Welcome to Arizona

[theyarecomingforyou]

He's not being stopped for that... checkpoints are for ensuring there aren't drugs or a fiesta of illegal amigos in your trunk.

And that would be equally unjustified. There is an assumption of innocence until proven guilty and police are not allowed to go on fishing expeditions in order to search out crimes. Otherwise what's to stop the police going from door to door and searching every home in order to ensure that no laws are being broken?

As sensationalist as it sounds, Nazi Germany really is the most appropriate comparison here.

[mokthraka]

Thus dude s a complete and total sack of ****. Seriously you say yes and move along.

Here's how mine goes.

Immigration Officer: Citizen?

Me: Yes

IO: Have a nice day.

Before anyone says anything I am originally Mexican and look Mexican and have a Mexican accent.

In the time he spent arguing he could have been 3 miles up the road.

seriously, my dad has never complained about getting pulled over. people like making big problems out of small ones.

[ArialBlue]

So I am watching a video of some ******* who doesn't have identification...

... I don't get it.

[andrewbares]

And that would be equally unjustified. There is an assumption of innocence until proven guilty and police are not allowed to go on fishing expeditions in order to search out crimes. Otherwise what's to stop the police going from door to door and searching every home in order to ensure that no laws are being broken?

As sensationalist as it sounds, Nazi Germany really is the most appropriate comparison here.

So then DUI checkpoints are unjustified?? That's the same, police shouldn't be going out searching for drunk people according to you.

Fact is, this is a drug cartel area and also a heavy immigration area. We have border patrol on the border, and we have them here. This is how we protect our border.

[rfirth]

I was talking about turning around before a police STATION and a border security checkpoint, not a police checkpoint. Read again.

No, you weren't. This is what you said:

He has the full ability to turn around and not drive through that checkpoint before he reaches it, just like if he were a murderer he has the full ability to not walk into a police station where his face could be identified as the murderer.

You said that he has the full ability to turn around and not drive through that checkpoint before he reaches it. Let's ignore the fact that he had to drive through a total of three checkpoints that day. These aren't border security checkpoints... they aren't on any border...

He does not have the full ability to turn around at a checkpoint. They will follow you. It's suspicious activity.

Besides, driving down the road is different from walking into a police station. Driving down the road is an every day activity of an innocent person. A murderer walking into a police station... you have to be going out of your way to walk into a police station. One does not simply walk into a police station.

Lastly, you're comparing innocent people to murderers.

So when I fly on an airplane I shouldn't have to show my license right???????

That's for passenger safety... to make sure you're not on the no-fly list.

But since you brought up airlines, you also don't have the right to turn around at an airport checkpoint. Just by entering an airport, you agree to be searched. And if you are selected to be searched - even a strip search - you can't refuse.

Checkpoints are for making sure there are no drugs and that there aren't 20 people in the back of your van. They're not for just asking "are you a citizen". They have drug dogs there and they always check through your windows.

That's fine. I'm ok with the drug dogs. I'm also ok with DUI checkpoints. I'm not ok with them searching for 20 people in the back of your van. That's an illegal search without a warrant. It's ok to do that on the border, but not on random streets.

And no, he's wrong thinking that "I'm in America, I should be able to travel freely". That's like "I killed someone but I'm in America, I should be able to not be arrested for it", or "I illegally immigrated to America and I'm here illegally, but I'm in America and should be able to do whatever I want".

If you think the right to travel freely is the same as requesting the right to not be arrested for murder is the same... you just can argue that and be serious.

[andrewbares]

You said that he has the full ability to turn around and not drive through that checkpoint before he reaches it. Let's ignore the fact that he had to drive through a total of three checkpoints that day. These aren't border security checkpoints... they aren't on any border...

They are BORDER SECURITY checkpoints. The people there are NOT police officers. They work for Border Security.

He does not have the full ability to turn around at a checkpoint. They will follow you. It's suspicious activity.

Oh I highly doubt that. Their job is to sit there and patrol that one location, not go after people who made a wrong turn.

That's fine. I'm ok with the drug dogs. I'm also ok with DUI checkpoints. I'm not ok with them searching for 20 people in the back of your van. That's an illegal search without a warrant. It's ok to do that on the border, but not on random streets.

Looking through someone's visible windows is NOT illegal. Sorry but you need to learn more about laws. If an officer sees me drinking a bottle of beer while driving, he can pull me over. If border patrol sees a bunch of people suspiciously hiding in the back, they can inquire about it.

[PALMERx64]

Showing papers = Nazi Germany? I forgot that's the only country in the world that has ever had a system where people have papers for birth records... -.-

If he really wanted to be on his way, he would have said "yes" and continued driving. Or if he wanted to retain his right to not answer questions, drive away after asking if he is being detained (since the answer was obviously no). I've seen people with cameras do it before, and authorities can't stop you for not acknowledging them or answering any question they throw at you on the spot, which is why they told him to go after they realized he was just going to continue to not answer...

At the same time, he is in the right for not answering in the first place, but he could have left earlier than that and they could not have done ****.. Apparently a lot of people don't know that if someone asks (key word, asks) to search you/your vehicle/your house anything real to go off of, you can just say no and you are good to go- a lot of people think you have to sit there and say yes to everything because they have a badge. So in some light it is good that things like this happen, so it is on YT for others to see... Fight fire with fire, if they try to monitor and keep their thumb on everything, keep a camera on you and monitor them so people know what really happened.

P.S.I think DHS and border patrol are just focusing in the wrong area- they claim to be trying to stop illegal immigration but they should mainly be on the border, not having multiple checkpoints in one area. If an illegal immigrant sees one checkpoint, they are not seeing a second or third one.

Anyways, it's not "Nazi" style. This is just what an overly complex system slowly turning to a federal state looks like. Too many laws and rules allow people to expand their own pay, since that's all people care about now, apparently.

There is always probable cause. There are so many laws today that at any given moment any one person is in violation of one. The cop will say he smelled marijuana or crack on your breath and that's enough probable cause to the local judge who happens to be the uncle of the cop. If a New Yorker is driving through Missouri, you will be arrested for talking about rights or all that jazz to the? cops. That's reality. All else is smoke in the wind. Fair/Unfair is for kindergarten.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

There is an assumption of innocence until proven guilty

(Y) Exactly!

And the DHS has said that they have a new presumption now that everyone is potentially a terrorist. There's been a 180 degrees shift in the way the government deals with its citizens in the U.S.

[PALMERx64]

If anyone is confused about my last post and which way I am leaning on this... Sorry, I tend to ramble when I'm tired.

It's the attitude difference. The video of the guy OP linked to is getting an attitude and antagonizing them.

(Y) Exactly!

And the DHS has said that they have a new presumption now that everyone is potentially a terrorist. There's been a 180 degrees shift in the way the government deals with its citizens in the U.S.

DHS, Sheriff or local police- you still don't have to answer it without probable cause.

Assuming that everyone is a terrorist does not mean right or reason to detain. Assumption has no place in law, anywhere. If you use the word "Assume" at any time in any form of hearing, court session or other legal session, you basically lose as soon as that comes up.

[theyarecomingforyou]

So then DUI checkpoints are unjustified?? That's the same, police shouldn't be going out searching for drunk people according to you.

Yes, if they're stopping people without any suspicion of guilt. It's one thing to pull over a driver they suspect is drunk; it's another to stop people without cause in the hope that they're committing a crime.

Unfortunately, Americans - especially in the border states - have been conditioned to believe that stopping drugs and illegal immigrants is more important than their rights and freedoms. Nobody should be defending such a grossly invasive abuse of power. I have yet to see any compelling reason as to why such checks are justified and I'm surprised that people are defending them.

It's the attitude difference. The video of the guy OP linked to is getting an attitude and antagonizing them.

In the video you posted they simply moved on, which isn't what happened to the guy in the OP. But again, the very fact that such a question is being asked is abhorrent.

[MDboyz]

They should just beat the **** out of him. They only want a simple answer. Some people just ask for trouble. When they get it, they will cry like a baby.

Thus dude s a complete and total sack of ****. Seriously you say yes and move along.

Here's how mine goes.

Immigration Officer: Citizen?

Me: Yes

IO: Have a nice day.

Before anyone says anything I am originally Mexican and look Mexican and have a Mexican accent.

In the time he spent arguing he could have been 3 miles up the road.

[theyarecomingforyou]

They should just beat the **** out of him. They only want a simple answer. Some people just ask for trouble. When they get it, they will cry like a baby.

You're suggesting that assault is an appropriate response to refusing to answer a question? I seriously question the sanity of a lot of people on these forums.

[ylcard]

Yes, if they're stopping people without any suspicion of guilt. It's one thing to pull over a driver they suspect is drunk; it's another to stop people without cause in the hope that they're committing a crime.

Unfortunately, Americans - especially in the border states - have been conditioned to believe that stopping drugs and illegal immigrants is more important than their rights and freedoms. Nobody should be defending such a grossly invasive abuse of power. I have yet to see any compelling reason as to why such checks are justified and I'm surprised that people are defending them.

In the video you posted they simply moved on, which isn't what happened to the guy in the OP. But again, the very fact that such a question is being asked is abhorrent.

My god you are living in a ****ing bubble, get off whatever medications you're taking and face reality.

You don't need to have any suspicions to stop someone and ask them for their ID, you might think it is against your rights, but that doesn't make it so, just because you think so.

The DUI checks are NOT operating on a suspicion base, it has nothing to do with "oh I think he might be drunk" and everything with statistics and probability, that's why it is (more) common to find such check points at night and around bars or places that serve alcohol, they don't just pick a dead road and stand there and turn on their suspicion radars on.

They don't have a magical wand that detects alcohol 500 meters away.

Same goes to other checkpoints, routine questions are asked to see the driver's reaction, for example - if they speak English. It might shock you, but illegal immigrants might not know English very well, while citizens do. You can tell just by the way a person answers if he's being truthful or if he's hiding something, you wouldn't know a single ****ing clue about it as it's dead obvious that you're a clueless liberal fighting for whatever is cool these days.

The guy in the video is a total douchebag, and it matters not what his occupation is, he is filming the whole encounter which suggests, no - proves, that he intended to cause a provocation, he started talking about "proving" something when he was not asked to do such a thing, he was merely asked if he was a citizen, and you could hear it in his voice that he's nervous as ****, trying to stick it to the system by exercising his right to be a dick.

Checkpoints in no way diminish any of your rights, it's like saying waiting in line does, because they MADE YOU WAIT. Or having to show ID in a liquor store, or a bank, HOW DARE THEY?

Sorry for bursting your bubble.

[theyarecomingforyou]

My god you are living in a ****ing bubble, get off whatever medications you're taking and face reality.

I don't know what your problem is but this isn't the first time you've directly insulted me and you typically do so in an incredibly rude and unsophisticated manner. Nothing I said warranted such a hostile response.

Anyway, I've made my position quite clear. I believe that such checkpoints are a very bad way to enforce drug and migration policies. Even setting aside the justification for such a check they are hugely inconvenient, costly, intimidating to legal citizens and ineffective. Immigration is best tackled through employers and non-disruptive measures, like using automatic licence plate recognition to flag vehicles that don't have current information (they had to get the vehicle from somewhere and they're usually not borrowed from law abiding citizens).

The guy in the video is a total douchebag, and it matters not what his occupation is, he is filming the whole encounter which suggests, no - proves, that he intended to cause a provocation, he started talking about "proving" something when he was not asked to do such a thing, he was merely asked if he was a citizen, and you could hear it in his voice that he's nervous as ****, trying to stick it to the system by exercising his right to be a dick.

I never claimed he wasn't a "total douchebag" and openly accepted he was being confrontational but he filmed it because he was making a point and wanted to ensure if he was arrested that he had proof of his innocence (specifically, that he didn't break any laws). There have been numerous cases recently of police in the US making up offences in order to arrest people.

I see checkpoints as an example of politicking - they're not designed to address the actual issue at hand but to make it look like the state / government is doing something about it. They are deliberately intimidating and should only be used as a last resort, as soon people become complacent with such checks and you quickly end up with a fascist state.

PS - My brother travelled through the US on his way to South America and was asked whether he was a Muslim by US airport security, simply because of the necklace he was wearing (he bought it in Jordan). It's an example of the widespread xenophobia that is rife in US culture. It's a very dangerous attitude that the US has towards Muslims (and illegal immigrants), similar in many ways to how the Nazi Party portrayed Jews during the 1930-40s.

[andrewbares]

Anyway, I've made my position quite clear. I believe that such checkpoints are a very bad way to enforce drug and migration policies. Even setting aside the justification for such a check they are hugely inconvenient, costly, intimidating to legal citizens and ineffective. Immigration is best tackled through employers and non-disruptive measures, like using automatic licence plate recognition to flag vehicles that don't have current information (they had to get the vehicle from somewhere and they're usually not borrowed from law abiding citizens).

If you don't like it, then start a bill about it and try to get it passed removing the checkpoints. It's a democracy after all.

[Richteralan]

I was expecting something fun/interesting but it turned out was a bunch of dbags boring dialog.

[Growled Member]

I guess we need the jobs but for the life of me I don't understand why we are making border security such a huge issue. We have millions of illegals here now. What is one or two more when we obviously are not really serious about ending the problem.