masterrig

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? I watched the video and I am sorry but the border patrol guy is polite. He says "Can you wind down your window sir?" Muppet "Yes" BP "Is that as far as it will go?" Muppet "it can go down more" ---> ATTITUDE PROBLEM is here! If a guy askes you if it can wind down more why not simply wind it down if you are not looking for confrontation? BP "Is this your vehicle sir?" is the 3rd question asked. Honestly what did the guy think when someone asks if your window can wind down more? Did he think that the BP guy doesn't know how far a cars window winds down? Sure if he was asked "are you a US citizen?" he would probably have answered. I have no problem with authorities giving suspicious or awkward people a closer look - in my opinion that does help to reduce the threat of terrorism and criminal activities. I wonder why, the Agent didn't ask the guy about his citizenship? I think the Agent may have gotten a bit 'rattled' by the driver's actions. Makes me wonder how often the agent has worked a check-point. Still, the driver's actions were probably throwing-up 'red flags' all over the place. I do believe, you get a lot farther by cooperating and not being a jerk by showing-off how informed you are. Bottom line... the driver, being in the military, should've known better and not been such an arrogant jerk. The Border Patrol Agents were courteous, though. Chuck

You've got a good sense of humor! Chuck

Imet John Stanford in 1996, when he gave me my practical for 'seats'. At the time, he had a new container he had been working on. As he told me, he waited too long and the 'Wings' beat him to the punch. the container John was building was the spittin' image of the 'Wings'. If, Im not mistaken, he quit making containers to make camera vests for outdoor photographers. Very interesting man! Chuck

I'm sorry but... that was funny. Chuck

You have consistently painted the interaction by giving the agents a pass on illegal action (I have posted the law and Border Patrol procedure, there is no dispute they broke the law and you have offered not a single shred of substance otherwise), instead choosing to call the driver a jerk, say that he "set it up," and implying that he had it coming. You have no sympathy, you said, for this guy who behaved legally, did nothing wrong, and was harassed by the government for thirty five minutes. Beyond that you said that he should have just rolled down his window and answered a few questions, despite the clear fact the driver answered every question other than naming his commanding officer. I hope you have more attention to detail when you're packing chutes. I think you nailed it. You do not give a shit if your government breaks the law and harasses its citizens. You are right, I am hurt by the apathy of Americans who think this is ok, and who side with unlawful armed power over the rights of their countryman. Take care. I'm not going to fool with you. You continually mis-quote me, twist my words and come real close to personal attacks and etc. That's my last word on the matter. Chuck

I think, you're just hurt because everyone isn't jumping on your band-wagon and agreeing with you. You might try trolling in other waters. Have a nice day!

Go back and re-read any of my posts... I just flat, didn't present that example. You must have me confused with someone who gives a shit. Chuck

#1!!! Chuck

Ha ha. No. There are plenty of wise asses who haven't broken the law. Come on guys, just admit when you're wrong. I've posted the laws, if you want to respond, respond with the law and legal citations. It's not that hard! You're right back at it after a very hollow apology. Chuck

Also, the fact they are dealing with a 'wise-ass' could be enough to lead them to believe he's up to something or hiding something? Chuck

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

That there's funny... I don't care who you are! Chuck

Thank God. Chuck

Got-up this morning to feed my horse and the thermometer read '-1'! I can't remember it ever being near this cold, here. We're looking at another day of cold temperatures then, Friday,it;s supposed to be in the low forties. Chuck

Here in far West Texas, it's 9-deg. and by morning, about 6-deg. We had a light dusting of snow this morning. Supposed to only be 19-deg. tomorrow, for the high. Don't care to hear about global warming! Chuck

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41377119/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/ It hurts to even think about how that was done. Ouch! Many corkscrews have a blade for cutting the foil over the cork. Maybe that is what was used. 10 to 1, the blade was dull. What a horrible way to go. Maybe, the guy will have an all 'male' jury! Chuck

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

Let's see... making only minnimum payments... maybe, have them paid-off in say 30-yrs? Chuck Some guys have all the luck. That worked in his favor, for sure! Chuck

You didn't really... let the dog take the blame? Chuck George Carlin . That's some funny stuff! Chuck

You didn't really... let the dog take the blame? Chuck I knew it wasn't me and I suspected that it wasn't the dog. Chuck

Local newspapers and local news channels. Chuck

You didn't really... let the dog take the blame? Chuck

Let's see... making only minnimum payments... maybe, have them paid-off in say 30-yrs? Chuck

breath... !! Chuck

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