The one that caught my eye recently is this guy named Rick Herbert, who has apparently just discovered Border Patrol checkpoints despite the fact that we've had them in place since the mid-1970s without any effect at all on liberty or freedom. Here's a video of Rick, with his wife and kid along as props, heading into a Border Patrol checkpoint just to cause a scene. In his Youtube comments, he calls these his "law patrols", which suggests that he actually goes out loking for police officers to bother. But let's watch what happened when Rick took on the Border Patrol recently:
It's always interesting to see the double standards that these loons try to apply to police as well. In thie video, we see Herbert both insisting that he doesn't have to answer questions (which is actually true) and then stating that the officers have to answer all of his questions before he'll comply with their instructions.
To their credit, they don't take his bait. They repeat the instruction one time, then take it to the next level when it's clear that he heard them and refuses to comply.
Here's a newsflash for wanna-be street lawyers: The police don't have to explain jack to you. All that's required is that they have probable cause to detain you but they'll just have to be able to articulate what that is in court later and they don't have to tell you at the time. Now they may decide to tell you if time permits and you're not otherwise acting like a tool, but they don't owe you an explanation and if you refuse to comply with their lawful orders, then you risk the consequences of that, including being locked up, as our pal Rick Herbert was. I know that Herbert was hoping to see the officer lose his cool, but that didn't happen. And obviously the officer knew that any answer the officer gave would have just been followed up with more questions intended to prolong the encounter and provoke a reaction, so his response was appropriate and proper. He's not paid to stand there and get jerked around; he's got a job to do and he goes about handling Herbert firmly and efficiently with a minimum of force. My only critique was that he got hung up in Herbert's seatbelt and he let Herbert close the window on his arm, which could have led to him being dragged and Herbert getting lawfully and appropriately shot. But hey--no harm, no foul, right? Otherwise, they got him under control quickly and took care of business.
So what is this guy protesting, exactly? You might think that it's some sort of sinister government plot to take everyone's guns or snatch everyone's kids, but no, it's just a Border Patrol checkpoint. You know, one of those spots where they stop you, ask you and your passengers about your citizenship, and if you don't draw their suspicion, send you on your way in about five seconds. People in the southwest are used to these as we've had them for decades. And contrary to the internet "constitutional lawyers" that seem to be in abundance these days, these checkpoints ARE constitutional. The Supreme Court ruled on these in 1976 in United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976). In that case, by a 7-2 decision, the Court looked at the conflict between the right of the individual to travel freely and the compelling government interest in detering and apprehending illegal immigration and drug smuggling. They concluded that the government interest was significant enough to justify the minimal intrusion that citizens were subjected to. And this opinion came from legal heavyweights such as Burger, Rehnquist, White, Stevens, Powell and Blackmun. These checkpoints have been around for over forty years and other than a bunch of smugglers, they have no actual effect on anyone. But these days, America's law-enforcement professionals are a ripe target for losers who want to feel empowered. Sorry, but I can't get on that wagon, since I know an awful lot of police officers and other public safety professionals and I consider most of them to be among the most selfless and professional people that I've ever met. They are the good guys, in my view. And they deserve our gratitude, not the crap that they're now getting from this current unholy coalition of the lunatic left, the radical fringe right, and the low-information crowd that sumps around going "Hands up, don't shoot"
And now just who exactly is Rick Herbert, you might ask?
Well according to his own Google and Youtube posting,
He's an unemployed former wal-Mart worker.
He's a pot-head. ("Super Skunk" is a marijuana strain.)
He's a crystal meth fan. (Like we couldn't tell from looking at him.)
And according to his own internet posts, it seems that he does little more than videotape himself as he provokes confrontations with the police or cheer on other losers who make similar videos. It's also telling that when I and others have posted questions asking him if the Border Patrol found any drugs in his car (remember that the dog alerted, and in the video, at 5:34, his wife seems to say "There's a bong right there" as she points to the area below the driver's seat), he refused to answer and the questions were removed from his feed.
Fortunately for those who wondered, his wife, in her own Youtube post, confirmed that there was marijuana in the car:
Kati Herbert 20 hours ago
They told him he was being charge, booked, and released. Then told Photography is not a crime that he was released with no charges. They told him that the marijuana leave they said they found under the drivers seat, was enough to charge him for possession. They threatened to seize my car also...
So yeah, I'm satisfied that the dog did alert to the presence of narcotics, and that right there is probable cause for a search of the car per our Supreme Court. Florida v. Harris, 568 U.S. ___ (2013).
Folks, even if we don't always care for everything that our government may or may not do, I submit to you that this guy is not the one that we want to get behind and hold up as our standard-bearer. While I can and have sympathized with people who, through no fault of their own, get caught up by some over-zealous government officials, I'm not about to stand in solidarity with some useless drug-user who spends his days driving around with his child in tow trying to bait the cops for Youtube fame instead of working at some job to support his family.
I'll almost always support decent hard-working Americans who get jammed up by Big Brother, especially veterans, but very few of these cop-hating internet jackwagons fit that description. Most of these perpetually angry losers tend to blather on incessantly about how they're great Americans and the rest of us are "sheeple", yet they never seem to find their way into uniform despite us fighting two wars in which tens of thousands of actual patriotic Americans enlisted and served. Ironically, a majority of these Border Patrol Agents are likely to be honorably discharged veterans these days, but the radical fringe that claims to support our vets now often targets them specifically as enemies of our nation even though these vets have already given more to our country than a hundred Rick Herberts or Shawn Dixons or Adam Kokeshes ever will. So you'll forgive me if I don't rush out and hit this guy's new crowdfunding website where he begs for money even though he wasn't even criminally charged and has no legal expenses. But I can understand why he's panhandling for cash: Meth is really getting expensive.