In Santa Fe (March 17)

In Santa Fe (March 17)

There are 36 comments on the Las Cruces Sun-News story from Mar 17, 2011, titled In Santa Fe (March 17). In it, Las Cruces Sun-News reports that:

Expanding Katie's Law began without controversy but has turned into an all-out fight.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Las Cruces Sun-News.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
MovingAlong

Albuquerque, NM

#1 Mar 17, 2011
Naturally it's the libs who want to throw up their BS, anything tho thwart the Gov's ideas to make things better. I can't wait for next elections when they can be thrown out of office and we can get laws enacted that protect normalcy and move this State forward. Their blocking actions are disgusting and they need to be replaced....
republicansareno tgod

Las Cruces, NM

#2 Mar 17, 2011
How do you know it's the "libs?" I do believe the Gov and other Conserves have as much "BS", as you put it, to thwart every conceivable idea that is put to them. Next elections? What a misconception you have. Not only will it NOT bring order of any kind, no matter who's in office you tend to see only what you want to see. As for NORMAL, apparently you haven't lived long enough to know, "this is NORMAL in NM Politics." But, I applaud your wishful thinking, maybe you should run for office and straighten out those "LIBS" but don't forget to watch your back from those who say they're your "friends."
the

Santa Fe, NM

#3 Mar 17, 2011
MovingAlong wrote:
Naturally it's the libs who want to throw up their BS, anything tho thwart the Gov's ideas to make things better. I can't wait for next elections when they can be thrown out of office and we can get laws enacted that protect normalcy and move this State forward. Their blocking actions are disgusting and they need to be replaced....
the governor has no agenda except to grandstand on hot button, but meaningless issues while selling us down the river to the extraction industries. There are no ideas to move the state forward - just big bucks calling the shots and pandering to the rest of y'all. She's got you fooled, obviously.
LC Today

Brighton, MI

#4 Mar 17, 2011
What legislation doesn't hit a snag in the NM Senate? These worthless damned politicians are not representing the people in this state.

Recall petitions should already have begun floating around. We can't wait until 2012 to get control of our state government again.
LC Today

Brighton, MI

#5 Mar 17, 2011
republicansarenotgod wrote:
How do you know it's the "libs?" I do believe the Gov and other Conserves have as much "BS", as you put it, to thwart every conceivable idea that is put to them. Next elections? What a misconception you have. Not only will it NOT bring order of any kind, no matter who's in office you tend to see only what you want to see. As for NORMAL, apparently you haven't lived long enough to know, "this is NORMAL in NM Politics." But, I applaud your wishful thinking, maybe you should run for office and straighten out those "LIBS" but don't forget to watch your back from those who say they're your "friends."
The Senate is under Democrat control, dummy..........they are the libs.
LC Today

Brighton, MI

#6 Mar 17, 2011
MovingAlong wrote:
Naturally it's the libs who want to throw up their BS, anything tho thwart the Gov's ideas to make things better. I can't wait for next elections when they can be thrown out of office and we can get laws enacted that protect normalcy and move this State forward. Their blocking actions are disgusting and they need to be replaced....
Absolutely agree 100%.
John Smiff

Washington, DC

#7 Mar 17, 2011
Just what the heck is up with these guys?! They fight tooth and nail for illegals and criminals and spit on law enforcement. This law isn't designed to snare people who get in trouble for singing too loud in church, but for felonies. Seems to me these lawmakers are on the wrong side of the law.
John Smiff is not smart

Albuquerque, NM

#8 Mar 17, 2011
John Smiff wrote:
Just what the heck is up with these guys?! They fight tooth and nail for illegals and criminals and spit on law enforcement. This law isn't designed to snare people who get in trouble for singing too loud in church, but for felonies. Seems to me these lawmakers are on the wrong side of the law.
Could you come up with a more ridiculous straw man? If you're going to comment, at least make an honest argument. The senate is rightly putting a halt to an unconstitutional encroachment on civil liberties that would surely be struck down by our state supreme court upon the very first glance. If the idea of DUE PROCESS is over your head, or if you don't know what that is, perhaps you need to Google it, and get back to us. Seems to me like you're not much of an American.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Dumb hicks leave NM now

Albuquerque, NM

#9 Mar 17, 2011
LC Today wrote:
What legislation doesn't hit a snag in the NM Senate? These worthless damned politicians are not representing the people in this state.
Recall petitions should already have begun floating around. We can't wait until 2012 to get control of our state government again.
If the senate gave in to every dumb knee-jerk impulse that the reactionary rednecks in this state have, we would be in a much sorrier state than we already are. Good thing some of our legislators are smart enough to care about liberty and the constitution.
Dumb hicks leave NM now

Albuquerque, NM

#10 Mar 17, 2011
MovingAlong wrote:
Naturally it's the libs who want to throw up their BS, anything tho thwart the Gov's ideas to make things better. I can't wait for next elections when they can be thrown out of office and we can get laws enacted that protect normalcy and move this State forward. Their blocking actions are disgusting and they need to be replaced....
Yes, naturally it's the "libs" who care about the Constitution, as always.
WTF

Las Cruces, NM

#12 Mar 17, 2011
It is good to see that there are at least a few Senators that understand the concept of "innocent until PROVEN guilty.
John Smiff

Washington, DC

#13 Mar 17, 2011
WTF wrote:
It is good to see that there are at least a few Senators that understand the concept of "innocent until PROVEN guilty.
...and in the case of illegal aliens, innocent WHEN PROVEN guilty.
Dumb hicks leave NM now

Albuquerque, NM

#14 Mar 17, 2011
Even as it stands, Katie's Law is probably unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution (and applied to the states through the 14th Amendment) as far as it extends to people who are merely arrested for, rather than convicted of, a crime. The U.S. circuit courts of appeal have upheld the constitutionality of these laws in cases where the parties were convicted, but they have not addressed any cases dealing with mere arrestees.

The U.S. Supreme Court has not looked favorably upon suspicion-less searches, and that is what these DNA tests are, as they are intended to help solve FUTURE crimes. The New Mexico Supreme Court might overturn this law, but even if it doesn't, the law would probably not survive a challenge in federal court by a party who is forced to submit to a drug test despite not having been convicted of a crime.

Extending this law is an exercise in futility.
John Smiff is not smart

Albuquerque, NM

#15 Mar 17, 2011
John Smiff wrote:
<quoted text>
...and in the case of illegal aliens, innocent WHEN PROVEN guilty.
What is that even supposed to mean? Are you suggesting that illegal immigration is a crime?(Technically, it's not.)
John Smiff

Washington, DC

#16 Mar 17, 2011
John Smiff is not smart wrote:
<quoted text>
What is that even supposed to mean? Are you suggesting that illegal immigration is a crime?(Technically, it's not.)
Are you stoned or just stupid? The word "illegal" connotates crime. If you get arrested, go before a judge and are sentenced to jail, guess what caused this cycle? The commission of a crime. Therefore, illegal immigration is a crime.
What

Santa Fe, NM

#17 Mar 17, 2011
LC Today wrote:
<quoted text>
The Senate is under Democrat control, dummy..........they are the libs.
an idiot - no knowledge of politics or the English language.
John Smiff is not smart

Albuquerque, NM

#18 Mar 17, 2011
John Smiff wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you stoned or just stupid? The word "illegal" connotates crime. If you get arrested, go before a judge and are sentenced to jail, guess what caused this cycle? The commission of a crime. Therefore, illegal immigration is a crime.
You can look it up for yourself. "Illegal immigration" is not technically a crime; illegal ENTRY is a crime -- but only on the second proven offense. And most "illegal immigrants" are people who came here legally and overstayed their visas, so they haven't committed any crime. They have committed a civil offense. Is this still too far over your head? Not a fan of nuance?
John Smiff is not smart

Albuquerque, NM

#19 Mar 17, 2011
John Smiff wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you stoned or just stupid? The word "illegal" connotates crime. If you get arrested, go before a judge and are sentenced to jail, guess what caused this cycle? The commission of a crime. Therefore, illegal immigration is a crime.
This might be of further assistance in your learning:

Crimes in the American legal system are only those offenses specifically defined by statute as being crimes. If something is not in the U.S. criminal code, it is not a federal crime (and illegal immigration cannot be a state crime because this is solely a federal matter). Illegal immigration is not in the criminal code, except in the situation I mentioned in my last post. Therefore, illegal immigration, except in that situation, is not a crime.
Who Dat

United States

#20 Mar 17, 2011
Dumb hicks leave NM now wrote:
Even as it stands, Katie's Law is probably unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution (and applied to the states through the 14th Amendment) as far as it extends to people who are merely arrested for, rather than convicted of, a crime. The U.S. circuit courts of appeal have upheld the constitutionality of these laws in cases where the parties were convicted, but they have not addressed any cases dealing with mere arrestees.
The U.S. Supreme Court has not looked favorably upon suspicion-less searches, and that is what these DNA tests are, as they are intended to help solve FUTURE crimes. The New Mexico Supreme Court might overturn this law, but even if it doesn't, the law would probably not survive a challenge in federal court by a party who is forced to submit to a drug test despite not having been convicted of a crime.
Extending this law is an exercise in futility.
Make sure you let the Federal Govt. know it's unconstitutional to collect DNA as they have been doing it for years Genius!
republicansareno tgod

Las Cruces, NM

#21 Mar 17, 2011
LC Today wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely agree 100%.
Surely you are smoking more than just tobacco. Either that or you're just plain stupid. Either way, when you come to a cliff, don't look, just jump.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Belen Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Starbucks in Los Lunas "Warning about a Golddig... (Jan '17) Feb 6 Autozone Employee 15
husband murdered.rene rivera covered it up (May '10) Feb 2 SIVAK 11
News Convicted stalker running for Pearce's seat as ... Jan '18 Laura 9
News Prisoner in Los Lunas dies, cause to be determined (Jan '13) Dec '17 Mazie320 3
stephenchannings Nov '17 channing sanders 1
News Piedra gets 5 1/2 years (Mar '11) Oct '17 PullDaCovers 45
News Los Lunas homes showing foundation problems (Jan '08) Sep '17 HRresident 197

Belen Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Belen Mortgages