3 ms·

>how do you know the person is not, in fact, a citizen? By checking their ID? Don't you think it's a little hypocritical of you? You seem just fine with green

by danjoc 10y ago

>how do you know the person is not, in fact, a citizen? By checking their ID? Don't you think it's a little hypocritical of you? You seem just fine with green card holders being subjected to something you yourself would not stand for. My spouse has a green card. I find the requirement rather onerous given the level of scrutiny required to get one. Edit: Oh yes. Let the down votes begin. How many DHS officials looked through your wedding photos? ID requirements are fine for "those" people.

derefr 10y ago
Errr... you didn't parse the context of what I said, did you? They wouldn't have an ID to check. My point was that if you're not carrying any form of identification, there's no way for anyone to prove you're not a US citizen. And that that's a good thing, because the perspective of American law is that you need positive proof that someone is an illegal immigrant to arrest them, rather than just a lack of proof of them being a US citizen. Because—crucially—it's perfectly customary for US citizens to walk around without such proof, and so the law can't work any other way. This creates a loophole for those who lose, forget, or never had green cards: if you just avoid carrying any ID, you can, when questioned, say you're a US citizen who left their ID at home. It's then up to the other party to prove otherwise; until they do, they can't detain you, because you're presumably a US citizen without their ID and there is no crime in that. This didn't used to be a feasible thing to do, because you are required to carry some form of ID if you want to operate a motor vehicle, and the US is a big sprawl that requires most people to be operating motor vehicles at least some of the time. But as the US gradually builds up metropolitan areas with public transit systems, this becomes less of a concern; for many Americans, there's nothing they do on an average day that requires an ID, and they'd be fine without it. (Also, re: "something you yourself would not stand for"—I'm not an American myself. I just like contrived discussions of law.)

by danjoc 10y ago

derefr 10y ago

Errr... you didn't parse the context of what I said, did you? They wouldn't have an ID to check. My point was that if you're not carrying any form of identification, there's no way for anyone to prove you're not a US citizen. And that that's a good thing, because the perspective of American law is that you need positive proof that someone is an illegal immigrant to arrest them, rather than just a lack of proof of them being a US citizen. Because—crucially—it's perfectly customary for US citizens to walk around without such proof, and so the law can't work any other way. This creates a loophole for those who lose, forget, or never had green cards: if you just avoid carrying any ID, you can, when questioned, say you're a US citizen who left their ID at home. It's then up to the other party to prove otherwise; until they do, they can't detain you, because you're presumably a US citizen without their ID and there is no crime in that. This didn't used to be a feasible thing to do, because you are required to carry some form of ID if you want to operate a motor vehicle, and the US is a big sprawl that requires most people to be operating motor vehicles at least some of the time. But as the US gradually builds up metropolitan areas with public transit systems, this becomes less of a concern; for many Americans, there's nothing they do on an average day that requires an ID, and they'd be fine without it. (Also, re: "something you yourself would not stand for"—I'm not an American myself. I just like contrived discussions of law.)