If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Border patrol agents teamed up with authorities in New Jersey to arrest drug addicts   ( slate.com) divider line
    More: Murica, U.S. state, Police, United States, United States Constitution, Constable, New Hampshire, Supreme Court of the United States, United States Congress  
•       •       •

2387 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Jan 2018 at 6:09 AM (27 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



93 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-01-14 12:54:57 AM  
Very interesting article about the collusion of federal agents with local police to neuter a state constitution.
 
2018-01-14 01:20:54 AM  
Might have been New Mexico...
 
2018-01-14 02:34:26 AM  
But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

That's pretty farking weak, even as cop excuses go.
 
2018-01-14 03:44:30 AM  
I couldn't tell from a quick read if anything had been decided.  But the defense marshaled some pretty powerful and rational arguments.

So I guess the defendants are all going to jail.

Also, it was New Hampshire, subby.  My understanding is that the new NJ governor has promised to legalize in the first 100 days of his term.
 
2018-01-14 06:12:11 AM  
Umm, New Hampshire is NOT New Jersey.  Not really even close geographically when you think about it.  Not even close any other way either...
 
2018-01-14 06:21:21 AM  

medic2731: Umm, New Hampshire is NOT New Jersey.  Not really even close geographically when you think about it.  Not even close any other way either...


When you've lived in large states, everything in the northeast feels close geographically.  One of the things I really liked about living in the northeast.  I'm rooting really hard for these folks and I hope the new governor's word is good
 
2018-01-14 06:53:33 AM  
"In the end, the 9/11 attacks succeeded, in the sense that they destroyed American democracy."
 
2018-01-14 07:01:31 AM  

knobmaker: Very interesting article about the collusion of federal agents with local police to neuter a state constitution.

 
It's the Republican version of States Rights.
 
2018-01-14 07:19:09 AM  
 I always ride a minimum of 125 miles in the trunk when I cross international borders illegally.
 
2018-01-14 07:21:43 AM  

Scanty Em: "In the end, the 9/11 attacks succeeded, in the sense that they destroyed American democracy."


More like they knocked over the propaganda facade that was erected during the cold war to cover up the sins of the past in the eyes of the hoi polloi.

America, even under Trump, is still better than it has been.
 
2018-01-14 07:25:44 AM  

doglover: Scanty Em: "In the end, the 9/11 attacks succeeded, in the sense that they destroyed American democracy."

More like they knocked over the propaganda facade that was erected during the cold war to cover up the sins of the past in the eyes of the hoi polloi.

America, even under Trump, is still better than it has been.


Not for long if that side of the political divide retains their complete control over the government  in 2018 and/or 2020.
 
2018-01-14 07:35:11 AM  

Smoking GNU: doglover: Scanty Em: "In the end, the 9/11 attacks succeeded, in the sense that they destroyed American democracy."

More like they knocked over the propaganda facade that was erected during the cold war to cover up the sins of the past in the eyes of the hoi polloi.

America, even under Trump, is still better than it has been.

Not for long if that side of the political divide retains their complete control over the government  in 2018 and/or 2020.


Meh. We were REALLY bad in the 40's and 50's.

The Republicans are still just reversing progress.
 
2018-01-14 07:39:00 AM  
In case anyone here doesn't know, NH is in the top five states with the worst opioid crisis in the country.  Spending millions of dollars to put a few functioning members of society in prison for MJ is an obscene waste of resources.
/elections matter
 
2018-01-14 07:47:14 AM  
If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.
 
2018-01-14 08:02:44 AM  
Seems awfully elaborate.  Why not just plant the contraband? Include a few throw downs to make it a weapons offence too?
 
2018-01-14 08:13:30 AM  

backhand.slap.of.reason: If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.


which border?  federal, state. county, south of the border (South Carolina), run for the border Taco Bells?
 
2018-01-14 08:33:04 AM  

fusillade762: But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

That's pretty farking weak, even as cop excuses go.


A dog to detect concealed humans needs an entirely different set of training than a drug sniffing dog.
 
2018-01-14 08:33:16 AM  

Hyjamon: backhand.slap.of.reason: If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.

which border?  federal, state. county, south of the border (South Carolina), run for the border Taco Bells?


Seriously, international including coasts. This includes many large cities and most of the places people live
 
2018-01-14 08:35:31 AM  

backhand.slap.of.reason: If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.


Or if you live 100 miles from and International airport. Because they have a customs desk they are considered a border crossing. Which would place every major city within 100 miles of a border crossing.
 
2018-01-14 08:36:02 AM  
Narcotics?  Drug addicts?  Jesus Christ, is it time to pick up Mary Ann for the sock hop?  Do we have time to go to the soda fountain in the flivver for a phosphate?  Yay, it's 1957!
 
2018-01-14 08:39:44 AM  

Hyjamon: backhand.slap.of.reason: If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.

which border?  federal, state. county, south of the border (South Carolina), run for the border Taco Bells?


International.

The Justice Department adopted regulations in 1953 saying that the Border Patrol had virtually unlimited authority to search within 100 miles of an international border, as long as they were searching for illegal immigrants or smuggled contraband.

Courts have upheld this as an exception to the 4th Amendment, as the authority of the government to search people crossing international borders is a known exception.  Some circuits have even held that there is no mileage limit, and that the Border Patrol has unlimited warrantless search authority as long as they are searching for immigration and customs violations.

However, the problem comes when they use that authority to set up searches for customs & immigration purposes as a pretext for warrantless searches otherwise, like in this case.

https://www.aclu.org/other/constituti​o​n-100-mile-border-zone
 
2018-01-14 08:41:55 AM  

backhand.slap.of.reason: If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.


They already can do that...

The 100-mile Constitution-Free(TM) zone was even mentioned in the article. Basically Woodstock, NH is just like Guantanamo except for the orange jumpsuits and hoodies...
 
2018-01-14 08:43:03 AM  

Evil Twin Skippy: fusillade762: But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

That's pretty farking weak, even as cop excuses go.

A dog to detect concealed humans needs an entirely different set of training than a drug sniffing dog.


not if the humans are carrying drugs

techincally_correct.jpg
 
2018-01-14 08:45:37 AM  

Evil Twin Skippy: backhand.slap.of.reason: If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.

Or if you live 100 miles from and International airport. Because they have a customs desk they are considered a border crossing. Which would place every major city within 100 miles of a border crossing.


this is kinda what i was wondering.  place 'borders' just right across the country so that you can cover the whole thing with 100-mile radius circles.  do embassies count?
 
2018-01-14 08:55:00 AM  
Constitutional issues aside, how much taxpayer money is being spent on these prosecutions?  I'm glad to know all other crime has been solved.  I'd like to see public officials defend this nonsense.
 
2018-01-14 09:07:02 AM  
But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

Now, I was under the impression that drug-sniffing dogs were used to tell their handlers when they smelled drugs.  Wouldn't a person-sniffing dog pretty much signal all the time - or at least all the time that a handler was holding their leash using them to search something?
 
2018-01-14 09:08:04 AM  

ColonelCathcart: Basically Woodstock, NH is just like Guantanamo except for the orange jumpsuits and hoodies...


This kind of hyperbole really doesn't help.

Somebody should waterboard you for engaging in it.
 
2018-01-14 09:11:38 AM  
Now, I've never smoked.  And I admit that my personal knowledge of marijuana is thin.

But if you've got a few grams of marijuana, are you not officially out of marijuana?
 
2018-01-14 09:19:07 AM  
I see they used the 'OMG HUMAN TRAFFICKING!!!' excuse: taxpayers are finally getting tired of paying for the drug war so they now need a new boogeyman to scare people with
 
2018-01-14 09:19:39 AM  
That's just lazy police work there. Stand around waiting on the BP to find something, then take credit for a drug bust, seize some property, call it a day and head back to the donut shop.
 
2018-01-14 09:21:25 AM  

edmo: That's just lazy police work there. Stand around waiting on the BP to find something, then take credit for a drug bust, seize some property, call it a day and head back to the donut shop.


That's typical govenrment stuff. Human trafficking is the issue du jour and they get budget money for the interdiction of it. So they want to show they're doing something about it so they get more money for it and ... so on.
 
2018-01-14 09:22:08 AM  

Karac: But if you've got a few grams of marijuana, are you not officially out of marijuana?


Easier to be without cash, then cash and no weed.
 
2018-01-14 09:22:17 AM  

edmo: edmo: That's just lazy police work there. Stand around waiting on the BP to find something, then take credit for a drug bust, seize some property, call it a day and head back to the donut shop.

That's typical govenrment stuff. Human trafficking is the issue du jour and they get budget money for the interdiction of it. So they want to show they're doing something about it so they get more money for it and ... so on.


That was supposed to be in response to cmb53208 .

Time for more coffee...
 
2018-01-14 09:36:49 AM  

Karac: Now, I've never smoked.  And I admit that my personal knowledge of marijuana is thin.

But if you've got a few grams of marijuana, are you not officially out of marijuana?


Nah. That's aboutvan eigth of an ounce, or enough for two or three joints. About what you'd take to go with a couple of friends on a walk in the woods.

Or so I'm told.
 
2018-01-14 09:40:36 AM  

Evil Twin Skippy: fusillade762: But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

That's pretty farking weak, even as cop excuses go.

A dog to detect concealed humans needs an entirely different set of training than a drug sniffing dog.


Why?

I mean, aside from how shiatty some canine training is and how dishonest some handlers are, they could legally use a drug-only sniffing at an immigration checkpoint for exterior searches without any suspicion at primary during the immigration interview and interior searches at at secondary with reasonable suspicion.

Saying a dog can't be multitrained is like saying if a cop searches your car after seeing a brick of cocaine slide out from under your seat he shouldn't be able to look under and take the gun he finds too.
 
2018-01-14 09:43:31 AM  

Billy Bathsalt: Narcotics? Drug addicts?


How about "stupefacients" and "drug-dependent people" respectively?  Better?
 
2018-01-14 09:45:19 AM  

Silverstaff: Hyjamon: backhand.slap.of.reason: If the judge rules in favor of the police, they will no longer need a warrant to search your home if you live within 100 miles of a border so long as they say they're searching for undocumented immigrants.

which border?  federal, state. county, south of the border (South Carolina), run for the border Taco Bells?

International.

The Justice Department adopted regulations in 1953 saying that the Border Patrol had virtually unlimited authority to search within 100 miles of an international border, as long as they were searching for illegal immigrants or smuggled contraband.

Courts have upheld this as an exception to the 4th Amendment, as the authority of the government to search people crossing international borders is a known exception.  Some circuits have even held that there is no mileage limit, and that the Border Patrol has unlimited warrantless search authority as long as they are searching for immigration and customs violations.

However, the problem comes when they use that authority to set up searches for customs & immigration purposes as a pretext for warrantless searches otherwise, like in this case.

https://www.aclu.org/other/constitutio​n-100-mile-border-zone


Based on your post I suspect you didn't read your link.

USBP is subject to the 4th amendment. They get a border search exemption AT THE BORDER and for things they can articulate are going to cross or have just crossed (functional equivalent of the border) and they get to setup immigration checkpoints, but they only get suspicion-free immigration authority there: all other checkpoint activities require standard Terry Stop reasonable suspicion and arrest probable cause.

They might get away with breaking those rules less if people could stop right repeating the lie that they are allowed to.

I can find the SCOTUS ruling from the 70s? I think it is if you'd like.
 
2018-01-14 09:49:39 AM  

Karac: But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

Now, I was under the impression that drug-sniffing dogs were used to tell their handlers when they smelled drugs.  Wouldn't a person-sniffing dog pretty much signal all the time - or at least all the time that a handler was holding their leash using them to search something?


something something - bacon
 
2018-01-14 09:52:06 AM  
The police are your enemy.  Act accordingly.
 
2018-01-14 09:55:40 AM  

edmo: edmo: edmo: That's just lazy police work there. Stand around waiting on the BP to find something, then take credit for a drug bust, seize some property, call it a day and head back to the donut shop.

That's typical govenrment stuff. Human trafficking is the issue du jour and they get budget money for the interdiction of it. So they want to show they're doing something about it so they get more money for it and ... so on.

That was supposed to be in response to cmb53208 .

Time for more coffee...


Have a cup of mine...
 
2018-01-14 09:59:55 AM  

Evil Twin Skippy: fusillade762: But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

That's pretty farking weak, even as cop excuses go.

A dog to detect concealed humans needs an entirely different set of training than a drug sniffing dog.


yeah, but cops can lie about everything, and it's cool. People go to jail if a PIG says you are "disprespecting" them. That's all you need to know about the reality of the myth of "freedom".

There is no real freedom.
 
2018-01-14 10:01:10 AM  
"disrespecting" even. You could literally end up in jail for being sweetly sarcastic to a pig
 
2018-01-14 10:10:54 AM  
Nice headline, subby. "Drug addicts"

BREAKING NEWS: Kids caught smoking weed at a Woodstock festival.

Concerned face.
 
2018-01-14 10:16:17 AM  

tirob: Billy Bathsalt: Narcotics? Drug addicts?

How about "stupefacients" and "drug-dependent people" respectively?  Better?


Yeah, that sounds so much more melodramatic than "medicine" for "patients".
 
2018-01-14 10:18:19 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-01-14 10:18:55 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-01-14 10:22:24 AM  
Even CBP's own website says they have 4th amendment restrictions.

https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detai​l/a_id/1084/~/legal-authority-for-the-​border-patrol
Fark called this link unfetchable.

Here is Almeida-Sanchez v United States, where USBP performed a suspicionless vehicle stop 25 miles from the border and SCOTUS ruled that 25 is too far for them to use the border exception.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremeco​u​rt/text/413/266

Too often, people allow their dislike of particular laws and/or distaste for a particular police force to lead them to making exaggerated claims about what those people have the authority to do. While such mistruths make great hay for talking heads, guests on radio shows, interviewers, and activists, I believe they do a great disservice to the population as a whole. Because every time this topic comes up there are a dozen farkers insisting USBP has the authority to do things they can't.  One of the major ways in which law enforcement get away with doing things they can't is the belief by the population, and sometimes the officers themselves, that they actually CAN do those things.  Don't feed into that, folks.


USBP CANNOT stop you or your vehicle without cause simply because you are within 100 miles of the border.  They need either a border nexus, or an immigration checkpoint (again a thing I personally consider bullshiat, but nobody made me a SCOTUS judge so what am I gonna do?). At the immigration checkpoint, they only have the authority to get an answer regarding your citizenship. There are only a few questions that can get to the bottom of this, like "where are you coming from, where are you heading, and what is your citizenship, country of birth, etc".  Without further suspicion they cannot even force you to show them ID, though it certainly speeds things along when you are with someone who has a tan (true story for me at the I-10 checkpoint).

Can we please put this strong-legged lie down now?

https://www.northcountrypublicradio.o​r​g/news/story/28616/20150610/what-are-y​our-rights-at-a-border-patrol-checkpoi​nt-here-are-some-answers
 
2018-01-14 10:29:43 AM  

Dare to keep slugs off kids: Might have been New Mexico...


New Mexico... Not really new, not really New Hampshire
 
2018-01-14 10:36:23 AM  

Kirablue42: Evil Twin Skippy: fusillade762: But CBP also brought along drug-sniffing dogs, alleging that the canines would help them to "detect concealed humans."

That's pretty farking weak, even as cop excuses go.

A dog to detect concealed humans needs an entirely different set of training than a drug sniffing dog.

yeah, but cops can lie about everything, and it's cool. People go to jail if a PIG says you are "disprespecting" them. That's all you need to know about the reality of the myth of "freedom".

There is no real freedom.


Well, no, you aren't in violation of the law for merely disrespecting cops.  I'm not sure why you use quotes where you do.

You can be arrested if your outburst rises to the level of fighting words or could be articulated as some kind of pre-assaultive indicator. And certainly the type of person who goes around telling cops to go fark themselves during a terry stop is likely to be subjected to more thorough encounter by a pissed off cop (not saying I support this, but calling it how it is), who may then go on to fabricated evidence or claim you did something you did not.

But afaik you cannot actually be LEGALLY arrested for merely disrespecting a police officer. Perhaps I read your post too seriously and you didn't mean to make that claim?
 
2018-01-14 10:42:43 AM  

Smackledorfer: you aren't in violation of the law for merely disrespecting cops


In Philly you will be arrested for resisting arrest.  No joke.
 
Displayed 50 of 93 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report