February 27, 2013

Resisting government intrusions: Top DHS Checkpoint Refusals

Last evening over beers I spoke with our town’s Mayor and tried to impress upon him the utter impotence of any kind of universal registration law that wasn’t attached to a gun registry. My concern is that a State Trooper, eg., can pull me over on my way to or from the gun range — for, say, a busted tail light — and, seeing a rifle bag or weapons bag in my truck, claim he has a right to inspect my weapons for illegal magazines.

As there is no way to prove when I purchased the magazines — either pre or post ban (unless I’m henceforth required to carry receipts with me) — it is then his discretion that determines if he will seize my weapons, my magazines, and my ammo, forcing me to prove (somehow) that I owned them before the ban took effect.

Remember: he has no way to check this if in fact the magazines came standard with the weapons and background checks are being destroyed after 24 hours as is required by law; and with any other aftermarket magazines he has no way of determining when they were purchased: just because Colorado is demanding Magpul microstamp new mags (which they won’t do) doesn’t mean that I couldn’t have purchased older magazines post ban, or newer magazines legally in, say, Utah or Wyoming.

The point being — and this was illustrated time and again during the Colorado House assembly debates — this is a law that is unenforcible save by sheer police-state tactics that violate 4th, 5th, and 2nd Amendment protections; and it is a law that gives unconstitutional powers to police, should they determine that the weapons or magazines that I have a natural and Constitutional right to own can be seized until I’m able to prove my innocence, often at great expense in time and treasure, having first been presumed guilty for owning what is legal to own.

So what we need to be doing now, as citizens being greeted by the emergence of a police state, is to know our rights and be able to articulate them when confronted by bald police-state powers. Refusal to grant searches, or demands for identification, etc., — having a gun in your vehicle is not probable cause to require you to show papers, I don’t believe, if discovery of the weapons is the result of some sort of checkpoint stop — will be crucial in teaching law enforcement, be they local, state, or federal, that there are limits on what they can and cannot demand of us.

Resist we much. And we must. Because fuck them.

Posted by Jeff G. @ 9:15am
81 comments | Trackback

Comments (81)

  1. fascism is so disappointing

    not a one of these fascist little pension whore piggies in the video are making a contribution to anyone’s security are they

    nope

  2. Even when you follow all the rules and fill out the proper paperwork you can end up having your property seized: http://tinyurl.com/a88vrng

  3. don’t worry there’s another hill just around the bend

    Senate GOP ponders ceding power to President Obama

  4. this is a law that is unenforcible save by sheer police-state tactics that violate 4th, 5th, and 2nd Amendment protections; and it is a law that gives unconstitutional powers to police

    Not to divert the discussion, but the phenomenon of contemporary law nullifying prior constitutional right is rife in America.

    In my home state there was as of the Eighties a law on the books making it mandatory to sue any public official who violates a citizen. Lien his house lien his property.

    So I ask again, why are the statists running these illegal institutions not being prosecuted? All of them, at all levels, and in all instances. Why isn’t official negligence against the citizen’s constitutional rights actionable?

  5. Things like this,
    http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00934587000P?sid=IDx01192011x000001&kispla=00934587000P&srccode=cii_17588969&cpncode=30-120556605-2
    make good range bags for handguns. Don’t draw any undue attention and work great.

    Still looking for ideas for shotguns.

  6. Forgetting guns for a minute, it sounds like the protein wisdom crowd is ok with people not proving they are American. That does not sit well with me.

  7. FWIW it’s worth, Kevin, I admit I’m not okay that you’ve just proved you aren’t an American. That doesn’t sit well with me.

  8. a contribution to anyone’s security are they

    Yes they are, and it is the only point that matters to them and their bosses. They are making a contribution to their own job security.

    Our Federal as it exists now has one main priority, to extract money from private citizens which then is used to provide overpaid jobs to those who will then support enlarging the government more because otherwise their gravy job goes away. Like the ATF at Waco they are trying to prove they are needed. This too will not end well for everyone.

    Governor Lepetomane writ large, “gentlemen”.

  9. This is the way the progressive worldview ends, not with a whimper but with a bang.

  10. That Zavala guy made my skin crawl.

    He had all the Big Ape traits you see in Jane Goodall’s chimpanzee documentaries: imposing size, barking voice and looming menace. But, unlike his furry antecedents, this Zavala guy has been awarded an office with REAL authority over me and mine.

    Imagine what damage he could wreak on free Americans if he had a battalion of UN troops under him!

    Can we get that guy fired?

  11. If somehow the feds had evidence that led them to suspect I’m not an American citizen, they would have a basis for asking me to prove that I am. But once I’d satisfied them, I’d damn well have the right to know what led them to that suspicion, and to do everything in my power to have the source of that suspicion held responsible for the false accusation.

    The mere fact that I’m driving on a highway within x miles of the border doesn’t obligate me to tell them a damn thing.

  12. Kevin,
    It’s worth remembering that American freedoms apply to anyone willing to strive for them. Many Mexican citizens in border states might prefer to enjoy inalienable rights, if only we’d push the border South to embrace them.

    Sonora, Baja and Chihuahua states’d likely approve a Puerto-Rico-style referendum and adoption of American jurisprudential practices. They would, that is, if Mexico City’d let their prefects openly air the idea in the press.

    Instead, it’s Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and California (tnjaf) that are yielding to Latin jurisprudence, such as presumed guilt, mob-rule and celebrity worship. Let’s get the ball back near the Latins’ net – they should be on the defensive, not we

  13. Forgetting guns for a minute, it sounds like the protein wisdom crowd is ok with people not proving they are American. That does not sit well with me.

    At an “immigration checkpoint” (or more accurately, fishing expedition), 50 miles from the nearest US border?

    That does not sit well with me.

    What part of “unconstitutional search” are you not comprehending? Or are you a staunch believer that all American subjects should have their papers and travel permits in order and be prepared to show them whenever and wherever their benevolent leaders deign them to?

  14. on this let us all agree. fuck the police state. . . and there is nothing progressive about what is in that video – that is the stark, terrifying reversal of progressive positive rights.

  15. it sounds like the protein wisdom crowd is ok with people not proving they are American. That does not sit well with me.

    Under the circumstances portrayed above? Stopping everyone and asking them about citizenship for no reason?

    That’s exactly the scenario that people warned us about when Arizona enacted that law. We all pointed out that cops couldn’t inquire after citizenship status unless they had detained the person for another reason.

    Driving along a road is NOT probable cause for detention.

  16. Just wish we could have seen more of the exchange with the officer who claimed he knew the Constitution better than the driver did. I suspect there would have been some comedy gold in that back and forth.

  17. Forgetting guns for a minute, it sounds like the protein wisdom crowd is ok with people not proving they are American. That does not sit well with me.

    Well, that’s just too bad, steveaz. As an American citizen I am not obligated to provide any Troopers with my papers upon demand.

  18. Jhoward, don’t be your normal douchebag self. This is a serious issue. That video may tangentially give info about gun laws ( fyi I support only the second amendment. No new laws need to be added), but it more importantly highlights the need for MORE power to be given to ICE.

    There is simply no way to enforce the border or prevent invasion of illegal aliens if an enforcer can’t demand proof of citizenship. Are you guys against this?

  19. A key point in the vid is that the guy kept his cool, saying “No, thank you,” instead of letting loose with a string of profanities. “Am I being detained?” and “Am I free to go?” were the pressure points he used to persuade the officers to let him go anyway.

  20. <i.on this let us all agree. fuck the police state. . . and there is nothing progressive about what is in that video – that is the stark, terrifying reversal of progressive positive rights.

    Dale, this is what you guys wanted Comrade. It’s not so pretty when those teeth and guns are in your face not ours, is it?

  21. stoopid html FAIL

  22. here is simply no way to enforce the border or prevent invasion of illegal aliens if an enforcer can’t demand proof of citizenship

    Like hell there isn’t.

    Enforce the employment laws and stop giving food stamps to non-citizens.

    Given the black market in “proof of citizenship,” it’s not hard to foil the agents at the checkstops.

  23. it more importantly highlights the need for MORE power to be given to _____

    There is not a single city, county. state or Federal agency, bureau or department that this statement could be applied to. Just the opposite, in fact. Replace MORE with LESS and I think we can give you a whole mess of acronyms to fill in the blank.

  24. Forgetting guns for a minute, it sounds like the protein wisdom crowd is ok with people not proving they are American.

    I’m OK with Americans not having to prove anything unless they’re undertaking some act that merits such proof.

  25. also I don’t think it should be a private employer’s job to verify citizenship of people what apply to work at their company

    maybe some of these thuggy road pigs could be civilized to where they could handle that job

  26. There is simply no way to enforce the border or prevent invasion of illegal aliens if an enforcer can’t demand proof of citizenship.

    They’re not enforcing the border. They’re not at the border in these clips. Of course you show ID to enter the country. But not to drive down the highway.

  27. Apropos Jeff’s comment about not knowing when and where the magazines were purchased, Magpul flips the bird to the state of Colorado lawmakers before departing the state.

  28. This is a serious issue.

    What is, Kevin? Systematic intimidation pursuing warrantless interstate border detentions and searches of persons and properties based on an unfounded presumption of guilt? Funny, I thought I’d alluded to the seriousness of such.

    That video may tangentially give info about gun laws ( fyi I support only the second amendment. No new laws need to be added), but it more importantly highlights the need for MORE power to be given to ICE.

    Horseshit. International borders and passports in specific cases are fine. Pursuant that, and as dicentra also corrected you, borders do not conflate to immigration, especially state borders.

    Jhoward, don’t be your normal douchebag self.

    Funny, if I were to employ the principle of hitting back twice as hard against such empty rhetoric, douchebag would hardly cover it.

  29. <there is simply no way to enforce the border or prevent invasion of illegal aliens if an enforcer can’t demand proof of citizenship

    What dicentra said. If you take away the employment and free money incentives, the only mass border migration you’ll have will be in the Southernly direction.

    What many of the “path to citizenship” crowd forgets is that a sizable number of illegal immigrants in the US have ZERO interest in becoming American citizens or assimilating into our country. They just want to earn a living and send the money home to their dirt-poor families in Mexico and Central America. There’s a reason that remittances from the US (between $1-2 billion per month)are the number one source of revenue in the Mexican economy, surpassing even their oil industry.

    If people know that they can’t come to the US to make money and send it home, they won’t bother coming in the first place.

  30. Whos is this Kevin dude and where does he get off calling you a ‘douchebag’, JHo?

    He strikes me as an ignorant of our USC surrender monkey.

  31. Zavala?

    Sounds Mexican. I would like to see his identification.

  32. also I don’t think it should be a private employer’s job to verify citizenship of people what apply to work at their company

    As long as in practice it’s no more onerous than checking a person’s references or confirming prior work history I have no problem with it. Nor should any business manager or owner.

    Why do you?

  33. cause if the thuggy fascists working for this failshit little country can’t police its border at the border then the onus shouldn’t fall on non-fascist normal americans to do it for them I don’t think

  34. I don’t like employers being culpable for hiring illegals, either. It is possible that the hires have false papers/id and the employer was none the wiser. The employer shouldn’t have a lein put on or worse have his business confiscated by the Feds who are quite obviously dropping the ball on the immigration court.

    It may not be an attractive sight, but I don’t care if we build a regular Checkpoint Charlie on both our Northern and Southern borders. Certinly, person here illegally should not be eligable for social services such as EBT, cash assistance and free medical care.

    Illegal aliens cost us much in the way of healthcare. Not only are they coming here to have anchor babies, but they are unvaccinated and spread disease. For instance, when I was in college, I worked as a waitress at a Mexican restaurant in Santa Barbara for a summer. We had many Mexican nationals who worked as busboys and dishwashers and none of them had Green Cards.

    During the course of three months, the entire staff of the restaurant was sent to the health clinic three times to have a TB skin scratch done. TB is highly contagious and is often found in persons from underdeveloped countries. It is passed on through particles in the air and can be deadly if not treated. (TB germs have been known to remain “alive” on a dry surface for over one year, for example.)

    Three dishwashers tested positive, but all of us had to be treated and our restaurant, which wa a humdred year old landmark, was in danger of losing its license. All this, not to mention the threat to public health just by the presence of these three interacting with the community in their everyday lives. Who knows how many in the city, how many visitors were infected that summer?

  35. TB is terrifying I was watching people paw the romas at vallarta this weekend and I thought to myself omg I really need to scrub these babies when i get home

  36. Respect microbes, happy. They outnumber us by the billions.

  37. for mexican in santa barbara me and NG like La Super-Rica Taqueria … maybee told us about it once

    i took my obamawhore friend J once and she got all snooty and would only eat the guacamole cause she saw a fly

    I don’t talk to J anymore

  38. leigh
    Dale, this is what you guys wanted Comrade. It’s not so pretty when those teeth and guns are in your face not ours, is it?

    I strongly doubt anything that goes on in Arizona is what “we” wanted, and certainly not the AZ ‘show me your papers beaner’ undocumented immigrant strategy. As far as guns/teeth go 1. paranoid fantasy and 2. way to ruin the moment.

  39. Don’t lie, Dale. you progs are all closet commies.

    If you could round up the rest of us and put us in forced labor camps, you’d be thrilled to death.

  40. As far as guns/teeth go 1. paranoid fantasy and 2. way to ruin the moment.

    If that were coherent I suspect it’d be denying that any of these instances were anything but staged, amirite? Throw us a bone because as it’s worded it makes no sense.

  41. Don’t lie, Dale. you progs are all closet commies.

    Yeah leigh, gulags just make me wet. Hence why I’m giving props to this #outlaw dude fucking with the police apparatus. I love watching minorities being abused by the police, that’s just so progressive. It’s super weak sauce you’re serving.

  42. I don’t like employers being culpable for hiring illegals, either

    Nor do I, and I don’t think they should be held accountable if a potential employee has fake papers or the federal database is hosed. I do think they should be able to easily check a database like eVerify and print out a page showing the results of the check at the time it was done, stick that page in the employee’s file and forget about it. If the database is inaccurate or flawed, it’s not their problem.

    But let’s make a minimal effort at least.

  43. Don’t lie, Dale. you progs are all closet commies.

    Deke is free to erect a progg manifesto here, the planet’s first. Many have been asked but none yet risen to the honor. Oddly.

    Go ahead and make history, Deke.

  44. I enjoyed the moment Dale. I think the point Leigh was inelegantly trying to make was there is Irony in your statement since you support the progressive agenda, which is pushing us towards a police state.

    Leigh made the mistake of assuming you care about the ultimate destination of the road you travel, when really all you care about is the journey of self-righteousness. Where the road leads is simply beyond your imagining.

  45. When I re-entered the States from Canada back in 1999 after driving down from Outer Palintopia, the border agent at Sweetgrass asked me a handful of questions, the last of which was whether I was U.S. citizen. I answered each truthfully even as I was aware of other vehicles at the border station being subjected to full searches. To my citizenship answer of “Yes” he said, “Welcome back” and let me drive on.

    Had I then been waved to the side of the road 50 miles south of there to be re-interviewed by border agents, I would have wanted to know how it was that after being waved over the border just 45 minutes ago I was suddenly crossing it again.

  46. Hi Leigh!

    Not sure how a discussion about border patrolmen harrassing licensed motorists miles from a border devolved into one about tuberculosis.

    Something for the Children, I’ll guess. Like about the interdiction of Americans being like the USDA interdicting uninvited E. coliform frass and tuburculosis spores before they infect our kitchens.

    But it can’t be that, right? B’cuz then the US Citizen = a germ, and the BP-guys=our immune response. We call that an “autoimmune disease” in the medical trades. And leukemia and HIV/AIDS are just two popularized epidemiological analogs to this.

    Clearly, Leigh, you’re not proposing that citizens lawfully driving on public roads constitute a threat to the body politic, are you? If you do, Kevin I will have to disagree.

  47. dale the khunter is really quite dense. Oh, and you all are racists, because dale the Khunt said beaner.

  48. steveaz, you’re in over your head when it comes to medicine, so give it a rest all right.

    I was referring tangentially to the costs of having illegal aliens illegally entering the country. That would be because it’s all of a piece with doing patchwork fixes such as this harassment on the roads. The problems of illegal immigration and its costs to our society are myriad and disease is but one example.

  49. They do these checkpoints because Profiling Is Bad™ which means if they only stop people who are behaving like lawbreakers and too many of them happen to be Latinos, they’ll get sued — even if every single person they stop is a lawbreaker and they catch all of the lawbreakers.

    That’s why somebody who looks, sounds and acts like he’s a seventh-generation Wisconsinite has to be questioned about his citizenship when all he was doing was going about his business on a public road. Because if he didn’t want to be harassed by Elmer Fed he should have stayed more than 50 miles from the border.

  50. Hmm, I dunno. DiCentra has an ok first step (won’t work against someone who comes here specifically to harm Americans), but it sounds like most of you think that if an alien successfully gets through the border he should never be asked to prove his citizenship again.

  51. No, Kevin. The border should not be porous. You have to prove citizenship to hold a job, get a driver’s license and cash a check. If you have no business in this country, you shouldn’t be allowed to cross the border.

  52. it sounds like most of you think that if an alien successfully gets through the border he should never be asked to prove his citizenship again.

    I see what you’re doing there: you’re demonstrating that whole “adversarial misinterpretation” thing that Jeff has written so much about railed so consistently against.

    Claiming to find an inane and false meaning in what we’re saying — excellent portrayal of a typical progtard troll! Bravo, sir!

  53. people adversarially misinterpret me here all the time but I forgive them

  54. maybe if you punctuated and left out the misogyny and cupcakes and oh look something shiny

  55. Adversarially maybe, but the “mis” part of the interpreting, chirpy? Not so much.

  56. i um

    i feel judged

  57. i thought we said we weren’t gonna judge

  58. An interesting situation , isn’t it? Where we sit it’s 62 miles north to the Border Patrol’s immigration checkpoint south of Alpine, TX. We go through the checkpoint all the time and they do ask if we’re US citizens. But we’re anglos and and we have Wyoming tags on the truck so we’ve never been asked to produce “papers” of any kind. It’s no big deal for us. But for our Hispanic friends, some of whose families have lived on this side of the Rio Grande since it belonged to Mexico? Not so much. If I were them I’d be furious.

    But oddly enough, they save their most obnoxious treatment for our Canadian friends. Pull up with Ontario plates on your vehicle and they still ask if you’re a US citizen.. duh. “No”. Okay, pull over, show passports, get the third degree regarding your itinerary and on, and on. It’s almost as if it’s more about justifying their phony baloney jobs than anything to do with illegals.

  59. but it sounds like most of you think that if an alien successfully gets through the border he should never be asked to prove his citizenship again.

    Nope, not it at all.

  60. It’s almost as if it’s more about justifying their phony baloney jobs than anything to do with illegals.

    I think you’re on to something there, Swen.

  61. Leigh,

    No, Kevin. The border should not be porous. You have to prove citizenship to hold a job, get a driver’s license and cash a check.”

    So if you come here without the intention of getting a job or driving a car, you can’t be checked?

    McGeehee, Jeff, that’s not it at all. I’m just admitting that I’m only slightly libertarian. There have to be checks, or the idea of being American would be just that – an idea. No real meaning. Anyone who successfully sneaks through the border can’t be questioned. Again, I’m not ok with that.

    Since I’m already in the doghouse (as I always seem to be whenever I speak here at protein wisdom), I might as well go all out. Jeff, you should change your avatar. It’s an image of someone who is criminally insane and has raped and murdered people. I kinda get that it’s a funny reference to a goofy cult movie, but I don’t think most people who aren’t fans of this site will. It could easily be used against you if someone suggested that you share that creepy guy’s values. Hmm, I may have to rethink my A-10 avatar…

  62. You need a work Visa to get across the border. One that states the name of your employer, not just your intention to look for a job once you get waved through.

    That is what I meant by the border should not be porous. Your other questions are hinged on a basic and deliberate misunderstanding of this principle.

  63. yeah no means no

  64. “You need a work Visa to get across the border”

    Completely untrue :(. You just need legs. I can see now that you’ve never walked across the border. I have done it 3 times. Twice in Brownsville and once in Laredo. You just get in a long line and pass by a border guy who looks at you angrily (he was angry all 3 times) but says nothing. It takes about 10 minutes, and you’re in.

    To be fair, it is the same on the Mexican side. They check nothing and don’t ask for ID.

  65. Kevin, are you saying we should all have to show our papers on demad at any time, or just brown people

  66. It’s almost as if it’s more about justifying their phony baloney jobs than anything to do with illegals. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=47630#comment-961705

    Thus, Guv LePetomane.*

  67. Now that is weird.

  68. L.Bascom, why does skin color play a part?

  69. A quote seems to add in a link to the previous comment not the one copied and pasted.

  70. “Now that is weird.”

    mr g. is just doing what newsbusters and am thinker do. got to get the word out.

  71. details details

  72. I meant, by weird, that the link went to the previous comment and not the comment quoted from.

  73. Kevin, I lived in San Diego for ten years. I’ve walked across the border numerous times.

    This needs to change or we can just keep talking about illegal aliens draining our resources, but not doing anything about it.

  74. in texas i don’t remember walking across as being all that big a deal

    if you had a car though then there were these puppy dogs they brought over to do sniff sniff in case you had narcotics and such

  75. It wasn’t a hassle in California, either. Lots of booths and not much waiting to drive through. I did get sent to secondary once when I had three bottles of Kahlua, though. They lectured me and let me go and didn’t take my Kahlua away. Which was good since they were Christmas presents for my brothers.

  76. . I kinda get that it’s a funny reference to a goofy cult movie, but I don’t think most people who aren’t fans of this site will.

    Actually, it’s a reference to the fact that a particular blogger on the right — as well as a few on the left — have suggested I’m dangerously ultraviolent and psychosexually warped.

    I sneer at them.

  77. There have to be checks, or the idea of being American would be just that – an idea. No real meaning. Anyone who successfully sneaks through the border can’t be questioned. Again, I’m not ok with that.

    Nor am I. I just don’t believe in random stops w/o probable cause, for the same reason I don’t want cops worrying about my legally-owned, legally-carried weapons.

    Checks can be affected by looking for redundancies in social security number use, by policing the welfare rolls, by making border security tight at the border, and by punishing businesses who knowingly hire illegals.

  78. i never been across here in california

    i seen the twinkling lights of mexico from coronado is all

    but it is enough

  79. I haven’t been down there in 20 years. We used to drive down to Rosarito Beach and eat lobsters for lunch and then drive further south to Ensenada and go clubbing.

    It was a little unnerving to ask directions to the hotels from a Federale who was armed and drinking beer. That and buying Mexican car insurance is a pain.

  80. dicentra wrote:

    Under the circumstances portrayed above? Stopping everyone and asking them about citizenship for no reason?

    That’s exactly the scenario that people warned us about when Arizona enacted that law.

    Progessive projection at work again?

  81. Here’s a great snippet. I suggest printing it out, card size, and laminating it. Then when they ask for your ID, give them this instead:

    “The Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution require that a consent to a search not be coerced, by explicit or implicit means, by implied threat or covert force. For, no matter how subtly the coercion was applied, the resulting “consent” would be no more than a pretext for the unjustified police intrusion against which the Fourth Amendment is directed”. [Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 “

Leave a Reply