• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Conversation, Detention, and Arrest

Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
46

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
6,909
Location
here nc
I found this troubling.

“What are my rights at borders? Within 500 miles of a border your constitutional rights are greatly reduces”

It seems that the Constitution-free zone is expanding.
Sad part doug, is the cited material’s statement is, at a minimum 4+ years old, and doesn’t reflect the current border climate perspective!

Personally grasping the relevant content from the site and ensuring my dl’d stand-alone material is off their website as their links are not being maintained.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
238
Location
Kentucky
Cbp auhourity should not extend more than 50 miles inside the border.
They can't cover that. Much less 500 miles.

I thought their limit was 100 miles. Live and learn
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,060
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
The Right to Remain Silent
  • The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gives every person the right not to answer questions asked by a police officer or government agent.
  • I WISH TO REMAIN SILENT.
This drives me up the wall.
No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,
Where does it say you can't talk? It doesn't. It says you don't have to be a witness against yourself.
It is the First Amendment that gives you the right NOT to speak. If you have a right to speak, you have a fight NOT to speak.
In West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, and later in Wooley v. Maynard, the Supreme Court recognized that the First Amendment protects a "concomitant" negative free speech right, the right not to speak.

Watch a judge flip out when you exercise your 1st. Amendment right not to speak.
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,060
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Cbp auhourity should not extend more than 50 miles inside the border.
They can't cover that. Much less 500 miles.

I thought their limit was 100 miles. Live and learn
It's a 100 miles. And, within that 100 miles the Border Patrol can operate immigration checkpoints.
Border Patrol cannot just pull anyone over without "reasonable suspicion" of an immigration violation or a crime. Border Patrol cannot search vehicles in the 100-mile zone without a warrant or "probable cause."
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
6,909
Location
here nc
It's a 100 miles. And, within that 100 miles the Border Patrol can operate immigration checkpoints.
Border Patrol cannot just pull anyone over without "reasonable suspicion" of an immigration violation or a crime. Border Patrol cannot search vehicles in the 100-mile zone without a warrant or "probable cause."
Hummm, you mean the scary USBP checkpoint in Southern NM on I 25, appox 35 miles from the Mexican/US border with the gaggle of cameras at eye level and threating signs stating this and that, as well as the gruff fat disheveled looking USBP agent :rolleyes: mumbling ‘citizen’ is strictly for show and they can’t force a search on a whim....whew i was truly worried they could. BTW, I mumbled back, ya!
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,060
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Hummm, you mean the scary USBP checkpoint in Southern NM on I 25, appox 35 miles from the Mexican/US border with the gaggle of cameras at eye level and threating signs stating this and that, as well as the gruff fat disheveled looking USBP agent :rolleyes: mumbling ‘citizen’ is strictly for show and they can’t force a search on a whim....whew i was truly worried they could. BTW, I mumbled back, ya!
Before I answer your question pretend police officer, I have a question. Which has more rights, the illegal alien or the citizen?
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
238
Location
Kentucky
It's a 100 miles. And, within that 100 miles the Border Patrol can operate immigration checkpoints.
Border Patrol cannot just pull anyone over without "reasonable suspicion" of an immigration violation or a crime. Border Patrol cannot search vehicles in the 100-mile zone without a warrant or "probable cause."
I thought it was 100 miles.
I do know within that zone CBP can and will stop random vehicles and search them using "probable cause".

Of course as with LE in general "probable cause" means whatever flimsy made up excuse to stop they want it too.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
11,497
Location
White Oak Plantation
All they gotta do is right down what their PC is. As with OC, where OC is not unlaful, mere OCing is not PC. Mere presence is not PC. provide your papers and if the feds get uppity get their names/badge numbers then inform them that they will be sued. QI does not protect idiots who know they are violating the law/your rights.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,060
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
All they gotta do is right down what their PC is. As with OC, where OC is not unlaful, mere OCing is not PC. Mere presence is not PC. provide your papers and if the feds get uppity get their names/badge numbers then inform them that they will be sued. QI does not protect idiots who know they are violating the law/your rights.
You are sadly mistaken. The SC has made it clear that 99.99% of 42 USC 1983 suits shall be dismissed because CI cannot be overcome accept is very rare instances.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
6,909
Location
here nc
Except for the criminals in LE or the obvious idiots...thus the word "know" being used. Mostly, idiots are protected, like dogs and drunk sailors, by robed villains.
Oh please do not forget the protection provided by all their brethren co-worker savant(s)!
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,816
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
All they gotta do is right down what their PC is. As with OC, where OC is not unlaful, mere OCing is not PC. Mere presence is not PC. provide your papers and if the feds get uppity get their names/badge numbers then inform them that they will be sued. QI does not protect idiots who know they are violating the law/your rights.
Body cams work both ways. I think I'll take a hint out of the pages of Russia drivers and wear a body cam full-time. Can't afford a high-quality, concealable body cam right now, so I'll rely on my trusty digital voice recorder.


I thought it was 100 miles.
50 miles fully covers San Diego, and 100 miles covers the southern 'burbs of Los Angeles. Is there, perhaps, an official definition which excludes dense pockets of known American citzens?

I do know within that zone CBP can and will stop random vehicles and search them using "probable cause".
While they might "claim" probable cause," unless the conditions actually meet probable cause, they're not "using" probable cause.

The 19 sections of our local police department's General Orders amount to 672 pages. Broken down into Field and Admin sections, they include all normal situations the average police officer could be expected to encounter.

One of the most important situations is "Citizen Contact," defined as "a face-to-face communication between an officer and a citizen under circumstances in which there is a lack of probable cause to detain or arrest." The reg goes on to day, "Contacts differ from detentions or arrests in that contacts do not involve the "seizure of persons" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and, therefore, the person has a legal right to leave at any time."

The section further explains:

"When initiating "citizen contacts," officers will remember that the person contacted is under no legal obligation to cooperate. The lack of legal obligation to cooperate results from the absence of probable cause, or of the legal justification to detain or arrest the person. Officers lack the authority, under these circumstances, to require the person to answer questions or to cooperate in any way. If the person contacted refuses to cooperate, the officer must allow the person to proceed with whatever activity s/he was engaged in before the contact was made. However, an officer may continue to observe such a person and, when additional facts warrant, conduct a stop and field interview or arrest."

Essentially, a "field interview" is a detention: "A field interview occurs when an officer uses police authority either to compel a person to halt, to remain in a certain place, or to perform some act (such as walking to a nearby location where the officer can use a radio or telephone). If the person being stopped reasonably believes that s/he is not free to leave the officer's presence, a field interview is occurring."

Of course as with LE in general "probable cause" means whatever flimsy made up excuse to stop they want it too.
That's not been my experience, not in any of the nine states and thirteen cities in which I've lived over the last 55 years.

Just where DID you received your jaded view of "LE in general," Ghost1958? Was it scattered around the country, thereby constituting a reasonably fair random sample? Or were bad guys with badges localized in one particular area?

The reason I ask is because I have encountered crooked cops, mainly in the state highway patrol.

One such group patrolled the Virginia side of the border between Virginia and West Virginia along I-460, westbound. Yes, the first ticket of three I was speeding, 64 in a 55 zone. The next two tickets I was smack on 55, then smack on 50. Exact same locations, and twice, the same officer, who was crooked as hell. I worked just over the border, in Pearisburg, WV. Rather than suffer a fourth speeding ticket from the hands of a crooked cop, I quit my job (I was 6 weeks from graduating, anyway, so no big deal).

The second incident involved the wide-known debacle whereby Colorado's State Highway Patrol asked all county sheriffs to forward them a list of CHP holders, which was subsequently entered into a database. Fortunately, only half of Colorado's sheriffs complied. They were sued such a list is a direct violation of Colorado State law. The judgement was for the plaintiffs.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,247
Location
Florida
Hummm, you mean the scary USBP checkpoint in Southern NM on I 25, appox 35 miles from the Mexican/US border with the gaggle of cameras at eye level and threating signs stating this and that, as well as the gruff fat disheveled looking USBP agent :rolleyes: mumbling ‘citizen’ is strictly for show and they can’t force a search on a whim....whew i was truly worried they could. BTW, I mumbled back, ya!

Tell that to this guy

 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
238
Location
Kentucky
Body cams work both ways. I think I'll take a hint out of the pages of Russia drivers and wear a body cam full-time. Can't afford a high-quality, concealable body cam right now, so I'll rely on my trusty digital voice recorder.




50 miles fully covers San Diego, and 100 miles covers the southern 'burbs of Los Angeles. Is there, perhaps, an official definition which excludes dense pockets of known American citzens?



While they might "claim" probable cause," unless the conditions actually meet probable cause, they're not "using" probable cause.

The 19 sections of our local police department's General Orders amount to 672 pages. Broken down into Field and Admin sections, they include all normal situations the average police officer could be expected to encounter.

One of the most important situations is "Citizen Contact," defined as "a face-to-face communication between an officer and a citizen under circumstances in which there is a lack of probable cause to detain or arrest." The reg goes on to day, "Contacts differ from detentions or arrests in that contacts do not involve the "seizure of persons" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and, therefore, the person has a legal right to leave at any time."

The section further explains:

"When initiating "citizen contacts," officers will remember that the person contacted is under no legal obligation to cooperate. The lack of legal obligation to cooperate results from the absence of probable cause, or of the legal justification to detain or arrest the person. Officers lack the authority, under these circumstances, to require the person to answer questions or to cooperate in any way. If the person contacted refuses to cooperate, the officer must allow the person to proceed with whatever activity s/he was engaged in before the contact was made. However, an officer may continue to observe such a person and, when additional facts warrant, conduct a stop and field interview or arrest."

Essentially, a "field interview" is a detention: "A field interview occurs when an officer uses police authority either to compel a person to halt, to remain in a certain place, or to perform some act (such as walking to a nearby location where the officer can use a radio or telephone). If the person being stopped reasonably believes that s/he is not free to leave the officer's presence, a field interview is occurring."



That's not been my experience, not in any of the nine states and thirteen cities in which I've lived over the last 55 years.

Just where DID you received your jaded view of "LE in general," Ghost1958? Was it scattered around the country, thereby constituting a reasonably fair random sample? Or were bad guys with badges localized in one particular area?

The reason I ask is because I have encountered crooked cops, mainly in the state highway patrol.

One such group patrolled the Virginia side of the border between Virginia and West Virginia along I-460, westbound. Yes, the first ticket of three I was speeding, 64 in a 55 zone. The next two tickets I was smack on 55, then smack on 50. Exact same locations, and twice, the same officer, who was crooked as hell. I worked just over the border, in Pearisburg, WV. Rather than suffer a fourth speeding ticket from the hands of a crooked cop, I quit my job (I was 6 weeks from graduating, anyway, so no big deal).

The second incident involved the wide-known debacle whereby Colorado's State Highway Patrol asked all county sheriffs to forward them a list of CHP holders, which was subsequently entered into a database. Fortunately, only half of Colorado's sheriffs complied. They were sued such a list is a direct violation of Colorado State law. The judgement was for the plaintiffs.
I got my realistic view of LE by being one for a couple of stints, living in two different states. And traveling and working in the lower 48 for 22 yrs.

There are some, iron clad, can't be bought, will not violate the COTUS leos.

But sad fact is they are few and far between when faced with some lucrative graft, or losing their badge by refusing to bend or break the law.

Even fewer who won't cover a brother officer to the gates of hell regardless what that officer did.
 

HP995

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
520
Location
MO, USA
Nice link S9. My interactions with LE have been mostly, uh, weird. Often with LE taking a position either opposed to or irrelevant to the actual law or code. Many non-LE people also double down when they are wrong, very common, but with LE it feels worse. And a bit riskier.

The other problem is that unless you're in the country illegally or otherwise a bona fide criminal such as a drug dealer, gang banga, or GTA-IRL, the wonderful legal help organizations seem to have approximately zero interest in defending a citizen's rights. Ain't it great? :rolleyes:
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
11,497
Location
White Oak Plantation
Wearing a bodycam full time will be a wee bit awkward full time. Cops lie all the time and most prosecutors and judges will not let a mere serf gig a criminal cop...even when there is irrefutable evidence (video/audio) of the cop's unlawful acts. remember, there is no bad cop, just poorly trained or under-trained good cops.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
6,909
Location
here nc
AP, 17 Jan 2019 quote
A judge has acquitted three Chicago police officers of trying to cover up the 2014 shooting of black teenager Laquan McDonald to protect another officer who pulled the trigger.

Judge Domenica Stephenson said Thursday that after considering all of the evidence, including police dashcam video of the killing, she did not find that officer Thomas Gaffney, Joseph Walsh and David March conspired to cover up the shooting. Unquote.

No further commentary is needed...
 
Top