Note: I do not agree with racial profiling, or profiling of any type.
Originally, I wrote a piece about Arizona’s Immigration Law back when it first hit the news. But something told me to wait, so I deleted it. I wanted to wait and see the full extent of the reaction spectrum before I weighed in on this issue. And I’m glad that I did.
I’ll just put it out there: I think that the law is a great idea in theory, and I hope that it’s something that, in the future, can be enforced all over the country. I read the entire text of the law, and I’m not quite sure what people are upset about. Well, I do know what they’re upset about, and I hope that there are things that done to curb potential racial profiling. If not, this law would pretty much fail.
Either way, I think that the Immigration Law does bring some interesting ideas to the table. For example, being an illegal alien…yeah, that’s illegal now. Go fig, huh? Or harboring an illegal alien aka a criminal….yeah, that’s illegal now too. Hiring an illegal immigrant, or working without legal US citizenship status – that can get you in trouble as well.
I look at this law, and I look at people’s reactions, and I’m confused. Let’s change “illegal alien” or “immigrant” to “people with a weapon”. Ok. So, if you’re carrying a weapon, and you’re caught, you go to jail, right? And if you are caught harboring someone with a weapon, you can get in trouble. So what’s the difference? Both are crimes. I mean, the term is “illegal alien”. Why are we ignoring logic here?
Yes, they are people, but so are drug dealers. If you’re caught standing on a corner with some drugs, you’re going to at least get a misdemeanor, because you’re breaking the law. If you’re caught standing on a corner in a country that you are not legally supposed to be in, shouldn’t you be punished by the law as well? Shoot, it’s at least trespassing, and people are legally reprimanded for trespassing all the time.
So why is this such a big deal? Is it because there are so many illegal and legal Hispanic and Latino people in the United States who are willing to fight for their “rights”? I wonder if a bunch of marijuana dealers and their families got together and protested about their plight and being constantly harassed by the police for something that they didn’t feel was wrong just because they wanted equal rights as businessmen, would we feel bad for them and ignore basic principles of law for them too? Hmmmmm….
I read an article in the Huffington Post from Jim Wallis, where he discussed his reaction to the law. Here’s one of my favorite quotes:
Enforcement without compassion is immoral. Enforcement that breaks up families is unacceptable.
I laughed out loud when I read that. No, seriously, I did. In the middle of my office. What he’s saying here is true, but why is it that this idea of compassionate enforcement is only requested for Hispanic and Latino people who are breaking the law to be here anyway? What about the families of African American and Caucasian families that are broken up because of non-compassionate legal enforcement? The people who are sitting behind bars now for something they didn’t do, just for being Black in the wrong place at the wrong time?
I’m more disappointed than upset. I’m disappointed that we as a nation have decided to rally around a group of people who illegally came into this country and are now upset that they are going to have to pay for the crime that they committed in coming here. Really? Does that really make sense?
I’ll end with this: What are we really fighting for here? If it’s against racial profiling, that’s one thing. It’s a little premature to fight about something that hasn’t happened yet, but I can see the fear. But if we’re really just fighting for the rights of criminals and their families, then let’s look at more than just illegal aliens and take a gander at how we’re treating all criminals of all races and crimes.