Its funny, you watch the first 2 videos and you almost feel bad for the guy, but after watching the last one its as if he drove to this checkpoint looking for a confrontation. I tell you what, it would be interesting to see how the guy acted with the border patrol. While no innocent person deserves the treatment he got, it seems like he got the confrontation he wanted.
This is a lose lose lose situation. Yes, He may get a huge settlement...but he also sort of had it coming. It is uncalled for for the officers to beat and taser him and drop him on his face in the broken glass. That is a serious LACK OF JUDGEMENT on the part of all LEOs involved. He did have a 4th amendment right to say no to a search without a warrant no matter how big of a pain in the neck he is being to the LEOs involved. As professionals, I would hope that the standards run just a tad higher than that. They should never have let this guy get under their skin.
It seems that Johnson's participation in the anti-fence demonstration may have landed him on a government watch list that has inhibited his ability to travel freely between the US and Mexico. A professor of Music, Johnson said he traveled to Tijuana about a week after the protest; upon returning to the US, Johnson says he was handcuffed and arrested by customs agents after a listing associated with his name pegged him as armed and dangerous.
"I was thoroughly and aggressively searched. ... Every inch and crack and crevice of my body was poked and prodded," Johnson said. "I was in complete bewilderment of what was going on; I felt violated and frankly was embarrassed."
Prior to that visit, Johnson said he had traveled regularly between the US and Mexico for a variety of reasons without facing any harassment. After the June visit, Johnson said he did not cross the border again until October, when he decided to go simply to see whether he could re-enter the country easily. He was subjected to the same harassment.
"It took me four months to return to Mexico," he said. "Not because I'm afraid of traveling outside my own country, but rather because I'm afraid of returning home."
Johnson spoke Wednesday at a gathering organized by the American Civil Liberties Union, which is highlighting the extent to which the Department of Homeland Security is expanding the authority it claims at US border crossings to infringe upon Americans rights.
The ACLU says a "Constitution-free zone" exists within 100 miles of the US border, where DHS claims the authority to stop, search and detain anyone for any reason. Nearly two-thirds of the US population lives within 100 miles of the border, according to the ACLU, and the border zone encompasses scores of major metropolitan areas and even entire states.
Customs and Border Patrol, a component of DHS, was authorized by Congress to operate within a "reasonable" distance of the border, and that distance has been set at 100 miles in regulations governing CBP, the ACLU says. The authorization has been in place for decades, but complaints about abuses of the extended border zone began to ramp up as CBP was expanded and folded into DHS after 9/11.
Also of concern, according to the group, is the border patrol's use of massive databases and watch lists to screen travelers. Much remains unknown about how those lists are compiled and it is exceedingly difficult for a person to be removed from the list once he or she is added to it.
ACLU affiliates around the country have fielded dozens of calls from people claiming they were harassed by border agents, and the group believes there are untold numbers of other victims who are afraid to come forward.
No lawsuits have yet been filed against DHS or CBP, but the ACLU says its attorneys in border states are preparing cases.
"Part of what we're trying to do is to draw our own line in the sand here and say this has to stop," Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Program, said Wednesday. "We cannot determine two-thirds of America as a Constitution free zone."
DHS 33 "interior checkpoints" that are monitored by the border patrol, according to a 2005 Government Accountability Office report. The ACLU assumes more checkpoints have been established since then, and group affiliates have complained about checkpoints as far as 93 miles from the border.
ACLU lobbyists are working with members of Congress to rein in DHS's border authority. Caroline Fredrickson, the group's chief legislative counsel, praised a measure introduced by Sen. Russ Feingold and others to ban suspicionless laptop searches at the border.
"We need to restore the Constitution to the Constitution-free zone," Fredrickson said.
Wednesday's event also featured a video testimonial from Vince Peppard, another San Diegoan who faced trouble from border agents. Peppard said he was stopped at least 20 miles inside the border on a return trip from Mexico. He refused to open his trunk "on a matter of principle" and was detained for about 30 minutes.
"I didn't feel like I was in the United States," he says. "I felt like I was in some kind of police state."
I don't think anyone here would argue otherwise.As a LEO I must say that we dont have to go hand-to-hand with you (think walker texas ranger) we are allowed by law to go one "force level" higher than the other person to "control and defend"
Again, no arguement. But, I am curious... is there a specific post in this thread that comes off as "people automatically getting on their kick about how cops are evil stormtrooper nazis whenever they get a chance"? You state that you haven't watched the video. It seems like you've not read the thread either, any further than perhaps the title. The point I'm trying to make is, if you have a problem with those who rush to judgement against cops, you would do well not to make a presumptive judgement against people commenting on a video that you haven't even watched.I did not watch the video and am defending nobodies actions. But I do get a little upset when people automatically get on their kick about how cops are evil stormtrooper nazis whenever they get a chance.
I don't think anyone here would argue otherwise.
Again, no arguement. But, I am curious... is there a specific post in this thread that comes off as "people automatically getting on their kick about how cops are evil stormtrooper nazis whenever they get a chance"? You state that you haven't watched the video. It seems like you've not read the thread either, any further than perhaps the title. The point I'm trying to make is, if you have a problem with those who rush to judgement against cops, you would do well not to make a presumptive judgement against people commenting on a video that you haven't even watched.
I think you have that backwards. When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.It's only when the people respect and fear the government that there is liberty. When the government fears the people there is only anarchy and tyranny.
This country has given its people more freedom than any other government in the history of the world. You should thank your lucky stars for the rights and freedoms you've been granted.
It's only when the people respect and fear the government that there is liberty. When the government fears the people there is only anarchy and tyranny.
God gave me my rights, not this country. But I'm not sure how that relates to the topic.
I deliberately left off the {sarcasm} icon to see how many would get it....without it having to be spelled out for them.
I don't think anyone here would argue otherwise.
Again, no arguement. But, I am curious... is there a specific post in this thread that comes off as "people automatically getting on their kick about how cops are evil stormtrooper nazis whenever they get a chance"? You state that you haven't watched the video. It seems like you've not read the thread either, any further than perhaps the title. The point I'm trying to make is, if you have a problem with those who rush to judgement against cops, you would do well not to make a presumptive judgement against people commenting on a video that you haven't even watched.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?