dmallind
Member
and, lest we overstate the obvious
It is a bit of a reach to equate proving one's legal residence status as opposed to proving oneself innocent of murder.
As far as profiling goes, sorry if it offends you, but allowing young Arab males to board an airliner unmolested while strip searching granny offends me.
Get real.
Oh lord where to start.
Please explain what I did to change the meaning of the sentences as logical arguments except alternate between two completely factual propositions? You do realize that means they cannot possibly be anything else but logically consistent right? Only way to avoid that is to prove that most murderers DON't have guns or knives - which would be kind of tricky since the two account for about 80% or more of all murders.
It doesn't matter if murder is worse than illegal alien status (although it's kind of refreshing that someone seems to realize that) - the propositions are equal in that we are asking the innocent (who share some characteristic with most guilty people) to prove their innocence rather than proving the guilt of the guilty individuals. If I had used the example of people who have cars proving they hadn't broken speeding laws (since most speeders are in cars as opposed to semis or motorcycles) would it make you feel better? If so go ahead - all three are completely logically consistent - the nature of the crime is immaterial - the important point is equal protection and assumption of innocence.
I am far from offended by having to prove citizenship, or even by what you disingenuously call profiling. Dunno how many times I have to say I'm all for stringent requirements. But you tell me how it passes Constitutional muster to require greater documentation or burden of proof from citizens based on their skin color or accent. It's a pipe dream to think something like that would fly. I have less problem than most with any kind of ID requirements - but itr's got to, to pass Constitutional muster, apply to everyone.
Good luck on passing an amendment that says equal protection and presumption of innocence doesn't apply to anyone who isn't a WASP. That's what you'd need.