masterrig 1 #26 January 31, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteGot ya. So in your view it's ok for the government to harass, lie to, and punish citizens if in their view the citizen is a jerk, a douche, or a poo poo head regardless of whether said jerk has broken the law. And I guess in your view, you give a pass to the Agents who lie several times to the driver, right. Not jerks? Right on. Very enlightened. Well, just enjoy yourself and others will defend your freedoms for you so you don't have to get your hands dirty. I never said the Agents handled it right! They really didn't BUT the driver of the car approached the incident WRONG. Had he rolled his window all the way down, answered a couple questions, he'd have been on his way with no problem. The driver set it up and the Agents let that asshole get to them. I do believe, this is a rather 'isolated' incident. The Agents I've dealt with have handled things more professionally. The Agent here, might have been a rookie. Your defense of this guy is a bit mis-guided... I think. Plain and simple... the driver was acting like a jerk and has had previous encounters similar to this. Got NO sympathy for him. Chuck I see. You think both are wrong, but you slam the driver (who may have been wrong in your eyes, but acted legally whether you like it or not) instead of the agents who were LEGALLY wrong (violating the Constitution as specifically defined by the Supreme Court in its case law concerning these checkpoints). You're just outraged at the color of the shirt worn by the driver (oh, it's so tacky) yet have practically nothing to say about armed agents violating the Constitution! Priorities much? Yeah no sympathy with him. He's had previous encounters and was looking for it. That's why he set up cameras. He was setting them up. Like a DZ owner who gets her student rigs robbed by some meth-heds and then decides to set up a camera to catch the illegal act. She was setting them up! Like Martin Luther King, the dude did that shit all the time (standing up for his rights as an American in the face of an abusive and legally wrong government), no sympathy for him, either. You make no sense! I think, you just like to argue for the sake of arguing. I'm done here. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #28 February 1, 2011 breath... !! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigbearfng 18 #29 February 1, 2011 OK, let's take another look at this.... Border patrol not only check illegal immigrants, they also check for anything illegal coming in; wehter it be drugs, assholes with kids they're molesting or whatever else comes across the border. They are law enforcement. So if I've got a guy that won't roll down his window, my first reasonable suspicion would be that he doesn't want the smell of drugs (or even explosives) wafting out of the vehicle where I or the dogs could smell it. Make sense so far? So I would not have had a problem with the BP insisting on searching that car. So I'd say they showed an amazing amount of restraint!!!!! And the guy is just a baiting asshole that I sincerly hope was reamed by his CO; as he most assuredley deserves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 612 #30 February 1, 2011 Are you a parant or have you been around young kids much? Young children will "obey" you while deliberately trying to show you who is the boss. For example tell our son to get in the car NOW or he will be punished he will start walking to the car - 1 step every few seconds Is he complying? I see this drivers behaviour in exactly the same light. For some people everyone around them is an arsehole, if they stepped back and looked in the mirror they might get a shock. Don't forget that guy is facing disciplinary action, jeez he's unlucky seems everyone is out to get himBy the way and for the record - with your stance on "rights" and freedoms I really don't think you should ever bitch about illegal immigration. I would hate for an innocent citizen to be inconvenienced in the process. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAPA 0 #31 February 1, 2011 I think there have been too many jumps above 20K without oxygen for a couple in this crowd... Border Patrol suspicion less checkpoints (ie not on the border), have a DIFFERENT set of rules applied to them by the Supreme Court of the United States. Why? Because in the U.S. we have ruled that the government cannot just randomly pull people over, you know, just to check how things are going and to just see if maybe something illegal is going on. We have said that is a violation of the FOURTH AMENDMENT (please go read it). So, when the Supreme Court said these checkpoints can exist they gave SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS. One of those, is they are limited to BRIEFLY determine immigration status. That's all they can fish for. Now if they happen to see another federal violation committed in their presence, they can move on that (but that's not just being generally "suspicious"). Does that make sense? I know you guys are not lawyers and are too lazy to research the law of the link provided with the video. Got it. But until you pull your head out, please save the tone because you just look like idiots. But, hey there are some really good DZs in North Korea and I think you'd really like the politics. Ever thought about moving? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAPA 0 #32 February 1, 2011 QuoteAre you a parant or have you been young kids much? I have been [around] young kids in school, not as a [parant], but rather as somebody witnessing young people learn the basics of how to read and write (and type). I'm guessing this was not your school I saw. If only it was just your grammar and not your logic. But it's both. Do yourself a favor and STFU. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 612 #33 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuoteAre you a parant or have you been young kids much? I have been [around] young kids in school, not as a [parant], but rather as somebody witnessing young people learn the basics of how to read and write (and type). I'm guessing this was not your school I saw. If only it was just your grammar and not your logic. But it's both. Do yourself a favor and STFU. Sorry my grammar and spelling suck. I drop into the forums and don't spend much time proof reading. I guess you have seen how kids comply while driving people nuts then.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAPA 0 #34 February 1, 2011 It has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. It's telling when only idiots speak up and nobody with any sense chimes in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
david3 0 #35 February 1, 2011 QuoteIt has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. Cool. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #36 February 1, 2011 Quote It has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. It's telling when only idiots speak up and nobody with any sense chimes in. What did you expect here? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #37 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIAll he had to do was unroll the window a reasonable amount at the first area and all would have been good.. So how would the driver rolling the window down all the way, have done anything to help the BP determine his citizenship? It would have helped set the scene of a compliant and helpful person, rather than someone out to be awkward. Have you ever tried to talk next to a busy road? It is very difficult to hear against the background noise. And do you really think the window being all the way down would have helped the agent determine citizenship when he never asked about it? He asked about car ownership (which the driver answered). Don't you think if the driver were asked, "Are you a U.S. citizen" instead, that he would have answered that question? That questi0on was brought up about 2:40~ in the video. I still did not hear or see where the BPA Violated the Constitution. I did see where the driver acted like and asshat and do not think he nor your methods are helping any cause. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #38 February 1, 2011 QuoteOK, let's take another look at this.... Border patrol not only check illegal immigrants, they also check for anything illegal coming in; wehter it be drugs, assholes with kids they're molesting or whatever else comes across the border. They are law enforcement. So if I've got a guy that won't roll down his window, my first reasonable suspicion would be that he doesn't want the smell of drugs (or even explosives) wafting out of the vehicle where I or the dogs could smell it. Make sense so far? So I would not have had a problem with the BP insisting on searching that car. So I'd say they showed an amazing amount of restraint!!!!! And the guy is just a baiting asshole that I sincerly hope was reamed by his CO; as he most assuredley deserves. Add his unbecoming conduct. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #39 February 1, 2011 QuoteIt has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. It's telling when only idiots speak up and nobody with any sense chimes in. Are you "Pot" or "Kettle"? MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #40 February 1, 2011 QuoteIt has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. It's telling when only idiots speak up and nobody with any sense chimes in. idiots respond to idiotic posts. what does that make me right now? well... yeah... an idiot.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #41 February 2, 2011 QuoteOK, let's take another look at this.... Border patrol not only check illegal immigrants, they also check for anything illegal coming in; wehter it be drugs, assholes with kids they're molesting or whatever else comes across the border. They are law enforcement. So if I've got a guy that won't roll down his window, my first reasonable suspicion would be that he doesn't want the smell of drugs (or even explosives) wafting out of the vehicle where I or the dogs could smell it. Make sense so far? So I would not have had a problem with the BP insisting on searching that car. So I'd say they showed an amazing amount of restraint!!!!! And the guy is just a baiting asshole that I sincerly hope was reamed by his CO; as he most assuredley deserves. Yes, I agree, they did show a great deal of restraint. They were definately, dealing with an A#-1 jerk. In looking again, at the video, I see it a bit differently. The driver of the car really thought he knew it all. Thanks for pointing-out, what you did. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #42 February 2, 2011 QuoteIt has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. It's telling when only idiots speak up and nobody with any sense chimes in. But, enough about you.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #43 February 2, 2011 QuoteIs there a part of our Constitution that allows a citizen to be a dickhead without consequences? Not in the constitution but in the Bill of Rights. I think the 4th amendment applies. Being a (debatable) dickhead is not a crime.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #44 February 2, 2011 QuoteIt has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. . Thank God.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #45 February 2, 2011 Quote Quote It has been nice, but I'm done with this forum. . Thank God. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAPA 0 #46 February 3, 2011 I just wanted to come back real quick and apologize for insulting a few of you, saying you were morons and implying that I had the only reasonable argument and facts. Sometimes I just forget my gentle nature. My apologies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #47 February 3, 2011 QuoteI just wanted to come back real quick and apologize for insulting a few of you, saying you were morons and implying that I had the only reasonable argument and facts. Sometimes I just forget my gentle nature. My apologies. takes character to come back and apologize. thanks-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 612 #48 February 3, 2011 Quote Quote I just wanted to come back real quick and apologize for insulting a few of you, saying you were morons and implying that I had the only reasonable argument and facts. Sometimes I just forget my gentle nature. My apologies. takes character to come back and apologize. thanks Not only takes character, but he owes beer for the first ever apology in SCExperienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAPA 0 #49 February 3, 2011 QuoteI just wanted to come back real quick and apologize for insulting a few of you, saying you were morons and implying that I had the only reasonable argument and facts. Sometimes I just forget my gentle nature. My apologies. Since we're all friends again... QuoteThe driver was a douche. He got what was coming to him. QuoteOK, let's take another look at this.... Border patrol not only check illegal immigrants, they also check for anything illegal coming in; wehter it be drugs, assholes with kids they're molesting or whatever else comes across the border. They are law enforcement. So if I've got a guy that won't roll down his window, my first reasonable suspicion would be that he doesn't want the smell of drugs (or even explosives) wafting out of the vehicle where I or the dogs could smell it. Make sense so far? So I would not have had a problem with the BP insisting on searching that car. So I'd say they showed an amazing amount of restraint!!!!! QuoteI still did not hear or see where the BPA Violated the Constitution. Matt Here is what the official Border Patrol Inspector's Field Manual (2008), which is compiled to comply with the law set by the Courts, has to say: "18.6(E) Checkpoints: The Border Patrol conducts two types of inland traffic-checking operations: checkpoints and roving patrols. Border Patrol agents can make routine vehicle stops without any suspicion to inquire into citizenship and immigration status at a reasonably located permanent or temporary checkpoint provided the checkpoint is used for the purpose of determining citizenship of those who pass through it, and not for the general search for those persons or the vehicle. Inquiries must be brief and limited to the immigration status of the occupants of the vehicle. The only permissible search is a “plain view” inspection to ascertain whether there are any concealed illegal aliens." "18.7(B) Reasonable Suspicion: Before an inspector may constitutionally detain a person (non-entry related case), the inspector must have reasonable suspicion that the person is an alien and is illegally in the United States. This higher degree of suspicion arises generally in questioning persons encountered in and around the port who are awaiting persons referred to secondary. This suspicion is based on questioning of alienage alone and also involves specific articulable facts, such as particular characteristics or circumstances which the inspector can describe in words." The Border Patrol refused to provide that manual for quite some time, in light of several lawsuits, but eventually a lawyer got it with his FOIA request. It's based on the case law previously cited, including: "We have already noted that the permissible duration of the stop is limited to the time reasonably necessary to complete a brief investigation of the matter within the scope of the stop. The scope of an immigration checkpoint stop is limited to the justifying, programmatic purpose of the stop: determining the citizenship status of persons passing through the checkpoint. The permissible duration of an immigration checkpoint stop is therefore the time reasonably necessary to determine the citizenship status of the persons stopped. This would include the time necessary to ascertain the number and identity of the occupants of the vehicle, inquire about citizenship status, request identification or other proof of citizenship, and request consent to extend the detention. The permissible duration of an immigration checkpoint stop is therefore brief. Indeed, the brevity of a valid immigration stop was a principal rationale for the Supreme Court's conclusion in Martinez-Fuerte that immigration checkpoints are constitutional: 'The stop does intrude to a limited extent on motorists' right to free passage without interruption; but it involves only a brief detention of travelers during which [a]ll that is required of the vehicle's occupants is a response to a brief question or two and possibly the production of a document evidencing a right to be in the United States.' Within this brief window of time in which a Border Patrol agent may conduct a checkpoint stop, however, we will not scrutinize the particular questions a Border Patrol agent chooses to ask as long as in sum they generally relate to determining citizenship status." - Fifth Circuit (U.S. vs Machuca Barrera), 2001 Quote"As we have stated, 'the Constitution [is] violated...when the detention extends beyond the valid reason for the initial stop.'" - Fifth Circuit (U.S. vs Machuca Barrera), 2001 So does anybody still think the Border Patrol did not violate the Constitution? And for those who have concentrated their venom on the driver's behavior, and now understand that this was a violation of the driver's civil rights upon clear proof, don't you think it's strange to spend your energy pointing fingers at the driver who simply didn't want (and was not legally required) to roll his window down all the way for any number of reasons, such as perhaps one of these: 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btzlmMRU6pI 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJF5cUWXA_A BTW the Baptist Pastor in that video refused to go to secondary, refused to answer any questions, refused to roll down his window despite the agent's lying that a drug dog hit on his car--not only did he have his windows smashed in, get tazed for 20 seconds, and have his head slammed into the broken edge requiring 11 stitches, he was charged with multiple crimes. In his first trial, the judge dismissed the case with prejudice (ie, saying the prosecution was out to lunch). The prosecution appealed the case, and Pastor Anderson had to go to another trial to defend himself. This time it wasn't dismissed and a jury heard it. Verdict--> NOT GUILTY on all charges (and one juror thanked the Pastor for standing up for our rights). Youtube has the first trial for those who wish to watch. 3. Why Don't You Just Roll Your Window Down and Answer the Question?? https://www.checkpointusa.org/blog/index.php/2010/02/12/why_don_t_you_just_roll_down_your_window The military driver was exercising his Constitutional rights, and honoring his oath to defend the Constitution domestically. You may not like the way he talked, the clothes he wore, or his legal course of action but you SHOULD appreciate that, and spend your venom on the clear Constitutional violation and unlawful actions of the Border Patrol. Except you Nigel, you're not American so you can still believe in the divine right of Kings or whatever you believe. Still think these guys got what they deserved? I'll let the Pastor respond to that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix5i8Iv-OmE&feature=related Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #50 February 3, 2011 Apology accepted. Just don't let it happen again. I think, at one time or anoter, we've all said something we regretted. It's cool! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
