• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Sheriff Joe Arapio slapped down by judge.

So you are appealing to emotion to stereotype and demonize an entire group of people?[/

You have your opinion of Arapio (a clown). The Phoenix police union head has his. Just a different opinion from someone with different qualifications as yours. That's all.
 
<snip>

Yes, I know a Fed Judge has ruled in accord with our libs here it was 'racial profiling'. I also didn't know latino Latino was a race.

ftfy

For many years "Hispanic" was a racial category in both law and the US census. Then the politics behind it began to change. "Hispanics" began to insist "Latino" was a more accurate term. As the popular understanding of both terms has evolved, so has the definition.
Census 2000 adheres to the Federal standards for collecting and presenting data on race and Hispanic origin as established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in October 1997. The OMB defines Hispanic or Latino as "a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race."
Link

I would argue that the question and classification has evolved in step with the politics that drive it.

One question, you write the judge agreed with "our libs here it was 'racial profiling'." Are you saying conservatives don't consider it racial profiling or they don't have a problem with racial profiling?
 
You have your opinion of Arapio (a clown). The Phoenix police union head has his. Just a different opinion from someone with different qualifications as yours. That's all.

An irrelevant appeal to authority when the actual authority was the one talked of in the OP. But what the other law enforcement officer said doesn't even actually support the profiling that Araprio was found to have been conducting.
 
So you are appealing to emotion to stereotype and demonize an entire group of people?[/

You have your opinion of Arapio (a clown). The Phoenix police union head has his. Just a different opinion from someone with different qualifications as yours. That's all.

What exactly is his opinion of sheriff joe?
 
...

One question, you write the judge agreed with "our libs here it was 'racial profiling'." Are you saying conservatives don't consider it racial profiling or they don't have a problem with racial profiling?
Neither. I'd like more facts on what was actually occurring in the stops as I suspect most conservatives would.

SFAICS our libs here do seem to agree it was racial profiling.
 
So you are appealing to emotion to stereotype and demonize an entire group of people?

You have your opinion of Arapio (a clown). The Phoenix police union head has his. Just a different opinion from someone with different qualifications as yours. That's all.
Against all evidence this clown has pursued proof that Obama was not born in Hawaii. He held absurd, idiotic and self serving press conferences to attack a registered document from another state pissing all over full faith and credit.

I thought he was a world class idiot when I was a Republican. I now just think the guy is a world class clown.

 
Last edited:
Against all evidence this clown has pursued proof that Obama was not born in Hawaii. He held absurd, idiotic and self serving press conferences to attack a registered document from another state pissing all over full faith and credit.

I thought he was a world class idiot when I was a Republican. I now just think the guy is a world class clown.


There certainly appears to be plenty of reason to not like the guy and his "methods".
 
Can somebody explain to me why this clown is still in office?

I mean... if this was some third-rate banana republic, sure - but in the USA...?
 
Neither. I'd like more facts on what was actually occurring in the stops as I suspect most conservatives would.

SFAICS our libs here do seem to agree it was racial profiling.

Do you think the judge has jumped to conclusions?

If not, why do you need to see more facts?
 
Do you think the judge has jumped to conclusions?

If not, why do you need to see more facts?

No. She just ruled that a person can be a racist against a group that is not a race. A group that is made up multiple races. And that this person(s) can identify this group on sight.

Another forum picked that up right a way.

So it goes. Let the spin begin.
 
So you are appealing to emotion to stereotype and demonize an entire group of people?

I agree but disagree at the same time. Illegals should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law because there is no way to insure that they aren't criminal scum or even worse, which is the point of legal immigration when you boil down the process to it's simplest components.

Would you really want to be living next door to a person who illegally came to this country to escape the law because they're serial rapists and murders?

I do agree that racial profiling is a poor 'tool' for the job at hand, though.
 
Would you really want to be living next door to a person who illegally came to this country to escape the law because they're serial rapists and murders?

How is this any more likely than that they are Americans hiding from U.S. law for the same reasons?
 
No. She just ruled that a person can be a racist against a group that is not a race. A group that is made up multiple races. And that this person(s) can identify this group on sight.

Another forum picked that up right a way.

So it goes. Let the spin begin.

Ok, so you deny that there is racism against Jews? That there is racism against blacks? You realize that racism doesn't have to make sense for someone to be able to be a racist, right?

And if that other forum agrees with your inane views, perhaps you should stay there.
 
Last edited:
How is this any more likely than that they are Americans hiding from U.S. law for the same reasons?

I don't know, but in my opinion I think it's far more likely.

I think of more concern, though, are illegals that are members of enemies of the peace like Al Qaeda or similar. We have a system, sometimes that system is a bitch. But I'd rather immigrants go through it than bypass if only for their own good if nothing else because of the inherent danger of coming into the country illegally.
 
Last edited:
I agree but disagree at the same time. Illegals should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law because there is no way to insure that they aren't criminal scum or even worse, which is the point of legal immigration when you boil down the process to it's simplest components.

Would you really want to be living next door to a person who illegally came to this country to escape the law because they're serial rapists and murders?

I do agree that racial profiling is a poor 'tool' for the job at hand, though.
Do you know how to beg the question? Would you like to be face down in the mud and kicked in the side by a steal boot? Of course not. It's a dumb question. It never happens. Forget it. (apologies to Airplaine)

Come up with something a bit less fallacious and I'll try and respond.
 
Do you know how to beg the question? Would you like to be face down in the mud and kicked in the side by a steal boot? Of course not. It's a dumb question. It never happens. Forget it. (apologies to Airplaine)

LolWut.jpg

Explanation, kind sir.

RandFan said:
Come up with something a bit less fallacious and I'll try and respond.

Where is the fallacy in pointing out that there is a legitimate reason for being concerned about illegal immigration?
 
Democracy in action

So to you - and apparently to quite a few people in Arizona - "democracy in action" means pissing on the very concepts that your nation was built on?
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom