I'm not sure I understand the whole innocent untill proven guilty thing.
The IRS can send you a bill and you have to prove that you don't owe it.
Get pulled over in Ma and the officer thinks you were drinking they can arrest you and your license will be suspended and you will pay a huge fine without any prove that you had a drink.
I would think the legal US immigrants would want enforcement.

And how about those violent protest by illegals?

To me that reads that in Mass you can be convicted of DWI without a field sobriety test, chemical test or breathalyzer.
Or are you arrested for refusal to submit to testing?
There's a big difference - the guy who passes any of the sobriety tests has not been drinking, and the guy who fails or refuses usually has been drinking. People might tell you later they had not, but lying goes with having a substance abuse problem.

And asking for ID and refusing to show one should result in deportation. Most people that refuse to show an ID are guilty. Lying goes with having a citizenship problem.

Fair enough. I don't think the issue needs exaggerating - the truth is bad enough.

I guess I might be a bit offended if your accusation wasn't so clumsy.

What's funny is that there are two very appropriate anecdotes from the Arizona border with Mexico, and the Sheriff's who preside over these counties.

One has come out with strong words that the original bill is racist and will absolutely encourage racial profiling.

The other is known for using strong tactics himself, and is the recipient of numerous accusations of racial profiling.

Not to mention that immigration is generally a Federal issue. How quickly they caved on amending the bill is a pretty good indicator of where they think they stood.

More fodder for real Federal reform.

-spence