Border Patrol now investigating firearms in Michigan

[smellslikemichigan]

i have strong doubts about whether investigating citizens with firearms falls under the border patrol's job. this was nothing more than an illegal stop from a couple bored agents.
from the border patrol website:
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/border_patrol/
"The priority mission of the Border Patrol is preventing terrorists and terrorists' weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, from entering the United States."
do i and my 9mm fall into that category?

 

[budlight]

Here is my two cents…….
1. I’m sure the courts would interpret a Boarder Patrol Agent as a law enforcement officer, so if you are carrying under the authority of a CPL, then you would have to disclose and show your CPL upon request IF you are being stopped or detained.
2. OC, and CC w/CPL in Michigan is legal…..there is no state or federal law prohibiting it. Based on the conversation, the only reason for approaching/stopping was because of the firearm. Therefore they had no authority to stop or detain, all they could do is inquire if he was willing to talk to them.

My suggestion would be to file a FOIA and also talk to their supervisor and inquire why Federal tax dollars are being spent to investigate LEGAL CITIZENS carrying firearms. What’s next, are they going to stop grandma for playing her radio too loud and check to make sure her gospel CD is not pirated?

 

[TheQ]

do i and my 9mm fall into that category?

nope you're already in the US

 

[jeremy05]

why do you suspect your gun was the only reason for talking to you? The location you were in could be a drug area, or smuggling area, who knows. Maybe he wanted to see if you would be nervous upon a causal conversation. Don't try wash rinse and repeat with border patrol, they have the right to investigate anyone near the border, and i use the word near loosly haha. i cant cut paste law as im on my phone. There are a hundred things border patrol can use to stop someone, you haveing a gun openly is not needed.

 

[budlight]

why do you suspect your gun was the only reason for talking to you? The location you were in could be a drug area, or smuggling area, who knows. Maybe he wanted to see if you would be nervous upon a causal conversation. Don't try wash rinse and repeat with border patrol, they have the right to investigate anyone near the border, and i use the word near loosly haha. i cant cut paste law as im on my phone. There are a hundred things border patrol can use to stop someone, you haveing a gun openly is not needed.

Based on the original post I would strongly suspect the gun was the only issue. They only asked for his CPL which by itself is not a valid form of ID, they never searched his vehicle, or ran his info. Granted they have more authority in the areas of borders, but the only issue brought up was the gun, so it appears they were trying to act like local uneducated officers. I have to wonder what their supervisor would think of this. As a tax payer I am upset that they would waste time with something like this and not try to enforce the laws they were hired for.

 

[jeremy05]

well like i said, we don't know why the contact was started. To me it was just small talk. No point trying to make stuff up, because i could make up lots of situations where the agents were 100 % in the right, or 100% wrong.

Now for me its going to be easier for the agents to be in the right, but i'm a bit biased lol

 

[JoeSparky]

i have strong doubts about whether investigating citizens with firearms falls under the border patrol's job. this was nothing more than an illegal stop from a couple bored agents.
from the border patrol website:
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/border_patrol/
"The priority mission of the Border Patrol is preventing terrorists and terrorists' weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, from entering the United States."
do i and my 9mm fall into that category?

I wasn't there but... just what if the BP agents had gotten a "good tip" about something illegal from a reliable source and our OP just happened to sort of match what they were looking for.... Initiate contact but didn't push...

Sounds like a "consensual encounter" as much as I hate the so called "constitution free zone". As far as I am concerned the only Constitution free zone is that area OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE UNITED STATES!

 

[Venator]

why do you suspect your gun was the only reason for talking to you? The location you were in could be a drug area, or smuggling area, who knows. Maybe he wanted to see if you would be nervous upon a causal conversation. Don't try wash rinse and repeat with border patrol, they have the right to investigate anyone near the border, and i use the word near loosly haha. i cant cut paste law as im on my phone. There are a hundred things border patrol can use to stop someone, you haveing a gun openly is not needed.

We'll sort of. The US Supreme court decided you lose 4th amendment rights at the border crossings. The 4th and others still apply within the US. So they can have a casual conversation, they can not just search you and your car without RAS or PC. Lots of videos of in-land border check points where people tell the PB no thanks and Wash rinse and repeat....

Please post your cite that states difeerently.

 

[dougwg]

I think this was VERY SMALL PEANUTS. And to make a big deal over it makes us look like the boy that cried wolf.

We really need to pick our fights and the one's we pick should be clear, 100% clear that a citizen was jacked up.

Then WE need to ALL stand behind that citizen 100% and win a JUDGMENT and NOT settle the case.

When people make posts like this and complain over the chicken sheet stuff and people get all worked up and want to file complaints and FOIA's and make a big deal over something so minor, people will stop listening to us. We become an "Extremist Group".

Take the money that you would use for the FOIA for this incident and donate it to MOC so they can print more tri-folds so they can hand them out and educate more people, you'll get more bang for your buck this way.

 

[autosurgeon]

I think this was VERY SMALL PEANUTS. And to make a big deal over it makes us look like the boy that cried wolf.

We really need to pick our fights and the one's we pick should be clear, 100% clear that a citizen was jacked up.

Then WE need to ALL stand behind that citizen 100% and win a JUDGMENT and NOT settle the case.

When people make posts like this and complain over the chicken sheet stuff and people get all worked up and want to file complaints and FOIA's and make a big deal over something so minor, people will stop listening to us. We become an "Extremist Group".

Take the money that you would use for the FOIA for this incident and donate it to MOC so they can print more tri-folds so they can hand them out and educate more people, you'll get more bang for your buck this way.

I agree with Doug.

 

[smellslikemichigan]

why do you suspect your gun was the only reason for talking to you? The location you were in could be a drug area, or smuggling area, who knows. Maybe he wanted to see if you would be nervous upon a causal conversation. Don't try wash rinse and repeat with border patrol, they have the right to investigate anyone near the border, and i use the word near loosly haha. i cant cut paste law as im on my phone. There are a hundred things border patrol can use to stop someone, you haveing a gun openly is not needed.

because they told me it was...

 

[Venator]

I think this was VERY SMALL PEANUTS. And to make a big deal over it makes us look like the boy that cried wolf.

In regards to the OP, the citizen's right were not violated because he consented to the request/order. One issue is, did the BP officers have RAS for a stop, i.e was it a lawful detention which would require the OP to show his CPL upon demand?

Well I think it's worth discussing the powers of federal LEO's and in general the border patrol's while operating within the border.

Do we lose our 4th Amendment right inside our borders to BP LEO's and if so is it a slippery slope?

Every peanut is important in protecting our civil liberties.

 

[SpringerXDacp]

In regards to the OP, the citizen's right were not violated because he consented to the request/order. One issue is, did the BP officers have RAS for a stop, i.e was it a lawful detention which would require the OP to show his CPL upon demand?

Well I think it's worth discussing the powers of federal LEO's and in general the border patrol's while operating within the border.

Do we lose our 4th Amendment right inside our borders to BP LEO's and if so is it a slippery slope?

Every peanut is important in protecting our civil liberties.

Brian, do you still have the map you generated showing the area in Michigan 100 miles from the U.S. border where BP has jurisdiction? Maybe that has something to do with it.

http://www.usborderpatrol.com/borderframe302.htm

 

[Venator]

Brian, do you still have the map you generated showing the area in Michigan 100 miles from the U.S. border where BP has jurisdiction? Maybe that has something to do with it.

http://www.usborderpatrol.com/borderframe302.htm

I can't seem to post images so I found it on MGO's forum here.http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1088461#post1088461

Post 23

 

[autosurgeon]

 

[dougwg]

In regards to the OP, the citizen's right were not violated because he consented to the request/order. One issue is, did the BP officers have RAS for a stop, i.e was it a lawful detention which would require the OP to show his CPL upon demand?

Well I think it's worth discussing the powers of federal LEO's and in general the border patrol's while operating within the border.

Do we lose our 4th Amendment right inside our borders to BP LEO's and if so is it a slippery slope?

Every peanut is important in protecting our civil liberties.

I agree with your post.....as posted.

But! To take only a small piece of my post and comment on it as if it were a solitary statement is disingenuous.

I have NO issue with talking about it and never will.

BUT!

To talk about sending letters to superiors and making FOIA requests and the whole "How dare they" attitude which drips off of some of the posts in this thread is, in my opinion, going overboard.

It's like the 8 y/o kid jumping up and down saying "But Suzy touched me!"....yeah, so what kid, get over it.

We only have so much resources, only so much time...only so many volunteers.
We need to pick our fights wisely and not spread ourselves too thin.

 

[Tucker6900]

double tap

 

[Tucker6900]

We need to pick our fights wisely and not spread ourselves too thin.

+100

 

[Venator]

I agree with your post.....as posted.

But! To take only a small piece of my post and comment on it as if it were a solitary statement is disingenuous.

I have NO issue with talking about it and never will.

BUT!

To talk about sending letters to superiors and making FOIA requests and the whole "How dare they" attitude which drips off of some of the posts in this thread is, in my opinion, going overboard.

It's like the 8 y/o kid jumping up and down saying "But Suzy touched me!"....yeah, so what kid, get over it.

We only have so much resources, only so much time...only so many volunteers.
We need to pick our fights wisely and not spread ourselves too thin.

Well I agreeded with your other comments and wanted only to comment on what I quoted you posting. No offense to you. I think it's worth discussig.

 

[NHCGRPR45]

I think this was VERY SMALL PEANUTS. And to make a big deal over it makes us look like the boy that cried wolf.

We really need to pick our fights and the one's we pick should be clear, 100% clear that a citizen was jacked up.

Then WE need to ALL stand behind that citizen 100% and win a JUDGMENT and NOT settle the case.

When people make posts like this and complain over the chicken sheet stuff and people get all worked up and want to file complaints and FOIA's and make a big deal over something so minor, people will stop listening to us. We become an "Extremist Group".

Take the money that you would use for the FOIA for this incident and donate it to MOC so they can print more tri-folds so they can hand them out and educate more people, you'll get more bang for your buck this way.

yup.

View attachment 4754

yup NDAI he was in there "jurisdiction" such as it is. but IMO nothing bad happened, or nothing bad enough happened to start FOIA's and letters to supervisiors. now if he had been black bagged and sent to gitmo then yea, FOIA's and letters to supervisiors would be justified.

not to trivialize your encounter but some here would try to make this out to be more than it actually was.

if you want to do something about it then maybe you could take a LEO packet to the substation closest to your encounter and leave it with the desk agent. or make some calls and find out who may have been in the area at that time and send a packet to where those particular agent/s came out of. can't hurt, might help.