"Family Guy" Creator Says Arizona Law Like Nazi Germany

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=10523673

~snip~

"It's too much. It's kind of a slap in the face, it's not the way to handle it...Nobody but the Nazis ever asked anybody for their papers," MacFarlane told Reuters Television in an interview on Thursday.

"Walking down the street, a cop can come up to you and say 'May I see your papers?' -- I think they should be required to ask that question in German if the law sticks around," he added.

~snip~

your job and writing a real piece of journalism.

PB

This is not from the politics page, this is from the entertainment section. Seth is not the only entertainer interviewed. Interestingly to me, Shakira is talking about it, which is fitting for me because I first encountered her when we were both playing Phoenix.
Entertainers travel, generate huge money, it is commerce and business. This law impacts all of that and more, of course entertainment writers will wonder what Seth has to say about it as he is outspoken and they know he will address this on his show, which airs in Arizona, which locals might not air, and that is a multi million dollar event.
Did the author or the text claim that Seth is a barometer? And in what way is an entertainment writer not doing their job when writing about the reactions and results of this law upon entertainers and their products? Is he also not doing his job if he does not write about the price of tea in China? His job is writing about entertainment, which is a huge business.
What were you trying to say again?

...yeah, we've been sliding towards a fascist state for a long time now.

A driver's license proves I can drive. It does not prove lawful presence.

If they see me walking around the Grand Canyon, they'll see a guy who looks like he doesn't belong there. I'll be all fat and pasty-white from living in sun-deprived Ohio. When they ask me something, I'll have a strange accent. (I grew up near Worcester, MA and have what non-New Englanders would characterize as a "Boston accent.")

Am I supposed to bring a passport just to go to another American state?

If this law if unconstitutional it should be struck down. I can certainly understand the frustration of the AZ people that lead to its enactment.

to believe they were.

That's what the Fourth Amendment is for. It secures the right of the people to be secure in their persons, papers, property, etc. from unreasonable search and seizure.

A police officer can NOT just stop people and ask for their ID, until now, in Arizona.

although nevermind the constitutionality.
all the laws passed in nazi germany were "constitutional" and "legal"

the unconstitutionality is a mean of fighting back, but the main point is that this is a horrendous POLICY and the az lege should be condemned for passing it in the first place, aside of its constitutionality or enforcement.

ask them for ID the standard appears to be "reasonable suspicion" which I believe is the same standard under this new AZ law.

See also.

Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004), held that statutes requiring suspects to identify themselves during police investigations did not violate either the Fourth or Fifth Amendments. Under the rubric of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the minimal intrusion on a suspect's privacy, and the legitimate need of law enforcement officers to quickly dispel suspicion that an individual is engaged in criminal activity, justified requiring a suspect to identify himself.

Nevada has a “stop-and-identify” law that allows a peace officer to detain any person he encounters “under circumstances which reasonably indicate that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime”; the person may be detained only to “ascertain his identity and the suspicious circumstances surrounding his presence abroad.” In turn, the law requires the person detained to “identify himself”, but does not compel the person to answer any other questions put to him by the officer. As of April 2008, 23 other states<1> have similar laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_District_Court_of_Nevada

Also if I just appear to violate a traffic law the police in my state seem to be able to ask me to produce my license, registration, and proof of insurance.

Yes, the police can ASK you for identification. You aren't required to produce ID under threat of arrest/detainment AND absent any probable cause of crime or intended crime.

Another concept apparently beyond your grasp is the difference between verbally identifying yourself and providing positive proof of identification. "identify yourself" (as in Hi, My name is John Doe - answering truthfully per the "Terry" case judgment requirement) versus "provide identification PAPERS" under threat of arrest.

And if there is any doubt in your mind how this law is INTENDED to be enforced, see the thread posted today with an email from the attorneys who crafted the law. They specifically left language in to allow police to inquire in to status when police contact is made regarding MUNICIPAL CODE violations. In other words, "Your grass has not been mowed or you have cars on blocks in your driveway. Here is a citation and, oh by the way, can I see your birth certificate?"

edit to add link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4363815

seems to be able to tell me...

What we've learned from the "tenthers", is that all powers not given to the Feds are given to the states and the people. Since immigration policy is a Federal right, what part of the Constitution gives states the right to set their own federal policies if they feel the Government's not acting fast enough or effective enough?

If Gov Brewer didn't like the thought of Iran getting a nuke, could she declare war on them and call up the National Guard of Arizona?

What say you, teabaggers??

You're strict Constitutionalists and all.

It's about hassling brown people.

And, you haven't even seen the frustration of "the AZ people" yet.







About a third of Arizona's citizenry IS Latino. :hi:

I thought that the reason for history was for people not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Unfortunately, this age is showing that there are people out there who aren't good students of past events.

Brian will be asked for his papers when visiting AZ or something.

They say it is not racially motivated. My soon to be ex wife who is 33 and her 60 something parents have never even been asked for ID, neither have I and I have an accent, of course we are white, the cops usually ask the children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren of north african immigrants for their papers because they dont "look" french, but the govt. assures us that no racism is involved.......(this is one law i want to change here in france by the way)