sundries

[rm]

I will probably be super scarce until after work hours today.

Yesterday's food: 1 vitamin water (defense flavour), 3 miniature gluten-free apple pies, chana masala, Chipotle chicken burrito bowl (no beans, mild & medium salsa and sour cream), some of the chocolate pomegranate candy, a bowl of white rice with olive oil (after my stomach decided WTF about what I'd eaten yesterday, which is a shame, because I made Patty a gorgeous dinner).

Consumers are starting to cut the cord on cable. Interestingly, everyone I know in the biz already has.

I want to take a moment to talk about Arizona. Because I'm upset. I'm upset at being told I haven't read the law (I have). Or that I'm stupid (I'm not). Or that I'm overreacting (it's not up to you to police my emotions).

And I'm upset at declarations of "all __________ feel ___________ about this law."

I am an American citizen who, because I don't drive, very often happens not to carry ID. This is not a political statement; it's just a fact. The passport doesn't fit neatly into everything, sometimes I forget to change it between jackets. I don't always have ID.

And, historically, legally, that's been okay. There is no national ID card in America. There is no legal requirement that I be able to identify my citizenship and residency status for any reason at any time. I cannot be stopped on the street for no other reason than how I look and be asked for my papers. If, in the course of some other event, cops ask me for ID, if I don't have it on me, yeah, that'll be a hassle, but it's not a crime in and of itself (reality is slightly more complicated than that, but I'm going with brevity and the assumption that I'm not committing a crime at the time of said hypothetical police interaction).

The Arizona law, to my reading, changes that in Arizona. To my reading of the political climate of Arizona and its particular issues, people can make all the noise they want about this law being directed at all illegal immigrants, I still read this as specifically targeting the Latino population for reasons that - while it may include some legitimate concerns about the very screwed up state of immigration, immigration laws and immigration enforcement in the US - absolutely, positively look like racism to me.

And, while I have not, nor do I intend to, refer to the people who have put this law into action as Nazi's, because that is hyperbole (and not useful hyperbole), I will saw unequivocably that one of the reasons the law makes me uncomfortable, beyond its racism, beyond the distraction it provides from deterring crime with clear-cut and immediate victims, is because I'm a Jewish person. Full stop. Other Jews may or may not feel that way. I do.

And guess what? I'm allowed to.

I am too fucking old to "agree to disagree" on some aspects of some issues. These include racism and civil rights. Does a person in Arizona have more meaningful commentary to offer on this law than I? You bet. Do Latino people? Also yes. Do people with personal immigration-related experiences? Yup. Here's the thing though, we all get our perspective. And I can't speak for anyone else. So I'd like people to stop speaking for me or telling me how I should speak.

You can think anything you damn well want about the law in Arizona. But the voicing of opinions has consequences - for me and for you. For everyone. And I won't socialize with people who think I'm less than human because of any of the various categories I fit in to.

That also means I'm not interested in socializing with people who think those sorts of things about others because of their categories. We're all a little bit racist and a whole lot ignorant; it's the human condition and I can live with it, especially when we're all trying to do better. But it's the a lot racist and the proud of ignorance thing I've got a problem with.

And don't call me stupid. Ever.

Iowa Bird Story.

The man who designed New York's iconic coffee cup has died.

"Crush" is the most hilarious, awesome, awkward, painful, weird Buffy episode ever. I love the Dawn/Spike friendship. I feel, oddly, really bad for Spike even though he's a creepy stalker asshole. And the whole thing was just unsettling and smart.

Meanwhile on Angel it's the return of Ann. That fundraiser thing was so ridiculous; weirdly it reminded me of the most useless White Collar episode ever, witht he mortgage fraud. It was that same sort of "ignore the actual boring thing driving this plot" problem.

Angel and his humans are so useless without each other. I loved the demon from the 1920s Angel has the fight drama going on with. Great character, great performance. I like Wesley around Gun. It makes Wesley seem like he's actually getting to be a boy, and it strikes me that that's unusual for him, like he had to be a serious little adult at nine. I mean, I did, and I wasn't a Watcher. ;)

Comments

[azn-jack-fiend.livejournal.com]

The law enforces racial profiling. There is no way to interpret "reasonable suspicion" other than racially.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a good explanation of connections involving Nazi sympathizers.

Given the authors of this law, no one should be surprised about its intended targets. The law was drafted by a lawyer for the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), whose founder has warned of a “Latin onslaught” and complained about Latinos’ alleged low “educability.” FAIR has accepted $1.2 million from the Pioneer Fund, a racist foundation that was set up by Nazi sympathizers to fund studies of eugenics, the science of selective breeding to produce a “better” race. The legislation was sponsored by state Senator Russell Pearce, who once e-mailed an anti-Semitic article from the neo-Nazi National Alliance website to supporters.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

There are many ways to both correctly use and abuse reasonable suspicion. It's already in place for other laws , such as if a cop were to " smell " marijuana in your car they have reasonable suspicion to search your car for illegal drugs ( I saw a lecture on this recently ).

A few examples of reasonable suspicion in this case have been tied to lack of expected documentation. Again, they can not just stop you to check your papers. It has to be in the process of some other action such as a traffic stop, or some other lawful action. Usually the first thing a cop will ask for is some form of ID , such as a drivers license or state ID card. These have been taken as Prima Facie evidence of citizenship ( AZ Lawyer ) so that woudl stop it right there. If they did not have an ID , or any other proof of being licensed or the car not being registered, that could be considered reasonable suspicion of many things.

Can it be abused? Yes. Will it? Probably. Does this happen already? Yep. The bottom line is, within the auspices of this law you can not just randomly stop someone because of their race and demand to see their papers. It woudl be thrown out almost instantly.

There is a big difference between Nazi sympathizers and actual Nazis. When Arizona cops start stripping people, forcing them to wear labels on their clothing, and sending them off to death camps then I'll accept the Nazi comparison. Until then it's just Goodwin material.