But we are not having problems from Mexicans, Salvadorans, Columbians, etc. either. We have a problem with violence along the border. That violence is committed by criminals involved in drug trafficking and smuggling of humans.
You already agreed with me earlier that the main driver behind this law is the unemployment rate and budget deficit, not crime along the border. The problems that I was talking about have a lot
to do with Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Columbians taking jobs under the table (exacerbating unemployment among legal residents) and using public services without paying taxes (exacerbating the budget problem).
I don't think I agreed with that but if I did I was mistaken. This law came from anger over a rancher being killed on his own property for no reason. He almost certainly was not killed by an unemployed Mexican seeking work. He was killed by an armed smuggler who could be any nationality. Many of the smugglers are US citizens. This law really does nothing to target them.
That's fine, but obviously that law (or the enforcement of it) is not tough enough because your state continues to struggle with this issue. I mean, do you think everything was solved, or do you agree that something else needed to be done?
I think something needs to be done. We need to work with the Mexican government at the DC/DF level and at the Phoenix/Hermosillo level to address the problem of the cartels. Mexico is willing. We are not. How many times did Reagan, Bush the Elder, Clinton, W, or Obama sit down with the leadership of our biggest trading partner to discuss neighborly issues? A few, but not many...and not productively. What they get are lectures, platitudes, and invasion of their sovereignty by Federal agents that are not punished for their crimes and not turned over to Mexico for prosecution.
I'm afraid you are right, this will inconvenience a lot of law-abiding Hispanic Americans, and I don't know what to tell you. My point is simply that this isn't racism; it is a fairly logical (albeit insensitive) method for trying to locate the majority of illegal immigrants.
If you are the sheriff in a town where everyone is green except for a half-dozen blue people, and a blue person robs the bank and runs off with the money, what do you do? Do you try to fool yourself and everyone else by pretending that it's just as likely that a green person is the guilty party? Or do you bring in the six people who fit the description of being blue for questioning? Does that mean you are a racist bigot discriminating against blue people? Does that mean that blue people enjoy fewer civil liberties than green people? Or is it just a practical technique for law enforcement?
In Arizona it is a known fact that a whole bunch of Spanish-speaking, dark-skinned people have committed the crime of illegally crossing the border and continue to do so every day. Therefore, I think that if you want to find those people it simply makes sense to start by questioning dark-skinned, Spanish-speaking people. This has absolutely nothing to do with treating dark-skinned people as inferior or extending them fewer rights and freedoms because of their race.
What you have described is racial profiling and is racism. It might be pragmatic but it is something that most believe this country can do without. Even if all crime is committed by blue people it would be unacceptable to target the other blue people with greater scrutiny or restrictions.
It is also a known fact that this area used to be a part of Mexico. Parts of it technically are (land grants). There are many, possibly the majority, who are dark skinned and Spanish speaking. The majority of illegal border crossers might fit that description but that does not mean the majority of dark skinned Spanish speakers came across the border illegally.
What has happened here is that a bunch of whackos have gotten control of the legislature and had a free-for-all. They used to be kept in check by the govenor. But when Janet Napolitano was appointed Secretary of Homeland Security our previous Secretary of State took over and she is a complete nut case so she has signed their nonsense into law. The Associated Press had a good article on this.