Got stopped at a check point....

[Deborah K]

If I have a question, I search for the answer.

In my opinion "questioning", no matter how brief, is searching without probably cause.

They shouldn't be questioning me for answers (searching for info when it comes to me) for driving down a road.

If I was crossing a border I would understand the holdup.

Just my two cents... <3

Crossing a border as in a state border, or a nation border? This was a state border. And while I applaud anyone who would just drive through without stopping and go through the inevitable onslaught of pure hell they would thus experience, I chose to answer the questions and refuse the search. As a result, I and my family are home safe and sound and our vehicle was not entered.

I choose my battles carefully, and that was not the hill I chose to die on.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

...while traveling from Texas to Cali. They wanted to board our RV and when they realized I wasn't going to let them, they backed off. That is the first time that has ever happened to me and I have lived in the southwest my entire life in all four border states.

Good for you Debbie!!!!

 

[Chester Copperpot]

what were they checking for?

Driving while Hispanic.

actually not.. Theyre just getting people used to the idea of checkpoints and stopping and showing papers.. It was part of the REAL ID law that went into effect.

 

[ghengis86]

I got pulled over for the second time in my life last night. I was furious cause I was driving perfectly..

Then the cop came up to the window and said, "did you know you're license plate illuminaters are out?"


Touche.


Needless to say he let me go after a quick flashlight test on the eyes I'd just smoked some fat bong loads, but he actually complimented me on how well I did on the test. Good to know. Must have thought I had allergies or something with those red eyes

Anyway I've seen people driving at night without license plate lights before and it looks really shady.

UNITED STATES V. MARTINEZ-FUERTE, 428 U. S. 543 (1976)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Page 428 U. S. 566
In summary, we hold that stops for brief questioning routinely conducted at permanent checkpoints are consistent with the Fourth
Amendment, and need not be authorized by warrant. [Footnote 19] The principal protection of Fourth

was this a permanent checkpoint?

i'm of the type that will resist politely, but with no smile. Always good to live to fight another day. I think deb's approach was perfect; she wasn't detained or searched and lived to fight another day. i probably wouldn't have been to nice/smiley, but whatever...different means, same ends; not tased, detained, cuffed, etc.

Danno had me laughing

 

[JoshLowry]

Crossing a border as in a state border, or a nation border? This was a state border. And while I applaud anyone who would just drive through without stopping and go through the inevitable onslaught of pure hell they would thus experience, I chose to answer the questions and refuse the search. As a result, I and my family are home safe and sound and our vehicle was not entered.

I choose my battles carefully, and that was not the hill I chose to die on.

Didn't know it was at a state border.

I just like my privacy. You did well as I said earlier.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

You were in a Constitution-free zone. If the gentleman knew of this, you would not have been in a good position if you were making the 4th Amendment argument.

the constitution free zone doesnt exist anymore as far as I know.. If law enforcement wants to search your vehicle they must have a warrant or permission as per Judge Napolitano some months ago he said the SCOTUS had recently reached that decision.

 

[raystone]

Driving while Hispanic.

actually not.. Theyre just getting people used to the idea of checkpoints and stopping and showing papers.. It was part of the REAL ID law that went into effect.

The REAL ID law did NOT go into effect. It was stopped by state sovereignty stances by over 30 states that either enacted legislation not complying or with resolutions.

 

[devil21]

If I have a question, I search for the answer.

In my opinion "questioning", no matter how brief, is searching without probably cause.

They shouldn't be questioning me for answers (searching for info when it comes to me) for driving down a road.

If I was crossing a border I would understand the holdup.

Just my two cents... <3

The 4th Amendment requires a reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed for you to be detained or questioned. This has been upheld as the standard for traffic stops by SCOTUS repeatedly. Otherwise, cops could just pull you over because they're bored and go fishing. When you are stopped at a checkpoint, there is no reasonable suspicion of a crime, therefore the checkpoint is illegal. It's pretty simple really. Checkpoint = 4th amendment violation. The 4th amendment doesn't just cover physical searches of your property or your person. It covers the mere act of stopping you from proceeding on your way.

http://www.fpd-ohs.org/PV_New/Pv4B.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion

 

[Danke]

Don't register your car with the State. Then lien them up if they detain you.

 

[raystone]

You are entitled to your opinion. Everyone will have to make their own choices when faced with situations such as this. Just because I am okay with check points to control human trafficking does not mean I am okay with being searched without probable cause.

What part of my opinion don't you agree with ? That checkpoints are unconstitutional ?


The bottom line for you is, if you continue to support checkpoints for the "greater good" of stopping illegals, then you must support searching your RV for the greater good of finding more illegals.

 

[Deborah K]

The 4th Amendment requires a reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed for you to be detained or questioned. This has been upheld as the standard for traffic stops by SCOTUS repeatedly. Otherwise, cops could just pull you over because they're bored and go fishing. When you are stopped at a checkpoint, there is no reasonable suspicion of a crime, therefore the checkpoint is illegal. It's pretty simple really. Checkpoint = 4th amendment violation. The 4th amendment doesn't just cover physical searches of your property or your person. It covers the mere act of stopping you from proceeding on your way.

http://www.fpd-ohs.org/PV_New/Pv4B.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion

The fourth amendment says nothing about being stopped and questioned.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[Deborah K]

What part of my opinion don't you agree with ? That checkpoints are unconstitutional ?


The bottom line for you is, if you continue to support checkpoints for the "greater good" of stopping illegals, then you must support searching your RV for the greater good of finding more illegals.

The bolded part. I've already explained my position on this.

 

[james1906]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

If you are stopped, you are detained. You are held by the government for no reason, therefore the 4A is violated. Border Patrol should as their name implies, patrol the border. Interstate Highways miles inland is not their jurisdiction.

 

[GBurr]

The fourth amendment says nothing about being stopped and questioned.

Yes it does. You and your vehicle are being seized. The 4th protects against seizure.

 

[Deborah K]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

If you are stopped, you are detained. You are held by the government for no reason, therefore the 4A is violated. Border Patrol should as their name implies, patrol the border. Interstate Highways miles inland is not their jurisdiction.

These are border states. And a study of human trafficking will indicate that smuggling doesn't just take place at the Mexican border, it continues from border state to border state.

I disagree with your interpretation of the 4th and so does the SCOTUS.

 

[Deborah K]

Yes it does. You and your vehicle are being seized. The 4th protects against seizure.

There is a difference between being seized and being stopped.

 

[Danke]

Yes it does. You and your vehicle are being seized. The 4th protects against seizure.

Is it your vehicle if you surrendered your title to the State by registering it? Or do you just have an equity interests?

 

[dannno]

Is it your vehicle if you surrendered your title to the State by registering it? Or do you just have an equity interests?

So you think states have the right to prevent you from traveling if you're not willing to give up your property?

I saw a guy who got detained for walking down the highway today, so how does one go about traveling without giving up property to the state?

 

[Danke]

So you think states have the right to prevent you from traveling if you're not willing to give up your property?

au contraire

 

[devil21]

There is a difference between being seized and being stopped.

Sorry Deborah but you are wrong. Read the links I posted.