Re: Cell Phone Jammers are Illegal in USA

[JoeRaisin <joeraisin2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

G. Morgan wrote:
> nick markowitz wrote:
>
>> I have customers who spend there winters in san diego area  and said
>> twice this winter they were stopped at road blocks.
>> they were glad to see border patrol stopping the illegals but in same
>> breath it gave them the creeps.
>
> I bet it did.
>
> If the feds really wanted to do something about the illegal entry of people at
> the border, they could.  Throwing out a dragnet some 40 miles from the border
> makes no sense.  They are on a 'fishing' expedition, no probable cause, no
> reasonable suspicion.  It is a 4th Amendment issue for me.

Fixing the problem of illegals would be a simple matter of drying up the
job market for them.  Just make sure that it isn't worth hiring these folks.

Any company found knowingly hiring illegals is seized and put into
receivership by the government until it can be sold.  The
President/CEO/Owner is put in jail and the head of human resources joins
him/her.

If the company is public, all stock is declared worthless and if the new
owners wish to issue new stock that is up to them.

That way, the big boss will want to ensure that every employee is above
board, the person in charge of hiring folks will be careful to vet new
employees as throughly as possible and the stock holders will be adamant
that the company does not engage in such behavior.

As for hiring illegal domestics, obviously private ci9tizens may not
have as much access to systems used to identify possible illegals but
even then, if it is apparent that the homeowner knowingly hired an
illegal - he/she loses the home.

Such penalties are already in place in other areas of the law so why not
here?

As for the road blocks - I found the following:

1) US v. MARTINEZ-FUERTE

This is a border-related case that incrementally increased law
enforcement?s ability to avoid Fourth Amendment restrictions. The court
permits the use of roadblocks several miles inland from national borders
under the following rationale:

     * There aren?t feasible alternatives (in their opinion).
     * It is a known and ongoing roadblock so travelers can avoid it if
they want to.
     * And, supposedly motorist fear and surprise is minimal because
this is an established roadblock with clear evidence of enforcement
authority.



2) DELAWARE v. PROUSE 1979

This is the case that pulls together the two themes that have merged in
the dispute over when it is permissible to stop motorists without
probable cause or reasonable suspicion. The court re-affirmed that
individual officers cannot randomly stop motorists, just because they
don?t have anything better to do with their time. They must have at
least reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle and question the driver.

However, the court volunteered that all the issues that made such random
stops ?unreasonable? under the Fourth Amendment could be remedied by
setting up formal roadblocks. This was a loud and clear signal from the
court that roadblocks were OK as long as they were organized and
systematic in their administration and implementation.


I can't find the source anymore but I remember reading somewhere that
the courts have determined that such checkpoints must be within a
reasonable distance to the border and that such a distance is considered
to be 100 miles.


I'm not saying that I think these checkpoints are my favorite things,
but since court precedent deems them legal this guys actions smack of
useless petulance.

The agents at these checkpoints are not jack-booted thugs.  They are
just normal guys doing a legal (as deemed by court precedence) job they
are told to do.  Giving them a hard time and backing up traffic making
other people late just so he can post inflammatory videos that do
nothing to change the law is childish.

At the very least he could be polite when he speaks to them.  It seems
his rude and overbearing manner is actively trying to escalate the
situation - maybe hoping for a lucrative lawsuit if he is ever lucky
enough to run into an agent who is having a bad day.

Better he should be organizing folks to get his state (or federal)
congressman or senator to write laws that would change this on the basis
that it is a waste of taxpayer money since they are established and
easily avoidable by those that need to avoid them.