The Mexican Consulate in Phoenix has joined the chorus of federal lawmakers and advocacy groups coming
down on Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his treatment of undocumented immigrants. Earlier this month, Arpaio segregated undocumented immigrants in the county jails and marched 220 convicted inmates from Durango Jail to Tent City.
Rocky,
I think your words will fall on deaf ears....well, blind eyes. To many people around here, if you're not a U.S. citizen, you have no human rights and can be tortured, murdered, raped, or whatever with no consequence. You have to provide more examples like the one I did of a U.S. citizen being rounded up and accused of being here illegally, or more of the many cases where U.S. citizens have been arrested on demonstrably false charges, or other cases of innocent people (remember that only U.S. citizens count as people to some here) treated horribly.
I think your words will fall on deaf ears....well, blind eyes. To many people around here, if you're not a U.S. citizen, you have no human rights and can be tortured, murdered, raped, or whatever with no consequence. You have to provide more examples like the one I did of a U.S. citizen being rounded up and accused of being here illegally, or more of the many cases where U.S. citizens have been arrested on demonstrably false charges, or other cases of innocent people (remember that only U.S. citizens count as people to some here) treated horribly.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's continuing and controversial crackdown on illegal immigration and the federal program that lets him identify and arrest undocumented immigrants is a financial and public-safety failure, according to a new report.
The program, known as 287 (g), has been touted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement as a public-safety measure aimed at removing criminal illegal immigrants. But the Sheriff's Office and other participating agencies have focused on easy targets such as traffic violators and day laborers who pose little threat, says the report by Justice Strategies, a non-profit nonpartisan research group based in Brooklyn, N.Y.
Arpaio defended his participation in the program, which he said has led to the identification of thousands of illegal immigrants.
Actually this is a pretty good example of someone using the publicity they get to their own advantage. I've heard of the guy, even back here in the Midwest, but Rocky actually lives in the same county, so I would think he would be much more likely to have the inside story than I would.
Never heard anything negative about him up here in the cold and freezing Midwest.
P-Mosh - please do NOT get me going on this topic. I live in San Diego. I know the folks who do the grounds at my town home complex every day. They are "documented" (screw that) but they get up at 3:30 AM to make a two hour border crossing at Tijuana and are promptly at work at 7:00 AM. They work hard as heck and ask for nothing. Tell ya a short story if you are in the mood to read it. Asked the groundskeepers what it would cost to remove a couple of rose bushes. Guy said $10.00. I told him I would give him $40.00. When he was done the roses were removed BUT BUT BUT the patio was also blown clean, and EVERY SINGLE WEED was removed by hand. I came out with another $10.00 which he waved off - I pushed it anyway and he took it. Do you realize that eight out of every ten dollars is sent back to Mexico to feed family? While I am not ignorant that some of the border crossings are by less than desirables - the often stated views against ALL Mexican immigrants is kinda like saying all Jews should have stayed in the death camps. And as Ed Morrow (well before your time and even mine) said - Good Night and Good Luck
Rocky,
I think your words will fall on deaf ears....well, blind eyes. To many people around here, if you're not a U.S. citizen, you have no human rights and can be tortured, murdered, raped, or whatever with no consequence. You have to provide more examples like the one I did of a U.S. citizen being rounded up and accused of being here illegally, or more of the many cases where U.S. citizens have been arrested on demonstrably false charges, or other cases of innocent people (remember that only U.S. citizens count as people to some here) treated horribly.
I had no idea about any of this. I am really sickened if this is true.
Imagine you are the mother of a mentally handicapped thirty-three-year-old-man. Your son functions on the level of a twelve-year-old boy. His disability often causes him to act erratically, but you still hope that one day, he can lead a normal life. One night in August, 2001, he is arrested on a misdemeanor loitering charge when he begins acting strangely in a convenience store. When officers arrive to arrest him, he is clinging to the store's coffee machine and won't let go. Four officers forcibly remove him from the store, handcuff him, and throw him to the ground to be hogtied. The force seems excessive, since your son is disabled and only weighs about a hundred and thirty pounds. A few minutes later, his limbs bound behind his tiny frame, officers load him into the squad car to take him away. Before they pull away, your son asks you, like a little kid:
"Mom, will you ride in the car with me?"
"I can't," you tell him, "the police won't let me."
You figure that the police will probably hold your son overnight, and you head home to get some rest.
Two hours later, your son is dead.
When Charles Agster arrives at Madison Street Jail, he is confused, as is typical of his condition. He tries to wriggle underneath a bench, and although he is still hogtied, three or more officers and a sheriff's deputy jump on him, punch him, and knee him in the side. One officer grips his face, pressing upward toward his chin. Although he is now unresponsive, the officers drag him, face down, into the Intake area and strap him into a restraint chair. They place a spit-hood over his head, encasing him in darkness. Minutes later, he stops breathing. The original autopsy lists "positional asphyxia due to restraint" as his cause of death.
Videotape of the incident shows guards trying to resuscitate Agster, but he's already brain dead. A 2002 Amnesty International report expresses concern "that the degree of force used against Agster was grossly disproportionate to any threat posed by him."
I had no idea about any of this. I am really sickened if this is true.
Imagine you are the mother of a mentally handicapped thirty-three-year-old-man. Your son functions on the level of a twelve-year-old boy. His disability often causes him to act erratically, but you still hope that one day, he can lead a normal life. One night in August, 2001, he is arrested on a misdemeanor loitering charge when he begins acting strangely in a convenience store. When officers arrive to arrest him, he is clinging to the store's coffee machine and won't let go. Four officers forcibly remove him from the store, handcuff him, and throw him to the ground to be hogtied. The force seems excessive, since your son is disabled and only weighs about a hundred and thirty pounds. A few minutes later, his limbs bound behind his tiny frame, officers load him into the squad car to take him away. Before they pull away, your son asks you, like a little kid:
"Mom, will you ride in the car with me?"
"I can't," you tell him, "the police won't let me."
You figure that the police will probably hold your son overnight, and you head home to get some rest.
Two hours later, your son is dead.
When Charles Agster arrives at Madison Street Jail, he is confused, as is typical of his condition. He tries to wriggle underneath a bench, and although he is still hogtied, three or more officers and a sheriff's deputy jump on him, punch him, and knee him in the side. One officer grips his face, pressing upward toward his chin. Although he is now unresponsive, the officers drag him, face down, into the Intake area and strap him into a restraint chair. They place a spit-hood over his head, encasing him in darkness. Minutes later, he stops breathing. The original autopsy lists "positional asphyxia due to restraint" as his cause of death.
Videotape of the incident shows guards trying to resuscitate Agster, but he's already brain dead. A 2002 Amnesty International report expresses concern "that the degree of force used against Agster was grossly disproportionate to any threat posed by him."
I know you didn't. That was my point. I figured you would follow your own advice to post links and do so in your own post.
Others did (which I'm looking at), but you've been negligent. Why should I google something that is in *your back yard*?
If it's at your fingertips, and you brought it up, it's incumbent upon you to validate the claims you make, dude.
You're letting others carry the water for you here.
My point is that when I make (made) suggestions for people to back up their claims, the inference is that if they do not, then I don't see any reason for me to take their claims seriously.
To apply that here, you are free to disregard my claims. I have no desire to spend time researching what I already know about OurPieHole. Take it or leave it.
My point is that when I make (made) suggestions for people to back up their claims, the inference is that if they do not, then I don't see any reason for me to take their claims seriously.
To apply that here, you are free to disregard my claims. I have no desire to spend time researching what I already know about OurPieHole. Take it or leave it.
I just saw a newsclip of Sheriff Joe on Doctor Phil. They round up deadbeat dads on Valentine's Day and throw them in tent-jail until they pay a $10,000 bond.
Now I ask you (and please don't think I am excusing nonpayment of child support) how is the guy supposed to pay off the late child support if he just lost his job because he got tossed in the slammer?
They do that here, too. First, they take away his driver's license so he can't get to work. Then he loses his job and can't go anywhere to find another, and he gets tossed in the graybar motel and the child support just keeps on mounting.
I know a lot of people are stupid about paying, but some of them, my kid included, have problems getting a job because of a lack of training/education, lose the job or get laid off, can't afford to hire a lawyer to get it reduced, and are probably behind the 8-ball by that time.
The advocate for dads on Dr. Phil called it a "political stunt." I tend to agree.
Twas up to me, I would find a job for these guys with a fair wage, make them work it as long as they were in arrears, bus them to it and take as much of their paycheck as I possibly could in order to pay off the child support. We got a lot of bad roads up here and think how much money they could make and how they could benefit the state/county by repairing them, maybe even learn a trade.
Sprout has a job now. He has a new wife and child. He owes back child support, however, and guess how much of his income tax return his ex-wife gets in child support? 100%. She lives with three to four other adults, makes good money herself, and spends very little money on MiniSprout. She wouldn't even take him for speech therapy, saying that he would be in kindergarten and that way she wouldn't have to use extra time to fill out the paperwork to get him FREE speech therapy where he would even ride a bus rather her having to drive him.
I just saw a newsclip of Sheriff Joe on Doctor Phil. They round up deadbeat dads on Valentine's Day and throw them in tent-jail until they pay a $10,000 bond.
Now I ask you (and please don't think I am excusing nonpayment of child support) how is the guy supposed to pay off the late child support if he just lost his job because he got tossed in the slammer?
They do that here, too. First, they take away his driver's license so he can't get to work. Then he loses his job and can't go anywhere to find another, and he gets tossed in the graybar motel and the child support just keeps on mounting.
I know a lot of people are stupid about paying, but some of them, my kid included, have problems getting a job because of a lack of training/education, lose the job or get laid off, can't afford to hire a lawyer to get it reduced, and are probably behind the 8-ball by that time.
The advocate for dads on Dr. Phil called it a "political stunt." I tend to agree.
Twas up to me, I would find a job for these guys with a fair wage, make them work it as long as they were in arrears, bus them to it and take as much of their paycheck as I possibly could in order to pay off the child support. We got a lot of bad roads up here and think how much money they could make and how they could benefit the state/county by repairing them, maybe even learn a trade.
Sprout has a job now. He has a new wife and child. He owes back child support, however, and guess how much of his income tax return his ex-wife gets in child support? 100%. She lives with three to four other adults, makes good money herself, and spends very little money on MiniSprout. She wouldn't even take him for speech therapy, saying that he would be in kindergarten and that way she wouldn't have to use extra time to fill out the paperwork to get him FREE speech therapy where he would even ride a bus rather her having to drive him.
I know, but Sheriff Joe did get me started!!!!!
WG
Actually, you provided a pretty good real life example of the ramifications of publicity stunts that media whores like Arpaio do on a regular basis. So, I think it goes quite well with the subject of this thread.
I just saw a newsclip of Sheriff Joe on Doctor Phil. They round up deadbeat dads on Valentine's Day and throw them in tent-jail until they pay a $10,000 bond.
Now I ask you (and please don't think I am excusing nonpayment of child support) how is the guy supposed to pay off the late child support if he just lost his job because he got tossed in the slammer?
They do that here, too. First, they take away his driver's license so he can't get to work. Then he loses his job and can't go anywhere to find another, and he gets tossed in the graybar motel and the child support just keeps on mounting.
I know a lot of people are stupid about paying, but some of them, my kid included, have problems getting a job because of a lack of training/education, lose the job or get laid off, can't afford to hire a lawyer to get it reduced, and are probably behind the 8-ball by that time.
The advocate for dads on Dr. Phil called it a "political stunt." I tend to agree.
Twas up to me, I would find a job for these guys with a fair wage, make them work it as long as they were in arrears, bus them to it and take as much of their paycheck as I possibly could in order to pay off the child support. We got a lot of bad roads up here and think how much money they could make and how they could benefit the state/county by repairing them, maybe even learn a trade.
Sprout has a job now. He has a new wife and child. He owes back child support, however, and guess how much of his income tax return his ex-wife gets in child support? 100%. She lives with three to four other adults, makes good money herself, and spends very little money on MiniSprout. She wouldn't even take him for speech therapy, saying that he would be in kindergarten and that way she wouldn't have to use extra time to fill out the paperwork to get him FREE speech therapy where he would even ride a bus rather her having to drive him.
I know, but Sheriff Joe did get me started!!!!!
WG
Hello? Exactly. This kind of stupidity happens all the time in our justice system. People who should NOT be in jail. . . end up there. Sometimes, due to circumstances beyond their control. Then people like Sheriff Joe or State legislators try to play judge and jury. . . actually tying the hands of real judges to execute sound justice.
See, it is crazy. Single mothers, kids, mentally retarded, minorities, and mostly the POOR end up in our prisons. One in nine African American men are in prison. One in a hundred black women. One in 355 white woman. . . . .
People should take a look at the prison statistics in this country. Staggering. Costly. Ineffective. Reform would save us so much in pain and in dollars. That is why we advocate and educate to what is really going on.
Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, and children of all ages, once again it's show time.
Performing for your entertainment this week is the renowned TAG Team of Thomas, Arpaio and Goddard. Once again we're going to be treated to the state's master showmen of elected law enforcement officials.
The first act was Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who started the week's entertainment by rounding up "deadbeat dads" on Valentine's Day. Joe stole for show. The sheriff gave us the same old schtick, including his world-renowned growling for the camera, as he showed off another catch of low-hanging fruit chained up in pink handcuffs. If you're easy to find and arrest, he'll track you down and parade you around like you're Charles Manson, even if your charged with a cracked windshield. (continued)
-------
(Emphasis mine)
The East Valley Tribune is a VERY conservative Phoenix area newspaper (Mesa, AZ).
The writer of this column, Bill Richardson (NOT the governor of New Mexico) is a retired Mesa police officer, living in the East Valley (suburbs of Phoenix).
Don't many people turn to a life of crime because they were abused, mistreated, humiliated, and/or tortured during their childhood and youth? So what on God's green earth does this Arizona cowboy Joe think abusing, mistreating, humiliating, and torturing inmates will accomplish, really? Seems to me this sort of treatment would simply serve to fuel more anger and lead to more antisocial behavior. Many of these individuals have known hate all their lives. More of the same isn't going to make them better citizens if and when they get out of prison, that's for sure.
(Why does that song from West Side Story..."We're depraved on accounta we're deprived...." keep running through my head?)
I'm not saying convicted felons should be coddled in prison, but c'mon. Living in tents in the Arizona heat? Eating crappy food. They don't need steaks but they should get nutritional meals.
Back to the original post...
I do think the dog-training program is a great one. Someone besides Joe A must have instituted that one, if all accounts of his usual approach are true! I've seen documentaries on similar programs at both men's and women's prisons, and I think they're fantastic. They teach the prisoners responsibility, give them someone to care about and take care of, and give them a productive, rewarding way to spend their time. In turn, dogs love them unconditionally, as only dogs seem able to do, and the dogs ultimately get homes instead of being euthanized. Everybody wins!
I know by experience what a dog's love can do for a person. At particular a time in my life when my heart was really hurting, one of the things that got me through was a beautiful little rescued mutt who came to share my home and steal my heart. So for prisoners, many of whom have never known unconditional love, I can't imagine the depth of healing that can take place when an innocent, frightened dog looks up at him or her with trust and affection and gives a cuddle or a happy wag or a a big slurpy kiss on the cheek.
So I'll give Joe a thumbs-up for that, even if his motives were only to help the bottom line. The rest of his antics are worthy of the Jerry Springer Show, from what I've seen.
Don't many people turn to a life of crime because they were abused, mistreated, humiliated, and/or tortured during their childhood and youth? So what on God's green earth does this Arizona cowboy Joe think abusing, mistreating, humiliating, and torturing inmates will accomplish, really? Seems to me this sort of treatment would simply serve to fuel more anger and lead to more antisocial behavior. Many of these individuals have known hate all their lives. More of the same isn't going to make them better citizens if and when they get out of prison, that's for sure.
(Why does that song from West Side Story..."We're depraved on accounta we're deprived...." keep running through my head?)
I'm not saying convicted felons should be coddled in prison, but c'mon. Living in tents in the Arizona heat? Eating crappy food. They don't need steaks but they should get nutritional meals.
Back to the original post...
I do think the dog-training program is a great one. Someone besides Joe A must have instituted that one, if all accounts of his usual approach are true! I've seen documentaries on similar programs at both men's and women's prisons, and I think they're fantastic. They teach the prisoners responsibility, give them someone to care about and take care of, and give them a productive, rewarding way to spend their time. In turn, dogs love them unconditionally, as only dogs seem able to do, and the dogs ultimately get homes instead of being euthanized. Everybody wins!
I know by experience what a dog's love can do for a person. At particular a time in my life when my heart was really hurting, one of the things that got me through was a beautiful little rescued mutt who came to share my home and steal my heart. So for prisoners, many of whom have never known unconditional love, I can't imagine the depth of healing that can take place when an innocent, frightened dog looks up at him or her with trust and affection and gives a cuddle or a happy wag or a a big slurpy kiss on the cheek.
So I'll give Joe a thumbs-up for that, even if his motives were only to help the bottom line. The rest of his antics are worthy of the Jerry Springer Show, from what I've seen.
Linda... I agree on the animal care programs. Arpaio is concerned about animals, goes after known animal abuse emphatically.
Several thousand people marched nearly 4 miles in central Phoenix on Saturday to protest Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the federal program that allows his deputies to enforce immigration laws.
Opponents of the sheriff marched from Steele Indian School Park to the Sandra Day O'Connor Federal Courthouse in a half-day event that also drew about 150 Arpaio supporters.
Organized by several groups, the march attracted protesters from Los Angeles to Miami. (continued)
Let it go, Dave. Despite whatever valid points you _may_ have against Rocky's failure to show sources, your counter-argument in support of Sheriff Joe has all but evaporated due to the _overwhelming_ facts re: his white-trash abuse of power. And not even your conservative 'law & order' and 'drive out them damn immigrants' is able to drum up valid support for that pig.
He and his ilk has done absolutely nothing for what this country stands for. Absolutely nothing.
Let it go, Dave. Despite whatever valid points you _may_ have against Rocky's failure to show sources, your counter-argument in support of Sheriff Joe has all but evaporated due to the _overwhelming_ facts re: his white-trash abuse of power. And not even your conservative 'law & order' and 'drive out them damn immigrants' is able to drum up valid support for that pig.
He and his ilk has done absolutely nothing for what this country stands for. Absolutely nothing.
Hey there Garth. How be ye?? :)
In post #13 I asked for sources from Rocky;
In post #18 I said I was willing to believe Rocky, if he would provide sources for what he was saying;
In post #19 I said *give that man a medal* for dealing with illegal immigration.
Now - - - if you care to peruse the thread, you might notice that NOT ONE SINGLE LINK was given until now I see did so in post #20.
In post #33 I said I was looking at the links provided (with NO comment pro or con on Sheriff Joe);
Then Rocky said:
My point is that when I make (made) suggestions for people to back up their claims, the inference is that if they do not,
then I don't see any reason for me to take their claims seriously.
To apply that here, you are free to disregard my claims. I have no desire to spend time researching what I already know about OurPieHole.
Take it or leave it.
For what it's worth --- I did think Sheriff Joe was an OK kinda guy. Now I'm hearing different things about him from folks who have first hand evidence to back up their claims. Should I take those claims at face value, simply because they are *first-hand*? According to Rocky first hand evidence isn't applicable without links to other sources provided, and in spades (unless it's done by himself). So I asked for links providing evidence. Nothing more, nothing less.
I don't see anywhere here that I support Sheriff Joe's *agenda* (as you claim), other than my saying give him a medal for working against illegal immigration before any links were provided showing what he was truly capable of. So -- you (with your assertion I'm still defending Sheriff Joe), and P-Mosh (who jumped on me about *thinking all Hispanic people being illegal immigrants - - - WHICH I NEVER SAID OR EVEN IMPLIED!) are both wrong. Just as Rocky is wrong for not following his own advice/ mandates to provide proof for claims made here in cyber-space.
It's ironic that NOW there are some links being provided, eh?
Should have been done on page one, rather than two or three.
So there you have it. My posts have been more about producing *proof*,
1) Please note Dave, that I _did_ address Rocky's initial lack of releasing sources, ie., "Despite whatever valid points you _may_ have against Rocky's failure to show sources," (<--- and looky! You even had it in your quote back to me :) ), and I put the _may_ in there as Rocky made mention that he LIVES in the same county as Sheriff OurPieHole, thus giving the "Hey pal! I have had front seat experience in this situation!" advantage. It'd be like I could tell you a LOT more about Huntsville politics than you could even read on the internet, beings that I _live_ here.
"Should I take those claims at face value, simply because they are *first-hand*?" Usually, they are to be given more weight.
"According to Rocky first hand evidence isn't applicable without links to other sources provided, and in spades (unless it's done by himself)." ... which would be one of your valid points re: his failure to show sources. Ummm, I believe I already touched upon that, did I not?
2) Your support for Sheriff Joe's 'agenda' that I alluded to refers specifically to the immigration issue, and even there, he winds up smelling like a grade-A a**hole. So just because someone 'takes a stand against illegal immigrants' doesn't automatically make them right. Ie., like everything else, there is a right way and a wrong way of doing things, and this ain't no different.
"So -- you (with your assertion I'm still defending Sheriff Joe), and P-Mosh (who jumped on me about *thinking all Hispanic people being illegal immigrants - - - WHICH I NEVER SAID OR EVEN IMPLIED!) are both wrong."
Ahhh, not as wrong as you for not reading more carefully what I said, which you have at the very least, over-simplified. Over-simplification can easily delete necessary details that are _needed_ to fully understand what the other person is saying, ... even if its done under the intent of 'Keeping it simple'.
Instead of saying, these people deserve to be in prison, why don't you ask WHY they are in prison? What are their circumstances that get them there? What is being done to address their circumstances?
If someone is illiterate - do they get reading and writing lessons?
If they have been violent is it because they have been abused and have anger management problems - do they get counselling and anger management courses to help them find better ways to cope?
If someone has stolen, is it because they really can't make ends meet? Some family tragedy has afflicted them?
It's hard enough for someone with a prison sentence to get out and find a decent job, or any legal job, afterwards. So what does that do? Push him back into the prison system. Which costs every taxpayer money.
Instead if some money were made available to teach skills - there would be a lot more people who could contribute to society. As legal, decent working people.
Some prisons I'm aware of have programs that teach prisoners skills for life. Some sort of trade. They get to sit external qualifications. The recidivism rate is very low because these people are integrated back into society.
In other countries, there are "restorative justice" programs. These aim to restore offenders back to society by confronting them with the effects of their crimes. Many say it is so painful being confronted by their victims that they would rather go to prison. But the ones who do go through restorative justice programs often realize the error of their ways and do not offend again.
If the Sheriff gives some prisoners dog-training skills and a feeling of respect for what they have done, that will go a long way to those prisoners' rehabilitation.
If, however, he treats them like caged animals in a zoo, to be kicked whenever he feels like it, he's actually kicking out the welcome mat for their next visit.
Which one of you hasn't done something wrong? You just didn't get caught for it. Did you ever "borrow" a pen, or a paperclip, from where you work? Did you ever drive a little carelessly? Did you ever hit out at anything in frustration?
Pretty much all of us here have an abused background, to a greater or lesser degree, through our time in TWI. We did things that now we find almost unbelievable. We hurt friends, and relatives; we abused people in the name of God; we may have behaved despicably; we were rude and intolerant; some may have engaged in sexual exploitation (the low end of which is known at the Cafe as "date and switch").
If we had had a decent background to begin with, we may have managed to pull back to that. If we didn't, we have to find out more appropriate ways of dealing with life. It took or takes time, effort, and help to re-train our thinking.
Some of those people in prison have lived all their lives like that. They didn't have decent backgrounds or role models to begin with. Violence was their role model.
You have had grace and mercy extended in your life. If you have no criminal record, be thankful.
Extend some grace and mercy to others. You have done things wrong too, some just in the eyes of God, and some in the eyes of the society in which you live. It's just a question of degree.
BTW I don't necessarily advocate not removing people from society; it's what you do with them when you remove them that this post concerns.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
18
7
6
6
Popular Days
Feb 24
15
Feb 25
10
Feb 26
7
Feb 27
7
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 18 posts
Watered Garden 7 posts
dmiller 6 posts
geisha779 6 posts
Popular Days
Feb 24 2009
15 posts
Feb 25 2009
10 posts
Feb 26 2009
7 posts
Feb 27 2009
7 posts
Mister P-Mosh
Rocky,
I think your words will fall on deaf ears....well, blind eyes. To many people around here, if you're not a U.S. citizen, you have no human rights and can be tortured, murdered, raped, or whatever with no consequence. You have to provide more examples like the one I did of a U.S. citizen being rounded up and accused of being here illegally, or more of the many cases where U.S. citizens have been arrested on demonstrably false charges, or other cases of innocent people (remember that only U.S. citizens count as people to some here) treated horribly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Well, how about THIS: Experts call ICE program used by Arpaio a failure
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's continuing and controversial crackdown on illegal immigration and the federal program that lets him identify and arrest undocumented immigrants is a financial and public-safety failure, according to a new report.
The program, known as 287 (g), has been touted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement as a public-safety measure aimed at removing criminal illegal immigrants. But the Sheriff's Office and other participating agencies have focused on easy targets such as traffic violators and day laborers who pose little threat, says the report by Justice Strategies, a non-profit nonpartisan research group based in Brooklyn, N.Y.
Arpaio defended his participation in the program, which he said has led to the identification of thousands of illegal immigrants.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Actually this is a pretty good example of someone using the publicity they get to their own advantage. I've heard of the guy, even back here in the Midwest, but Rocky actually lives in the same county, so I would think he would be much more likely to have the inside story than I would.
Never heard anything negative about him up here in the cold and freezing Midwest.
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
P-Mosh - please do NOT get me going on this topic. I live in San Diego. I know the folks who do the grounds at my town home complex every day. They are "documented" (screw that) but they get up at 3:30 AM to make a two hour border crossing at Tijuana and are promptly at work at 7:00 AM. They work hard as heck and ask for nothing. Tell ya a short story if you are in the mood to read it. Asked the groundskeepers what it would cost to remove a couple of rose bushes. Guy said $10.00. I told him I would give him $40.00. When he was done the roses were removed BUT BUT BUT the patio was also blown clean, and EVERY SINGLE WEED was removed by hand. I came out with another $10.00 which he waved off - I pushed it anyway and he took it. Do you realize that eight out of every ten dollars is sent back to Mexico to feed family? While I am not ignorant that some of the border crossings are by less than desirables - the often stated views against ALL Mexican immigrants is kinda like saying all Jews should have stayed in the death camps. And as Ed Morrow (well before your time and even mine) said - Good Night and Good Luck
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I had no idea about any of this. I am really sickened if this is true.
Imagine you are the mother of a mentally handicapped thirty-three-year-old-man. Your son functions on the level of a twelve-year-old boy. His disability often causes him to act erratically, but you still hope that one day, he can lead a normal life. One night in August, 2001, he is arrested on a misdemeanor loitering charge when he begins acting strangely in a convenience store. When officers arrive to arrest him, he is clinging to the store's coffee machine and won't let go. Four officers forcibly remove him from the store, handcuff him, and throw him to the ground to be hogtied. The force seems excessive, since your son is disabled and only weighs about a hundred and thirty pounds. A few minutes later, his limbs bound behind his tiny frame, officers load him into the squad car to take him away. Before they pull away, your son asks you, like a little kid:
"Mom, will you ride in the car with me?"
"I can't," you tell him, "the police won't let me."
You figure that the police will probably hold your son overnight, and you head home to get some rest.
Two hours later, your son is dead.
When Charles Agster arrives at Madison Street Jail, he is confused, as is typical of his condition. He tries to wriggle underneath a bench, and although he is still hogtied, three or more officers and a sheriff's deputy jump on him, punch him, and knee him in the side. One officer grips his face, pressing upward toward his chin. Although he is now unresponsive, the officers drag him, face down, into the Intake area and strap him into a restraint chair. They place a spit-hood over his head, encasing him in darkness. Minutes later, he stops breathing. The original autopsy lists "positional asphyxia due to restraint" as his cause of death.
Videotape of the incident shows guards trying to resuscitate Agster, but he's already brain dead. A 2002 Amnesty International report expresses concern "that the degree of force used against Agster was grossly disproportionate to any threat posed by him."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
It happened more than once.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I know you didn't. That was my point. I figured you would follow your own advice to post links and do so in your own post.
Others did (which I'm looking at), but you've been negligent. Why should I google something that is in *your back yard*?
If it's at your fingertips, and you brought it up, it's incumbent upon you to validate the claims you make, dude.
You're letting others carry the water for you here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
My point is that when I make (made) suggestions for people to back up their claims, the inference is that if they do not, then I don't see any reason for me to take their claims seriously.
To apply that here, you are free to disregard my claims. I have no desire to spend time researching what I already know about OurPieHole. Take it or leave it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Classic!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Glad you're happy. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
I just saw a newsclip of Sheriff Joe on Doctor Phil. They round up deadbeat dads on Valentine's Day and throw them in tent-jail until they pay a $10,000 bond.
Now I ask you (and please don't think I am excusing nonpayment of child support) how is the guy supposed to pay off the late child support if he just lost his job because he got tossed in the slammer?
They do that here, too. First, they take away his driver's license so he can't get to work. Then he loses his job and can't go anywhere to find another, and he gets tossed in the graybar motel and the child support just keeps on mounting.
I know a lot of people are stupid about paying, but some of them, my kid included, have problems getting a job because of a lack of training/education, lose the job or get laid off, can't afford to hire a lawyer to get it reduced, and are probably behind the 8-ball by that time.
The advocate for dads on Dr. Phil called it a "political stunt." I tend to agree.
Twas up to me, I would find a job for these guys with a fair wage, make them work it as long as they were in arrears, bus them to it and take as much of their paycheck as I possibly could in order to pay off the child support. We got a lot of bad roads up here and think how much money they could make and how they could benefit the state/county by repairing them, maybe even learn a trade.
Sprout has a job now. He has a new wife and child. He owes back child support, however, and guess how much of his income tax return his ex-wife gets in child support? 100%. She lives with three to four other adults, makes good money herself, and spends very little money on MiniSprout. She wouldn't even take him for speech therapy, saying that he would be in kindergarten and that way she wouldn't have to use extra time to fill out the paperwork to get him FREE speech therapy where he would even ride a bus rather her having to drive him.
I know,
but Sheriff Joe did get me started!!!!!
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Actually, you provided a pretty good real life example of the ramifications of publicity stunts that media whores like Arpaio do on a regular basis. So, I think it goes quite well with the subject of this thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zshot
If there were anybody here that could come close to challange Rocky concerning what is going on in Arizona, it would be someone else from Arizona.
As someone else from Arizona (Southern Arizona, about 200 miles south of Rocky), Rocky has been right on point on this thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Hello? Exactly. This kind of stupidity happens all the time in our justice system. People who should NOT be in jail. . . end up there. Sometimes, due to circumstances beyond their control. Then people like Sheriff Joe or State legislators try to play judge and jury. . . actually tying the hands of real judges to execute sound justice.
See, it is crazy. Single mothers, kids, mentally retarded, minorities, and mostly the POOR end up in our prisons. One in nine African American men are in prison. One in a hundred black women. One in 355 white woman. . . . .
People should take a look at the prison statistics in this country. Staggering. Costly. Ineffective. Reform would save us so much in pain and in dollars. That is why we advocate and educate to what is really going on.
Prison is a business in this country.
Excellent observation WG.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8022803016.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Law Enforcement Circus continues
Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, and children of all ages, once again it's show time.
Performing for your entertainment this week is the renowned TAG Team of Thomas, Arpaio and Goddard. Once again we're going to be treated to the state's master showmen of elected law enforcement officials.
The first act was Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who started the week's entertainment by rounding up "deadbeat dads" on Valentine's Day. Joe stole for show. The sheriff gave us the same old schtick, including his world-renowned growling for the camera, as he showed off another catch of low-hanging fruit chained up in pink handcuffs. If you're easy to find and arrest, he'll track you down and parade you around like you're Charles Manson, even if your charged with a cracked windshield. (continued)
-------
(Emphasis mine)
The East Valley Tribune is a VERY conservative Phoenix area newspaper (Mesa, AZ).
The writer of this column, Bill Richardson (NOT the governor of New Mexico) is a retired Mesa police officer, living in the East Valley (suburbs of Phoenix).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
Sheessshhhhh - - - and I thought things were bad in Trenton and Newark!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Something occurs to me after reading this thread.
Don't many people turn to a life of crime because they were abused, mistreated, humiliated, and/or tortured during their childhood and youth? So what on God's green earth does this Arizona cowboy Joe think abusing, mistreating, humiliating, and torturing inmates will accomplish, really? Seems to me this sort of treatment would simply serve to fuel more anger and lead to more antisocial behavior. Many of these individuals have known hate all their lives. More of the same isn't going to make them better citizens if and when they get out of prison, that's for sure.
(Why does that song from West Side Story..."We're depraved on accounta we're deprived...." keep running through my head?)
I'm not saying convicted felons should be coddled in prison, but c'mon. Living in tents in the Arizona heat? Eating crappy food. They don't need steaks but they should get nutritional meals.
Back to the original post...
I do think the dog-training program is a great one. Someone besides Joe A must have instituted that one, if all accounts of his usual approach are true! I've seen documentaries on similar programs at both men's and women's prisons, and I think they're fantastic. They teach the prisoners responsibility, give them someone to care about and take care of, and give them a productive, rewarding way to spend their time. In turn, dogs love them unconditionally, as only dogs seem able to do, and the dogs ultimately get homes instead of being euthanized. Everybody wins!
I know by experience what a dog's love can do for a person. At particular a time in my life when my heart was really hurting, one of the things that got me through was a beautiful little rescued mutt who came to share my home and steal my heart. So for prisoners, many of whom have never known unconditional love, I can't imagine the depth of healing that can take place when an innocent, frightened dog looks up at him or her with trust and affection and gives a cuddle or a happy wag or a a big slurpy kiss on the cheek.
So I'll give Joe a thumbs-up for that, even if his motives were only to help the bottom line. The rest of his antics are worthy of the Jerry Springer Show, from what I've seen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Linda... I agree on the animal care programs. Arpaio is concerned about animals, goes after known animal abuse emphatically.
Here's more contemporaneous Arpaio doo doo...
March against the sheriff
Several thousand people marched nearly 4 miles in central Phoenix on Saturday to protest Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the federal program that allows his deputies to enforce immigration laws.
Opponents of the sheriff marched from Steele Indian School Park to the Sandra Day O'Connor Federal Courthouse in a half-day event that also drew about 150 Arpaio supporters.
Organized by several groups, the march attracted protesters from Los Angeles to Miami. (continued)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Let it go, Dave. Despite whatever valid points you _may_ have against Rocky's failure to show sources, your counter-argument in support of Sheriff Joe has all but evaporated due to the _overwhelming_ facts re: his white-trash abuse of power. And not even your conservative 'law & order' and 'drive out them damn immigrants' is able to drum up valid support for that pig.
He and his ilk has done absolutely nothing for what this country stands for. Absolutely nothing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
In post #13 I asked for sources from Rocky;
In post #18 I said I was willing to believe Rocky, if he would provide sources for what he was saying;
In post #19 I said *give that man a medal* for dealing with illegal immigration.
Now - - - if you care to peruse the thread, you might notice that NOT ONE SINGLE LINK was given until now I see did so in post #20.
In post #33 I said I was looking at the links provided (with NO comment pro or con on Sheriff Joe);
Then Rocky said:
For what it's worth --- I did think Sheriff Joe was an OK kinda guy. Now I'm hearing different things about him from folks who have first hand evidence to back up their claims. Should I take those claims at face value, simply because they are *first-hand*? According to Rocky first hand evidence isn't applicable without links to other sources provided, and in spades (unless it's done by himself). So I asked for links providing evidence. Nothing more, nothing less.
I don't see anywhere here that I support Sheriff Joe's *agenda* (as you claim), other than my saying give him a medal for working against illegal immigration before any links were provided showing what he was truly capable of. So -- you (with your assertion I'm still defending Sheriff Joe), and P-Mosh (who jumped on me about *thinking all Hispanic people being illegal immigrants - - - WHICH I NEVER SAID OR EVEN IMPLIED!) are both wrong. Just as Rocky is wrong for not following his own advice/ mandates to provide proof for claims made here in cyber-space.
It's ironic that NOW there are some links being provided, eh?
Should have been done on page one, rather than two or three.
So there you have it. My posts have been more about producing *proof*,
rather than supporting/ denigrating Sheriff Joe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Hey! Cut Dmiller some slack! He's defending our northern border from all those Canucks wantin' to play hockey down here!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Speaking of getting various details wrong:
1) Please note Dave, that I _did_ address Rocky's initial lack of releasing sources, ie., "Despite whatever valid points you _may_ have against Rocky's failure to show sources," (<--- and looky! You even had it in your quote back to me :) ), and I put the _may_ in there as Rocky made mention that he LIVES in the same county as Sheriff OurPieHole, thus giving the "Hey pal! I have had front seat experience in this situation!" advantage. It'd be like I could tell you a LOT more about Huntsville politics than you could even read on the internet, beings that I _live_ here.
"Should I take those claims at face value, simply because they are *first-hand*?" Usually, they are to be given more weight.
"According to Rocky first hand evidence isn't applicable without links to other sources provided, and in spades (unless it's done by himself)." ... which would be one of your valid points re: his failure to show sources. Ummm, I believe I already touched upon that, did I not?
2) Your support for Sheriff Joe's 'agenda' that I alluded to refers specifically to the immigration issue, and even there, he winds up smelling like a grade-A a**hole. So just because someone 'takes a stand against illegal immigrants' doesn't automatically make them right. Ie., like everything else, there is a right way and a wrong way of doing things, and this ain't no different.
"So -- you (with your assertion I'm still defending Sheriff Joe), and P-Mosh (who jumped on me about *thinking all Hispanic people being illegal immigrants - - - WHICH I NEVER SAID OR EVEN IMPLIED!) are both wrong."
Ahhh, not as wrong as you for not reading more carefully what I said, which you have at the very least, over-simplified. Over-simplification can easily delete necessary details that are _needed_ to fully understand what the other person is saying, ... even if its done under the intent of 'Keeping it simple'.
:)
Edited by GarthP2000Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I just looked at this thread for the first time.
My goodness me, aren't some of you hard line?
Instead of saying, these people deserve to be in prison, why don't you ask WHY they are in prison? What are their circumstances that get them there? What is being done to address their circumstances?
If someone is illiterate - do they get reading and writing lessons?
If they have been violent is it because they have been abused and have anger management problems - do they get counselling and anger management courses to help them find better ways to cope?
If someone has stolen, is it because they really can't make ends meet? Some family tragedy has afflicted them?
Violence breeds violence. Brutality breeds brutality.
It's hard enough for someone with a prison sentence to get out and find a decent job, or any legal job, afterwards. So what does that do? Push him back into the prison system. Which costs every taxpayer money.
Instead if some money were made available to teach skills - there would be a lot more people who could contribute to society. As legal, decent working people.
Some prisons I'm aware of have programs that teach prisoners skills for life. Some sort of trade. They get to sit external qualifications. The recidivism rate is very low because these people are integrated back into society.
In other countries, there are "restorative justice" programs. These aim to restore offenders back to society by confronting them with the effects of their crimes. Many say it is so painful being confronted by their victims that they would rather go to prison. But the ones who do go through restorative justice programs often realize the error of their ways and do not offend again.
If the Sheriff gives some prisoners dog-training skills and a feeling of respect for what they have done, that will go a long way to those prisoners' rehabilitation.
If, however, he treats them like caged animals in a zoo, to be kicked whenever he feels like it, he's actually kicking out the welcome mat for their next visit.
Which one of you hasn't done something wrong? You just didn't get caught for it. Did you ever "borrow" a pen, or a paperclip, from where you work? Did you ever drive a little carelessly? Did you ever hit out at anything in frustration?
Pretty much all of us here have an abused background, to a greater or lesser degree, through our time in TWI. We did things that now we find almost unbelievable. We hurt friends, and relatives; we abused people in the name of God; we may have behaved despicably; we were rude and intolerant; some may have engaged in sexual exploitation (the low end of which is known at the Cafe as "date and switch").
If we had had a decent background to begin with, we may have managed to pull back to that. If we didn't, we have to find out more appropriate ways of dealing with life. It took or takes time, effort, and help to re-train our thinking.
Some of those people in prison have lived all their lives like that. They didn't have decent backgrounds or role models to begin with. Violence was their role model.
You have had grace and mercy extended in your life. If you have no criminal record, be thankful.
Extend some grace and mercy to others. You have done things wrong too, some just in the eyes of God, and some in the eyes of the society in which you live. It's just a question of degree.
BTW I don't necessarily advocate not removing people from society; it's what you do with them when you remove them that this post concerns.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.