U.S. Border Patrol arrests 25 illegals at I-93 roadblock

Rating - 100%
28   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
38,241
Likes
13,619
Location
Chelmsford MA
A journey of millions of deportations begins with a single arrest.
Exactly.

And if they got 25 - which seems like a lot - and they all had traces of drugs on them - that sounds to me like a big dent in the drug trade right here in New England.

I wouldn't be surprised if the illegal drug orgs smuggle people into the country - and have them do their dirty work. That's another BAD side effect of being so lenient on the illegals that the left never wants to acknowledge.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the Feds could put a major dent in the drug distribution networks by simply deporting a shit load of illegals.
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
1,978
Likes
456
Exactly.

And if they got 25 - which seems like a lot - and they all had traces of drugs on them - that sounds to me like a big dent in the drug trade right here in New England.

I wouldn't be surprised if the illegal drug orgs smuggle people into the country - and have them do their dirty work. That's another BAD side effect of being so lenient on the illegals that the left never wants to acknowledge.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the Feds could put a major dent in the drug distribution networks by simply deporting a shit load of illegals.
It appears that the 46 legals were the drug dealers.
14 of the illegals had just overstated their visas. I'm willing to bet 0 criminal record on those particular ones.
Your assumption is unrealistic.
 

Individualist

NES Member
Rating - 100%
42   0   0
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
3,505
Likes
1,535
There is a right way( or Rights way) and a wrong way to catch and deport illegals. Random dog sniffing interior checkpoints are the wrong way. Period. Either you are for a Constitution and BOR or you are not. You can't have this both ways.
 
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,455
Likes
495
From the article:

...Another 46 people, nearly all from New England, were arrested at the checkpoint. Nearly all face drug charges after border patrol drug-sniffing dogs zeroed in on their vehicles, said Woodstock Police Chief Ryan Oleson, whose department assisted.

The cumulative amount of marijuana seized totaled two pounds. Police seized smaller amounts of cocaine, psilocybin mushrooms and hash oil...
One last big roundup before the marijuana decriminalization takes effect in less than 3 weeks?

Or maybe federal agents will continue to use drug-sniffing dogs for this purpose even after that (because they are "federal").

ETA: It looks like they left the drug violations to the locals:

Oleson said Woodstock police handled arrests for state law violations, nearly all of which involved drug possession or drug transportation.
 
Last edited:

Asaltweapon

NES Member
Rating - 100%
45   0   0
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
13,323
Likes
6,219
Location
Northern Mass
Exactly.

And if they got 25 - which seems like a lot - and they all had traces of drugs on them - that sounds to me like a big dent in the drug trade right here in New England.

I wouldn't be surprised if the illegal drug orgs smuggle people into the country - and have them do their dirty work. That's another BAD side effect of being so lenient on the illegals that the left never wants to acknowledge.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the Feds could put a major dent in the drug distribution networks by simply deporting a shit load of illegals.
I made mention of this elsewhere on NES this morning.

Reader's Digest version:
To the feds and BP reefer is still illegal in Maine (story today in the Bangor Daily) even though you are allowed 2.5 oz and it can be Rx'ed. BP says it doesn't go looking for it but if you spark up a doobie in front of them or they find it you are going to jail.

What I'd like to know is how was the dog being used? After the illegal was found or was every car at the check point sniffed by the K9?
 

namedpipes

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
32,929
Likes
15,900
Location
PREM
Dealers or just users? Marijuana, mushrooms, hash oil, and "small amounts" of coke. Great work there. Nothing about opioids, the sort of drugs actually killing people at too high a rate in NH.
No way in HELL did they catch 46 drug shipments. They caught 46 individuals that like to smoke weed.

The bulk shippers knew and changed course.
 

HarryPottar

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
1,141
Likes
863
Location
MA
How do you prove you are not illegal at one of these stops?

I'm British by brith and US Citizen by choice, however I do not drive around with my passport and my accent being British obviously makes me an immigrant.

My wife is Japanese green card holder, again she doesn't drive around with her green card.

Not worried, just wondering, because anyone could say they are a US Citizen?

I could show them my EDC as ONLY law abiding Citizen can have them... correct?

harry.
 
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,455
Likes
495
...What I'd like to know is how was the dog being used? After the illegal was found or was every car at the check point sniffed by the K9?
From the article:

He said federal agents used three dogs and walked them alongside cars as they waited in the checkpoint. If the dog signaled the possible presence of drugs, the driver was asked to park. Occupants of the car exited the car, and a dog went through the interior.
 

namedpipes

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
32,929
Likes
15,900
Location
PREM
Meanwhile, hundreds of illegals were likely caught and released elsewhere, mainly in more Urban areas.
 

Dennis in MA

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
18,043
Likes
9,324
How do you prove you are not illegal at one of these stops?

I'm British by brith and US Citizen by choice, however I do not drive around with my passport and my accent being British obviously makes me an immigrant.

My wife is Japanese green card holder, again she doesn't drive around with her green card.

Not worried, just wondering, because anyone could say they are a US Citizen?

I could show them my EDC as ONLY law abiding Citizen can have them... correct?

harry.

You could tell them to F off citing the 4th and 14th amendments. And English accent and "Driving While Asian" isn't probable cause.
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
15,524
Likes
8,743
Location
Southern NH
I made mention of this elsewhere on NES this morning.

Reader's Digest version:
To the feds and BP reefer is still illegal in Maine (story today in the Bangor Daily) even though you are allowed 2.5 oz and it can be Rx'ed. BP says it doesn't go looking for it but if you spark up a doobie in front of them or they find it you are going to jail.

What I'd like to know is how was the dog being used? After the illegal was found or was every car at the check point sniffed by the K9?
Go to 8:33

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Broccoli Iglesias

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
21,395
Likes
11,542
Location
Suckachusetts
I made mention of this elsewhere on NES this morning.

Reader's Digest version:
To the feds and BP reefer is still illegal in Maine (story today in the Bangor Daily) even though you are allowed 2.5 oz and it can be Rx'ed. BP says it doesn't go looking for it but if you spark up a doobie in front of them or they find it you are going to jail.

What I'd like to know is how was the dog being used? After the illegal was found or was every car at the check point sniffed by the K9?
It was clearly every single car, since they found 25 + 46.
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
15,524
Likes
8,743
Location
Southern NH
Don't forget the Union motto, "Don't Kill The Job".
Yep. Sadly if you read the SCOTUS rulings that allow for these bogus checkpoints, the court basically stated that minor infringements of a very large number of people's 4th Amendment rights was okay AND that the checkpoints need not even be effective.

I'll cite.

In Michigan State Police v. Sitz, which was about DUI checkpoints, the court referred to US v. Martinez-Fuerte, which was specifically about these internal immigration checkpoints. They said this:

[FONT=&quot] By way of comparison, the record from one of the consolidated cases in [/FONT]Martinez-Fuerte[FONT=&quot] showed that, in the associated checkpoint, illegal aliens were found in only 0.12 percent of the vehicles passing through the checkpoint. See 428 U.S. at 554. The ratio of illegal aliens detected to vehicles stopped (considering that on occasion two or more illegal aliens were found in a single vehicle) was approximately 0.5 percent. See [/FONT]Ibid.[FONT=&quot] We concluded that this "record . . . provides a rather complete picture of the effectiveness of the San Clemente checkpoint", [/FONT]ibid,[FONT=&quot], and we sustained its constitutionality. [/FONT]
And to expand, the court did in fact agree every time someone was stopped at one of these checkpoints, it was indeed an "intrusion upon the constitutionally protected interests of the private citizen", in other words, a violation of your 4th Amendment right.

From Martinez-Fuerte

[FONT=&quot] As the intrusion here is sufficiently minimal that no particularized reason need exist to justify it, we think it follows that the Border Patrol
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]officers must have wide discretion in selecting the motorists to be diverted for the brief questioning involved.

[/FONT]
...

[FONT=&quot]While the need to make routine checkpoint stops is great, the consequent intrusion on Fourth Amendment interests is quite limited.

...

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Routine checkpoint stops do not intrude similarly on the motoring public. First, the potential interference with legitimate traffic is minimal. Motorists using these highways are not taken by surprise, as they know, or may obtain knowledge of, the location of the checkpoints, and will not be stopped elsewhere.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
...

[FONT=&quot]"[T]he circumstances surrounding a checkpoint stop and search are far less intrusive than those attending a roving patrol stop. Roving patrols often operate at night on seldom-traveled roads, and their approach may frighten motorists. At traffic checkpoints, the motorist can see that other vehicles are being stopped, he can see visible signs of the officers' authority, and he is much less likely to be frightened or annoyed by the intrusion."[/FONT]
I like that last one. SCOTUS actually ruled that if you are less "frightened or annoyed", then the government can intrude on your rights. Some high standard there. I'm certain that isn't found in the Constitution.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
3,009
Likes
667
Location
Near Worcester
How do you prove you are not illegal at one of these stops?

I'm British by brith and US Citizen by choice, however I do not drive around with my passport and my accent being British obviously makes me an immigrant.

My wife is Japanese green card holder, again she doesn't drive around with her green card.

Not worried, just wondering, because anyone could say they are a US Citizen?

I could show them my EDC as ONLY law abiding Citizen can have them... correct?

harry.

Brown is the current scapegoat Du Jour, good sir. So white and asian persons, likely to be waived through the checkpoint, as you're not on the "baddies" list (today anyways). You may or may not however, remember a time in contemporary American history where your wife being Japanese may not have been so lucky, and instead of being waived through, may have instead been interned into a camp.
 
Top Bottom