What is so bad about Gov. Spitzer's plan? Hillary is Right!

Lola wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

Quote:

I think plenty of immigrants would want the ID, not to pass themselves off as citizens, but just to be able to get to work everyday.

Why should we make it easier for people to break the law?

What would we do without the rigid, all good/all bad rule bound people of this world? Breath easier and get down to work on real solutions to real problems.

So then we should just ignore any rules or laws we disagree with?

How far do you want to take that?
I don't agree with the law making rape illegal, so should I just ignore it?
Should I expect everyone to allow me to ignore that law?

mysteryman wrote:

Lola wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

Quote:

I think plenty of immigrants would want the ID, not to pass themselves off as citizens, but just to be able to get to work everyday.

Why should we make it easier for people to break the law?

What would we do without the rigid, all good/all bad rule bound people of this world? Breath easier and get down to work on real solutions to real problems.

So then we should just ignore any rules or laws we disagree with?

How far do you want to take that?
I don't agree with the law making rape illegal, so should I just ignore it?
Should I expect everyone to allow me to ignore that law?

There you go again, MM. Concrete thinking is a problem that does not allow for problem solving. What does one do when a law is immoral or unjust? Blind obedience is dangerous. Doubt and social advocacy are needed in an evolving society.

I don't entirely agree with Centroles. Ignoring laws can result in loss of independence. Civil disobedience is an extreme alternative that I believe should be reserved for a time when all else has failed. Working within the system to change bad laws is my preferred method. Lessons of the 60s..........or at least my interpretation of those lessons. In the same way we should be pursuing diplomatic solutions in foreign affairs, so should we try diplomacy, advocacy and attempting to change laws and elect leaders who know how to problem solve and negotiate at home.

The more I study for this evil social work test, the more I sound like a social worker. Ah well, I suppose I should make peace with my past.

The law is the law. If it's found to be immoral or unjust it should be changed. Until it is changed, it should be obeyed as it's the law.

Permission to live in America and permission to drive in America have nothing to do with one another.

The law is the law. If it's found to be immoral or unjust it should be changed. Until it is changed, it should be obeyed as it's the law. There is not much more black and white then the law. You either break or you don't.

A NYS drivers license is a gateway document. With a license, you gain access to other documents and programs. That is because it is assumed that if you have a license, you are a citizen as you had to produce valid documentation to get a license. With Spitzer's program, that is no longer viable. I am glad to see it go away and hope it never comes back.

A NYS drivers license is a gateway document. With a license, you gain access to other documents and programs. That is because it is assumed that if you have a license, you are a citizen as you had to produce valid documentation to get a license.

If you are the manager of an athletic club, and you ask a person for his membership or guest card and they have neither, do you go ahead and give them access to use all the workout equipment?

If you are the government of a state, and you ask a person for proof of being there legally, either as a citizen or legal visitor and they don't have any, do you give them access to all the rights and privileges of being there? After all, driving is a privilege.

This whole argument is preposterous, and I find it incredible that some here actually are attempting to say it makes sense. Some of the arguments put forth here on a2k, I have to pinch myself to see if I am dreaming.

McGentrix wrote:

A NYS drivers license is a gateway document. With a license, you gain access to other documents and programs. That is because it is assumed that if you have a license, you are a citizen as you had to produce valid documentation to get a license.

Yet again, we hear the same straw men argument that Lou Dobbs and so many misinformed people throw up there.

Under Spitzer's plan, there would be three seperate types of licenses a person could get. The first would be a stand in for a passport to go to Canada or Mexico. The second would be a traditional drivers licence usuable for federal identification purposes. And the third would be clearly marked as not valid for federal identification purposes and would be unusable for any purpose other than driving.

Illegal immigrants would only be getting that third type of ID. They would not be getting a traditional drivers licence. Traditional licenses aren't marked that they are not usable for federal verification purposes. And thus they will not be able to do anything with that ID other than the ability to drive.

We aren't talking about being legally here as a non-citizen, Thomas. Surely you see the difference?

McGentrix wrote:

A NYS drivers license is a gateway document. With a license, you gain access to other documents and programs. That is because it is assumed that if you have a license, you are a citizen as you had to produce valid documentation to get a license.

Yet again, we hear the same straw men argument that Lou Dobbs and so many misinformed people throw up there.

Under Spitzer's plan, there would be three seperate types of licenses a person could get. The first would be a stand in for a passport to go to Canada or Mexico. The second would be a traditional drivers licence usuable for federal identification purposes. And the third would be clearly marked as not valid for federal identification purposes and would be unusable for any purpose other than driving.

Illegal immigrants would only be getting that third type of ID. They would not be getting a traditional drivers licence. Traditional licenses aren't marked that they are not usable for federal verification purposes. And thus they will not be able to do anything with that ID other than the ability to drive.

The baseline issue is WHY should ILLEGAL immigrants get ANYTHING (other than deported).

woiyo wrote:

The baseline issue is WHY should ILLEGAL immigrants get ANYTHING (other than deported).

Because Spitzer's plan will increase traffic safety if he is right, I am wrong, and illegal immigrants will accept the new licenses. The plan would encourage incompetent drivers among illegal immigrants to drive less, and competent drivers among them to drive more. Spitzer's initiative isn't about taking a stand on illegal immigration. It's about a pragmatic improvement in the safety of New York's roads.

this issue is complicated. I agree with woiyo (holy ****) that an illegal is illegal and that's really the only point. They don't belong here.

Having said that, we can't just put the cat back in the bag. this is 13 million people for god's sake, and no matter who says what they're not going to be depoerted.

Meanwhile we argue this nonsense and more and more illegals sneak in because we're so busy arguing we're not tightening up our borders and security.

Makes great party conversation though huh?

There are no really good answers, but some are surely better than others. Do you not have some admiration for hard working people who don't give up?

Since when does a license make you a "better" driver?

HOW does his plan "encourage incompetent drivers to drive less"?

WHY should taxpayers incur the cost "training" illegal immigrants to be "better drivers"?

Your argument is not convincing and I still feel there are only "political" reasons for Spitzer to suggest this plan. It has nothing to do with "improving the safety of NY Roads, in my opinion.