This guy makes Arpaio look like a social justice warrior. Arpaio’s methods were harsh, and he has had a fair number of allegations lodged against him, but he is not what I would consider a genuine racist, just an extreme pragmatist… Nucera does sound like a racist, and a pretty hardcore one at that…
Racial profiling and contempt of court are extreme pragmatism?
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/03/28/joe-arpaio-racial-profiling-lawsuit-costs-maricopa-county-another-400k/99712036/
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/07/31/maricopa-county-sheriff-joe-arpaio-found-guilty-criminal-contempt-court/486278001/
When 81% of the unauthorized immigrants in Arizona are from Mexico, your resources are best utilized focusing on the 81%, not the 0.01% from Ireland… so yes, it is pragmatic. It’s logical.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/02/what-we-know-about-illegal-immigration-from-mexico/
As for contempt of court, that’s a character flaw of his for sure. I’m not here to cheerlead for the guy, just pointing out that not everything has to be black and white.
Most Mexican( American)s are not unauthorized immigrants, so such racial profiling would target many innocent people who would justifiably be annoyed by it. Besides, similar arguments could be used to justify or excuse any kind of racial profiling (or other profiling based on characteristics that are often illegal to discriminate on the basis of), which would erode the trust between police and members of the community that effective policing depends on.
Actually his resources would’ve been best utilized enforcing local laws as he was elected and authorized to do, rather than trying to be a mini-ICE enforcement division illegally enforcing federal civil laws and costing taxpayers millions in legal fees. We voters in Maricopa County would prefer our police to arrest rapists than undocumented cooks at the local diner. It’s logical.
Regardless, despite willfully breaking many laws, he personally never actually physically assaulted anyone. So there’s that.
From a justice dept complaint against Arpaio, “MCSO” is Maricopa Cnty Sheriff’s Office:
Arpaio was the guy who didn’t go after child rapists if they raped immigrant kids. I don’t call that logical; I call it nauseating.
Correct, but most unauthorized immigrants are from Mexico.
People trust the police to reduce crime and maintain law and order. That’s what they’re hired for. They are not here to be BFFs with everyone in the community.
If your job as a police department chief is to crack down on illegal immigration, you are going to do the best you can with the limited resources you have at your disposal to reduce the numbers of illegal immigrants. That means focusing primarily on the largest population of illegal immigrants as that’s where you will make the biggest impact, and if you happen to get leads on illegal immigrants from countries other than Mexico you go after them too. You’re not going to send your officers to upper middle class German neighborhoods because that makes no sense… you’re going to send them to predominantly Mexican immigrant neighborhoods and locations where you are much more likely to find illegal immigrant populations.
Do you have a source for this?
Having good relations with people in the community means that people in the community will trust them and help them (e.g. reporting crimes, acting as witnesses). When there is less trust, the police will become less effective. For example, http://www.npr.org/assets/img/2017/10/23/discriminationpoll-african-americans.pdf found that 31% of African Americans have avoided calling the police, and 27% have avoided doing things that they might do normally to avoid potentially interacting with police. Without a trusting cooperative community as additional eyes and ears, the police’s job is more difficult and less effective.
Since when was it the local police or sheriff department’s priority to look for unauthorized immigrants, as opposed to stopping the major crimes that people fear the most (e.g. murder, rape, robbery, assault, theft)?
And what do you want them to do in this case, ask every Mexican-looking person for his/her papers (even though US citizens may be carrying none that prove citizenship)?
Since when is it the job of local police departments to “crack down on illegal immigration”? Good grief, in my city they have more than they can handle just responding to 911 calls.
My mind is still spinning at the thought of Arpaio being described as just a harsh pragmatist. People died. One corpse was measured to have a temperature of 109 degrees. He is a sick bastard who enjoyed what he was doing.
It is not the job of local police to crack down on illegal immigration.
Those comments could be given weight if they came from people who thought it was/should be anyone’s job.
because of a bad title for the thread, posters are discussing what happened in Arizona instead of what happened in New Jersey.
Arpaio was county sheriff, not just a local police officer. And yes, sheriffs can and do help with immigration law enforcement. It is entirely legal.
https://fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/local-immigration-enforcement
Sheriffs function as local police in unincorporated parts of counties. That they may do something relating to immigration enforcement is a far cry from it being their priority job (versus the usual serious crimes like murder, rape, robbery, assault, theft). Also, you did not answer the question as to how they would effectively do any immigration enforcement, since even intrusive paper checks using racial profiling would not effectively determine who has legal status or citizenship.
Also, Federation for American Immigration Reform was founded by John Tanton, who wrote “I’ve come to the point of view that for European-American society and culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a clear one at that.”, among other things (see https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/john-tanton for more quotes).
Illegal activity in pursuit of a legal action is illegal. Sheriff Joe was guilty of illegal activity as a matter of fact. That’s a judge’s legal ruling, not my opinion.