TexasCHLforum.com

I just read this on the TFC website regarding a proposed bill in the Texas Senate:

SB294 - By Hinojosa: Requires DPS and TABC to study feasibility of check points to search for firearms, drugs and contraband in vehicles leaving Texas and entering Mexico. Check points must be within 1 mile of the border. Guardedly neutral on Bill. CAVEAT: Watch bill for detrimental amendments.

Isn't this the responsibility of the Mexican government? Do we need more regulation and more things to spend money on?

Maybe I am missing the big picture.

Should be the duty of border protection and control agencey

Beiruty wrote:Should be the duty of border protection and control agencey

They handle stuff coming in. Why does anyone on this side of the border have to handle anything going out?

Maybe drugs would not be going out, but green cash and fireams maybe going out. I guees, since it is not against the law to have firearms in one's car, Such measure would not fly. Border agents can search ast will in inbound traffic. Outbound is totally up to those on the south border to enforce. This is the rule so far. I think it should stay that way. However, it could be the case that someone who crossed the border llegally and decided the best way to turn around a flee south. But, in this casse. DPS can stop and search suspected vehicles with no warrent.

I certainly don't care what goes out.

Do we need more regulation and more things to spend money on?

We sure don't as we already have more regulation than is holy and not a red nickle to pay for it with.

Purplehood wrote:I just read this on the TFC website regarding a proposed bill in the Texas Senate:

SB294 - By Hinojosa: Requires DPS and TABC to study feasibility of check points to search for firearms, drugs and contraband in vehicles leaving Texas and entering Mexico. Check points must be within 1 mile of the border. Guardedly neutral on Bill. CAVEAT: Watch bill for detrimental amendments.

Isn't this the responsibility of the Mexican government? Do we need more regulation and more things to spend money on?

Maybe I am missing the big picture.

Could it be because the Mexican government border patrol... (finish with your own words).

Purplehood wrote:Isn't this the responsibility of the Mexican government? Do we need more regulation and more things to spend money on?

Yes it is. No we don't.

just wondering; if the flow of cash back to the drug cartels was slowed/stopped, how would that be bad? Confiscated cash might pay for the program. If we also checked for registration to slow/stop the flow of stolen vehicles to Mexico, I think it would be a good thing.
JMHO
Dave

TexasFlash wrote:just wondering; if the flow of cash back to the drug cartels was slowed/stopped, how would that be bad? Confiscated cash might pay for the program. If we also checked for registration to slow/stop the flow of stolen vehicles to Mexico, I think it would be a good thing.
JMHO
Dave

I would use confiscated cash to offset the deficit. Not pay for a program to seize it in the first place.

The stolen car issue is actually a good point that you bring up. I would have to ruminate on that one a while.

Um...do y'all realize just how corrupt the LEOs are on this side? Just had one officer from Pharr indicted for helping the Zetas safely get their drugs through. He was also trying to broker a deal that would have sent arms down into Mexico.

That's just one example. There are many CBP officers who are on "the take". Local and county ones, too. It was rumored our former Sheriff in Cameron Co. was one of those on the take.

Sometimes, the cartels have their own members go through the CBP academy. Just to ensure safe passage.

Jasonw560 wrote:Um...do y'all realize just how corrupt the LEOs are on this side? Just had one officer from Pharr indicted for helping the Zetas safely get their drugs through. He was also trying to broker a deal that would have sent arms down into Mexico.

That's just one example. There are many CBP officers who are on "the take". Local and county ones, too. It was rumored our former Sheriff in Cameron Co. was one of those on the take.

Sometimes, the cartels have their own members go through the CBP academy. Just to ensure safe passage.

Are you saying that we need this bill to police our police?

If I understand this bill correctly, it will allow an unconstitutional search of our vehicles on demand and it effectively would out law guns from within 1 mile of all 1200 miles of border. Effectevly creating a 1200 sq mile gun free zone.

Mexico's problem starts with the inability of good citizens to defend themselves from not only the drug gangs, but the corrupt police and military forces. We as Texans should be trying to get as many guns across the border and into the hands of of the otherwise law abiding, not trying to blockade the people. It is not guns that are causing the problems in Mexico. It's the drug gangs and corrupt government that are causing the problems, and until the ranchers and villagers get to shoot back, nothing will ever get fixed.


Can anything within that country be resolved without arming of their population? It worked for us in 1776 and 1835.

Purplehood wrote:I just read this on the TFC website regarding a proposed bill in the Texas Senate:

SB294 - By Hinojosa: Requires DPS and TABC to study feasibility of check points to search for firearms, drugs and contraband in vehicles leaving Texas and entering Mexico. Check points must be within 1 mile of the border. Guardedly neutral on Bill. CAVEAT: Watch bill for detrimental amendments.

Isn't this the responsibility of the Mexican government? Do we need more regulation and more things to spend money on?

Maybe I am missing the big picture.

The Short Answer is: Texas Doesn't. It is a waste of money and other resources.

Purplehood wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:Um...do y'all realize just how corrupt the LEOs are on this side? Just had one officer from Pharr indicted for helping the Zetas safely get their drugs through. He was also trying to broker a deal that would have sent arms down into Mexico.

That's just one example. There are many CBP officers who are on "the take". Local and county ones, too. It was rumored our former Sheriff in Cameron Co. was one of those on the take.

Sometimes, the cartels have their own members go through the CBP academy. Just to ensure safe passage.

Are you saying that we need this bill to police our police?

No, not at all. I'm just saying that corruption occurs on both sides. We don't need a bill to police our police. We need to re-think our drug policy in the US. Also, with all the violence going on in Reynosa and Matamoros, The US should step in. And, if it doesn't stop, let's just say that Brownsville and McAllen need additional parking lots.

I believe this is a bill that Ruben Hinojosa is trying to push through. He's about as smart as a box of rocks.

The one thing I can tell you about my experiences with "checkpoints" for (insert whatever they say they're looking for) is that there is a high likelyhood of abuse by whatever enforcement agency is running them.

In North Carolina. where I'm originally from, the State Police would set up checkpoints locations for sobriety checks, DL check, car registration etc. Since there was usually a heavy flow of traffic, they would only be able "sample" the population; that being a presumed "random" sample that would reflect the entire population.

Invariably, they pulled over a decidely non-random sampling of drivers; black drivers, out of state drivers, female drivers or people in trucks in disproportinate numbers to the population.

These tended to be nothing more than fishing expeditions and with folks pretty uneducated with respect to their 4th Amendment (and 5th Amendment) rights, the cops found (or invented) stuff that got lots of folks charged with lots of crimes.

While I don't advocate driving while drunk, Texas laws on 0.08 BAC ruins more lives of otherwise law-abiding folks who are caught the 1st time than it does to help protect society.

On the other hand, Texas does an terrible job at removing multiple offenders off the streets. That's why you hear many a news story where there is an intoxication manslaughter arrest of a person that been convicted of DUI 4, 5 or more times. We need to implement something more stringent when they're stopped for multiple DUI offences, rather than subject the majority of law abiding citizenry to unreasonable searches.

We really don't need the checkpoints as much as we need the legislature (and then the courts) to more heavily punish multiple offenders to prevent recurrences.

Checkpoints are ripe fruit for systemic abuse; if you get a zealous police department and a compliant judge together under the right circumstances, you can kiss your 4th Amendment rights buh-bye.

I'd rather our reps concentrate on legislation that will have a better return on investment and a less likely chance of doing more damage than it's worth.

LabRat