of the DMV on 30NOV2007. We were in and out in relative good time and saw about a dozen people total go and come. I didn't hear the first lick of Spanish. Not even an accent. At all. I just thought you'd like to know.
"It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit." - Harry Truman
"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."