Originally Posted by
Whiskey_Bravo
Resources well spent then........ We should have more inland border check points, it's the only way to be sure.
We should put them on every road, just to be extra sure. How about we start with Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C.???
Originally Posted by
jmoney
The supreme court ruled that the checkpoints are legitimate. This is absolutely a lawful detention and if drugs were found, arrest. The only reason he was pulled out of the car, was his refusal to answer simple questions.
The CBP did absolutely nothing wrong there except waste federal taxpayer dollars and violate this man's civil rights. In fact, when the guy rolled up the window on the CBP agent's arm, which he never should've put in the car in the first place I thought he showed pretty good restraint from not escalating the issue further as that is a HUGE officer safety issue, and a precursor to how many officers get dragged by cars. Because after all, violating a citizens civil rights is his right under color of law.
In every video like this, there is always one common denominator, an individual refusing to comply with simple, lawful orders.
Fixed it for you.
I can't believe anyone would support this agent's actions based on this video. From what we see on the dashcam, there was no RAS or PC to stick his arm in the window, and no RAS or PC to pull him bodily from the vehicle. After all, did anyone see a dog sniff the vehicle before the agent put his arm in the car at 2:38? I never saw a single agent around the car until that arm appeared. As a matter of fact, the driver gave the agent a lawful order to remove his arm from the car, which the agent ignored. That was civil rights violation #1. The dog doesn't show up until 2:41 and that agent moves the dog away from the car at 2:47, with the dog never stopping or "alerting". We never see the dog again. The man and his wife answered the citizenship question at 2:51 and he positively asserts his rights at 3:02. He follows the agent's order to put the car in park immediately at 3:09, yet the agent goes hands on at 3:17, having never articulated any RAS or PC. That was civil rights violation #2. The agent says the dog alerted at 4:33, but we've still never seen a dog sit or alert. Absent proof from a 2nd camera, I'd call BS on that statement. The agent goes for the trunk at 5:13, and we know the dog never stopped there. Ultimately, the agent seems most interested in halting the citizen's video recording of his actions at the very end of the video.
If the results of the search were pursuant to those actions, they should be fruit of the poison tree and tossed. If I were this man's lawyer, I'd use that video to crucify the agent's heavy handedness and rights violations. This is not how we're supposed to treat American citizens traveling peaceably, as is their lawful right. The only thing that agent didn't do wrong was forcibly remove the child when he said "no, I don't want to". Are we supposed to view this as "restraint" on the agent's part? This entire episode could've been handled better in a hundred different ways by the agent. It didn't have to go that way. From what we see on the video, all I see is an overzealous federal agent asserting his "authority" over an American citizen. The only word I can come up with is disgraceful. 
What if this whole crusade's a charade?
And behind it all there's a price to be paid
For the blood which we dine
Justified in the name of the holy and the divine…
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks