Drug War

Tased Motorist to CBP Agent: 'What the Fuck Is Wrong With You?'

Would-be CBP agent gets the full CBP treatment at an internal checkpoint.

|

YouTube

Jessica Cooke, a 21-year-old from Ogdensburg, New York, recently graduated from SUNY Canton with a degree in law enforcement leadership and had already applied for a job as a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent when she was surprised by an impromptu final lesson at a CBP checkpoint on Route 37 in Waddington last week. What she learned—that people who insist on their constitutional rights in this setting run the risk of being roughed up and shot with a stun gun—should help make her a better CBP agent, although CBP may not see it that way.

Cooke was driving from Norfolk to her boyfriend's house in Ogdensburg, the northern border of which is the St. Lawrence River. If you cross the river, you are in Canada, but Cooke was not crossing the river. She nevertheless became subject to the arbitrary orders of CBP agents by driving through one of the country's many internal immigration checkpoints, which can be located anywhere within 100 miles of the border (a zone that includes two-thirds of the U.S. population). For some mysterious reason, she was instructed to pull into a secondary inspection area, where she used her cellphone to record a five-minute video of the stop (below).

After presenting her driver's license, Cooke, who surely learned in college that police (and even CBP agents!) need "reasonable suspicion" to detain someone, asks why she was pulled over. "You guys have no reason to be holding me," she says. A male agent who identifies himself as a supervisor has no explanation for the detention, but he says Cooke will have to wait for a drug-sniffing dog to inspect her car. "Well, they'd better be here soon, because if not, I'm calling 911, and this can all be figured out," Cooke says. "You guys are holding me here against my will." Eventually the female agent who first interacted with Cooke says she seemed nervous—an all-purpose excuse for detaining someone, since people tend to be nervous when confronted by armed government officials.

"Why do you want to get in my trunk when you have no right to?" Cooke asks. That question also reflects a potentially disquieting familiarity with Supreme Court decisions related to traffic stops. Just last month, the Court ruled that, in the absence of reasonable suspicion, police may not extend a traffic stop for the purpose of walking a drug-sniffing dog around the vehicle. But the Court also has said that if a dog alerts to a car (or, same thing, a cop claims that the dog alerted), that is enough by itself to supply probable cause for a search, even though there are lots of reasons (including a handler's deliberate or subconscious cues) why a dog might alert to a car that contains no contraband. 

"If they're not here within 20 minutes, I'm gone," Cooke says. "You can leave," the male agent says. "You can walk down the road right now….Your car's not going anywhere….I'll spike the tires." After Cooke refuses to comply with his order to "stand over there" instead of "here," they have this exchange:

CBP agent: I'm going to tell you one more time, and then I'm going to move you.

Cooke: If you touch me, I will sue your ass. Do you understand me?

CBP agent: Go for it.

Cooke: Touch me then.

CBP agent: Move over there.

Cooke: Go ahead. Touch me.

CBP agent: I'm telling you to move over there. 

At this point the agent seems to grab Cooke, and soon she is lying on the ground, screaming. According to a CBP spokeswoman, the agent "deployed an electronic control device." Naturally, the government is considering assault charges—against Cooke.

While Cooke is rolling around on the ground, screaming in pain, the agent repeatedly orders her to "get on your stomach." Her response: "What the fuck is wrong with you?" Also this: "Are you fucking retarded?" And this: "You fucking Tased me, you asshole!" These rejoinders do not have quite the same emotional impact as "I can't breathe," especially since Cooke survived the incident. Still, she asks good questions.

The video ends at this point. But according to Cooke, the dog finally arrived, sniffed around her car, and did not alert. The agents opened her trunk anyway. They found no contraband.

If that account is accurate, it is hard to see how the search could have been legal. While nervousness alone might be deemed enough for reasonable suspicion, SUNY Buffalo immigration law professor Rick Su told the local NPR station, "it is not sufficient" to justify a vehicle search, which requires probable cause to believe the vehicle contains evidence of a crime. Su notes that CBP is "starting to use these checkpoints beyond their intended goal":

It's an immigration checkpoint. But what it seems from the video is that the interest of the officials is not so much immigration at that point. It's something else, maybe a drug violation, or other ordinary crimes that they were investigating….This belief actually sets up a very dangerous dichotomy between the exception that's granted for immigration and the use of immigration checkpoints to [pursue] all sorts of other law enforcement priorities….

[A checkpoint stop] really should be relatively nonintrusive. Ask questions about identification, about residency, and, as long as they are satisfied that there is no reasonable suspicion that there is an immigration violation, most people should be waved through. It should be a relatively quick check.

But because "the exception is so broad," Su says, the feds are "using immigration checkpoints to enforce other areas of federal law, including the war on drugs." In other words, the Supreme Court, which has explicitly rejected drug interdiction as a rationale for randomly stopping cars, has effectively allowed such stops within 100 miles of any "external boundary," as long as the feds claim to be looking for illegal immigrants.

Even though she was preparing for a career as a CBP agent, Cooke clearly was disturbed by this development. But the Watertown Daily Times found some local residents who think her objections are much ado about nothing. "I'm all for border patrol checks," said one. "Look at the drugs seized weekly by these that would otherwise go right onto the streets. If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate."

NEXT: The Free Press Clause as protecting all users of mass communications -- responding to the redundancy objection

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This reminds me of James Coburn in Payback: “No, no, it’s all right, he’s just killing my alligator bags and shooting holes in my suits. Man, that’s just MEAN. That’s MEAN, man.”

    1. She’s white. No one gives a shit.
      Sharpton Pimp cannot incite mass riots on this one so he could care less and Obama’s stupid ass can’t make black people hate white people over this either. meanwhile the press gets no fires or “protesting”.

      This whole story might as well never exist.

      1. ^^^This

      2. BlackWorld called her a know-it-all:

        http://www.worldstarhiphop.com…..PV7Dl9VyRs

        Black fools blinded by black skin.

        1. people on that site are absolutely cock sucking assholes

          1. I just went on the site. Calling them cock sucking assholes is putting it mildly.

          2. is it really possible to have a negative IQ?

        2. I just read the comments on that site and my God – if you want to lose faith in humanity, that’s a great way to do it.

          1. Wow, no doubt.

          2. I made the mistake of reading the comments too. Incredibly, they’re about two steps down from Youtube comments in thoughtfulness, spelling, and syntax. Most of the commentors are happy it happened to that “loud, white bitch.”

            I’m going to say a little prayer for the SMOD before I hit the sack tonight because that was just fucking depressing.

          3. I visited that site. I felt it incumbent upon me to leave a comment. Telling them what I thought of them. I’m sure I made some new friends today.

      3. I’ve only read about her event here. I’m pretty certain I’ll only be reading about her event here.

  2. “I’m all for border patrol checks,” said one. “Look at the drugs seized weekly by these that would otherwise go right onto the streets. If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.”

    I hope the cops accidentally No-Knock raid your house you sycophantic asshole.

    1. Obligatory:

      “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” – H. L. Mencken

    2. that’s because most local residents in America are moronic sheep who do what their elected representatives tell them to do.

      Word of advice: If the cops knock you door down and shoot your family, just lay on the ground like the average chicken-shit American and surrender.

      The license to kill has been awarded and we are all doomed.

    3. “If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.”

      Eulogy for the Constitution.

      1. Counter:

        “If you have no reason to search someone, why are you assaulting them?”

        1. Why so hostile, citizen? This is for your safety.. and that of your community, which is much more important. Assault is an ugly word… and poorly applied here. Take a seat with the other miscreants.. suspicious individuals and we will sort this out. I’m not asking.. I’m telling you..

          1. I meant as a counter to boot lickers. If faced with a hostile cop it’s best to record it and be polite. “I will stand over there, and I do not consent to a search.” Maybe not as big of a payout as getting your ass kicked but I don’t need the money.

            1. I was being sarcastic in my post, but I certainly agree on both points.

            2. The real fun is when you manage to wreck their career along with the lawsuit. Talk about taking a nothing day and making it all seem worthwhile.

              1. Amen

            3. Wow how do you miss that he wasn’t being serious? He even went out of his way to write “miscreants” in crossed out text. I don’t know how to do that, but it’s cool. I know some sites it’s a little html like “

        2. How about: “Don’t you federal employees all take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution? Have you ever READ the bill of rights? Do the words ‘except within some arbitrary proximity to the border’ appear anywhere in it, you unpatriotic motherfucker?”

          -jcr

          1. My brother got stopped by highway patrol in Montana (the reason for which was never disclosed), and he started off the interchange with this question. The answer was, “You’re going to jail!” Which permitted, of course, him to avoid the degrading and absurd show of being asked for his papers and other obnoxious queries. Once they got to jail, the highway patrolman had to call the prosecutor and ask what to charge him with. They went with obstruction of a peace officer. After a jury trial, my brother was convicted, though there was one reluctant juror who had to be bullied by the judge who at one point said, “People like you are the problem.” This judge also was moved to the verge of some kind of fit when the constitution got mentioned during a hearing earlier on and forbade that it ever be mentioned again in his court. Still, maybe it’s good advice, but I think one needs to be ready to follow the question with commensurate force.

            1. Please don’t protect the guilty. What are the names of the pig, the persecutor, and the kangaroo court judge?

              -jcr

        3. I like this one.. a lot.

      2. “”If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.””

        That presumes that you can trust the cops not to plant evidence on you, or the legislature not to have quietly made illegal today what was legal yesterday.

        And if you are ready to presume THAT, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.

        1. No, the speaker is assuming that he (the speaker) is of some privileged caste gainst which this’ll never be done. Any malfeasance will be directed only toward distasteful others and jerks, where although it may not be lawful still works to the betterment of “society”. It’s one of the great deceptions of the culture in which nearly everyone imagines himself to be part of the normal majority who will never be unjustly abused by the tyrants it sustains.

      3. I think sir, that you hit the nail on it’s head with your very brief, pointed comment.

    4. Look at the drugs seized weekly by these that would otherwise go right onto the streets. If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk?

      Reason #8450 as to why I don’t bother to vote.

      1. Reason #1 that I do vote: Because assholes like do as well.

    5. “I’m all for border patrol checks,” said one. “Look at the drugs seized…”

      So you aren’t in favor of border patrol, you’re in favor of drug patrol.

      1. Those damn Mexicans and their drugs.. They even come in from Canada nowadays.. Diabolical!

  3. Orwellian.

    How much will people take?

    1. All this and more!

    2. How much will people take?

      I usually think of this passage from Solzhenitsyn (link) whenever pondering that question.

      1. ^^^This

      2. Solzhenitsyn should be required reading to graduate high school.

        1. Learning that the expression is “graduate *from* high school” should also be a high school graduation requirement.

          1. Let’s poll the millennials and find out what they think!

            1. We don’t need no stinking prescriptive grammar!

          2. Seamus,
            graduate: to pass from one stage of experience, proficiency, or prestige to a usually higher one

            Graduate from actually means graduate from from. Mr. Trshmnster’s usage, while not common today, is correct.

      3. Truth from someone who actually lived this shit and still had the balls to speak out against it. Most of his work is a long slog but, “One Day In the Life of Ivan Denisovich”, would be a perfect compliment to “1984”. Maybe the little shits would understand that reality is always far worse than fiction.

  4. Su notes that CBP is “starting to use these checkpoints beyond their intended goal”

    I’m stunned. Really. Look, this is my stunned face.

    If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.

    Lick. That. Boot.

    1. If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.

      Have you ever noticed that the people screaming that the loudest never say that about investigations of “our heroic boys in blue”?

      1. Authoritah is always right, Bill. It’s never wrong. Ever.

        1. 5 out of 5 District attorneys agree..

      2. ^this

  5. Guess that’s what she gets for not obeying.

  6. On of the few joys of living in Iowa is being way more than 100 miles from the border.

    1. You’re not. Do you have an airport nearby?

      1. Air miles aren’t like square miles.

      2. No international flights. No customs.

        1. Ah.

          Intl Airports count as borders.

          So do a lot of other things you wouldn’t expect. For example, the Chevron Refinery in El Segundo counts as an international border because they have shipments coming in from overseas. There are CBP patrols there and everything, and they have huge gates across the railroad tracks.

          1. There are no direct flights to anywhere except major US hubs.

              1. But there is a CBP port of entry there.

          2. Immigration occasionally raids a local restaurant or meat-packing facility, but I don’t know of any customs in Iowa. I don’t think even Des Moines (the state capital) has flights anywhere but the major hubs.

          3. This. Border Patrol operates in Denver, where it’s more than a thousand miles in any direction to a national border.

            1. They’re there to keep the hippies on their mountains..

              1. Didn’t work. I got away.

                1. You know why they’re there – to check for people taking cannabis with them out of the state. Fascist assholes.

                  1. “You know why they’re there – to check for people taking cannabis with them out of the state. Fascist assholes.”

                    That’s what I was thinking. And the fact that all Colorado’s bordering states have set up state police ambushes at virtually every connecting road…

            2. Denver, where it’s more than a thousand miles in any direction to a national border.

              no

  7. “Court ruled that, in the absence of reasonable suspicion, police may not extend a traffic stop”

    These were not police, this was not a traffic stop. Cavity searches all around, and go deep.

  8. At this point the agent seems to grab Cooke, and soon she is lying on the ground, screaming. According to a CBP spokeswoman, the agent “deployed an electronic control device.” Naturally, the government is considering assault charges?against Cooke.

    Urge… to… commit violence… rising….

    1. Well, she did assault his Taser with her body. Fair is fair.

      1. I’m sure they’ll bill her for replacing the batteries in the Taser, too. Those don’t come cheap.

      2. Exactly. We need to start analyzing the tax payer’s role in all this police suffering. If they can’t hold us suspicious for breathing, then they’ll just get fatter sitting on their ass and the battery industry will suffer.

        It takes a village of succumbing dolts to give dumbass cops all the power they desire.

        And the sheep rejoice because we bombs some guys with sticks today in Syriahistan.

    2. Cooke should consider it a blessing that the agent didn’t *accidently* draw and fire his/her gun, *mistaking* it for their taser. All that new “training” must of paid off..

  9. Well if this doesn’t make her reconsider a career in law enforcement the large settlement she’s inevitably going to get will.

    She seems like someone who understands the Constitution but I’m skeptical of how long her convictions would have lasted had she joined the gang.

    1. I’m not sure she’ll get anything out of this. Especially when the potential jurors have already sided with the CPB.

    2. Well if this doesn’t make her reconsider a career in law enforcement the large settlement she’s inevitably going to get will.

      Paging someone of our acquaintance from SoCal AND…wait…

    3. Meh. As bad as it often looks there are a few LEOs who take their jobs as something beyond a bully license. Otherwise there wouldn’t be groups like the Oathkeepers or LEAP.

  10. My cop-sucking friends on Facebook (mostly my fellow Marine buddies who became cops or CBP officers) were all over this one. I think I was the one dissenting opinion, but yes, most people said “She should have just shut the fuck up and run it up the chain later”

    I pointed out that if you can’t challenge an officer’s illegal search on the spot, then the 4th amendment is worthless. I was called a hippy.

    1. Oh yeah, they were actively cheering on the BP agents tasing her, because she was being “disrespectful” and “hysteric”. She didn’t sound hysterical to me. I expected to watch the video and see her screaming at or trying to slap the agents. Of course, this didn’t happen.

      1. The human brain has an apparently unlimited capacity for rearranging facts in their head to fit their own narrative. It’s one of the primary reasons for my theory that mankind isn’t sentient.

        1. Hey, don’t project your non-sentience on us!

          1. Fuck you, I’m the sentient one. Don’t you apes read philosophy?

            1. What are you talking about, you’re just text on my computer screen.

            2. We do, Warty. We just don’t understand it.

              1. “We do, Warty. We just don’t understand it.”

                +1 Otto

                1. Was that smart or was that stupid

            3. “Yeah? Well I used to taze for the CBP!”

          2. Mankind. A few people demonstrate the ability to think. I might even be one of them, on a good day, or at least I strive for it. On the whole, though? I’m not seeing it.

            I’ll be funny when I’ve had more coffee. Right now, I just want an interstellar colony ship and another cuppa.

            1. Sorry, I wasn’t listening, I was too busy breathing. It takes a lot of my processing power.

              1. I told you not to process one molecule at a time.

                1. Its the only way to convert the poison for the orgy.

                  1. He is a witch, only not a Bene Gesserit one.

              2. Close your mouth!

                1. This is Hamster’s joy that she didn’t need to make the Herbert reference explicit for everyone to get it anyway.

              3. I’m going to hit you in the head with this coffee mug.

        2. Dang it Doom Hamster – you posted as I was proof-reading my comments to C-GS.

        3. Individuals are smart.

          People are stupid.

          1. I used to believe that. Now I dont. After interacting with certain people (in the “natural food” movement) on facebook, I realize that reading comprehension, common sense, and general intelligence are all in short supply.

            1. Individuals are smart in the sense that they know their own situation best and how to manage it. When they try to manage the lives of others then they become really stupid.

            2. Well, it’s all relative. Most people are pretty good at something or other. And no one is as rational as they want to believe.

              It’s also important to realize that intelligence doesn’t necessarily mean correct. There have been a whole lot of quite brilliant people who believe ridiculous or downright evil things.

              I do agree that it is often shocking how poorly some people use logic and comprehend what they read or hear.

          2. Words of wisdom from Agent K.

        4. I would argue that that is a big part of what makes us sentient, or sapient. Sentience has nothing to do with being right or completely rational.

      2. Ask them what’s worse, a guy shitting on an American flag or a former marine shitting on the constitution?

        1. Luckily the progressives have sided with the marines on this one. Shitting on an American flag is not acceptable.

        2. Tarran, many of these same guys are the ones pointing out that flag burners should be jailed.

          I reminded them of the oath we took- you know, to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, and said the domestic enemies are our biggest threat right now. I equated that their viewpoint is similar to the “hate speech is not free speech” screed used against people like ENB… Luckily a few of them on the comment thread agreed with me, so all hope is not lost it seems.

          1. Progressives are the greatest enemy. As they sap our defense and enable evildoers, like radical muslims, against us.

            Strike them all down.

      3. You’ve described a couple of my buddies.

        It seems that many of us see what we want to see, and hear what we want to hear.

    2. I remember going to one meeting when I was mustering out where the TN state troopers were begging us to join them. Since all of us getting out were from the air wing, there weren’t a lot of takers.

      And if you still don’t have your high and tight CGS, you are a hippy. Probably a dope smoking commie hippy too.

    3. Well, now we know why they were marine buddies and not army buddies.

    4. Cis-Gnedered; didn’t you know that rational discussion is not allowed in this country any more?

      1. Yeah, I was just disappointed more didn’t take their oath seriously, or have a misunderstanding of it. They’re just like the progs- they approve of “freedom”, but only when they agree with it. Like I said , some of them chimed in and defended my position, and I do know a few guys I served with who post more libertarian things. Heck one of them regularly links to Reason.

        What’s funny is when things like Citizens United, guns, or Christian bakers come up, they all pay lip service to the Constitution. A classic example of “I believe In freedom but…”

    5. I pointed out that if you can’t challenge an officer’s illegal search on the spot, then the 4th amendment is worthless. I was called a hippy.

      The better response is that if cops can pretty much do whatever the fuck they want and you’re supposed to just lie back and think of England, how is that not a police state?

    6. I pointed out that if you can’t challenge an officer’s illegal search on the spot, then the 4th amendment is worthless. I was called a hippy.

      Did you ask them about the fucking oath they swore?

      1. They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, as in keep it from touching the ground and getting dirty. They certainly didn’t swear an oath to abide by what it says.

        1. Support and defend.

          Marines should fucking know better. Fighting for our freedoms???? Apparently, these guys don’t understand the meaning of the word.

          1. One of my coworkers is a retired Marine. He’s also a total cop-sucker. There is literally nothing they can do that he would not justify. After all, as long as you do what you are told then theoretically you won’t be harmed. If they hurt you, then it’s because you didn’t obey. The concept of lawful and unlawful orders doesn’t even enter his mind. All orders are lawful on the basis of who gave them.

            1. So yet another mindless robot who will bow and scrape to do the bidding of someone with a spiffier costume than he wears?

              Well, “He is a great American”!

            2. ask him about Jos? Guere?a formerly of New Mexico, recently mustered out Marine.

      2. The oath they swore is FUCK OFF! I’m in charge now because I was a pip-squeak in high school and people made fun of me.

        This is what happens when you parade cops and firemen out in front of every ball game for 10 years after 9/11. Eventually its too late to criticize public servants.

        When you think of how brilliantly this charade was executed, all I can say is the Marxists beat the capitalists. Even most of the people that call themselves libertarians secretly hate capitalism. And therein lies the problem; total lack of understanding of free market economics which is really very simple to understand.

        1. Even most of the people that call themselves libertarians secretly hate capitalism.

          Er, what?

          1. ‘T first I thought he meant “capitalism” in the original Marxian sense, but then he says that bit about the free market, which is incompatible with Marx’ capitalism.

        2. Timbo, this is why I hate the whole “parade of heroes” thing. My fellow grunts hate it because everyone in uniform gets called a hero, even if they were the biggest POGs and the closest they got to Iraq was Kuwait.

          But then a lot of the guys start to actually believe it because they’ve been praised so much. They start to get this veteran’s entitlement mentality. Hearing some of the douches at the vet center at my school bragging about how much they’re gaming the VA for benefits by claiming some vague “disability” convinced me of this.

          1. And yes, this goes for my marine buddies who became cops as well. They eventually succumb to that “us vs civilians” mentality, and I see a TON of posts about how the boys in blue are unsung noble heroes

            1. My landlord was in the Army for four years. Helicopter mechanic. He was in a helicopter crash, somehow. Thirty years later, he got disability for a bad back due to the crash. The thirty years of ability to hold gainful employment was apparently a non-issue.

              The very second he got disability, he and his entire family quit working and they now live their lives in bed, watching Pawn Stars. They get out of bed only to pee or make a sandwich. The VA mails him large supplies of narcotics, which he sells to and through his brothers. I’ve never seen anything like it. I think I’d rather shoot myself than live like that. And entitled? Jesus H Christ, nothing will convince him and his wife that this isn’t the very least a grateful populace owes them for his heroic something something.

            2. yeah but then look at folks who retired from swinehead twenty or thirty years ago and you find a completely different habit of thinking. Now, anybody who can keep a job distantly related to the fringes of LE for more than six months is by that time an incorrigible authoritarian asshole dick. It didn’t used to be this way.

    7. I was called a hippy.

      So they admitted you were correct since name-calling is what the losing side does.

  11. The “supervisor” fits all the descriptions of the typical “I WEAR A BADGE HURR DURR IM BETTER THAN YOU” type that end up on the wrong side of these encounters.

    I hope she sues the ever living shit out of all of them, but we all know that the end result will be “mistakes were made, officers have been made aware of the changes to procedure for future encounters.”

    QUALITY FRIDAY NUT PUNCH JACOB, WELL DONE.

    1. When cops looking for a large, black former male colleague engaged in a one-sided panic fire hail of bullets against two older unarmed Asian women delivering papers, and the PD later offered a settlement to the women of a new truck so long as they paid several thousand dollars in fees and taxes, I began to anticipate that one day, even the lawsuits will go no where.

      Maybe when they can’t win the middle-class lottery, people will start to give a shit.

  12. And yet The Swayzie Express continues to bring foul Canadian weed into our country.

    1. Ricky: You know, your thoughts might be better than mine but I have thoughts going around in my head too about different thinkings and brain things that you can use… and doing different things… and I think I know what’s best for my daughter. So fuck off and let me fix the brakes for my daughter and then I’ll help you with the hash. You guys don’t always know what’s best. My fuckin’ thoughts have feelings of their own too sometimes.

      Bubbles: Ricky, what are you talking about?

      Ricky: I don’t know, Bubbles. I don’t know.

      1. Smokes. Let’s go.

        1. Have you watched all of Season 9 yet? Lahey almost drowning in a kiddie pool full of Booberry liquor, and a manequin dressed up like Julian!

          He really should have won some kind of award for that. Brilliant physical comedy.

      2. Fuck off Lahey!

  13. “These rejoinders do not have quite the same emotional impact as “I can’t breathe,” especially since Cooke survived the incident.”

    Plus, Cooke isn’t the right color so the normal media outage signals won’t go off. Cause remember kids, we don’t have an authority problem, we just have some bad apples that haven’t had enough diversity training.

    1. The victim has a vagina, which should count for some anti-patriarchy outrage – especially against the male supervisor and the poor female subordinate who wouldn’t do such things to a sister if not for the patriarchy.

    2. Chris Kelley didn’t survive his encounter with the heros in blue.

      Must be something other than survival that gets these events on the national news.

      1. A victim/witness that would be very hard to impeach.

    3. I don’t know… All these mud people kind of look the same.

  14. ‘What the Fuck Is Wrong With You?’

    Nothing, nothing at all. They have the gun.

    Good… Bad… I’m the guy with the gun.

  15. OK, for all you people who think restricting immigration is just good sense and not a big deal: this is what is necessary and inevitable if you want to seal the border to keep out most immigrants and deport those who are here illegally. Any kind of general freedom and heavily controlled borders are incompatible. You want all the illegals out of the country? You are going to have to put up with a whole lot of this shit.

    1. They’re fine with that, Zeb. They’ve made that clear. It’s more important to keep the filthy illegals out. Their own actions show what their priority is.

      1. We need a police state to keep all the illegals from turning us into a socialistical police state!

        1. This is an issue that I turned 180 on after reading reason. If it takes a police state to enforce the border, then I don’t want the border enforced.

          1. That’s great. I love it when people are actually convinced to change their minds about something. Seems to be a rare thing. I know I changed my mind about a bunch of things when I started reading The Agitator and later Reason.

            1. This is sort of what I was referring to upthread. When faced with new facts that do not support their position, does an individual change their position in light of new information, or do they quixotically defend their position despite the facts?

              The former indicates that one can be wrong, and even irrational at times, but that one still possesses the ability to think. The latter indicates a really talkative omnivore who won the opposable thumbs lottery.

              1. I think you make a good observation there. I was just quibbling with the terminology. Almost by definition humans are sentient and sapient. But original thought and rational assessment of one’s prejudices are pretty rare things.

            2. I cut most people slack. It’s not that they’re stupid, it’s just the world is too big to examine every little thing. Especially things that don’t directly effect them. I took borders as just the way things are. After reading here about all the border abuses, it really opened my eyes.

              1. I think that says it very well. It comes back to what I say above somewhere. No one is as rational (or well informed) as they would like to imagine. There is too much information out there to process and we are really good at convincing ourselves that appealing arguments make sense. Even awesome and brilliant libertarians and anarchists are guilty of it. Everything that every one of us believes rests on a whole bunch of unfounded assumptions and logical leaps.

        2. You joke, but they’re fine with that. Again, their actions say all that need be said. Their overall priorities are crystal clear.

      2. Well they weren’t detaining her because she was an illegal alien. they’d satisfied themselves that her ID was genuine. They were just fucking with her on general principles.

    2. Although, I’d hazard a guess that if this woman were noticeably hispanic, the Border Patrol would have let her go on her way.

      Basically what I’m saying is that this isn’t restricting immigration because Border Patrol isn’t interested in and isn’t actually enforcing “immigration” law.

      1. “I’d hazard a guess that if this woman were noticeably hispanic, the Border Patrol would have let her go on her way.”

        Not likely. I grew up along the Mexico border and drove through multiple “inland” bp checkpoints regularly. Officers Ramos, Gonzales and Martinez always gave extra scrutiny to people who looked like officers Ramos, Gonzales and Martinez.

        I had a Hispanic sister-in law who got rude treatment event she went through.

      2. No, I’m pretty sure the border patrol does look for immigrants. You are thinking of the police in certain cities.

        Anyway, since this was near Canada, shouldn’t they be looking out for polite people who say “eh” a lot?

    3. Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning. Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
      -Ludwig von Mises

      1. Greenhut, Stephen ? “I still regularly meet people who believe that the laws under which we are governed are the result of a deliberative process led by legislators driven by a commitment to the public good. Stay away from people like this. They will lead to more crack-baby scares, to the funding of new armies of social workers, planners, tax collectors, cops, and regulators, who are more than happy to lobby for higher taxes and meddle in our affairs.(add:

    4. Look, Zebulon, I believe I’ve been clear. As each immigrant crosses the border, he/she is tagged and registered in the indentured servant program. Seven years later, he/she will be eligible for citizenship and will have learned a trade! And the tag gets removed.

    5. False dichotomy. I imagine if you shut off the government cheese faucet, many libertarians who object to illegal immigration would become blase about the whole issue. Which means you need to ask yourself, and haven’t, whether such people object to illegal immigrants or the extraneous tax burden rampant illegal immigration fosters. And there are a plethora – OODLES – of ways to repair the latter without a police state.

      1. Sure. So advocate that (the reduction/removal of the welfare state). Advocating for a police state to stop illegals from mooching off the welfare state is just doubling up on the idiocy. It’s saying “let’s have a horrible welfare state AND a police state” as opposed to “let’s have neither”.

        Because you cannot say you are for controlling the borders and not be for a police state. The two are inextricably linked. And that’s one of the horrible problems of anti-free-movement positions (besides the pure moral element).

        1. I don’t actually know of anyone here who “advocates for a police state to stop illegals”. Is that really a thing in the commentariat? Seems a bit at odds with the general tone.

          You have been here longer than I, Epi, so, you know, deferring to superior experience.

          1. I think Epi’s point is that since you can’t stop illegals without a police state, then if you advocate for stopping illegals then you’re advocating for a police state.

            Most people simply don’t understand that enforcing victimless crimes requires a proactive and intrusive police state.

            1. That’s my point, anyway.

          2. Not so much. But, I think he’s arguing (forgive me if I’m mistaken, Episiarch) that there’s plenty of people willing to refrain from think through the conclusion that a police state is what you wind up having to have if you want to stop illegal immigration.

          3. I don’t actually know of anyone here who “advocates for a police state to stop illegals”. Is that really a thing in the commentariat?

            You’re presuming that a Hit&Runpublican; has thought it through to that extent.

          4. sarcasmic is correct. My point is that if you advocate stopping “illegals” (really meaning “free movement”), you by default advocate a police state since you cannot stop free movement without it.

            I mean, if I said I advocated taking drugs off the streets and then said “but I don’t advocate for a police state”, you’d laugh out loud at me because you can’t have the WoD without the police state. It’s precisely the same for stopping border-crossers.

            That’s why those who advocate stopping free movement need to own up to what that really means. The entire cause behind this story we’ve just read.

            1. This makes much more sense with the extra clarifications. Zeb’s original comment sounded as if he was lumping in people who don’t care all that much about sealed borders.

              It seems, as per y’alls addendums, as if we have two different sorts; anti-freedom of movement and anti-welfare state. I feel obliged to point out that being anti-freedom of movement is a very strange position for a libertarian. Not that I’m going to judge, I leave the purity tests to Hihn.

        2. Making it a criminal felony to hire illegals and denying them any welfare of any type should do the trick without an army at the border or a fence. In Texas you have to show a birth certificate ( in theory) to get a state issued drives license so no need for a national ID database either.

          I always tell my “lets build a fence” buddies two things.

          1. we probably couldn’t build a fence without illegal labor

          2. fences work both ways

          I’m for massive immigration, especially the younger one coming in droves. That’s probably the only thing that will keep Social Security afloat. I just want them registered.

          1. explanation: A future employeer running a drivers license check should prove citizenship, or legal status, IF the government is doing it’s job properly.

            I know that’s a big IF but it would make major inroads toward getting a handle on immigration run amok.

          2. .Texas is very strange. You don’t have to show proof of residence, just proof of citizenship.

            I could give a rat’s arse end about immigration either way. A fence, oh myyyy, I laughed so hard at that until I realized people were serious.

          3. Criminalizing voluntary transactions between two people sounds like a pretty horrible thing too. As does forcing employers to help enforce immigration law. Why should an employer be required to check anything? For that matter, why should the even be required to know their employees name, let alone their citizenship or origin?
            I’m not saying that most employers wouldn’t want to know at least some of those things. But the only reason to require it by law is to conscript employers into helping collect taxes and to enforce immigration and other laws.

            1. If one doesn’t think about it too deeply, it seems as if it’s a logical process. We don’t want foreigners who aren’t here legally anyway to take American jobs, so we just make the employers ensure all positions are filled by people with proper permissions.

              And then one asks whether the job belongs to the government, to “the people”, or to the employer and all that air-quotes logic goes poof. It’s the employers job, to fill or piss away or hire his wife’s nephew’s best friend or whatever.

              I think this is a happy conjunction of what I was sort of referencing earlier, AND what you were referencing earlier about positions people don’t consider thoroughly.

      2. There are a good number of people here who advocate for immigration restrictions both to stop them using welfare and because they presume that immigrants will bring socialistic ideas from their home countries and they will all have kids who vote for Democrats. There are also some who would be happy with open immigration if the welfare state were gone.

        And I am not at all convinced that immigrants on the whole take more in the form of welfare and other benefits than they pay in taxes. I suspect that a lot of the people who want to come to the US want to come here to make money and improve their lives, not to turn us into a socialist shithole like where they came from. Maybe if more conservatives and libertarians supported them in doing that they wouldn’t see lefty Democrats as their only friends so much.

    6. So if I want a job to be done at all, then I must fully support any and all actions of the people doing that job regardless of whether it has fuck all to do with accomplishing the goal? Just like since I think murder should be illegal, I also support anything any cop does, anywhere, ever. Nice strawman.

      1. By supporting the CPB and their current agenda, you are implicitly supporting the actions that they take. You can’t separate the two.

        It’s not different than any other petty law that statists want enforced. To support that law, that means you are willing to support all actions needed to enforce it, up to and including lethal force of anyone who sufficiently resists.

        1. I support laws against trespassing. Does that mean that I must support 24/7 video surveillance of all private property in order to catch all trespassers?

          1. So you’re fine with getting rid of all border patrol, their checkpoints, etc? Because guess what they are? They’re on the border 24/7.

            You want enforcement, you get a police state. That’s it. Own it. Because trust me, you already do.

          2. If you want the immigration laws to be effective and enforceable, you have to support the police state stuff. Otherwise you have the situation we have now where, even with the unpleasant degree of police-state stuff that we now have, loads of people come into the country illegally.

            So, no you don’t have to support the checkpoints if you support restrictive immigration laws. But if you actually want to have the laws effectively enforced so that they are kept out or deported if they do get in, then yes you do need the police state stuff.

          3. It means that if you want laws and agents of the state to enforce these laws, you support all actions that they take in executing that enforcement. Full stop.

            It doesn’t matter what *you* think they should do in that effort. They never asked you.

      2. No, not a strawman. There is no way to keep illegal immigrants out of the country without checkpoints and allowing police to demand ID from anyone at any time.

        You are right, you don’t have to support checking for drugs at supposed immigration checkpoints or unnecessary tasering of people who assert their rights. But you do have to have the checkpoints. And you are a real sucker if you don’t think that there will be any mission creep and excessive force like this. You want expanded police powers, you get this shit. How are you going to catch illegals without expanded police powers?

        1. I would love to see some numbers related to just how many illegals are actually caught at these checkpoints ?

          Just because someone is here against the law doesn’t automatically mean they are stupid.

          1. That would be interesting to see. Are they even effective? I particularly doubt that the ones near the northern border or inland ports catch many. I bet that they do it because they can get away with it. If they happen to catch some illegals, bonus.

      3. No, if you want a job done you must acknowledge the requirements of doing the job.

        There are only 2 ways to have a tightly controlled border that severely limits immigration….

        1) Make your country so much of a shithole that no sane person would ever try to emigrate to it

        2) Employ a panopticon police state

        Ultimately immigration controls are just another form of prohibition and just like Alcohol in the 30’s and drugs today no amount of laws will stop the flow of the banned thing (in this case people)

    7. I might agree with you if it weren’t so patently obvious that the CBP folks here weren’t enforcing the immigration laws but just being general-purpose dicks and enforcing whatever law Cooke might have been found to have violated.

      1. Those who give up liberty for security will get neither.

        True story, man.

    8. not true. How many illegals swim across the St. Lawrence River, or come down through Sumas, or swim the Straits of Juan de Fuca? Or even come across in a boat such that CBP might even find them The whole “inland checkpoint” thing is a scam. As mentioned above, it simply gives one federal agency the cover that allows them to attempt to interdict over all manner of federal laws.

    9. Well, no.

      If you actually secure the border, you won’t have to stop people at random seeing if they are citizens.

      We only have to do that because we already have open borders anyone can walk through..

      1. you won’t have to stop people at random seeing if they are citizens.

        Pretty sure you don’t “have to” do that now. Also, judging by the stories many US citizens going through actual borders have shared, it seems harassment is the name of the game. No matter what the rules, these same people are going to be enforcing them.

  16. OT:

    Weapons of mass distraction: Kazakhstan reveals the 12 winners of its Miss Army beauty contest after judges can’t choose just one
    Country’s Ministry of Defence said it couldn’t decide between the women
    They were pictured in uniform, with weapons and in civilian clothes

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ntest.html
    If that’s the best they’ve got…

    1. Bota Korabaeva scares the shit out of me

    2. Eh, the top two and Kamasheva were cute. It’s the Kazahk Army, I’ll judge on a curve.

    3. Satire, right?

  17. OT:

    Weapons of mass distraction: Kazakhstan reveals the 12 winners of its Miss Army beauty contest after judges can’t choose just one
    Country’s Ministry of Defence said it couldn’t decide between the women
    They were pictured in uniform, with weapons and in civilian clothes

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ntest.html
    If that’s the best they’ve got…

    1. Distracted you enough to double post.

  18. So, why would they have a drug dog at a checkpoint for illegal immigrants? Shouldn’t that right there be clear evidence that they are exceeding their proper powers?

    Yeah, I know.

    1. Don’tchaknow illegal immigrants all smell of pot.

    2. They’re trying to keep poutine from entering the country. If there’s a more noble cause, I don’t know what it is.

      1. You can have my Poutine when you pry it from my wet greasy fingers

    3. C’mon man. Using logic and reasoning when government is involved is just asking for trouble.

      Do you a piece of Uncle Taser too?

    1. And here I was expecting Samantha Fox.

    2. Well, she can’t really complain when they take her at her word and touch her. Administering powerful electric shocks as they do so.

  19. If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.

    I’ve never seen a case of Tulpism this bad. Quarantine the town and start gassing the residents.

    1. Then we’d just end up with a town full of nazi zombies.

      1. Then hand out the mosins!

        1. The price is going up. Mostly because Warty hordes them.

          1. Well shit. What’s cheap that we can use to kill zombie boot lickers? Sharp sticks?

            1. Machetes are still dirt cheap and don’t run out of ammo.

      2. Dead Snow 3: Rise of the CBP Jackboots

      3. We already have a nation full of Nazi zombies. They are called people who identify with political parties.

        Meanwhile Christi and Clinton fight over who is going to buy the steak on the state credit card.

      4. Now, are those Nazi’s who were bitten by zombies? or zombies who choose to live by the Fascist philosophy?

        1. crap…pardon the apostrophe…

  20. There are two questions here, was the detention legal and was the order to stand in a certain spot legal. Even if the detention was illegal it was probably legal for them to order here to stand where they told her. I’m pretty sure once you are officially detained whether legally or illegally you have to do what they say.

    1. I’m pretty sure once you are officially detained whether legally or illegally you have to do what they say.

      That has limits on it. Not many, but it does have limits.

      1. According to the law there are limits, but since those who enforce the law face no consequences for ignoring it, in practice there is no difference between a lawful order and an unlawful order.

    2. By logic (which has nothing to do with the law), anything done after the illegal detention is also.

      Illegal detention is basically a lower degree of kidnapping. Can kidnappers “legally” tell you where to stand?

  21. “”Are you fucking retarded?””

    Between this and her understanding of the constitution, I think there’s about a 75% chance Jessica Cooke comments on this site.

    1. In that case, she should have known better than to want to join a law enforcement outfit.

      1. She’s a double agent

    2. 100% sure if she had said, “Shut up, Tony”

      We should make that an internet meme

  22. Like Iowa, we here in Ohio have little to fear from this particular kind of outrage. Yet I still feel rage…
    I hope she sues for 100 million and prevails.

    Now I’m going to be a grumpy bastard the rest of the day. Why do I come here? It only makes me angry.

    1. Are you happy reason?!? You made Drew Carrie sad!!!

    2. Where in Ohio? Though I don’t see roadblocks or patrols, I haven’t been on I-71 lately, and you can get a good part of the way to Columbus before you get outside that 100 mile zone. Even better, since Akron Fulton Airport is technically international and houses a Customs operation, Akron Fucking Ohio (40 miles from Cleveland) is technically a border town, which means pretty much all of Eastern Ohio is subject to this shit. That’s leaving aside that Port Columbus is also technically an international airport, and Cincitucky, too.

    3. Ohio has international airports. You have much to fear.

  23. “Well the cops say that your car trunk has something to do with 9/11. They’re not philosophers, they’re crossing guards with guns.”

  24. here’s the thing =

    since this is approximately the 10,000th time i’ve heard some version of this =

    Border Patrol douchebag tases irritated citizen for not respectin his authoritah“-story…

    …doesn’t everyone already know the script at this point? For chrissakes lady, you’re *studying law enforcement* , and apparently you haven’t watched the news in the last 10 years? Not even once watched those infuriating videos on youtube of priests getting tased & beaten, etc?

    I mean, i have little sympathy if you *dont know how this is going to end* by now.

    What she SHOULD have done was something new, different and surprising. Like = pre-emptively strip yourself nude and bend over spreading your cheeks, aiming your gaping pucker at the border patrol to ensure they feel entirely comfortable in your presence. This should be done while droning “I COMPLY, I COMPLY, I COMPLY”.

    1. She might have thought herself to already be a part of the protected classes.

    2. …doesn’t everyone already know the script at this point?

      Of course they don’t, Gilmore. You’ve seen how this goes. Cops/BP/CPS/government bureaucratic douchebag du jour does something illegal and morally offensive on videotape, and the country tells itself this would never happen to them, personally, because reasons. It only happens to other people. Brown people, poor people, criminals, something something never gonna affect me. Great lengths are gone to, to maintain the narrative that this will never happen to them.

      They are always surprised to discover not only that they were wrong, but that everyone else in the country is now trying to shove them into the box of ‘other people’ in order to convince themselves that it still only happens to ‘other people’.

      1. This is spot on.

    3. BAD APPLES!

      That the entire system is going along with and condoning the actions taken is just a silly misunderstanding.

    4. In real life I’m an Army Officer, from a combat arms MOS. These stories worry me because I’m afraid that if our Border Patrol Heroes here saw me as a mark, cruising in my Black Q5, and pulled this shit I’d probably be dead, or they would, or best case I’m in jail for the rest of my life.

      Maybe cops don’t mess with anyone larger unless they are in a pack, but shit, this stuff will keep getting uglier for all involved.

      1. “cruising in my Black Q5′

        (looks up Q5)

        That was not quite the “bad motherfucker” image i expected.

        1. There is no accounting for taste I suppose…..

        2. There is no accounting for taste I suppose…..

    5. The video is a very discriptive illustration of what happens when a college snowflake who is used to trigger warnings and safe rooms meets the real world.

      The CBP officers should be made to offer subjects of the realm a puppy to cuddle with while their cars are being searched.

      1. College snowflakes, as you call them, don’t typically know, and/or stand up for their rights, so I’m going to say you’ve mischaracterized this person.

        But you’re right about this being the “real world.” Unfortunately this part is correct.

      2. Maybe if the CBP officers should be made to abide by the constitution, then they won’t have to provide a puppy. But of course they are above the law. Maybe if the King of England would have given our founding fathers a puppy to cuddle… I love it when people who are educated above their level of intelligence make comments like this.

  25. What about crowdfunding people to hang with these insane CBP checkpoints and video ALL the interactions? I’m sure the troopers would fuss at first (after all, officer safety!) but think of the fun we would have. Maybe we could get Judge N. to voiceover a greatest hits video!

  26. He should be up on assault changes. At a minimum, both of these agents should lose their jobs. First off, even if he honestly thought she was doing something illegal, it seems obvious in the video that she was not threatening either agent. To require a taser to subdue her, for basically just standing there when he initiated force by approaching her to begin with, tells a lot about this guy. Then to leave the taser in her while she’s screaming and he asks over and over, “Are you done?” just shows what kind of sicko this guy is. I imagine he got off on torturing puppies as kid. I hope she does sue him.

    1. Some people will defend state agents no matter what though. The other day there was that cop who killed a drunk guy by slamming his head into the ground. If you watch the video, the cop is actually the one to initiate violence every step of the way – he’s the first one to lay his hands on the other person in an aggressive manner thus causing the conflict in the first place and then he picked the guy up, dropped him on his head and killed him.

      There were still people here defending that guy.

  27. Looks to me like she had ambitions to be a good cop who respects the rights of the people and follows the laws that she would have been tasked with enforcing.

    Now she knows that her kind is not welcome within the law enforcement community.

    Too bad. She wasted a lot of money on a useless education.

    1. Anyone who wants to willingly join their ranks knows exactly what they’re getting into. Hey, she wants to be one of them. She got what she deserved. Suck it up, cupcake, these are your heroes.

      1. Anyone who wants to willingly join their ranks knows exactly what they’re getting into.

        I don’t think so. I think many people naively believe that the police serve and protect people, because that’s what they’ve been taught and because they’ve never actually had any interactions with the police. I used to believe that in my youth. It was only after I committed a few victimless crimes and found the police to be very interested in what I did, and was the victim of a few crimes and found that the police didn’t give a shit (they ran me for warrants, asked for permission to search for drugs, then left without asking a single question about by the crime that I called them about), that I discovered that the last thing they care about is serving and protecting anyone except themselves and people connected to them.

        1. When I joined the Navy in 1978 I had a lot of naive notions, such as the idea that I would be “defending my country” and that the President and his advisors were Great Men who had wisdom beyond my ken. Heh. Boy was I fucking stupid. My (very minor) participation in the Iran hostage crisis and the Beirut clusterfuck in 1983 showed me the error of my ways. The latter especially opened my eyes to how moronic and self-serving our “leadership” is.

      2. No, she didn’t know exactly what she was getting into. She knew what she was taught in her classes, which was a lot farther from reality than Ogdensburg is from the Canadian border. She was taught what the law on the books says, not how the law works on the street.

    2. She would have been assimilated anyway.

      1. Possibly. Or she would have been run out. For example her calls for backup would have gone ignored until she got the point and resigned.

  28. “You assaulted a federal officer.”
    Tar. and. feathers.

    1. Yep. The pigs don’t like the stink eye throw their way

      1. thrown, dammit!!!

        Where’s our edit?

        1. I’m thinking changing my handle to “Florida Man, Slayer of Esquires” but I forgot my login.

          1. “Florida Man” is perfect. You should just stick with that.

          2. Nice . . .

  29. Su notes that CBP is “starting to use these checkpoints beyond their intended goal”

    *outright, prolonged laughter*

  30. “I’m all for border patrol checks,” said one. “Look at the drugs seized weekly by these that would otherwise go right onto the streets. If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.”

    This person is unworthy of the freedom he or she (or ze) enjoys. I do not wish ill on others but this person might sign a different tune if he or she were the target.

    1. I do not wish ill on others…

      I consider wishing ill on people who actively support the use of force against people who have in no way harmed the life, liberty or property of other people to be a just state of mind.

    2. Is it wrong that I fantasize that some masked crusader would Swat every person who ever seriously makes this comment?

  31. “Look at the drugs seized weekly by these that would otherwise go right onto the streets. If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.”

    Scientists are just now perfecting fire hot enough for this commenter to die in. It will concentrate and sinter all that smug from the bones..

  32. Just wait ’til Scalia hears about this. Boy, is he gonna be pissed.

    1. Hope so.

      9-0

  33. The world is definitely coming to an end when a white woman gets tazed just “because”

    1. Happens all the time. A couple of years ago, in Culpeper, VA, a white woman was gunned down by a cop in a parking lot, pretty much just “because.” (In that case, he actually got convicted, but that was because there was eyewitness testimony to the effect that his claim that he feared for his life was bullshit: https://reason.com/blog/2013/05…..ed-patrici

      1. Well, then NOBODY IS SAFE

      2. Oh good, the guy just got out of prison. Wonder which police department is going to hire him.

  34. The machine of law and order organically spirals on a single vector that ultimately plows directly into the razor sharp teeth of dictatorship.

    Individuals and organizations that fear being devoured by hellish men and women of the future are the only brakes on the machine of law and order.

  35. What is your major malfunction numbnuts. Didn’t mommy and daddy give you enough attention?

  36. Someone is in deep doo-doo.

    1. I am in a world of deep doo-doo.

  37. DON’T TASE ME, BRO!!

  38. My question – don’t these BCP realize, with the proliferation of camera phones, they will be recorded?

    They seem to still think it is 2005 and the only cellphone was a Blackberry

  39. Local residents: “If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.”

    Hitler liked that attitude: If you aren’t a jew, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.

    1. She did cooperate. She provided them the documents they asked for. And she got out of her car.

      But the pigs, like all Nazis, aren’t happy until they meet their daily taser quota.

      1. no reasonable suspicion or probable cause just a poor excuse

        1. Ah. Plus, she probably flipped them Da Bird.

          There is nothing that says “give me some taser” than the Middle Finger Salute.

    2. Thousands of houses of American Jesus worship chock full of the hallelujah pro-incarcerate-them-all-for-even-tiny-crimes crowd pour millions into law-breaking missionaries.

      Law-breaking is at its most righteous and justified when engaged in by the faith-filled and ONLY the goddamn faith-filled.

  40. The notion that if you have nothing to hide then comply is total crap and utterly stupid. The reason you insist the police tell you why the are holding you and want to search your car is it is your right to do so. Law enforcement is not the friend of anyone. All many focus on is making a bust, especially along the border. The more busts you make the faster you are promoted. There are officers who truly wish to serve and protect the public, but there are an equal number if not more who get off on the power and being bullies. In addition, the longer you are in any position that puts you in situations where most of time you meet people who are at their worst, you become jaded and look at everyone with suspicion and contempt. You do not give up your rights under the Constitution to make nice. It is very easy to remain respectful when dealing with police without letting them do as they please.

    1. Yeah. When you have nothing to hide is exactly when you should insist on your rights and make their job difficult. It is the people who have things to hide who would be well advised to be deferential in hopes that they won’t think you are acting suspiciously.

  41. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.freelance-cash.com

  42. “You assaulted a federal officer,” when we have clear video evidence that nothing constituting assault took place and the officer initiated it.

    “You sexually assaulted me by looking at me.”

    Authoritarians will always distort language to control others. Not complying is assault. Accidentally brushing up against someone in a crowded area is sexual assault.

  43. I wish I were barred in NY. I would represent her pro bono… Good opportunity for the 2nd Circuit to replicate the 6th Circuit’s recent decision allowing a case to go forward against a cop who had no reason to detain a citizen open carrying.

  44. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.freelance-cash.com

  45. OMG, it has happened! Nick and Matt are right – this is the libertarian moment

  46. “I’m all for border patrol checks,” said one. “Look at the drugs seized weekly by these that would otherwise go right onto the streets…”

    This says it all. Drugs… immigration enforcement… yeah, that’s one in the same.

    I have no idea how this is still going on? The Supreme Court has ruled you cannot randomly stop people to look for drugs, yet this is so clearly what they are doing. It is so sad and I feel so helpless to stop it. My complaints seem to fall on deaf ears.

    1. Hell, they said just last month that you can’t extend a stop to wait for a drug sniffing dog. What these agents were doing was unquestionably illegal. There should be no qualified immunity.

      1. If it comes to it, the courts will say the cops made a “reasonable” mistake. So it’s all good.

  47. The agents didn’t appreciate back talk. Which – aren’t they better trained to calm things down, rather than make them worse?

    Those agents work for the taxpayers. Even backtalkers like Jess Cooke.

    (p.s. is it just me or are their accents annoying?)

  48. If I got tased every time I smarted off to an authority figure, I’d be dead by now.

  49. better keep a close eye on those border patrol, i think they are suspicious.

  50. To me this video shows excatly what happens when a college snowflake meets the real world.

    She was probably expecting the officers to offer her a puppy to cuddle or the use of a safe room with play dough when she resisted having her rights violated.

    1. She might have been expecting that they weren’t Nazis. Poor naive little snowflake…

    2. She already had a puppy. That was the “dog” spoken about.

      Do try to keep up

    3. Sounds more like a naive idealist than a precious snowflake.

  51. The story of Jessica Cooke gets even better. The following Sunday while she was at graduation border patrol showed up at her house and started taking pictures of what turned out to be her fathers car. Initially they denied they had taken pictures until they were informed they were caught on a security camera.

    1. Well, I think her reaction is still the correct one: WTF is wrong with these people?

      Would driving on to the property require a search warrant?

  52. This reminds me of a horrible incident I had many years ago while driving across the border from Windsor, Canada to Detroit, MI. I believe it was about 10-12 years ago. I was advised to pull over for a secondary inspection after coming to what they thought was an abrupt stop at the bridge checkpoint. No other reason. I was told to get out of the car and then stood inside the border police building. The officer who brought me into the building left me and I asked another official if I could go to the bathroom. I had to pee really really bad. He said yes. So I was in the bathroom taking a leak when a couple officers, including the original one, came rushing in and grabbed me. He yells, “what are you doing?” I guess he thought I was flushing drugs or something. It was terrifying. I was still taking a leak. They let me finish and then took me into another room for a hostile interrogation by about 5 or so officers. I answered their questions and they decided to let me go since I apparently gave satisfactory answers. In the meantime, I believe they did a cursory search of my vehicle. It was a horrific experience. I think it lasted 1-2 hours. I was probably lucky I’m white and an upstanding professional without any prior criminal record. Otherwise, I would be screwed. US CPB officers are no better than nazis. I am appalled that they can now do this within US borders.

    1. I lived in Vancouver BC for five years, a legal resident. Plenty of trips across the boundary. I caught five times as much flak heading south as I ever did heading north. The US clowns were nasty, belligerent, insulting, pushy… jerks. the ONLY time I was treated decently was when I was returning by bicycle. Pulled into the lineup along wiht the cars, came up to the wicket, she asked my citizenship, I said US. City of birth? O________. Place or residence? O_________. How long have you been in Canada? Ten days. Where have you been? Vancouver ISland and lower mainland. HaVve a great ride and stay safe….. all asked with respect and interest. Of course, a middle aged male on a touring bicycle is most likely a low grade threat. The nearest town was thirty miles back, and Vancouver was close to a hundred miles back….. the bike looked like it had been worked hard for a week, too, as did I.

      1. Yes, I think the US border agents are typically pricks while the Canadians are much nicer.

        I’m still appalled by my experience. And I still think I was lucky it wasn’t worse. They have ultimate power over you. I am glad I just cooperated with them. They could have planted drugs or maybe an illegal weapon in my car and then I would have been fucked. They could have beaten the crap out of me and gotten away with it. I haven’t driven across the Canadian border since then.

  53. There is no border exception to the bill of rights, or any other part of the constitution.

    -jcr

    1. There’s no murder exception, no armed robbery exception, but there surely is a de jure intoxicating substance exception. Might as well throw another arbitrary one in there.

      1. Tony|5.15.15 @ 8:45PM|#
        “There’s no murder exception, no armed robbery exception, but there surely is a de jure intoxicating substance exception.”
        I wonder if there’s anyone stupid enough not to recognize false equivalence? I mean, outside of Tony.

        “Might as well throw another arbitrary one in there.”
        Or several stupid ones.

        1. I have no idea what you’re trying to say.

          1. That’s because you’re an idiot. Sorry if you weren’t already aware of this, but it’s been obvious to all of us here since the day you started posting here.

            -jcr

  54. Start posting the pictures of these POS on billboards near where they work. That’s the ONLY way they will stop. When their behavior is called out in public, and people in the grocery stores recoil in horror when they seem them.

  55. “Why do you want to get in my trunk” — Is that how the kids say it these days?

    1. Border Patrol took one look at her at surmised the bitch had junk in her trunk

  56. We have allowed two very unAmerican things to go un challenged:

    Civil forfeiture and immigration checkpoints, way inside the border, and using immigration as a front for a trumped up reason for a search of an innocent citizen.

  57. Should be part of the mandatory training for all cops.

  58. The Canadian border solution is to declare maple syrup a drug, and train dogs to alert to people with pancakes on their breath.

  59. ah yes, the old “nothing to hide enables government intrusion” meme. A false one at that. CBP need to get back to the reason for which they exist. This is out of conrtol federal policing.. unconstitutioinal on its face.

  60. What difference did it make where she stood? She was already far from the vehicle, & not blocking the way. I’ve a feeling if she’d gone to stand over there, in a minute or 2 they’d’ve asked her to move to another spot, etc. Just pushing her buttons to get her to react, seeing if there was some way to provoke her enough. But her dog came out unscathed. Maybe got a date w the working dog they called, too.

    1. I imagine it’s about asserting control, embellishing the officer’s position of dominance and showing that there is nothing the citizen can do about it.

      I wonder if a union pension can be used to satisfy a civil judgement . . .

  61. The don’t have time for a warrant? Yes, what the FUCK IS WRONG WITH THEM

  62. The don’t have time for a warrant? Yes, what the FUCK IS WRONG WITH THEM

  63. AND THIS is why we get attacked with a nuke -‘because the border control would rather waste time looking for pot or illegal Quebecers or taser a mouthy broad.

  64. Might have something to do with Justice Dept’s recent stepped-up anti-terrorist efforts… an order to inspect more trunks or something like that.

  65. I recently saw something similar. Two VTA fare Nazis where chasing down some young guy for ‘not paying his child support’. He boarded light rail and paid using a clipper card.

    Big mistake. Those clipper cards, while convenient, enable government to track your every move.

    On the bright side, however, he easily outran them. VTA fare Nazis average ages are 75.

    1. How could you have seen and known this? Why would fare checkers know a guy hand’t paid child support? If he was being chased, why did he pay his fare? Clearly you are lying. Clipper cards can only be tracked at fare points. One cannot “track your every move” with the cards. You might even be an idiot besides a liar.

  66. Follow up story to this.
    http://www.watertowndailytimes…..o-20150512

  67. “If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.”

    This is way many enlightened civilizations have descended to despotism, terror, and destruction.

    In this instance, noncompliance is a civic virtue.

  68. Eventually the female agent who first interacted with Cooke says she seemed nervous?an all-purpose excuse for detaining someone, since people tend to be nervous when confronted by armed government officials.

    No doubt, not seeming nervous is even more suspicious.

    1. Fly casually. But not TOO casually.

  69. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link,
    go to tech tab for work detail ????????????? http://www.jobsfish.com

  70. If you have nothing to hide, you should not mind one gloved finger up your butt. It is only one finger and it is for the greater good.

  71. She seemed “nervous”? There couple be a gazillion reasons that someone is “nervous” that has NOTHING to do with policing. Like a college graduation, an empty gas tank, a puppy that has to go potty. Would it be too hard for law enforcement to assume it’s only about them?
    What a bunch of trigger happy assholes we have guarding our borders

  72. And this is why we should control our borders. If we actually restricted who comes into the country, we wouldn’t have to stop people at random seeing if they are actually here legally, we could assume they are.

    1. And it’s not like they’ll do anything when they find an illegal except let him/her go.

    2. You just shift the location of the harassment.

  73. . . NOT only about them.

    Damn! NEED Edit Button . .

  74. When the Nazi SS stop you and “If you have nothing to hide, why be a jerk? Just cooperate.”

  75. I hear this all the time “if you have nothing to hide”. There is no consideration given to why we should need to hide in the first place.

    Apparently rights are only valuable when they mean free shit or when our enlightened political and media classes tell us they do.

  76. I hate to say it but it would appear that she instigated the situation, perhaps purposely?

  77. So I have the sudden urge to shoot something, but in a foreign land now so no guns around. Great, thanks. But seriously, this thread has made me change my views. Traveling around Europe and crossing borders there are no walls or fences. No guns. Fuck, nobody even looks at you or asks for a passport. So how do they possibly maintain order and sovereignty? How do these countries control immigration? Honest question. Just an ovservation, but do we want this situation or do we want our border to look like those around Israel? We had better think this through very carefully.

    1. To be fair to Israel, they’re surrounded by people who want them all dead. It’s not like Belgians have to worry about the Dutch marching in and stealing all their cheese and women.

      -jcr

  78. I started with my online business I earn $58 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it out. For information check this site.
    ,………….. http://WWW.TIMES-REPORT.COM

  79. I have no sympathy for her. If people don’t like having no rights, they can move to a country that respects rights and doesn’t have law enforcement hassle citizens. Everyone has seen enough of these videos to know that the United States is not such a country. It’s a police state.

    1. There is no such place. Countries that won’t harass you for this reason will harass you for others.

  80. Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super… I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I’ve ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h….. ?????? http://www.Jobs-Cash.com

  81. “I’m all for border patrol checks,” said one. “Look at the drugs seized weekly by these that would otherwise go right onto the streets.”

    And this person also supports the complete destruction of the principle of inalienable rights, too. The presently illegal drugs–which, at one time were perfectly legal without any criminal justice problem associated with their use–cause far less harm, disease, death, and crime than the narcotic drug alcohol, or the dangerous substance tobacco. If the government–politicians–would pull their heads out of where the sun doesn’t shine and repealed the drug laws, the manufacture and sales of them could be dealt with like any legal product and would not be available on “the streets” and marketed to minors. But adults, peaceful, honest adults should have the inalienable right to the full ownership and possession of their bodies and minds and, therefore, the right to use any drug they want, just so long as they do not violate the rights of others in so doing, which pretty much sums up the vast majority of drug users.

  82. “Her response: “What the fuck is wrong with you?” Also this: “Are you fucking retarded?” And this: “You fucking Tased me, you asshole!” These rejoinders do not have quite the same emotional impact as “I can’t breathe,”

    The first two are BETTER than “I can’t breathe,” and the third is the perfect follow up to “Don’t Tase me bro.”

  83. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.jobnet10.com

  84. Fuck that stupid bitch at the end of this column “If your not guilty you have nothing to hide” or “They’ve stopped alot of drugs with these searches” something to that effect. Fuck her, fuck her in her dusty cunt with a serrated, rusty knife.

  85. If you’d like more of this, Hillary or Jeb 2016

  86. I am amazed that neither the article nor any others leaving comments mentioned the real reason for these events. It is MONEY, M-O-N-E-Y. The civil forfeiture laws allow them to seize any large amounts of cash that they find, since large amounts of cash are always under the suspicion of being drug money. And, if you are innocent, you are still subject to a year’s worth of attending required hearings at specific times and places and hiring a lawyer to get your money back. One missed hearing and you are out of luck. Somehow, the Supreme Court has decided that that ridiculous process is due process, and so it is not unconstitutional. Many don’t bother, as it isn’t worth the hassle. If your state has any civil forfeiture laws, you should write your representative repeatedly and make a lot of noise until those laws are changed.

  87. If anyone gets arrested for their behavior after being stopped at one of these checkpoints, and I am on their jury, they are going to be acquitted. And if any cop carries out one of these atrocities, and I am on their jury, I will do my best to throw them in jail.

    1. You’d likely never get on a jury, having expresses such sentiments.

  88. Justice is rare, but it does happen.

    http://www.odmp.org/officer/92…..r-miles-sr

  89. Could it be that he Land of The Free, The Home of The Brave has degenerated into something akin to a Banana Republic, where the Storm Troopers wear pressed trousers, and might say Please.

  90. Checkpoints are not constitutional or acceptable anywhere. Not even AT the border. These badge thugs need to start getting arrested or tased for making them.

  91. Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super… I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I’ve ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h….. ?????? http://www.Jobs-Cash.com

  92. YOU. WILL. OBEY.

    Also, the comments have since gotten much better.

  93. The standard is reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Did anyone notice in the background the numerous vehicles who were passing through the checkpoint? This shows that the stops aren’t random, but based on reasonable suspicion, nervousness. No one else was so nervous they got stopped. Oh, and by the way, they were Border Patrol Agents (BPA), not CBP agents. The writer could at least get the basic fact correct. A Customs and Border Protection Officer (CBPO) is different from a BPA. If she was smart she would have just waited patiently, then filed her lawsuit if she was in the right. I also noticed that the whole encounter was not filmed, especially her initial encounter with the female BPA. She was told she had to wait for a drug sniffing dog. Did she not understand that she was suspected of drug smuggling?

    1. Claiming she was nervous is the excuse given to justify detaining someone that you have nothing solid.

      They didn’t like something about her, most likely that she was asserting she has rights, and they decided to punish her for it.

  94. Welcome to your new Fascist Overlords.

  95. Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super… I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I’ve ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h….. ?????? http://www.Jobs-Cash.com

  96. They later visited her home to follow up with her!

    http://www.watertowndailytimes…..o-20150512

  97. Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super… I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I’ve ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h….. ?????? http://www.netcash9.com

  98. Practical discussion . For my two cents , if anyone is searching for a IRS 709 , my family used a blank document here http://goo.gl/88r2Xq

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.