Sunday, August 5, 2012

Resisting Tyranny at CheckPoint City, USA

Danny Benavides emails:
Here is a hot and fresh Youtube video of my good friend, Guillermo Jimenez, editor of the website to which I contribute,
This video, brief as it is, shows an example of how any American can resist tyranny at an unconstitutional checkpoint. All it takes is a little fortitude, a little knowledge and awareness....and balls of steel. My friend extends gratitude to Pastor Steve Anderson for the inspiration.


  1. Great video, but I have a question: If the border patrol officer had answered that his suspicion was raised because the driver and his rider (and/or their vehicle)"appeared to fit a pattern that is characteristic of previously detained illegals", or something to that effect, would that have been a sufficient answer to the drivers question? I saw the bully tactics on the part of the officers, but real answer as to what raised their suspicion. Probably because they've never been trained to properly articulate why they are suspicious of a particular person. In this case it seems obvious it was simple profiling, which I don't wholly disagree with when dealing with a known pattern of appearance and behavior. I've said for years "stereotypes exist for a reason."

    1. OK, As far as it goes. But Hispanics constitute a gimongous slice of the population (LEGAL).

      If you want to secure your borders, fine. But inside the U.S.? I can tolerate a few illegals. Besides, who else will cut my lawn?

  2. Wow!

    My new hero!

    Yeah, at the end, the ACLU says these are the magic words: "Am I free to go?"

  3. "mere suspicion" LOL is that legit language or BS? The way the young fed said it it sounded like he made it up on the spot, but the supervisor said it too. Either way, it sounds bogative.

  4. I hope that people realize this video is made by activists for activist purposes. I do not feel it is a good idea for the average person to take these measures.

    However, I do think it is a good idea to talk to your lawyer about how you should respond to law enforcement. My lawyer told me to use the following response: "My lawyer has advised me not to approve any law enforcement requests without first talking to him." Or, revised for this specific situation, it would be, "my lawyer advised me not to answer any questions from law enforcement officials without first talking to him."

  5. To Border Patrol agents involved, you did not violate his rights as a citizen, but he violated yours. I think you have a good lawsuit case against this driver for violating your rights. I didn't see where he asked your permission or advised you that he was videotapeing this conversation. Also, he posted it to YouTube, a public forum, without your permission, so that brings up the whole , violation of your rights, defamation of character issue and how it could adversely effect your careers! It falls into the same category as taping phone conversations without telling the other party you are doing so, unless you have a signed wiretap warrant or advise the person, it's illegal.

    To the driver:
    Freedom isn't free, remember 9/11/2001. You succeeded in getting your 5 minutes of fame on YouTube. Not to smart, I hope they get to sue you! Using your logic of free travel within the USA, you shouldn't have to stop to pay tolls, or stop at sobriety checkpoints. After all, it's preventing your free travel. How soon you forgot what happened on 9/11 and now complain about checkpoints on highways and airports. Here's my solution, if you don't like the inconvenience of checkpoints or airport security, don't travel, your FREE to stay at home!

    1. I love when people with a rudimentary grasp of the language and zero understanding of logic post crap like this. It further shows how far ahead the liberty movement is when their defenders are subliterate morons.

      "your" free?

    2. To Anonymous,

      Videotaping is not the same as wiretapping. If I take your photo or make a video with you in it and post it on youtube, it doesn't matter if I have your permission or not. Who own's the property of the camera or video material? The same person who owns the camera or video, therefore, they are free to do what they please with it. Defamation is non-sensical, because it deals with public image. A person doesn't own their public image, because public image's are developed by other people's minds and thoughts. A person would be violating other people's personal property rights if that individual tried to control and dictate how other people view them. Dr. Walter Block's book Defending the Undefendable discusses this viewpoint.

      I suppose you could be a government agent and enjoy aggressing against other citizens. Or you could just be a citizen not associated with the government and just enjoy being dominated and aggressed against by other people; in this case other people are government agents. Hopefully one day you will resist your slavery to the ruling elite or dominate or try to dominate over you and the rest of us.

    3. Hilarious. Another bootlicker siding with the tyrants aggressing against once-free individuals.

      It's helpful to keep in mind that "public servants" such as these Border Patrol agents should have no problems whatsoever being filmed or questioned by the private citizens they claim to serve.

      Additionally, photographing or filming public officers in a public space requires no approval or special permission of any kind. This is a completely different subject from wiretapping, which this video is not.

      This officer was not defamed as you indicate; just because this wet-behind-the-ears thug in a government uniform looked like an idiot on camera means nothing, nor indicates any violation requiring litigation. Same goes for the other two Border Patrol officers involved.

      Besides, if THEY are going to photograph, videotape, x-ray, and inspect YOUR vehicle, a free American SHOULD be able to videotape THEM. Hell, the driver might've been wise to ask for names and badge numbers, just for good measure.

      And really, can Americans TOTALLY forget about 9/11/01 now? How long will we be forced to accept a totalitarian society until freedom is restored? There have been ZERO terrorist incidents in the Rio Grande Valley, yet somehow the fear card is played up time and time again.

      The only incidents of violence in the area pertain to drug cartel activity, which the CIA, DEA, FBI, and ATF have been caught funding, training, supplying, and supporting.

      For the record, all highways and roads leading out of Laredo, Texas have checkpoints of this type. And they've been moving further inland every few years.

      Enjoy your slavery, genuflector.

    4. Perhaps you failed to notice the phalanx of cameras trained upon our young hero.

  6. Why the checkpoints given Obama's Executive Order? Just say to the ICE goons "Yeah, I'm here illegally, so what? Didn't you guys get the word out of DC down here? Am I free to go?"