6 ms·

> Every vehicle is stopped, its occupants questioned about where they have come from and where they are going. This is great and all, but it's not truly consis

> Every vehicle is stopped, its occupants questioned about where they have come from and where they are going. This is great and all, but it's not truly consistent with an American style of democracy which respects the rights of individuals to travel freely. It's easy to imagine what would happen to any US city/county/region which set up a check point with the sole purpose of asking those questions of every person who passed through it.

eyelidlessness 10y ago
Checkpoints are routine in the US, in quite a lot of places but particularly near (not just on) the border. Many of the latter racially profile, directing a lot more scrutiny at non-white travelers.
FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
>This is great and all, but it's not truly consistent with an American style of democracy which respects the rights of individuals to travel freely. Its completely consistent. Ever hear of stop and frisk?
- gruez 10y ago
  ...which was declared unconstitutional
  - FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
    Driving while black? or brown? DUI checkpoints? Or, if you're ever found to be carrying a large amount of currency, police will seize it. My point is that the right of an individual to travel freely isn't respected as you think it is, especially if you are a minority,
    - HillaryBriss 10y ago
      i was trying to make the point that a local government in the US could not restrict the freedom of movement the way that collection of people are doing in that region of Mexico. it would end up in court and be forced to cease such restrictions on travel. only the federal government could do a thing like that, and even it might face lawsuits for such a restriction. my comment got a lot of down votes, but i feel like either i'm missing something or the people who voted it down are missing something. yes, the federal government restricts movement. yes, there are DUI spot checks in cities from time to time. yes there is even racial profiling by local police forces (which is not constitutional). but all of those things differ from an all-encompassing restriction on the freedom to travel into a region by mandatory choke points on roads into that region. but people reacted quite strongly. what on earth am i missing here?
      - FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
        > but all of those things differ from an all-encompassing restriction on the freedom to travel into a region by mandatory choke points on roads into that region. >but people reacted quite strongly. what on earth am i missing here? try driving through the panhandle of Texas while brown or black. It's not exactly a choke point because I could go a few hundred miles out of my way or fly, but, at the time, I believed the same thing you do. I learned the hard way that often times the written law has no bearing on reality. You can say it's unconstitutional all you want, but that doesn't change what millions of people face. The reality on the ground matters more so than some dusty old document written a few hundred years ago, especially since, like a religious text, people interpret it in wildly different ways. >yes there is even racial profiling by local police forces (which is not constitutional), but all of those things differ from an all-encompassing restriction on the freedom There is the America as it likes to see itself and the America that truly exists. Just because there is a document written a few hundred years ago that expressly forbids the restriction on freedom of movement doesn't mean that it meshes with reality.
throwaway_exer 10y ago
> an American style of democracy which respects the rights of individuals to travel freely. That was true maybe in the 70's or 80's. Now you're required to have a passport to leave or enter the USA, which can be revoked. Most domestic police insist that you carry an ID and present it on demand, despite the courts ruling otherwise. Also, within X miles of the border, the police are allowed to stop you for no reason at all. We now live in a police state, not a democracy, whether you got the memo or not.
redial 10y ago
Almost every country in the world does this. The US certainly does at every border. In fact, in the US you could be stoped and searched almost anywhere if police think they have even a hint of probable cause, and if they don't and just don't like you they might even create it.
- HillaryBriss 10y ago
  Countries yes. But, in the OP, it's about a local region within Mexico. The checkpoints are created not by the federal government in Mexico, but by some people in a local region. My point was that, within the US, a city/county/regional government would ultimately not be allowed to do this. My comment was not about the US Federal government. As for DUI checkpoints, though they are conducted by local law enforcement, such checkpoints do not ask people the same questions as the checkpoints in the original story and they do not exhaustively stop and check everyone on all the roads leading into a region. So, I'm not seeing a serious criticism of my original comment.
inimino 10y ago
It is consistent with self-government, which is what the article describes. It's more like a tiny city-state than an ordinary town.
jrochkind1 10y ago
> It's easy to imagine what would happen to any US city/county/region which set up a check point with the sole purpose of asking those questions of every person who passed through it. Not much? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_interior_checkpoints https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_in...
- HillaryBriss 10y ago
  You're linking to an article about the US Federal Government, not a city/county/region government. It's not a counter example.
grecy 10y ago
I was stopped at exactly this kind of Checkpoint in Arizona recently, and up in Northern New York a while back. Don't kid yourself into thinking you have unrestricted travel in the United States.

eyelidlessness 10y ago

Checkpoints are routine in the US, in quite a lot of places but particularly near (not just on) the border. Many of the latter racially profile, directing a lot more scrutiny at non-white travelers.

FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago

>This is great and all, but it's not truly consistent with an American style of democracy which respects the rights of individuals to travel freely. Its completely consistent. Ever hear of stop and frisk?

gruez 10y ago
...which was declared unconstitutional
- FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
  Driving while black? or brown? DUI checkpoints? Or, if you're ever found to be carrying a large amount of currency, police will seize it. My point is that the right of an individual to travel freely isn't respected as you think it is, especially if you are a minority,
  - HillaryBriss 10y ago
    i was trying to make the point that a local government in the US could not restrict the freedom of movement the way that collection of people are doing in that region of Mexico. it would end up in court and be forced to cease such restrictions on travel. only the federal government could do a thing like that, and even it might face lawsuits for such a restriction. my comment got a lot of down votes, but i feel like either i'm missing something or the people who voted it down are missing something. yes, the federal government restricts movement. yes, there are DUI spot checks in cities from time to time. yes there is even racial profiling by local police forces (which is not constitutional). but all of those things differ from an all-encompassing restriction on the freedom to travel into a region by mandatory choke points on roads into that region. but people reacted quite strongly. what on earth am i missing here?
    - FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
      > but all of those things differ from an all-encompassing restriction on the freedom to travel into a region by mandatory choke points on roads into that region. >but people reacted quite strongly. what on earth am i missing here? try driving through the panhandle of Texas while brown or black. It's not exactly a choke point because I could go a few hundred miles out of my way or fly, but, at the time, I believed the same thing you do. I learned the hard way that often times the written law has no bearing on reality. You can say it's unconstitutional all you want, but that doesn't change what millions of people face. The reality on the ground matters more so than some dusty old document written a few hundred years ago, especially since, like a religious text, people interpret it in wildly different ways. >yes there is even racial profiling by local police forces (which is not constitutional), but all of those things differ from an all-encompassing restriction on the freedom There is the America as it likes to see itself and the America that truly exists. Just because there is a document written a few hundred years ago that expressly forbids the restriction on freedom of movement doesn't mean that it meshes with reality.

throwaway_exer 10y ago

> an American style of democracy which respects the rights of individuals to travel freely. That was true maybe in the 70's or 80's. Now you're required to have a passport to leave or enter the USA, which can be revoked. Most domestic police insist that you carry an ID and present it on demand, despite the courts ruling otherwise. Also, within X miles of the border, the police are allowed to stop you for no reason at all. We now live in a police state, not a democracy, whether you got the memo or not.

redial 10y ago

Almost every country in the world does this. The US certainly does at every border. In fact, in the US you could be stoped and searched almost anywhere if police think they have even a hint of probable cause, and if they don't and just don't like you they might even create it.

HillaryBriss 10y ago
Countries yes. But, in the OP, it's about a local region within Mexico. The checkpoints are created not by the federal government in Mexico, but by some people in a local region. My point was that, within the US, a city/county/regional government would ultimately not be allowed to do this. My comment was not about the US Federal government. As for DUI checkpoints, though they are conducted by local law enforcement, such checkpoints do not ask people the same questions as the checkpoints in the original story and they do not exhaustively stop and check everyone on all the roads leading into a region. So, I'm not seeing a serious criticism of my original comment.

inimino 10y ago

It is consistent with self-government, which is what the article describes. It's more like a tiny city-state than an ordinary town.

jrochkind1 10y ago

> It's easy to imagine what would happen to any US city/county/region which set up a check point with the sole purpose of asking those questions of every person who passed through it. Not much? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_interior_checkpoints https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_in...

HillaryBriss 10y ago
You're linking to an article about the US Federal Government, not a city/county/region government. It's not a counter example.

grecy 10y ago

I was stopped at exactly this kind of Checkpoint in Arizona recently, and up in Northern New York a while back. Don't kid yourself into thinking you have unrestricted travel in the United States.