Overwhelming Support FOR Driving Checkpoints

I saw it in the sidebar, and didn't click on it quickly enough -- now I don't see it. Would you repost the link here, please?

....It should be noted by those who live far from the border that internal suspicion less checkpoints are quickly becoming the norm while our fundamental right to travel unmolested absent reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing is being routinely trampled on. Keep in mind, this checkpoint did not take place on the border. It took place inside the country over 40 miles North of the border along a regularly traveled State highway that never intersects the border at any point.

After being stopped by a Border Patrol agent (who wasn't actually patrolling the border), the agent refused to identify herself or her badge number while at the same time demanding to know my citizenship. Unlike local or State police who have never given me a hard time about identifying themselves, just about every federal agent whose ever approached me in the field has refused to do so. At the last federal checkpoint I was stopped at along this route, I had to read their name tags to find out who they were. This time around, the agents weren't even wearing name tags.

To put it another way, Homeland Security agents are increasingly acting like secret police by hiding their identities from the very public they allegedly serve and protect. This attitude is also pervasive when requesting documentation from DHS. The department routinely redacts the names of its agents making it difficult to find out who they are, let alone hold them accountable for their actions. It's also extremely difficult to get any documentation out of the department in the first place. DHS routinely violates the Freedom of Information Act and the current waiting period for those few who receive responsive replies is several years long.

When I asked the stopping agent whether or not I was being detained, she indicated I wasn't. When I requested to leave however, she told me I couldn't until I answered her questions - quite a contradiction!

Legally, the agent can only hold an individual for a very limited amount of time absent reasonable suspicion. Her citizenship demands are nothing more than an attempt to create reasonable suspicion out of thin air based upon an individual's response along with their general appearance, mannerisms, skin color and other arbitrary profiling indicators used to build cases against individuals for further detention and investigation.

Make no mistake - these federal suspicion less checkpoints are nothing more than dragnet fishing expeditions designed to intimidate and harass the traveling public. They represent a fundamental violation of our right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and shouldn't be suffered by a free people.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court created a 4th amendment loophole for immigration checkpoints over thirty years ago in United States vs. Martinez-Fuerte. This court case is now used as a blanket excuse for all manner of Homeland Security abuse and is helping to usher in the burgeoning American police state.

As my interaction with the federal agent continued, she eventually 'requested' that I pull my vehicle off to the side of the road and into a secondary inspection area. All the while claiming I wasn't being detained. I continued to challenge her contradiction however and was eventually given permission to go on my way. How very nice of her!

The checkpoint included high intensity lights with generators for night operation along with two personnel and equipment trailers. At least two additional uniformed Border Patrol agents were present along with one plainclothes individual.

Given the setup, I suspect the roadblock will be in operation for several more days. This means myself, along with countless other travelers, will be subjected to yet another attack on our right to be left alone in the very near future......

In a few states it is illegal for police to conduct checkpoints, based on protections within their state constitutions.

I'm not sure if there is anything in the US constitution which offers such protection nationally. Possibly the 4th amendment, although I'm not certain about that.

This may be one of those issues where it is not a power delegated to the US and not forbidden to the states, so the states have the right to decide on this matter. Thus, if they do not decide on the matter then it is by default a right of the people.

thanks

YOU REALIZE THAT IF WE DON'T STAND UP TO THE STUPID MASSES THEY WILL STAY STUPID!!!We all must be the Educators of the masses that have no media to guide them correctly

I posted a comment as well! Let's flood the board with pro-constitution comments!

"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism."

-George Washington

If you Digg and comment, don't stop there -- it is particularly useful to comment directly on the newspaper article itself, so those readers will see our words of wisdom.

Interesting, and I still need to read the whole thing. However, it seems that, although it's not verbatim with the reference you supplied, this same concept is already covered in Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution:

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State."

And in Article 1, Section 10:

"No State shall (...) grant any Title of Nobility."

This was first brought up for me when we were examining all the ways InSane is ineligible to be President. Heh; I never cease to be amazed at the education I've received here as a member of the Daily Paul. I never would have known this stuff off the top of my head a year and a half ago!!

Let them know there's not just one lone voice of reason out there. These folks are sending the message to law enforcement and other agencies that, not only are they A-OK with this, but they want more of it.

Is a state patrol regulation considered to be law in Nebraska? The state patrol simply cannot just make these regulations up as they go along. They must be based on law and if no law exists then they are unlawful regulations.

Laws are passed by legislatures, not by enforcement agencies.