Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member concernedmother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006

    The Profiling Smoke Screen

    Letters: The 'profiling' smoke screen
    Matthew Vela

    As liberal Americans, we complain every time we believe that our rights have been infringed upon. Is it because we feel sorry for illegal immigrants, that we feel as if we have an obligation to let them stay? The law extends far beyond the profiling issue, which is the smoke screen preventing further action.

    Ask any person who is against the Arizona law why they oppose it, and their answer will be "racial profiling." Ask them again for an alternative, and they say one of two things: 1) Strengthen the borders, or 2) No response. The problem with strengthening the borders is a deadlock comparable to passing a "racial profiling" bill, since there is another front of activists supporting the rights of illegal immigrants, advocating for amnesty rather than removal.

    So we conclude nothing will get done. At this point, we have to ask ourselves, if enforcement doesn't solve illegal immigration, what will? Anyone can say that the policy to strengthen our borders has never made use of its full potential. However, if the policy has never been implemented to its fullest, then what is keeping it from doing so?

    Politicians have had plenty of chances to include this as a part of their platform, yet fail to do so. Not even President Barack Obama has declared the issue significant enough to be on his platform, and has condemned Arizona for its actions – to insure reelection.

    Instead, Americans care more about tax cuts, increasing spending on education, and health care rather than securing our borders (which translates to, "I don't want the government's hands on my money," "Think about the children," and "I want coverage for pre-existing conditions.")

    Yet, the illegals continue to reap those benefits as well. No one has had the guts to tackle the situation and get past the anti-profiling block when confronted about their stance on the issue.

    Illegal immigrants are lucky that we haven't gathered unity to kick them out before now, since there's no corollary that says we have to respect their rights in the first place. Take that same immigrant in the situation above, and get him to cross the border of some stricter country, and he or she will most likely get shot. But not in America, because the same people that we allow to reap the benefits of our system, we also give a free ride home with a slap on the hand when they're done.

    If enforcement doesn't solve illegal immigration, what will? The average American isn't willing to comply with increased taxes that will go toward spending on identification services to pinpoint who doesn't have a green card – so that's out of the question. The average American also isn't willing to sacrifice even a minute liberty to accomplish a greater cause, so there's no way we will solve the problem. Just like the old proverb: you have to give up something to get something in return – well, that doesn't apply to Americans, so never mind.

    In the end, nothing gets done, despite however many promises we make, and however many times we keep telling ourselves that the issue will eventually be solved. There is no question that the law divides society along a political spectrum – the liberals scream racial profiling and humanitarian violations, while the conservatives scream invasion and security breach. Both are gross exaggerations.

    Ostensibly, the only people who are offended by this are the ones ashamed of being called a minority. So what if you're profiled? Does that really make you any less of a human being for admitting that you're ethnically different? I'm Hispanic, but if I cringed for every time someone made a racist joke or called me a dirty Mexican, then I wouldn't associate with half the people I know.

    Sure, there may be a difference between joking and being serious, but the principal remains the same: if we're really that inclined to take offense for each time a seemingly racial declaration occurs, then we need to be tied to our own words and cease half the subconscious things we do and think. But regardless, who are the people complaining?

    Remember affirmative action and how it was able to get people into Harvard? I'd say being a minority has its perks, especially if the government recognizes that you are underrepresented.

    Mexico is next door to us, so it's no wonder that Mexicans are the ones stereotyped as illegal. But people really shouldn't be angered about something that is probably true, especially if they are self-aware of such fact.

    The U.S. government already uses profiling to single out potential terrorists, and though some oppose it, the norm hasn't created nearly as much of a fiasco as this has. Since the same practice is being used there, what makes that profiling any different from the Arizona state law?
    <div>"True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else."
    - Clarence Darrow</div>

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 1970

    The Difference

    I believe the difference between the Federal Government using Profiling and the State of Arizona doing the same is that should Arizona do it, the Federal Government isn't in control.

    You article was interesting. Thanks for giving all of us something to think about.
    [b]My loyalty is to the United States of America. I have no loyalty to politicians. I will watch over, care for, respect, honor, pray for and never forget her history ~~Sher~~

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts