# News & Current Events > U.S. Political News >  Today I put my life on the line for liberty...

## Reason

Today my g/f and I decided to take a day off from college and go on a trip out to the local desert.

Once over the mountains and into the desert floor I headed north to show my g/f some awesome mud caverns that I had been to as a little kid many years ago.

We are now in the middle of nowhere. I think we passed maybe 3 cars during the entire 5 hours we spent in the desert.

We are driving along enjoying the sights looking for the cross road we need to find when all of a sudden there is a sudden homeland security (border patrol) check point in the middle of the 2 lane road.

There are cones and official vehicles directing any passing drivers into the shoulder where there is a movable STOP sign.

I slow and drive up...

Agent: "Are you a US citizen?"

Me: "I'm not going to be answering any questions"

Agent: "Where are you coming from?"

Me: "I'm not going to be answering any questions"

Agent: "Where are you traveling to?"

Me: "I'm not going to be answering any questions"

Agent: "You have to answer my questions!"

Me: "I'm not going to be answering any questions under the protection granted via the 5th amendment of the constitution of the United States."

Agent: "Pull over to the side here and turn off your vehicle"

Me: "Am I being detained?"

Agent: "Yes".

*I pull to the side and turn off the vehicle and lock the doors and leave the window down apx 4 inches*

Agent: "You're going to sit here until you answer my questions"

Me : "I would like to speak to your supervisor"

Agent: "Oh, a supervisor huh... (nodding head and gesturing in a confrontational manner) *he then walks over and gets the supervisor*

Supervisor: "Why won't you answer the questions? It's not a big deal..."

Me: "I understand that you're just trying to do your job, however under the 5th amendment of the constitution I will not be answering any questions"

Supervisor: "You have to state citizenship status at checkpoints like these under immigration law"

Me: "I understand that there might be a law that states that, however I feel that the constitution is the supreme law of this country and I believe that my ability to remain silent trumps this immigration law you are citing".

Supervisor: "Well that's nice but you're not free to leave until you answer our questions"

Me: "How long can you detain me?"

Supervisor: "We will detain you here until you answer our questions".

Me: "At what phone number can I reach your supervisor?"

*He gave me the phone number and I called*

Dispatch transferred me to a supervisor and I explained the situation, the phone supervisor told me that I was required by law to state my citizenship status and then told me that I needed to deal with the supervisor that was at the checkpoint and then got off the phone with me.

~~

We proceeded to sit in the car discussing our options for apx 30 mins, I was figuring that there was a legal amount of time in which they could "detain" me before making the decision to either arrest me or let me go.

During this time, my g/f and I listened to their conversations from a distance.

We heard them mocking us and saying things like "what a douchebag" "what does this guy think he is accomplishing?" laughing, also saying to my face that quote "we don't care, we are getting paid to stand here anyway".

*I overheard one agent say that "well if we decide to arrest him and he resists we can LIGHT HIM UP"*

Another thing we overheard was a younger agent saw my bumper sticker



and using his personal cell phone he called someone and asked them to look up what prop 19 was...

I also have a Gadsden flag "don't tread on me" sticker on the back as well.

~~

The agent then asked me for my ID which I of course refused.

I asked if I was suspected of committing any crimes and was told "no".

Eventually after about an hour of sitting in the sun I called the dispatch back again and asked to speak to that supervisor again and when I got her I asked to speak to her supervisor.

This guy was actually polite and sounded like he knew what he was talking about... I told him that there was no way they could detain me indefinitely and that I would be calling 911 and telling the state police and local sheriff dept. that I was being held against my will.

He responded by stating that the CHP (CA state police) was already en route.

He also clarified that I was not being "detained indefinitely" and that I was being detained until the CHP officer arrived.

I asked how long can I legally be detained? and the response was that there is no set amount of time and that it is defined as a "reasonable amount of time".

After about another 45 mins - an hour goes by, the CHP officer arrives...

I greet him warmly and shake his hand through the window and ask if I can speak to him away from the gaggle of 4-6 agents that were sorrounding my vehicle with hands on their pistols and one clutching a shotgun.

He agrees and I exit the vehicle and we walk about 35 feet just out of earshot of the agents and I explain to him that I am not trying to cause problems and I apologize that he had to be called way out here to deal with this but that these agents were demanding that I answer their questions and that I was declining to do so under the 5th amendment.

He seemed agreeable from the start and asked if he could run my license to make sure it was valid, now.... at this point I realized that if I had wanted to take this even further I likely could have argued that he had to legal reason to run my license since I had not done anything wrong... However... we had now been sitting in the sun roasting for 2 full hours... 

I let him run my license under the condition that he was not to share my information with any of the agents under any circumstance. He agreed and over his radio had dispatch check the license number and there were no problems. He stated that he didn't see any problems or any reason for him to bother me any further. He walked over to the agents outside my vehicle and I got back into the drivers seat.

He explained to the agents that my license was valid and that he had no probable cause to suspect that I had done anything wrong in any way and that if I wanted to exercise my rights under the 5th amendment that that was my choice. He said to them that it was their call if they wanted to arrest me under any federal statues but that he would not be assisting or having anything to do with it.

The agents looked like someone had just told them their dog had died, it was disturbing... they all clamoured to ask if I had any warrants or any other "issues"... and the officer said no. 

I then asked directly to the supervisor if I was free to go and he said yes.

I then started my engine and left...

As a very nice side note, when we got to where we were going I started chatting with the park ranger and ended up having a solid 45 min conversation with him about the incident, politics, etc and he was a vietnam vet that was now a libertarian and he shook my hand and told me that he was proud that there are young people still willing to fight for what's right.

~~
*
Things I think I did well...*

Stayed calm.

Contacted superiors and made ultimatum to call sheriff and chp

Refused to answer any questions.

Did not give any personal information to any federal agents.

Held my ground in polite and non-image damaging fashion (ie: wasn't calling them nazi's etc...

*Things I could do better...*

Video tape instead of pictures (I will be buying a video camera to keep in the car tomorrow)

Have the local sheriff dept's phone number ready to go in my phone should it happen again.



Thoughts/comments?

I can honestly say that I was scared. They were trying their hardest to intimidate me, aggressive postures, guns at the ready, talking about looking forward to the possibility of tazering me, the fact that this checkpoint was mobile and likely had no cameras recording, there was almost no other traffic passing through either.

I was alone.

----------


## Kotin

Very proud of you man..

----------


## Anti Federalist

Well done Reason, well done.

----------


## Wesker1982

well done

----------


## RileyE104

At least they didn't break your window, pull you out of the car and beat the $#@! out of you, and arrest you like they did that one guy (forgot his name).

Anyways, you did great...

----------


## DisillusionedPatriot

> If you just answered some basic questions a law enforcement official has the right to ask, it would have been less chaotic.


Have you given leave of your senses? He had every right not to answer and they had none to question him.

----------


## amy31416

Well done. Nothing shameful in being afraid, and everything to be proud of that you didn't buckle when you were (and for good reason).

Five stars, thumbs up--all that.

----------


## JCF

Nice job!

----------


## Daamien

You did everything right.  Legally you would have to give your driver's license to the local policeman/Sheriff as you were driving a motor vehicle and they do have the right to properly identify you regardless of a crime or lack thereof.  Your identity is not protected under the Fifth Amendment.  However, identifying yourself only pertains to your name, address, and known date of birth... not your citizenship status.

----------


## speciallyblend

awesome    Wolverines!!!

----------


## speciallyblend

> If you just answered some basic questions a law enforcement official has the right to ask, it would have been less chaotic.


ok george you gotta stop living with your parents     you sure palin didn't get channeled into you by christine O'Donnell??

----------


## james1906

> If you just answered some basic questions a law enforcement official has the *right* to ask, it would have been less chaotic.


Where is this right for the federal government to run a suspicionless checkpoint on a road not on an international border or at the entrance to federal installation?  

Aren't you Muslim?  Why don't you step out of your car and let the nice officer search your car for bombs?

----------


## Inflation

Great story, bro.

Wolverines!!!

----------


## lx43

I wish every american would do as you did with the check point.   Good job!

----------


## amy31416

Abe...you disappoint me.

----------


## Kludge

Inspiring, Reason - thanks for posting.

----------


## JoshLowry

Awesome report!  Nice job making a stand.




> If you just answered some basic questions a law enforcement official has the right to ask, it would have been less chaotic.


Seriously?

----------


## Kotin

> Abe...you disappoint me.


^^^^

That.

----------


## Kregisen

Great job man.

----------


## silentshout

This is awesome. It's great that you were able to be so calm!

----------


## Lucille



----------


## libertybrewcity

That is wonderful. I give you five stars!!!

----------


## libertybrewcity

> 


lol

----------


## Minuteman2012

Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?


Oh $#@!, here we go...

----------


## amy31416

> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?






And how have you lived this long without someone reminding you to breathe?

----------


## amy31416

> Oh $#@!, here we go...


He gives douches a bad name.

Looking into my crystal ball...I see a banhammer in his future....

----------


## Kotin

> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?

----------


## aravoth

> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?


I don't see how not doing anything wrong at all constitutes having your head up ass.

He wasn't the one threating to detain anyone. 

He wasn't suggesting shooting anyone.

He wasn't demanding anyone to "show him their papers". 

He wasn't being overtly totalitarian.

He wasn't violating anyones rights.

In fact all he wanted was to be left alone, and to continue on his way. When a _local_ officer of the law appeared, he complied with everything he was required to comply with. 

Not sure why you think he's a "doucher" with his head up his ass.....

----------


## amy31416

> 


Gotta give him credit, he got over 100 posts in before totally exposing himself as a "doucher" and someone who resents those who stand up for their rights.

----------


## Reason

> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?

----------


## amy31416

> 


Feed him? No.

Bait him? Hell yeah....

----------


## speciallyblend

> 


did you smoke a joint afterwards?? kinda like a cigar after an epic WIN!!

----------


## Kotin

> Gotta give him credit, he got over 100 posts in before totally exposing himself as a "doucher" and someone who resents those who stand up for their rights.


That does take quite a degree of troll patience..

----------


## Anti Federalist

LOL.

"Minuteman2012 is an unknown quantity at this point"

----------


## Minuteman2012

> 


Your the only troll here, except you are a real life troll, thinking you put your life by sitting on the side of the road not showing your license, when all you will become is the butt of a joke for the guys back at the station. You didn't contribute to the Liberty Movement, at all, with your actions. Just being honest

----------


## amy31416

> That does take quite a degree of troll patience..


Did a quick browse of his posts....quite a mixed bag.

----------


## Pericles

> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?


Any rational person who has looked at a history of citizen encounters with "law enforcement" and does not fear for is life is delusional.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Your the only troll here, except you are a real life troll, thinking you put your life by sitting on the side of the road not showing your license, when all you will become is the butt of a joke for the guys back at the station. You didn't contribute to the Liberty Movement, at all, with your actions. Just being honest


Disagree.

If just 20 percent of the people stopped like this or anywhere else for that matter, refused consent and exercised their rights, most of this $#@! would come to halt overnight.

----------


## Minuteman2012

> Any rational person who has looked at a history of citizen encounters with "law enforcement" and does not fear for is life is delusional.


I would say they are, how many people get killed in relation to not getting killed when they are pulled over? 

I am not going to apologize, I am an individual, and won't be a lemming and agree with everyone. I will state my opinion, and I think this guy isn't a hero, and wasn't risking his life, he was just being an annoyance.

----------


## amy31416

> Disagree.
> 
> If just 20 percent of the people stopped like this or anywhere else for that matter, refused consent and exercised their rights, most of this $#@! would come to halt overnight.


I think it's sweet that you give him the benefit of the doubt. 

Maybe I'm too cynical.

----------


## amy31416

> I would say they are, how many people get killed in relation to not getting killed when they are pulled over? 
> 
> I am not going to apologize, I am an individual, and won't be a lemming and agree with everyone. I will state my opinion, and I think this guy isn't a hero, and wasn't risking his life, he was just being an annoyance.


So how would you stand up for your Constitutional rights when they're being violated?

I guess you just promote letting it happen because you might be the butt of a joke at the police station?

----------


## Reason

> Disagree.
> 
> If just 20 percent of the people stopped like this or anywhere else for that matter, refused consent and exercised their rights, most of this $#@! would come to halt overnight.


Nullification!

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I would say they are, how many people get killed in relation to not getting killed when they are pulled over? 
> 
> I am not going to apologize, I am an individual, and won't be a lemming and agree with everyone. I will state my opinion, and I think this guy isn't a hero, and wasn't risking his life, he was just being an annoyance.


Ah give me a minute to find the thread which shows statistically that you are more likely to become of victim of violence by a random encounter with cop than with a citizen.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I think it's sweet that you give him the benefit of the doubt. 
> 
> Maybe I'm too cynical.

----------


## Minuteman2012

> Ah give me a minute to find the thread which shows statistically that you are more likely to become of victim of violence by a random encounter with cop than with a citizen.


The statistic you are going to provide has nothing to do with what I am talking about, and I wouldn't doubt it. But have fun anyway.

----------


## speciallyblend

> I would say they are, how many people get killed in relation to not getting killed when they are pulled over? 
> 
> I am not going to apologize, I am an individual, and won't be a lemming and agree with everyone. I will state my opinion, and I think this guy isn't a hero, and wasn't risking his life, he was just being an annoyance.


any chance your from germany? The annoyance was the officers themselves! It is beyond me that you cannot see the police state in the cities as well as the government waste with these unethical if not unlawful road blocks and just plain waste of law enforcement time and job placement for the unemployed  thru government programs to fill gov jobs aka homeland security aka out of work folks looking for a paycheck!!!!   

i see you live in dallas , i heard they are hiring for homeland security! you should apply(sarcasm)

----------


## Nate-ForLiberty

> I would say they are, how many people get killed in relation to not getting killed when they are pulled over? 
> 
> I am not going to apologize, I am an individual, and won't be a lemming and agree with everyone. I will state my opinion, and I think this guy isn't a hero, and wasn't risking his life, he was just being an annoyance.


What is an acceptable ratio to you?

----------


## CUnknown

Where can I find a girlfriend like the one you have?  She seems very understanding.  Or is she a libertarian herself?

----------


## eOs

Anyone worth anything stands up for what they believe in. Good job reason.

----------


## JoshLowry

That has to be WaltM.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Ah give me a minute to find the thread which shows statistically that you are more likely to become a victim of violence by a random encounter with a cop than with a citizen.


Here 'tis:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=254109

Now, taking that into consideration and the path we are on and what is happening every day to citizens who come in contact with cops, I can say that, yes, Reason most certainly *did* take a risk and not a minor either, for the audacity of exercising his rights to the state enforcers.

----------


## Nate-ForLiberty

> That has to be WaltM.




ip check!

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I would say they are, how many people get killed in relation to not getting killed when they are pulled over?





> The statistic you are going to provide has nothing to do with what I am talking about, and I wouldn't doubt it. But have fun anyway.


Yes, it does...

----------


## Minuteman2012

> What is an acceptable ratio to you?


Why do you assume I find any deaths acceptable, with absolutely no basis? I am merely pointing out the absurdity of the title, which is that he claimed to be risking his life

----------


## Minuteman2012

> Yes, it does...


It has nothing to do with what I said. I said, how many people who get pulled over are killed by cops in relation to people getting pulled over who aren't killed. But whatever makes you feel good.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> That has to be WaltM.


Lawlz

----------


## eOs

> Why do you assume I find any deaths acceptable, with absolutely no basis? I am merely pointing out the absurdity of the title, which is that he claimed to be risking his life


YouTube - Baptist pastor beaten + tazed by Border patrol - 11 stitches

----------


## Minuteman2012

> ip check!


I don't know who Walt is, but I think it is silly that you want to IP check me because I don't go in line with group think(other than Abe). But go ahead, I guess.

----------


## Nate-ForLiberty

> Why do you assume I find any deaths acceptable, with absolutely no basis? I am merely pointing out the absurdity of the title, which is that he claimed to be risking his life


The government agents were talking about tasering him. Tasers can kill. Therefore, there was a very real and potentially deadly threat.  Is this difficult?

----------


## Anti Federalist

> It has nothing to do with what I said. I said, how many people who get pulled over are killed by cops in relation to people getting pulled over who aren't killed. But whatever makes you feel good.


Yes, you made that clear.

You also made it clear that you dispute the OP's claim that he risked his life.

I presented evidence to you to suggest just the opposite.

That he did, in fact, take a life threatening risk in confronting armed state enforcers.

----------


## JoshLowry

> ip check!


IP Check deemed unnecessary.  Citizen is deemed guilty of breaking forum guidelines here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpos...7&postcount=15




> That ****** just committed assault.




Target Destroyed.

----------


## Nate-ForLiberty

> I don't know who Walt is, but I think it is silly that you want to IP check me because I don't go in line with group think(other than Abe). But go ahead, I guess.


obvious troll is obvious  :yawn:

----------


## silus

You are a good example for people to follow.

----------


## Nate-ForLiberty

> IP Check deemed unnecessary.  Citizen is deemed guilty of breaking forum guidelines here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpos...7&postcount=15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Target Destroyed.


i've never seen a freeze frame of that scene. Dude had his crotch exploded!

----------


## Anti Federalist

> IP Check deemed unnecessary.  Citizen is deemed guilty of breaking forum guidelines here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpos...7&postcount=15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Target Destroyed.


ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Bang bang maxwell banhammer

----------


## dannno

> If you just answered some basic questions a law enforcement official has the right to ask, it would have been less chaotic.


They have every right to question him, he has every right not to answer.

----------


## CCTelander

> Disagree.
> 
> If just 20 percent of the people stopped like this or anywhere else for that matter, refused consent and exercised their rights, most of this $#@! would come to halt overnight.



Wouldn't even take close to 20%.

There used to be an unwritten "rule" in many jurisdictions that if a mere 5% of the general population refused to abide by any particular statute, ordinance, whatever, it would be stricken.

That was a LONG time ago, but I doubt that more than 5% would be necessary even now. The bastards would probably be $#@!ting their pants if that mere 5% refused to comply.

----------


## jdmyprez_deo_vindice

I am so proud of you and thankfully I do not live in an area that is subject to this garbage.........yet.

----------


## Liberty Rebellion

Good show OP!! 

Whatever happened to the guy in AZ that used to video tape his confrontations with the feds and their bogus immigration checkpoints 100 of miles inland from the border. Wasn't his website checkpointusa or something like that?

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

This going to spark a heated immigration debate isn't it? $#@!s, I told you so. What the hell do you think is going to happen? This likely won't be nothing, once you get your vaunted Police State installed. It'll be East Germany all over again.

----------


## JoshLowry

> This going to spark a heated immigration debate isn't it? $#@!s, I told you so. What the hell do you think is going to happen? This likely won't be nothing, once you get your vaunted Police State installed. It'll be East Germany all over again.


Calling everyone $#@!s isn't going to help much.

You have an I told you so attitude about a police state while one of the very members you preach at is actively practicing civil disobedience.

----------


## squarepusher

does anyone know nitty gritty laws about this?  like, what he can and can't do.

Could he have just drove off from the border patrol, or would they have opened fire?  
Did he really have to sit there for 2 hours in the sun and wait for a CHIP's to clear him?

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

> Calling everyone $#@!s isn't going to help much.
> 
> You have an I told you so attitude about a police state while one of the very members you preach at is actively practicing civil disobedience.


I wasn't preaching at him, but everyone who actively campaigns and calls for this sort of thing. If they are ignorant of the facts of the situation, then I will definitely call them out on it. It isn't me saying these things, it's history. You think this is bad? Wait until there are thousands and thousands of these guys everywhere along with armed Military patrolling. The people who call for that State, will be the first to denounce it once it arrives. I am sick and tired of the plainly obvious being ignored. So, yes, when I get a little perturbed, I'm going to call them $#@!s (And they know who they are -- the zealot border freaks).

----------


## JoshLowry

Well, insults are not allowed so please refrain from doing so.

Gracias amigo.

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

> Well, insults are not allowed so please refrain from doing so.
> 
> Gracias amigo.


I would hardly classify that as an insult. It was pretty benign, not targeted at any one specific person. We insult Neo-Conservatives and Statists all the time around here. I merely do the same to those who say they love liberty, yet hold Statist positions. This is one area. However, if you wish I won't call these Statists $#@!s (Lord knows, I've been "insulted" enough around here -- oddly I am the one called out on it ).

----------


## pcosmar

> does anyone know nitty gritty laws about this?  like, what he can and can't do.
> 
> Could he have just drove off from the border patrol, or would they have opened fire?  
> Did he really have to sit there for 2 hours in the sun and wait for a CHIP's to clear him?


The nitty gritty is,,, there is no telling ever.
Any confrontation can go either way. The hardest part is staying calm.

Good on ya Reason.

YouTube - Golden earring - Twilight zone

----------


## JoshLowry

> (Lord knows, I've been "insulted" enough around here -- oddly I am the one called out on it ).


Please feel free to report posts that break our guidelines.

The moderators do act on them albeit usually in a private communication.

----------


## WorldonaString

Excellent job Reason!  Good idea about keeping a camera in your car at all times.

----------


## newbitech

+ rep.  Everyone needs to rep reason.

----------


## Live_Free_Or_Die

It's nice talking about liberty but....  sometimes....  even when you know the odds of violence during a police encounter is higher than the odds of violence in many other normal activities of life...

It just feels really $#@!ing good to act like a free human being!

----------


## squarepusher

http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/kitsap/b.../29962474.html

Border Patrol sets dangerous precedent with checkpoints

Oct 01 2008

The Peninsula Daily News reports of recent U.S. Border Patrol highway checkpoints on the North Olympic Peninsula near Forks, Discovery Bay and the Hood Canal Bridge. The Journal of the San Juans reports Border Patrol ferry checkpoints on domestic-only ferry runs from San Juan Island to Anacortes since February. An additional checkpoint location will soon be added on state Highway 20 in Skagit Valley. Also there are reports of recent Border Patrol spot checks at the Agate Pass Bridge (outside the Clearwater Casino), plus ICE Fugitive Ops teams at Wal-Mart in Poulsbo.

Checkpoints have been set up to look for illegal immigrants, criminals and terrorists, and have resulted in roadside arrests and detentions of individuals who are deemed suspicious. Deputy Chief Border Patrol Agent Joseph Giuliano, as quoted in the Daily News, wouldnt say how the Border Patrol determines suspicion, only that its process is scientifically established. In reality, the scientific method nets individuals primarily of Mexican or Central American origin.

If unable to establish proper citizenship and/or valid immigration status on the spot, these individuals may be sent to the Northwest Detention Center (NWDC) in Tacoma for days, weeks or years prior to being deported  often without representation. The facility is operated by a publicly held corporation, and conditions have been cited as violating national detention standards and international human rights laws.

The Olympic Peninsula roadblock checks have resulted so far in 25 arrests for immigration violations, including Edgar Ayala, who graduated with honors from Forks High School and lived in the area since infancy. Many immigrants in our communities are now living in fear of losing their freedom, their loved ones, friends, caregivers, employees/employers, and their means of support for family members, etc. The Border Patrol says the stops are annoying but necessary to keep the country safe.

Aside from obvious legal and moral issues, it is hard to imagine that these operations make us safer or are worth the cost. The Border Patrol is part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Its mission is to detect and prevent the illegal entry of aliens into the United States  not with screening unprepared residents and visitors far from a border crossing.

In the current climate of deficits, cutbacks and financial bailouts, DHS continues to receive a generous amount of taxpayer dollars to secure our borders. The 2008 DHS budget increased to $8.9 billion ($886 million in 2007), including $27 million to add 250 additional Custom & Border Patrol Agents to its force of 16,000. You wonder whether roadside immigration checks well outside border communities are truly warranted or if DHS needs to keep these new hires busy.

Surprise enforcement operations are occurring at a time when our legal immigration system is overwhelmed and in need of reform. Obtaining legal immigration status is expensive and complicated. Fees for immigration benefit-seekers tripled in 2007 while backlogs of adjudications increased dramatically. Often, immigration officials fail to correctly implement complicated immigration laws and mistakes are made, such as sending U.S. citizens to the NWDC.

There is little funding appropriated to fix our legal immigration system and maintain our American principles as a nation of immigrants. Instead, our government is focused on raids, road checks and expanding detention facilities to show it is addressing a politically charged illegal immigration issue. These policies are undemocratic, bad for our economy and out of step with an inevitable future era of global cooperation. Violators of our civil immigration laws are treated as criminals and their cases dehumanized, while the more difficult issue of intelligent immigration reform remains ignored.

A Stop the Checkpoints Committee was formed this summer in Port Angeles by residents of five nearby communities. It represents family members of the detained/deported, Native American tribal members, small business owners, students, teachers, civil libertarians, peace activists and concerned neighbors.

In Forks, 90 residents formed picket lines downtown to protest the deportations. On Sept. 20, a rally and march was held in Port Townsend to stop the escalation of Border Patrol roadblocks, raids and detentions in the region. The Border Patrol has indicated it will increase the use of these checkpoints until a court order declares them illegal.

If this concerns you, please speak out. For information about your legal rights at Border Patrol stops, as well as other pro bono immigration assistance go to: www.nwirp.org/ServicesProvided/Resources.aspx.

Jacqueline A. Wood is an immigration attorney on Bainbridge Island.

----------


## Live_Free_Or_Die

> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?


May all your encounters with law enforcement be blessed and remain peaceful.




> *I overheard one agent say that "well if we decide to arrest him and he resists we can LIGHT HIM UP"*

----------


## squarepusher

not sure if this response is valid or not

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...9234724AASeK1x

Are Border Patrol Checkpoints Legal?
There are a bunch of BP checkpoints on highways down here, pretty close to the border. Note they aren't actually on the border, just within 100 miles or so. There are all the videos on you tube of some stupid kid saying "Am I being detained?" and just generally being an asshat to the officer.
Are they actually illegal? Has there been a court case about this or anything? It seems as though it does violate the 4th Amendment if people are being detained, but it hasn't been shut down yet so maybe there's something I don't know?

Overall I think its a good program and support it.

    * 1 year ago

Report Abuse
whitefangz1 by whitefan...

Member since:
    July 16, 2006
Total points:
    32737 (Level 7)

    * Add to My Contacts
    * Block User

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
At present, border patrol checkpoints are legal, and the issue has been to the Supreme Court. In the case of The United States vs. Martinez-Fuerte back in 1976, it was rgued that the border patrol stops violate our 4th amendment rights. The SCOTUS decided 7 - 2 that the border patrol checkpoints were constitutional. Basically, they argued that the traffic at the border and the amount of illegal entries alone provided probable cause for the stops. Searching the vehicles required a little more probable cause, but this could be obtained simply by questioning the people in the vehicle and visually inspecting the vehicle from the outside.
This issue came up again years later with regards to sobriety checkpoints, and the results were the same.

    * 1 year ago

100% 1 Vote

----------


## awake

Courage.

----------


## bunklocoempire

Thank you Reason. 



Bunkloco

----------


## osan

> *
> 
> ** Things I think I did well...*
> 
> Stayed calm.
> 
> Contacted superiors and made ultimatum to call sheriff and chp
> 
> Refused to answer any questions.
> ...


Yep.  Well done indeed.

The other thing you did well was "recruiting" the CHP officer to  your side by not getting too picky about running your plates.  Speaking with superiors was a key element in what you did well.  Never talk to the drones - always go as high up as you can as rapidly as you can.  I would have IMMEDIATELY asked to speak with the superior of a superior the moment the one you are speaking with started going in circles - just one minor improvement for next time. 




> *Things I could do better...*
> 
> Video tape instead of pictures (I will be buying a video camera to keep in the car tomorrow)
> 
> Have the local sheriff dept's phone number ready to go in my phone should it happen again.


Absolutely have video capability.  You saw/heard what they were saying.  Make sure someone else gets to see/hear it.

If you are recording, ask leading questions if/when they resort to threats of force.  Such question will lead them to either back down or pretty much incriminate themselves.  For example, if they threaten you somewhat indirectly, ask them something like "are you threatening me?"  "are you threatening to use force against me because I am standing on my constitutional right to remain silent?" - that sort of thing.  Paint them into a corner.  In this you have the advantage.  Don't ask open-ended questions like "why are you doing this?"  You need to STEER them precisely so that they are either forced to let you go or to at least admit that they are doing something wrong.  These bastards are so poisoned with hubris most of the time that they will brazenly show their contempt for you, your rights, the constitution, etc.  Draw that out.  Let them put on a show.  The bigger the better.

If possible, live-stream it to a secure video site and if they discover you and take the recording device, make sure you turn it off first and remove the memory card.  They are small and if you can, swallow it if things get hairy.  It'll come out. 

As the gun became the great physical equalizer, video is becoming a political one.  Use it extensively.  Always have it on hand and be as surreptitious with it as possible.  No sense in getting killed if you can avoid it, and video appears to send many "law enforcement" types into a blind rage.  Be careful.

I'm wondering what would happen if you had an entourage of, say, 50 well armed people come upon such a check point and showed the willingness to smoke every last one of those DHS $#@!s once they started their act?  Bet you'd not have been there long.  Of course in holes like CA that isn't possible.





> I can honestly say that I was scared. They were trying their hardest to intimidate me, aggressive postures, guns at the ready, talking about looking forward to the possibility of tazering me, the fact that this checkpoint was mobile and likely had no cameras recording, there was almost no other traffic passing through either.
> 
> I was alone.


SHows you have some sense in you.  Good.  Remain that way, just not too much so.

You did well.  Good on you.

----------


## osan

> Lawlz


HEY!  You leave Mr. T alone - hear?

----------


## Baptist

> Thoughts/comments?




The SCOTUS has ruled that Border Patrol is allowed to setup checkpoints and 1.) briefly stop you, 2.) ask for yous citizenship status.  Many in our movement might find it reasonable to 1.) stop, 2.) say you are a U.S. citizen, 3.) answer no further questions.  Under the Constitution, the Feds to have the privilege to enforce immigration after all.  So I do not think lowly of anyone here who does answer the questions.  

There is no way I can look down on those who stand up for our rights either.  I am proud of everyone, like you, who stands up for our rights.  You know what the Constitution says but you took a stand on principle, and that is awesome.  

My main thoughts are twofold: get a video cam of some sort (which you said you are), and make sure this is cool with your girlfriend.  Besides guarding our freedoms, your woman's safety is your responsibility.  I can tell you that I am always discussing with my wife what we will do when certain situations arise.  I want to make sure that she is down with certain types of activism and defending of freedom, and if she is not, then we need to reconcile those differences so that we are on the same page.  


Anyways, mad props to you.  You probably made the blue list with many of us!

----------


## BuddyRey

Hey Reason, well-done man!!!  Contrary to the protestations of those who suffer from Triple-S (State Stockholm Syndrome) and falsely believe that people are never tazed, killed, or dehumanized by our gracious overlords, you certainly did take quite a chance standing up for your rights like that.  That takes serious _cojones_, especially in the People's Republic of Kalifornia.

----------


## angelatc

> You did everything right.  Legally you would have to give your driver's license to the local policeman/Sheriff as you were driving a motor vehicle and they do have the right to properly identify you regardless of a crime or lack thereof.  Your identity is not protected under the Fifth Amendment.  However, identifying yourself only pertains to your name, address, and known date of birth... not your citizenship status.


They're not allowed to pull you over specifically for the purpose of checking your driver's license.

----------


## erowe1

> If you just answered some basic questions a law enforcement official has the right to ask, it would have been less chaotic.


Do you and I also have the right to use threats of violence to detain people until they answer our questions? Or is this some special right that "law enforcement officials" have that you and I don't?

----------


## Deborah K

Reason, I admire what you did.  I had a similar experience that I posted on here about a year ago.  They wanted to search my RV and I did not let them.

----------


## Pericles

> Please feel free to report posts that break our guidelines.
> 
> The moderators do act on them albeit usually in a private communication.


In this case, I suspect the poster would take the 5th, rather than turn himself in.

----------


## speciallyblend

I have this vision of Reason and his girlfriend riding off into the sunset after this encounter while taking a safety break listening to The Dead at the end of a Quentin Tarantino Movie puff puff pass

----------


## pcosmar

> I have this vision of Reason and his girlfriend riding off into the sunset after this encounter while taking a safety break listening to The Dead at the end of a Quentin Tarantino Movie puff puff pass



It's always nice when you get away alive.

----------


## Ekrub

Pretty sure there are three UFO's in the top right of the first picture. Coincidence? I think not.

----------


## klamath

This explains  why the real border is so porus- a hundred miles away from the border harrassing US citizens?? If an illegal manages to get that far into the country he has lost himself here already. It appears the politicians are still just throwing money at the border to placate the anti illegal people, but the behind the scenes orders,  "Don't accomplish the mission!"

----------


## pcosmar

> This explains  why the real border is so porus- a hundred miles away from the border harrassing US citizens?? If an illegal manages to get that far into the country he has lost himself here already. It appears the politicians are still just throwing money at the border to placate the anti illegal people, but the behind the scenes orders,  "Don't accomplish the mission!"


That
And compliance conditioning the public to expect and accept complete control.

----------


## ClayTrainor

> This explains  why the real border is so porus- a hundred miles away from the border harrassing US citizens?? If an illegal manages to get that far into the country he has lost himself here already. It appears the politicians are still just throwing money at the border to placate the anti illegal people, but the behind the scenes orders,  "Don't accomplish the mission!"


Protecting individuals and private property is actually against the inherent interests of the state.  This is exactly the kind of results you should expect from such an incompetent and evil organization, no matter what you think they are "supposed" to be doing.

----------


## idirtify

> Protecting individuals and private property is actually against the inherent interests of the state.  This is exactly the kind of results you should expect from such an incompetent and evil organization, no matter what you think they are "supposed" to be doing.


But it would not be against the interests of private enterprise.

Idea: Lets exploit the free market to help solve this problem. I envision an enterprise that provides a pulled-over hotline. You call them the instant you get waved over. Upon police questioning, the hotline operator tells you exactly how to reply (or not reply) and what to do (or not do). Details to be ironed out would include things like payment methods and liability disclaimers (purchaser assumes risk of being victim of police brutality as a result of following instructions). Considering said problematic details, a subscription to the services would probably have to be setup beforehand; like another type of auto insurance or something. The company might also provide an array of recording and video services, and act as witnesses in court cases.  

With all the current abuses of big government, I see lots of demand for services like these; private services that help protect people from government protection rackets. I suppose the only reason the market is not seeing their birth/existence is the same old fear of reprisal from the police state element.

----------


## Matt Collins

*How to record the police:*
http://reason.com/archives/2010/09/2...ecord-the-cops


YouTube - Cops on Camera

----------


## puppetmaster

well done

----------


## ClayTrainor

> But it would not be against the interests of private enterprise.
> 
> Idea: Lets exploit the free market to help solve this problem. I envision an enterprise that provides a pulled-over hotline. You call them the instant you get waved over. Upon police questioning, the hotline operator tells you exactly how to reply (or not reply) and what to do (or not do). Details to be ironed out would include things like payment methods and liability disclaimers (purchaser assumes risk of being victim of police brutality as a result of following instructions). Considering said problematic details, a subscription to the services would probably have to be setup beforehand; like another type of auto insurance or something. The company might also provide an array of recording and video services, and act as witnesses in court cases.  
> 
> With all the current abuses of big government, I see lots of demand for services like these; private services that help protect people from government protection rackets. I suppose the only reason the market is not seeing their birth/existence is the same old fear of reprisal from the police state element.


You're absolutely right, and that is a great idea, man.  

 We should have an entrepreneur section on this board to discuss private enterprise solutions like this one, in more detail.

----------


## Anti Federalist

YouTube - Dont Talk to Police

----------


## Reason

I should have asked in the op,

I wrote down all the names of the agents involved, do you guys think it would be worth my time to file complaints with the border patrol?

My friend also suggested that I ask a lawyer about anything that could be done in regard to the agent who was looking into my political free speech bumper sticker as well as the agent who seemed almost thirsty for violence when speaking about "lighting me up"

I also have the contact info for the CHP officer who came out and was thinking of putting in a good report with his supervisor for being so helpful and calm.

----------


## Deborah K

> I should have asked in the op,
> 
> I wrote down all the names of the agents involved, do you guys think it would be worth my time to file complaints with the border patrol?
> 
> My friend also suggested that I ask a lawyer about anything that could be done in regard to the agent who was looking into my political free speech bumper sticker as well as the agent who seemed almost thirsty for violence when speaking about "lighting me up"
> 
> I also have the contact info for the CHP officer who came out and was thinking of putting in a good report with his supervisor for being so helpful and calm.


Do you have the name of the jerk who was looking forward to "lighting" you up?  I'd report his a$$ in a heartbeat.

----------


## amy31416

> I should have asked in the op,
> 
> I wrote down all the names of the agents involved, do you guys think it would be worth my time to file complaints with the border patrol?
> 
> My friend also suggested that I ask a lawyer about anything that could be done in regard to the agent who was looking into my political free speech bumper sticker as well as the agent who seemed almost thirsty for violence when speaking about "lighting me up"
> 
> I also have the contact info for the CHP officer who came out and was thinking of putting in a good report with his supervisor for being so helpful and calm.


Isn't the ACLU usually pretty good with this sort of stuff? At the very least, you could report the incident to them so they can amass these types of incidents.

----------


## aGameOfThrones

The defendants arrested at the San Clemente checkpoint suggest that its operation involves a significant extra element of intrusiveness in that only a small percentage of cars are referred to the secondary inspection﻿ area, thereby "stigmatizing" those diverted and reducing the assurances provided by equal treatment of all motorists" "...We think defendants overstate the consequences. Referrals are made for the sole purpose of conducting a routine and limited inquiry into residence status that cannot feasibly be made of every motorist where the traffic is heavy. - U.S. V Martinez-Fuerte

U.S. v Martinez-Fuerte (1976): "...We have held that checkpoint searches are constitutional only if justified by consent or﻿ probable cause to search....And our holding today is limited to the type of stops described in this opinion. -*'[A]ny further detention...must be based on consent or probable cause.')"*

The 4th Amendment held to forbid Border Patrol officers, in﻿ the absence of consent or probable cause, to search private vehicles at traffic checkpoints removed from the border & its functional equivalents, & for this purpose there is no difference between a checkpoint & a roving patrol. - U.S. V Ortiz

"Our prior cases have limited﻿ significantly the reach of this congressional authorization, requiring probable cause for any vehicle search in the interior and reasonable suspicion for inquiry stops by roving patrols. Our holding today, approving routine stops for brief questioning is confined to permanent checkpoints. We understand, of course, that neither longstanding congressional authorization nor widely prevailing practice justifies a constitutional violation".- U.S. V Martinez-Fuerte

"Border Patrol agents have no part in enforcing laws that regulate highway use, and their activities have﻿ nothing to do with an inquiry whether motorists and their vehicles are entitled, by virtue of compliance with laws governing highway usage, to be upon the public highways."~ United States v. BRIGNONI-PONCE, 422 U.S. 873﻿ (1975)

*If the traffic is not heavy stay in the lane until they let you leave.*

----------


## idirtify

> I should have asked in the op,
> 
> I wrote down all the names of the agents involved, do you guys think it would be worth my time to file complaints with the border patrol?
> 
> My friend also suggested that I ask a lawyer about anything that could be done in regard to the agent who was looking into my political free speech bumper sticker as well as the agent who seemed almost thirsty for violence when speaking about "lighting me up"
> 
> I also have the contact info for the CHP officer who came out and was thinking of putting in a good report with his supervisor for being so helpful and calm.


Nothing influences like social reinforcement. To get maximum get back in this situation (of no overt/physical abuse), the best you could probably have done was video the fed officers and put it on YT with their names. Similarly, the best you can do to reward the CHP officer is post his name and contact info here and encourage folks to thank him and show appreciation for his patriotic courage. IMO.

----------


## idirtify

> You're absolutely right, and that is a great idea, man.  
> 
>  We should have an entrepreneur section on this board to discuss private enterprise solutions like this one, in more detail.


Thats a great idea itself. See you in Forum Feedback and Ideas?

----------


## RonPaulGetsIt

> But it would not be against the interests of private enterprise.
> 
> Idea: Lets exploit the free market to help solve this problem. I envision an enterprise that provides a pulled-over hotline. You call them the instant you get waved over. Upon police questioning, the hotline operator tells you exactly how to reply (or not reply) and what to do (or not do). Details to be ironed out would include things like payment methods and liability disclaimers (purchaser assumes risk of being victim of police brutality as a result of following instructions). Considering said problematic details, a subscription to the services would probably have to be setup beforehand; like another type of auto insurance or something. The company might also provide an array of recording and video services, and act as witnesses in court cases. 
> 
> With all the current abuses of big government, I see lots of demand for services like these; private services that help protect people from government protection rackets. I suppose the only reason the market is not seeing their birth/existence is the same old fear of reprisal from the police state element.


Where can I buy some of that anti-tyranny insurance?

----------


## pcosmar

> Where can I buy some of that anti-tyranny insurance?


Check your local gun store.

----------


## Pericles

> But it would not be against the interests of private enterprise.
> 
> Idea: Let’s exploit the free market to help solve this problem. I envision an enterprise that provides a “pulled-over hotline”. You call them the instant you get waved over. Upon police questioning, the hotline operator tells you exactly how to reply (or not reply) and what to do (or not do). Details to be ironed out would include things like payment methods and liability disclaimers (“purchaser assumes risk of being victim of police brutality as a result of following instructions”). Considering said problematic details, a subscription to the services would probably have to be setup beforehand; like another type of auto insurance or something. The company might also provide an array of recording and video services, and act as witnesses in court cases.  
> 
> With all the current abuses of big government, I see lots of demand for services like these; private services that help protect people from government protection rackets. I suppose the only reason the market is not seeing their birth/existence is the same old fear of reprisal from the police state element.


Sorry, you have to get permission to sell insurance, and your rates have to be approved (where is that barf smiley?):
http://www.tdi.state.tx.us/licensing/company/index.html

----------


## Pericles

> Check your local gun store.


That is where I get mine

----------


## Ekrub

No one wants to address the UFOs?




> 


Its fairly obvious that Reason is an alien. That is why he was stopped.... With his friends looking onwards laughing at his defiance to "The Man"

Neg Rep for you my friend. Get out of my country. And off my world.

----------


## bwlibertyman

Yeah good job. That's awesome to hear a story like this.

----------


## rancher89

> Where can I find a girlfriend like the one you have?  She seems very understanding.  Or is she a libertarian herself?


This^^^Reason, you have an outstanding friend, who happens to be a girl, and I'm proud of both of you.  Keep on keepin' on.

----------


## newyearsrevolution08

The only thing that confuses me was that the first officers simply wanted to run your license however once chp came and wanted the same thing it was fine? I don't get the difference between the two and if you were apt to give your license to the second why not give it to the first set of cops?

seems to be the same thing

he simply said it was to see if your dl was valid, was it just the wording that made you feel the need not to let the first run it versus the second?

----------


## thehighwaymanq

That is incredible!

----------


## Anti Federalist

> actively practicing civil disobedience.


Subtle but important point, to me anyway.

Reason did not commit civil disobedience here.

He did not break any laws, he *followed* the law and exercised his rights under the law.

If anybody was breaking the law, it was the border patrol cops.

That's why, at the end of it all, they had to let him go.

----------


## Reason

> The only thing that confuses me was that the first officers simply wanted to run your license however once chp came and wanted the same thing it was fine? I don't get the difference between the two and if you were apt to give your license to the second why not give it to the first set of cops?
> 
> seems to be the same thing
> 
> he simply said it was to see if your dl was valid, was it just the wording that made you feel the need not to let the first run it versus the second?


Well... There were a few factors that were running through my head...

Federal vs state.

Why should I have to present ID to a federal agent for driving down a state highway and not doing anything wrong in any way?

I was already pissed at the agents and the way they were speaking to me and handling the situation.

After two hours in the desert sun I wanted the state cop to be my ally against these prick agents had been holding me against my will while discussing how awesome it would be if they got the chance to electrocute me...

I was genuinely concerned for my safety and wanted this cop to shift the balance of power for the situation.

The state cop was being a genuinely nice and understanding human being that seemed to know the importance of the 5th amendment and the ramifications of the situation with the agents.

You have to understand that by the time this officer arrived these agents were PISSED OFF that I was just sitting in my car phoning their supervisors and their supervisors' supervisors.

etc.

If this had been at a permanent checkpoint installation with cameras rolling, a lot of traffic passing by, and I had a video camera rolling I may have pushed the issue of showing my ID to the state cop without committing any crime or being suspected of committing any crime.

----------


## JoshLowry

> Subtle but important point, to me anyway.
> 
> Reason did not commit civil disobedience here.
> 
> He did not break any laws, he *followed* the law and exercised his rights under the law.
> 
> If anybody was breaking the law, it was the border patrol cops.
> 
> That's why, at the end of it all, they had to let him go.


Point taken.

Whatever they do ask is pretty much the law, color of law and all...

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Point taken.
> 
> *Whatever they do ask is pretty much the law, color of law and all*...


Or so they like to think.

If more patriots like Reason stood up, they'd get schooled, quickly, as to what the real law is.

----------


## UtahApocalypse

> Well... There were a few factors that were running through my head...
> 
> Federal vs state.
> 
> Why should I have to present ID to a federal agent for driving down a state highway and not doing anything wrong in any way?
> 
> I was already pissed at the agents and the way they were speaking to me and handling the situation.
> 
> After two hours in the desert sun I wanted the state cop to be my ally against these prick agents had been holding me against my will while discussing how awesome it would be if they got the chance to electrocute me...
> ...


Driving is not a RIGHT it is a PRIVILEGE. You do have legal culpability to show a proper and valid drivers license to law enforcement went operating a motor vehicle. 

That being said.... they still would not be able to legally ask your citizenship status.

----------


## QueenB4Liberty

Good job man!  Good story! I wish people did it more often.

----------


## Daamien

> They're not allowed to pull you over specifically for the purpose of checking your driver's license.


Actually they legally can if they are investigating a crime.  Have you ever encountered a roadblock setup to stop vehicles as an attempt to find a fugitive or wanted suspect?  Law enforcement would be operating within legal parameters by asking you to stop and identify yourself.

You do not have the right to hide your identity from the police.  The Fifth Amendment does not protect your identity, it protects you from self-incriminating by answering questions regarding a crime or circumstance.

Now, in Reason's case, the local policeman did not have the right to compel him to reveal his citizenship status to the federal agents.  However, given that he was already pulled over and was operating a motor vehicle the policeman did have authority to ask for his driver's license.

I'm just playing devil's advocate and clarifying the law and the application of the Fifth Amendment.  Reason did everything correctly and was patient.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Driving is not a RIGHT it is a PRIVILEGE. You do have legal culpability to show a proper and valid drivers license to law enforcement went operating a motor vehicle. 
> 
> That being said.... they still would not be able to legally ask your citizenship status.


Untrue.

One of the biggest lies ever foisted off on the American people.

*"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." - Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.*

The courts have held numerous times that if taxes from the general public pay for a government entity, then government *cannot* deny you use of the entity without due process.

You have a right to use the roads that your taxes pay for.

The burden of proof lies on the government to deny that right.

It is a right.

----------


## Reason

I will admit that I have not done too much digging into the issue of driving on public roads being a right vs privilege...

----------


## Philhelm

> Subtle but important point, to me anyway.
> 
> Reason did not commit civil disobedience here.
> 
> He did not break any laws, he *followed* the law and exercised his rights under the law.
> 
> If anybody was breaking the law, it was the border patrol cops.
> 
> That's why, at the end of it all, they had to let him go.


This is an important point.  To take it a step further, those who wish to abide by the Supreme Law of the Land, are the ones who are viewed as threats.  That alone is evidence enough to show that our "leaders" are unlawful.  In a properly run government, those who support the Constitution would be praised.

----------


## tremendoustie

Wow, awesome work, and thank you for defending my liberty!!

By the way, check out qik.com, if you get a smart phone. That way, even if they steal the phone, the video's already on the 'net.

And get thee to NH!!

----------


## Vessol

You did an awesome job man. My very first encounter with a police officer on a traffic stop, I was a mess..I hope that in the future that I can learn to stand up more like you did.

----------


## tropicangela

> Untrue.
> 
> One of the biggest lies ever foisted off on the American people.
> 
> *"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." - Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.*
> 
> The courts have held numerous times that if taxes from the general public pay for a government entity, then government *cannot* deny you use of the entity without due process.
> 
> You have a right to use the roads that your taxes pay for.
> ...


Good to know AF.

And good that you lived to tell Reason.

----------


## Matt Collins

YouTube - Santa Fe Police Confront Man for Open Carring Legally

----------


## tremendoustie

> You did an awesome job man. My very first encounter with a police officer on a traffic stop, I was a mess..I hope that in the future that I can learn to stand up more like you did.


I was too. I had a more recent encounter, over a broken headlight, that I think went better. I innocently and confusedly commented, "I could certainly understand if I had damaged anyone's property, I should pay them back, but I haven't harmed anything at all, and just don't see why I should pay the state anyway -- I certainly didn't harm them". Then, upon request to sign, "So, if I don't sign, you'll hurt me or something?". And, upon comment that I could fight it in court, "How much time would that take?" (all day) "So, really, I'm going to spend even more than the value of the ticket in time, anyway ... I guess I've really got no choice, huh?"

Nothing near as heroic as the OP, but the cop looked pretty shaken.

----------


## proudclod229

Okay, I didn't read the whole thread, but man, you stood up for what was right!....the thing I want to know is: what if you had to take a piss?! hahaha seriously

----------


## Anti Federalist

///

----------


## Danke

> Untrue.
> 
> One of the biggest lies ever foisted off on the American people.
> 
> *"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." - Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.*
> 
> The courts have held numerous times that if taxes from the general public pay for a government entity, then government *cannot* deny you use of the entity without due process.
> 
> You have a right to use the roads that your taxes pay for.
> ...


UtahApocalypse is correct.  But I'm not sure if he understands why.

----------


## phill4paul

Way to go Reason! You covered all the bases and I think did a bang up job. Even better the next time you run into this situation you'll know the exact measures you need to take. 
  I hope you get that video soon. Because, it seems that sooner rather than later you may run into this again and I'm sure we would all love to see the video of the next encounter.

----------


## Anti Federalist

///

----------


## Reason

Thanks for all the words of support guys & gals, I will be keeping my new video camera with me 24/7!

----------


## lucius

Alright dude...grab on to that torch...starts some more fires in the minds of humans...

Use them or loose them...




> Today my g/f and I decided to take a day off from college and go on a trip out to the local desert.
> 
> Once over the mountains and into the desert floor I headed north to show my g/f some awesome mud caverns that I had been to as a little kid many years ago.
> 
> We are now in the middle of nowhere. I think we passed maybe 3 cars during the entire 5 hours we spent in the desert.
> 
> We are driving along enjoying the sights looking for the cross road we need to find when all of a sudden there is a sudden homeland security (border patrol) check point in the middle of the 2 lane road.
> 
> There are cones and official vehicles directing any passing drivers into the shoulder where there is a movable STOP sign.
> ...

----------


## Krugerrand

> Do you have the name of the jerk who was looking forward to "lighting" you up?  I'd report his a$$ in a heartbeat.


I agree that this person should be reported.  If for no other reason,than if the person does "light up" somebody else down the road, your letter could potentially support a civil action or criminal case against him.

The other angle I would consider investigating is seeking the information they provided to the state police that got the state police car there.




> Eventually after about an hour of sitting in the sun I called the dispatch back again and asked to speak to that supervisor again and when I got her I asked to speak to her supervisor.
> 
> This guy was actually polite and sounded like he knew what he was talking about... I told him that there was no way they could detain me indefinitely and that I would be calling 911 and telling the state police and local sheriff dept. that I was being held against my will.
> 
> He responded by stating that the CHP (CA state police) was already en route.
> 
> He also clarified that I was not being "detained indefinitely" and that I was being detained until the CHP officer arrived.


I'd be hesitant to try and win a fight against the legality of the state trooper to ask for your drivers license.  But, if he was there because of a false claim submitted on the part of the Border Patrol, then I could see you going after them for something there.

You're a hero.  As mentioned, your GF also deserves great appreciation for her support.

----------


## Krugerrand

Item to consider:


DealExtreme: $59.00 Wide Angle 8-LED IR Night Vision Vehicle Safety AV Camcorder (SD Card/ DC12V/24V)


I have ordered from this site.  It can take a really long time to get what you purchase.  The quality is hit and miss.  The price is usually great - IF the quality is a hit.  Consider shopping for the same product elsewhere.

----------


## Danke

> Item to consider:
> 
> I have ordered from this site.  It can take a really long time to get what you purchase.  The quality is hit and miss.  The price is usually great - IF the quality is a hit.  Consider shopping for the same product elsewhere.


I'd like a device like that to stream to an off site server in case they confiscate it.

I'd imagine a smart phone could be set up that way.  Porcupine 411 site does that with audio.

----------


## idirtify

> I'd like a device like that to stream to an off site server in case they confiscate it.
> 
> I'd imagine a smart phone could be set up that way.  Porcupine 411 site does that with audio.


Yes, that would be ideal. I would also like to learn more about how to do it.

----------


## Mystical Nationalist

> Today my g/f and I decided to take a day off from college and go on a trip out to the local desert.
> 
> Once over the mountains and into the desert floor I headed north to show my g/f some awesome mud caverns that I had been to as a little kid many years ago.
> 
> We are now in the middle of nowhere. I think we passed maybe 3 cars during the entire 5 hours we spent in the desert.
> 
> We are driving along enjoying the sights looking for the cross road we need to find when all of a sudden there is a sudden homeland security (border patrol) check point in the middle of the 2 lane road.
> 
> There are cones and official vehicles directing any passing drivers into the shoulder where there is a movable STOP sign.
> ...






I wholeheartedly admire your firm conviction to your interpretation of the 5th amendment. 

However, I hope the time that it took for you to engage in this legal exercise did not keep these officers from the more valuable task of detaining border jumpers - many of whom are probably raping the property rights, liberty, and security of US citizens as we speak.

----------


## pcosmar

> I wholeheartedly admire your firm conviction to your interpretation of the 5th amendment. 
> 
> However, I hope the time that it took for you to engage in this legal exercise did not keep these officers from the more valuable task of detaining border jumpers - many of whom are probably raping the property rights, liberty, and security of US citizens as we speak.


*BULL$#@!*
If they had any intention of doing that they would be on the border.
 Or patrolling the border.
Pure bull$#@!.

They are there to give the false impression that they are doing something. and to teach compliance to Americans.

----------


## tremendoustie

> the more valuable task of detaining border jumpers - many of whom are  probably raping the property rights, liberty, and security of US  citizens as we speak.


Prohibiting an owner from renting to, or employing a person without approval of the federal government is the violation of property rights -- and the violation of liberty.

And peacefully seeking such employment doesn't "rape" anyone's "security".

----------


## james1906

> *BULL$#@!*
> If they had any intention of doing that they would be on the border.
>  Or patrolling the border.
> Pure bull$#@!.
> 
> They are there to give the false impression that they are doing something. and to teach compliance to Americans.


This.  If more citizens tell border patrol to patrol the $#@!ing border like their name entails, then maybe more people sneaking into the country would be caught.

----------


## squarepusher

I believe its the 4th amendment, the 5th amendment is protection against trial twice for the same crime.

----------


## Reason

YouTube - MARV Rolls Through Internal Checkpoint Unscathed

----------


## Anti Federalist

Well deserved bump

----------


## Reason

https://www.checkpointusa.org/blog/i...meland_securit

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

That checkpoint is the kind of society the rabid border stasi's want us to live under. They call that freedom and liberty. Give me a break.

----------


## CCTelander

> That checkpoint is the kind of society the rabid border stasi's want us to live under. They call that freedom and liberty. Give me a break.



To a great many people in the so-called "liberty movement" freedom means the freedom to do what THEY want you to do. Sad, but true.

----------


## Reason

> That checkpoint is the kind of society the rabid border stasi's want us to live under. They call that freedom and liberty. Give me a break.


Scary isn't it...

----------


## Modern_Matthew

I salute you.

However, some of the replies I've read on this have saddened me. I can't believe people on here condone a law enforcement officer to coerce you into revealing your identity. 

As long as I'm not coercing or harming another individual or their property, then no one should have the right to coerce, harm, question, or detain me for any reason.

----------


## Ireland4Liberty

Courage is truly a beautiful virtue.

----------


## steve92004

I just wanted to say that I admire what you did

I live in Borrego Springs right by where you were accosted
This whole homeland security thing is getting way out of hand
I drive through the highway 86 checkpoint everyday, it's no fun
I've been in secondary more times that I can count for not bowing down to them
That Highway Patrol officer was probably one of ours from Borrego, they aint nothing nice but at least they respect your rights

people need to step up... it's time

----------


## RideTheDirt

Great Job man.

----------


## Madly_Sane

I would've called them nazis, its just in my nature 
But other than that, well done, sir.

----------


## AGRP

No video footage?

----------


## MyLibertyStuff

> Today my g/f and I decided to take a day off from college and go on a trip out to the local desert.
> 
> Once over the mountains and into the desert floor I headed north to show my g/f some awesome mud caverns that I had been to as a little kid many years ago.
> 
> We are now in the middle of nowhere. I think we passed maybe 3 cars during the entire 5 hours we spent in the desert.
> 
> We are driving along enjoying the sights looking for the cross road we need to find when all of a sudden there is a sudden homeland security (border patrol) check point in the middle of the 2 lane road.
> 
> There are cones and official vehicles directing any passing drivers into the shoulder where there is a movable STOP sign.
> ...


Congrats! I honestly dont know if I could do that out in the middle of the desert, but I would guess no...

----------


## Reason

> Congrats! I honestly dont know if I could do that out in the middle of the desert, but I would guess no...


20/20 Hindsight, I don't know if this was the greatest place to draw the line but it was a split second decision that I was forced to make when confronted with the initial agent who came across as hostile from the very beginning.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> 20/20 Hindsight, I don't know if this was the greatest place to draw the line but it was a split second decision that I was forced to make when confronted with the initial agent who came across as hostile from the very beginning.


No need to second guess yourself.

That's the nature of this beast we're fighting, split second decisions are required.

Ya' did just fine.

----------


## jmdrake

> Today my g/f and I decided to take a day off from college and go on a trip out to the local desert.
> 
> Once over the mountains and into the desert floor I headed north to show my g/f some awesome mud caverns that I had been to as a little kid many years ago.
> 
> We are now in the middle of nowhere. I think we passed maybe 3 cars during the entire 5 hours we spent in the desert.
> 
> We are driving along enjoying the sights looking for the cross road we need to find when all of a sudden there is a sudden homeland security (border patrol) check point in the middle of the 2 lane road.
> 
> There are cones and official vehicles directing any passing drivers into the shoulder where there is a movable STOP sign.
> ...

----------


## Reason

Considering attending CPAC in a few months, will make sure to bring my video camera for my travels =D

----------


## Lucille

This thread was just blogged by Matt Welch at _Hit & Run_.




> Read all about it at ronpaulforums.com. My favorite part (besides the sheer righteous, time-wasting ballsiness of standing up to The Man)

----------


## puppetmaster

good!

----------


## Waggoneer

Way to go. If 10% of the drivers did this they would have to remove these checkpoints. "Just going along" and taking the easy road leads to tyranny. 
I have a video of when I did this. I did alright, but it was tough as I was in a car with several others. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msFEj-UBU9Q

----------


## Krugerrand

> Way to go. If 10% of the drivers did this they would have to remove these checkpoints. "Just going along" and taking the easy road leads to tyranny. 
> I have a video of when I did this. I did alright, but it was tough as I was in a car with several others. 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msFEj-UBU9Q


Welcome to RPF, Waggoneer!  Glad to have you here.

----------


## itshappening

welcome new members!

----------


## low preference guy

> Read all about it at ronpaulforums.com. My favorite part (besides the sheer righteous, *time-wasting* ballsiness of standing up to The Man)


In a decent world, Matt Welch would be fired within hours of writing that crap.

----------


## JoshLowry

It does waste time.  It's worth it though because it's righteous.  Don't take it as an insult.

----------


## low preference guy

> It does waste time.  It's worth it though because it's righteous.  Don't take it as an insult.


I don't think Reason wasted time. The officers did.

Exercising one's rights isn't wasting time. If you don't exercise your rights, you lose them.

----------


## JoshLowry

> Exercising one's rights isn't wasting time. If you don't exercise your rights, you lose them.


Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

----------


## LedHed

I give up. What part of the 5th amendment were you invoking for reason to refuse to answer questions and show ID? Did you mean the 4th amendment?

Also, at what point do you feel that you were placing your life "on the line?" Did they threaten to shoot you on the spot?

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

Kudos to everyone who does this civil disobedience. I would be their worst nightmare if I lived in the Southwest. Remember folks, 4th and 5th amendment. Never talk to the cops. They either have to arrest you or let you go and 99% of the time they will let you go because they know what they are doing is illegal. If they arrest you, you have them in the vice. I hate to say this, but the Government listens to money, rather than reason, liberty, or the law they are supposed to uphold. Sue them once and get them for a lot of money and they'll start to back off. Then again, you aren't guaranteed the courts will actually rule in the affirmative, and in that case and least you have documented proof of the Government failing its charters to the full extent. That is what essentially the colonies did until it become so obvious, so obtuse, and so tyrannous that they listed the affronts and fought a Revolution. Then again, the extent of documentation we have is enough to have a revolution right now, we just need more people to support the movement.

^ This type of civil disobedience (getting arrested and suing) is how many of our open carry rights were won back.

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

> I give up. What part of the 5th amendment were you invoking for reason to refuse to answer questions and show ID? Did you mean the 4th amendment?
> 
> Also, at what point do you feel that you were placing your life "on the line?" Did they threaten to shoot you on the spot?


The right not to incriminate oneself, which means the right to be silent. Just because you are silent doesn't mean you are guilty, what kind of crap is that?

----------


## LedHed

> Kudos to everyone who does this civil disobedience. I would be their worst nightmare if I lived in the Southwest.


I'm pretty certain they probably have worse nightmares than you to deal with. You'd be more like a running joke at shift change.

So, we have an illegal immigrant problem here in the USA. Would you agree with that, or do you feel we should have open borders with no constraints on who (and WHAT) comes in and who goes out? If you feel we should have some control over entry into the country, how would you propose this control be implemented without random spot checks being part of the process?

From the description of the event, it appears that the underpaid agents who detained the guy were pretty civil and polite. Was he dragged out of his car? Was he handcuffed? Was he arrested? Was he threatened? As far as the title goes, it should be changed to: _"I was temporarily impeded and slightly inconvenienced on a public road in the name of my definition of liberty"_

If it was me? I would have shown them my license, answered their innocuous questions and been on my way after thanking them for doing an otherwise thankless job. But that's just what the incredibly overwhelming majority of other patriotic Americans would do as well.

What the hell, though. It broke up their otherwise boring day and gave them something to laugh about at shift change.

----------


## hazek

Do not reply to LedHed. He is a troll and is by his own words in another thread he is here for his own entertainment. Do not fuel it by replying.

----------


## LedHed

> Do not reply to LedHed. He is a troll and is by his own words in another thread *he is here for his own entertainment*. Do not fuel it by replying.


Absolutely! 

Entertainment - •_Entertainment consists of any activity which provides a diversion_ or permits people to amuse themselves in their leisure time. 

And you aren't?

Engaging with those who may or may not agree with me is intellectually stimulating and allows me to examine and sometimes adjust my previous philosophies and perspectives based on cogent and logical arguments or personal views from the other side. I include that in my personal definition of "entertainment" as being a diversion, and I do find many of the comments here as being the universal definition of "amusing." 

I also support many (not all) of Dr. Paul's stated positions on various current issues which have a direct impact on me and my way of life, although I also feel he is a very long shot for nomination by any established party for several reasons, not the least of which is his age. Reading the posts of other suppoters here helps me to better undertstand what types of people who also support him and their own political viewpoints. This entertains me, too.

Why are YOU here?

----------


## VAPA

Another incident shows just how important video is when dealing with the Border Patrol and a "guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent" police state.  New thread started here, http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-Border-Patrol

----------


## Krugerrand

bump for those who didn't get a chance to give the Superman of RPF some rep on this one last September

----------


## Krugerrand

Another bump in light of Paul Revered's thread:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...unter-with-DHS

----------


## Reason

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/mar/07...-check-points/

----------


## Barrex

Pictures are gone...

----------


## DamianTV

> Do not reply to LedHed. He is a troll and is by his own words in another thread he is here for his own entertainment. Do not fuel it by replying.


Looks like he is banned at the moment.  Proceed to reply, just to get his goat...  

---

Egads!  Another troll!




> Wow, excuse me, but you sound like you have your head up your #ss and are totally delusional. How did you risk your life by being a doucher?


Can we pretty please unban this guy just so we can -Rep the $#@! out of him?  Then you can reban him again!  

(... or allow +/- Reps for banned members ...)

----------

