Thegreekone
Banned
:rofl:
Willie busted again
- Thread starter Alwayslit
- Start date
X2 he is a singing/song writing legend.
I realize that courts have upheld these checkpoints. I still strongly disagree that these are Constitutional.
The fact that some people smuggle drugs in U-Hauls does not constitute probable cause. I was stopped at the checkpoint, asked where I was going, and then ordered to open the back of the truck.
I really, really hate the "if you had nothing to hide" argument. It's BS. Our Founding Fathers didn't write our Constitution and our Bill of Rights to protect criminals. The point is to protect citizens from tyranny. If that sounds extreme or fanatical, just look at the history of regimes with unchecked power.
I agree with this part. The Border Patrol enforces the law as interpreted by the courts; my beef is with the lawmakers and the courts themselves.
He should have been....No excuse for him either.
So you are really saying that the law enforcement agents that had every legal right to search your vehicle exercised tyranny while doing their job? That is utterly ridiculous. Views like this is why groups like the ACLU are formed....Let's protect the criminals (not saying YOU are/were a criminal in this case) so they have more rights than the law abiding citizens.
To each his own...I respect your opinion and your taste.
I have never gotten over the FACT that he thumbed his nose at our government by choosing not to pay taxes....That is complete and absoloute BS.
No, I said that the BP did their job, which is to enforce the law with the tools given to them by the law, as interpreted by our courts. Nor did I claim that a simple search, even an un-Constitutional one, is tyranny. But our Founding Fathers wrote our Constitution and our Bill of Rights to protect against tyranny, and limiting the powers of the state is a key part of that.
First, how on earth do criminals have more rights than law-abiding citizens? Second, the Bill of Rights does not exist to protect criminals; it protects us all. Do you really believe that law-abiding citizens don't need the Bill of Rights? If so, which Amendments are expendable?
WARDOGG
Crusher of Hopes & Dreams
I'm not saying that this is the reason they searched your vehicle. I wasn't there, so I'm not going to "guess" at what the Agents Probable Cause.
You are correct. The fact that people use u-hauls to smuggle people and/or narcotics is not probable cause.
However, when you start to factor in the type of people driving said u-haul that usually are smuggling, the time of day, known illegal traffic patterns, current Intel, citizen reports, officer experience, etc.., then you can form probable cause. In other words there could have been a million things occurring that day that could have added to the Agents probable cause.
If this happened while you were still in primary, then the primary Agent had mere suspicion you were up to no good and asked you to open the back of the u-haul to eliminate his suspicions to either send you up the road or refer you to secondary. You could have refused to open the back of the u-haul and been well within your rights to do so. At the point the Agent may or may not have sent you to secondary.
If this happened in secondary then the Agent had probable cause to search your vehicle.
Now, if you happen to be driving through the same check point or even any check point, yet again driving a u-haul, will you be searched? Maybe, all depends on the whether or not the Agent has probable cause. Will you know what it is? No. Will you be upset and feel that your fourth amendment rights were violated? Yes.
The simple fact is this. You were stopped and search. The Agent had probable cause. You don't know what it was.
I 'm glad that you agree the Agents were simply doing their Jobs as outlined to them through the law. So then why are you upset with the Agents?
I know you disagree that immigration check points are Constitutional. Every one is entitled to their opinion. Just because you think that way doesnt mean you should take it out on the law enforcement officers who are enforcing that law. Like you said, theyre just doing their jobs.
Thats my biggest beef with society. You have a problem with a law? Then take it up with the lawmakers. Yell at them, spit on them, assault them, be angry with them, not the law enforcers.
****DISCLAIMER****
Every thing stated is my personal opinion, to include statistics. Case law cited is simply what I know and what I've been taught. My posts are in no way an official stance, representation or statement for or from the Border Patrol.
Just to be clear: my issue was never with the agent who stopped me, but with the policy itself. I agree with you on this point: I always try to treat LEOs with respect, and I don't blame them for enforcing a law I disagree with. (Having lived in a crime-ridden neighborhood until recently, I had lots of contact with the local PD, and was always happy to see them.) When I accepted my current job, I was in the application pipeline for a federal LE job, and I thought about this a lot. I knew that I'd have to enforce some laws that I didn't agree with, and I had no problem with that.
WARDOGG
Crusher of Hopes & Dreams
Glad to hear it Asher.
Like I said in the original post, no offense taken, no harm done, we're both just voicing our opinions.
What FED LE job were you putting in for if you don't mind me asking?
If you have ever lived in a place where you couldn't get your favorite cigars, then when you have the chance to stock up this is what you do and it could explain why some members think Willie had a lot. I daresay it was all for his own use.
The law which criminalizes marijuana use in the USA is the result of moralistic hypocrisy, passed by cigar-smoking, bourbon-swilling politicians who, as far as paying taxes goes, are masters in developing and using tax shelters, all the while extolling the virtues of smaller government.
The law which criminalizes marijuana use in the USA is the result of moralistic hypocrisy, passed by cigar-smoking, bourbon-swilling politicians who, as far as paying taxes goes, are masters in developing and using tax shelters, all the while extolling the virtues of smaller government.
What I mean is that it makes me sick every time I hear of a criminal breaking into somebody's house, tripping on the carpet, and the ACLU steps in and helps the criminal sue the homeowner for negligence.
Even when I have no objections to people doing it, smoking weed is illegal and there are consequences. I am all for legalizing it (would bring the illegal market down and slash me country's problems by half), but until then, it is illegal and thre are consequences.
Those pounds grown on this side only get accross because people; like Willie Nelson, for instance; buy it.
I handled that for you Greg. No worries there.:smokingboSomebody, please, smoke a fatty for this legend today.eace:
I handled that for you Greg. No worries there.:smokingboSomebody, please, smoke a fatty for this legend today.
That's we have to stop buying imported products. I support only my local California Growers.