1. If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

  2. Dismiss Notice

World's most annoying SJW at immigration checkpoint

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by nstassel, Jun 24, 2019.

  1. nstassel

    nstassel NES Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,103
    Likes Received:
    3,053
    Location:
    Middlesex County
    I agree in reality. I am not in favor of a checkpoint within the US borders. I just love how this is now an issue when they've been in effect since 1953.
     

  2. Picton

    Picton NES Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Messages:
    7,966
    Likes Received:
    5,433
    Location:
    MA
    So have police shootings.

    But cellphone video has a way of... making things more relevant, let's say. Shining the light on things. Plus, the current security theatre-industrial complex was nowhere near as profound in the past as it is now.

    I get that times change. But rights are rights, and she had a right NOT to be hassled on a public way. She had the same right in 1953, too. We just wouldn't have known about it.
     
    KVX, The5thDentist and Howland like this.
  3. Drix

    Drix

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Messages:
    2,523
    Likes Received:
    1,340
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    I'd take the day off and glue myself to the news/facebook/twitter if NH put a checkpoint on 93 right at the border to MA. Maura would go out of her flippin mind.
     
    Palladin likes this.
  4. whacko

    whacko

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    9,174
    Likes Received:
    4,592
    I agree with her in sentiment only. Those off border checkpoints are bullshit. So are dwi checkpoints.

    However she lost me with her crying ass voice and her "my teacher friends" yadayada......who gives a flying f*** that your a teacher? Then her rant about nationalism leading to fascism. Stick to the point you f***ing liberal.
     
    jpk likes this.
  5. Fixxah

    Fixxah NES Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    27,704
    Likes Received:
    6,504
    Location:
    Norwood mostly.
    Pepper spray then taze. Rinse and repeat.
     
  6. Boston4567

    Boston4567 NES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2018
    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    461
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    This is where paying close attention to the precise wording is very important:

    "Border Patrol may stop vehicles at certain checkpoints to: (1) ask a few, limited questions to verify citizenship of the vehicles’ occupants and (2) visually inspect the exterior of a vehicle."

    "Agents may send any vehicle to a secondary inspection area for the same purpose: brief questioning and visual inspection."​

    What it does NOT say, and what no court to my knowledge has ever ruled, is that you're required to answer those questions, or that you're required to follow their order to move to a secondary checkpoint, in the absence of probable cause.

    I believe the reason no court has every ruled on this is because CBP has smart lawyers that know they're in extremely dicey territory here constitutionally, and they make sure they train their officers to reflect that. If they push their luck, they're likely to lose, and there's a good chance they'd also lose their right to have these checkpoints in the first place.

    So instead you have the weird nether-world of "they're allowed to ask, but you don't have to answer; they're allowed to order you to secondary, but you don't have to obey; you can't just drive off, but they can't lawfully detain you". Watch some videos on YouTube of people at these checkpoints refusing to obey and you'll see this weird dichotomy play out time and time again. It's not tenable in the long run, but they're trying to preserve their power for as long as possible.
     
    The5thDentist likes this.
  7. milktree

    milktree NES Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2008
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    1,461
    So, riddle me this:

    Say you're a tourist from a "good" country (Japan, UK, France, etc.) who has entered through conventional/legal means, and you get stopped by these clowns. They ask if you're a US citizen, and you say, "No."

    Then what happens? Presumably they'll ask for your passport (which is legal, because bizarrely foreigners are required to carry papers) They look at it and ... what? Do they even stamp passports anymore?

    You're legally in the country, you're not breaking any laws. Do they let you go?
     
  8. Woodsy

    Woodsy NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    4,443
    Likes Received:
    1,612
    Location:
    Middle of the woods in Maine
    Something people often forget and in that zone, if the border agent determines probable cause they can do almost anything...and NO WARRANT is required
     
  9. Boston4567

    Boston4567 NES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2018
    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    461
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    Yes. Basically, from a constitutional perspective, here's how it works:

    1. No reasonable suspicion = illegal to stop. BUT... SCOTUS has allowed an exception to this rule for checkpoints. At the checkpoints they have a limited right to stop you only to ask a few questions about citizenship and visually inspect the vehicle from the outside.
    2. They ask the questions and inspect the vehicle. You have a constitutional right to remain silent under 5A. Under 5A, remaining silent cannot be construed as reasonable suspicion.
    3. Unless the result of them asking those questions and conducting the inspection has yielded objective evidence that provides reasonable suspicion of lawbreaking, they have exhausted the scope of their lawful authority and have to let you go. Being a lawfully present foreigner is not lawbreaking, so you're free to go.
     
    The5thDentist likes this.
  10. whalerman69

    whalerman69 NES Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    646
    I am certain her husband swallowed the barrel of a .357 as opposed to listening to that douche...
     
  11. richc

    richc NES Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    14,106
    Likes Received:
    10,014
    Location:
    metro west
    1. I am so glad I'm not married to her
    2. I am so glad someone tries to make the lives of the checkpoint personnel miserable

    These checkpoints a BULL$HIT...
     
  12. milktree

    milktree NES Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2008
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    1,461
    Specifically, if you *do* answer "no", then what?

    They can't arrest you, 'cuz there's nothing in any of your behavior that suggests a law has been broken, right?

    So, what if all the people in the country illegally just answered "no"? Could they do anything other than let you go?
     
  13. bauer

    bauer NES Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2015
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    736
    Location:
    The Land of Rocks & Holly
    I believe you have to throw in the occasional “stop resisting!” to keep it honest
     
  14. wilson911

    wilson911

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages:
    990
    Likes Received:
    1,451
    Location:
    Southwest NH
    I'm scared for the dogs that have to go through these checkpoints.
     
  15. Palladin

    Palladin NES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    23,893
    Likes Received:
    5,494
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    I've got something to shut her up.....
     
  16. Boston4567

    Boston4567 NES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2018
    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    461
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    A "no" supplies sufficient justification to lawfully continue the stop until they can ascertain your legal status in the country. If you then refused to answer any questions, they might have probable cause to lawfully detain you.

    It's like if you were stopped at a sobriety checkpoint and said yes when they asked if you'd been drinking, then refused to answer any more questions. It's not proof you're under the influence, but it's at least reasonable suspicion, and depending on your overall behavior, it could be probable cause.
     
  17. BrianWilson

    BrianWilson NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    1,208


    Quoted from the ACLU link....."Even though you always have the right to remain silent, if you don’t answer questions to establish your citizenship, officials may detain you longer in order to verify your immigration status."

    Seems pretty clear to me, but then I'm not a very learned man either.
     
  18. BrianWilson

    BrianWilson NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    I guess I just kinda look at it this way. Although I do not like or approve of these checkpoints , if someone, anyone, for any reason, posed the question to me "Are you a citizen of the United States?" I can not for the life of me picture a set of circumstances, any circumstances what so ever, where the response from me would not be "Yes, yes I am."





    edited for clarity
     
  19. Bonesinium

    Bonesinium NES Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    14,246
    Likes Received:
    6,695
    Location:
    Southern NH
    They aren't "just now" an issue. They've been an issue for decades. Maybe you just haven't been paying attention?
     
  20. seanc

    seanc

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Messages:
    3,734
    Likes Received:
    492
    Location:
    northbridge, ma
    While apparently an unpopular sentiment. I completely support this woman.

    We loose our rights all the time because “just saying yes” is the easy answer.

    It is just easier to let them do this. And it easier to just let them search your car. And it’s just easier to take off your shoes and your belt.

    This is absolutely the same as.. why can’t you just get rid of the full auto? It is perfectly reasonable to register a muffler for your gun. Nobody needs a bump stock. Armor piercing ammo is too Killy and scary....

    I am tired of “being reasonable”
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2019
  21. tuna

    tuna NES Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Messages:
    6,324
    Likes Received:
    4,780
    Location:
    Western Mass
    Didn’t watch the video but I can tell what it is about from the comments.

    I’m usually on the side of busting balls just because.
    And I don’t tend to do well when told I HAVE to do something.
    Since I don’t drink and drive, I’m a real a-hole at sobriety checkpoints.
    I’m with the state on this one though.
    You don’t want illegals running around? Who else is going to at least try to arrest them, local cops? Please, their mayors want the votes.
    Quick question on citizenship and off you go.

    This isn’t the hill I want to die on, heck, this isn’t even the damn fight I want. I want to see this actually work, with a bus driving right onto a ferry for a trip to Australia or Antarctica.

    And don’t forget, not all illegals are brown. How racist of that lady to think so.
     
    Coyote33 and Cipher like this.
  22. usp45ct

    usp45ct

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,307
    Likes Received:
    1,371
    Location:
    Western Ma

    This...very much this.
     
    Coyote33 likes this.
  23. Michael Whyers

    Michael Whyers

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    8
    I'm not sure I get some of the arguments here. OK so you think shes a libtard. So the f*** what? Does that mean she is not afforded the same rights as anyone else? She's smarmy. So? Again I didnt realize that it was one of the litmus tests for having or not having rights, cause I know some real doucebags who are subject to those same rights.

    One of the problems we have in this country is the way the politicians and the MSM have us fighting each other on EVERYTHING when in reality the thing that we should be doing, we arent. We should be defending our rights and freedoms, and instead we bend over and give them up, (except for the 2nd because thats more important than all the other ones...... right?)

    If people from either end of the spectrum up to and including the middle were to sit down and have a calm, rational, objective conversation (yeah like the nut jobs from either far end of the spectrums will let that happen) we would find that most of the things we are fighting about are minimal compared to the majority of things we all agree on.

    To bad most people arent rational.... On either side.
     
  24. swatgig

    swatgig NES Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,854
    Likes Received:
    3,908
    Location:
    Chained together with 999 of my associates at the
    Even if this group asked you?
    1.6133067.3292468386[1].jpg
     
    Nick Fury, Bonesinium and milktree like this.
  25. BrianWilson

    BrianWilson NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Funny you post that. When I was thinking about this, that was the group I had in mind.
     
  26. drgrant

    drgrant Moderator NES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    65,994
    Likes Received:
    21,922
    IMHO she should assert her rights if she wants to waste the time, I don't think these stupid checkpoints should exist or anyone should be harassed like that especially without PC for a stop etc. It's pure bullshit, but the supreme court f***ed all that up when they didnt protect 4A with the DUI issue.

    That said, from a practical standpoint none of what she did actually matters much. A bunch of jingoservative retards are going to go "why didnt she just anser the queustion they just protechtin ar bordars! mlarc! quack! maga!" And the agents giving a lady a hard time at a checkpoint with the authority to do so... well, they're getting paid by the hour to do that shit. So they really don't care, and probably even think it is amusing (well, at least the ones with more of a sense of humor) So unless her goal is to just tie them up shes spending her own time not theirs... they gettin paid. She's not.

    -Mike
     
    Larry Gentile and LLF like this.
  27. Bonesinium

    Bonesinium NES Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    14,246
    Likes Received:
    6,695
    Location:
    Southern NH
    Their ruling on internal border patrol checkpoints predates DUI checkpoints actually.

    The Supreme Court has nearly always ruled in favor of violating the 4th Amendment instead of upholding it.
     
    drgrant and Picton like this.
  28. BrianWilson

    BrianWilson NES Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,576
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Neither are the 150 folks sitting in the hot sun in line behind her.
     
  29. Bonesinium

    Bonesinium NES Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    14,246
    Likes Received:
    6,695
    Location:
    Southern NH
    Utah v. Strieff

    Heien v. North Carolina

    Kentucky v. King

    Florida v. Harris

    Davis v. United States

    Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz

    United States v. Martinez-Fuerte

    Michigan v. Fisher

    Stanton v. Sims

    Some of these are really great. Like getting a drug dog to false alert is still probable cause. Or even searches that have been ruled unconstitutional become constitutional as long as the cop didn't know. Or minor 4A violations aren't a big enough deal to matter and are therefore acceptable. Or that if police themselves create an "exigent circumstances" circumstance themselves, warrantless searches of the wrong locations are good to go.

    United States v. Martinez-Fuerte is the applicable SCOTUS case for these border patrol checkpoints.
     
  30. akma

    akma

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    96
    Location:
    Not the land of the free but the home of the brave
    I think these checkpoints are a precursor to something much worse. When people with large firepower can stop you for zero cause and you don't cooperate it can go south real fast in a bad way. It's reminiscent of totalitarian regimes and the response to the Marathon bombings. What if they want to know if you have any firearms or how much money you are carrying? Why not put them on the border and keep people from coming here illegally and not threaten American citizens?
     

Share This Page