PDA

View Full Version : transporting weapons through internal checkpoints


Bucky G
11-07-2009, 9:56 PM
First of all I really resent internal checkpoints inside our country's borders
to me it's the first step in a militarized state

anyway... I was driving through one, just like I do everyday for the last thirteen years on the way home from work

only this time the homeland security officer asked if I had any weapons
I asked if that was any of his business
so I was promptly sent to secondary inspection where they xray'd my vehicle and their drug sniffing dog put two big scratches down the drivers door
I was driving my wife's new Yukon and she is pissed

so what's the deal, forget the fact that I consider internal checkpints illegal and a violation of my rights, but do they have the right to ask if I have weapons in my vehicle?

I thought they were only supposed to determine if i am a US citizen and let me on my way :confused:

Cali-Shooter
11-07-2009, 10:11 PM
only this time the homeland security officer asked if I had any weapons
I asked if that was any of his business


I side with you on this, but to be honest, it IS his duty to ask (only when he has reasonable authority to though, but when he is allowed this authority is a mind-boggling subject). It seems like to me that that officer may or may not have perceived an attitude issue with you, but, in the least, perhaps what you said simply caused him to say to himself "Oh great, another 'Is it any of your business?' attitude-pusher" and sent you off to be searched instead of just being lax on you. I suggest you take a look at this thread for figuring out some ways to avoid being unnecessarily and blood boilingly searched.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=80571&page=7

sevensix2x51
11-07-2009, 10:23 PM
eh, i go through the border patrol checks all the time with guns, not a big deal. when i have 5 cases piled on the back seat, and my varmint gun wedged between the passenger seat and center console, uncased and in the open, with magazines in the cupholders, the dude at the stop sign with the badge says, "do you have any weapons?"
i reply, "uhh, yes? of course?" staring at the gun 6" from my right elbow, and the response?
"have a nice day."
the best response i ever got was, "a whole bunch, huh? hahaha! have a nice day."

Cali-Shooter
11-07-2009, 10:27 PM
I forgot to add, ALWAYS be honest. Also, don't be an *** to people who can give you a hard time.

Bucky G
11-07-2009, 10:29 PM
I side with you on this, but to be honest, it IS his duty to ask (only when he has reasonable authority to though, but when he is allowed this authority is a mind-boggling subject). It seems like to me that that officer may or may not have perceived an attitude issue with you, but, in the least, perhaps what you said simply caused him to say to himself "Oh great, another 'Is it any of your business?' attitude-pusher" and sent you off to be searched instead of just being lax on you. I suggest you take a look at this thread for figuring out some ways to avoid being unnecessarily and blood boilingly searched.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=80571&page=7

thanks I just read a lot of that thread
I never gave them permission to search my car, yet they xrayed it, had drug dog search it , and they physically searched it as well

so where were my rights and where was probable cause as stated in that thread

I want them to pay for the scratches their dog did as well :)

Bucky G
11-07-2009, 10:31 PM
I forgot to add, ALWAYS be honest. Also, don't be an *** to people who can give you a hard time.

amen :D

sevensix2x51
11-07-2009, 10:32 PM
a lot of times your rights are sorted out in court, after the fact. it seems like the border patrol would rather make a bust than tiptoe around the 4th amendment... keep that in mind, and youll be alright.

Cali-Shooter
11-07-2009, 10:36 PM
I never gave them permission to search my car, yet they xrayed it, had drug dog search it , and they physically searched it as well

so where were my rights and where was probable cause as stated in that thread

Man, I feel that same way, I was searched once. I went through all that you described to me, minus having the car x-rayed, having doggies sniff it out, and it wasn't MY car that they were searching (but a lot of my goodies were in it). Plus, I was handcuffed in the backseat of a squad car staring at the AR in front of me and thinking "LEO's get all the fun in kali..."

Bucky G
11-07-2009, 10:43 PM
I'm going to get an estimate from the body shop on the scratches and take it to the chief at the border patrol, their office is just down the street from my work
I'll let you know what happens

JustGone
11-07-2009, 10:52 PM
Who would you file a complaint with? I wouldn't want to file the complaint with the department or agency that did it.. could you file one with the FBI if needed?

slappomatt
11-07-2009, 10:55 PM
good luck. Lets hope you can get some cash out of them. God knows they have got enough out of US.

JTROKS
11-07-2009, 11:47 PM
The worst thing you can do is give an attitude to an augmentee wearing military uniform. He's there for his whole shift and he doesn't mind pulling overtime - he gets paid the same either way.

Seesm
11-07-2009, 11:55 PM
bummer I hope they take care of you...

joelukehart
11-08-2009, 12:16 AM
I went through a BP checkpoint in Imperial County about 10 years ago. The officer asked if I had anything illegal in my van and I replied " No sir, just my atv and my rifle." and he said "have a nice day" and waved me through. A good attitude goes a long way in an LEO encounter.

rc50cal
11-08-2009, 12:53 AM
I went through a BP checkpoint in Imperial County about 10 years ago. The officer asked if I had anything illegal in my van and I replied " No sir, just my atv and my rifle." and he said "have a nice day" and waved me through. A good attitude goes a long way in an LEO encounter.

Joelukehart's advice is pretty good. Power hungry LEO's really irritate me, but nothing good ever comes out of giving them attitude even if it is justified.

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 7:02 AM
I went through a BP checkpoint in Imperial County about 10 years ago. The officer asked if I had anything illegal in my van and I replied " No sir, just my atv and my rifle." and he said "have a nice day" and waved me through. A good attitude goes a long way in an LEO encounter.

that's the one I go through everyday

and normally they are cool as hell, as am I
even though they rotate shifts, most of them have seen me... I mean I'm through their the same time everyday

I've even offered em a pizza... they wouldn't take it :D

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 7:10 AM
Who would you file a complaint with? I wouldn't want to file the complaint with the department or agency that did it.. could you file one with the FBI if needed?

I'm going to go directly to them
I have some friends in authority there, one is in a captain and in charge of another border crossing and another is retired from them and now is a contractor doing background investigations for them... he told me a lot of interesting information
he said that those internal checkpoint lines you wait in are not supposed to be more than seven minutes long.
He gave me the chief's number to call and complain when the line is too long. I've called it a number of times, but he's NEVER in his office :D

Nefarious
11-08-2009, 7:32 AM
I read through these posts rather quicly, im going to go back and read them a little closer... but

I cross that checkpoint all the time as well - going home on my "weekends".

As far as the damages to your car go. Did you notice them before or after you left (again ill go back and read the OP a little more closer). If you noticed them AFTER you left, your going to have a hard time proving that it was infact the K9 that did the damage. You can ALWAYS speak to a supervsor if you have a complaint. They should allow you to file a tort claim and at that point it gets routed up the chain. But again, if you did not show them the damage right then and there, its going to be iffy.

BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D
In secondary - for us - the comment you made to the officer could be considered non-compliance, at which point (to keep it short) we could escort you out of the vehicle, handcuff you, take you into the office for pattdown, and detain you untill our inspection is complete. I do believe your response at the checkpoint was considered non-compliance and the BP escalated per guidlines from there.

-hanko
11-08-2009, 9:19 AM
It seems like to me that that officer may or may not have perceived an attitude issue with you, but, in the least, perhaps what you said simply caused him to say to himself "Oh great, another 'Is it any of your business?' attitude-pusher" and sent you off to be searched instead of just being lax on you. I suggest you take a look at this thread for figuring out some ways to avoid being unnecessarily and blood boilingly searched.
This.

Your mouth did you in.

A 'yes' answer would have sent you on your way with no scratches on the door.

-hanko

Jpach
11-08-2009, 11:31 AM
BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D
In secondary - for us - the comment you made to the officer could be considered non-compliance, at which point (to keep it short) we could escort you out of the vehicle, handcuff you, take you into the office for pattdown, and detain you untill our inspection is complete. I do believe your response at the checkpoint was considered non-compliance and the BP escalated per guidlines from there.

I am in no way trying to be a jerk or disrespectful here, but how is it that asking someone if it is their business can land you in handcuffs while your vehicle is being searched without consent? That seems pretty sick to me.

If telling an LEO that you have "nothing illegal" in your car when asked if there are any weapons in the car isnt PC to search, then how on earth can the OPs situation happen?

OP, I hope you get those scratches taken care of and that this sort of thing never happens again.

ddimick
11-08-2009, 11:37 AM
Sometimes it's not what you say, it's how you say it. You may have gotten a different response if you had asked "Am I legally required to answer your question?".

Then again, you may not have.

reidnez
11-08-2009, 11:47 AM
"I have nothing illegal in my vehicle and do not consent to a search, but I will not resist you in any way." These are the magic words when dealing with LEO...it is not rude or confrontational, and it doesn't leave anything vague which could be construed as consent to a search. If he's going to search your vehicle anyway based on probable cause, so be it, but at least he knows that he may have to back it up in court later.

It's funny, I didn't even realize there were internal checkpoints, and I used to live about 8 miles from the border. I guess I just haven't run into one yet.

Linh
11-08-2009, 11:58 AM
I read through these posts rather quicly, im going to go back and read them a little closer... but

I cross that checkpoint all the time as well - going home on my "weekends".

As far as the damages to your car go. Did you notice them before or after you left (again ill go back and read the OP a little more closer). If you noticed them AFTER you left, your going to have a hard time proving that it was infact the K9 that did the damage. You can ALWAYS speak to a supervsor if you have a complaint. They should allow you to file a tort claim and at that point it gets routed up the chain. But again, if you did not show them the damage right then and there, its going to be iffy.

BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D
In secondary - for us - the comment you made to the officer could be considered non-compliance, at which point (to keep it short) we could escort you out of the vehicle, handcuff you, take you into the office for pattdown, and detain you untill our inspection is complete. I do believe your response at the checkpoint was considered non-compliance and the BP escalated per guidlines from there.

+1

I personally have driven through lots of these checkpoints mostly through the one of the 8.

I have NEVER been asked anything. They just nod and let me go. Of course if they ever did anything that was illegal then I would let their chain of command know.

So if you feel that things should be different then take it with DC. No one is going to change anything by getting into a shouting match with any BPA or CBP officer.

AR-1904
11-08-2009, 1:37 PM
I go through one on the way home from the gun range(South Bay Rod and Gun Club). Until last week they have never spoken to me, just waved me through. Last week my brother and I went out to test fire my newly put together Yugo M70. On the way home the Border Patrol officer asked me:

BP: Where are you coming from?
Me: The gun range
BP: (looks in the back seat, sees nothing) What kind of guns are you shooting?
Me: Legal ones.
BP: Legal ones?
Me: Yes sir.
BP: Have a nice day.


I kinda froze when he asked the question, but I didn't want to say AK47. I could have said Zatava M70b1 but I wasn't thinking that fast. He just kind of smiled and I drove away.

gimebakmybulits
11-08-2009, 1:39 PM
I read through these posts rather quicly, im going to go back and read them a little closer... but

I cross that checkpoint all the time as well - going home on my "weekends".

As far as the damages to your car go. Did you notice them before or after you left (again ill go back and read the OP a little more closer). If you noticed them AFTER you left, your going to have a hard time proving that it was infact the K9 that did the damage. You can ALWAYS speak to a supervsor if you have a complaint. They should allow you to file a tort claim and at that point it gets routed up the chain. But again, if you did not show them the damage right then and there, its going to be iffy.

BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D
In secondary - for us - the comment you made to the officer could be considered non-compliance, at which point (to keep it short) we could escort you out of the vehicle, handcuff you, take you into the office for pattdown, and detain you untill our inspection is complete. I do believe your response at the checkpoint was considered non-compliance and the BP escalated per guidlines from there.

Nice, glad we are safe from "that guy"

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 2:38 PM
I read through these posts rather quicly, im going to go back and read them a little closer... but

I cross that checkpoint all the time as well - going home on my "weekends".

As far as the damages to your car go. Did you notice them before or after you left (again ill go back and read the OP a little more closer). If you noticed them AFTER you left, your going to have a hard time proving that it was infact the K9 that did the damage. You can ALWAYS speak to a supervsor if you have a complaint. They should allow you to file a tort claim and at that point it gets routed up the chain. But again, if you did not show them the damage right then and there, its going to be iffy.

BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D
In secondary - for us - the comment you made to the officer could be considered non-compliance, at which point (to keep it short) we could escort you out of the vehicle, handcuff you, take you into the office for pattdown, and detain you untill our inspection is complete. I do believe your response at the checkpoint was considered non-compliance and the BP escalated per guidlines from there.

when did the border patrol get the carte blanche authority to act in vilolation of my constitutional civil rights?
I'm trying to recall when california turned into a police state

what's the diference between BP (border patrol) and CBP (US Customs and Border Protection)?

and for the record, I didn't even have weapon with me, it just seemed odd that he felt the need to ask me
I just wanted to know if he had the authority to do so

Nefarious
11-08-2009, 2:56 PM
I am in no way trying to be a jerk or disrespectful here, but how is it that asking someone if it is their business can land you in handcuffs while your vehicle is being searched without consent? That seems pretty sick to me.

If telling an LEO that you have "nothing illegal" in your car when asked if there are any weapons in the car isnt PC to search, then how on earth can the OPs situation happen?

OP, I hope you get those scratches taken care of and that this sort of thing never happens again.

Im not taking it like your being a jerk or disrespectful, but I think you missed a key point in my post. The op did not say "nothing illegal" he basically said what business it is of his (the BP). Thats "non-compliance" with a passenger

If im in secondary and I asked a passenger a simple question, and they answer with "what business is that of yours", thats flat out non-compliance. Personally I would ask again (I do understand that people get frustrated and annoyed), but even so we do not need any permission to search a vehicle. Again this is at the border not a checkpoint. There are some things I obviously cannot go into, but, BP operate along most of the same guidelines. When the OP make his statement, that right there gave them what they needed to refer him to secondary and continue with a 7pt/k9 inspection of the vehicle.

I too hope the op can get the damage to his vehicle fixed. Its not like im trying to be the bad guy here and say the OP was wrong and thats what he deserves. Just trying to shed some light on the situation from the other side.

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 3:17 PM
BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D

with all due respect and fellow calguns members camaraderie
what you said there, is everything that is wrong with government authority today to me

you can't tell my tone because I'm typing on a computer, but I was completely respectful to the officer
but being an Border Patrol officer your mindset automatically assumed I was being disrespectful... and there's my problem with it

as far as compliance, I'm not a slave to authority and will not bow down like a dog... my pride will not allow me to do that

there is a huge discussion going on about the legality of internal checkpoints and the 100-mile "Constitution-free" zone established by Customs and Border Patrol

I'm going in tomorrow to talk to the captain tomorrow on Aten Road, based on what you said here, I have a lot of questions that need answering

cheers

Nefarious
11-08-2009, 3:49 PM
with all due respect and fellow calguns members camaraderie
what you said there, is everything that is wrong with government authority today to me

you can't tell my tone because I'm typing on a computer, but I was completely respectful to the officer
but being an Border Patrol officer your mindset automatically assumed I was being disrespectful... and there's my problem with it

as far as compliance, I'm not a slave to authority and will not bow down like a dog... my pride will not allow me to do that

there is a huge discussion going on about the legality of internal checkpoints and the 100-mile "Constitution-free" zone established by Customs and Border Patrol

I'm going in tomorrow to talk to the captain tomorrow on Aten Road, based on what you said here, I have a lot of questions that need answering

cheers

I was a member of these forums long before I became an officer, so I do understand where your comming from. But no one said you had to be a slave to authority to be compliant. You could have simply answer the question and that would have been it.

If you mean that I was assuming your were being disrespectful to the BP, your wrong. I made my reply based simply on what you had stated in the OP. Primary is not meant for a forever interview. If you cannot obtain what you are looking for in primary quickly, well, thats where secondary comes in.

Whenever ANYONE asks to speak to a supervisor at the port, we MUST allow that person to speak with him or her. As someone who crosses that checkpoint all the time as well, I hope you get the answers your looking for.

Edit: on a side note. When I used to go out shooting in Jacumba or out in the valley and had to cross the checkpoint, did I or do I like being stopped on the way home and questioned by BP - HECK NO. But again I simply answer their one or two questions and all is done

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 3:52 PM
I was a member of these forums long before I became an officer, so I do understand where your comming from. But no one said you had to be a slave to authority to be compliant. You could have simply answer the question and that would have been it.

If you mean that I was assuming your were being disrespectful to the BP, your wrong. I made my reply based simply on what you had stated in the OP. Primary is not meant for a forever interview. If you cannot obtain what you are looking for in primary quickly, well, thats where secondary comes in.

Whenever ANYONE asks to speak to a supervisor at the port, we MUST allow that person to speak with him or her. As someone who crosses that checkpoint all the time as well, I hope you get the answers your looking for.

thanks man :)
do you work at calexico?

Nefarious
11-08-2009, 3:59 PM
thanks man :)
do you work at calexico?

Yes thats right. Im stuck out in Calexico until I can make my way back to Skid Row :D

For a while I was commuting EVERY DAY back and forth, that got old real quick.

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 4:01 PM
"I have nothing illegal in my vehicle and do not consent to a search, but I will not resist you in any way." These are the magic words when dealing with LEO...it is not rude or confrontational, and it doesn't leave anything vague which could be construed as consent to a search. If he's going to search your vehicle anyway based on probable cause, so be it, but at least he knows that he may have to back it up in court later.

It's funny, I didn't even realize there were internal checkpoints, and I used to live about 8 miles from the border. I guess I just haven't run into one yet.

after dealing with the Border Patrol five days a week for thirteen years, I honestly believe those magic words will get you into a secondary checkpoint nine out of ten times :D

I'll try them next time just to be sure

here's the deal.... five days a week, thirteen years, and I can count on one hand the number of times I jave been asked anything but my citizenship
in fact Friday was the FIRST time I had ever been in secondary during those thirteen years

you know who is always in secondary?
hot chicks, that's whi
you will always see a hot chick sitting on the bench with five border patrol agents talking to her while some guy with a dog is walking around her parked car in secondary :D

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 4:03 PM
Yes thats right. Im stuck out in Calexico until I can make my way back to Skid Row :D

For a while I was commuting EVERY DAY back and forth, that got old real quick.

east or west?
my best buddy runs that place

skidrow? san ysidro? lol

Gp100
11-08-2009, 4:20 PM
Yes they violated your 4th amendment rights period. The government wont close down the border and are now using the border patrol on the citizens.
You cant call, write DC because they don't listen to anything else we ask them.

Welcome to the police state just like in germany,they dont implement all there police state control rapidly,instead little by little like boiling a frog.

The politicians are waging a war on terror on citizens of the USA only, all these new restrictions for citizens like wire tapping and the patriot act. If real terrorist wanted to get a bomb in the USA they could have come over the border with the 1 million people and drugs our government refuses to stop. they do token enforcement on the border. To me homeland security is a farce.

And this control grid the government with a 12% approval rating has installed is for us. The constitution has been ripped up and thrown away, and I believe it will only get worse. We must all stand up for our rights or loose them.

reidnez
11-08-2009, 4:36 PM
after dealing with the Border Patrol five days a week for thirteen years, I honestly believe those magic words will get you into a secondary checkpoint nine out of ten times :D

I'll try them next time just to be sure

here's the deal.... five days a week, thirteen years, and I can count on one hand the number of times I jave been asked anything but my citizenship
in fact Friday was the FIRST time I had ever been in secondary during those thirteen years

you know who is always in secondary?
hot chicks, that's whi
you will always see a hot chick sitting on the bench with five border patrol agents talking to her while some guy with a dog is walking around her parked car in secondary :D

Well, I meant that's what you say when you are being questioned and when the officer seems to want to search your car...obviously I don't lead with that phrase at a checkpoint, or when I get pulled over for speeding! :D That would definitely come off as strange!

Librarian
11-08-2009, 5:31 PM
In this context, what is the definition of 'compliance' that the officers are using?

Is that definition from policy or CFR or USC?

How is one coming into such a checkpoint constructively notified on what the officers there expect and on what the officers are permitted/required to do?

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 6:00 PM
In this context, what is the definition of 'compliance' that the officers are using?

Is that definition from policy or CFR or USC?

How is one coming into such a checkpoint constructively notified on what the officers there expect and on what the officers are permitted/required to do?

now we're on the same page :thumbsup:
those are the questions I intend to find out the answers to tomorrow

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 6:07 PM
Yes they violated your 4th amendment rights period. The government wont close down the border and are now using the border patrol on the citizens.
You cant call, write DC because they don't listen to anything else we ask them.

Welcome to the police state just like in germany,they dont implement all there police state control rapidly,instead little by little like boiling a frog.

The politicians are waging a war on terror on citizens of the USA only, all these new restrictions for citizens like wire tapping and the patriot act. If real terrorist wanted to get a bomb in the USA they could have come over the border with the 1 million people and drugs our government refuses to stop. they do token enforcement on the border. To me homeland security is a farce.

And this control grid the government with a 12% approval rating has installed is for us. The constitution has been ripped up and thrown away, and I believe it will only get worse. We must all stand up for our rights or loose them.

I'm with ya brother

that's why I questioned his motives, it's out of control and people need to speak up

if not us, then who?

Cokebottle
11-08-2009, 6:24 PM
BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D
In secondary - for us - the comment you made to the officer could be considered non-compliance, at which point (to keep it short) we could escort you out of the vehicle, handcuff you, take you into the office for pattdown, and detain you untill our inspection is complete. I do believe your response at the checkpoint was considered non-compliance and the BP escalated per guidlines from there.
How does someone exercising their 5th amendment rights in primary provide RS/PC for detainment in secondary?
How does someone exercising their 5th amendment rights in secondary provide RS/PC for search?

Following that line of thinking, refusal to "chat" with a CHP officer would warrant a trip to "secondary" (his substation) and detainment/search there, with the difference being that in the case of the CHP, the driver did something to catch the attention of the officer. In the case of the BP, the only thing the driver did was legally operate his vehicle on a stretch of public roadway.

It seems that you're saying that somehow BP is exempt from the 4th and 5th.

Cokebottle
11-08-2009, 6:27 PM
If you cannot obtain what you are looking for in primary quickly, well, thats where secondary comes in.
That's backwards.

Secondary is detainment. Detainment is by definition "not free to go", which requires RS or PC that a crime is being or has been committed.
If RS/PC cannot be ascertained in primary, there is no Constitutional grounds for detainment in secondary.

Bucky G
11-08-2009, 6:31 PM
How does someone exercising their 5th amendment rights in primary provide RS/PC for detainment in secondary?
How does someone exercising their 5th amendment rights in secondary provide RS/PC for search?

Following that line of thinking, refusal to "chat" with a CHP officer would warrant a trip to "secondary" (his substation) and detainment/search there, with the difference being that in the case of the CHP, the driver did something to catch the attention of the officer. In the case of the BP, the only thing the driver did was legally operate his vehicle on a stretch of public roadway.

It seems that you're saying that somehow BP is exempt from the 4th and 5th.

That's backwards.

Secondary is detainment. Detainment is by definition "not free to go", which requires RS or PC that a crime is being or has been committed.
If RS/PC cannot be ascertained in primary, there is no Constitutional grounds for detainment in secondary.

Bingo!

Jpach
11-08-2009, 7:59 PM
To Nefarious: I agree 100% with Cokebottle. The fact is that in the OPs situation, his rights are being violated. I do understand that you say what the OP did is considered "non-compliance" but that is straight up BS. The BP people do not have the right to disregard our rights just because someone with a power trip feels disrespected.

Again, not trying to be a jerk or anything by saying all of that. What was done to the OP and many others is just rediculous.

Cokebottle
11-08-2009, 8:06 PM
Again, not trying to be a jerk or anything
Exactly.

I'm asking seriously, as I would like to know exactly what rights I do and do not have when I move through a checkpoint within our borders.

And no, it's never been a problem. 99% of the time, I am simply flagged through without a word. I think maybe twice I was asked what country I was a citizen of (along Hwy 94).

shark92651
11-08-2009, 8:15 PM
Tell me more about this X-Ray device the BP is using. Shouldn't they be required to have PC or consent to use it?

chsk9
11-08-2009, 8:17 PM
To Nefarious: I agree 100% with Cokebottle. The fact is that in the OPs situation, his rights are being violated. I do understand that you say what the OP did is considered "non-compliance" but that is straight up BS. The BP people do not have the right to disregard our rights just because someone with a power trip feels disrespected.

Again, not trying to be a jerk or anything by saying all of that. What was done to the OP and many others is just rediculous.

I have to say that I'm a law and order guy, but when the government sets up check points for it's citizens things have gone too far. We have lost so many of our rights because we are too busy watching re-runs of the 'family guy' instead of being politically active.

250rah
11-08-2009, 8:28 PM
I have been thru the one east of glamis on the way to Blythe first 2 times was easy the third the BP asks if I am a resident and I say yes (keep in mind I have a naval base decal on my car and I am white as can be) he asks where I am going I say Arizona he asks where I tell him and he says why(at this point I am irritated) and I reply why? he says what buisiness do you have htere I told himit was personal and not of his concern suprisingly he let me go.
Here is my favorite
The 4th time I pull up he says untied states border patrol and I say United states navy he laughs and waves me thru ..
Some of them are just head strong.
Good luck with your claim

CSACANNONEER
11-08-2009, 8:34 PM
I was a member of these forums long before I became an officer, so I do understand where your comming from. But no one said you had to be a slave to authority to be compliant. You could have simply answer the question and that would have been it.

If you mean that I was assuming your were being disrespectful to the BP, your wrong. I made my reply based simply on what you had stated in the OP. Primary is not meant for a forever interview. If you cannot obtain what you are looking for in primary quickly, well, thats where secondary comes in.

Whenever ANYONE asks to speak to a supervisor at the port, we MUST allow that person to speak with him or her. As someone who crosses that checkpoint all the time as well, I hope you get the answers your looking for.

Edit: on a side note. When I used to go out shooting in Jacumba or out in the valley and had to cross the checkpoint, did I or do I like being stopped on the way home and questioned by BP - HECK NO. But again I simply answer their one or two questions and all is done


I understand where you are coming from and that when John Q. Public answers agent's questions, it makes life easier for all involved. BUT, why should anyone here legally be forced to answer personal questions? Is there really any reason a citizen or legal visitor to this country should be subjected to this type of random questioning and searches? Can you please point out why someone not answering a BP agent's questions should lead to a violation of their constitutional rights? If these random detainments and searches US citiens who simply don't care to share their personal information with strangers wearing badges are constitutionally legal, please explain why they are legal. I fully understand and agree with being questioned and/or searched upon crossing our borders but, I don't understand it when these check points are miles from the border.

dieselpower
11-08-2009, 9:52 PM
I am reading these and I am just too ****ing pissed to get past the 4th page.

"Are there any weapons in the car?"
"That's none of your business."
"We need to inspect your car."
"Fine, I want to see your supervisor immediately afterward."

The line is clear, but because YOU people give up your freedom so easily, it is NOW expected that we all give them up, or face the consequences of harassment.

To you who say, "Oh yessa masta, I do have firearms in my car"...you are sheople.

To you who are in uniform and hand out crap when someone challenges your authority to REMOVE their freedom...you are a dictator and a traitor to this country..PERIOD.

To the OP, you did the right thing. Do not let the wannabe Nazis in uniform change you into a "good little slave". That is exactly what they do, little by little since its just easier to comply then to fight...its just easier and they make your life harder...that's why FREEDOM is the hard road. Little by little the Nazis will chip it away. In fifty years, people will think nothing of allowing LEO to randomly search their homes, for safety.....whats the matter...you got something to hide???

Maybe I am just too freaking old and wish for the good ole-days when we were free men.

Jpach
11-09-2009, 1:15 AM
Maybe I am just too freaking old and wish for the good ole-days when we were free men.

You arent too freaking old. Im 20 and Im pissed off as well. This type of crap gets me genuinely fired up. What can we do? Nobody, at least in large enough quantities, is willing to do anything to get our rights back. I think its so sad how damn near everyone has the "who cares if they search, do you have something to hide?" attitude. Everyone is so ignorant. Im still very ignorant but atleast I can see how disgusting things have become in general and I can see where things area headed.

What can we do?

Big D
11-09-2009, 1:34 AM
Yeah you guys are right! I mean what are those BP guys doing on the highway anyway? They should be down there on the border. I mean we all know that those illegal aliens cross the border and then just WALK hundreds of miles north or east or west. It would never occur to them to get in a car and DRIVE to where they want to go right?
And what are they doing asking about weapons? It's not like they frequently get shot at in their line of work. They should just be required to ignore anything that might pose a hazard to their lives.
They should get rid of those checkpoints. Hey, while we are at it who wants to volunteer to be the first one to let a previously deported child molester move in next door? Anyone?

Cokebottle
11-09-2009, 2:23 AM
Yeah you guys are right! I mean what are those BP guys doing on the highway anyway? They should be down there on the border. I mean we all know that those illegal aliens cross the border and then just WALK hundreds of miles north or east or west. It would never occur to them to get in a car and DRIVE to where they want to go right?
And what are they doing asking about weapons? It's not like they frequently get shot at in their line of work. They should just be required to ignore anything that might pose a hazard to their lives.
They should get rid of those checkpoints. Hey, while we are at it who wants to volunteer to be the first one to let a previously deported child molester move in next door? Anyone?
They can ask and inspect all they want to, but it needs to be within the limits of the US Constitution.

There are plenty of sheep who are willing to voluntarily give up their Constitutional rights in the name of security. Those of us who are not should not be punished by being illegally detained and searched.


And as I said before... the questions are pointless.
How many illegals, drug smugglers, and gun runners are going to answer the questions honestly? Zero.

And they are not going to be the person who asserts his Constitutional rights, because for one, he probably isn't aware of them. He's going to most likely be polite, and indicate that he is a US citizen, and say that he does not have guns, drugs, or illegals in his vehicle.

If they have reasonable suspicion or probable cause? Perfectly fine... tear the vehicle apart. If my SUV having tinted windows in the back gives them RS that I might be carrying contraband, then fine. They can and will do what the law says they can do.
But if I pull up in a completely empty SUV with no tinted windows and no indication that the suspension appears to be compressed, then they have no reasonable suspicion or probable cause to ask or do anything unless I open my mouth and give them a reason to search me.

"Where are you coming from?"
"Ensenada"
"Bring back any fireworks?"
"Uhh...(not expecting the question) No sir"

Bingo... the pause and "uhh" is now going to be used as reasonable suspicion.

tenpercentfirearms
11-09-2009, 6:07 AM
Police can ask you any questions they want. They have freedom of speech too. So if they want to ask you if you have weapons in the vehicle, that is their right. It should also be your right not to answer. It is also your right to question them.

I am having a hard time fully understanding what Nefarious is saying when he says they have a right to take you out and cuff you for non compliance. So make it clear to me.

Are we talking about an internal checkpoint like the one on the 8 east of SD? Or are we talking about the border crossing at TJ? Are we talking about the initial stop (I am assuming primary) or the "pull over" (is that secondary?)?

Man I am glad I don't live by the border. Then again, maybe if I did live by the border, it would be my job to stand up for our rights and help fight this thing.

GrizzlyGuy
11-09-2009, 6:31 AM
I'm sorry to hear about your situation, but am glad to hear you are fighting back. The checkpoint is constitutional as ruled by SCOTUS in United States v. Martinez-Fuerte. Trojan Bayonet summarized the case in his post here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3317817&postcount=73).

However, you are not required to answer any of their questions, including their question regarding citizenship. See this video for an example of how you can (and should) be the one in charge and asking the questions:

http://www.youtube.com/user/CheckpointUSA#p/a/7BC956C2E15751BE/1/u6uw7506xMw

There are many more on his YouTube channel and more info is on his site here:

https://www.checkpointusa.org/

I know that many people recommend making this statement when stopped at a checkpoint or by a LEO: 'there is nothing illegal in my vehicle'. I disagree with that recommendation, because there may in fact be something illegal in your vehicle that you are unaware of.

There are so many laws today that it is virtually impossible for the average citizen to know them all: federal, state, county, municipality, DHS regulations, etc. And, your wife/son/friend/parking attendant/car wash dude/anonymous prankster/hitchhiker/etc. may have inadvertantly left something illegal in your car. If you somehow get searched and that is found, your statement will now be used against you.

If you don't feel comfortable proceeding like the activist in the videos, then I'd recommend this statement: "Hi officer, I know you're just doing your job and I respect that. But I don't wish to answer any of your questions, and I hope that you'll respect that as well." You've now setup what should be an easy, mutually respectful encounter. If they don't show you respect in return, then continue to answer NO questions and continue to assert your rights and fire back your own questions.

FYI, I did some research into the legality of agricultural checkpoints and summarized what I found here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3323849&postcount=85).

Good luck and keep up the good fight!

Cokebottle
11-09-2009, 6:33 AM
In looking back, Nefarious works Calexico, so he is working an actual border crossing (if not patrolling the area just inside the border, bit speaking of "primary" and "secondary" would describe the actual border checkpoint).

However, a Calgunner who was recently detained and had his OLL seized was returning home from a range somewhere east of SD, so he was not detained at an actual crossing, but rather at a checkpoint or by a BP officer on patrol (he did not give any details beyond that).

popeye4
11-09-2009, 7:20 AM
I am reading these and I am just too ****ing pissed to get past the 4th page.

"Are there any weapons in the car?"
"That's none of your business."
"We need to inspect your car."
"Fine, I want to see your supervisor immediately afterward."

The line is clear, but because YOU people give up your freedom so easily, it is NOW expected that we all give them up, or face the consequences of harassment.

To you who say, "Oh yessa masta, I do have firearms in my car"...you are sheople.

To you who are in uniform and hand out crap when someone challenges your authority to REMOVE their freedom...you are a dictator and a traitor to this country..PERIOD.

To the OP, you did the right thing. Do not let the wannabe Nazis in uniform change you into a "good little slave". That is exactly what they do, little by little since its just easier to comply then to fight...its just easier and they make your life harder...that's why FREEDOM is the hard road. Little by little the Nazis will chip it away. In fifty years, people will think nothing of allowing LEO to randomly search their homes, for safety.....whats the matter...you got something to hide???

Maybe I am just too freaking old and wish for the good ole-days when we were free men.

This says it all. The "good" advice in this thread seems to be oriented to how to get along in a police state and not cause an officer any discomfort, mainly so he doesn't exercise is "authority" to be a pain in the a**. Perhaps they can get away with this sort of behavior because questioning authority is aberrant behavior. Perhaps if EVERYONE told them to pound sand, they'd become overwhelmed by their own bovine excrement.

Won't happen, though. Most people will roll over so they won't be late to the mall.....:(

Does anyone get the feeling that this sort of stuff is conditioning us (LEO's and citizens alike) for bigger and better things? Nah, just the natural evolution of an unchecked bureaucracy.....

cgseanp1
11-09-2009, 7:23 AM
Not to get too off topic here, but I will be crossing through a few BP checkpoints today on my way home from AZ. On the way here, I was asked to go to Secondary and then asked to get myself and my baby son out of the car so they could have the dog go through.. I'm pretty sure they didn't have any RS (reasonable suspicion?) or PC (probable cause?).. I'm without a doubt a US Citizen, and I answered them when they asked me. I also told them I was heading to Tucson to visit family, and I was coming from San Diego.. Then they had me pull to secondary, dog went through and I was on my way in a few minutes.. I have a rental car, supposedly people are using rentals to smuggle nowadays.. Is that RS or PC to detain somebody?
If they hassle me again today, I won't answer any questions.

Dangerpin
11-09-2009, 7:48 AM
Man I am glad I don't live by the border. Then again, maybe if I did live by the border, it would be my job to stand up for our rights and help fight this thing.

If you live within 100 miles of a land border or an ocean you are within the zone that the border patrol can set up these checkpoints. I believe Taft, CA falls is less than 100 miles from the ocean so get ready to stand up.

GrizzlyGuy
11-09-2009, 7:49 AM
I have a rental car, supposedly people are using rentals to smuggle nowadays.. Is that RS or PC to detain somebody?


Absolutely not. Driving a rented care is legal. Engaging in lawful activities like driving a rental car never meets the RAS standard for detainment. Although LEOs may act as if it does.

If they hassle me again today, I won't answer any questions.

Good for you. See the video I linked to in my post above for some inspiration. :)

MasterYong
11-09-2009, 8:02 AM
There's internal checkpoints going into AZ?

I didn't see any a few weeks ago.

If I pass through one on the way back they're not searching my vehicle. Period. There will be no RS or PC of any kind because I am a law abiding citizen. If they insist on searching my vehicle it'll only be after I've been detained/arrested/whatever for resisting. I wont lay down just because I'm afraid of the law. I have recording equipment and it'll be running, and when they finally let me go I'll be contacting my attorney.

Surely that wont happen though. Are there really so many people that get searched for no reason at these checkpoints???

cgseanp1
11-09-2009, 8:05 AM
There's internal checkpoints going into AZ?

I didn't see any a few weeks ago.

If I pass through one on the way back they're not searching my vehicle. Period. There will be no RS or PC of any kind because I am a law abiding citizen. If they insist on searching my vehicle it'll only be after I've been arrested for resisting. I wont lay down just because I'm afraid of the law. I have recording equipment and it'll be running, and when they finally let me go I'll be contacting my attorney.

Surely that wont happen though. Are there really so many people that get searched for no reason at these checkpoints???

There are plenty of checkpoints coming from San Diego into AZ. Not sure about the route you are taking. And I have passed through these things many times, only been searched once, and that was just a few days ago.

chsk9
11-09-2009, 9:18 AM
I'm sorry to hear about your situation, but am glad to hear you are fighting back. The checkpoint is constitutional as ruled by SCOTUS in United States v. Martinez-Fuerte. Trojan Bayonet summarized the case in his post here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3317817&postcount=73).

However, you are not required to answer any of their questions, including their question regarding citizenship. See this video for an example of how you can (and should) be the one in charge and asking the questions:

http://www.youtube.com/user/CheckpointUSA#p/a/7BC956C2E15751BE/1/u6uw7506xMw

There are many more on his YouTube channel and more info is on his site here:

https://www.checkpointusa.org/

I know that many people recommend making this statement when stopped at a checkpoint or by a LEO: 'there is nothing illegal in my vehicle'. I disagree with that recommendation, because there may in fact be something illegal in your vehicle that you are unaware of.

There are so many laws today that it is virtually impossible for the average citizen to know them all: federal, state, county, municipality, DHS regulations, etc. And, your wife/son/friend/parking attendant/car wash dude/anonymous prankster/hitchhiker/etc. may have inadvertantly left something illegal in your car. If you somehow get searched and that is found, your statement will now be used against you.

If you don't feel comfortable proceeding like the activist in the videos, then I'd recommend this statement: "Hi officer, I know you're just doing your job and I respect that. But I don't wish to answer any of your questions, and I hope that you'll respect that as well." You've now setup what should be an easy, mutually respectful encounter. If they don't show you respect in return, then continue to answer NO questions and continue to assert your rights and fire back your own questions.

FYI, I did some research into the legality of agricultural checkpoints and summarized what I found here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3323849&postcount=85).

Good luck and keep up the good fight!

Great post to a interesting thread- thanks!

POLICESTATE
11-09-2009, 9:32 AM
There's internal checkpoints going into AZ?

I didn't see any a few weeks ago.

If I pass through one on the way back they're not searching my vehicle. Period. There will be no RS or PC of any kind because I am a law abiding citizen. If they insist on searching my vehicle it'll only be after I've been arrested for resisting. I wont lay down just because I'm afraid of the law. I have recording equipment and it'll be running, and when they finally let me go I'll be contacting my attorney.

Surely that wont happen though. Are there really so many people that get searched for no reason at these checkpoints???

No reason to get arrested resisting, simply say "I will not consent to a search of my vehicle or my property. Am I being detained? Am I free to go?"

Also to add, once you get arrested they can search your stuff, and anything they find can be used against you. You want to make it so that if they do search w/o your consent then the only thing they can fall back on is RS/PC which they would have to prove.

MasterYong
11-09-2009, 10:27 AM
There are plenty of checkpoints coming from San Diego into AZ. Not sure about the route you are taking. And I have passed through these things many times, only been searched once, and that was just a few days ago.

I took I-10 E outta LA. (From Norcal the shortest way is 101 N to 20 E to 5 S to 10 E... don't know if it's the fastest but it's the shortest distance and I don't feel like trying other routes just to time myself LOL).

I noticed there was a "checkpoint" on I-10 on the westbound side at the border of AZ/CA but I think it was just one of those typical produce checkpoints they have at most places...

shark92651
11-09-2009, 10:52 AM
I am reading these and I am just too ****ing pissed to get past the 4th page.

"Are there any weapons in the car?"
"That's none of your business."
"We need to inspect your car."
"Fine, I want to see your supervisor immediately afterward."

Is this indeed how it went down? If so then the OP consented to the search, but I must have missed this dialog somewhere within the thread.

Bucky, I know you are understandably upset about the dog scratching your car but did you consent to a search (by XRay or any other means) or not?

dieselpower
11-09-2009, 4:21 PM
Talked at work about this and the general consensus was this.

Driver- "Hello officer"
BP Officer- "Hello. Do you have any pornographic materials in the car?"

Child porn is illegal and is not covered under the 1st. That still doesn't mean you must answer this question or that it is within a scope of questioning used to detain you further.

Driver- "Hello Officer."
BP Officer- "Hello. Are you a member of the Nation of Islam or a Muslim Fundamentalist?

The US is currently being attacked by fringe groups in these areas. This still doesn't allow BP to use the answer or refusal to answer as a reason for further detainment.

The simple fact some people here are saying they have been asked, "Do you have firearms in the car?" and have answered, "Yes", then the BP officer let them go WITHOUT detainment means the question is being used to detain persons who either refuse to answer, or react suspiciously.

This is exactly the same as LEO asking you to search your car on a speeding ticket. Your refusal is seen as PC since only some one with some thing to hide will say "no". This is the world we have created by not exercising our rights.

Bucky G
11-09-2009, 4:23 PM
Nope I never consented to any type of search at all
In fact right now I'm sitting in the very same line with my eight year old boy
We are about a half hour from the front
I'll take a photo from my phone when we get up there

Bucky G
11-09-2009, 4:51 PM
Ok I just got in trouble for taking a picture of their xray truck
The army soldiers made me delete it while they watched
I explained I was trying to take a picture of the scene where my car was damaged
The BP supervisor came and gave me the number of headquarters to file my claim
He said everthing there is recorded 24 hours a day and tapes will clearly show what dog jumped on my car
He said it was likely a customs dog, they are to scratch and dig
He said BP dogs are trained passive and will sit when they something
Now I have go because its hard to type on this phone

GrizzlyGuy
11-09-2009, 5:52 PM
Ok I just got in trouble for taking a picture of their xray truck
The army soldiers made me delete it while they watched

What?!? Were these American solidiers, or were they goose-stepping with "SS" patches on their uniforms?

There is nothing at all illegal in what you did. You weren't on federal property. Even if you were, it would still be legal. See this story (http://carlosmiller.com/2009/08/20/homeland-security-arrests-man-for-filming-fbi-building-in-nyc/) and the PDF file (http://carlosmiller.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/randallthomas.pdf) showing the search warrant and the "charges" they filed against the poor guy. Not a single one is for taking a picture or video. No charge because it ISN'T ILLEGAL. They just made up a bunch of hassle-the-poor-citizen charges out of spite.

The only law that is even close is this one (http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/795.html) (18 USC 795):

"Whenever, in the interests of national defense, the President defines certain vital military and naval installations or equipment as requiring protection against the general dissemination of information relative thereto, it shall be unlawful to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of such vital military and naval installations or equipment without first obtaining permission of the commanding officer of the military or naval post, camp, or station, or naval vessels, military and naval aircraft, and any separate military or naval command concerned, or higher authority, and promptly submitting the product obtained to such commanding officer or higher authority for censorship or such other action as he may deem necessary..."

Hard to imagine how a citizen-hassling checkpoint, staffed by yahoos who have apparently never been trained on any of the Constitution, would be designated by the President as a vital military installation. :rolleyes:

What the he** happened to this country? :mad:

ETA: Are you sure those were army soldiers? They aren't authorized to be doing law enforcement duties inside the country.

Wes
11-09-2009, 6:09 PM
get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****

paul0660
11-09-2009, 6:10 PM
The sad thing is the supposed LEOs here trying to defend their craft. The constitution does not have magic phrases that we are taught to use as children, and if it did would probably not be so foresightful as to include the proper, and different, ones for border crossings, internal checkpoints, and speeding tickets.

Policemen take oaths to protect the constitution, and instead routinely use their authority so that citizens (and residents) will give up their rights. Failure to respond "correctly" to a question, without actually admitting to a crime, is the farthest thing from PC I can think of.

Those jerks on youtube are making a point. Internal checkpoints are there to find illegal aliens and terrorists, both of which are covered by the constitution until arrested. NO ONE wants to racial profile (right?) so everyone gets pulled in and asked if they are a citizen. Where have I been? Do I have guns? NOT AN ISSUE.

paul0660
11-09-2009, 6:12 PM
Thanks for making my point Wes.

Cokebottle
11-09-2009, 6:17 PM
get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****
One day, you're going to do that to the wrong "*****" and end up standing before a judge, possibly without a job.

Bucky G
11-09-2009, 6:18 PM
What?!? Were these American solidiers, or were they goose-stepping with "SS" patches on their uniforms?

There is nothing at all illegal in what you did. You weren't on federal property. Even if you were, it would still be legal. See this story (http://carlosmiller.com/2009/08/20/homeland-security-arrests-man-for-filming-fbi-building-in-nyc/) and the PDF file (http://carlosmiller.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/randallthomas.pdf) showing the search warrant and the "charges" they filed against the poor guy. Not a single one is for taking a picture or video. No charge because it ISN'T ILLEGAL. They just made up a bunch of hassle-the-poor-citizen charges out of spite.

The only law that is even close is this one (http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/795.html) (18 USC 795):

"Whenever, in the interests of national defense, the President defines certain vital military and naval installations or equipment as requiring protection against the general dissemination of information relative thereto, it shall be unlawful to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of such vital military and naval installations or equipment without first obtaining permission of the commanding officer of the military or naval post, camp, or station, or naval vessels, military and naval aircraft, and any separate military or naval command concerned, or higher authority, and promptly submitting the product obtained to such commanding officer or higher authority for censorship or such other action as he may deem necessary..."

Hard to imagine how a citizen-hassling checkpoint, staffed by yahoos who have apparently never been trained on any of the Constitution, would be designated by the President as a vital military installation. :rolleyes:

What the he** happened to this country? :mad:

ETA: Are you sure those were army soldiers? They aren't authorized to be doing law enforcement duties inside the country.

Absolutely positive they were US soldiers
They were wearing ACU's and the patch above their shirt pocket said US Army

they run the Xray truck, they have been there the last year and half

they made me delete my photo but their truck looks exactly like this one...

http://media.govtech.net/pub_images/emgmt/EMJuly09/Port%20Security/Port2.jpg

Bucky G
11-09-2009, 6:22 PM
get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****

so you are law enforcement and when somebody doesn't give you the answer you want, he's a ***** and you are going to violate his rights?

no disrespect but did you take an oath to uphold the constitution?
if so you should resign

sevensix2x51
11-09-2009, 6:23 PM
One day, you're going to do that to the wrong "*****" and end up standing before a judge, possibly without a job.

+1.

stix213
11-09-2009, 6:43 PM
People's recommendations here seem to come down into one of two categories:

1) You're not looking for trouble and just want to get home, and are willing to bend a bit in the officer's favor to make that happen

2) You're more interested in the 100% protection of your rights at all cost than how the rest of your evening will go

As the OP has stated a few pages back, he didn't even have any weapons in the car while not answering the officer's question about whether he had any or not. Yes your vehicle shouldn't have been scratched and I believe you are in the right that they should not have taken you aside for additional searches just for asking if you were required to answer the weapons question, BUT obviously these things are prone to go a whole lot smoother when you don't have any weapons you just say "No I don't have any weapons."

Personally I plan on saving my gun activist moments for when I actually have them with me. Maybe that makes me a bad American for answering "No I have no weapons" so I can get home and watch some TV instead of getting my SUV scratched and bombarded with X-rays, but it is what it is. I try to fight the battles worth fighting, and I'm sorry to say not telling an officer you don't have any weapons would not have been one of them.

Realistically if you want to be the guy with the "Your Name Vs The United States" court case named after you to keep your right to not tell an officer you don't have any weapons, then keep doing what you are doing, and I think you have a good chance of winning. I'll be the guy watching how that turns out and maybe donating to your legal fund. I'd rather the case named after me sound a little more important than not telling that I don't have something... but that's just me.

dieselpower
11-09-2009, 6:46 PM
Wes.....you are the reason civilians need firearms. Obama has a job for you.

Bucky G
11-09-2009, 6:52 PM
People's recommendations here seem to come down into one of two categories:

1) You're not looking for trouble and just want to get home, and are willing to bend a bit in the officer's favor to make that happen

2) You're more interested in the 100% protection of your rights at all cost than how the rest of your evening will go


that's true, but I noticed that those who were in favor of "bending a bit in the officer's favor", were in fact officers themselves :p

stix213
11-09-2009, 7:02 PM
that's true, but I noticed that those who were in favor of "bending a bit in the officer's favor", were in fact officers themselves :p

That is a good point :)

And I hope I didn't come off as condescending. I really hope you get somewhere with how they scratched up your SUV. That is really messed up. And really, we should be able to go up to a check point and just clam up and if the officer ACTUALLY sees anything then they can detain you. I'm just saying, my experience with authority in general is there are those few who get on a power trip so I like to play the "I don't have to tell you game" sparingly, cause no matter how wrong it is you are asking for the few with the power trips to push back.

A trick a friend of mine showed me is to keep a video camera in the car. Whenever he is stopped by an officer he sets it on his dash aimed out the window in the officer's direction and turns it on. He is always asked what it is for and he just says "I've had problems in the past, and this is just to make sure everyone's rights are kept." Yeah he used to dress like a wannabe gang banger even though he was a white boy with his own business, and I always told him that's why he kept getting his car searched for drugs once a month by a cop with a "hunch." My friend is one of those guys who thinks you should never put anything in your body. He never does any drugs or even drinks, ever.

His rights stopped getting violated as soon as he started with the video camera, and he didn't even have to change how he dressed. Funny no officers ever thought his car needed to be searched when they were being recorded... hmmm

Desert_Rat
11-09-2009, 7:06 PM
A few years ago I went through that one near needles.The guy asked "Do you have any weapons in the vehicle sir?"I said "Hell Ya" then the guy chuckles and said "Well get-on down the road with Your bad self" And I drove on.With my wife chewing my *** for a few miles

Gp100
11-09-2009, 7:18 PM
that's true, but I noticed that those who were in favor of "bending a bit in the officer's favor", were in fact officers themselves :pTrue, as long as almost every gun law passed has a exemption for LEO's, as long as they never get there car searched because they flash there badge. As long as there rights are protected they could careless about your rights your just a little surf ***** talking to a great lord, don't you dare look at him in the eye.

The real problem is the politicians at city,state and federal that let them treat us like this, that is the problem. They have absolute power and we know what that does.
1776-2009 the red coats are back?

GrizzlyGuy
11-09-2009, 7:21 PM
Absolutely positive they were US soldiers
They were wearing ACU's and the patch above their shirt pocket said US Army


Hmmmmm... Let's try to give them the benefit of the doubt. Were they maybe National Guard and not U.S. Army?

If you're sure they were U.S. Army rather than the guard, a bigger problem exists than you getting your car scratched and personal property (the photo) destroyed. The Posse Comitatus Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act) makes it illegal for the U.S. military to perform civilian law enforcement within our country, except for under some very limited exceptions (such as to help LEO's deal with threats involving nuclear materials).

There are other exceptions for the National Guard: "There are a number of situations in which the Act does not apply. These include... National Guard units while under the authority of the governor of a state"

The only thing I can find regarding manning of internal checkpoints by the military (other than the National Guard) is this info from the article:

"On December 10, 2008, the California Highway Patrol announced its officers, along with San Bernadino Sheriff's Department deputies and US Marine Corps Military Police, would jointly staff some sobriety and drivers license checkpoints. However, the Marines at the checkpoints are not arresting individuals or enforcing any laws, which would be a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. A spokesperson said that the Marines were present to observe the checkpoint to learn how to conduct checkpoints on base, to help combat the problem of Marines driving under the influence. The Marines at a recent checkpoint learned techniques to conduct sobriety checkpoints and field sobriety tests."

In your case a "law" (nonexistent, of course) was enforced by these uniformed people when they ordered you to destroy your photo. Not good no matter who they were. That photo was your intellectual property, and we do have laws protecting property in this country.

Again, to give them the benefit of the doubt and present this information fairly, here is an article titled The Myth of Posse Comitatus (http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/articles/Trebilcock.htm) that was written by a U.S. Army Reserve JAG (attorney). I don't see anything in this pro-government interpretation of Posse Commitatus that would authorize what happened to you.

So... if these guys really were U.S. Army and not National Guard, you may need to call the FBI and have them arrested for violating Posse Comitatus. Or if they really were National Guard, have the FBI arrest them for forcing you to destroy your property. :D

CSACANNONEER
11-09-2009, 7:32 PM
get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****

Please pull me over and insist that I answer personal questions like "Where are you coming from?" "Where are you going?" and "Do you have any weapons in your vehicle?" Please....Please.... I really need some cash and since you are indicating that you'll illegally search me just because I don't want to make small talk with you, I should be able to sue your dept. for enough to let me retire. BTW, thanks for posting your intentions here first. It'll make my lawyer's job so much easier. Now, where exactly do you work? I'm willing to travel a ways for this. BTW, I'll have my vehicle camera'd and mic'd for your protection.

GrizzlyGuy
11-09-2009, 7:39 PM
Please pull me over and insist that I answer personal questions like "Where are you coming from?" "Where are you going?" and "Do you have any weapons in your vehicle?" Please....Please.... I really need some cash and since you are indicating that you'll illegally search me just because I don't want to make small talk with you, I should be able to sue your dept. for enough to let me retire. BTW, thanks for posting your intentions here first. It'll make my lawyer's job so much easier. Now, where exactly do you work? I'm willing to travel a ways for this. BTW, I'll have my vehicle camera'd and mic'd for your protection.

I call dibs for riding shotgun with you! We get to split the settlement money, right? :D

tenpercentfirearms
11-09-2009, 7:41 PM
Ok I just got in trouble for taking a picture of their xray truck
The army soldiers made me delete it while they watched
I explained I was trying to take a picture of the scene where my car was damaged
The BP supervisor came and gave me the number of headquarters to file my claim
He said everthing there is recorded 24 hours a day and tapes will clearly show what dog jumped on my car
He said it was likely a customs dog, they are to scratch and dig
He said BP dogs are trained passive and will sit when they something
Now I have go because its hard to type on this phone

Man, you should have pushed the edge, eight year old and all. That would have been a great case. However, that is easy for me to say here at my computer and honestly can't fault you for something I haven't had the chance to prove yet.

How come when I get stopped they never try screwing with me? We make small talk about Geocaching, they give me a ticket, and off they go.

I call dibs for riding shotgun with you! We get to split the settlement money, right? :D

I need to come along to prove I am not all talk.

Bucky G
11-09-2009, 7:48 PM
Hmmmmm... Let's try to give them the benefit of the doubt. Were they maybe National Guard and not U.S. Army?


they could have absolutely been National Guard
I only said Army soldiers because that's what their patch said on their shirts

I have never been in the Guard but I did serve in the army, I don't know if the Guard wears the US Army logo or not

Desert_Rat
11-09-2009, 8:47 PM
they could have absolutely been National Guard
I only said Army soldiers because that's what their patch said on their shirts

I have never been in the Guard but I did serve in the army, I don't know if the Guard wears the US Army logo or not

Yes, The Guard has the same "US ARMY" on their uniform.
A guy would have to know about the unit patches on the shoulders to know what unit the Soldiers are from

shark92651
11-09-2009, 10:10 PM
get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****

And what agency do you work for? What laws give you the right to go on a fishing expedition for weapons with no RS or PC of any illegal activity?

Jpach
11-09-2009, 10:48 PM
get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****

You are the *****, and for our safety I hope you cease to be a LEO. You truly disgust me.

chsk9
11-10-2009, 12:03 AM
:popcorn:

Timmay
11-10-2009, 2:41 AM
The only thing I can find regarding manning of internal checkpoints by the military (other than the National Guard) is this info from the article:

"On December 10, 2008, the California Highway Patrol announced its officers, along with San Bernadino Sheriff's Department deputies and US Marine Corps Military Police, would jointly staff some sobriety and drivers license checkpoints. However, the Marines at the checkpoints are not arresting individuals or enforcing any laws, which would be a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. A spokesperson said that the Marines were present to observe the checkpoint to learn how to conduct checkpoints on base, to help combat the problem of Marines driving under the influence. The Marines at a recent checkpoint learned techniques to conduct sobriety checkpoints and field sobriety tests."



Not to go off topic but I find it hard to belive that Marine MP's need training to run checkpoints on base. They were just looking for jarheads driving drunk. In the 9 years I have been at Pendleton I have not once ever seen or heard of an on base check point. If you get through the gate, your home free...minus driving into the mountain side on Vandergrift. ;) Not that I condone driving drunk.

GrizzlyGuy
11-10-2009, 7:36 AM
they could have absolutely been National Guard
I only said Army soldiers because that's what their patch said on their shirts

I have never been in the Guard but I did serve in the army, I don't know if the Guard wears the US Army logo or not

OK cool, they probably were CA National Guard. They're OK to operate checkpoints.

Still, it really sounds like the folks at that checkpoint need some additional training on 4th and 5th amendment rights, RAS, and the laws (none) about people taking pictures at that location. Maybe you should contact the media. Would be interesting to see what happens when they demand that a reporter destroy his photos or video. Or contact the guy over at checkpointusa.org (https://www.checkpointusa.org/) (who made the videos and successfully sued in one case) and see what he recommends(?).

cgseanp1
11-10-2009, 9:06 AM
So on the way home from AZ, I passed through 2 check points and they were waving me through before I was even stopped. I've noticed (and don't mean this to sound racist or anything) that it's almost always the hispanic BP guys that stop and question me, and the caucasion guys that just wave me on through.

Untamed1972
11-10-2009, 9:06 AM
Shoulda just told the guys "sorry...SCOTUS has determined you have no right privacy when in a public place and this highway you're on is a public place."

Bucky G
11-10-2009, 9:07 AM
I noticed the very same thing

Ross
11-10-2009, 2:35 PM
I have to stop all the time at the one near South Bay Rod & Gun. Last time it went like this:

Him - "Coming back from the range?" (he could see the targets and rifles behind me in the truck)

Me - "Yes."

Him - "You have any weapons?"

Me - (I have the "WTF, did you just ask me what I think you asked me, look on my face) "Yes."

Him - "What kind?"

Me: "a Remington 700, a Marlin lever action, an M1 Garand, and and AR."

Him - (with a "did you just say what I think you said look" on his face) "Were you shooting targets?"

Me - "Yup, they're right behind me. Matter of fact, those are the 300 yard ones I was shooting with the M1 and AR." (Really the ones I used for 100 yards, which had a butt load of 10 round, 2" groups)

Him - "Daaammn. You can go."

FYI - I get sunburned if someone says it'll be sunny outside, and I have the obligatory NASNI base sticker and a hair cut which would still pass inspection.

Cali-Shooter
11-10-2009, 3:24 PM
People's recommendations here seem to come down into one of two categories:

1) You're not looking for trouble and just want to get home, and are willing to bend a bit in the officer's favor to make that happen

2) You're more interested in the 100% protection of your rights at all cost than how the rest of your evening will go

As the OP has stated a few pages back, he didn't even have any weapons in the car while not answering the officer's question about whether he had any or not. Yes your vehicle shouldn't have been scratched and I believe you are in the right that they should not have taken you aside for additional searches just for asking if you were required to answer the weapons question, BUT obviously these things are prone to go a whole lot smoother when you don't have any weapons you just say "No I don't have any weapons."

Personally I plan on saving my gun activist moments for when I actually have them with me. Maybe that makes me a bad American for answering "No I have no weapons" so I can get home and watch some TV instead of getting my SUV scratched and bombarded with X-rays, but it is what it is. I try to fight the battles worth fighting, and I'm sorry to say not telling an officer you don't have any weapons would not have been one of them.

Realistically if you want to be the guy with the "Your Name Vs The United States" court case named after you to keep your right to not tell an officer you don't have any weapons, then keep doing what you are doing, and I think you have a good chance of winning. I'll be the guy watching how that turns out and maybe donating to your legal fund. I'd rather the case named after me sound a little more important than not telling that I don't have something... but that's just me.

Great suggestion. Don't waste time and energy (and funds) on fighting battles without good reason or payoff. I'm not saying that what the OP is fighting against falls into this category (it might if he pursues it too far) but there are better things in which it is worth risking it all to fight for, pick your battles.

Bucky G
11-10-2009, 7:33 PM
Shoulda just told the guys "sorry...SCOTUS has determined you have no right privacy when in a public place and this highway you're on is a public place."

I'm seriously going to use that next time :p

gimebakmybulits
11-13-2009, 12:37 AM
get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****

Yeah, your our hero and savior. I'm so impressed that someone with that kind of mental toughness is out there keeping people safe. What a joke.......

CalNRA
11-13-2009, 12:54 AM
is this the Mr "I'll check that pirck" Wes?

nothing special. M4 w/203 and trijicon reflex sight. nothign crazy but shes my baby. im on the left, my buddy jones on the right

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v701/DFwes/5968_144042424991_793804991_3442491.jpg

Bucky G
11-13-2009, 8:10 AM
is this the Mr "I'll check that pirck" Wes?

being checked by a 203 will ruin your day
good thing they don't let him have mags and grenades :p

GrizzlyGuy
11-13-2009, 8:14 AM
Here is an inspiring video made by a group of freedom activists in AZ:

NAZI Checkpoint Confronted - Part 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kantS-kzIWU)

Note that the African-American in the video is the same guy who brought his AR-15 to the Obama rally:

Brother Carries AR-15 at Obama Rally (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63GiXzpfGhA).

Their whole set of checkpoint videos are entertaining. I love these two where they drive there in an RV, it "breaks down" right at the checkpoint, and they cover it with anti-checkpoint signs:

Hold On, We're Coming (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=susdzfoPlrY)

RV Breaks Down in Front of NAZI Checkpoint (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RI3GNYYm-3Q)

Notice how the checkpoint guy waves them on through without even asking a question. He knew better than to mess with these guys who stand up for their rights. :D

Bucky G
11-13-2009, 9:37 AM
thanks!
I'll check those out when I get home from work

our checkpoint line is getting out of hand... longer by the day

AM9000
11-14-2009, 8:24 AM
Why would Homeland security be maning a state border in the first place? I thought they were a federal agency?

tenpercentfirearms
11-14-2009, 8:34 AM
Here is an inspiring video made by a group of freedom activists in AZ:

NAZI Checkpoint Confronted - Part 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kantS-kzIWU)

Note that the African-American in the video is the same guy who brought his AR-15 to the Obama rally:

Brother Carries AR-15 at Obama Rally (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63GiXzpfGhA).

Their whole set of checkpoint videos are entertaining. I love these two where they drive there in an RV, it "breaks down" right at the checkpoint, and they cover it with anti-checkpoint signs:

Hold On, We're Coming (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=susdzfoPlrY)

RV Breaks Down in Front of NAZI Checkpoint (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RI3GNYYm-3Q)

Notice how the checkpoint guy waves them on through without even asking a question. He knew better than to mess with these guys who stand up for their rights. :D
That pastor dude gives me mixed feelings. He drops F bombs and wants to preach righteousness. I find that a little troubling personally.

Second, properly plan your protest. Giving the DPS and even the Border Patrol guys hell because you want to protest on an interstate is not that bright. Don't preach your message to the one or two guys on the front lines, they aren't policy makers. They are just guys doing their jobs. Sure educate them and hold them accountable, but arguing with them like they make the laws and make policy decisions is foolish and a waste of everyone's time.

I think some of these videos are done for the wrong reasons. I think they are done to stroke personal egos and just for the thrill of screwing with the cops.

I have seen his Taser video. Although I think they might have gone overboard, even if you refuse to consent to a search, the courtroom is where you arguing whether the cops had PC and what not. Actively resisting arrest can get you Tased. Will it be an educator for the BP? Possibly, but I don't feel sorry for the guy. Cops don't have to give you reasons in the field, they just have to try and back it up in court.

dieselpower
11-14-2009, 10:25 AM
That pastor dude gives me mixed feelings. He drops F bombs and wants to preach righteousness. I find that a little troubling personally.

Second, properly plan your protest. Giving the DPS and even the Border Patrol guys hell because you want to protest on an interstate is not that bright. Don't preach your message to the one or two guys on the front lines, they aren't policy makers. They are just guys doing their jobs. Sure educate them and hold them accountable, but arguing with them like they make the laws and make policy decisions is foolish and a waste of everyone's time.

I think some of these videos are done for the wrong reasons. I think they are done to stroke personal egos and just for the thrill of screwing with the cops.

I have seen his Taser video. Although I think they might have gone overboard, even if you refuse to consent to a search, the courtroom is where you arguing whether the cops had PC and what not. Actively resisting arrest can get you Tased. Will it be an educator for the BP? Possibly, but I don't feel sorry for the guy. Cops don't have to give you reasons in the field, they just have to try and back it up in court.

I disagree on this. The protest needs to be directed at the problem, which is the Officers and the field supervisors. No one at the top is telling the Officers they are allowed to search a car when they feel like it. No one at the top is telling them "mere suspicion" means a "any thing they don't like".

One of the Videos shows a Supervisor telling the drive the courts ruled that they only need "mere suspicion". Then he asks the driver what "mere" means. I bet if you look up the ruling the word "mere" is used to denote suspicion is needed and not hard evidence, and the rules of PC still apply.

The Officers and Supervisors are moving outside of their duties because they are bored. They will harass 1000 people and find 1 criminal...that not what they are there for. They are setting a precedent for searching cars the same way the Highway Patrol did in the 70s....why are you asking about guns in the car...an honest person posses no threat, a criminal will lie...so why ask? Because the officer needs to cover his *** with PC by saying the driver was suspicious when answering and since firearms pose a threat for safety, he now has a solid basis to go on a fishing trip for crimes ignoring the 4th. The LEO doesn't give a crap what you say...he is just covering his ***.

The only other alternative is to get these guys fired by using $$$ to hire lawyers...so not only are rich people the only people that can get their 4th, you now have to get some guy fired for doing what he THOUGHT he was supposed to.

Please note that once the first encounter goes wrong, the Officers let up on future encounters. This is due to the Officers getting pissed, researching the laws, and then the Supervisors advising them their true mission and how to not violate the 4th. Now everyone is happy except for the true criminal who will exhibit true suspicious behavior when stopped.

Remember, let 100 guilty go free, to avoid 1 innocent convicted..this is true for warrantless searches as well.

Cokebottle
11-14-2009, 12:38 PM
Why would Homeland security be maning a state border in the first place? I thought they were a federal agency?
The discussion has been revolving around the internal border checkpoints formerly run by the INS (now DHS).
DHS should not be present at the state ag checkpoints on the 10, 40, and 15, but they will be manning the INS checkpoints on the 5, 8, 111, 86, and the Temecula stop on the 15.

hawk81
11-14-2009, 4:50 PM
I don't know where you get this non compliance B.S, but it is B.S. There is a little thing called the constitution that you may or may not have heard of. You have the right to not answer any of the officers(5th ammenment). Also you can say anything you want to the officer, as long as it is not threatening. Also you still have to have probable cause to go inside of someones vehicle and search it. I suggest you go and brush up on some laws, before you go and get your department sued.



I read through these posts rather quicly, im going to go back and read them a little closer... but

I cross that checkpoint all the time as well - going home on my "weekends".

As far as the damages to your car go. Did you notice them before or after you left (again ill go back and read the OP a little more closer). If you noticed them AFTER you left, your going to have a hard time proving that it was infact the K9 that did the damage. You can ALWAYS speak to a supervsor if you have a complaint. They should allow you to file a tort claim and at that point it gets routed up the chain. But again, if you did not show them the damage right then and there, its going to be iffy.

BP opperates under somewhat different guidlines than CBP - We dont have to ask permission to search your vehicle . I consider myself extreemly polite with the traveling public, but when I run into "that guy" ... well, his inspection takes a little longer lol :D
In secondary - for us - the comment you made to the officer could be considered non-compliance, at which point (to keep it short) we could escort you out of the vehicle, handcuff you, take you into the office for pattdown, and detain you untill our inspection is complete. I do believe your response at the checkpoint was considered non-compliance and the BP escalated per guidlines from there.

The Director
11-14-2009, 5:07 PM
Those videos are a little over the top. It's not the cops / bp / trooper's fault they have to man that checkpoint. They should go find out who makes that policy rather than go instigate stuff with the cops.

hawk81
11-14-2009, 5:15 PM
Yeah, you sound like a real winner. I hope you run into someone someday that owns your @ss.



get over it. different states have different weapon laws. when im on duty and someone gives me lip when i ask a simple question, you bet you *** im gunna check that *****

sevensix2x51
11-14-2009, 5:50 PM
is this the Mr "I'll check that pirck" Wes?

he looks kinda short to me... maybe compensating for being a little guy?

Cokebottle
11-14-2009, 6:02 PM
he looks kinda short to me... maybe compensating for being a little guy?
Posted that in the "real military issue hardware" thread....

I didn't realize black "Mechanix" gloves were GI.

sevensix2x51
11-14-2009, 6:19 PM
Posted that in the "real military issue hardware" thread....

I didn't realize black "Mechanix" gloves were GI.

at least cough up the dough for clc 'subcontractors'.... :D

Cokebottle
11-14-2009, 6:23 PM
at least cough up the dough for clc 'subcontractors'.... :D
Ya, I dunno. I know the guys have some amount of freedom WRT personal gear... and they either aren't loaded or are posing with 10 rounders, so they may be off duty stateside, so I certainly don't want to make the statement that he's not serving.

sevensix2x51
11-14-2009, 6:32 PM
Ya, I dunno. I know the guys have some amount of freedom WRT personal gear... and they either aren't loaded or are posing with 10 rounders, so they may be off duty stateside, so I certainly don't want to make the statement that he's not serving.

http://www.utilitysafeguard.com/Gloves/Performance-Gloves/Flex-Grip-Subcontractor-Gloves/
just clarifying. i hate mechanix gloves.

Cokebottle
11-14-2009, 6:54 PM
http://www.utilitysafeguard.com/Gloves/Performance-Gloves/Flex-Grip-Subcontractor-Gloves/
just clarifying. i hate mechanix gloves.
Ya, I use them for riding the dirtbike, but I'm not picky as to the brand...

After getting holes and tears in i-don't-know-how-many pair of $45+ "motocross" gloves, I'll grab anything now.
Those clc's do look nice... I'd want to check them out in person though.

Same for my street bike. I got tired of the black "biker" gloves staining my hands... makes it kinda hard to go in for a job interview... so I'm wearing a pair of Wells Lamont work gloves from Home Depot.

sevensix2x51
11-14-2009, 6:56 PM
i use them for work and spearfishing. they can handle some abuse.worth a shot, (especially at my cost ;) )

tenpercentfirearms
11-14-2009, 11:13 PM
I disagree on this. The protest needs to be directed at the problem, which is the Officers and the field supervisors. No one at the top is telling the Officers they are allowed to search a car when they feel like it. No one at the top is telling them "mere suspicion" means a "any thing they don't like".

One of the Videos shows a Supervisor telling the drive the courts ruled that they only need "mere suspicion". Then he asks the driver what "mere" means. I bet if you look up the ruling the word "mere" is used to denote suspicion is needed and not hard evidence, and the rules of PC still apply.

The Officers and Supervisors are moving outside of their duties because they are bored. They will harass 1000 people and find 1 criminal...that not what they are there for. They are setting a precedent for searching cars the same way the Highway Patrol did in the 70s....why are you asking about guns in the car...an honest person posses no threat, a criminal will lie...so why ask? Because the officer needs to cover his *** with PC by saying the driver was suspicious when answering and since firearms pose a threat for safety, he now has a solid basis to go on a fishing trip for crimes ignoring the 4th. The LEO doesn't give a crap what you say...he is just covering his ***.

The only other alternative is to get these guys fired by using $$$ to hire lawyers...so not only are rich people the only people that can get their 4th, you now have to get some guy fired for doing what he THOUGHT he was supposed to.

Please note that once the first encounter goes wrong, the Officers let up on future encounters. This is due to the Officers getting pissed, researching the laws, and then the Supervisors advising them their true mission and how to not violate the 4th. Now everyone is happy except for the true criminal who will exhibit true suspicious behavior when stopped.

Remember, let 100 guilty go free, to avoid 1 innocent convicted..this is true for warrantless searches as well.

You will note I stated to hold them accountable and educate them. This means stand up for your rights. Telling a supervisor or line officer that their border checkpoint 50 miles inside the border is illegal and wrong is foolish at best. You better believe that they don't get a say on where that checkpoint is. They just follow orders.

And that is my point. The videos I am talking about are people protesting at the checkpoints, which isn't so bad if you are trying to notify motorists they don't have to answer questions and they should not consent to searches. If you start arguing with the BP about why they are set up there and how they are violating the law, you are wasting your time.

I guess you can show this footage to your congresscritter and maybe they will find it interesting. Or maybe they will dismiss you and move on.

The videos do serve some educational purpose to the masses, but how much and how effective I am not sure.

Nefarious
11-15-2009, 6:38 AM
I don't know where you get this non compliance B.S, but it is B.S. There is a little thing called the constitution that you may or may not have heard of. You have the right to not answer any of the officers(5th ammenment). Also you can say anything you want to the officer, as long as it is not threatening. Also you still have to have probable cause to go inside of someones vehicle and search it. I suggest you go and brush up on some laws, before you go and get your department sued.

I dont know if it was overlooked - it seems it has been - but I am NOT BP. I do NOT work at the BP checkpoint(s), I do NOT wear a green uniform, I do NOT drive around in a white and green vehicle and I do NOT stop people at checkpoints located WITHIN the United States.

I am CBP, as in Customs and Border Protection. Im the guy in the Blue uniform, driving the blue and white vehicle, stopping people comming from OUTSIDE the United States seeking admission INTO the United States. BP and CPB - along with others - are all part of DHS.

I know what I can and cannot do here at the ACTUAL border.

I was not trying to turn this thread into an argument over this or that. I now know better than to try and shed some light on situations like these

To the OP: Actually, I work both the East and the West. I enjoy the West POE more, simply because there is WAAYYYYYy more action over there :). But, cant wait to come back home. Did you eventually get the answers you were looking for?

GrizzlyGuy
11-15-2009, 9:22 AM
Judge Napolitano weighed in on this issue back in April on his Freedom Watch show. Being 'none too pleased' with the government's behavior at these internal checkpoints would be an understatement. :D

Napolitano includes an interview with Pastor Steve Anderson and shows footage from two different encounters of his with the checkpoint goons. In the first one, he was accused of being a terrorist because he refused to answer their questions, and in the second he was tazed and arrested (you all probably heard about that one already).

Anyway, fascinating stuff, you can watch Napolitano's show on this here:

http://stevenandersonfamily.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-not-comply_22.html

In the first video, skip forward to the 8 minute mark. Then watch the 2 videos that follow.

Note also that the 'constitution free zone' where these checkpoints are authorized extends 100 miles from any border, including 100 miles from our coastlines. That puts most of CA, even northern CA, within that zone. If DHS wants to setup one of these checkpoints on I-80 between SF and Sacramento (for example) they can. :mad:

Bucky G
11-15-2009, 11:00 AM
I dont know if it was overlooked - it seems it has been - but I am NOT BP. I do NOT work at the BP checkpoint(s), I do NOT wear a green uniform, I do NOT drive around in a white and green vehicle and I do NOT stop people at checkpoints located WITHIN the United States.

I am CBP, as in Customs and Border Protection. Im the guy in the Blue uniform, driving the blue and white vehicle, stopping people comming from OUTSIDE the United States seeking admission INTO the United States. BP and CPB - along with others - are all part of DHS.

I know what I can and cannot do here at the ACTUAL border.

I was not trying to turn this thread into an argument over this or that. I now know better than to try and shed some light on situations like these

To the OP: Actually, I work both the East and the West. I enjoy the West POE more, simply because there is WAAYYYYYy more action over there :). But, cant wait to come back home. Did you eventually get the answers you were looking for?

lol, yup lots more action at the west port
A knucklehead buddy of mine tried to run through that place with a carload of cocaine
you might remember that
he wasn't a drug dealer or anything, in fact we were all shocked when we heard about it, he was in desperate need of money and made the stupidest move in his life
he was calexico pd and he figured they would just wave him through, he wasn't counting on dogs being there... anyway do the crime and pay for it big time
that whole area is a real ****hole
my buddy that works the POE grew up there and now he's moved to vegas and actually commutes back and forth

oh and about the original post, they gave me the number to the Indio office and I called
They won't do anything over the phone, I have to drive all the way to Indio and let them inspect it and blah blah blah
be cheaper to let it go
haven't decided yet

Glock-matic
04-17-2010, 1:54 PM
When they ask if you if you have weapons, tell them that talking about weapons makes you uncomfortable. Don't lie, just misdirect. If they keep pushing, say I feel uncomfortable, can I leave?

Nick5811
04-18-2010, 2:02 PM
You should complain immediately as his first question to you should have been one dealing with immigration or customs as that is the purview of a CBP Border Patrol checkpoint. Border Patrol can, and will, enforce other federal laws if there is a nexus with immigration or customs violation. They will also be able to summon local law enforcement for violations encountered during their immigration and customs determination. Whether or not you think it is a violation of your rights to be stopped there is another issue all together.

After the officer determines there is no violation of federal immigration or customs laws, the officer can ask you anything as it would be engaging in a casual conversation. Most CBP Border Patrol Agents do not know s&!^ from shinola when it comes to firearms laws, federal or state. It would be wise for you to know your rights so that you can spit them out to the officer if you are given any guff.

They may send you to secondary, but they may search your vehicle only if the officer has mere suspicion of an immigration or customs violation. This is a very low burden and has been upheld by the courts. See, its all in why the officer sent you to the secondary inspection. If he sent you there because you answered his question pertaining to firearms as, "yes, I have firearms in my vehicle," and they searched your vehicle based on that, they have performed a "bad search" or an illegal search and seizure upon you and your property. If they sent you for secondary inspection and can articulate mere suspicion of an immigration or customs violation (not very difficult by the way), and they encounter a firearm that is being transported in violation of some state/local or federal law, they may take action upon it by calling local authorities in case of a state/local violation. Make sure you know the local laws governing the transport of your firearms as most Border Patrol Agents will not know this. Law enforcement, unfortunately, gets to fudge the words of the constitution, not purposefully, but because we citizens don't know our rights and think that Law Enforcement on any level, federal/state/local, does.

BTW, I am not a lawyer, I am just a concerned citizen that is quite informed of my rights and I just wanted to throw my .02 into the bucket.

The rest of you are just spitting out ignorant dribble, claiming fourth and fifth amendment privilege which actually only applies in limited circumstances. You're getting each other all riled up based on your various interpretations of portions of the constitution, CFR and USC that you happen to find on google. There is SO much case law and executive privilege that also applies to these cases that unless you worked there you wouldn't understand how it all fits together and it can be applied actually in the field at the checkpoint.

Before you sit here and spout ignorant conservative diatribe as the gospel truth, do some in-depth research! While I don't agree with that one cop saying he'd "check the *****" that gives him attitude, THEY ALL feel that way, and MOST departments will back that up with policy and training. It'll be articulated in their report and by the time you have your civil court hearing (months or years later) his reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause will be officially documented and presented as a nearly air-tight account of events compared to your laymen's recollection.

To the OP, if you don't act like a dick, you won't be treated like one. NOBODY is a bigger dick than a guy with a uniform, gun and badge who can deny your freedom of movement and f*** up your life. Sure, you MIGHT win a civil suit down the road, but much like the guy with the OLL's by LAX, you still go to jail NOW, pay bail NOW, and deal with the court system NOW. It's not worth the hassle you'll run into just to 'stand up to the man' who is only doing the job he was TRAINED to do. The Basic Academy for BP is like 22 weeks of intense Constitutional LAW training as well as immigration law and firearms/defensive tactics training. They know more about the law then you could ever hope to know, including laws you very likely don't even know exist.

RE: the Nasty Girls (nat'l guard) at the x-ray machine deleting the picture from the phone; Since 9/11 many things have changed, and photographing critical infrastructure is a very touchy subject. I'm not aware of any case law yet, but I am aware of MANY cases where people have been denied their freedom of movement and had their equipment seized as evidence after taking pictures of or on federal installations/enclaves or within their jurisdiction. Federal law enforcement is very different from municipal law enforcement, and the 'rights' you have as a citizen vary from Federal installation to State or municipal jurisdictions. For example, carrying a pocket knife with blade length longer than 3.5" can be a Federal Felony if you do it in the wrong place.

Bottom line, stop spewing BS to everyone and disguising it as fact. It does nobody any good, and will only get someone hurt.

odysseus
04-18-2010, 2:24 PM
Have we learned anything from this thread?

- Being stopped as a citizen inside the border on a normal freeway for border and customs control is lawful and you should accept it as so. You in all probably will be briefly questioned.

- They can ask you all kinds of questions about where you are going, why, and if you have weapons. You are required to answer them.

- Don't be a dick, the officers have authority and don't like it and will hassle you for questioning them, so shut up and do as you are told. Don't get upset that you are a citizen on a highway you paid for inside the US, and are routinely stopped inside the border and questioned about a lot more than if you are lawfully inside the border. Some here in the thread claiming to be officers/agents in these operations say doing this will nearly always get you to secondary inspection as a form of pay back.

- Soon, if they want to do a secondary questioning because they didn't like what you say or how things look, they will x-ray your car for anything. Also anything seen suspicious outside of just BP/Customs issues can become PC for civil LE.

??? Sounds weird.

BTW - I haven't been by one of these in a while, but when I did I wasn't been inquired about weapons. However I don't doubt it, usually things slowly get more intrusive because of "middle management" until some kind of slap down happens.

adrenalinemedic
04-18-2010, 5:43 PM
The rest of you are just spitting out ignorant dribble, claiming fourth and fifth amendment privilege which actually only applies in limited circumstances. You're getting each other all riled up based on your various interpretations of portions of the constitution, CFR and USC that you happen to find on google. There is SO much case law and executive privilege that also applies to these cases that unless you worked there you wouldn't understand how it all fits together and it can be applied actually in the field at the checkpoint.

Before you sit here and spout ignorant conservative diatribe as the gospel truth, do some in-depth research! While I don't agree with that one cop saying he'd "check the *****" that gives him attitude, THEY ALL feel that way, and MOST departments will back that up with policy and training. It'll be articulated in their report and by the time you have your civil court hearing (months or years later) his reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause will be officially documented and presented as a nearly air-tight account of events compared to your laymen's recollection.

To the OP, if you don't act like a dick, you won't be treated like one. NOBODY is a bigger dick than a guy with a uniform, gun and badge who can deny your freedom of movement and f*** up your life. Sure, you MIGHT win a civil suit down the road, but much like the guy with the OLL's by LAX, you still go to jail NOW, pay bail NOW, and deal with the court system NOW. It's not worth the hassle you'll run into just to 'stand up to the man' who is only doing the job he was TRAINED to do. The Basic Academy for BP is like 22 weeks of intense Constitutional LAW training as well as immigration law and firearms/defensive tactics training. They know more about the law then you could ever hope to know, including laws you very likely don't even know exist.

RE: the Nasty Girls (nat'l guard) at the x-ray machine deleting the picture from the phone; Since 9/11 many things have changed, and photographing critical infrastructure is a very touchy subject. I'm not aware of any case law yet, but I am aware of MANY cases where people have been denied their freedom of movement and had their equipment seized as evidence after taking pictures of or on federal installations/enclaves or within their jurisdiction. Federal law enforcement is very different from municipal law enforcement, and the 'rights' you have as a citizen vary from Federal installation to State or municipal jurisdictions. For example, carrying a pocket knife with blade length longer than 3.5" can be a Federal Felony if you do it in the wrong place.

Bottom line, stop spewing BS to everyone and disguising it as fact. It does nobody any good, and will only get someone hurt.

****ing. Thank. You.

Some of you 'experts' would do well to spend some time on the job before you start telling cops whats what. I also notice a lot of "Well I would do this" and "I would say that" instead of "I did this" and "I said that." I would bet good money that a majority of the tough guys nod, smile, and comply absolutely when they encounter law enforcement.

But whatever. I'm fire, my fiance is a cop, and you people keep us employed. We should probably thank you.

Oh, and to the guy questioning the credibility of a soldier solely on his wearing mechanix gloves, your ignorance is showing. Bad. If you've ever served overseas, you definitely haven't done so in the last decade. The days of "Delta wants to wear Oakley's, thats their business" are long gone.

Cokebottle
04-18-2010, 5:55 PM
Geez... this thread WAS dead and buried since last November.

Just curious why regular members who question procedures in the LEO forum get threatened with being banned, but LEO who pull "Respect Mah Authoritay" in 2A and other forums get a pass.

Oh well....

odysseus
04-18-2010, 6:08 PM
Some of you 'experts' would do well to spend some time on the job before you start telling cops whats what. I also notice a lot of "Well I would do this" and "I would say that" instead of "I did this" and "I said that." I would bet good money that a majority of the tough guys nod, smile, and comply absolutely when they encounter law enforcement.

I am not speaking for said experts, but what isn't good is to personalize into yourself a discussion like this. Especially on the internet. These discussions breakdown because on either "side" of the issue, someone becomes agitated taking something personally, and then makes wide aspersions about motive and such, setting off a rally back and forth.

Questioning authority and use of it in LE on its face is not an attack on LE itself, nor the officer personally. Yes, there are some on here that do due that and they themselves would be at fault for doing so.

Thus real conversation about the merits of something like this, use/abuse of power, Constitutional law, real life experience, repercussions, crime, money spent, social division, etc. kind of just get glossed over.

thevic
04-18-2010, 6:42 PM
adding to the whole bein asked if you are carryin any weapons...

One night i was posted up at a "vista point" on an undeveloped lot looking over the bay area smoking a cigar. i park my car behind a hill because uually police come in and ask you what you are up to if the see it. a car full of kids park about 50 yards away from me out in plain sight. i already knew this was all bad. 10 minutes later hillsborough police pull into the lot and stop at the kids car and they begin to search it. im asuming the kids were smoke marijuana so the smell or what not gave the cops permission to search, whatever. an officer approaches my truck, asks what im up to and if i know the kids. i reply " no i was just enjoying a smoke and those idiots parked out in the open and ruined that". so the says " okay, do you have anything illegal or weapons?". i say " just an axe" ( im in the gardening business but i did not mention this). the officer laughs and says "hahaha axe body spray! allright get out of here before my supervisor shows up."...lol

another time i was pulled over because of a brake light out, Officer asks if i have any weapons (im assuming because of the HK sticker on my rear window. i look to my back seat and say "uhhh not at the moment".."have a good day sir" ahah

theres been other small incidents, but ive always found being polite and talk friendly with the officer is always a good outcome

chiselchst
04-18-2010, 7:37 PM
Man, I am totally blown away from on this issue, clicking on MANY links going much deeper & deeper, with mucho time spent learning.

What an education this has been. I thank ALL of you, that had, and have had the courage to exercise their rights, and share your experience with the rest of us.

Great education, linking to many friends here.

Thanks!