# border patrol



## MRGisevil (Mar 22, 2008)

tim & I are on the way back from sugarbush. Right after I-89 junctions a/91 border patrol has the highway stopped and is asking people in every car if they're US citizens or not. Does this happen alot? Never seen this before.


----------



## Dr Skimeister (Mar 22, 2008)

They used to do the same on the Northway (I-87) right after you got on from the Keene exit. 

Our tax dollars at work.  *shrug*


----------



## BeanoNYC (Mar 22, 2008)

I hit the same stop.  I asked the guy if I was heading North or South.  Seemed like an odd place to put up a boarder patrol stop.  He just asked me where I was heading and how the Skiing was.


----------



## thetrailboss (Mar 22, 2008)

MRGisevil said:


> tim & I are on the way back from sugarbush. Right after I-89 junctions a/91 border patrol has the highway stopped and is asking people in every car if they're US citizens or not. Does this happen alot? Never seen this before.



They do it at random times to check for illegal aliens and contraband.  If they were smart, they'd set up above the 89/91 interchange because if someone "was" smuggling, they could easily get onto 89 and avoid the roadblock altogether.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 22, 2008)

thetrailboss said:


> They do it at random times to check for illegal aliens and contraband.  If they were smart, they'd set up above the 89/91 interchange because if someone "was" smuggling, they could easily get onto 89 and avoid the roadblock altogether.


If they were smart, they would do it even further north say above the I-93/I-91 split to catch every possible interstate option. Any one smuggling would obviously take the 93 option knowing that the checks happen below WRJ. Though I did see one stop point done in Lincoln, NH once, it is far less often than the one on 91 in question. In either case, it wouldn't take much recon to figure on that both the 91 and 93 checks can be easily avoided by Route 5 and Route 3 respectively. I hope they catch enough people to warrant both the cost and inconvenience to law abiding citizens.


----------



## BeanoNYC (Mar 22, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> If they were smart, they would do it even further north say above the I-93/I-91 split to catch every possible interstate option. Any one smuggling would obviously take the 93 option knowing that the checks happen below WRJ. Though I did see one stop point done in Lincoln, NH once, it is far less often than the one on 91 in question. In either case, it wouldn't take much recon to figure on that both the 91 and 93 checks can be easily avoided by Route 5 and Route 3 respectively. I hope they catch enough people to warrant both the cost and inconvenience to law abiding citizens.



I don't understand why they're so far south to begin with.  Are they not doing their job at border entries?


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 22, 2008)

I hope they bust some terroists with Marijuana..


----------



## twinplanx (Mar 22, 2008)

Thats right gotta stop them Canadians from coming down here to take Jobs and advantage of our fantastic health care system.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 22, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> I hope they bust some terroists with Marijuana..





yep, that allah bud is wreaking havoc on our youth :lol:


----------



## severine (Mar 22, 2008)

BeanoNYC said:


> I don't understand why they're so far south to begin with.  Are they not doing their job at border entries?


Puzzles me, too.  Strange spot to set up.  We've never had problems with border control in VT.  In fact, only time I've dealt with border control was on the border-entering and exiting Canada (and they were friendly as could be).


----------



## snoseek (Mar 22, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> I hope they bust some terroists with Marijuana..



I've heard people have driven shipments off mary jane right across frozen lakes in the winter.


----------



## loafer89 (Mar 22, 2008)

Of all of the customs agency's that I have come across, the U.S customs have to be the most rude and unfriendly that I have encountered, heck even the East German customs agents where more friendly.

I agree though that the Canadian customs agents are very curtious.


----------



## Zand (Mar 23, 2008)

I hit it yesterday too. Pretty much just "Are you a US citizen?" "Yes." "Thank you, have a good afternoon." First time I've seen it since I was coming home from Sugarbush in January of 2004.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 23, 2008)

These stops have nothing to do with border security. They are starting do do this all over the U.S.. This is an exercise in "obedience training". Why are they doing these checkpoints so far away from the borders? Go to Youtube and type in "Operation Checkpoint". Pretty soon it will be "Papers please", but they won't say "please". "Papieren bitte" as in Germany 75 years ago. As an Honorably Discharged Combat Decorated Veteran, I find these developments disturbing. This is unconstitutional. Sorry. Ed.


----------



## andyzee (Mar 23, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> These stops have nothing to do with border security. They are starting do do this all over the U.S.. This is an exercise in "obedience training". Why are they doing these checkpoints so far away from the borders? Go to Youtube and type in "Operation Checkpoint". Pretty soon it will be "Papers please", but they won't say "please". "Papieren bitte" as in Germany 75 years ago. As an Honorably Discharged Combat Decorated Veteran, I find these developments disturbing. This is unconstitutional. Sorry. Ed.


 
I'm getting up in age so dementia may be sinking in, but didn't we used to have something called the constitution? And didn't we used to look down on such practices in places like Russia? And didn't JimG used to have a sense of humor?


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 23, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> These stops have nothing to do with border security. They are starting do do this all over the U.S.. This is an exercise in "obedience training". Why are they doing these checkpoints so far away from the borders? Go to Youtube and type in "Operation Checkpoint". Pretty soon it will be "Papers please", but they won't say "please". "Papieren bitte" as in Germany 75 years ago. As an Honorably Discharged Combat Decorated Veteran, I find these developments disturbing. This is unconstitutional. Sorry. Ed.



They've been doing this for years. It's nothing new. They're just hoping to round up illegal migrant workers. It is pretty lame to inconvenience everyone to try to catch one or two illegals. If they did their job correctly in the first place it wouldn't be necessary.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 23, 2008)

Illegal migrant workers from Canada? They haven't been doing this for years. I have been skiing the northeast for over 35 years, and it did not happen years ago. Do NOT act like sheep and comply to this ILLEGAL harassment. These are stops without suspicion. "Are you an American citizen?". "Yes, sir, I am." "OK then, be on your way."   They take your word on this? Yeah, right. People can lie. What is the difference in accents between an English speaking Canadian accent and a American one based on a "yes" answer. Pretty hard to tell isn't it?  They pull over cars with U.S. license plates on them, don't they?  Sixty miles away from the Canadian border is a LONG way from Canada for a "border checkpoint". Go to Youtube and look at "OPERATION CHECKPOINT." READ THE CONSTITUTION. A lot of Veterans (myself included) have given their lives and sanity to defend our rights, and people are scared to death to stand up for our rights in this country. "If people tolerate tyranny and despotism in any way, they deserve their slavery." Ben Franklin. Don't be a "Sheeple".


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 23, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Illegal migrant workers from Canada? They haven't been doing this for years. I have been skiing the northeast for over 35 years, and it did not happen years ago. Do NOT act like sheep and comply to this ILLEGAL harassment. These are stops without suspicion. "Are you an American citizen?". "Yes, sir, I am." "OK then, be on your way."   They take your word on this? Yeah, right. People can lie. What is the difference in accents between an English speaking Canadian accent and a American one based on a "yes" answer. Pretty hard to tell isn't it?  They pull over cars with U.S. license plates on them, don't they?  Sixty miles away from the Canadian border is a LONG way from Canada for a "border checkpoint". Go to Youtube and look at "OPERATION CHECKPOINT." READ THE CONSTITUTION. A lot of Veterans (myself included) have given their lives and sanity to defend our rights, and people are scared to death to stand up for our rights in this country. "If people tolerate tyranny and despotism in any way, they deserve their slavery." Ben Franklin. Don't be a "Sheeple".



No not from Canada, although a fair amount do come through there from other countries. There are a large amount of migrant workers from Mexico and South America that work in NE throughout the year, wether it is in Egg farms, picking apples and blue berries and even crewing on some fishing boats. Either way this is a discussion for another forum. Please keep it to skiing around here.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 23, 2008)

Sorry, but I did not start this subject on this forum. Chastise the person who started it. Thank you. Ed.


----------



## Greg (Mar 23, 2008)

thetrailboss said:


> If they were smart...





riverc0il said:


> If they were smart...



I love it how much we Internet folks think we're experts in _everything_. :lol: Trust me, I'm sure they have a reason for it. Probably to catch someone either coming south via 89 or 91.

Anyway, I got stopped in it too. I have no problem with it. Asked me if I was alone and if I was a citizen. I was on my way in less than 10 seconds.


----------



## Dr Skimeister (Mar 23, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> These stops have nothing to do with border security. They are starting do do this all over the U.S.. This is an exercise in "obedience training". Why are they doing these checkpoints so far away from the borders? Go to Youtube and type in "Operation Checkpoint". Pretty soon it will be "Papers please", but they won't say "please". "Papieren bitte" as in Germany 75 years ago. As an Honorably Discharged Combat Decorated Veteran, I find these developments disturbing. This is unconstitutional. Sorry. Ed.



I'm in full agreement with you, Ed-Drum. Just another part of the erosion of the liberties this country was founded on.

What's next? A knock on the door? "You have any illegals as domestic help?"


----------



## jack97 (Mar 23, 2008)

Along with smuggling guns and drugs.... here's a story that basically outlines a new problem. The Canadian immigration policy has been lax (by US standards) in letting people into their country which translates to people crossing (or smuggled across) the border. 

http://www.king5.com/topstories/stories/NW_041206WABsmugglingringSW.2bb8e66e.html

Having said that, I am disturbed by having our liberties taken away in small steps.

BTW.... Ed, thank you for serving this country.


----------



## BeanoNYC (Mar 23, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Sorry, but I did not start this subject on this forum. Chastise the person who started it. Thank you. Ed.



I agreed with you up until this point.  The original poster was just making an observation of an odd border stop and asking if it happened often.  You (although I agree with what you 100%)  took it to another level.  This thread is flirting with disaster.  I'm politely bowing out before it gets locked.


----------



## severine (Mar 23, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Sorry, but I did not start this subject on this forum. Chastise the person who started it. Thank you. Ed.


Um, yeah.  Great way to make friends when you're new to the forum. :roll:

This is the Miscellaneous Discussion portion of AZ. Anything goes here, other than politics.  Don't like it?  Don't read it... or don't comment.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 23, 2008)

Dr Skimeister said:


> I'm in full agreement with you, Ed-Drum. Just another part of the erosion of the liberties this country was founded on.
> 
> What's next? A knock on the door? "You have any illegals as domestic help?"




+1

No issues with border patrol, but this kind of activity seems a bit excessive.


----------



## MRGisevil (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Sorry, but I did not start this subject on this forum. Chastise the person who started it. Thank you. Ed.



Uhm. Like others have said- I was just curious about what was going on and whether or not it was a common thing. 

Thanks for the info everyone


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 24, 2008)

_The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized._

RIP, 4th Amendment. You were loved, and will be missed.


----------



## MRGisevil (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg I'm sorry.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 24, 2008)

MRGisevil said:


> Greg I'm sorry.



Trouble maker! :razz:


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> _The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized._
> 
> RIP, 4th Amendment. You were loved, and will be missed.


 
Anyone read Animal Farm? Great book, very appropriate.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> These stops have nothing to do with border security. They are starting do do this all over the U.S.. This is an exercise in "obedience training". Why are they doing these checkpoints so far away from the borders? Go to Youtube and type in "Operation Checkpoint". Pretty soon it will be "Papers please", but they won't say "please". "Papieren bitte" as in Germany 75 years ago. As an Honorably Discharged Combat Decorated Veteran, I find these developments disturbing. This is unconstitutional. Sorry. Ed.



Comparing a 10 second border patrol stop to Nazi Germany is a pretty big stretch. Oh and I did search YouTube and came across this winner:

http://youtube.com/user/CheckpointUSA

I only wish I had that amount of free time... :roll:


----------



## tjf67 (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Illegal migrant workers from Canada? They haven't been doing this for years. I have been skiing the northeast for over 35 years, and it did not happen years ago. Do NOT act like sheep and comply to this ILLEGAL harassment. These are stops without suspicion. "Are you an American citizen?". "Yes, sir, I am." "OK then, be on your way."   They take your word on this? Yeah, right. People can lie. What is the difference in accents between an English speaking Canadian accent and a American one based on a "yes" answer. Pretty hard to tell isn't it?  They pull over cars with U.S. license plates on them, don't they?  Sixty miles away from the Canadian border is a LONG way from Canada for a "border checkpoint". Go to Youtube and look at "OPERATION CHECKPOINT." READ THE CONSTITUTION. A lot of Veterans (myself included) have given their lives and sanity to defend our rights, and people are scared to death to stand up for our rights in this country. "If people tolerate tyranny and despotism in any way, they deserve their slavery." Ben Franklin. Don't be a "Sheeple".



OMG that squerve your growing down there is saugetise is making you paranoid.  PEACE TO ALL


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 24, 2008)

Has Chamillionaire says..They're trying to catch me riding dirty..lol


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Has Chamillionaire says..They're trying to catch me riding dirty..lol



You wouldn't have such a problem if you'd just wear pants occasionally.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 24, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> You wouldn't have such a problem if you'd just wear pants occasionally.




But driving bare assed is so invigorating..:-D


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> OMG that squerve your growing down there is saugetise is making you paranoid. PEACE TO ALL


 
Anytime anyone tries to erode any of your rights, should make you very paranoid. Read Animal Farm, great book.


----------



## tjf67 (Mar 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> Anytime anyone tries to erode any of your rights, should make you very paranoid. Read Animal Farm, great book.



I draw my conclusion on life experiences not on another persons thoughts put down in a book.  As far as I can tell life is pretty good.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

*Right on!*



tjf67 said:


> I draw my conclusion on life experiences not on another persons thoughts put down in a book.  As far as I can tell life is pretty good.



+1


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 24, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> I draw my conclusion on life experiences not on another persons thoughts put down in a book.  As far as I can tell life is pretty good.



Since this has devolved into a political thread. 

Things are ok in your world, so everything must be ok? Ed rubbed me the wrong way when he showed up, but he and a few others here have legitimate concerns regarding our civil liberties. Is a random border patrol something to get upset about, no. The seeming continual degradation of our privacy and individual rights, absolutely yes.

The Nazi comparison is a little extreme, but some of you might remember this little number:



> When they came for the communists,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a communist.
> 
> ...


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> I draw my conclusion on life experiences not on another persons thoughts put down in a book.


 
Same here, and that is why I do have strong feelings on this subject. I only reference the book because it does present the dangers of liberties being slowly taken away in a very smart fashion.


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 24, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> I draw my conclusion on life experiences not on another persons thoughts put down in a book.  As far as I can tell life is pretty good.



A smart man learns from his own mistakes.
A wise man learns from other's.


----------



## tjf67 (Mar 24, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> A smart man learns from his own mistakes.
> A wise man learns from other's.




Heres another one hickory dickery dock  OHHHHHH!!!!!!!!


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

Okay. I guess I get the civil liberties thing; although I really don't worry about it all that much. I barely have time to fart sometimes so cooking up conspiracy theories is not something I get involved with. Anyway, exactly how is a 10 second border patrol stop encroaching on one's civil liberties? Is it the slippery slope potential that worries people? Is it at all possible that perhaps the intentions of the DHS are sincere and really looking out for the security of the country? I guess it's more dramatic to read too deep into it and call it unconstitutional...

Are DUI check stops unconstitutional too?


----------



## hammer (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> I barely have time to fart sometimes so cooking up conspiracy theories is not something I get involved with.


You always have to make time for that...unless you are one of those types who takes care of it while you sleep...



Greg said:


> Are DUI check stops unconstitutional too?


Different animal altogether...those deal with safety on the roads, and people have to remember that driving is a privilege and not a constitutional right.


----------



## tjf67 (Mar 24, 2008)

hammer said:


> You always have to make time for that...unless you are one of those types who takes care of it while you sleep...
> 
> Different animal altogether...those deal with safety on the roads, and people have to remember that driving is a priviledge and not a constitutional right.




Now that you are talking about a different animal.  I think anyone with an suv or car without snow tires should be thrown in jail.


----------



## hammer (Mar 24, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> Now that you are talking about a different animal. I think anyone with an suv or car without snow tires should be thrown in jail.


My guess is that you agree with seat belt laws as well...

Maybe the Border Patrol was checking cars that didn't have snow tires?


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> Okay. I guess I get the civil liberties thing; although I really don't worry about it all that much. I barely have time to fart sometimes so cooking up conspiracy theories is not something I get involved with. Anyway, exactly how is a 10 second border patrol stop encroaching on one's civil liberties? Is it the slippery slope potential that worries people? Is it at all possible that perhaps the intentions of the DHS are sincere and really looking out for the security of the country? I guess it's more dramatic to read too deep into it and call it unconstitutional...
> 
> Are DUI check stops unconstitutional too?


 
Slippery slope is correct and I do believe DUIs to be unconstitutional.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> Anyway, exactly how is a 10 second border patrol stop encroaching on one's civil liberties? Is it the slippery slope potential that worries people? Is it at all possible that perhaps the intentions of the DHS are sincere and really looking out for the security of the country? I guess it's more dramatic to read too deep into it and call it unconstitutional...



There is no easy place to draw the line. So it's important to stay on top of what the gov't is up to. No crazy conspiracy theories. Plenty of folks in govt just trying to do their jobs, but sometimes they overstep the line under the guise of looking out for you.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 24, 2008)

OldsnowboarderME said:


> Stopping you to look into your car is not unconstitutional but coming to your house to do a search without a warrant is ...



What about a random ID check while walking down the street?  I think people would get even more fired up about that than being stopped at a road block, but they're both essentially the same thing.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> Slippery slope is correct and I do believe DUIs to be unconstitutional.





wa-loaf said:


> There is no easy place to draw the line. So it's important to stay on top of what the gov't is up to. No crazy conspiracy theories. Plenty of folks in govt just trying to do their jobs, but sometimes they overstep the line under the guise of looking out for you.



Understood. But unless there is some evidence that the DHS is acting underhanded with these stops, it is all in fact a conspiracy theory. Maybe I am just a naive little sheep, but I have to believe the intent here is sincere. But if you guys want to stay up at night worrying about it, then knock yourselves out. I'll be trying to catch up on some sleep after chasing my 2 year old around...



OldsnowboarderME said:


> Stopping you to look into your car is not unconstitutional but coming to your house to do a search without a warrant is ...



I don't believe that is what we are talking about here, but it seems some folks think that's what these border patrol stops are designed to lead to. I don't.


----------



## hammer (Mar 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> Slippery slope is correct and I do believe DUIs to be unconstitutional.


What is unconstitutional about an arrest for DUI? :blink:

Checking people to make sure that they aren't driving impaired is for safety reasons...the constitution doesn't have rights that allow people to do stupid things that endanger the lives of others...


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> Understood. But unless there is some evidence that the DHS is acting underhanded with these stops, it is all in fact a conspiracy theory. Maybe I am just a naive little sheep, but I have to believe the intent here is sincere. But if you guys want to stay up at night worrying about it, then knock yourselves out. I'll be trying to catch up on some sleep after chasing my 2 year old around...


 
I do believe the intent to be sincere, but that doesn't change the fact that constitutional rights are being stepped on.  

I will not stay up nights worrying about it, I have no kids. You on the other hand do, and it's the kids that will have to live with the consequences of our apathy.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> I don't believe that is what we are talking about here, but it seems some folks think that's what these border patrol stops are designed to lead to. I don't.



Yup, I don't think the border patrol stop is a big deal and they've been at it for 10+ years so it's not new. They were doing them in Maine in the 90's. Which is why Ed annoyed me because it looked like he joined AZ purely to post about the Border Patrol thing. Haven't seen him post anywhere else yet about skiing. . .

My later posts are just about civil liberties in general.


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

hammer said:


> What is unconstitutional about an arrest for DUI? :blink:
> 
> Checking people to make sure that they aren't driving impaired is for safety reasons...the constitution doesn't have rights that allow people to do stupid things that endanger the lives of others...


 
Nothing unconstitutional about arrests for drunk driving. What I have a problem with is detention without cause, which is what a check amounts to.


----------



## hammer (Mar 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> Nothing unconstitutional about arrests for drunk driving. What I have a problem with is detention without cause, which is what a check amounts to.


Not entirely sure I agree, but I understand your point. Peace...


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> I do believe the intent to be sincere, but that doesn't change the fact that constitutional rights are being stepped on.
> 
> I will not stay up nights worrying about it, I have no kids. You on the other hand do, and it's the kids that will have to live with the consequences of our apathy.



Like many things in life, it's all about balance. Things are rarely black and white and sometimes sacrifices and compromises need to be made. If these border patrol stops result in the apprehension of some would-be terrorist (I am not arguing for or against the border patrol stops' effectiveness, mind you) which might save my kids from feeling any affect of some attack, then I'm all for that minor sacrifice in whatever constitutional right I'm forgoing.



wa-loaf said:


> Yup, I don't think the border patrol stop is a big deal and they've been at it for 10+ years so it's not new. They were doing them in Maine in the 90's. Which is why Ed annoyed me because it looked like he joined AZ purely to post about the Border Patrol thing. Haven't seen him post anywhere else yet about skiing. . .
> 
> My later posts are just about civil liberties in general.



Thanks for clarifying. BTW, despite quoting you and Andy to make my point, it wasn't made in response to either of you exclusively or specifically.

And regarding this thread being political - typically when specific partisan politics is brought up is when we shut these down. Discussing POVs is fine.


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> L
> And regarding this thread being political - typically when specific partisan politics is brought up is when we shut these down. Discussing POVs is fine.


 
Well, you finally made a good point in this thread.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> Well, you finally made a good point in this thread.



Thanks. I'm still waiting for yours...


----------



## jack97 (Mar 24, 2008)

Since Eisenhower's presidency, the issue of executive power and accountability of the executive has been in debate base on the principle of check and balance at the Federal level. IMO, it's still ongoing, based on a PBS documentary from Frontline, the current VP when he was an aide for Nixon believed in more executive power and allied himself with a constitutional lawyer to ague his case. It looks like he is continuing that cause and with more effect. Apathy is a not a good thing right know.


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> Thanks. I'm still waiting for yours...


 
Touché!


----------



## Euler (Mar 24, 2008)

We like to burst out in a rousing song of "This Land is Your Land" as we roll into the checkpoint!


----------



## mlctvt (Mar 24, 2008)

We all better watch out at these check stops. The border patrol might view our skis as weapons and hold us as enemy combatants without cause. Seems to be standard practice lately, under guise of the patriot act. 
Have we all become too busy with our lives to be concerned by this? Or do we think- someone else who's really concerned will do something about it so we won't have too? 
Our government is in the business of spreading fear and its working.


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 24, 2008)

I don't believe there's some malevolent force operating within the government, bent on eliminating our rights and shredding the Constitution.

I do believe that there is a potential for undertakings "for the common good" to go too far, and I absolutely believe that there is a cumulative effect. While "slippery slope" is not my favorite term, there's really not a better one for it. Once upon a time there was no special FIS court, there was no such thing as "no knock" warrants, there was no such thing as warrantless wiretaping. There is now. 

While border stops may be for teh purpose of safeguarding the population from threats such as terrorists, illegal immigrants, or smuggling, random stops 90 miles form the border are probably not the most effective method fo dealing witht he problem. It's an easily instituted and readily identifiable way to prove DHS is doing something, to be sure. Even if that something amounts to nothing. So, what we have here is a minor inconvenience and a small infringement on our rights, with little or no benefit. That, I have a problem with.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Mar 24, 2008)

hammer said:


> What is unconstitutional about an arrest for DUI? :blink:
> 
> Checking people to make sure that they aren't driving impaired is for safety reasons...the constitution doesn't have rights that allow people to do stupid things that endanger the lives of others...



But the DUI stops turn out to be a drag net for all sorts of other minor traffic violations, not just DUI. I got a stupid $80 ticket for my inspection being overdue at one of these stops one evening at 5:30 pm on a Thursday! Who the hell is driving around drunk at 5:30 in East Burke? The guy stopped in front of me apparently had expired registration. These are hardly "stupid things that endanger the lives of others" (personally stupid that I should have had my less than one year old truck inspected for seat belts and head lights that work is another thing :roll: ). I didn't see anyone pulled over for DUI.


----------



## jack97 (Mar 24, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> I don't believe there's some malevolent force operating within the government, bent on eliminating our rights and shredding the Constitution.



No..... but they come in believing they know what is best for the people.

BTW, me thinks the evils are passive trollers......everything they post has been so polarizing


----------



## from_the_NEK (Mar 24, 2008)

I believe the location for the check-point in question south of the I89-I91 interchange is that I-91 continues toward NYC from there. This is a higher profile target than any cities accessed by I89 or I93. I have heard that they do catch quite a few drug runners at this checkpoint (e.g. Boston Globe). 
I agree that checkpoints are stepping on our freedom. However, the quick stop as it is currently set up ("Are you US citizens? Okay. Move along.") is as much as I'm willing to put up with. 
If I have to start producing ID or a passport, I'm NOT down with it and my congressman/senators are going to hear about it. 
I wonder what it is like if you are a Canadian trying to cross through the checkpoints after already having wait 2 hours at the actual border and go through the interrogation process they have there.


----------



## loafer89 (Mar 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> Since this has devolved into a political thread.
> 
> Things are ok in your world, so everything must be ok? Ed rubbed me the wrong way when he showed up, but he and a few others here have legitimate concerns regarding our civil liberties. Is a random border patrol something to get upset about, no. The seeming continual degradation of our privacy and individual rights, absolutely yes.
> 
> The Nazi comparison is a little extreme, but some of you might remember this little number:


 
Martin Neimoller


----------



## loafer89 (Mar 24, 2008)

How about this good little piece, it must be in the Killington ski report manual:lol::lol::

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels.


----------



## Dr Skimeister (Mar 24, 2008)

One point that is not clear in this discussion is what is the purpose of these stops? We're assuming, being that the authorities in question are Border Patrol, that the stops are intended to check for illegal entrants to the US. I don't recall ever in the stops I've experienced along the Northway being asked for any sort of identification. Is my being caucasian and not having a foreign accent enough proof that I'm not up to no good? Assuming that it is an attempt to be proactive in a quest for illegals, if I were of Arabic origin or wore a turban, would the cursory stop be more involved? Would documentaion be required? Would my vehicle be searched? Would I feel like I was being "profiled"?

I'd also question if the intention of the stops are to be sure illegals aren't traveling on major routes from our borders, what would be the consequence if a car being questioned had the smell of burnt substance when the officer approached the window? Does a random stop like this allow the car and passangers to then be searched? 

I personally don't like the idea.


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

Dr Skimeister  and from_the_NEK bring up some very good and valid points. A check point is setup for one thing, yet the possibility of being arrested or fined for something else exists. Now as valid as the reason for setting up the check point may be, what assurance do we have that this was the intent?


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> Dr Skimeister  and from_the_NEK bring up some very good and valid points. A check point is setup for one thing, yet the possibility of being arrested or fined for something else exists. Now as valid as the reason for setting up the check point may be, what assurance do we have that this was the intent?



If you're not doing or possessing anything illegal than you have nothing to worry about.

Riiiiiiiiight?


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

Gee, I guess I got people to THINK. Maybe that was my intention.  When I joined the Air Force, I took an oath that went "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies foreign and DOMESTIC." Domestic is the key word here.It does NOT say to support the policies of our government blindly. I didn't know that at the time (as now) that where I was going to be sent was dangerous. I didn't know that they were killing us there, for the "news" didn't report it in the states. I can't go into details because of my secret clearance, but you will NEVER forget the smell of the pungent aroma of blood mixed with gunpowder. I received the USAF Outstanding Unit Award for Valor, along with TEN years of nightmares. Searching cars or persons without cause is illegal and unconstitutional. Stopping someone without suspicion is ILLEGAL. Having a temporary roadblock without  prior knowledge by the local prosecutor's office is illegal. Detaining without cause is illegal. Check into flexyourrights.org on the internet. I am NOT a lawyer. Hitler did NOT take the Jews away at first. He exterminated the mentally and physically handicapped, then blacks, then the gypsies and then the Jewish people. The mother of a friend of mine survived the concentration camps. "Arbeit Macht Frei." Knowledge is power. NOT money. Ed.


----------



## Dr Skimeister (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> If you're not doing or possessing anything illegal than you have nothing to worry about.
> 
> Riiiiiiiiight?



That's not the way this country is supposed to run, Greg. Innocent until proven guilty is etched in stone. Stopping me or anyone else just to be sure I'm not doing or possessing anything illegal smacks of invasion on our supposed most basic of rights. 

I fear that the mentality that it's OK as long as I'm not doing anything illegal opens the door for further erosions of our liberty.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

Oh, one last thing. Border patrol discussions go beyond politics. Political discussion, in my opinion are things like Republicans vs. Democrats, I don't like the president, etc.. Border patrol discussions go beyond politics, I believe. This is our freedom at stake. Freedom to ski, freedom to go to the movies, freedom to read the books that we want to, freedom to be with who we please. This is NOT a "conspiracy theory". If we all believe that it is, then we are all doomed. If anyone is upset by this discussion, GOOD! We should be upset. "A true Democracy needs a loyal opposition." Read my introductory post. Due some research. Talk amongst yourselves on the chairlift, in the lodge, EVERYWHERE. America is NOT a Democracy, it's a Republic by definition. There is a difference. It seems that by the number of friendly private messages that I received, I seem to have a lot of  people on my side. You are true friends. Ed.


----------



## roark (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> If you're not doing or possessing anything illegal than you have nothing to worry about.
> 
> Riiiiiiiiight?



I know you're kidding but this line comes up far too often these days, and it displays a shockingly profound lack of comprehension of the constitution and the fundamentals this country is supposed to stand for.

Bad Greg, no bumps for you! :razz:


----------



## loafer89 (Mar 24, 2008)

My experience with a police state is limited to crossing Checkpoint Charlie on July 1st, 1989 at the age of 17 and even though the wall fell only a few months later, it was still a deadly business to cross the border. I had to go alone as my uncle was German and not permitted to cross as Germany obviously was not part of the victorious allied countries. A 17 year old had recently been shot and killed trying to cross into West Berlin in May, so I was more than a bit scared.

The trip into East Berlin gave me a new found respect for a democratic nation and for the freedoms that alot of us take for granted from time to time. I am curious if the Stazi kept a file on my crossing as they most likely did.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Gee, I guess I got people to THINK. Maybe that was my intention.  When I joined the Air Force, I took an oath that went "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies foreign and DOMESTIC." Domestic is the key word here.It does NOT say to support the policies of our government blindly. I didn't know that at the time (as now) that where I was going to be sent was dangerous. I didn't know that they were killing us there, for the "news" didn't report it in the states. I can't go into details because of my secret clearance, but you will NEVER forget the smell of the pungent aroma of blood mixed with gunpowder. I received the USAF Outstanding Unit Award for Valor, along with TEN years of nightmares. Searching cars or persons without cause is illegal and unconstitutional. Stopping someone without suspicion is ILLEGAL. Having a temporary roadblock without  prior knowledge by the local prosecutor's office is illegal. Detaining without cause is illegal. Check into flexyourrights.org on the internet. I am NOT a lawyer. Hitler did NOT take the Jews away at first. He exterminated the mentally and physically handicapped, then blacks, then the gypsies and then the Jewish people. The mother of a friend of mine survived the concentration camps. "Arbeit Macht Frei." Knowledge is power. NOT money. Ed.



Thank you for your service to the country.

However, your service does not make your opinion more valid than anyone else's.

Finally, not everything you read on the internet is true.



Dr Skimeister said:


> That's not the way this country is supposed to run, Greg. Innocent until proven guilty is etched in stone. Stopping me or anyone else just to be sure I'm not doing or possessing anything illegal smacks of invasion on our supposed most basic of rights.
> 
> I fear that the mentality that it's OK as long as I'm not doing anything illegal opens the door for further erosions of our liberty.



I think you missed the winkie. Still, I stand by my statement. If you're not doing anything illegal, the chances of getting something random "pinned" on you is slim to none. I'm no goody-goody, but say, for example, you have a bag in your car and you get caught with it as a result of a border patrol stop, then you need to own the responsibility of having it. It's the risk you have to assume and you can't fault the DHS and argue that your civil liberties were violated if you get caught. Just keeping it real.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 24, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> I don't believe there's some malevolent force operating within the government, bent on eliminating our rights and shredding the Constitution.
> 
> I do believe that there is a potential for undertakings "for the common good" to go too far, and I absolutely believe that there is a cumulative effect.


100% completely agree. However, this is the least of our problems. It is terribly unfortunate that free Americans need be stopped on an Interstate Highway and questioned but there are much bigger problems that are being pursued in the name of the public good that are dubious and questionable at best.



ctenidae said:


> While "slippery slope" is not my favorite term, there's really not a better one for it.


Sure there is. The term is called "precedent" and much of our legal, civil, and governmental systems are based on it. Once a precedent is set, it is much easier to justify further continuations erosion of rights and liberties. It is why the NRA is so set against any and all implementation of gun regulation and why any other special interest group puts up a complete and unreasonable wall in which they do not want to budge even if a compromise really is in everyone's best interest. Few things in this world and country are black and white but to give in is to set a precedent that can be expanded upon and justify further changes. Some may can shenanigans via semantics and that I am actually just elaborating on a "slippery slope" but precedent implies legal justification and is the big difference in the terminology.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> Still, I stand by my statement. If you're not doing anything illegal, the chances of getting something random "pinned" on you is slim to none. I'm no goody-goody, but say, for example, you have a bag in your car and you get caught with it as a result of a border patrol stop, then you need to own the responsibility of having it.




There is the statement, if you're going to commit a crime, you better be willing to pay the fine and do time.  I do agree with that.  I also feel however that an authority needs to have just cause for search.  Driving on the highway, walking down the street etc....this should not happen.

I used to live near the Sunshine Daydream Camp in West Virginia, which regularly held small Woodstock style music festivals.  Local authorities and the DEA would set up road blocks specifically looking to bust people for drugs going to these festivals.  Granted, if you had nothing on you, you had nothing to worry about.  That said, they were profiling, searching and arresting literally hundres of people.  If I was involved in this where my car got searched because I had a Phish sticker on it, I'd be pretty BS.  That is a violation of civil liberties in my opinion.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 24, 2008)

Dr Skimeister said:


> Assuming that it is an attempt to be proactive in a quest for illegals, if I were of Arabic origin or wore a turban, would the cursory stop be more involved? Would documentaion be required? Would my vehicle be searched? Would I feel like I was being "profiled"?


The feds know that profiling does not work (whether they implement procedure according to knowledge is a different story...). Once profiling begins, counterfeits are recruited to take over jobs. This is currently happening in the Palestine-Israel conflict, many bombers are not being caught because they don't match the "profile". Once you start focusing on the people that match a profile, you begin getting lax on everyone else that should be handled in a similar fashion. Additionally, people are recruited to carry out tasks that do not match the profile being looked for.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 24, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> If I was involved in this where my car got searched because I had a Phish sticker on it, I'd be pretty BS.  That is a violation of civil liberties in my opinion.


What ever, you pot smoking hippy. Sounds like you got an ax to grind.

    :lol:

Sorry, thought this discussion needed some humor.


----------



## loafer89 (Mar 24, 2008)

When my wife and I where crossing the border in Coburn Gore, Maine several years ago, our car was searched and the border guard reached into my pocket and removed my wallet and proceeded to count how much money I had.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> There is the statement, if you're going to commit a crime, you better be willing to pay the fine and do time.  I do agree with that.  I also feel however that an authority needs to have just cause for search.  Driving on the highway, walking down the street etc....this should not happen.
> 
> I used to live near the Sunshine Daydream Camp in West Virginia, which regularly held small Woodstock style music festivals.  Local authorities and the DEA would set up road blocks specifically looking to bust people for drugs going to these festivals.  Granted, if you had nothing on you, you had nothing to worry about.  That said, they were profiling, searching and arresting literally hundres of people.  If I was involved in this where my car got searched because I had a Phish sticker on it, I'd be pretty BS.  That is a violation of civil liberties in my opinion.



The border patrol south of the 89/91 junction was not looking for the guy who likes to get stoned after/during a day of skiing. Take a guess at how many of those guys they probably waved through this weekend. Let's keep it in perspective...


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

I don't read blogs on the internet. Does everything reported on the main steam media to be believed ? Why does one get the idea that I read the incursions that are eroding our rights are derived from reading the internet? Did anyone check out the video evidence on Youtube? Being in the military only reinforced my belief in what this country was founded upon. The Bill of Rights is not an opinion. It is a fact. The television media is a dying conveyance of reporting. Polls prove this. That is not an opinion. The Vietnam War Memorial is not an opinion. It is real.The WWII Memorial is not an opinion, it is real. The symbol of Fascism is the Fasces. What is it doing on the back of a Dime? What is the symbol of Fascism doing all over our government buildings? That is not an opinion, it is there. "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." Einstein. Peace, Ed.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Why does one get the idea that I read the incursions that are eroding our rights are derived from reading the internet?





ed-drum said:


> Did anyone check out the video evidence on Youtube?



Come again?! :blink:



ed-drum said:


> Check into flexyourrights.org on the internet.



Say, what?

:lol:


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 24, 2008)

loafer89 said:


> When my wife and I where crossing the border in Coburn Gore, Maine several years ago, our car was searched and the border guard reached into my pocket and removed my wallet and proceeded to count how much money I had.



The American or Canadian? Either way that's wrong. Is it possible to fit more than $10,000 in your wallet?


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 24, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> What ever, you pot smoking hippy. Sounds like you got an ax to grind.
> 
> :lol:
> 
> Sorry, thought this discussion needed some humor.




See, profiling happens even here in AZ


Hippy?  hmph


----------



## loafer89 (Mar 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> The American or Canadian? Either way that's wrong. Is it possible to fit more than $10,000 in your wallet.


 

The U.S customs did this and I had maybe $500 in US currency.

I have had lots of fun with customs, my favorite was when I flew from Innsbruck to Venice. Upon arrival at the Venice airport I encountered a drug sniffing female German Shephard and that's where the fun began. I had been summer skiing and we store our bags at home where our male German Shepard liked to sleep.

I had the scent of our dog on my luggage and the snifflehund at the airport must have been in heat or something and followed me as I got my luggage. Anyway I got a nice trip to a dark room with a bunch of Italian customs agents who spoke not one word of English. After thoroughly ripping apart my luggage and finding no contraband, my parent's picked up one pissed off teenager.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

Some people don't get it. Video evidence on the internet is not an opinion. It is not reading. Watching a tornado video on the internet is evidence. Watching border patrol stops on the internet video is not reading. Reading our rights on the internet or a library is not an opinion. Random drug stops by the police or DHS  or any government agency was ruled unconstitutional and invasive. The point is, give them an inch and they'll take a mile. The government is here to help us? Instead of helping Katrina victims the government was searching houses, and people died. That is not a opinion from reading. There is video evidence. Ed.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Some people don't get it. Video evidence on the internet is not an opinion. It is not reading. Watching a tornado video on the internet is evidence. Watching border patrol stops on the internet video is not reading. Reading our rights on the internet or a library is not an opinion. Random drug stops by the police or DHS  or any government agency was ruled unconstitutional and invasive. The point is, give them an inch and they'll take a mile. The government is here to help us? Instead of helping Katrina victims the government was searching houses, and people died. That is not a opinion from reading. There is video evidence. Ed.



So where do you ski? What skis do you have in your quiver?


----------



## mlctvt (Mar 24, 2008)

loafer89 said:


> When my wife and I where crossing the border in Coburn Gore, Maine several years ago, our car was searched and the border guard reached into my pocket and removed my wallet and proceeded to count how much money I had.



I used to have an old VW camper bus that I restored to as new condition, you know the old rounded "hippy" vans. The members of my VW club told me I'd be searched coming back into the US from Canada and I was every single time. Yes I was profiled. They searched every nook and cranny and even brought a drug sniffing dog into it once. The Canadians never searched me going into Canada.


----------



## loafer89 (Mar 24, 2008)

The last time that we left the U.S was in January of 2003 to meet my brother at Mount Orford and I was happy that it was -25F outside when we got Back to Coburn Gore as the customs agents did no want to come out of their little hut.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Some people don't get it. Video evidence on the internet is not an opinion. It is not reading. Watching a tornado video on the internet is evidence. Watching border patrol stops on the internet video is not reading. Reading our rights on the internet or a library is not an opinion. Random drug stops by the police or DHS  or any government agency was ruled unconstitutional and invasive. The point is, give them an inch and they'll take a mile. The government is here to help us? Instead of helping Katrina victims the government was searching houses, and people died. That is not a opinion from reading. There is video evidence. Ed.



There's video and photographic evidence of UFOs, Sasquatch and the Lock Ness Monster too. :lol:

Not that I'm that naive to believe the YouTube "evidence" is altered or staged in any way, but still. The YT vids I looked at seemed to portray the border patrol as men and women just doing there job, while the videographer was the one being antagonistic. I'm still trying to figure out what that proves...


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

*Border Patrol*

Okay, I give up! All right already! I live in the Catskills, so I mostly ski at Belleayre, (boring terrain but decent bumps), Plattekill, (best gnarly terrain in the Catskills), Windham (Ski Mag says it's the land of cell phones and all the black trails are blue), and I did go to Hunter this year again. I hate ski trips alone (my wife doesn't ski."You're all CRAZY!" ) so I'll go with friends anywhere else they want to. Skied when I was stationed in Germany. YOWZA!!!! I have Dynastar SC10's, Dynastar Speed 63's, Dynastar Speed SX's, and a brand new pair (!) of STRAIGHT (!?)  Fischer RC4's, for bumps. Got a couple of pairs of Dalbellos, and was given as a present a BRAND NEW pair of Full Tilt Kamo boots from a good friend and former member of the Russian ski Team two weeks ago. Oh yeah, I skied at Felberg Germany.when the Force had me stationed there, so I wouldn't have to cross the border and get SEARCHED! The skis were the only things that were straight with me back then, get my drift? Ed.


----------



## Greg (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Okay, I give up! All right already! I live in the Catskills, so I mostly ski at Belleayre, (boring terrain but decent bumps), Plattekill, (best gnarly terrain in the Catskills), Windham (Ski Mag says it's the land of cell phones and all the black trails are blue), and I did go to Hunter this year again. I hate ski trips alone (my wife doesn't ski."You're all CRAZY!" ) so I'll go with friends anywhere else they want to. Skied when I was stationed in Germany. YOWZA!!!! I have Dynastar SC10's, Dynastar Speed 63's, Dynastar Speed SX's, and a brand new pair (!) of STRAIGHT (!?)  Fischer RC4's, for bumps. Got a couple of pairs of Dalbellos, and was given as a present a BRAND NEW pair of Full Tilt Kamo boots from a good friend and former member of the Russian ski Team two weeks ago. Oh yeah, I skied at Felberg Germany.when the Force had me stationed there, so I wouldn't have to cross the border and get SEARCHED! The skis were the only things that were straight with me back then, get my drift? Ed.



SWEET! Welcome to the boards! :beer:


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Oh yeah, I skied at Felberg Germany.when the Force had me stationed there, so I wouldn't have to cross the border and get SEARCHED! The skis were the only things that were straight with me back then, get my drift? Ed.



When were you in Germany? I used to drive from Munich to Austria every weekend and was never stopped. Although you pretty much got a free pass back then with a military ID. Checkpoint Charlie was another story . . . When I went back in 2001 right after 9-11 we had to buy a special pass to get into Austria.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

*Border patrol*

I  was in Ramstein Germany from 1981-1983. Participated in the Ramstein Bombing in 1981. Only needed military ID to cross the border back then, so when I went to France and Switzerland, no problem. Didn't have any ski extras with me, so no worries. Pretty scary though. After the Ramstein bomb, I did NOT go to GI clubs. They shot up the GI's in the Athens airport, blew up Frankfurt, and Berlin too when I was there. Friend of mine shot a couple of guys who stuck a gun barrel through the window while he was guarding the gate at Mannheim.  Killed them dead. He lives down the road from me and has PTSD really bad. Worse than mine.  SKIING KEEPS ME SANE! Ed.


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

Greg said:


> If you're not doing or possessing anything illegal than you have nothing to worry about.
> 
> Riiiiiiiiight?


 
Guess I have a lot to worry about.:beer:  But being in this country illegally isn't one of those things.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

They train dope sniffing dogs by getting them stoned and then feeding them. GEEZ! I have a set of the champion drug dog trading cards. "I just wanna be your dog." Iggy Pop. Ed.


----------



## andyzee (Mar 24, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> They train dope sniffing dogs by getting them stoned and them feeding them. GEEZ! I have a set of the champion drug dog trading cards. "I just wanna be your dog." Iggy Pop. Ed.


 
And with that line, I have to say "Glad you came back!"


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 24, 2008)

I saw an old WWII movie (can't remember the name of it) and the spy was running to the border away from the Nazis with the dogs barking, where he met with a man from the resistance. They ran for a while and the resistance man stopped and took out a jar and proceed to dump a powdery substance on the ground. The spy said "what's that" and the resistance man said, "it's a mixture of dried blood and cocaine. One whiff of this and the dogs won't be able to smell themselves." Then the Nazis and dogs got to the spot and the dogs started rolling on the ground and were useless. The spy got to the border safely. Ed.:razz:


----------



## Bumpsis (Mar 25, 2008)

I find the idea of border patrol stopping people 90 some miles south of the border rather bizzar and frankly,  worrisome. 
I speak with a slight foreign accent (born and raised in Europe) so does my wife. The idea of having to carry my passport on a ski trip to VT just has not crossed my mind. So, if I get pulled over, I well maybe taken for an illegal with nefarious plans in mind and no way to prove otherwise. Great!

The prospect of being held on some unfounded suspicion sounds really wonderful 

An this has been happening for years now??


----------



## Plowboy (Mar 25, 2008)

Some info from 05'

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050106/NEWS/501060332/1003/NEWS02

Stop The Checkpiont

http://stopthecheckpoint.blogspot.com/


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 25, 2008)

Thank you Plowboy! The writings about the checkpoint in Hartford Vt. totally reinforces the point that I  am trying to make. The DHS does NOT "protect" us from terrorists or anything else. Customs has so much stuff going in and out of our country that it virtually impossible to look at every container of goods. How does the vast amount of drugs like Heroin and Cocaine get into America? Poppy and coca plants are not grown in the states. I have traveled from Europe on many occasions and I wouldn't even bring a piece of fruit with me for fear of having it seized. A CIA (Cocaine Importing Agency) plane crashed in the Yucatan last September with 7 TONS of coke and 1 TON of heroin aboard. Then, the coke became three tons and the heroin disappeared.(!) There are PICTURES of the plane crash with the bails of dope sitting next to it on the net. What I am worried about is the Nuclear bomb that DISAPPEARED on it's way from Minot Air Force base to Barksdale last year. Ed.


----------



## MichaelJ (Mar 25, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> Any one smuggling would obviously take the 93 option knowing that the checks happen below WRJ. Though I did see one stop point done in Lincoln, NH once, it is far less often than the one on 91 in question.



They used to set up down near Waterville Valley. Trivial to avoid, get off the exit before and get back on after. Any smuggler worth their salt would have no problem with these "checkpoints".

I think I remember a fatal accident because of their setup (no warning, traffic suddenly dead stopped), and haven't seen it since, but the portable lights and message board are still there on the side of the road.


----------



## Plowboy (Mar 25, 2008)

MichaelJ said:


> I think I remember a fatal accident because of their setup (no warning, traffic suddenly dead stopped), and haven't seen it since, but the portable lights and message board are still there on the side of the road.



The past few times I've been down 91 it has been closed but the signs and trailer are still set up. The accidents were in NY on the Northway(I87). Not sure if they set that one up anymore.
http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/Schu..._releases/2004/PR02921.I87accident092104.html


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 25, 2008)

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/03/25/police_limit_searches_for_guns/

Fortunately, not everyone s entirely apathetic.


----------



## LongStep (Mar 25, 2008)

governments tend to become paranoid when they are doing things they know are wrong. Liberties and personal freedom have  being taken and rights have certaintly been eroded in the past 20 years or so. Many think the country is heading down a terible road of facism. I try and see both sides of an argument when thinking about these points. I can absolutly see both sides of the picture. I tend to believe we are heading in the wrong direction expecially in the economic world but only time will tell. An old quote I enjoy is "there can be no daily democracy without daily participation" Americans have gotten lazy and a lazy uninformed public is breading grounds for the boys up top to wreck havok. Sorry if this offends anyone but I believe in the constitution and in America.


oh and I was once stopped at a checkpoint up in northern NH maybe 30 miles from the border by heavily armed border patrol agents. Not the friendliest folks I have ever met. My gf was pretty shook up.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Mar 25, 2008)

My god we get stopped regularly here on the Canadian border in NNY --its an everyday event it seems . the only thing that changes is the location and route number ---what a sad reality .


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Mar 25, 2008)




----------



## drjeff (Mar 25, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


>




If you're not doing anything you shouldn't/have anything you shouldn't no big deal.  If you're doing something you shouldn't/have something you shouldn't than you should be worried.  It's really that simple.


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 25, 2008)

drjeff said:


> If you're not doing anything you shouldn't/have anything you shouldn't no big deal.  If you're doing something you shouldn't/have something you shouldn't than you should be worried.  It's really that simple.



If I haven't been doing/don't have something I shouldn't, then I shouldn't have to have my rights infringed upon. It's as simple as that.

It's not a question of inconvenience. It's a question of rights.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Mar 25, 2008)

AGREED -- its a pain in the tush when its a regular occurance and of QUESTIONABLE value  in terms of keeping undesirables out > Moreover its destroying what for centuries was a harmonious relationship with our across the river neighbors in Canada . 

Local economies on Both sides of the river  are being negatively impacted  as a result of this policy -


----------



## LongStep (Mar 25, 2008)

Warp Daddy said:


> AGREED -- its a pain in the tush when its a regular occurance and of QUESTIONABLE value  in terms of keeping undesirables out > Moreover its destroying what for centuries was a harmonious relationship with our across the river neighbors in Canada .
> 
> Local economies on Both sides of the river  are being negatively impacted  as a result of this policy -





People will give up much for safety. This is either a saftey issue or a control issue.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Mar 25, 2008)

This is a situation of control without guaranteeing safety:  thus a  Zero Sum Game


----------



## MichaelJ (Mar 25, 2008)

drjeff said:


> If you're not doing anything you shouldn't/have anything you shouldn't no big deal.  If you're doing something you shouldn't/have something you shouldn't than you should be worried.  It's really that simple.



I haven't done anything I shouldn't have, so what business is it of the border patrol where I was, what I was doing, or where I'm going, when I didn't cross the border? Let them question me if I'm a legal suspect in an investigation, or at a border checkpoint *on the border*.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 25, 2008)

drjeff said:


> If you're not doing anything you shouldn't/have anything you shouldn't no big deal.  If you're doing something you shouldn't/have something you shouldn't than you should be worried.  It's really that simple.


There are lots of cases in which people breaking laws had to be worried when what they were doing wasn't hurting any one. If no one questioned laws and tried to change things and had to be worried for doing things they "shouldn't" be doing, we would still be living under Victorian conditions. Rules and laws adapt to society because groups of people decide that the things we "shouldn't" be doing are perfectly acceptable and they want to engage in those actions without fear of being punished. Defending questionable and potentially civil liberties breaking precedents on those grounds does not make sense to me.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 25, 2008)

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will lose both." "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security." Benjamin Franklin.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 25, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will lose both." "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security." Benjamin Franklin.


That was a Charlie Schussler signature at one point! :-D


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Mar 25, 2008)

It is quite funny how many of you are saying what about YOUR rights, but yet have posted many times of taking away other rights  of others.........


----------



## andyzee (Mar 25, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> If I haven't been doing/don't have something I shouldn't, then I shouldn't have to have my rights infringed upon. It's as simple as that.
> 
> It's not a question of inconvenience. It's a question of rights.


 
I thought it was "Protect and serve" not "Dictate and intimidate"


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 25, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


> It is quite funny how many of you are saying what about YOUR rights, but yet have posted many times of taking away other rights  of others.........



Where?



ed-drum said:


> "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will lose both." "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security." Benjamin Franklin.



Unfortunately, "Democracy is the best way to ensure the People get the government the People deserve." -Thomas Jefferson


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Mar 25, 2008)

ctenidae said:


> Where?



Not in this thread, but through reading over time.  Don't care enough to go search though.  But when a person has different opinions they see things that happen entirely differently.


I am not saying this from here, but the NRA that was mentioned earlier.  Is it not infronging upon people's rights to take away any of their guns?:uzi:  It says it in the Constitution.....;-)


----------



## dmc (Mar 26, 2008)

In england right now... Last time i was here I had issues getting through customs because i said I was there to help sell security software...  I got the third degree on why? Who? Why can't someone from England do this?

This time I just said I was helping a co-worker out on some computer stuff..  Walked right through....

The customs line in London is pretty scarey if you get freaked by middle easterners...  Which I'm not...


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 26, 2008)

It isn't infringing on peoples rights to take their guns away? It says it in the Constitution? WHERE? The definition of Militia is PEOPLES army. Hitler took the guns away. That was one of the first things he did! What Constitution are you talking about? The right to bear arms (the PEOPLES right to bear arms) shall not be infringed. When that nutcase Charles Whitman shot all the people from the tower at the University in Austin Texas, the PEOPLE got their guns, shot back at him to pin him down and two brave souls went to the top of the tower and killed him. Now, as in the last University shooting where they banned guns on campus, the shooter killed a lot of people while cops tried to figure out what to do. Oh yeah, before I get "cop bashed", my brother is a retired cop who was shot while interrupting a robbery. These are not opinions, they are facts. Ed.


----------



## LongStep (Mar 26, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> It isn't infringing on peoples rights to take their guns away? It says it in the Constitution? WHERE? The definition of Militia is PEOPLES army. Hitler took the guns away. That was one of the first things he did! What Constitution are you talking about? The right to bear arms (the PEOPLES right to bear arms) shall not be infringed. When that nutcase Charles Whitman shot all the people from the tower at the University in Austin Texas, the PEOPLE got their guns, shot back at him to pin him down and two brave souls went to the top of the tower and killed him. Now, as in the last University shooting where they banned guns on campus, the shooter killed a lot of people while cops tried to figure out what to do. Oh yeah, before I get "cop bashed", my brother is a retired cop who was shot while interrupting a robbery. These are not opinions, they are facts. Ed.



the right to bear arms and form militia is the check the founders gave us to protect us from tyranny. Checks and balances do exist and I find it funny when people would gladfully give up the one check they have over the boys up top.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 26, 2008)

The gun confiscation is starting. They are trying to do it in Boston, and now Washington D.C. is trying to do it. The people are telling them to stick it. Hold on, my tin foil hat just fell in my eyes.......................... that's better, I had to adjust it. Check it out on Badcopnews.com. Ed.


----------



## ctenidae (Mar 26, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> The gun confiscation is starting. They are trying to do it in Boston, and now Washington D.C. is trying to do it. The people are telling them to stick it. Hold on, my tin foil hat just fell in my eyes.......................... that's better, I had to adjust it. Check it out on Badcopnews.com. Ed.



Supreme Court's going to knock down DC's law. Hopefully before they can act on it.


----------



## Dr Skimeister (Mar 28, 2008)

*Now it all makes sense.....*

From a Mount Snow email:

We have some unfortunate news regarding the Toots and the Maytals concert Saturday night.  There is a visa issue with Toots and the Maytals, their agency and U.S. immigration.  At 4:30 pm on Friday, we were notified that the Department of Homeland Security are not allowing them into the United States until Monday, at the very earliest.  We were told that this resulted in the cancellation of three shows:  Mount Snow, one in New Hampshire and one in Boston. 

Got to keep those hemp smoking Reggae heads out of Vermont!


----------



## andyzee (Mar 28, 2008)

Dr Skimeister said:


> From a Mount Snow email:
> 
> We have some unfortunate news regarding the Toots and the Maytals concert Saturday night. There is a visa issue with Toots and the Maytals, their agency and U.S. immigration. At 4:30 pm on Friday, we were notified that the Department of Homeland Security are not allowing them into the United States until Monday, at the very earliest. We were told that this resulted in the cancellation of three shows: Mount Snow, one in New Hampshire and one in Boston.
> 
> Got to keep those hemp smoking Reggae heads out of Vermont!


 
Guess they can't keep out terrorists, so they have to do something to prove they're doing their job.


----------



## ed-drum (Apr 8, 2008)

The Lou Dobbs show on CNN had a story about how the state of Arizona's  border patrol and Homeland Security is not prosecuting anyone for smuggling less than 500 pounds of dope that has been detected at border checkpoints. The prosecution rate is only .4%. Which means that 99.6% of the smugglers are set free. (where does the weed go? HMMM!) I guess there goes the "checking for drug trafficking"  reason for these stops that are far away from our borders. Ed.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Apr 8, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> The Lou Dobbs show on CNN had a story about how the state of Arizona's  border patrol and Homeland Security is not prosecuting anyone for smuggling less than 500 pounds of dope that has been detected at border checkpoints. The prosecution rate is only .4%. Which means that 99.6% of the smugglers are set free. (where does the weed go? HMMM!) I guess there goes the "checking for drug trafficking"  reason for these stops that are far away from our borders. Ed.



Too bad the Mexican weed is mostly crap..as long as the Canadian pot makes it into the US..I'm happy..:beer:


----------



## ed-drum (Apr 8, 2008)

Yeah, they had pictures of the stuff they confiscate. It was brown looking dried up dirt weed. I heard about some guys (I didn't know them ) who were growing in Dutchess county N.Y. in the ' 90's and they got caught with 80lbs.(!) However, the newspaper said there was only 40lbs. .COPS?  GRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ed.


----------



## tjf67 (Apr 25, 2008)

I was going from Tupper Lake to Long Lake yesterday and the border patrol was there.  I had just freshened up when I came around the corner and bam they were there.  They had a dog.  My windows went down.  Pulled up they asked me where I was born and off I went.  I was crapping in my knickers the dog was going to start going crazy.  Not a problem.  I was polite they were polite and I was on my way.  No harm done


----------



## Dr Skimeister (Apr 25, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> I was going from Tupper Lake to Long Lake yesterday and the border patrol was there.  I had just freshened up when I came around the corner and bam they were there.  They had a dog.  My windows went down.  Pulled up they asked me where I was born and off I went.  I was crapping in my knickers the dog was going to start going crazy.  Not a problem.  I was polite they were polite and I was on my way.  No harm done



Those must have been the dogs trained to sniff out dark skinned hombres, not red-eyed ones.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Apr 25, 2008)

Dr Skimeister said:


> Those must have been the dogs trained to sniff out dark skinned hombres, not red-eyed ones.



Sounds good as I'm a red eyed Hombre..lol..at least after 4:20PM..lol


----------



## ComeBackMudPuddles (Apr 28, 2008)

Plowboy said:


> The past few times I've been down 91 it has been closed but the signs and trailer are still set up. The accidents were in NY on the Northway(I87). Not sure if they set that one up anymore.
> http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/Schu..._releases/2004/PR02921.I87accident092104.html





They subsequently (and thankfully) installed a bunch of rumble strips and bright, flashing signs (a little late for that family of 4).  It also made the checkpoint seem much more "permanent", but it rarely seems to be manned (at least when I drive by it).

One of the justifications I heard for the border checkpoint was that it was meant to deter the trade in illegal immigrants from China passing through Canada on the way to NYC (both to stop illegal immigrants from coming, and to help stop poor Chinese workers from getting conned into basically becoming indentured servants for x number of decades in the U.S. to pay off their travel debt).  There are a number of barely manned/easily traversed checkpoints between the U.S. and Canada, and, somehow, these additional interstate checkpoints are supposed to counteract illegal crossings (because, of course, those trafficing in drugs, people and terrorism presumably can't be bothered to get off the exit before the stop and get back on the highway at the next exit :roll.

Don't really feel like getting sucked into the constitutional arguments on this thread, but, as someone mentioned, I think driving is a privilege, not a right, and the state has a legitimate interest in insuring drivers aren't drunk, driving without insurance, not trafficing illegal immigrants, etc., on our roads, so a minimal amount of intrusion into our lives isn't unreasonable and probably isn't unconstitutional.


----------



## Plowboy (May 1, 2008)

ComeBackMudPuddles said:


> They subsequently (and thankfully) installed a bunch of rumble strips and bright, flashing signs (a little late for that family of 4).  It also made the checkpoint seem much more "permanent", but it rarely seems to be manned (at least when I drive by it).
> 
> One of the justifications I heard for the border checkpoint was that it was meant to deter the trade in illegal immigrants from China passing through Canada on the way to NYC (both to stop illegal immigrants from coming, and to help stop poor Chinese workers from getting conned into basically becoming indentured servants for x number of decades in the U.S. to pay off their travel debt).  There are a number of barely manned/easily traversed checkpoints between the U.S. and Canada, and, somehow, these additional interstate checkpoints are supposed to counteract illegal crossings (because, of course, those trafficing in drugs, people and terrorism presumably can't be bothered to get off the exit before the stop and get back on the highway at the next exit :roll.
> 
> Don't really feel like getting sucked into the constitutional arguments on this thread, but, as someone mentioned, I think driving is a privilege, not a right, and the state has a legitimate interest in insuring drivers aren't drunk, driving without insurance, not trafficing illegal immigrants, etc., on our roads, so a minimal amount of intrusion into our lives isn't unreasonable and probably isn't unconstitutional.



I think I read somewhere that the troopers on the Northway were going to be using Automatic licence plate recognition (ALPR).


----------



## Warp Daddy (May 1, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> I was going from Tupper Lake to Long Lake yesterday and the border patrol was there.  I had just freshened up when I came around the corner and bam they were there.  They had a dog.  My windows went down.  Pulled up they asked me where I was born and off I went.  I was crapping in my knickers the dog was going to start going crazy.  Not a problem.  I was polite they were polite and I was on my way.  No harm done



 Had same experience at the same location on 4/2---------------been thru it there on more than one occasion !  Never heard of any major arrests or interdictions there tho


----------



## ctenidae (May 5, 2008)

And then there's this:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topsto...ps-and-mobile-phones-searched-89520-20405885/


----------

