Originally Posted by stevegmu
Actually, it does, but you wouldn't be the only one who has condemned it, without bothering to read the law.
That's not at all what I gather from that statement in the law. Again, it is against the law to not carry valid papers. To question someone with regard to their papers when it's suspected (reasonably?) that they are in the US illegally, would be lawful contact. So this "lawful contact" does nothing at all to prohibit random checks based on ambiguous suspicion. Which is why this law is wrong. As I stated.
'Lawful contact' when discussing state code and police actions refers to investigations of crimes.
And not carrying papers is a crime. Are police not allowed to investigate that crime?
A tonton is a child's toy in Taiwan.
Not that I know of. Or my Taiwanese girlfriend from college. Is it an ethnic Taiwanese minority term?
Oh, boy, I wasn't aware Hong Kong residents didn't have to carry the little Red Book...
You were aware that from 1947 to 1997, Hong Kong, including Kowloon and the New Territories (Hong Kong Proper) was a British colony, right? And before that, Hong Kong Island and Kowloon was owned by the British? And NT was controlled by the Nationalists before their defeat in the revolution, right?
Why on Earth would the British
require their residents to carry Maoist propaganda?
Do they even teach world history in American schools any more? Do students even care enough to learn it?
I guess they do teach history... as long as that history is twisted to pretend that the motivation of all of the founding fathers was pro-Christian religious (it wasn't) and that there was no "slave trade" and that Jefferson... well... you get it. But that's US history. What on Earth are they teaching in world history these days if graduates don't know that Hong Kong was British?