“Are you a citizen?” inland checkpoints are real?

By | November 21, 2012

Are these things real? I find it hard to believe that someone in American could be stopped like this for a citizenship check!  This first one was funny, and I thought it was a joke, that the checkpoint might be staged:

But then we have the same guy going through a few more checkpoints… I  haven’t seen anything like this in Northern California… yet.

“Westbound I-8 in Southern California (an East-West highway that NEVER intersects the international border).”

Next I read more on inland Border Patrol checkpoints and the Supreme Court:

When discussing the issue of law enforcement checkpoints, one has to question whether recent Supreme Court Justices have ever actually read the United States Constitution. Their decisions, dating as far back as their 1976 Martinez'”Fuerte decision, show a court that is as indecisive as their partisan congressional counterparts. The legal history of checkpoints is weaved with a patchwork of decisions that leaves the Fourth Amendment full of holes. These holes are easily exploited by unscrupulous law enforcement officials.

Martinez-Fuerte dealt with the issue of inland Border Patrol checkpoints. The Court ruled that these stops are considered seizures under the Fourth Amendment. What they said though was that the overwhelming government and public interest in stemming the flow of illegal immigrants was sufficient to overcome the limited intrusion to motorists. The court even went as far as examining whether a motorist would feel more scared being stopped by a roving patrol than at a checkpoint. In this case, the court said that the limited purpose stated for the checkpoints was sufficient to overcome an intrusion upon a person’s Fourth Amendment right.

In Martinez-Fuerte the court went on to add that while the stop does infringe upon a motorist’ right to free passage without interruption, it is a minimal infringement. They also went on to state that a warrant for such a minor infringement was not necessary, despite the Fourth Amendments declaration that no search or seizure of a person or thing occur without a warrant issued by a detached neutral magistrate.

Even more disturbing in its decision, is the fact that the court essentially gave the go ahead for law enforcement to use tactics that constitute racial profiling. By stating that Mexican ancestry was a relevant factor in the case, the court opened the door for officers to base, at least in part, ethnicity as a reason for stopping a motorist. This decision is important and is likely to provide legal backing for future Supreme Court cases like Arizona’s SB1070 .

In other cases, the court offered more exceptions to the Fourth Amendment. In Michigan v. Sitz , the Court held that the overwhelming government and public interest in removing drunk drivers from the roadways, trumps the individuals interest of asserting his or her Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Because the Fourth Amendment makes it illegal for the government to search or seize a person place or thing without a warrant, it would stand to reason that any search without one is in fact unreasonable, despite court rulings that diminish these rights.

Although the court made this leap in determining that some government interests outweigh individual rights, it has refused to do so where other government and public interests are expressed. In Indianapolis v. Edmond , the court stated that checkpoints established with the primary purpose of interdicting illegal narcotics violated the Fourth Amendment. The court, using the term general crime control, found that detection and interdiction of illegal narcotics is not a government or public interest compelling enough to grant an exception to seizures without suspicion. That the court would even argue that detecting illegal immigrants is a more compelling interest than stopping the flow of illegal drugs is derisory.

The court seems to have established a system by which they and they alone, determine what is compelling and what is not. The argument in Edmond that some of the secondary purposes of the checkpoint met exceptions previously established by the court was met with resistance. The court stated that weighing the secondary purpose would allow law enforcement to set up checkpoints for anything so long as it included a driver’s license and registration check. What the court failed to realize is that this is exactly what they have done. …

One can clearly see a sort of schizophrenic mind set in the court’s decisions about checkpoints. In the mean time, citizens are being stopped by the Border Patrol every day along this nation’s borders. The inquiry often goes further than the standard question of whether you are a citizen or not. Motorists are often asked where they are going, where they are coming from and even who the vehicle they are driving belongs to.

What is even more disturbing is that the court would permit such an infringement based upon what they believe is reasonable. …

yahoo

The thing is, I heard the warnings about these citizen checkpoints years ago around 9/11 and I didn’t believe it. Then I heard the word “Homeland” Security and got chills because it sounded so much like Hitler’s “Fatherland”. Now these checkpoints are real?

Until I saw these videos tonight, I still thought Alex Jones was raving about something that would never happen. Or that these checkpoints were just at the borders. Things happen gradually. But they do  happen. Here’s what I read back in 2001 about these:

What has not been explained to the American people is the reason why 35,000 Army Reservists and 65,000 National Guard have been called up. It is to maintain internal checkpoints. It has nothing to do with the external “War on Terrorism.” All of these people are being trained at the US Army School of Urban Control at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. CNN actually showed an urban training mock-up, what they’re training on, and what the new Internal Security checkpoint is going to look like. It was mighty sinister looking.

There was a barrier that went across the road. To the right was an elevated shed like structure, elevated perhaps fifteen feet in the air. It had a small second story that was open. On it was a sign that read “Homeland Security Internal Checkpoint.” There were sandbags and the wooden arm that crossed the road read “100% ID Checked.” Then there was a small shed to the right with a small barbed wire area behind that. On this structure was a sign, which read, “All citizens not having proper identification will be detained. All foreign nationals will be detained. All citizens who are deemed to be acting in a suspicious manner will be detained.” At each of these posts there will be six armed Army or National Guard reservists with M-16’s with full field kit. On top of the structure to the rear, the open structure on top, there’s a man with a machine gun emplacement.

They showed the actual mockup used for training purposes. They had new uniforms. They weren’t in their regular uniforms. It’s a new gray uniform with a gray helmet and a visor so you can’t see their eyes. The only thing you can see is from their lips down because they said that’s “to prevent any retribution” from people who don’t like this new idea.

This uniform looked exactly like the Imperial Storm Troopers from “Star Wars” except instead of white, it was gray. All the helmets have little transceivers so they can communicate with each other. There will be six guards at each internal security checkpoint. And there’s another warning on the inside of the barbed wire enclosure, “Any detainees attempting to escape will be shot.” It was a yellow and red sign inside the detainment area. …

via Rense

Not many storm trooper helmets yet and they aren’t shooting a lot of people yet, but this is just phase 1 to get people used to the idea of citizen checkpoints. I never thought I’d even see this, but there it is. I read views such as, “What’s the big deal? Show your ID and go on your way!” and “If you aren’t doing anything wrong, why complain?”  (See the comments on this one).

People with these views don’t think the Holocaust could happen again. They, just like the German blacks, Jews, and homosexuals who were murdered, refuse to believe that the government could be taken over by a crazy person then turn down a dark alley where citizens of one kind or another are rounded up and slaughtered. The German citizens killed by the Nazis were not breaking laws.  Even when they were shipped off to death camps, they thought they were safe because they were obeying authority.

Only with an understanding of human nature and human history does the anger at these checkpoints become not only rational but heroic. Please understand that your freedom is not free. People died for it. Many people. It takes work. Don’t piss it away.

0 thoughts on ““Are you a citizen?” inland checkpoints are real?

Leave a Reply