Quantcast
Opinion

My view: Rejecting Arizona's strategy hard, but it's the right thing

Comments

Return To Article
  • CWEB
    June 28, 2010 1:47 p.m.

    Yes...they broke a law. Yes they came across the border.

    Fix the law. Fix the law that prohibits a worker from coming to the US to work and then go home.

    You gave them Tax Numbers. You gave them a wink and a nod, then when they came you yanked the rug out from under them.

    God help us. God created ALL men equal...not just humans fortunate enough to be born on a certain side of the border!

    God forgive us of our selfishness.

  • CWEB
    June 28, 2010 1:43 p.m.

    And EACH AND EVERYONE of you has certainly contributed money and help to you "neighbor" to the south...living in poverty...I'm sure.

    And EACH AND EVERYONE of you ... in your neighbor's
    (illegal immigrant)'s shoes..would do the same for your little children too. You would find a better life...if you don't...

    your children and family dies. Yes, that's the answer. I'm sure that is what God intended for his children south of the border!!!!! LET THEM ALL DIE.

    Send them BACK. We don't care what happens to them AFTER that! We just don't want them HERE!

    After all, (as we stand on our tower) Oh God, we thank thee that thou has created us to be better than them. For we are not like them...beggars and thieves! We have been blessed with great homes and great yards, pools and skiing and SUVS!

    We thank thee OH GOD for not making us poor, like unto the filth that comes across out border to find help! We thank thee, that our hearts are so tied to our wealth that we cannot see to help and reach a hand of LOVE.

  • Belching Cow
    June 28, 2010 1:40 p.m.

    @LOL
    "The most important question conservatives have on their minds today is:
    If the Mexicans are legalized, they can still be exploited, right?"

    You want them legalized so the libs can exploit them right? It is called buying votes. The libs will exploit them to stay in power, that's all they care about. Your opinion that only conservatives exploit illegal immigrants shows your ignorance.
    Sorry to burst your bubble but there are plenty of libs that do the same thing. Your probably gullible enough to believe the nobel peace prize is legit, right?

  • CWEB
    June 28, 2010 1:30 p.m.

    Great article...Great points.

    1. The US Government has dangled the immigration carrot in front of these wonderful people for years. Most have an ITIN...tax number...why? So when they work they can pay taxes...but wait, it's illegal to work. Yes, it is. Yet they are encouraged.

    2. They bite on the carrot and come to the US.

    3. U.S. benefits from their presence...taxes, Social Security collection, tax base, inexpensive and good labor.

    4. They buy homes, cars, food, clothing, all going into the tax base.

    5. The only problem? Fed Gov has not provide the proper means for them to come legally.

    6. Say what you may, coming legally is not a current possibility. The system is screwed up.

    7. IF they COULD come legally, then we would be talking about "almost" the SAME 12-14 million "legal" immigrants.

    8. Their biggest fault, they bit the carrot the U.S dangled in front of their faces! Don't pull the rug out now...

    9. Stop hating your brother, and IF you LDS...read 2Nephi 12, which says the None shall come into this land but those whom HE leads.

  • Paul in MD
    June 28, 2010 11:58 a.m.

    to 2 bits @12:14 pm 6/24

    We have the same problem here in Maryland. We aren't a border state (although we have several ports of entry - air and sea), and we have a HUGE problem with illegal immigrants. We also have a huge problem with organizations (like Casa de Maryland) encouraging illegals to move here, including putting out literature on how to take every step you need to get every penny of free aid you possibly can from our county.

  • Paul in MD
    June 28, 2010 11:54 a.m.

    to Pagan @11:36 am 6/24 (follow-up)

    You seem to be using these historical events to say that because our ancestors took what wasn't ours that we have no right to tell others to follow our laws or respect our property.

    In earlier posts you admonished us all to learn from history lest we repeat the mistakes of those before us.

    So, we should behave like the Native Americans did, allow the newcomers to share in our bounty, until they outnumber and outgun us and push us onto lands they don't want.

    Sorry, I can't buy into that. We live in today's world, with today's laws and today's issues. We need to look at history (amnesty laws didn't work in the 80's, they won't work today) and deal with the problems we face today.

    Immigrants are welcome here as long as they follow the law. All of the law. Including the ones governing how they can come in here. Just as you or I would have to do if we chose to move to Argentina, Germany, Japan, Australia or any other country.

  • Paul in MD
    June 28, 2010 11:48 a.m.

    to Pagan @11:36 am 6/24

    I don't think very many people would agree today that it was okay for early settlers to push Native Americans off their lands, push them into reservations or slaughter them. I would also argue that there were people alive at the time that it was happening who would agree with you. However, to accurately and fairly judge people of the past you have to judge them based on their frame of reference. Many of the people who did that had been taught that the aboriginal people were less than human, and they treated them that way.

    You and I may know better, but many of the people alive at that time did not. Many of the people who benefited from such atrocities probably didn't know that it was happening. News didn't travel nearly as fast as it does today (think months instead of seconds), far more people couldn't read, and it was not uncommon for the news writers of the time to fashion the news to make it look like Native Americans deserved what was happening to them.

  • Paul in MD
    June 28, 2010 11:39 a.m.

    To Reyndog @10:50 am 6/24

    Yes, illegal immigrants are people. So is every criminal that has ever lived or ever will.

    There are differences in definitions that you are glossing over.

    If you break a law that imposes criminal punishments, you are a criminal. If you break a law that imposes civil punishments, you are not a criminal.

    There are not criminal punishments for exceeding the speed limit, so that doesn't make you a criminal. Simply texting while you drive does not make you a criminal, although killing someone while you do it could (depends on the state). Letting your dog run around without a license doesn't make you a criminal. You aren't a criminal for stopping late, rolling through a stop sign, or even running a red light (although the fines for each get stiffer).

    You finally hit it on the head. All the examples you gave are local ordinances, not laws in criminal or penal codes.

    Immigration law, however, carries civil AND criminal penalties. Breaking those laws makes you a criminal.

  • Paul in MD
    June 28, 2010 11:12 a.m.

    to Pagan @10:47 am 6/24

    I don't think NevadaCoug meant that we should simply forget or ignore what has happened in the past. The point, I think, is some things in history can't be undone. Using historical wrongs to justify bad behavior today is NOT learning from history. Slavery was abolished over 140 years ago; women have had the vote for decades (Utah had it before the US generally, by the way). Has all inequality been eradicated? No, but as a nation we are trying.

    Yes, there are some very dark events in our history. And yes, we ignore them at our peril.

    Take 9/11. Immigration laws were not enforced, visas were allowed to expire with no consequences, and thousands of lives were lost and thousands more changed forever. Those laws continue to be ignored, and in doing so we invite a repeat of history.

    We can't round up and deport 12 million illegal immigrants. But we can deport the ones caught committing crimes, let them take their families with them, and eliminate the incentive for them to come illegally.

  • Paul in MD
    June 28, 2010 10:56 a.m.

    to Not_Scared at 8:56 am 6/24

    I'm not sure what your target failed to understand. There isn't anything in the California penal code that he quoted that encroaches on Federal jurisdiction.

    Similarly, the Arizona law clearly states that the enforcement of that law is not to encroach on Federal jurisdiction.

    That law also states that police may NOT stop someone for immigration issues, but that once stopped for another issue, police may ask for documentation if there is reasonable suspicion, which may NOT be based on race, color or national origin.

  • patriot
    June 28, 2010 9:20 a.m.

    You know it's funny to hear all these clueless, uninformed attacks against the Arizona immigration law and the suggestion that nobody really wants this sort of law in their state YET Utah and many other states DO want a law just like Arizona's and that is why there is legislation in the works right now to adopt such laws. The majority of Arizona and Utah residents want a strong immigration law to protect the law respecting citizens of their states and they are smart enough to see through all the smoke screens the media keeps throwing out to misrepresent the real issues. My guess is after all the smoke does finally clear, Arizona ,Utah and many other states will have new immigration laws protecting their citizens and all of this before years end.

  • James Madison
    June 28, 2010 8:59 a.m.

    @ Pagan | 3:31 p.m. June 24

    And don't forget the 80 million guns owners in the U.S.!

  • Belching Cow
    June 28, 2010 8:44 a.m.

    @Pagan
    "Logic has nothing to do with this."

    Pretty much every comment you've made defies logic.

  • James Madison
    June 28, 2010 8:30 a.m.

    A member of a "conservative public policy think tank" espousing liberal philosophy is an oxymoron if I've ever seen one.

  • James Madison
    June 28, 2010 7:30 a.m.

    More legal FACTS:

    Federal Immigration and Nationality Act
    Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

    "Any person who... encourages or induces an alien to... reside... knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such... residence is... in violation of law, shall be punished as provided... for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs... fined under title 18... imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."

  • James Madison
    June 28, 2010 7:26 a.m.

    Speeding and enter the US illegally CANNOT be compared. Get real, people!

    Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

    Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or

    Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or

    Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact; has committed a federal crime.

    Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

    ==========

    Such entry is a misdemeanor and, if repeated, becomes punishable as a FELONY.

  • azresident
    June 27, 2010 8:10 p.m.

    wrz--my point was based, in part, on an earlier post. The illegals actually committing various crimes are considered a scourge by those immigrants who are legal and many of the illegals who are living a crime-free life. These people are just as angry as the citizens here who are sick and tired of it all.

    I am in no way a supporter of illegal immigrants.

  • wrz
    June 25, 2010 9:33 p.m.

    @ReasonableRepublican 7:18 p.m.:

    "Let him who has never committed a misdemeanor cast the first stone at his unauthorized immigrant neighbor. Are they criminals?"

    I think you are making a reasonably valid point. Janet Napolitano tells us that crossing the border without authorization is just a civil misdemeanor. Makes you wonder why we are spending hundreds of millions trying to close the border.

  • ReasonableRepublican
    June 25, 2010 7:18 p.m.

    Let him who has never committed a misdemeanor cast the first stone at his unauthorized immigrant neighbor. Are they criminals? Of course. But so are we for a lot more superficial reasons than they are. We speed because we want to get home to watch the game or trespass because there is unbelievable fishing on the other side of the fence. I have traveled across Mexico and seen "kitchens" with no roof and "nurseries" with no floor. We are talking about people who clean up after us for pennies and pick our fruit in the midday sun to keep our prices low. Why? Because they want a better life for their families. Should they be punished, yes. But let's keep some perspective and make it fit the crime. As long as coming here illegally is their only crime, paying taxes and a large fine is appropriate. Unfortunately, most of you all call that reasonable approach amnesty. You want blood for the crimes they didn't commit. You confuse their service for the actions of a few, the MINORITY who are involved in gangs and drugs who truly deserve no mercy.

  • rjrun
    June 25, 2010 4:32 p.m.

    Holy cow.

    At the time that I'm typing this comment, there are 77 other comments to this op-ed...and [nearly] 77 reasons why I'm so happy that my family and I no longer live in Utah.

    This article is refreshingly humane in its view of immigration, and the author should be commended.

    And +1 to the commenter who reminded us all that being undocumented is akin to speeding or texting while driving. If you're willing to call yourself a criminal whenever you're driving 80mph down I-15 at the point of the mountain, the you can call undocumented immigrants criminals as well.

    Sometimes I'm afraid that Utahans are so grossly right-leaning that they're going to throw the earth off its axis.

  • MCFergy
    June 25, 2010 12:42 p.m.

    Mr. Monson, here is a ‘reality-based’ approach. You stand on you soap-box preaching, “It will require Utahans to check their emotions, including their frustrations…,” while in the same breathe painting a highly emotional scene of the plight of illegal foreign nationals, neighbors ratting them out and disrupting families.

    In fact, you do not want to hear the emotional side of jobless Americans and legal residents or the financial burden absorbed by them because the ‘rule of law’ has been ignored for twenty-four years. Your intent is to present your emotion driven side of the story while closing your eyes and ears to the flip-side of the discussion.

  • MapleDon
    June 24, 2010 8:53 p.m.

    (Cont'd) Even God leaves us to face consequences of our actions. Mercy is only applied under certain conditions and only after Someone else paid the penalty of bad actions. But the Savior’s mercy doesn’t resolve our accountability to parties offended here on earth. It squares things up between us and God.

    So is Mr. Monson volunteering to be held accountable for all illegals? If so, what’s the price to be paid?

    Our freedom and liberty are secured by lawfulness. By condoning lawlessness, Mr. Monson and those like him place the security of our nation and our freedom at risk. The majority of this nation’s people understand this.

  • MapleDon
    June 24, 2010 8:51 p.m.

    What Mr. Monson has done, like others, is bring emotion (and the weightier matter of mercy and grace) into the equation, forsaking the rule of law. They all claim mercy trumps justice in this matter. In essence, they believe certain people should not be held accountable for specific crimes.

    Various groups of criminals in this nation would like this same mercy applied to their misdeeds. If we’re fair, shouldn’t they also be granted mercy? Aren’t they just as worthy of “compassion” as any other?

    But, can Mr. Monson (or those who agree with him) provide us an example of how extending unbridled mercy (and no justice) to criminals results in a better--and safer--society?

    I'm dealing now with a fellow who was defrauded by one of his employees over an extended period of time. How would exercising mercy benefit the fraudster, let alone his employer? Would it help him think twice before doing it again?

    Understanding the severity of the consequence of getting caught is one of the deterrents to fraud. Without question, removing the consequence would only result in more fraud.

  • RRB
    June 24, 2010 6:20 p.m.

    Re The Sensible Middle
    HB2162 enforces the law equally. Everyone who is discovered to be here illegally will be turned over to ICE for processing and deportation.

    Japanese Americans were compensated. Americans living in Japan and interned Japan were not.

  • WatchDog
    June 24, 2010 5:42 p.m.

    I would remind all that EVERY family who breaks our laws to come here ALSO breaks several other laws. AT THE VERY LEAST, every home has one "breadwinner" who has taken a job AND in the process, stolen some citizen's ID, SSN, etc., in order to get that job.

    THIS IS A FELONY!!!

    Mercy requires justice. It CAN NOT EXIST without it!

    IF we believe in being Christian, we MUST demand that our laws be followed. While it is okay to feel kindly towards the criminal element among us (and yes, this includes illegal aliens) it is absolutely necessary to help them figure out that we do have laws - and that they HAVE TO BE followed.

  • The Sensible Middle
    June 24, 2010 5:29 p.m.

    The Arizona law is highly likely to cause profiling of hispanics and as such should be rejected.

    White America can't keep asking minorities to bear the burdens of laws they want.

    Japanese Americans lost all their belongings when they were put into internment camps in WW2. There was no provision in the law to make this up to them.

    I could go on, but this is the year 2010, we should be past this. If there is a burden to suffer, especially given our history, it is wrong to ask minorities to bear the burden of solution to the problems, which is what the Arizona law would require.

    Arizona should draft a law, in which all people are at risk to suffer equally, or where those minorities who do suffer are amply compensated, otherwise, the law should be thrown out and not stand.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 4:23 p.m.

    As patriots, we must do our part to preserve the climate of fear in this country. Fear has always made America strong. Our country deserves no less than every citizen living in apprehension. We can no longer rely solely on our enemies to menace the populace–we must find that horror within ourselves.

    You may say, "I am only one person. What can I do?" But all of our efforts are needed if we are to maintain a state of constant anxiety. We can all do more, but here is a good starting place: Twice a week, for at least 15 minutes, take the time to worry about any undocumented workers who may live in your area; lose sleep each night thinking about our thousands of miles of unguarded borders; stock up on water bottles and canned goods for no discernible reason other than that vague sense that civilization will collapse any second.

    Let's all come together as in fearful days of yore and do what we must to keep America free from peace of mind once and for all.

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 3:59 p.m.

    'More states are attempting to pass Arizona type immigration law as we speak and most of these aren't even border states. The Arizona law is gaining more and more support and strength nation wide.' - 3:53 p.m.

    Wow.

    Az, Tx and Utah.

    Yeah, that's 'national' all right.

    All kidding aside, I have not heard anything but center states even talk about this.

    And considering no other state factually HAS passed it as of yet except Az, I see no reason to worry.

    The states to pass it will become Democrat states soon enough.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 3:59 p.m.

    Let's get our parameters straight here: Are we talking about the kind of Mexicans who get into knife fights, or the kind that smile and refill your drink, cut your lawns, and clean your hotel room's toilets?

  • patriot
    June 24, 2010 3:53 p.m.

    More states are attempting to pass Arizona type immigration law as we speak and most of these aren't even border states. The Arizona law is gaining more and more support and strength nation wide. Gutless Obama won't do anything until after the November election because he fears losing Hispanic votes so he just as soon let Arizona suffer as long as he gets his votes. Any more anything Obama is for the American people are against .... not a good sign if you are a dem!!

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 3:51 p.m.

    The most important question conservatives have on their minds today is:
    If the Mexicans are legalized, they can still be exploited, right?"

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 3:39 p.m.

    As a fifth-generation English/Swedish-American, I am opposed to any and all immigration.
    (actually overheard at a social gathering recently)

    LOL!

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 3:32 p.m.

    Romney knew his company hired undocumented workers.
    He got caught and this is what primarily cost him the GOP nomination.
    The statute of limitations is still in effect.
    Make him an example to all the lawbreakers out their who STILL have illegals working for them and throw them in prison.
    What is it about "It's the law" they don't understand?

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 3:31 p.m.

    'Now try logic for a refreshing change.' - 2:54 p.m.

    Logic is that 97% of Americans are decended from immigrants.

    I'm willing to bet, not all of them legal.

    And we are...against, the 12 million illegal ones arleady in America...when our US military numbers 3 million.

    Logic has nothing to do with this.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 3:26 p.m.

    I yearn for the day when 100 percent of all workers are illegal immigrants and we as a nation can devote all our time to complaining about them.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 3:25 p.m.

    The American Dream is alive and well in Mexico. If people work hard, save their money, and plan well, They will be able to send their children to a good school–and who knows? If they study hard, perhaps they will get jobs someday at the new plant General Motors is building in China.

  • RRB
    June 24, 2010 3:16 p.m.

    @LOL, Romney hired a company that hired illegal workers. So when he found out, he fired them?

    When you go out to eat in a restaurant, do you ask to see the employee records before you eat?

    Sutherland is the school voucher group. Their sudden interest in illegal immigration makes me curious as to motivation.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 3:15 p.m.

    Round them all up, send them to a 4-day bootcamp (babies too) and put them on the ground in ship Iraq to fight insurgents.
    This will give them a chance to do something more with their lives rather than breaking their backs working in fields and cleaning toilets in hotel rooms.

  • 20/20
    June 24, 2010 2:54 p.m.

    Derek warns us to "check our emotions", meaning that we should not be emotional about the illegal immigrant issue. But the entire thrust of his op-ed is that our emotions must be brought into play for the illegals. So Derek, the only emotions approved by you are the emotions you endorse.
    OK, let's leave emotions out (since we're "checking" them at the door. That leaves logic. What does logic tell us to do with those who break the law? Logic tells us that the consequence of law-breaking is punishment. Only Derek's misplaced emotion tells us that we should respond to law-breaking by ignoring the law.
    Derek, you were right - we all need to "check our emotions". Now try logic for a refreshing change.

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 2:49 p.m.

    'So simple even a caveman can get it~!' - 2:37 p.m.

    A Geico quote?

    Really?

    I thought better of you truth.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 2:42 p.m.

    In fact, undocumented workers work was part of a regular pattern. Despite a Globe story in Dec. 2006 that highlighted Romney's use of illegal immigrants to tend to his lawn, Romney continued to employ the same landscaping company -- until today. The landscaping company, in turn, continued to employ illegal immigrants.
    Romney knew of the company's continued practice of employing illegal immigrants, and immediately fired it.
    The statute of limitations is in effect.
    Romney has said that employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants should be penalized.
    Arrest the lawbreaker.

  • TRUTH
    June 24, 2010 2:37 p.m.

    Pretty simple concept to grasp if you have a brain.......

    Illegal? Go home and come back legal....


    Or stay and get arrested!

    So simple even a caveman can get it~!

  • RRB
    June 24, 2010 2:17 p.m.

    Mitt Romney hired a local company to do his yard work (Community Lawn Service with a Heart). The companies owner Ricardo Saenz (legal immigrant) hired the illegal workers. (they were paid in cash)

    Now how is Romney responsible?

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 2:13 p.m.

    @Pagan:

    "So...immigration is comparable to...wall mart?"

    What's a wall mart?

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 2:08 p.m.

    @Ultra Bob:

    "Make them Americans with all rights and privileges and obligations of other Americans. Any one who does not want to become an American must leave."

    This was tried in 1986 by Reagan. It didn't work. All it did was encourage more foreigners to pour over the border illegally.

    "Hold officers and owners personally responsible for adhering to the law voluntarily."

    Too funny! Holding someone responsible for voluntarily action is an oxymoron.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 1:57 p.m.

    wrz is correct.
    "These are people ... people doing illegal things"
    So, let's go to the source.
    Arrest Mitt Romney for having Greencard-less workers working at his estate.
    It's the right thing to do.

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 1:47 p.m.

    @Reyndog:

    "What a bunch of objectifying bunch of (sic) individuals you are. The point of the article... was that we should see these 'illegal immigrants,' 'undocumented residents,' 'illegal aliens'.. as PEOPLE."

    They are people... people doing illegal things.

    "[You]... are a criminal anytime you go over the speed limit."

    True. Speed kills.

    "You are a criminal if you text when you drive."

    True, in states with applicable laws. If you are texting while driving you should be pulled over and read the riot act.

    "Do you turn in speeders?"

    Oh, yes! And drunk drivers as well.

  • Henry J.
    June 24, 2010 1:44 p.m.

    President Dieter F. Uchtdorf

    When we are tempted to judge, let us think of the Savior, who “loveth the world, even that he layeth down his own life that he may draw all men unto him. . . .

    As I read the scriptures, it appears that those who receive the Savior’s strongest reproach are often those who hold themselves in high esteem because of their wealth, influence, or perceived righteousness.

    On one occasion the Savior taught a parable of two men who went into the temple to pray. One man, a respected Pharisee, prayed: “God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.”

    The other man, a hated publican, stood “afar off, [and] would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.”

    And Jesus said, “I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other.”

    In truth, we “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 1:42 p.m.

    'Here's my Wal-Mart credit card... see how easy it is?' - 1:32 p.m.


    So...immigration is comparable to...wall mart?

    wrz, you can do better.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 1:38 p.m.

    I agree with Ultra Bob re: starting off with strict penalties for employers who have undocumented workers on the payroll.
    And to make a point start off by arresting conservative Mitt Romney who had undocumented workers working for him at one of his mansions.
    This would make a great example for those law-breakers.
    It's a law-of-the-land-thing.

    LOL!

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 1:32 p.m.

    @Pagan:

    "Can you show me your papers verifying your legal status please? ...see how easy it is?"

    Here's my Wal-Mart credit card... see how easy it is?

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 1:24 p.m.

    @Pagan:

    "Vickie, there was once fines charges against women who voted. Held a credit score. Signed a contract."

    Those were the good old days.

  • Ultra Bob
    June 24, 2010 1:23 p.m.

    The solution to all these problems with illegal immigration could be solved by the following:

    Make them Americans with all rights and privileges and obligations of other Americans. Any one who does not want to become an American must leave.

    Create and enforce regulations for all businesses requiring the payment of proper wages, tax withholding and other employee requirements including American citizenship. Hold officers and owners personally responsible for adhering to the law voluntarily. Penalties for not doing so would result in harsh criminal punishment for the officers and owners of a business.

    Actually proper regulation of businesses would solve a lot of other problems too.

  • LOL
    June 24, 2010 1:22 p.m.

    Wanting to round up "undesirables" aka undocumented workers, who work for born-in-America employees, is just a little bit like what the rationale was during the 3rd Reich. Why not start off by making them wear the letter "I" on their clothing? But leave the employees alone. They are your friends, neighbors and Ward members.

    Sounds like there are many Gestapo candidates being homegrown here in good ol' patriotic Utah.

    LOL!

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 1:18 p.m.

    @Pagan:

    "wrz, your arguments are hollow. Are YOU moving off native American land?"

    Heck no. Why should I? I paid good wampum for it.

    "And 'no' I don't have stones. Mine are brass."

    Touche!

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 1:16 p.m.

    Pagan:

    "Are all illegal immigrants robbing a bank? No."

    Correct. That's step two. First they immigrate illegally. Then they rob banks or steal something else to help pay their way.

    "Would you report a man sitting on his front lawn reading a newspaper?"

    If it was the DNews? No.

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 1:10 p.m.

    @azresident:

    "The legal Hispanic immigrants and those illegal immigrants who are abiding by the law (despite the fact that they entered the country ILLEGALLY)..."

    So if I obey the speed limit as I drive away from robbing a bank I'd be OK with bank robbing? Is that your point?

    "Unfortunately, laws are bent, broken, and trashed south of the border. Bribes are commonplace. Drugs and human smugglers are also. Violence occurs daily."

    That's what we will be getting in this country if we let illegal immigration continue unabated.

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 1:04 p.m.

    @Tom 9:59 a.m.:

    "So all my buddies who aided and abetted me in discharging illegal fireworks are tarnished for life also?"

    Only if it is illegal to discharge them. At which point you should be rounded up and put in jail. Don't you know that illegal fireworks are dangerous? That's why they are illegal, duh!

  • 2 bits
    June 24, 2010 12:14 p.m.

    I hope we don't feel we must enact a similar law in Utah (because we don't need it, we aren't a border state). But the reason I agree that getting tough and sending_a_message to Mexico (and other countries sending their people to the United States to lighten their social_services_burden) is... Even if it's NEVER used... Even if nobody is ever profiled by the RACIST_Arizona_cops... Even if nobody is deported as a result of this new law.... It AT LEAST sends a MESSAGE to Governments and people who THINK America thinks it's OK for them to cross our border illegally. And that they won't get caught. And even if they do... who cares... A liberal lawyer will get you put to the front of the line and you will be an instant full CITIZEN will all the benefits that are legend in Mexico.

    Currently many_in_Mexico are being told by their government AND their friends, family, neighbors and church, that America doesn't REALLY care. IF you can get there... and stay there... you become a statutory_citizen!



    We need to send the CLEAR message that it's NOT OK. This law does that.

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 11:36 a.m.

    'America was based on laws from the very beginning. Indians never owned the land. They didn't have that concept.' - 11:03 a.m.

    Monsieur, I really hope you were born in france.

    So because native americans didn't have the concept of ownership, it was 'ok' to drive them from modern day America?

    To put them on reservations.

    Kill them?

    Regardless of how you try to paint Native Americans as ignorant, WE knew better, didn't we? Since we know better and know 'right and wrong' was it 'wrong' to put native peoples on reservations by force?

    Apparently, you don't think so.

    Susan B. Anthony was a woman arrested for...voting. She was fined $100. Please do not sit there and tell me America is based on laws when a woman could not vote in 1872.

    Women didn't 'choose' to NOT own land....

    often times women were comparable to property themselves.

  • VickieB
    June 24, 2010 11:15 a.m.

    Tom, I suggest next time you take a ride, you visit the border and read the signs. "Warning:
    All persons and vehicles must enter the United States at a designated port of entry only. This is not a designated port of entry. Any person or vehicle entering at this point is in violation of title 19 usc 1459 and or 19 usc 1433 and is subject to a $5,000 penalty. US Customs Enforcement"

    Each entry after the first costs $10,000 and is a felony. Working in the US is multiple felonies. Breaking the law also includes deportation.

    There is a fine or punishment for fireworks, and one for illegal immigration. If an American gets caught buying fireworks, he pays the fine. If a person gets caught here illegally, they pay the fine and are deported.

    We can't ignore our laws out of compassion. We would be a lawless society.

  • foreal
    June 24, 2010 11:14 a.m.

    Here is a better analogy:

    You wake up one morning to find someone has broken into your home, to your surprise they are sleeping on your couch. When you confront this person he explains he is a good person and just needs a place to live, but there is a catch. The rest of his family needs a place to live as well. He explains to you that he is a hard worker and has a job. At the same time he exclaims that while he is living in your house he expects you to feed him, educate his kids, and cover his medical costs, all at your expense. You call the cops, when they show up they explain to you that even though this man has broken into your home he has every right to the things he has requested. You are going to have to provide the things he is asking for.

    This is exactly how are government is treating illegal immigrants. Yes they might be good people, but our country doesn't have the $$$ to pay for all of their needs. Yet somehow Liberals have the mindset that we need to take care of them.

  • boricuan8
    June 24, 2010 11:04 a.m.

    If we are going to talk about religion with regards to this issue, let's not forget what Jesus said is the greatest law, upon which hang all the laws and the prophets. If you have forgotten, John Charity Spring, let me refresh your memory. "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." That's not a liberal ideal. It's one that should be at the core of any Christian's values, republican or democrat, north or south of the border. Frustrations at the lack of legislation on the immigration issue, I can understand. But for those of you who feel outright hatred, as is demonstrated in many of these comments, I would guess that you don't know anyone in these situations. I do, and I have seen firsthand how they have given the shirt off their backs and food from their own poor tables to those in need. Many, in fact a vast majority of these "illegal aliens" demonstrate an understanding of Christian teachings that far exceeds that of many "born and bred" Americans that I know. "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."

  • Monsieur le prof
    June 24, 2010 11:03 a.m.

    Pagan makes up things as he goes along. There were never fines for women voting. There was a time when they couldn't vote, but that was because voters had to be landowners and women usually didn't own land. Non land-holding men couldn't vote either.

    America was based on laws from the very beginning. Indians never owned the land. They didn't have that concept. They just used it for their benefit, frequently migrating from place to place. That they were pushed off their lands is a sad fact, but true. But there was still no concept of illegality...some broken treaties, yes.

  • anti-liar
    June 24, 2010 11:01 a.m.

    First, the essential theme of the article -- illegal immigration is okay, even desirable -- is not at all surprising coming from the pro-illegal Sutherland Institute.

    Now, Derek: how's this for an exercise, somewhat patterned after yours:

    Your neighbor, whose daughter is sick, confides to you that earlier that afternoon, he robbed a bank, shoplifted, stole a woman's purse when she wasn't looking, "lifted" the wallet of a fellow pedestrian in the sidewalk, and burglarized a home in the neighborhood.

    Would you go home and report your neighbor to law-enforcement authorities?

    Apparently, you wouldn't. After all, he simply was "searching for a better life."

    And yes, lying, stealing, cheating, and trespassing, among many other things the illegals do every day, ARE crimes, and ARE a problem, as are the behaviors listed earlier.

    Obviously, Derek, you are attempting to discredit, devalue, mock, and re-define the concept of "rule of law" in your effort to rationalize illegal immigration and the employment of illegals.

    Nice try.

  • Reyndog
    June 24, 2010 10:54 a.m.

    By the way, for those of you who think all these people are criminals and that Arizona, for example, is becoming crime infested because of these people who are in the United States illegally, you may want to consider the fact that according to the United States Bureau of Labor and Statistics, property crime in Arizona is at its lowest point since 1966. Violent crime is at its lowest since 1971. By the way, these statistics are from 2009 -- before Arizona instituted implemented its new law.

    I absolutely hate it when facts get in the way of a good story.

  • Reyndog
    June 24, 2010 10:50 a.m.

    I can't believe some of the things I'm reading. What a bunch of objectifying bunch of individuals you are. The point of the article, which most of you clearly missed, was that we should see these "illegal immigrants", "undocumented residents," "illegal aliens" or whatever you want to call them, as PEOPLE. The are not criminals!!! If they are criminals, then you are a criminal anytime you go over the speed limit. You are a criminal if you text when you drive. You are a criminal when you let your dog run around without a license. You are a criminal when you stop 1 inch past the stop line at an intersection. These ordinances all carry the same weight. Do you turn in speeders? Texters? We're all people and we need to treat each other as such. Then, and only then will we be able to find a solution.

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 10:47 a.m.

    'And even if there were such laws, the American Indians were defeated multiple times in war. They are a conquered people. (sic) Get over it.' - 10:35 a.m.

    Should we also 'get over' slavery? Women unable to vote?

    We have many examples of oppression in American history. You ignore them at your peril.

    I'm sorry you had bad experiences with illegal aliens.

    I have bad expierences with legal citizens, everyday! Should I deport them?

    Like yourself.

    'NevadaCoug' is a 'unsual' name. I bet it's not your real name. Why would you hide your real name? I bet you have something to hide. Maybe you commited a crime?

    Can you show me your papers verifying your legal status please?




    ...see how easy it is?

  • Tom
    June 24, 2010 10:41 a.m.

    Actually the fine for crossing the border is 50 to 250 dollars and possible 6 months in jail. the fine for illegal fireworks is 1000 dollars and poss. 6 months in jail.

  • Rynn
    June 24, 2010 10:35 a.m.

    As far as the people who feel sorry for illegal immigrants:
    So the next time a legal citizen robs a bank, should we just let him get away with it? Because hey, he only broke the law (stole all that money) so he could provide a better life for his family..........

  • NevadaCoug
    June 24, 2010 10:35 a.m.

    Pagan, the claim that most of the immigrants to this country were "illegal" is just plain false. Would you please point out to me the laws that were in place that made the original English, Spanish, and French colonists "illegal"? I'd like to see them.

    And even if there were such laws, the American Indians were defeated multiple times in war. They are a conquered people. That may be harsh, but that is the way it has been throughout history. One people decides they want a piece of land and either purchase it or they fight a war to take it. Get over it.

    I've worked with several illegal aliens, or some that I suspected but didn't know for sure. Many of them had no respect for the law whatsoever. Like the guy who bragged about how many beers he drank while driving from Wendover to SLC. Or the guy who couldn't understand why the police wanted to impound his car when he didn't have a valid Utah driver's licence, nor registration, nor insurance. He kept saying, "I have a Mexican driver's license." Why isn't that good enough?

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 10:34 a.m.

    'Do you understand that although they both carry fines, there are marked differences in accompanying punishment?' - 10:17 a.m.

    Vickie, there was once fines charges against women who voted.

    Held a credit score.

    Signed a contract.

  • We the People
    June 24, 2010 10:28 a.m.

    Redshirt:
    Your analogy was masterful.

    I wish people would stop drumming up hypotheticals dripping with emotion. We get it; these people are looking for a better life, they are humans too, yada, yada, yada.

    How about respecting our laws and partaking in America's greatness in accordance with the laws of the land? How about respecting America enough to obey her laws? How about leaving needless emotion out of the argument and focus on the laws?

    How about leaving and coming back the right way and find a country read to welcome you with open arms?

  • VickieB
    June 24, 2010 10:17 a.m.

    Tom, Christian values also echo rendering unto Caesar, and obeying the Ten commandments. When does the preaching start telling people to obey the laws of the land, not stealing or lying?

    Fireworks? Working in this country illegally creates multiple felonies. I suggest you find a better analogy since people are not deported for firing off fireworks, but they are for crossing the border. Do you understand that although they both carry fines, there are marked differences in accompanying punishment?

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 10:05 a.m.

    wrz, your arguments are hollow.

    Are YOU moving off native American land?

    Didn't think so.

    And 'no' I don't have stones.

    Mine are brass.

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 10:03 a.m.

    'Are you saying that if you see someone robbing a bank you shouldn't call the police?' - 9:42 a.m.

    Are all illegal immigrants robbing a bank?

    No.

    The example stands. Would you report a man sitting on his front lawn reading a newspaper?

    Because you think he is an illegal immigrant?

  • azresident
    June 24, 2010 10:01 a.m.

    When you were a child you probably heard the platitude, "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch." Or perhaps something along the line of "you're going to ruin it for everybody." Like most platitudes, there is truth to them.

    The legal Hispanic immigrants and those illegal immigrants who are abiding by the law (despite the fact that they entered the country ILLEGALLY) are fuming over the actions of the illegals who are breaking the law, costing the taxpayers of Arizona big bucks, and in our news on a daily basis. Some speak out, others dare not.

    Unfortunately, laws are bent, broken, and trashed south of the border. Bribes are commonplace. Drugs and human smugglers are also. Violence occurs daily. You would think it is the Middle East. Just recently the Nogales Chief of Police and his bodyguard were shot. Off duty officers who stopped a drug deal have been threatened---these are U.S. officers! It's a different culture and some escape it, others bring it with them. Come on down. Spend some time. See for yourself.

  • Tom
    June 24, 2010 9:59 a.m.

    So all my buddies who aided and abetted me in discharging illegal fireworks are tarnished for life also?

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 9:58 a.m.

    @Pagan 9:04 a.m.:

    "Giving legal authority to call into question a persons legal status based on 'reasonable suspicion' aka, sight, to me is unreasonable...

    Federal ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) does it. Is that not OK?

    "Current America was built on the lands of Native Indians."

    May I suggest that you make it right by moving off their property?

    "Don't forget we have boarders with Canada as well. Is it hypocritical to focus on one boarder and ignore others?"

    Good point. Minnesota is being flooded with immigrants... from Somalia... Muslims... Many illegal.

    "Keep our boarders secure, yes. But kick out 12 million illegal immigrants. Good luck with that."

    No need to kick them out. Just enforce immigration labor laws... which laws make it illegal to hire illegals. Do that, take awake the incentive, and they will go home on their own.

    "Considering most of us descend from illegal immigrants, I have no stones to throw."

    You have no stones? How do you manage?

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 9:42 a.m.

    "Would you go home and report your neighbor and his family to federal immigration authorities?" - Article

    Are you saying that if you see someone robbing a bank you shouldn't call the police? You are required to report lawbreaking. Otherwise you could be accused of aiding and abetting.

    Example: 'A person charged with aiding and abetting or accessory is usually not present when the crime itself is committed, but he or she has knowledge of the crime before or after the fact...

    For example, Andy draws a floor plan of a bank, knowing of Dan's intention to rob it. After Dan commits the robbery, Alice agrees to let him store the stolen money at her house. Both Andy and Alice can be charged with aiding and abetting, or acting as accessories to the robbery.'

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 9:29 a.m.

    @IndependentLiberal 7:30 a.m.:

    "There ARE better way (sic) of controlling immigration than 'Adverse Information.'"

    How? Please list.

  • wrz
    June 24, 2010 9:25 a.m.

    Here's a quick thought exercise for you...

    Say your neighbor with the sick kid and all the rest of his family and friends decided they liked your home and decided to move in with you uninvited.

    Would you ask them to make themselves at home?

  • Pagan
    June 24, 2010 9:04 a.m.

    Giving legal authority to call into question a persons legal status based on 'reasonable suspicion' aka, sight, to me is unreasonable at all.

    Since America is made up of 97% of descendants from immigrants, I fail to see this line of thinking making any kind of sense.

    Current America was built on the lands of Native Indians.

    'Finish the dang wall'

    Don't forget we have boarders with Canada as well. Is it hypocritical to focus on one boarder and ignore others?

    What about the various bases America has outside this country?

    Keep our boarders secure, yes. But kick out 12 million illegal immigrants.

    Good luck with that.

    Since our military runs around 3 million we factually do not have the means to kick out EVERY illegal immigrant.

    Considering most of us descend from illegal immigrants, I have no stones to throw.

    Focus on the problem. Those that hire illegal immigrants rather than pay a legal citizen minimum wage.

    I'm not advocating a 'free ride' either. But considering that most Americans cannot pass the citizenship test, again, I have no stones to throw.

    Think before throwing them from your glass house.

  • Not_Scared
    June 24, 2010 8:56 a.m.

    The ignorance of our constitution by conservatives is frightening. The federal government controls immigration laws.

    Notice this conservative's poorly developed reading comprehension.

    "Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully
    cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested"

    Notice the person must have been arrested for a crime. There is no provision under the law to stop, detain or ID a person who has not been arrested and is being processed for a commission of a crime.

  • Tom
    June 24, 2010 8:56 a.m.

    It is kind of funny, We here all the cries about us being a "Christian Nation" when it furthers our ideological bent, but when some one calls for compassion and understanding and interjects Christian values it is said that religion does not have a place in the law. When I was a young man and went to Wyoming to get illegal fireworks and discharged them in Utah during the 4th of July I committed a crime with a greater penalty than coming across the border undocumented. I believe that I have tyred to repent of my crime, though some may question if I have since I have not turned myself into the police. Coming across the border undocumented in not the unpardonable sin. They are real human beings. Most of them are very good people just like most Utah natives are very good people.

  • Moosehead
    June 24, 2010 8:54 a.m.

    Illegal immigrants ARE NOT law abiding citizens. They are chronic law breakers and criminals. They do not have the right to break the law in order to achieve a better life any more than a bank robber or a drug dealer. And they certainly don't have the right to do it in a foreign country.

  • VickieB
    June 24, 2010 8:17 a.m.

    ICE does not respond to anyone reporting their neighbor. Pure hyperbole meant to solicit a sympathetic response. Thanks to NAFTA, Mexico's economy has become the 14th best in the world. We have helped them.

    My family and neighbors have moved many times to where the work is. The conjecture of breaking up families is unfounded.

    Compassion is extended on a personal level. Law enforcement is the Governments job. We can all be compassionate towards those here illegally, but still let law enforcement do their job.

    Or do you champion the removal of all law enforcement on compassionate grounds?

  • RedShirt
    June 24, 2010 8:01 a.m.

    Derek Monson got the analogy totally wrong. It should be that your hispanic neighbor had a sick child. It was the middle of the night, and rather than waking you and asking for help, he breaks into your house and takes what he needs. The next day, you find out that his daughter is sick, and when you ask him if he needs help, he tells you he already helped himself to your medications.

    What do you do, do you just let it go, or do you call the police?

  • Greenmountain
    June 24, 2010 7:52 a.m.

    Mr. Monson had better get after California ALSO. That state has a document called the California Penal Code. I would encourage all citizens and illegal immigrants to find the California Penal Code 834b on the internet. It has probably been California law for years. Here is part of their law concerning ILLEGALS.

    "834b. (a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully
    cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization
    Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is
    suspected of being present in the United States in violation of
    federal immigration laws.
    (b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected
    of being present in the United States in violation of federal
    immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the
    following:
    (1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person"...

    "(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien
    who is present in the United States in violation of federal
    immigration laws and"...

    "3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United
    States Immigration and Naturalization Service"...

    Not much difference between OLD California law and Arizona law that MAY go into effect soon.

  • All American
    June 24, 2010 7:30 a.m.

    If you were a REAL Christian and you REALLY want to help, you would research our immigration laws and see if you could sponsor this family (or whatever it takes) to help them become LEGAL, because, as stated by Ett, they are "illegal aliens" - period! And, please, do read the Arizona law before offering your opinion about it.

  • IndependentLiberal
    June 24, 2010 7:30 a.m.

    As a Deacon in a small Baptist church on the west side of the valley, I can say without hesitation, if I was approached for assistance and was told that they were illegal aliens, I couldn’t even think of turning them in.

    There ARE better way of controlling immigration than “Adverse Information”

  • KM
    June 24, 2010 7:22 a.m.

    1st, they don't live in your neighborhood.

    2nd, if we act like we care enough to financially destroy our system by continuing to pretend like we can afford to take care of everybody on earth, then we will not be able to take care of ourselves or others.

  • Ultra Bob
    June 24, 2010 6:56 a.m.

    Obviously anyone can make up stories to fit their point of view. And it is easy to understand why a conservative would favor immigration of cheap labor.

    What I don’t understand is why the poster “Ett” would label an article from a conservative as liberal.

  • John Charity Spring
    June 24, 2010 6:54 a.m.

    Ett is correct. This writer invokes religion as an excuse for breaking the law. And yet, he ignores the Christian requirement to honor, sustain, and uphold the law." It is outrageous th claim that anything in Christian doctrine supports illegal doctrine.

    When East Germany still existed,all Christian religions which where present there taught the members that they must obey the law and must not illegally emigrate out of the country.

    The Founding Fathers established this Country as a place where obedience to the law is paramount. All persons who are present in this Country must obey this doctrine.

  • Screwdriver
    June 24, 2010 5:24 a.m.

    The best reason to oppose the law is that it alienates hispanics from law inforcement wheather they are legal or not. Even if you are legal yourself they don't want to talk to police anymore for fear of attracting attention to friends and family or being suspected in thier deportation. If the gangs weren't nad enough to keep people from talking now they have to worry about being separated from thier kids and family.

    Crime is going to run rampant and the police won't get any help. Good job.


  • Ett
    June 23, 2010 10:45 p.m.

    For the record, they aren't "undocumented residents". The proper term is "illegal aliens."

  • Ett
    June 23, 2010 10:42 p.m.

    Your articke is a typical liberal response. You obviously haven't read the law. I have and your scenario isn't possible under the letter of the Arizona law. Maybe you should actually read and understand it before writing uninformed articles about it. Your sort of ignorance is frightening.