http://www.acluaz.org/sites/default/files/documents/Checkpoints%20One-Pager.pdf
Does anyone have the "right to remain silent" when stopped at a BP checkpoint? In the video (below) we see a driver giving the "silent treatment." Did the BP agent(s) overreact? Skip forward to about the 11 minute mark (to save 11 minutes of just hearing the air conditioning running).
In the opinion of this writer, no, they did not. The fact of the matter is that there are laws now which permit the BP to conduct these checkpoints. Someone I was dialoging with on Facebook said, "It's still wrong, as wrong as Dred Scott." Well, in the Dred Scott case, the laws were eventually changed. That's the way the Constitution works - if there is a bad law, it gets changed. Breaking a bad law is still breaking the law - and there are consequences, legal consequences.
That being said, to compare this situation to Dred Scott is quite the overreaction, in my humble opinion. Why? Because the Scotts were deprived of virtually ALL freedom. A BP agent merely asking, "Are you a United States citizen?" does not impinge upon your rights or freedom. One might claim they have the "right" to not answer them - well, again, in not answering you have now given them probable cause to suspect you might be doing something illegal. At that point, all bets are off. Once you have gone to the "secondary interview" - it is now the BP agents who have the "right" to further inspection and/or interrogation. Further refusal to cooperate can lead to you being legally and constitutionally detained. I would add, your refusal to answer a simple question is actually the cause of your lack of freedom of movement.
The Right To Remain Silent
To simply "remain silent" does not really apply here either. I'm sure those who would like to invoke this are thinking of the Arizona v. Miranda case where an arresting officer must inform the arrestee of their "right to remain silent" and that "anything you say can and will be used against you." When the officers are simply trying to assess "just cause" the Miranda rights have not even come into play yet. In fact, until you are read/given your Miranda rights, anything you say prior to that cannot be used against you! Those arguing for "the right to remain silent" have it exactly backwards here! You can say anything you want, yes or no, and that cannot be used against you until you've been read your Miranda rights! Now, if you answer "no" to the question about United States citizenship, well, you've just given them "probable cause" to detain you. If you answer "yes," then unless they have MORE reasonable cause to suspect you, you will likely be on your way with very little delay.
The following video is also a bit on the silly side, watch and then read my comments:
So, by expressing their 1) knowledge of the United States Constitution, they are giving evidence of United States citizenship! Hence, in most cases after the protestor has sufficiently spoken, he has provided enough evidence to be allowed to proceed. 2) In speaking in clear English, without a foreign accent, they are, again, providing evidence that they really do belong in the United States. This is likely why, after the person/protestor has willfully delayed him/herself - the BP agents just let them go without further incident. After you've talked enough, you've provided enough evidence to warrant either letting you go - or detaining you further.
Note also the comparison to "Nazi Germany," wherein this driver (and family) are well within the 100 mile range of the Border Patrol, which according to United States law, the Border Patrol is within their "rights." Someone driving on a roadway in proximity to the border, in the opinion of this writer, has already consented to such an interview, just as if one actually leaves the country, they are subject to interview and even inspection of personal property.
Why Do We Have Border Patrol Checkpoints?
Well, the reason is two-fold, at least. 1) In a post-911 era, where terrorists could easily be attempting to slip across the border and have avoided actual border checkpoints - putting these further inland gives them the opportunity to observe the behavior of those driving up - and if someone quickly turns around, they've just given "probable cause" to be pursued and detained. 2) With the ever increasing problem of illegal aliens coming across putting extra burdens upon the legal citizens of this country, well, the country has a right and even responsibility to protect herself from this illegal invasion.
The Bottom Line
Just answer the question! Especially if you ARE a United States citizen! If you're not - you deserve to be detained. And, if you don't like the law - work to get it changed - THAT is how our country's Constitution is supposed to work!
No comments:
Post a Comment