Comments about ‘HB497 compromises public safety’

HB497 is only 315 lines long. Anyone can read it in a matter of minutes.

I see it differently than Mr. Florez. I see it as a law that clarifies how a police officer must act instead of leaving that decision to the officer. In fact, it appears to me, that the law takes away ambiguity and replaces that ambiguity with easy-to-understand guidelines.

We have a problem with illegal aliens in Utah. That's a fact.

We have a problem with illegal aliens representing themselves as citizens to get employment. That's a fact.

We can sit back and wait for Mr. Obama to fix the problem, but he has shown that he's not concerned with illegal aliens, even though he's sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution and to execute the law of the land, which includes securing our borders and prosecuting those who have broken our Federal laws.

Because Mr. Obama has not acted, it is left to the States to protect themselves against people who are trespassers in the State, who use illegal identification, who work illegally, who use State funded services illegally.

HB497 will stop some of that.

So now we want to stop the deportation of the hardened criminals?

The law only applies to people arrested.
It's police that fail to enforce certain laws that hostile attitudes and mistrust of law enforcement.

When are we going to get back to honor and integrity in government and law enforcement? And in peoples attitudes toward this country as far as illegal immigration goes?

Certainly the Cop on the Beat wants to have good rapport with those in their precinct, however, an Officers primary responsibility and duty is to sustain and uphold the law.

What is the cost of requesting to view an ID? Has any agency run a cost analysis on the 90% of encounters with citizens and legal residents where an officer asks the detainee for identification?

Perhaps legislation should be crafted that pushes the sorting into the courts. All detainees, unable to produce valid identification, would be given a simple citation and be required to produce valid ID in court to avoid a fine, those unable to produce such documentation would be placed in custody and their legal status determined at that time. The rest is a matter of existing law.

Would this eliminate the mythical "compromise to public safety" or merely kick the can into another court? The Cop on the Beat would avoid possible indictment and the claim of "racial profiling," and the Judges would become the scapegoat.

Least we forget; almost every adult in the U.S. must provide valid ID not just for law enforcement, but for most all banking transactions, retail purchases and government services.

re: MCFergy | 4:30 p.m. May 7, 2011

How do we get 'detainees' into the court? Does that mean that every person stopped by a police officer gets hauled to jail until the court sorts things out? Would that be reasonable? Would that even be legal. I don't think so.

How do we fix any problem? Don't we list in order of priorities what needs to be done? When we reshingle an old house that has already been reshingled several times, do we lay down the new shingles before removing the old shingles?

1. Recognize that we have a problem

2. Define WHO is causing that problem

3. Act against those who are causing the problem

We could handle things like they do at the airport and give every 80-year-old grandma a virtual strip search, or we could spend 90% of our attention on those most likely to be a danger.

Some call that profiling. I call it common sense.

If 95% of the illegal aliens are a certain race, do we ignore that fact when we try to solve the problem?

I was profiled dozens of times in Europe. I survived.

Whine about officers all you want, but they do have a job to do. It's called enforcement! Ignoring some laws is NOT a good thing! Never has been, never will be.