Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Arizona Dem targets Minutemen with “domestic terrorism” bill

posted at 8:33 pm on January 20, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

WND is all over it. Her name’s Kyrsten Sinema and she’s a former Green Party member and winner of the “Vladimir I. Lenin Award” given by one right-wing group to the state’s most statist legislator. Now she wants the Minutemen prosecuted as “terrorists” if they’re caught with weapons, notwithstanding the fact that concealed-carry permits are perfectly lawful and easily obtained in Arizona.

So she’s giving them a choice: either stop pestering “the undocumented” or else make themselves easy, defenseless targets. From the bill:

A. An individual or group of individuals commits domestic terrorism if the individual or group of individuals are not affiliated with a local, state or federal lawenforcement entity and associate with another individual or group of individuals as an organization, group, corporation or company for the purpose of patrolling to detect alleged illegal activity or to individually patrol for the purpose of detecting alleged illegal activity and if the individual or group of individuals is armed with a firearm or other weapon.

The Minutemen’s SOP requires that they “do not verbally contact, physically gesture to or have any form of communications with suspected Illegal Aliens,” but of course the rules aren’t always followed to the letter. So her larger point is worth considering: why would the Mexican border’s neighborhood watch need firearms? Take it away, Dan Riehl!


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

WTF!

sonnyspats1 on January 20, 2007 at 8:37 PM

TRAITOR!

NRA4Freedom on January 20, 2007 at 8:41 PM

I guess that means that Neighborhood Watches are out of the question too.

Why doesn’t the silly bint move to a totalitarian hellhole more in tune with her troglodyte political views?

Like, say, Cuba?

Misha I on January 20, 2007 at 8:48 PM

Here we have another example of a lefty wanting to fight fellow citizens as terrorists rather than fight the Islamo-terrorists. I can see why leftists were always getting their ass kicked when growing up, they were always fighting the wrong person……….

And this ignoramus is home-grown..a product of govt. schools I’m sure………………

ritethinker on January 20, 2007 at 8:52 PM

As an Arizona resident, I now feel an increased obligation to buy more ammo.

Doghouse on January 20, 2007 at 8:57 PM

This idiot should be removed from office.

darwin on January 20, 2007 at 9:01 PM

Does this person not realize that this law would outlaw private security companies, who’s security guards are:

Employed by a corporation
Patrol to detect illegal activity
And are armed with a firearm or other weapon (like nightsticks)

This law is a joke, there’s no way it will ever get passed. And if it does, it’s such an idiotic joke that reasonable people should just ignore it.

corbettw on January 20, 2007 at 9:03 PM

Her web page bio;

‘A native Arizonan, Kyrsten is a two-time graduate of Arizona State University, earning a law degree and a masters’ degree in Social Work. At the legislature, Kyrsten is a bold voice for Democratic values, fighting daily for the rights of all people in Arizona. She has championed environmental protections, fought for criminal justice reform, worked to protect and support public education, and is an unfailing advocate for working families. In addition to her work at the legislature, Kyrsten has continued her work as a community activist, A native Arizonan, Kyrsten is a two-time graduate of Arizona State University, earning a law degree and a masters’ degree in Social Work. At the legislature, Kyrsten is a bold voice for Democratic values, fighting daily for the rights of all people in Arizona. She has championed environmental protections, fought for criminal justice reform, worked to protect and support public education, and is an unfailing advocate for working families. In addition to her work at the legislature, Kyrsten has continued her work as a community activist, focusing on civil rights, teaching citizens about the political process and citizen lobbying, and working with young people across the political spectrum. In her spare time, Kyrsten is a professor in the School of Social Work at ASU and also practices criminal defense law.
, and working with young people across the political spectrum. In her spare time, Kyrsten is a professor in the School of Social Work at ASU and also practices criminal defense law.’

Our next Secretary of Housing and Urban Development!

Limerick on January 20, 2007 at 9:08 PM

I guess that means that Neighborhood Watches are out of the question too.

Misha I on January 20, 2007 at 8:48 PM

Stole my thunder, Misha, excellent point, but what about our right for a “citizens arrest”?

Anyone thought to read the 2nd Ammendment to the Constitution of the United States? Yes, it still exists.

Not to be too graphic, but I suggest Kyrsten Sinema oil herself up, get on all fours, point her head North, and get ready for some refried habaneros…….

Bienvenidos!!!

PinkyBigglesworth on January 20, 2007 at 9:12 PM

This idiot should be removed from office.

darwin on January 20, 2007 at 9:01 PM

After that she should be ostracized.

This law is a joke, there’s no way it will ever get passed.

Democrats are not bothered by such trivial matters such as the constitution in order to forward their agenda. Right now, their agenda is to stay in power. If you think they were bad when trying to get in to power, you haven’t seen nothing yet.

A note for the people who sat home last election – blame yourselves for the next two years. What did you expect? As bad as the republican party would have been, things will be far worse now.

jman on January 20, 2007 at 9:17 PM

Absolutely ridiculous.

Somewhat offtopic: Can somebody explain the use of the steak image? I’ve seen it on posts here before, but the symbolism must be lost on me.

KSgop on January 20, 2007 at 9:19 PM

Somewhat offtopic: Can somebody explain the use of the steak image? I’ve seen it on posts here before, but the symbolism must be lost on me.

Meant to symbolize red meat issues that fire up the base.

Tasty, tasty red meat.

Slublog on January 20, 2007 at 9:22 PM

Where’s that radio DJ who was babbling about offing various politicians when you need him?

Maybe he’ll add this woman to his list and actually carry out his threat.

Gregor on January 20, 2007 at 9:24 PM

Nice of this Ms. Sinema to recognize a fratricide-prone issue on the Right and then do her best to find a way to bring unity! Thanks, Ms. Sinema!

Even Vicente Fox’s agent in the White House only called them “vigilantes.”

Alex K on January 20, 2007 at 9:33 PM

This is another of several ridiculous laws being proposed lately.
They will be knocked down in court as unconstitutional but it seems they are a new tactic being used by the illegal supporting crowd.
That being since they can’t win the debate with sympathy, facts or demographics yet these actions show public invader support and are intended to delay and wear us down through deceit and attrition.
The pro illegal empire has huge resources from any number of entities so this attrition strategy is a serious threat.

To counter this kind of attack we need to expose where the money and the imputes comes from to the light of day.
So come on out of the shadows you anti American cowards so the public can see what a bunch of slithering racist scum you really are!

Speakup on January 20, 2007 at 9:34 PM

the symbolism must be lost on me

The redder the better seems to be the feeling among us native Amurrican conservative types. Thus the added commentary on really good issues like illegal aliens “steak so rare”, “still moving”, or the always promising “tartare”.

Jaibones on January 20, 2007 at 9:39 PM

Basically, I think the way “Kyrsten” spells her name tells you everything you need to know. About this entire story.

Alex K on January 20, 2007 at 9:44 PM

They will be knocked down in court as unconstitutional but it seems they are a new tactic being used by the illegal supporting crowd.

This is why the dems have been fighting so hard on the Judges. A law does not have to be constitutional if they find the right activist judge. Likewise a perfectly constitutional law can be struck down by the same judge if he does not agree.

Sometimes I think we are slowly becoming an oligarchy.

jman on January 20, 2007 at 9:46 PM

Whoops. Should have read:

They will be knocked down in court as unconstitutional but it seems they are a new tactic being used by the illegal supporting crowd.

This is why the dems have been fighting so hard on the Judges. A law does not have to be constitutional if they find the right activist judge. Likewise a perfectly constitutional law can be struck down by the same judge if he does not agree.

Sometimes I think we are slowly becoming an oligarchy.

jman on January 20, 2007 at 9:46 PM

jman on January 20, 2007 at 9:47 PM

Tasty, tasty red meat.

Slublog on January 20, 2007 at 9:22 PM

Hhhmmmmmmmmmmmmm, red meat!

Can I get some salsa please, lo siento, por favor?

PinkyBigglesworth on January 20, 2007 at 10:00 PM

Sometimes I think we are slowly becoming an oligarchy.

I’m old enough to remember the early 60s.

Oligarchy is too nice a word.

Speakup on January 20, 2007 at 10:05 PM

This is another of several ridiculous laws being proposed lately……

Speakup on January 20, 2007 at 9:34 PM

OT a little, but here in CA the legislature is attempting to pass a law that would make it a crime for parents to spank their kids 4 yrs old and younger.

infidel4life on January 20, 2007 at 10:14 PM

Are not the Minutemen covered by the equal protection clause of the Constitution?

Zorro on January 20, 2007 at 10:15 PM

A good friend of mine just emailed this to me….

“Just remember, we’re all born with a librals heart- some of us, however, were also born with a brain and know how the world really works.”

I hope he starts to frequent here as he has a lot of connections in the intel community. I wont repeat what he told me, but we conservatives need to stick to our guns! We ARE on the right side (no pun intended) of this issue!

csdeven on January 20, 2007 at 10:52 PM

Are not the Minutemen covered by the equal protection clause of the Constitution?

Zorro on January 20, 2007 at 10:15 PM

Exactly…

PinkyBigglesworth on January 20, 2007 at 10:53 PM

Correction….that should have read

We ARE on the right side of many issues.

csdeven on January 20, 2007 at 10:54 PM

She must have forgotten that SB 1145 “Castle Doctrine” has already been signed into law. which not only covers your home but your vehicle, your person, family and other belongings.

So drive to the border and just sit in your vehicle .. locked and loaded.

AZPatriot on January 20, 2007 at 11:04 PM

Slight nitpick…

notwithstanding the fact that concealed-carry permits are perfectly lawful and easily obtained in Arizona.

Open Carry is also legal in AZ and as a result you dont need a CCW if you carry openly (some restrictions required)

That said I have traveled from VA (open carry also allowed) to vist friends in Paradise Vally/Payson AZ with no problem. (I followed all airport/airline rules).

F15Mech on January 20, 2007 at 11:12 PM

Meant to symbolize red meat issues that fire up the base.

Tasty, tasty red meat.

Slublog on January 20, 2007 at 9:22 PM

The redder the better seems to be the feeling among us native Amurrican conservative types. Thus the added commentary on really good issues like illegal aliens “steak so rare”, “still moving”, or the always promising “tartare”.

Jaibones on January 20, 2007 at 9:39 PM

Thank you very much. I understand now. :-)

KSgop on January 20, 2007 at 11:20 PM

May she rot in Hell.

SouthernGent on January 21, 2007 at 12:01 AM

So, a correct reading of that law makes:

Armored Car Guards

Personal Private Security Guards

non-public University Security

all would be domestic terrorists under that absurd law.

congratulations.

This may be the single worst designed piece of Legislation I’ve ever read from someone not already in prison.

Jones Zemkophill on January 21, 2007 at 12:37 AM

My kids and a couple others we have recruited participate in the Liberty Day program. Last September we set up a booth at a Diamond Backs baseball game and the kids began quizzing the crowd on the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and Amendments.

From that initial Liberty Day experience, other personal observation and discussion in my day, I firmly believe that a majority segment of the American population:

a) Is no longer aware of European history, and does not care;
b) Is no longer aware of our country’s history, and does not care;
c) Believe that statutes grant rights to citizens, moreover that the US Constitution grants citizens their rights;
d) Will scrap their all of their liberty for a little security provided by the state;
e) Has abdicated their responsibility as citizens to govern themselves;

From observing government utilitarian legislation and judicial decisions, I also believe that many of our elected and appointed officials are part of that segment. Others, knowing the ignorance of the general population and the fear that the state can generate in many folks, are usurping the nation, states, and local municipalities everyday. I don’t believe most US citizens even know what freedom is any longer, nor do they really care. After all, they get to keep most of their paycheck and were able to watch American Idol last week.

Her recent statements reflect her shot at the Minutemen, however, as another individual poster noted, if you are armed with a weapon (slingshot, baseball bat, firearm, …) and participating in a Neighborhood Watch program, this particular legislation would classify you as a domestic terrorist.

Under this little Sinema gem you can practice your 1st Amendment Right (association) and your 2nd Amendment Right (bear arms) individually, but if you perform them simultaneously for the purpose of detecting alleged illegal activity, you are a domestic terrorist.

Sinema is a lefty whack job, but not an idiot, nor ignorant. She is an insidious type that preys on the ignorance of the population to promote state usurpation of the governed. It’s worse. Head over to the AZ legislature site and you will find she has co-sponsors.

As another fine poster pointed out the 14th Amendment …

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Sinema knows the law and that the state can’t take the right away or turn it into a privilege. Tyrannical Marxist types rely on ignorance to trade liberty for security. After all, there are terrorists about and the citizenry looks to the state for protection these days.

We may all scoff at this stuff with “This is ridiculous …” or “It will never pass …”, but who would have thought that the Kelo v. New London decision would have come out the way it did? Who would have thought McCain-Feingold would have ever passed? Who would have thought that firearms would be outlawed in US cities? Gee whiz, we live in such a usurping nanny-state that ingredients in fast food are being outlawed.

Maybe it won’t pass in its current form this year, but I will wager it comes back at a later date in a different form. Attach it to banning some trans-fats and global warming, and Sinema might have a winner in the near future.

AZ_Redneck on January 21, 2007 at 1:11 AM

Arizona Dem targets Minutemen with “domestic terrorism”

WND is all over it. Her name’s Kyrsten Sinema and she’s a former Green Party member and winner of the “Vladimir I. Lenin Award” given by one right-wing group to the state’s most statist legislator.

Why does Kyrsten have to be so smokin’ hot? Seriously. That just ain’t fair. Her proposed bill is horrible. But she looks so…fine.

EFG on January 21, 2007 at 1:16 AM

I suspect that this is a bill that Bush wouldn’t mind signing…

RalphyBoy on January 21, 2007 at 1:38 AM

Why does Kyrsten have to be so smokin’ hot? Seriously. That just ain’t fair. Her proposed bill is horrible. But she looks so…fine.

EFG on January 21, 2007 at 1:16 AM

Heh

Chief Wiggum: Why are the pretty ones always insane?

F15Mech on January 21, 2007 at 1:43 AM

Why does Kyrsten have to be so smokin’ hot? Seriously. That just ain’t fair. Her proposed bill is horrible. But she looks so…fine.

EFG on January 21, 2007 at 1:16 AM

Yeah, EFG, been there, done that (not her) but similar looks and thinking…… wonderful soul, good sense of humor, nice person…….. until it came to who was the actual enemy of this country.

Myself, choosing to carry a badge, a gun, an oath, and take a post, turned out horrific to her.

After 9/11, I got a call……… “I’m sorry” was the message…….. I didn’t return the call.

PinkyBigglesworth on January 21, 2007 at 2:24 AM

The red meat imagery?
I’m getting a little tired of the condescension AP.

billy on January 21, 2007 at 2:47 AM

It will fail and the stupidity behind it will be exposed

I’m not for the minutemen project as it is currently – one, they never shed the vigilante label stuck on their backs

And they never got the public sympathy by exposing the terrible conditions that some illegals were undergoing to cross the border you just had photos a big strong men on horses watching small poor people try to run through the desert.

these images were used against them – its not the minutemens fault these people were running the border but instead of rendering the basic virtues of judeo/christian kindness they opted for citizens arrest or reporting them without rendering aid to the authorities.

They need to change their tactics while maintaining their mission – shifting gears while doing what they feel is their civic duty.

EricPWJohnson on January 21, 2007 at 3:02 AM

It has no chance of passing, and it’s just a bit of publicity for someone who has no chance of getting this passed.

Such as Charlie Rangel’s draft bill.

I don’t see why I should waste any time or attention on this crap. Other Dems are not so stupid as to go along with this, and other than this idiocy, this woman would be just another obscure politician. Let’s push her back into obscurity.

meep on January 21, 2007 at 6:08 AM

For those who point out that this statute would apply to neighborhood watches, campus patrols, etc., too true. But even more moronic, it would apply to the US military. The Posse Comitatus Act generally (not absolutely) limits the military from performing law enforcement.

Therefore, every military armed security agent would be in direct violation of ths law. Brilliant.

cmay on January 21, 2007 at 8:13 AM

Pretty is skin deep but ugly goes clear to the bone.

This Gal is proof that the road to ruin is paved with good intention.

I’m sure she means well but “means well” is nowhere in our Constitution and for good reason.
Any law that decreases liberty is wrong.

Leave your emotions out of our laws lady.

Speakup on January 21, 2007 at 10:35 AM

A master’s degree in social work? Post-graduate work in identfying the victims of the productive.

shaken on January 21, 2007 at 10:40 AM

Someone had better tell every private security agency that they are about to be made illegal in Arizona. The definition above would apply to every company I worked for or had any contact with in my eight years as a rent-a-cop.

Rusty Bill on January 21, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Darn, forgot to close the link. I wish I could edit it. Oh well.

voiceofreason on January 21, 2007 at 11:58 AM

Beautiful women aren’t automatically insane, but we let them get away with being insane more easily.

But this is pretty damned insane. I mean, like, out of town on a rail insane.

Some people get so buried in their “philosophy” that no avalanche of facts can dislodge them. I think this woman probably also holds to the rest of the list of far-left positions, and literally nothing will change her mind.

Merovign on January 21, 2007 at 1:04 PM

I think we need to adjust the argument.

This is not bad law just because it makes the actions of neighborhood watches, security guards, etc., illegal or more difficult. To maintain this argument suggests there is reasonableness of intent and perhaps some word smithing should occur to make it more palatable.

This is bad law on first appearance because it clearly infringes on the inalienable rights of American citizens.

———

Regarding

So her larger point is worth considering: why would the Mexican border’s neighborhood watch need firearms?

My response – Simply, because it is an inalienable right for free men to carry arms.

From a pragmatic position on the need for arms, take a look at the map on page 12 here. Note the fat black dotted line outlining a perimiter on the southern border. Then read the note in the legend.

Homeland Security issues along the international border may effect the quality of a persons hunt.

What could effect your hunt? Possibly coming across drug runners, border crossers or armed incursions from the Mexican government. They are armed or extremely desperate and a situation that poses a self preservation issue can arise quickly.

The other branch of this insidious legislation proposal opposes the inalienable right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly.

AZ_Redneck on January 21, 2007 at 1:30 PM

Allah — we need a preview button –

In my previous, this should be quoted

So her larger point is worth considering: why would the Mexican border’s neighborhood watch need firearms?

and this

Homeland Security issues along the international border may effect the quality of a persons hunt.

AZ_Redneck on January 21, 2007 at 1:35 PM

Gee whiz I really butchered that post.

Here is the link with the map mentioned.

AZ_Redneck on January 21, 2007 at 1:38 PM

Krysten Sinema is a stupid bimbo. She has previously made the news for attempting to get Sean Hannity arrested for border violations in April of ‘05. I see she hasn’t gotten any smarter. She’s only in it to make the news for her outrageous idiocy – and it works every time.

Redhead Infidel on January 21, 2007 at 2:39 PM

The Minutemen’s SOP requires that they “do not verbally contact, physically gesture to or have any form of communications with suspected Illegal Aliens,”…So her larger point is worth considering: why would the Mexican border’s neighborhood watch need firearms?

The reason is obvious, Allahpundit: because the illegal aliens are not similarly constrained. I know that you don’t know this, because you’ve not been there and do not believe the reports coming from the border: it is a godforsaken WARZONE.

Ask anyone who has been to the border – they’ll tell you it’s not even America down there anymore. The stuff that goes down on the border is unreported by the major media and is stuff you only hear about in Third World banana republics.

The coyotes, drug smugglers, and terrorists flowing across our border would not think twice about popping off a couple of Minutemen. The weapons are needed for self-defense. Even the people who LIVE on the border are armed, day and night. Their lives depend on it.

Redhead Infidel on January 21, 2007 at 2:59 PM

The reason is obvious, Allahpundit: because the illegal aliens are not similarly constrained.

For god’s sake, I was being sarcastic. Didn’t you follow the link to Dan’s post?

Allahpundit on January 21, 2007 at 3:01 PM

Now she wants the Minutemen prosecuted as “terrorists” if they’re caught with weapons, notwithstanding the fact that concealed-carry permits are perfectly lawful and easily obtained in Arizona.

You will see the vast majority citizens on the border exercising open-carry. We are a wear’em if ya got’em state.

We do have conceal and carry statutes, however, this has reduced the right to a privilege. I think these statutes should be abolished. How law-abiding folks arm themselves is their own business.

AZ_Redneck on January 21, 2007 at 3:41 PM

Didn’t you follow the link to Dan’s post?

Yes, I did – and saw that Dan’s post was merely a link to mine.

I didn’t realize you were being sarcastic, Allah. I honestly thought it was another dig at us border security types. Sorry ’bout that.

Redhead Infidel on January 21, 2007 at 3:54 PM

Bush probably agrees with her:

“I’m against vigilantes in the United States of America”

George W. Bush on the Minutemen
Waco, TX
March 23, 2005

Valiant on January 21, 2007 at 4:47 PM

“Kyrsten was the champion for breastfeeding moms across the state this session. Without her, we would not have passed a law protecting my baby’s right to breastfeed.” – Amy Milliron, Republican Mom
She is also pro-abortion. Hard to breastfeed a dead baby.

right2bright on January 22, 2007 at 2:30 PM

This has to be one of the worst conceived law proposals I have ever seen.

An individual or group of individuals commits domestic terrorism if the individual or group of individuals are not affiliated with a local, state or federal lawenforcement entity and associate with another individual or group of individuals as an organization, group, corporation or company for the purpose of patrolling to detect alleged illegal activity or to individually patrol for the purpose of detecting alleged illegal activity and if the individual or group of individuals is armed with a firearm or other weapon.

In just this one section alone this woman is attempting to eliminate the people’s rights to free assembly; free association, protection of life, liberty, and property; the right to keep and bear arms; and the right to protect the sovereign borders of the US by use of the constitutionally protected ‘unregulated militia’.

She is also trying to stop the public from assisting the police in preventing any crime, including the ability of the people to assist in detecting, reporting, and preventing any and all illegal activities. This means that someone could not, for example, stop another person from kidnapping a child, prevent a rape in progress, prevent an illegal entry into property, etc.

This woman is, in effect, telling the people that they should not be allowed to prevent ANY crimes and may be, if any such attempt is made, be held accountable and tried as a terrorist!

WFT is she thinking?

RedinBlueCounty on January 22, 2007 at 3:02 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.