OT:Cross Country Road Trip Anyone?

Member logins have been temporarily disabled. Please try again later.
User Forum Topic
Submitted by paramount on June 25, 2012 - 8:58pm

If you've even remotely considered a cross country road trip; you might want to get started on that trip while you still can.

Today, the supreme court codified increased tyranny in this country by affirming Arizona's "Show me your Papers" law.

Soon, I have little doubt you will have to "carry your papers" wherever you travel across the country just as the Jews did in Nazi Germany.

Oh, and if I were you I'd stay the hell out Arizona; especially if you have brown skin.

Submitted by SD Realtor on June 27, 2012 - 10:36am.

SK here is the link I copied the text below from:

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/...

See below:

In enacting a state policy of “attrition through enforcement,” Arizona’s S.B. 1070 ignores every objective of the federal immigration system, save one: the immediate apprehension and criminal sanction of all unlawfully present aliens. See S.B. 1070 § 1. Arizona’s one-size-fits-all approach to immigration policy and enforcement undermines the federal government’s ability to balance the variety of objectives inherent in the federal immigration system, including the federal government’s focus on the most dangerous aliens. By requiring local police officers to engage in maximum inquiry and verification (on pain of civil suit) and by providing for the conviction and incarceration of certain foreign nationals in Arizona for their failure to register, for entering or traveling throughout the state using commercial transportation, or for soliciting work, the “balance” struck by S.B. 1070 is not only different from that of the federal government, but it will interfere with the federal government’s ability to administer and enforce the immigration laws in a manner consistent with the aforementioned concerns that are reflected in the INA. Despite the statute’s self serving claim that it “shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration,” S.B. 1070 § 12, the act mandates a conflicting, Arizona-specific immigration policy – “attrition through enforcement” – and prescribes various provisions that implement that policy in conflict with federal priorities. To permit a hodgepodge of state immigration policies, such as the one Arizona has attempted in S.B. 1070, would impermissibly interfere with the federal government’s balance of uniquely national interests and priorities in a number of ways.

******************************************************

Now I did not boldface the part about enforcement but it is in there......

Arguing semantics is not necessary.

However having a law that is not enforced just seems lame to me. If we don't want to enforce immigration then don't enforce it at all... Having some sort of bizarre selective enforcement is a joke.

Submitted by SK in CV on June 27, 2012 - 10:48am.

SD Realtor wrote:

However having a law that is not enforced just seems lame to me. If we don't want to enforce immigration then don't enforce it at all... Having some sort of bizarre selective enforcement is a joke.

I don't disagree with this. But the fact is, every law enforcement agency across the country has to allocate resources. Those resources are directed at what the powers that be decide are the most pressing issues. Enforcement of other laws are either minimal or in some cases dismissed entirely. Immigration is no different.

Nothing in this ruling prohibits AZ from enforcing existing federal laws, to the same extent that federal agencies are allowed to enforce them. And with some very minor exceptions, there is little evidence that federal laws aren't being enforced.

Submitted by SD Realtor on June 27, 2012 - 10:56am.

I think we are very much in agreement except for the last line about little evidence that federal laws aren't being enforced. I believe the entire premise for AZ coming up with all of this was because of the lack of enforcement. True the lack of enforcement could be due to lack of resources. Possibly true the lack of enforcement could be due to a decision at the federal level not to allocate those resources.

Note... NOT unique to Obama.

Submitted by briansd1 on June 27, 2012 - 1:08pm.

sdrealtor wrote:
Brian
You got out just in time. July in Philly is notoriously the Dog Days of Summer. The weather changes quickly for the worse around July 4th. Stay away for the next 4 weeks as the heat/humidity breaks around Aug 1st each year as well.

The only people in Philly on weekends during July are those that don't have a place down the shore to go to.

I'm in Philly about once per month so I've experienced the weather at its best and worse. It's fine if you have a home with good insulation and mechanicals.

Lots of old run-down houses in Philly. A friend of mine is a postdoc at UPenn. Her apartment has a window A/C that hardly cools below 80F. Hard to find modern, comfortable housing in the city.

I think that back East, the summer heat was a rite of passage for kids, especially before central air-conditioning become common place.

I think that central AC is the best invention ever and is a human right issue:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/27/us/two...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/...

Submitted by desmond on June 27, 2012 - 1:37pm.

bg-
La Fonda is in the old section of Flagstaff and it is near the train tracks.

Not sure where the dinosaur are but the
Meteor Crater is located off I-40 at exit 233, then 6 miles south on the paved road. 35 miles east of Flagstaff, 20 miles west of Winslow, in Arizona, USA

Another place to stop, not sure if the kids would like it, is the Petrified Forest:

http://www.arizona-leisure.com/petrified...

Submitted by bearishgurl on June 27, 2012 - 1:59pm.

desmond wrote:
bg-
La Fonda is in the old section of Flagstaff and it is near the train tracks.

Not sure where the dinosaur are but the
Meteor Crater is located off I-40 at exit 233, then 6 miles south on the paved road. 35 miles east of Flagstaff, 20 miles west of Winslow, in Arizona, USA

Another place to stop, not sure if the kids would like it, is the Petrified Forest:

http://www.arizona-leisure.com/petrified-forest.html

I HAVE eaten at La Fonda last summer then. It was REALLY crowded and the food was good.

Oh, I see now, the dino fast-food truck stop is between Winslow and the Petrified Forest (near Holbrook), probably 30-50 mi EAST of Winslow.

http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM7HR...

Truck Stop Tyrannosaurus Rex

I'll have to take the time to see the Petrified Forest sometime! I'm usually in a hurry for a "late check-in" at my ABQ hotel when I'm traveling that route :=]

btw, the Conoco dinosaurs serve an assortment of good fast food!

Submitted by briansd1 on June 27, 2012 - 2:34pm.

SK in CV wrote:
deadzone wrote:
How about some evidence that AZ police intentionally are out to abuse "brown people"?

The DOJ said so.

http://racerelations.about.com/b/2012/05...

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/05...

Statistically, racial profiling is without a doubt unless everyone had an equal probability of getting screened. I doubt that a fair mechanism can be established.

Opponents are expected to ask a judge in the coming days to put the requirement on hold while they argue that the law can’t be enforced without racially profiling people
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/s...

I expect the last standing part of the AZ law to eventually get struck down.

Submitted by spdrun on June 27, 2012 - 2:58pm.

Story to tell -- this crap doesn't only happen in AZ:
I was driving from AZ to CA, and I took the scenic route to San Diego about 2 years ago. I'm pretty much straight-up white, but I was pulled over by Border Pigs twice.

Once on I-8 about 15 min after the CA border. The second time on Rt. 94 at the Dulzurra(?) checkpoint. The swine at the second stop didn't stop at asking my citizenship, checking ID/passport, and asking if I was carrying anyone else in the car.

They asked me: how long was I planning to be in CA? Where was I staying in CA? What was my business in CA?

None of which I was prepared to answer, since as an American citizen, I have the RIGHT to travel in my own damn country without being harassed and interrogated. So I answered that I was an American citizen traveling in my own country, and that anything else was none of their business. They tired of the game after about 5-10 minutes, checked the trunk and waved me to go. All was recorded by me, of course.

Frankly, thinking back on this treatment *still* enrages me. Granted, I was driving a dusty rental with Zonie plates, but this still disgusted me. Interestingly, I've never been harassed in this way since, mostly in vehicles with CA plates. Could this have been a bit of quid-pro-quo - maybe the checkpoint officer's cousin was harassed by some AZ cops?

Submitted by Hobie on June 27, 2012 - 3:19pm.

Spd: Makes you wonder just how many out of state rental cars covered in dust driving in from the desert were actually involved in some kind of criminal activity to trigger such a reaction by the border patrol.

Most of us locals are happy to help them do their job.

Me thinks, that somehow you brought about the long inspection on yourself. We are different here in Cali. Just sayin'

Submitted by spdrun on June 27, 2012 - 3:45pm.

What was I supposed to say? "Thanks for invading my privacy, have a great day, sir? Care to do a cavity search as well, sir? I can spread my cheeks for 'ya." Is that the Californian way?

Big difference between being checked AT the border, and being singled out for a random stop by some swine within my own country.

Submitted by bearishgurl on June 27, 2012 - 3:46pm.

spdrun wrote:
Story to tell -- this crap doesn't only happen in AZ:
I was driving from AZ to CA, and I took the scenic route to San Diego about 2 years ago. I'm pretty much straight-up white, but I was pulled over by Border Pigs twice.

Once on I-8 about 15 min after the CA border. The second time on Rt. 94 at the Dulzurra(?) checkpoint. The swine at the second stop didn't stop at asking my citizenship, checking ID/passport, and asking if I was carrying anyone else in the car.

They asked me: how long was I planning to be in CA? Where was I staying in CA? What was my business in CA?

None of which I was prepared to answer, since as an American citizen, I have the RIGHT to travel in my own damn country without being harassed and interrogated. So I answered that I was an American citizen traveling in my own country, and that anything else was none of their business. They tired of the game after about 5-10 minutes, checked the trunk and waved me to go. All was recorded by me, of course.

Frankly, thinking back on this treatment *still* enrages me. Granted, I was driving a dusty rental with Zonie plates, but this still disgusted me. Interestingly, I've never been harassed in this way since, mostly in vehicles with CA plates. Could this have been a bit of quid-pro-quo - maybe the checkpoint officer's cousin was harassed by some AZ cops?

NO! I have CA plates and what you describe has happened to me multiple times on that route (as well as I-10) in both CA and AZ. See both pages of:

http://piggington.com/why_is_a_doper_sno...

The Southwest border of the US has been a "police state" since shortly after 9/11/01.

Submitted by bearishgurl on June 27, 2012 - 3:48pm.

Hobie wrote:
Spd: Makes you wonder just how many out of state rental cars covered in dust driving in from the desert were actually involved in some kind of criminal activity to trigger such a reaction by the border patrol.

Most of us locals are happy to help them do their job.

Me thinks, that somehow you brought about the long inspection on yourself. We are different here in Cali. Just sayin'

No, he didn't "bring it on himself" and no, we're not any "different" here in Cali.

Submitted by spdrun on June 27, 2012 - 3:50pm.

^^^

I'd suspect that this started before 9/11/2001 -- I remember a "Border" checkpoint on the 5 near Camp Pendleton when I was there with family in the late 90s.

Submitted by bearishgurl on June 27, 2012 - 4:17pm.

spdrun wrote:
^^^

I'd suspect that this started before 9/11/2001 -- I remember a "Border" checkpoint on the 5 near Camp Pendleton when I was there with family in the late 90s.

Yes, that is the "San Onofre checkpoint" and it, along with the northbound "Rainbow checkpoint" on I-15 are much more sophisticated in that they have computers which can quickly scan front license plates passing thru and detain those that are on law enforcement "hotlists," wanted lists and AMBER alerts. Both have been in place for at least 35 years (although not as efficient as today).

I'm sure "racial profiling" occurs on these checkpoints (to some degree), likely mostly to the drivers/passengers of those vehicles bearing Baja plates and other Mexican plates.

The checkpoints along I-8 and I-10 are "makeshift" and entirely portable, without all the sophisticated equipment of the I-5/I-15 checkpoints. In addition, they are typically situated in the middle of nowhere.

If you travel months apart, you may notice that one or more of these east/west checkpoints along the SW border have "moved" miles down the road.

Submitted by spdrun on June 27, 2012 - 5:57pm.

Bescause citizens (as shown by my valid passport) have the right to travel in the US without harassment or treatment as suspects. Rights given away freely are rights lost. I really don't care about making the lives of some Mickey Dee's rejects in snazzy uniforms easy or pleasant.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on June 27, 2012 - 5:58pm.

Personally I don't like to be searched because I'm very ticklish.

Submitted by paramount on June 27, 2012 - 6:33pm.

deadzone wrote:

Why not just answer their damn questions and you would be on your way? What's the big deal? You are over-exaggerating with this police state bullshit.

These are the kinds of responses that sicken me; I think of the sacrifices made in the name of freedom and for so many to quickly subjugate themselves to the police state without any consideration of these sacrifices.

A bit of advice deadzone: stop living on your knees.

Submitted by CDMA ENG on June 27, 2012 - 7:03pm.

UCGal wrote:
CDMA ENG wrote:

Blame the Feds. If they had done what they were supposed to be doing and actually enforcing the laws they enacted then AZ would have never went down that path.
CE

Little know fact - Obama doubled the number of deportations compared to Bush.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/obamas-record-high-deportations-draw-hispanic-scorn/

Didn't know that UCGal but I would argue again the problem is not getting "rid of the Hispanics" but enforcing the border. It’s not Hispanics or Mexicans that is really at the root of this issue it is the criminals that are coming across the borders and have been for years.

Gangs, stolen motor cars, and other sorted activity are the heart of the border argument. Yes we have our racists and minutemen that are also in support of border protection, for the wrong reasons, but the underlying fact is that we need a secure border in both directions. Not so much a deportation policy.

Hell some of the vehicles the Policia is driving around in are AZ stolen cars... A reporter went across the border years ago and took the VINs off of the police cars there...

Of course a better US drug policy would get rid of 90 percent of this argument as well!

CE

Submitted by CDMA ENG on June 27, 2012 - 7:21pm.

The San Onefre story reminds me of one that my father in-law told me.

He was a marine shooting instructor and one morning the were on the firing line and he commenced firing. He said about twenty mexicans jumped up with thier hands in the air. Said it was almost comically but at the time it scared the shit out of him. They were lucky no one was hit. The poor guys had kids with them and everything. They gave them MREs and water until border patrol showed up. This was around 30 years ago...

CE

Submitted by paramount on June 27, 2012 - 10:06pm.

deadzone wrote:

You sound like a libertarian. That's cool, so I assume you are in favor of legalizing drugs? Me too. If that were to happen, then ironically these contentious border checks probably wouldn't exist in the first place because drugs are what they are really looking for, not illegals.

Exactly, and that is not their charter (looking for drugs).

And in reality, the BP is part of the police state apparatus and little more.

I say loosen the borders and stop all entitlements, that should slow down illegal immigration.

Submitted by spdrun on June 27, 2012 - 10:08pm.

You sound like a libertarian. That's cool, so I assume you are in favor of legalizing drugs? Me too. If that were to happen, then ironically these contentious border checks probably wouldn't exist in the first place because drugs are what they are really looking for, not illegals.

I'm a libertarian with liberal leanings on some issues. And yes, many drugs should be legalized, and the people responsible for wasting a trillion $ or so on the war on drugs should be locked up in an institution for the criminally stupid.

I have no problem with BORDER checks at the border. I do have a problem with random checks inside the US. I have an even bigger problem with probing questions about things that are none of the business of the people asking them, and have no relation to whether I'm carrying drugs, have a trunk full of "extreme Southerners," or am an American citizen.

Submitted by paramount on June 27, 2012 - 10:15pm.

spdrun wrote:

I have no problem with BORDER checks at the border. I do have a problem with random checks inside the US. I have an even bigger problem with probing questions about things that are none of the business of the people asking them, and have no relation to whether I'm carrying drugs, have a trunk full of "extreme Southerners," or am an American citizen.

Exactly. These are suspicion-less and illegal/unconstitutional interior checkpoints.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on June 27, 2012 - 11:57pm.

on the other hand, there is something to be said for not provoking the anger of people in power.

I was at a bat mitzvah recently where the reading was from Numbers, involving Korath challnging the authority of Moses. Why, asks Korath, do you get to be in charge? Moses basically says, well, korath, if I'm not supposed to be in charge, then you will live a normal life. But if I'm supposed to be in charge, something funky is going to happen. Soon. Then the earth opens up and swallows Korath and his family and his followers plus all their livestock for good measure. Clearly, Moses was meant to lead.

I think the lesson i took away from this was that while questioning authority is a catchy slogan that sold a lot of buttons, and it is theoretically good to stand up to authority if you think you're right, there is some actual risk to doing so, including but not limited to being swalleowed up by the earth, and potentially even with your livestock, and sometimes discretion is the better part of valor, whatever that means.

Submitted by spdrun on June 28, 2012 - 7:07am.

If you're comparing the current assclowns in power and their minions to Moses, G-d might smite you for your impudence :)

And sometimes, if you take footage/audio of authority violating the law and publicize it, they may end up being swallowed up by the earth. Or at least getting fired without pension.

Submitted by spdrun on June 28, 2012 - 9:15am.

If I'm taking a trip in my own country, I shouldn't have to justify this trip to a government official or give him my itenarary (which was flexible anyway since I was going by car, and that particular trip was mainly to see friends, go camping, and sightsee). Being a d--k? Sorry no. I was perfectly polite. I just chose not to answer questions that were none of his business.

If they wanted to look for drugs and/or people, they were welcome to walk a dog around the car. Did they really expect me to say: "I'm in California for a day to pick up 20 kg of heroin and bring it to Phoenix?"

Blindly obedient cop-huggers are why this country is going downhill.

Submitted by CDMA ENG on June 28, 2012 - 9:16am.

deadzone wrote:
paramount wrote:
spdrun wrote:

I have no problem with BORDER checks at the border. I do have a problem with random checks inside the US. I have an even bigger problem with probing questions about things that are none of the business of the people asking them, and have no relation to whether I'm carrying drugs, have a trunk full of "extreme Southerners," or am an American citizen.

Exactly. These are suspicion-less and illegal/unconstitutional interior checkpoints.

Which questions did they ask you that had nothing to do with drugs, contraband, etc? You said they asked you where you were going, what you were doing in California, etc. Those are valid, relevant questions. Sounds to me that you were just being a dick to the officer and he gave you a hard time in return.

Actually they are not illegal searches. Why? Because car travel is not a right. It's a privilage. They can stop your car all day long... Becuase its s privilege. However they need reasonable cause to search your car because its personal property. That is where you can flatly refuse.

CE
CE

Submitted by spdrun on June 28, 2012 - 9:40am.

^^^

DRIVING is a privilege. If they establish (via dog perhaps) that I'm not carrying any contraband, and my driver's license is valid, they can't detain me until I've given them a complete "flight plan" and my life's story.

That would be like a cop pulling me over for no reason at all: "where are you going? how long are you staying there? what is the address that you're staying over the weekend? are you planning to speed tomorrow? have you run any red lights today?"

Not that I'm worried, but giving my itinerary to a stranger is actually borderline dangerous. They had the address on my license. Do I really want a stranger who knows my address to also know how long my apartment might be vacant?

This is the US, not a police state where I have to justify my actions to some power-hungry swine in a uniform.

Submitted by Hobie on June 28, 2012 - 9:55am.

spdrun wrote:
Story to tell --

I think this was caught on tape :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_JtFBnFS...

Submitted by spdrun on June 28, 2012 - 10:04am.

This didn't have to do with a ticket or money. This had to do with my rights, and I remained calm while refusing to answer. It's pretty sad how many Americans willingly accept the "they're keeping us safe"/"they're just doing their jobs" excuse when faced with increased restrictions. Lastly, if the border was properly policed, the interior checkpoints wouldn't be needed.

PS - I heard about the video you posted. Apparently totally fake. The cop had a reputation for being an ass, and he staged it with a friend on his car's camera to "prove" "how nice a guy" he was to his superiors, who were planning to fire his sorry butt.

Submitted by bearishgurl on June 28, 2012 - 11:47am.

spdrun wrote:
This didn't have to do with a ticket or money. This had to do with my rights, and I remained calm while refusing to answer. It's pretty sad how many Americans willingly accept the "they're keeping us safe"/"they're just doing their jobs" excuse when faced with increased restrictions. Lastly, if the border was properly policed, the interior checkpoints wouldn't be needed.

I agree with all of this. But usually I have a loaded trunk, kid and/or dog with me in the 100+ deg heat and reservations to spend the night somewhere in NM or El Paso. Both are long drives from SD. I need to get down the road and can't fvck around for hours next to these minions' "secondary" trailer drinking their "free" water while I d!ck around with expounding my "constitutional rights" to them. In one case, I was towing a small trailer:

http://piggington.com/why_is_a_doper_sno...

In my case, traveling thru AriDzona is necessary to reach my destinations so I must accept reality, whatever that may be.

As children, we used to stand on the "hump" in the backseat of our parents' cars and crane our necks, blocking the rear-view mirror on road trips, then hang our bare feet out the windows while counting oil pumps and looking for different license plates. There were no seat belts in cars and a LOT of interior room. Babies slept in thin nylon beds on the rear floorboards or the rear windshield compartment of a Barracuda (if it was cooler weather). It was legal all over the US to carry around a pickup-bed-load of people with varying shades of skin color, along with a giant thermos or sodas on dry ice. Cars were very heavy and there wasn't the amount of commercial truck traffic on the road then as there is today. Nor were there very many interstate highways.

Dad's road machine

Those were the "free and easy" glory days of US road travel, now gone forever :=[

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.